London

  • “Letters of Credence”, also known as “credentials”, are the formal documentation accrediting an Ambassador in his or her host country. Greek Ambassador Raptakis presented on 06 October, accompanied by his wife Mrs Georgina Soultanopoulou, his credentials to Her Majesty The Queen. The Audience was held via video link from Windsor Castle to Buckingham Palace due to the protection measures against the coronavirus.

     Ambassador credentials 2Ambassador credentials 3

    Ambassador credentials 4

    Alistair Harrison, Marshal of the Diplomatic Corps, wished a successful term to the Greek Ambassador on behalf of the Queen and the British Government. "Greece has exerted a tremendous influence on the United Kingdom," he said, referring to the close political relations between Greece and the UK and the proximity of the two peoples.

    The Ambassador of Greece underlined the close relations between the two countries and he referred to the contribution of the United Kingdom to the outcome of the Greek revolution. "In every battle in history, Greece and the United Kingdom have always been on the same side: during the first world war, the second world war, we are allies in NATO, and though we are no longer partners in the EU, we remain allies as we share the same values and the same principles ", he said.

    The Queen praised Greece on the country's handling of the pandemic and went on to mention the visit of Prince Charlesin March of this year, at the start of the celebrations to mark the bicentenary of Greece's independence.This official Royal visit provided an opportuity to meet with Greece's President Sakellaropoulou and Prime Minister Mitsotakis. 

    More on that Royal visit with photographs, via the link here

  •  

    Barnaby Phillips is supporting the case for the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles. Dominic Selwood, as many of you know, has argued consistently for these specific sculptures to remain in the British Museum. 

    And you can read more on what grounds Dominic argues that the Parthenon Marbles should remain divided, here: https://www.lbc.co.uk/opinion/views/elgin-marbles-row-debate-not-going-away/

    We would agree wholeheratedly with Dominic's final paragrah where he begins with: "This debate is not going away." But would add that the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles will not stop the British Museum, and others in sharing their universal collections with an increasingly divided world. In fact, it would embelish the message of unity and cultural co-operation in a fragmented, war stricken world. We all need hope Dominic, hope for humanity. The history of these sculptures deserve a new 21st century chapter. A new chapter that reflects the will of the public. Time for great museums to make a respectful gesture, in this case reuniting the surviving, and fragmented sculptures in the one place on earth where it is possible to have a single and aesthetic experience simultaneously of the Parthenon and its sculptures. 

    Barnaby Philips debate

  • BCRPM web site BM

    Interview by Ta Nea, UK Correspondent  Ioannis Andritsopoulos with the Director of the British Museum, Hartwig Fischer

    Yannis and Hartwig

    Mr Fischer, do you think the Greeks are right to want the Parthenon Sculptures back?

    I can certainly understand that the Greeks have a special and passionate relationship with this part of their cultural heritage. Yes, I understand that there is a desire to see all of the Parthenon Sculptures in Athens.

    Would the British Museum consider returning the Parthenon Sculptures to Greece?

    There is a long-lasting debate on this issue. The Parthenon Sculptures in Athens are being shown in a specific context and since 2009 in this wonderful new museum in a very fascinating display. And the Parthenon Sculptures that are in London tell different stories about a monument that has a very complex history. As a temple of Athena, and then a Christian church and then a mosque. It was blown up in the 1687, and abandoned and neglected. And then rediscovered. And the rediscovery is obviously part of European history. We are showing the Parthenon Sculptures which are at the British Museum in a context of world cultures, highlighting achievements from all over the world under one roof, and showing the interconnectedness of cultures. Since the beginning of the 19th century, the monument’s history is enriched by the fact that some (parts of it) are in Athens and some are in London where six million people see them every year. In each of these two locations they highlight different aspects of an incredibly rich, layered and complex history.

    Greece says that it’s not just about returning the sculptures. It’s about reuniting the sculptures. Because they are a single work of art that should not be divided and fragmented. What’s your take on that?

