It is one of the wonders of antiquity and reunifying it would be an act of reverence, writes Alf Dubs.Letter published in the Guardian 27 February 2022.

It was with some surprise that I read the reunification of parts of one of the greatest works of classic antiquity described as a herald of “cultural cleansing” in a letter (16 February) on the question of the return of the Parthenon sculptures.

The removal of 75 metres of the Parthenon’s frieze, 15 metopes and 17 pedimental figures from Athens represents at best an abuse of power by Lord Elgin, and at worst an act of vandalism and spoliation that far exceeded the bounds of the dubious permission granted to him to “take away some pieces of stone” which were “preserved in rubble” around the Parthenon.

In the British Museum's re-opened Reading Room there are five 'new visions' with models and respective outline of thoughts put together by five internationally acclaimed architectural teams.

The five shortlisted teams are: David Chipperfield, Lina Ghotmeh, Eric Parry Architects and Jamie Fobert Architects, OMA and 6a Architects. They will be considered by a jury panel and the winning team will be announced this Spring.

The ideas are displayed in the domed Reading Room, now mainly used for the museum's archives and available for students and researchers to access. There is by the architectural models displayed in this space, a desk or feedback station with pencils and a blank cards, an opportunity for visitors to also have their say.

The British Museum explains that the ideas of the architects are part of the bold transformation of the Western Galleries. That these galleries exhibit over a third of the museum's displays and include the Rosetta Stone, the Assyrian lion hunt and the Parthenon sculptures.

The architectural team that is selected will have the task of "developing a complex project, balancing the Museum's architectural heritage with a forward-looking, visitor-focused experience."

'The British Museum reopened its Reading Room for general visitors on 01 July following the introduction of ticketed tours last year' , article in the Museums Journal.

The Western Range will be redeveloped in phases

Meanwhile in December last year, London-based Studio Weave won the competition to revamp British Museum entrance paving the way for an improved visitor experience at both entrances on Great Russell Street and Montague Place. More on this by Gareth Harris in The Art Newspaper.

The French artist, Auguste Rodin drew inspiration from the headless ancient sculptures. The Parthenon Marbles were his favourite works of art during his 15 visits to the British Museum from 1881 to 1917. Yet this is no argument for the British Museum's director Hartwig Fischer to justify retaining the sculptures from the Parthenon in the British Museum.

The new exhibition Rodin and the Art of Ancient Greece (26 April – 29 July 2018) at the British Museum may place the sculptures 'in the context of world cultures' but does not justify the BM's refusal to allow Athens to display the surviving pieces as united as possible, and with views to the Parthenon itself.

'Although the marble stonework of the Parthenon had proven its durability against the ravages of time, it was not indestructible. In 1687, Venetian forces laying siege to Athens shelled the ancient city, igniting a powder magazine stored inside the Parthenon. The resulting explosion was catastrophic, obliterating the cella and the elaborate frieze that had adorned its exterior. Attempts by the Venetians to remove statues from the pediments were similarly disastrous, as multiple sculptures fell to the ground and were shattered beyond repair. Most of the remaining statues and reliefs (known as the "Elgin" or "Parthenon Marbles") were later spirited away in the early 19th Century by Lord Elgin, the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire. Controversially, these pieces are displayed in the British Museum to this day. Meanwhile, the Parthenon itself has since undergone rigorous restoration and preservation work, with much of the damaged peristyle reassembled to give modern visitors a glimpse of the temple's ancient splendour atop the hill where it has stood for over two thousand years.' 

If understanding world culture also means understanding history's mistakes, then (where possible) putting right old wrongs can promote cultural and international relations. Reuniting the Parthenon Marbles in Athens ought to be a possibility that supports world cultures for all the right reasons and promotes greater understanding, respect and compassion.

We are certain that Rodin's exhibition at the British Museum will be exquisite and enjoyed by many, however it can never replace the sheer inspiration that would be enjoyed, by many more, if we could hope to see the surviving sculptures reunited in the superlative Acropolis Museum.

Hartwig Fischer, director of the British Museum, is also quoted as saying that although other artists had been inspired by the Parthenon sculptures, Rodin had responded "with a passion that was to last a lifetime". The passion and love for the Parthenon Marbles felt by millions of Acropolis Museum visitors will continue forever. A Rodin's exhibition at the British Museum would be equally possible with a loan from Athens to London too.

Whilst the BM might be trying to recontextualize the sculptures from the Parthenon, a building which still stands - it will never erode the natural thirst of millions of visitors to the Acropolis Museum, hoping to see the unity of this peerless work of art.

Letter from the Greek Ambassador, H E Dimitris Caramitsos-TzirasDimitris Caramitsos-Tziras to Hartwig Fischer, Director of the British Museum, 25 April  2018. 

More articles on this include:

British Museum claims French artist Rodin proves why Parthenon Marbles should stay in Britain

Rodin's work to go on show in London next to Parthenon marbles

Rodin's love of the Parthenon sculptures revealed

Article in the Evening Standard and letter from Chair of the BCRPM to the Evening Standard

Letters Page Evening Standard:

Dear Sirs,

I write as Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, to remind interested parties that although Rodin was much excited by the sculptures he saw in the Museum, and found them inspiring, he nevertheless lamented their exile from the sweet Attic sunlight beloved of Homer: "Toutes les lumières électriques n'ont pas la force de les empêcher de rechercher éternellement la douce lumière d'Homère".

Those sculptures, which we prefer to attribute to the Parthenon from whence they were grabbed rather than to Elgin the grabber, should now be relinquished back to the city they once crowned. They have inspired artists and thrilled the curious in their gloomy rooms in Bloomsbury for long enough and now the country of their origin deserves their glory, in the museum built especially to house them facing the Acropolis and the still miraculously upright building that they once adorned.

Yours sincerely,
Janet Suzman DBE
London NW3 2RN

The Right Honourable Robert Jenrick published his thoughts in the Daily Telegraph on Saturday 07 April. You can also read the entire article on MP Jenrick's website.

The article, 'Our Museums have fallen into the hands of a careless generation', caused concern amongst all generations represented in today's electorate of the UK. It would seem that Robert Jenrick did not appreciate the British Museum talking to another nation about artefacts from countries of origin in the museum's collection. 