    People go to some places to encounter cultural heritage that was created for that site. They go to other places to see cultural heritage which has been moved and offers a different way to engage with that heritage. The British Museum is such a place, it offers opportunities to engage with the objects differently and ask different questions because they are placed in a new context. We should cherish that opportunity. You could of course, and with reason, regret that original contexts are dissolved.
    When you move cultural heritage into a museum, you move it out of context. Yet that displacement is also a creative act. That is also true for the Acropolis Museum; the sculptures are out of their original context there. Nothing we admire in the Acropolis Museum was created for the Acropolis Museum.

    It’s there though. The Museum faces the Acropolis. It’s not the same as being (the Sculptures) here in London.

    Absolutely not. You’re right. They are close to the original context but they have still been taken away from it and been transformed through this act.

    So the answer to the question if you would consider returning the Sculptures to Greece, is it a no? Is it a yes? Is it a maybe?

    The British Museum was created in 1753 and opened in 1759 to allow people to not only encounter world cultures free of charge, but also to draw comparisons between cultures. Parliament who created this institution transferred the responsibility for this collection to the Trustees, stipulating that this collection has to be preserved for future generations. And that fiduciary responsibility the Trustees of the Museum take absolutely seriously. The Trustees feel the obligation to preserve the collection in its entirety, so that things that are part of this collection remain part of this collection. And to share them as much and wherever this is possible. The British Museum lends thousands of objects every year. And we also lend to the Acropolis Museum, we have excellent relations with our colleagues there.

    But that is the reason why the Museum will not permanently return the Sculptures? What you just told me about the Trustees.

    Yes.

    However, the British government has the power to pave the way for the Sculptures’s return. The majority of the trustees (15 out of 25) are appointed by the government. The parliament could also legislate. So there is, in theory, a way for it to happen.

    Well, if the British Parliament wants to legislate on this, then it is sovereign in doing so. It would have to pass primary legislation to change the legal basis that we are operating on today.

    A few months ago, I had the opportunity to interview the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. He told me that if he became PM he would make sure the Parthenon Sculptures return to Greece. What’s your comment on that?

    I think that this is Mr Corbyn’s personal view on the question, that you take note of. Obviously, that is not the stance and the view of the Trustees of the Museum.

    And of the Director as well?

    And of the Director.

    Are there active talks between the Museum and Greek officials or authorities about a possible return of the sculptures?

    There are no active talks.

    According to all polls, the British people are in favour of the reunification. Does that mean anything to you?

    I see the value of the objects that are part of the collection of the British Museum in being at the British Museum in the context that we just discussed.

    There is a question over the scultures’s ownership. Would you accept that Greece is the legal owner of the Parthenon Sculptures?

    No, I would not. The objects that are part of the collection of the British Museum are in the fiduciary ownership of the Trustees of the Museum.

    Would you consider an open-ended loan to Greece?

    There are two aspects to this: firstly, there are no indefinite loans. Every thing we lend, even on a long-term basis, will, at some point, return to the British Museum. And then it can go out again. The other aspect is that when we lend, we lend to those places where the ownership is acknowledged.

    There were several media reports last month regarding a leak in the Duveen Gallery where the Marbles are housed. As you can imagine there was a negative reaction. What’s your explanation about what happened?

    We had a tiny leak in one area of the roof in the Parthenon Sculptures’ galleries. A small quantity of rain entered the gallery, but did not touch any of the Sculptures and this was fixed right away.

    But you could see plastic containers collecting water next to the Sculptures. Did you find this embarrassing to the Museum?

    Buildings, especially buildings that are of a certain age, have to be taken care of. I don’t want the slightest little leak in any of the roofs of the Museum. We’re all aware of our responsibilities. And that we all have to do the utmost to live up to that responsibility. And that is what we do.

    Could you reassure the Museum’s visitors that in the future when it rains again they’re not going to see the same phenomenon?