"As was revealed last week the museum is in talks with four foreign governments to part with its collections.

The published minutes of the board tell us less about their plans than parish council minutes would of changes to verge cutting. We do know, however, that it is negotiating the long term loan of its most celebrated objects, the Elgin Marbles." Writes Robert Jenricks

“Long term loan” is a legal fiction constructed to circumvent the museum’s statutory duty to maintain its collection. There is surely no realistic prospect of the marbles returning from Greece should they ever be sent there. Parliament, like the nation, is being treated like a fool." He concludes going on to suggest that UK's curators are happy to denude museum, that the 'slippery slope' and 'floodgates' is 'corrosive post-colonial guilt wracking the progressive Left.'

Janet Suzman, BCRPM's Chair responded: 

Robert Jenrick's petulant essay on his website about the Parthenon Marbles - one might dub them the star steal - is typically high Tory; feigning ignorance of the full story of the steal. Their continuing presence in Bloomsbury is lumped with Jenrick's 'finders keepers' philosophy about all the other objects in the BM which were questionably obtained by a once powerful empire. His nationalism is depressing since these Marbles have a unique history, but with any luck a more generous solution might be achieved by more thoughtful actors.  

And many took to Twitter including BCRPM member Stuart O'Hara.

You can read all of Stuart's thread, here. 

Mark Stephens added his response too:

Sunday 23 February 2020,  The Sunday Times, Deputy Editor Sarah Baxter, wrote her  modest proposal for the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, aptly entitled: "The sane move is to give Greece back its Elgin marbles".

The first 'modet proposal' was written by Christopher Hitchens (pages 104 to 106) in the third edition of  'The Parthenon, The Case for Reunification' published by Versoin May 2008 and launched at Chatham House by the BCRPM. The second was written by Stephen Fry in 2011, you can  read that here too. 

Sarah Baxter attended the International Conference: 'The Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures'  in Athens on 15 April 2019 and saw for her self  "the marvellous museum facing the Acropolis that was built 10 years ago to house the marbles — much lighter and more beautiful than the windowless strip devoted to the sculptures that is admired" at the British Museum. She also spoke at the conference which was hosted by the President of  the Hellenic Republic, Prokopios Pavlopoulos.

In the Sunday Times of the 23rd of February, Sarah Baxter suggestes  the UK had "no need to keep the marbles when it was possible to access the “universal” culture, so prized by the British Museum, by the clever use of technology. As mayor of London in 2016, Johnson had welcomed to Trafalgar Square a 3D replica of the beautiful arch of Palmyra destroyed by Isis in Syria. And, of course, his own trusty bust of Pericles, the “populist” who ordered the construction of most of the Acropolis, is a fake — and none the less inspirational for UK's prime minister."

Sarah's article can be accessed on line or follow the link here.

Following on from Sarah's article, the Director of the British Museum, Dr Hartwig Fischer wrote a letter, which was published on 01 March:

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Sunday March 01 2020, 12.01am, The Sunday Times

Greeks should be glad we have the marbles

Sarah Baxter’s column on the Parthenon sculptures asks us to imagine how we would feel if Big Ben had been transplanted to Athens (“The sane move is to give Greece back its marbles”, Comment, last week). This is to ignore the many buildings and artworks that have been reused, reshaped and often moved across borders, such as Duccio’s altarpiece the Maesta, elements of which have been removed from Siena cathedral and are held in museums across Europe and America.

The Parthenon sculptures are fragments of a lost whole that cannot be put back together. Only about 50% of the original sculptures survive from antiquity. The Parthenon has become a European monument precisely because its sculptures can be seen not only in Athens but in London and other European cities. The public benefit of this distribution and what it means for our shared cultural inheritance is self-evident, and something to celebrate.

Hartwig Fischer, director, British Museum

Minister of Culture for Greece, Dr Lina Mendoni also responded by saying that Dr Fischer's letter was as “unfortunate, if not outright unacceptable.” To read one of the article's quoting Dr Mendoni, follow the link here.

As expected, this was not well received by most not just in the UK but elsewhere too. Yannis Andritsopoulos, London Correspondent for Ta Nea, Greece's daily newspaper, wrote an article  following on from Dr Fischer's letter to the Sunday Times, quoting a number of BCRPM members including Janet Suzman, Alex Benakis,  Dr Peter Thonemann and Professor John Tasioulas. An English version of the Ta Nea article can be read here.

As Chair of the BCRPM, Janet also submitted a letter to the Sunday Times, which is printed in today's paper, alongside one from Dr Peter Thonemann Professor of ancient history, Wadham College, Oxford  and a member of BCRPM. The online link is here and the texts for both letters are below:

Behind the Times at the Museum

Hartwig Fischer, the director of the British Museum and a respected art historian, fails to find a credible parallel for the Parthenon’s dispersed marbles (“Greeks should be glad we have the marbles”, Letters, last week). This is not surprising: there is none.

Thinking people in London were holding anguished debates on the merits of keeping the marbles 200 years ago. They still are. What has changed is the mood abroad: colonial acquisitions are regarded with an increasingly active disdain.

The Greeks have waited for the return of the marbles since 1843, with great dignity and patience. After his latest utterance in defence of the indefensible, Fischer should be aware that patience is wearing thin.

Janet Suzman, chairwoman, British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles

Hack job
Since the Parthenon frieze cannot be fully put back together, Fischer thinks that having its sculptures spread around London and other European cities is a “public benefit” and “something to celebrate”.

My local museum doesn’t have any bits of the Parthenon, and the British Museum has loads. It’s not fair. I wonder if Fischer might be persuaded to hack a few pretty bits off his sculptures and send them our way. If the division between Athens and London is to be celebrated, surely dividing them further would be even more beneficial.
Peter Thonemann, Professor of ancient history, Wadham College, Oxford (member of BCRPM)

Read Janet Suzman's letter sent directly to Dr Fischer on Friday by post and by email. 

Images from left to right: Sarah Baxter Deputy Editor of the Sunday Times, Dr Hartwig Fischer Drirector of the British Museum, Dr Lina Mendoni Greek Minister of Culture and Sport, Dame Janet Suzman BCRPM, Dr Peter Thonemann, Professor of Ancient History, Wadham College, Oxford and BCRPM member

02 November 2020, Janet Suzman in conversation with Yannis Andritsopoulos of Ta Nea

This is sad news indeed, wonderful charismatic handsome Connery - gone. But happily the mischievous gleam in his eye is immortalised on film for posterity to sigh over.

Alas, I never worked with him but admired him from the stalls just like the rest of the world. The legendary Sean fashioned an image of the not-to-be-messed-with British gentleman that far exceeded the reality, if indeed there ever existed such an exotic creature; there is certainly no sighting of the species at the present time.

Nineteen years have passed and the British government remains as obdurate as ever it was, nor the hint of a gentlemanly feeling to be spied amongst the Trustees of the British Museum which still keeps the Marbles captive.

For that is basically all it would take to have those Marbles returned; a sense of fair play and decency to override the tatters of empire and colonialism which hangs about the place.

No matter Acts of Parliament and de-accessions and all the superfluous commentary which obscures the basic argument; the Parthenon Marbles belong where they started, in Athens.

To the dishevelled apparatchiks of empire, Sean would surely murmur in his inimitable Scottish burr: “Give those shtatues back or you might like ataste of thish” - bang-bang. Lights of empire out.

Sean Connery had added his voice to the campaign in 2001. He was visiting Athens for the first time and discussed the issue with the then Greek Culture Minister Evangelos Venizelos.

He told Venizelos he was "confident that the British government will change its position" and the minister thanked Connery for his efforts on the matter.

Sean Connery visited the sacred rock of  the Acropolis to view the Parthenon with Jules Dassin and Vangelis Papathanassiou. He also spoke to journalists about the importance of the return of the Marbles to their homeland. "They had them for two centuries," Connery said referring to the British government "and should return them." 

You can read more on Sean Connery's 2001 historic visit to Athens and the Acropolis, here. 

For more quotes from supporters, kindly visit our 'Supporters' page here.

On Saturday 20 June, the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles (BCRPM) organised a silent protest outside the gates of the British Museum, which remains closed. The protest follows on for those held in previous years and since 2009 when the then ‘New Acropolis Museum’ in Athens was officially opened. This Saturday’s protest was held to marked the 11th anniversary of the Acropolis Museum, which post Covid19 lockdown re-opened to the public on Monday 15 June 2020.

The four large banners that were tied to the British Museum’s railings were the four original banners that hung down from the 4th Plinth in Trafalgar Square, when 19 year old student from Central St Martin’s College, Sofka Smalesstood to protest, 12 September 2009, on behalf of the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles. On the following day, accompanied by Eleni Cubitt and Marlen Godwin, Sofka visited the British Museum to hand the letter she had written on a roll of wallpaper during her protest on the plinth to the then British Museum Director, Neil MacGregor.

On Saturday the London protesters, Luke, Zara and Tayo wore the 2020 Melina Mercouri t-shirts that made their debut at the 08 February 2020 BM protest. They hung the 4 posters with a few additional scribbles on them (11 years later, there was more to say!) and held the ‘Reunite the Parthenon Marbles’ flag that Professor Edith Hall held out for the first time on 22 February 2020 in the British Museum’s Room 18, the Parthenon Galleries, at the end of Natalie Haynes recital of ‘A Thousand Ships’ the voices of the women of Troy.

On Saturday, 20 June, the Acropolis Museum reduced its entrance fee and there were a number of talks and additional exhibitions for visitors to take part in, including: ‘Chisel and Memory’, ‘The lost statue of Athena Parthenon’ and ‘A walk through the Museum with an archaeologist’.

The Director of the British Museum, Dr Hartwig Fischer spoke to UK correspondent for Ta Nea, Yannis Andrtisopoulos that the Acropolis Museum and the British Museum “are complementary in their approach,” adding that the museum “looks forward to continuing our collaboration and fruitful dialogue with our colleagues at the Acropolis Museum.”

Minister of Culture and Sport for Greece, Dr Lina Mendoni commented :“ Perhaps the main argument that the British Museum has been making for years in order not to return the Parthenon Sculptures - since 1982, when Melina Mercouri raised the issue at a UNESCO Conference of Ministers - was that Greece did not have a modern museum that could house the masterpieces of Phidias. Since September 2003, when the construction work for the Acropolis Museumbegan, Greece has been systematically demanding the return of the Sculptures, which are on display in the British Museum, because they are products of theft. The current Greek government - like any Greek government - is not going to stop claiming the stolen sculptures, which the British Museum continues to hold illegally contrary to any moral principle.”

Conservative MP Sir Roger Gale reflected: “while I do not hold to the view that all artefacts should be returned to their country of origin it does seem to me that the Parthenon Marbles have a good home to be returned to and a facility in which they can be properly displayed in home surroundings for the benefit and enjoyment of visitors from all over the world.”

Labour MP Mary Glindon also added: “I have enjoyed several classical tours of Greece and a highlight of those tours has always been the visit to the Acropolis and the Parthenon. But it’s sad that the Parthenon Marbles are in London. While they are seen in the British Museum by many people, as many, if not more, would appreciate seeing the Marbles as part of the amazing cultural experience to be enjoyed when visiting the Parthenon and the Acropolis Museum. The Marbles belong in Athens.”

Dame Janet Suzman, Chair of the BCRPM concluded: “there’s always an anniversary to celebrate. June 16th marked the 44th year since the student uprising in Soweto that was a turning point in the downfall of the apartheid state. A global reaction to the murder of a black man in America is sweeping the world, and those same students, grown much older if they survived at all, want to honour that murder by urging “a move away from a world centred on white supremacy and violence to one centred on justice and equity”.

“That argument was taken further when last week a statue was torn down from its plinth in the city of Bristol in England and thrown into the waters of the harbour where the slave ships used to anchor. Bristol, aware too well of its past, has decided that the statue should now be placed in the city museum with a full explanation of how the trader became so rich. Visitors can then understand that the defaced bronze figure is not just a benefactor of the city but a man who grew rich on other people’s misery, by exploiting the cruellest of white supremacies - the slave trade.