    We will be renovating the building over the next few years. The immediate problem has been solved.

    Have you visited the Parthenon and the Acropolis Museum?

    Of course I have.

    Did you like it?

    You cannot ask me if I like the Parthenon! 

    Why not? Some people might not like it. They have the right not to!

    I think it’s one of the miracles of world culture. When you stand in front of it you are filled by awe and admiration. That also goes for the Museum, but in a different way. The Museum is a major achievement. It’s a beautiful museum. It’s very inspiring.

    Don’t you think that something is missing there?

    Oh, I think that everywhere in the world something is missing. That is our human condition.

    What are the chances the Parthenon Sculptures returning to Greece?

    I think I’ve answered that question.

    You are the first non-British director of the British Museum since 1866. How does that feel, especially in times of Brexit?

    I feel, not as a German, but as the person I am, extremely honoured to be the Director of this institution. And to be responsible for the future of this institution, along with all my colleagues and the Trustees and the patrons. I do not assume this role as a German or the son of somebody who was born French or somebody who is married to somebody who was Italian and is now French and in between was Peruvian. I assume this as a European, who is a citizen of the world and who cherishes this.

    Do you think Brexit would affect the British Museum’s operation?

    Yes. I think that, depending on what kind of Brexit will happen in the end, if it happens, it will have a very strong impact.

    Do you fear a no-deal scenario?

    A no-deal Brexit would have a more profound impact.

    Why did you want to become Director of the British Museum?

    It was not my plan from birth, nor when I started my career. But being asked to think about it, I thought that this is the most wonderful place in the world.

    Have you thought about what you’d like to do after leaving the British Museum – whenever that happens?

    I’ve never thought about those things. I concentrate on the work.

    An option would be for you to be the Director of the Acropolis Museum. If you take the Marbles with you!

    You are a very creative journalist!

    For more on Hartwig Fischer's plans for the Beitish Museum, do read the article by Martin Baily in the Art Newspaper, 01 September 2017, follow the link here.

  • Professor Armand D'Angour, is Professor of Classics at Jesus College Oxford, and as the newest member of BCRPM, outlines his thoughts on the continued plight of the Parthenon Marbles: 

     

    When I was at school studying Classics in the 1970s, the general view in the UK was that the Elgin Marbles had been legally acquired from the Greeks (via the Turks), that they were the essential centrepiece of the British Museum collection, that they had been nobly rescued from destruction by Elgin, that they were far safer in the clean air of London than in traffic-plagued Athens, and that returning them would set a terrible precedent that could lead to the world's museums being denuded.

    Now, as a Classics Professor, I know that none of those arguments hold true. First, the acquisition by Elgin was for his personal profit and aggrandisement, and was dubiously legal - his alleged firman seems not even to exist; and it was completed through agreement with Turkish rulers of Greece and not Greeks themselves. Secondly, the display of the marbles in the Duveen Gallery is far from ideal; a colourful and well lit set of replicas would be much more appealing - not to mention the wonderful objects Greece might offer on loan in return, or a display of some of the BM's many other millions of objects currently in storage. Thirdly, the Marbles were not kept safe, but damaged with inappropriate cleaning fluids; the beautiful new museum on the Acropolis is a much worthier site today, and traffic is far worse in London than it is in Athens! Few objects have such iconic national status - and if they do, there would be a strong case for their return too to their place of origin.

    These are arguments from common sense and history. The main arguments, though, that have persuaded me personally that the time has come for the reunification of the marbles in Athens are moral and emotional. It feels to many, Greeks and non-Greeks as if they are a vital part of the Greek land and soul; and that their theft by Elgin, compounded by a high-handed attitude to their return, remains an open wound.