“And in Greece, the end of the Ottoman Empire’s occupation will be celebrated next year. Taking over bits of the world and ruling them according to your own values is an occupation that the British know only too well; at its height that Empire ruled a third of the world. So when Lord Elgin, British ambassador to the Ottoman court, decided he wanted to send back bits of the Parthenon to adorn his house in Scotland, he didn't bother to ask the subject Greeks, he greased the palms of functionaries from Istanbul, persuaded his own king to provide a ship and made off with the glory that was Greece. They landed up in Room 18 of the British Museum and for 200 years have been one of its star attractions.

“So we need to ask the British Museum, hiding from the tsunami of anti-colonialist feeling sweeping the whole world, whether they would have the decency to provide visitors with the full story: how did these incomparable pieces of sculpture torn from the greatest building in the western world get to sit - out of context - in the grey grandeur of Room 18? Reunification of the Marbles would seem to be a move away from white British exceptionalism and a move towards a world the survivors of Soweto are desperate to see. White supremacy stole them away and a white sense of justice should see them restored. But until that time comes, as it surely must: tell the story. Let the people judge the fairness of their captivity in London. There is a museum waiting for them in Athens.”

UK Under-Secretary of State Wendy Morton met with Alternate Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Hellenic Republic, Miltiadis Varvitsiotis on Tuesday 06 April 2021. Minister Varvitsiotis tweeted:
‘Standing together, we continue to deepen our strategic partnership & to strengthen our historic ties in order to jointly address the common challenges of the future.’

“Greece and the United Kingdom are working together to create very strong relations following Brexit and to shape the future strategic partnership between the two states,” Alternate Minister of Foreign Affairs Miltiadis Varvitsiotis stressed following his meeting with the UK Under-Secretary of State, Minister for European Neighbourhood and the Americas, Wendy Morton. The talks focused on the reopening of tourism, the Cyprus issue, cooperation on the migration issue, and security issues in the Eastern Mediterranean. Mr. Varvitsiotis also raised the issue of the Parthenon Marbles.

Mr. Varvitsiotis also raised an issue that, as he said, every Greek politician has a duty to raise: the Parthenon Marbles. More specifically, he stressed  that the Parthenon Marbles must be repatriated and reunited with the Global Heritage Monument of the Parthenon, especially following the opening of the Acropolis Museum, which is ready to welcome the Marbles “back to their home.”

To read the full press release of this meeting, follow the link here.

Greece continues to place the issue of the reunification of the Parthenon Marbles as a permanent request to the UK. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Nikos Dendias met with his counter part Dominic Raab, in London earlier on this year, on 02 February 2021 and also broached the subject of the sculptures from the Parthenon in the British Museum. During this meeting, both Ministers reaffirmed the strength of the UK-Greece relationship, noting 2021 marks 200 years since the beginning of the struggle that led to the foundation of the modern Greek state, in which the UK played a key role. The Ministers also discussed proposals for new initiatives to deepen UK-Greece co-operation, including in the fields of education, cultural exchange and defence.

Greece strongly supports the return and restitution of cultural property to the countries of origin and highly appreciates the work and achievements of the UNESCO ICPRCP Intergovernmental Committee, where the issue of the Parthenon Marbles is constantly examined since 1984.

In this context, Greece was disappointed that the United Kingdom refused to accept its request to initiate a mediation process on the Sculptures from the Parthenon through the relevant UNESCO Rules , despite the respective Recommendation of ICPRCP.

Despite the fact that, between 1984 and 2018, the ICPRCP adopted at least 16 Recommendations calling for the return of the Parthenon Marbles, the British side appears, to Greece’s regret, not to have seriously considered as yet the possibility of resolving the dispute over the sculptures of the Parthenon that are in the British Museum.

Aside from the British arguments, Greece's long-standing request to re-house the surviving sculptures of a unique world heritage monument, a 'wonder of the world', will continue to be made at every opportunity possible. Greece remains convinced that fairness will prevail. With that in mind, Greece continues to invite the British Government to reconsider its stand.

Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marble, Janet Suzman, continues to also look for a deeper, more meaningful exchange of discourse between Greece and the UK. "When we consider that Lord Elgin referred to the sculptures as 'stones of no value', it begs the question as to why, after 200 plus years, we cannot find our generosity of spirit and see the huge merit of reuniting these peerless sculptures in the Acropolis Museum. A donation to Greece of what is in Room 18 would support the long history shared by the UK with Greece. There is so much more to be gained in finding a way to facilitate such a donation than to be using arguments that are out of step with the times and global opinion."

Statement written by Dame Janet Suzman, Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles read out by Danny Chivers during Saturday's BP or not BP? protest at the British Museum.

These unmatched sculptures that you see before you have a home waiting for them. These figures, part of an ancient belief system, have been stranded in the grandest refugee centre you’ve ever seen - the great British Museum itself. But home is where they were created two and a half thousand years ago. 

In Athens stands a fine building especially built to house them, and next year this New Acropolis Museum will celebrate its tenth anniversary. On its top floor there are yearning gaps where these very sculptures should be sitting, joined with the other half of the pedimental carvings and in direct sight of the ancient building from which they were chopped, and which, astonishingly, still stands proud on its ancient rock. That fact alone makes these sculptures unique; we can still see exactly where they first displayed themselves, for they were never intended as separate 'works of art', but as part of the mighty whole of Athena’s glorious temple. Who, one wonders, was a mere occupying Sultan to sign away the genius of Periclean Athens? 

Now is the time to make a grand and generous gesture to the Greek people who in distant times laid the foundations of our modern democracies and who informed our artistic heritage. No sculptures have ever matched these languishing here. They are unarguably part of a history the Greeks feel profoundly. Modern Greeks may be as distant from their forebears as we to Anglo-Saxons but that never stopped a nation feeling viscerally connected to its antecedents. 

Let’s do so by celebrating the tenth anniversary of the Acropolis Museum in 2019 with the return of their prodigals. What a fabulous birthday present that would be! How civilised and decent of the British Museumto divest itself of dated strictures belonging to an era - now so over - of colonialist finders keepers. The time has come to do the right thing. Go BM! Do it! 

For more information on BP or not BP, visit here.