    The tale is told that when the Greeks were fighting for their independence, a group of soldiers observed the Turks stripping lead from between the stones of the Parthenon for use as bullets. Relatively uneducated and rustic Christians as the soldiers were, they felt strongly that this was a dreadful desecration of this pagan monument that had eternal significance to Greeks. They sent a delegation to the Turkish commander with a box of bullets - the very means of their own possible deaths - telling him that they would prefer them to be used than for the great ancient monument to be fatally damaged. Unhistorical as this anecdote undoubtedly is, the fact that it has often been told by Greeks is indicative of their strong feelings about this unique monument.

    The emotional resonance of the Parthenon to Greeks - something increasingly recognised and appreciated by British people - makes for me one of the strongest cases for the reunification of the Marbles.

    Armand

  •  

    29 November, 2021, The Critic

     Zachary Hardman states that Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis, on the issue of the reunification surviving sculptures, the Parthenon Marbles, can only counter logic with more logic.

    "When Elgin’s men hacked off the marbles, they left half a frieze behind. The body of the goddess Iris now resides in London. Her head is in Athens. This is the masterpiece of the ancient Greek sculptor Phidias. But the story his masterpiece once told is now unfinished; his protagonists mutilated. Imagine a Rembrandt or Delacroix painting cut in half and you will get some measure of the Greeks’ distress. Restored to its former glory, millions would flock to Athens to see it.

    These two arguments make Athens’ claim an exception. And there are others. Who, for instance, in modern-day Iraq or Turkey could seriously lay claim to the treasures of Babylonian or Hittite civilisations. There are few treasures so emblematic of a people, and of an entire civilisation, as the Parthenon. The treasures of antiquity are the heirlooms of all humanity: no country has a God-given right to possess or hoard them. That’s true of the Elgin marbles, too. But they would just be better off in Greece."

    To read the article in full, follow this link to The Critic.

     

     

  • 08 March 2022 

     

     

    Your Excellency, Mrs. President of the Hellenic Republic, Madam Vardinoyannis, Mr. President of the Acropolis Museum, honoured guests, women of the world.

    Let me begin by thanking the Vardinoyannis Foundation and the Acropolis Museum for the very kind invitation to join with you all in Athens this evening. This is one of my favourite places in the world. I was here at the opening of the museum in 2009 and have been back on many occasions since. So it’s an enormous pleasure and honour to be amongst you and to see Professor Pandermalis again.

    I found myself writing these words a week ago at a moment when for the first time in my life I sensed a genuine existential threat to the world order. That feeling of unease was amplified by the fact that my eldest son found himself stranded in Moscow where he has been teaching English for the past seven months to Russian schoolchildren. Restricted air travel into and out of Russia last week meant that he had to fly to Egypt in order to find a connecting flight back to London. But at least he got home safe. Not so, sadly, the numerous Ukrainian children trapped in their bombarded cities or trekking to safety in freezing temperatures under heavy artillery fire. I had hoped that by the time I delivered this talk the situation would have calmed down, but sadly the signs are ominous in the extreme. Encouragingly, however, the international community has shown rare solidarity in opposing the invasion of Ukraine.

    So unity is one of the themes I’d like to explore this evening, to emphasise the importance of building and sustaining unity in Europe and where possible across the world. And culture can play a significant part in the process of unification. You can probably already see where I’m going with this, so let me turn to the main event. We are gathered here to celebrate International Women’s Day and I applaud the Foundation for linking the event to the topic of the Parthenon Marbles. At least I assume that is why I was invited? Because, yes, the Marbles are indeed a topic close to my heart, as close to my heart as are the women in my life for I am blessed with three sisters, which has given me invaluable insights into how feminine instinct is so often the right one and the masculine instinct frequently misguided.

    So allow me to briefly explain the genesis of my commitment to the Marbles issue. I wrote an article for The Spectator magazine some years ago on the topic of museum deaccessioning. One person who saw that article was Eleni Cubitt, a founder and for many years the driving force behind the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, and who I’m sure will be remembered fondly by many of you here this evening. Eleni contacted me shortly after the article appeared and invited me for lunch at her favourite Greek restaurant in Islington. It became the first of many lunches and afternoon teas at her cosy little house in Highbury where we exchanged ideas and books over apple pastries and discussed the ways in which we might persuade more people to the Marbles cause. Eleni was a dear friend and a huge inspiration to me and to everyone involved in the Reunification campaign and her death a few years ago left a big hole in our lives.

    My friend the American sculptor Richard Rhodes gave a TedTalk in Seattle recently in which he quoted the writer David Brooks, who advised that one should always have a permanent commitment to tasks that cannot be completed in a single lifetime. This resonated with me, for it prompted me into asking myself whether I was committed to anything, the completion of which might not be achievable in my lifetime. I concluded that the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles represents an issue about which I care deeply but that I have frequently despaired of ever seeing come to fruition. And yet, seemingly insurmountable tasks occasionally have a tendency to loosen under pressure from other forces — social, economic, geopolitical — that suddenly offer a glimmer of light. Such, I believe is the case with the Parthenon Marbles.

    I was in my late teens when I first visited Athens and since then I have returned to this beautiful place more often than to any other European city. And this is where the beautiful goddesses enter the picture. I wrote my doctoral thesis on the great chryselephantine statue of Athena erected in the cella of the Parthenon during what is often referred to as the Periclean Building Programme of the mid-fifth century BCE. It was not the statue of the goddess that interested me so much as the nineteenth-century British reactions to her physical composition. As you are aware, she was constructed out of gold and ivory — and here I acknowledge the work of my American colleague Kenneth Lapatin, who has written the definitive account of the chryselephantine technique in the ancient world, which remains an invaluable resource on the subject. While I too became fascinated by Pheidias’s great gold and ivory creations, how and why they were made, what they might have meant to Athenian citizenry and so on, my own research was concerned with the controversy that grew up among European artists, critics, and academics in the early nineteenth century.

    Archaeological and philological speculations about the lost statue of Athena, and the Zeus at Olympia began to appear around the same time that the Parthenon Marbles arrived in London. One of the most significant of such studies was the Jupiter Olympien, a reconstruction of the ancient chryselephantine technique assembled by the French academic Quatremère de Quincy in 1805. These various researches divided the artistic community, separating those who saw the gold and ivory tradition as evidence of the widespread use of polychrome sculpture among the ancient Greeks — and therefore an acceptable practice to emulate — and those who viewed it as antithetical to the aesthetic of pure white marble, which became the idée fixe of the neoclassical imagination. That cleaving to the neoclassical aesthetic survived into the twentieth century when even the Parthenon Marbles in the British Museum were subjected to the abrasive obsession of Joseph Duveen whose workmen misguidedly sought to restore the Marbles’ “original” whiteness by scrubbing them. It reminded me of the words of Richard Payne Knight, who, when confronted with the first lawnmowers in the early 19th century, said of their inventors: — “To improve, adorn, and polish they profess, but shave the goddess whom they came to dress.”

    Of course, it was the luxurious and extremely valuable materials from which the Athena Parthenos was made that eventually brought about her terminal dismemberment. The gold plates were designed to be removable so that they could be used in the event of war or external threat. She was, then, literally a store of wealth, a convertible asset. The detachable nature of the gold plates may also have contributed to her eventual destruction for it seems possible that the tyrannical dictator Lachares fearing capture, stole the gold plates from the statue before fleeing Athens in disguise in the third century BCE.

    In the early nineteenth century any number of lofty arguments were deployed to dissuade contemporary artists from emulating the ancient mixed media creations. For some critics the ‘realism’ suggested by their contrasting materials and particularly the use of ivory, veered dangerously close to waxworks, then commonly used for medical anatomical models and in Madame Tussauds lurid displays. Sculpture, it was argued, had a duty to rise above such carnivalesque persuasions. The liberal use of gold and ivory in the statue also unsettled those who looked to medieval ideas of the dubious moral connotations of luxuria. The Athena Parthenos as she was handed down in ancient testimony seemed to be the very embodiment of conspicuous consumption, luxury run rampant.