20 November 2021, The Tablet

Just over 400 years have passed since Sir Henry Wotton, travelling through Europe on official business, offered a definition of his role: “An ambassador is an honest gentleman sent to lie abroad for the good of his country.”

Even if the preceding words are too harsh, the final six remain important. In everything they do or say, diplomats must serve their homeland, not their personal agenda. A recruit to the Foreign Office is warned of a code which forbids any use of an official position “to further your private interests or those of others.” Equally taboo is accepting “gifts or hospitality” which “might reasonably be seen to compromise your personal judgement or integrity.”

The past, you may say, is a foreign country, where things were done differently. But how differently? When Thomas Bruce, the seventh Earl of Elgin, was appointed ambassador to the Ottoman Sultan in 1799, it was an opportunity not just to consolidate an alliance against the French but to acquire some of the greatest artefacts ever fashioned – in order to decorate his house in Scotland.

He would later give different accounts of his motivation: at times he insisted that he was acting nobly to further British aesthetics. He would claim, quite implausibly, that he only decided to remove sculptures, as opposed to having them drawn, when he saw they were in acute danger. In more private communications, he was more frank. During the summer of 1801, when an exceptional military alliance seemed to offer exceptional personal opportunities, there is no mistaking the excited tone in which he writes to Giovanni Lusieri, his monument-stripper in chief: “The plans for my house in Scotland should be known to you. The building is a subject that occupies me greatly, and offers me the means of placing in a useful, distinguished and agreeable way, the various things that you may perhaps be able to procure for me.”

Studying the documentary evidence for the extraction of the Parthenon sculptures, which began in 1801 and continued intensively over two years, it is hard to avoid a sense of how shocking the operation was to many contemporaries. Was permission given? The original firman (an Ottoman letter of permission) has never been found but let us assume the authenticity of the Italian copy. The person induced to issue it was not the Sultan (who may never have known) but an official several notches down, the deputy to the Grand Vizier; and it has never been clear what exactly he meant by allowing the removal of “some pieces of stone with old inscriptions and figures” from the Acropolis. As the historian William St Clair concluded after a rigorous examination, Elgin’s agents used “cajolery, threats and bribes” to persuade Ottoman officials in Athens to exceed, at least in spirit, the firman’s terms.

When Lusieri and his team went to work with ropes, pulleys and saws, the spectacle was horrifying to British and Ottoman observers alike. As Edward Daniel Clarke, a traveller and antiquarian, describes the scene; “Down came the fine masses of Pentelican marble, scattering their white fragments with thundering noise among the ruins. The disdar (commander of the Ottoman garrison) took his pipe from his mouth and letting fall a tear, said in a most emphatic tone of voice, telos !
It was a scandalous act even with due consideration for the spirit of the times, which was itself pretty horrifying to modern sensibilities. The spirit might be described by the elusive New Testament Greek word harpagmos which refers to the act of grabbing, the thing grabbed or to a grabbing kind of mindset. For the powerful nations of western Europe and their wealthy representatives, Hellenism and its physical legacy was something to be grabbed: either by measuring, drawing and painting the ancient artefacts or, ultimately, by removing them.

Pause for a moment and consider what message is being sent to the world by the British establishment when it retrospectively endorses Elgin’s actions as procedurally correct and legal. Such formalistic arguments cut less and less ice in world where the tide of anger over Europe’s historic arrogance is growing. It surfaced most recently in September when a UNESCO committee, a rotating group of 21 countries, called with unprecedented firmness for the return of the Parthenon marbles to Athens. This emboldened Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the Greek prime minister, to make a formal request for talks on [reunification] during a visit to Britain this week.

The trustees of the British Museum insist, accurately enough, that they have no mandate to do anything except act in the interest of the institution and its educational mission. The British government hides behind the independence of the museum; it is not for any cabinet minister to interfere in the decision-making of such a robustly independent body. As a museum spokesperson said in response to the UNESCO vote, the trustees “have a legal and moral responsibility to preserve and maintain all the collections in their care and to make them accessible to world audiences.” But that need not be the final answer. Ways can be found to overcome the legal obstacles. A law was passed in 2009 to enable the Museum to return objects that had been looted by the Nazis. An equally powerful imperative is building up for the return of objects that were grabbed in the colonial era with egregious cynicism. These include the Benin heads that were seized in 1897 after British forces looted a royal palace in Nigeria.

In 2019, Germany vowed to work towards the return of imperial loot taken “in ways that are legally or morally unjustifiable today.” All over the world, the moral pressure to rectify (or at least not gloat over) the legacy of colonialism is growing, with the support of rising powers like China and India.  sensed and anticipated that trend when he said in 2017 that France’s museums should no longer be holding colonial booty from Africa, starting a process that culminated last year in a law which provided for some restitution.

Suppose Britain’s cultural establishment were to renounce the legacy of Elgin and instead throw itself behind the cause of the reunification of the Parthenon sculptures, perhaps on the understanding that Greece would freely grant or lend to the British people other artefacts of real value. Amidst the euphoric chain-reaction that would be triggered, wonderful new ideas would emerge as to how best to share the legacy of Greece with the world. Among the distinguished cultural and academic figures who advocate such a move, the term “reunification” is carefully chosen. If the sculptures now in London belong anywhere it is with the parts of the frieze that remain in Athens and are now superbly displayed, in Greek light and with the Parthenon in view, in the new Acropolis Museum. For the first time in two centuries, visitors would be invited to admire the great majority of the frieze, with its chariots, horsemen, tray-bearers and water-carriers … and ponder what they mean: the fact is that nobody knows.

In its handout on the marbles, the British Museum rightly notes that the Parthenon has a “complex history”, including phases as a “temple, a church, a mosque and now an archaeological site”. If there is a flaw in the way the Acropolis and its monuments are now presented to the world, it lies in the exclusive emphasis placed on the era of Pericles, leading statesman of Athens from 461 to 429 BC – perhaps the greatest of the Rock’s many ages, but not the only one. Eight centuries before Pericles, the citadel hosted a thriving Mycenean palace; two centuries before, the rock’s sanctity, whose violation incurred a terrible, inter-generational curse, became a wild card in Athenian power struggles. And the Parthenon was a temple of monotheism for longer than it served the Olympian religion: a Greek Christian cathedral for perhaps seven centuries, a Roman Catholic one for another two, then a mosque. For Christians, the mysterious light that emanated from the white pillars became an attraction for pilgrims and a sign of the Virgin Mary. In 1394 the Florentine duke Nerio Acciaiuoli bequeathed the entire modest town of Athens to the Catholic cathedral of Santa Maria, in other words the Parthenon.