    And so for me, while researching these critical reactions, the Athena Parthenos became an object of fantasy, of dreams, what she had really looked like was now lost in the mists of time, surviving only in the later written testimony of travellers like Pausanias, in a few small material fragments, and in several intriguing, small-scale souvenirs in marble of questionable reliability. An example of that category is the Varvakeion statue in the National Archaeological Museum here in Athens, which is a Roman copy and an approximation of how the Athena Parthenos might have looked. For me, Athena endures as a Parthenos Imaginaire, a figment of my fevered curiosity. Was she beautiful? I sense that is unlikely. Was she awesome? Sublime? My guess is she was all of these, a dazzling symbol of Athenian power, a triumph of the creative imagination and a demonstration of the collaborative nature of cultural production. 

    Now if the composite nature of the ancient chryselephantine statues was the source of their eventual demise, in time it also came to fuel the various controversies surrounding the animated academic debates about polychrome sculpture that continued throughout the nineteenth century. The nineteenth century did indeed see a kind of chryselephantine revival, one of the most notable being the encouragement provided by King Leopold II of the Belgians, who donated ivory from the Congo to Belgian artists in the hope of persuading the Belgian people of the benefits of his colonial adventure in Africa.

    If any single object came to embody the various debates about the mixed media of antiquity, it was surely the polychrome gilded bronze Minerva created by the French sculptor Pierre-Charles Simart for the Duc de Luynes, which was exhibited at the Exposition International in Paris in 1855. It survives today in its original location in the family château at Dampierre en Yvelines, outside Paris. On visiting the château I found myself pondering whether the Musée d’Orsay might be a better location for the Minerva where many more people would see her and learn of the archaeological research and fascinating currents of academic taste that surrounded her creation. Like the Parthenos, she was the product of diverse skills, crafts and materials – bronze, ivory, enamel, precious stones, silver and gold. But who am I to advise on where the Minerva ought to be displayed? Surely if I’m loyal to my Parthenon logic, the Minerva belongs in the place for which she was made, standing proudly in front of Ingres’ fresco L’Age D’Or,also commissioned by the Duke, and surrounded by the polychrome interior decorations of Félix Duban, a leading exponent of Beaux-Arts Néo-Grec architecture. Like the original Parthenon ensemble, the room in which the Minerva stands is a kind of Gesamtkunstwerk, a complete, total work of art in which all the individual elements are harmonically integrated into the whole. Remove one component and the magic evaporates.

    So why am I rambling on about the chryselephantine statues when we’re really here to discuss the Parthenon Marbles. Well, here’s a thought experiment. Ancient testimony informs us that during the planning stages of the Parthenon building programme, Pheidias was for a time favouring constructing the statue of Athena out of marble. The demos objected, however, insisting on the use of precious materials. Had Pheidias prevailed, might we today have surviving fragments of a colossal acrolithic cult statue of Athena as we do for that of Constantine in Rome? And how might that have changed our knowledge of the temple and its purpose?        

    Had such a thing survived, almost certainly Bernard Tschumi would have accommodated the ancient marble goddess as elegantly and sympathetically as he did with the surviving frieze and metopes upstairs. And here I will repeat another common criticism of the London display — the deliberate ‘inside out’ approach to their disposition. I’ll come back to this in a moment, but I think anyone who has visited this wonderful museum cannot fail to acknowledge the superior museology of the displays here in Athens.

    I see this museum as unique among world museums in being an environment in which one can engage with the beauty and essential mystery of the ancient world in stunning proximity to the Parthenon itself, one of the greatest surviving monuments of the ancient world. It is not only a place to learn and dream. I see it as a kind of public studiolo, a place where the private imagination can enjoy free rein.

    And here’s where I see another interesting parallel with the chryselephantine tradition. We know from the archaeological record that the Ergasterion, the workshop in which Pheidias constructed his chryselephantine Zeus at Olympia, stood alongside the site of the temple, and was orientated in such a way that its position mirrored that of the naos or cella of the temple for which the statue was destined. I meant to email Bernard Tschumi to ask whether this had been one of his reference points in deciding to position the Parthenon Galleries in relation to the temple itself — not that he needed any such pretext, for it is anyway a stroke of genius. In any event, I for one now see the orientation of the Parthenon Galleries as having an extra semantic charge, inviting me to ponder the creative practices of Pheidias and his contemporaries.

    And this brings me to another point. When I was invited to speak to you this evening my first thought was: ‘What can be said about the Parthenon Marbles debate that has not been said already?” As the late great Sir Norman Palmer once quipped when getting up to speak last at a conference. ‘Everything has been said already, but not by everyone.’

    I did not want to come here today to wheel out the now familiar arguments for reunification of the Parthenon Marbles. After all, I am in Athens with people far more knowledgeable about the issue than me. Over time, I have sought to focus my own contribution to the debate on the viability and sustainability of the concept of the Universal Museum, particularly as it is embodied in London. The ‘Universal’ component was eventually replaced by the notionally less controversial term, ‘Encyclopaedic Museum’, but the concept of universality has nevertheless become a fundamental tenet used by those seeking to retain the marbles in London. I don’t wish to rehearse my opposition to this concept here this evening as I vowed to try and adopt a positive outlook on this auspicious occasion. But I do want to draw attention to an aspect of the debate that is still not sufficiently explored. I refer to the continuing tendency of the British Museum to remove those specimens of the Marbles in London from their umbilical connection to the Parthenon. One former director of the museum went as far as to say, “The Elgin Marbles are no longer part of the story of the Parthenon. They are now part of another story.”

    We may not understand the true meaning of the scenes enacted on the Parthenon Frieze, but we know that they are, and will remain, part of the story of the Parthenon. To suggest otherwise is akin to promulgating what recently became known as “alternative facts.” For it is arguably the very ‘story-based' nature of the Marbles that is their most notable feature. The frieze is among the earliest and most cohesive narrative projects in art history, a story of chthonic resonance to Athens and its citizenry. It is one thing to have wrenched half that story from the building itself, it is quite another to sever it altogether from its original meaning and context. Therein lies the pertinence of the concept of unification at this particular moment.

    Today we are witnessing a hinge in history. A moment of potentially deep and lasting division in Europe. Countries from around the world and from all across the political spectrum have come together in unity to oppose a dangerous manifestation of fascism and a mortal threat to democracy. What is developing in Ukraine is, to borrow a phrase from Thomas Paine, “the most ridiculous and insolent of all tyrannies.”  

    By now you might have guessed how I’m going to conclude this brief talk. The need for unity among nations is more urgent today than at any moment since the Second World War. Unity can be expressed as it has been of late, in diplomacy and in vocal opposition to the agents of oppression and division. Following the invasion of Ukraine unity has also manifested itself in the cultural sector, whereby international organisations whose activities normally bring the world together have elected almost unanimously to exclude Russia from major events. The Champions League Soccer Final has been moved from St Petersburg to Paris, the Russian Formula One Grand Prix has been cancelled, this year the Russia Pavilion will be excluded from the Venice Biennale and a season of performances by the Bolshoi Ballet at London’s Royal Opera House has been cancelled. And just this morning I heard that the director of the Bolshoi Ballet has resigned. And let’s not forget the Eurovision song contest, which has also decided to exclude Russia, although as a citizen of the United Kingdom I would perfectly understand if we too were banished from future Eurovisions, if only on account of the uniformly poor quality of our entries every year.

    But now that we have this beautiful museum with its purpose-built Parthenon Galleries, there is surely no more appropriate moment at which to return the London specimens to Athens. What a deeply symbolic gesture it would be to unify a group of objects that until now have been a source of controversy and division. Would that gesture not resonate around the world?