It is an Ottoman Muslim traveller, Evliya Celebi, who gave one of the greatest descriptions of the Parthenon frieze: “The human mind cannot indeed comprehend those images – they are white magic, beyond human capacity: whoever looks upon them falls into ecstasy, his body grows weak and his eyes water for delight.” And the Acropolis has seen an extraordinary modern history – for example in 1941 when two brave young Athenians scrambled up a vertical tunnel first used by Myceneans in the middle of the night and tore down the Nazi banner that flew menacingly over the city. As described later by Manolis Glezos, emerging from the dark passage onto the moon-lit rock was a moment of spiritual ecstasy as well as political defiance.

All these moments have their place in the story of the Acropolis. It is a shame that the average guide book devotes, say 50 pages to the Periclean century and at most a paragraph to the monotheistic millennium. But if the injuries left by Elgin’s depredation could only heal, then the masters of the Acropolis would more easily find the freedom and confidence to present the story of the Sacred Rock in its mysterious entirety. And the whole world would joyfully assist them.

Bruce Clark’s article was published in The Tablet (Saturday 20 November 2021).

Bruce Clark writes for The Economist on history, culture and ideas. His latest book  'Athens: City of Wisdom', is published by Head of Zeus and is available to purchase via The Tablet also.

Jon Sleigh’s What Are Museums For? is one of a newish series from Bristol University Press in the vein of OUP’s Very Short Introductions or Bloomsbury’s 33&1/3. Other titles interrogate animal rights, the Olympics, philanthropy, and prisons; I’m looking forward to reading the volumes on music, journalism, and monarchy. Sleigh talks to people from the Ashmolean and British Museums alongside those from provincial collections (in the UK and Commonwealth) and niche museums dedicated to single topics and places. For those engaged with history and heritage, this book might turn out to be a bracing read. It was for me. In many cases the message is that museums are not “global [hubs] of scholarship, open to all”, to quote Neil MacGregor in Charlotte Higgins’ recent Guardian long read, but oppressive, uninviting spaces that force their visitors to submit to their intellectual authority and version of history. For example, I was content to view Classical antiquity in its Mediterranean context. I hadn’t really dealt with the possibility that its appropriation by 19^th Century imperialists prevents a great many people from having a positive emotional reaction to its artefacts.

That said, the overwhelming impression from Sleigh’s interviewees is that museums ought to be for everyone. These curators and museum staff may express it in different ways, but it’s clear that certain institutions, particularly those whose collections originate in Wunderkammern or the Grand Tour, have work to do to fulfil that ideal. There doesn’t seem to be dogma in museology beyond thoughtfulness and willingness to listen – this is a read gloriously removed from the rhetoric of culture wars – though it takes as much work again to prove to people that the work has been done, let alone get them into your museum in the first place. This gently provocative book often zooms out to imagine how museums and their collections may be viewed subjectively by the society that visits them, rather than as part of state apparatus to which people are subjected when they visit. The British Museum’s resemblance to a classical temple is more than superficial. Sleigh insists that “museums are not neutral. They were never intended to be.” The so-called universal museums are not important in this book and so little of it is relevant to the case of the Marbles. With Jon Sleigh and his interviewees, we’re among friends: as far as the author is concerned, they’re in the wrong place.

Sleigh also makes the point that, “at its inception… men were the expected primary audience within a patriarchal structure”, which makes one think not just of Archer’s painting of the temporary Elgin Room in 1819, which contains 16 men and four (accompanied) women, but also of Elgin’s initial display of the sculptures in the “shed on Park Lane”, alongside nude boxers – alas, no painting of this, so the gender split in the audience must remain a mystery.

This thought-provoking book repeatedly talks about museums catering for the past, present, and future in varying proportions – a means of inspiring how a newly-opened museum might behave. Speaking personally, there’s a lot of performative jargon which I had to work quite hard to understand, but its ethics are sound. What’s clear is that the niche museum is the future (that’s my interpretation, not Sleigh’s), and not just because it’ll be increasingly inappropriate to acquire and hoard collections from global sources. The universal museums are already isolated, and the breadth of their collections hasn’t resulted in the intended insights, comparisons, or levelling up (call it what you will) but rather encourages gatekeeping. Intersectionality is the way forward, but of visitors, not collections. Sleigh draws a direct line between BM founder Hans Sloane and 80s individualism:

The singular nature of where a museum can start from is vividly seen in Sloane himself – his wealth, his art[istic] taste, his social interactions, political decisions, and wishes are still to this day[sic] functioning today within UK democracy…

This is shortly followed by a quote from former BM director David M. Wilson:

Each generation makes its own contribution to the museum, and often it is the actions of individuals that change its course.

To me, that has shades there being “no such thing as society”.

There are a few more uncomfortable truths at play here – for example, digitising of collections increases accessibility for some constituencies while establishing barriers to others. Sleigh’s experts are big on the idea of placing their collections in a context that is relatable to the audience, particularly in collections where the audience may have lived experience of the exhibits: the example given is Matt Smith’s porcelain piece Happy Union, displayed in Liverpool’s Walker Art Gallery, which sits among the 19^th Century chintz but is charged with the legalisation of same-sex partnerships in 2013. The Marbles’ original context, that of 4^th Century Athenians, is unattainable, despite Alma-Tadema’s best efforts. But as we always rebuffed those who point out that they can’t be reattached to the Parthenon: their display in an airy gallery within sight of the temple, in Attic light, is a pretty good compromise, and a damn sight better than their gloomy cell in Bloomsbury.