    Is there any prospect of that happening? Some have suggested that London could have replicas made to replace the current display. Technology now exists that would make it possible to create copies from marble that would be indistinguishable from the originals down to the minutest detail. The suggestion has already been rejected by the British Museum on the grounds that its visitors would need to wrestle with the idea of the copy rather than the authentic object. But how can we be sure that La Gioconda in the Louvre is the original Mona Lisa and not a replica exhibited in order to protect the original? It is conceivable that we are already at the beginning of an inevitable journey away from our Romantic obsession with originality and authenticity.

    The Institute for Digital Archaeology, a joint project between Oxford University, Harvard University and the Museum of the Future in Dubai, a world leader in digital imaging techniques, claims to be able to produce convincing replicas of the Marbles in Pentelic marble. The Factum Arte company in Madrid, part of the Factum Foundation for Digital Technology in Conservation, are also among the leading practitioners in recreating the world’s cultural heritage through rigorous high-resolution recording and “re-materialisation” processes. Such techniques would be capable of creating replicas of the Parthenon Marbles down to the minutest degree such that the naked eye would be unable to tell the difference between the original and the copy. Now, I appreciate that the very idea of the British Museum displaying replica objects would likely be might be met with a raised eyebrow among curators. However, the two galleries adjoining the Marbles room at the British Museum already contain replicas of some Parthenon sculptures that are still in Greece. Technological replication may have the potential to resolve what often seems an unresolvable conundrum — providing each side with the “golden bridge” — an elegant face-saving compromise, but the idea is unlikely to succeed while we still cleave to the aura of the original. Meanwhile, the ethical arguments for full reunification and repatriation of all the surviving marbles to their home Athens remains the most forceful prospect for resolution. Few are aware that ethics were also at the very centre of the debate back in the 19th century.

    I was looking again at the minutes of the debates in the House of Commons in 1816 which sought to answer the question of whether to purchase the Marbles from Lord Elgin and if so at what price. Some honourable members made clear their scepticism about the purchase, one person opining that “the mode in which the collection had been acquired partook of the nature of spoliation,” while another opposed the decision to buy the Marbles “on the grounds of the dishonesty of the transaction by which the collection was obtained.” Needless to say, I’m being selective here to make the point that despite the eventual decision to buy the sculptures, there was nevertheless moral and ethical opposition even then to the circumstances in which they were acquired by Lord Elgin. But another paragraph stands out. It was decided to pay Elgin £25,000 for the collection in order to — and I quote — “recover and keep it together for that government from which it has been improperly taken, and to which this committee is of the opinion that a communication would be immediately made stating that Great Britain holds these marbles only in trust till they are demanded by the present, or any future, possessors of the city of Athens, and upon such demand, engages, without question or negotiation, to restore them, as far as can be effected, to the places from whence they were taken and that they shall be in the meantime carefully preserved in the British Museum.”

    Well, we know they failed on that final commitment, but we live in hope that one day the Marbles in London will be reunified with their brothers and sisters upstairs.     

    Before closing I should mention that my connection to Athens was strengthened five years ago when my business partner Angelina and I founded our art provenance research agency. Angie is Greek and her family home is here in Athens. She was saddened to be unable to join us here this evening as she currently has her hands full with her lovely new baby boy. Needless to say, she is as passionate as I am about the cause of reunification. 

    And it is on that note that I dedicate this talk to the women in Ukraine. I’m sure you all join with me in standing in support of their struggle for freedom and peace. They will prevail.  

    Finally I have our beloved Mary Beard to thank for an amusing anecdote on which to end. In the frontispiece of her excellent book on the Parthenon she quotes from a moment when the American baseball star Shaquelle O’Neal visited Athens. On arriving home he was asked by a reporter:

    “Did you visit the Parthenon during your time in Athens?” To which he replied,

    “I don’t remember all the clubs we went to.”

    So let me close by thanking you all for inviting me back to the most beautiful club in the world.

    Efcharistó.

© 2022 British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles. All Rights Reserved.