There are ghostly traces of old arguments on both side of the Marbles debate in What Are Museums For? You don’t have to believe in the supernatural to enjoy Ghosts of the British Museum: A True Story of Colonial Loot and Restless Objects. It’s not clear if author Noah Angell does, though some of his interviewees certainly do. Ghosts exist insofar as the human belief in them does, in our culture and those of the ancient worlds whose artefacts populate our museums. The supernatural conceit is a clever means of exploring colonial legacies in archaeology, science, cultural trafficking, and tourism. This is best proved in Angell’s chapter on the caryatid in Room 19, which covers similar ground to AE Stallings’ superior 2023 Hudson Review article (a book-length version of which, Frieze Frame, is about to be published): contemporary Ottoman feelings about the sculptures and Elgin’s agents, the structural groaning of the remaining caryatids for their lost sister, and the debate of 1816 on the government’s prospective purchase of Elgin’s collection. The BM’s more durable arguments for retention of the sculptures are pricked and punctured, and as such this chapter would be a good digested read to bring the uninitiated up to speed if they don’t have time for Stallings’ much longer investigation.

Running through both these books is something obvious and peripheral to the Marbles debate; that the current model of the world’s biggest museums is out of kilter with the way the wind is blowing. However, if the biggest museums are to get with the programme, they must look to Erik Olin Wright: they must be dismantled rather than destroyed. And they certainly mustn’t hunker down and stick their fingers in their ears.

Angell goes into greater depth elsewhere in the book, but his Greek-centric chapter mentions the pending case of former BM curator Peter Higgs’ selling of items from the museum’s collection, the same that triggered the resignation of director Hartwig Fischer and deputy director Jonathan Williamsin 2023. Curious to think that the collection’s continued similarity to a Wunderkammer and not a 21^st Century museum facilitated a scandal that may yet prove a catalyst in the marbles’ return to Greece. It will be no surprise to any of us that this is the only chapter of Angell’s book not to feature an interview with a British Museum employee past or present. It also lacks a single ghost.

Ta Nea, 01 August 2020

UK correspondent for Ta Nea, Yannis Andritsopoulos wrote on Saturday 01 August 2020:

A new chapter in the campaign for the return of the Parthenon Sculptures will start next week, aimed at raising awareness of the public opinion and mobilizing politicians, organizations and public figures in the UK.

The main slogan of the campaign, run by the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, is "Tell the real story", with the BCRPM inviting the British Museum to reveal to its visitors the truth about how the sculptures, displayed in London since 1817, were acquired.

“We urge the British Museum to tell the full story as Greece is preparing to celebrate 200 years of independence. The Parthenon Marbles were removed by Lord Elgin when Greece could not speak out. Reuniting the surviving sculptures from the Parthenon would be a friendly and just act by a nation looking to take the lead in responding to global challenges,” Dame Janet Suzman, Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, told Ta Nea newspaper.

The BCRPM is made up of respected British scholars, academics and artists, such as Emeritus Professor of Late Antique and Byzantine Studies Judith Herrin, fellow of the British Academy Professor Oliver Taplin and archaeologist Anthony Snodgrass.

“The Parthenon Marbles in the British Museum (since 1817) are a, perhaps the classic illustration of the colonialist-imperialist complex that so disfigures that august collection today. The large fortune acquired by the Museum’s founding collector and benefactor, Dr Hans Sloane, was itself deeply mired in the slave trade, and Lord Elgin, ambassador to the Sublime Porte, was able to loot the Parthenon marbles only thanks to Britain’s being an enemy of the Ottoman Sultan’s enemy, Napoleonic France, at a time when Greece was a possession of the Ottoman Empire. Next March 25, 2021, will mark the bicentenary of the Greeks’ declaration of independence from the Ottoman yoke after a subjection of nearly 37 decades. Is it too much to hope that it will also mark a significant moment in the decolonisation of the British Museum” said Professor Paul Cartledge, A.G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture emeritus, University of Cambridge, Vice-Chair of the BCRPM.

The BCRPM has produced a leaflet aimed at deconstructing the British Museum's arguments which are included in a leaflet distributed to visitors of Room 18 - also known as the Duveen Gallery - which houses the Sculptures. It says that this leaflet contains "inaccuracies and untruths" (the Museum goes so far as to claim that the Greek authorities completed Elgin's work because they transferred the Sculptures to the Acropolis Museum!).

Therefore, the BCRPM produced its own leaflet which contains the "true story" of the Parthenon Sculptures. It will soon send it to the British government, political parties and MPs, trustees of the British Museum and the British media. In addition, on specific dates in the fall, activists will distribute the booklet to British Museum visitors.

The campaign, which will unfold in the coming months, accompanied by the hashtags #TellTheStory, #TimeIsNow and #BMJustDoIt, is dedicated to the inspirers of the campaign in Britain, Eleni and James Cubitt, who had been urged to launch it by Melina Mercouri.

"Lusieri, the artist hired by Lord Elgin, literally demolished the temple so that he could extract the Sculptures," Robert Browning, a professor of Classics at the University of London and first Chair of the BCRPM, said on April 16, 1983, interviewed by Hara Kiosse for Ta Nea.

"That is why, when I hear that Elgin took the marbles so that they do not end up becoming quicklime in the hands of the Greeks, or that the British Museum keeps them because they are in danger due to air pollution of Athens, I feel that what they say is sacrilege."

Thirty-seven years on, the Museum still houses Pheidias's masterpieces, with its spokesperson telling Ta Nea that "the possibility of their permanent return is not being considered" and Marlen Godwin, the BCRPM's International Relations Officer, responding: "We will not give up. We will continue to call for the reunification of the Sculptures. Until then, we call on the Museum to reveal the truth to those who visit it to see the Marbles. That's the least it can do. "

Main points of the leaflet here.

Ta Nea, 01 August 2020

British Museum interim Director, Sir Mark Jones interviewed two weeks ago in The Times, explaining how he has dealt with the consequences of the British Museum thefts. He set a target of five years for the BM’s complete collection, eight million objects, to be catalogued online, each with an image. With 60% of the BM's objects already digitalised, this target will be met.

Ten of the recovered stolen items are to be featured in a new BM exhibition called 'Rediscovering Gems', which opens on Thursday, 15 February 2024. 

From theft of artefacts to the call for the British Museum to give back some of the contested items in its collection.

“It’s true that I find the legal situation of contested objects, and the historical justification for retaining them, much less interesting than consideration of their current and future benefits,” Jones says. "What we should really be thinking about is where these objects are going to create the most interest, where they are best going to engage people.”

We certainly concurr with that last sentence. The Parthenon Gallery in the Acropolis Museum is the one place on earth where it is possible to have a single and aesthetic experience simultaneously of the Parthenon and its sculptures. 

Read the full interview with Sir Mark Jones in the The Times.

Gareth Harris from The Art Newspaper also wrote quoting Sir Jones' response in The Times  with his reply to the question of if he were "still the BM’s director in a couple of years’ time, could he envisage supervising an arrangement to return the Elgin [Parthenon] Marbles to Greece?”

“Yes,” Jones said. “I could easily imagine a relationship between us and the Acropolis Museum [in Athens] that included mutual loans. Why not? They have some rather fabulous objects as well.”

Greece has been offering to loan antiquities to the British Museum in return for the reunification of the sculptures in Athens, for over 24 years.

11 December 2021, The Guardian

Miranda Sawyer reviewing Radio 4’s Vice World News, The Unfiltered History Tour ‘which brings a fresh eye to favourite museum pieces’.

'Remember Radio 4’s The History of the World in 100 Objects, hosted by the former British Museum director Neil MacGregor? This is the flip side. The Unfiltered History Tour wants the British Museum to return certain artefacts (“stolen goods”) to the places they originally came from.' Writes Miranda Sawyer. 

This one was about the Easter Island statues. Islanders Sergio Mata’u Rapu and Tarita Alarcón Rapu, who are working to get Hoa Hakananai’a back. “For us, it’s not just a well-carved rock,” said Tarita. “It’s a living ancestor. Living.” Miranda goes back to listen to  the relevant 100 Objects episode (this Easter Island statue is at No 70). 'The contrast between MacGregor’s lofty, academic approach and the emotion of Sergio and Tarita was stark.'

She concludes: ‘Other episodes discuss the Benin bronzes, the Rosetta stone, and, of course, the Parthenon Marbles. There is much non-romantic true love for them all, and it’s hard to argue that these works should not be returned to where they resonate the most’.

Nina Kelly is a London student studying A level Mathematics, Further Mathematics, History and Biology. She had always wanted to know more about the Parthenon Marbles and last year she made use of her EPQ (rs) as an opportunity to find out more.

Nina's research had her attend the BP or not BP? prtotest at the British Museum on 08 February 2020, travel to Athens and interview both Prof Paul Cartledge in Cambridge and William St Clair in London.

Professor Paul Cartledge

To watch her video, kindly follow the link here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbD-0qGwg08&feature=youtu.be

Nina's conclusion is one we can all take note of: "the more we know and understand about the Parthenon Marbles, the more we can all do to encourage and appreciate a fairer world. The outcome on the debate of this specific collection of sculptures is likely to go on forever or until the oldest of stories is being told in the most holistic setting possible." 

BCRPM wish Nina all the best with her University studies. 

16 October 2013, Room P4B001, European Parliament, Brussels, Belgium

Tom Flynn's presentation at yesterdays Round Table at the European Parliament in Brussels.

The round table was organised by The Swiss Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles under the patronage of the Ministry of Culture of the Hellenic Republic and MEP Rodi Kratsa, Vice-President European Parliament 2007-2012.

 The Parthenon Marbles — A European Concern

Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, distinguished members of the European Parliament. Let me begin by thanking Professor Sidjanskifor the kind invitation to contribute to today's Round Table. It is a pleasure and an honour to be with you in Brussels.

What can we say about the case for reunifying the Parthenon Marblesthat has not been said a thousand times before? What more can we add to the numerous persuasive argumentsalready made for reuniting the dismembered components of Phidias's finest achievement? How many more times must we convene to reiterate the importance of restoring coherence to a work of art whose desecration at the hands of Lord Elgindamaged one of Greece's greatest gifts to the world?

The answer to these questions is that there will always be more to say about the case for reunifying the Marbles. There will always be new and ever more compelling arguments for reuniting them in Athens. And until that happens our generation and future generations will continue to convene and will go on reminding the British Museumof its moral duty to restore to these objects the dignity that Lord Elgin so rudely snubbed.The story the Marbles tell, is of a cultural moment that is a precious and irreplaceable part of our birthright as Europeans and the bedrock of our democratic ideals. That story loses much of its narrative charge while its components remain dispersed across different locations.

The Parthenon Marbles are more than just a work of art. They are more than a mechanism through which to increase the footfall of cultural tourism. They are more than a means by which to impose some meaning on the randomly accumulated collections of an encyclopaedic museum.

The reason the Parthenon Marbles transcend conventional museum categorisation is that they have the potential to demonstrate that in a time of global economic turmoil and geopolitical unrest cultural objects can unite us across national boundaries and remind us of our shared humanity. I say 'potential' because there is an irrefutable logic to the proposition that a united,coherent sequence of objects that speaks with such clarity of our shared background is more likely to foster unity among nations than a fragmented series of objects that continues to symbolise disunion and cultural rupture. For this process to begin, however, the dialogue between Greece and London must rise to a higher level based on mutual trust and generosity of spirit.

The Parthenon Marbles are unquestionably important within the cultural landscape, but they have become renowned for all the wrong reasons. While they should be celebrated for representing the zenith of the Periclean building programme of fifth-century Athens, instead they are more widely recognised as the most controversial and divisive objects in world culture. They should be peacemakers but we are not allowing them to take up that peacekeeping role. Thus they have become emblematic of the wider disputes between western museums and developing nations that have become known as the 'culture wars'. While the Marbles remain immured within the Stygian gloom of the Duveen Galleries where their true significance to European art and culture is so wilfully misinterpreted and misunderstood — our attempts to build harmony in the realm of cultural heritage will be impaired. The international museum community — but more specifically the British Museum — has the power to repair that rupture. The symbolic resonance of a unifying gesture of this kind could be profound and long-lasting.

Allow me briefly to frame this within a broader context. The events that unfolded in Iraq and Afghanistan in recent years, and now in Syria, have brought unprecedented quantities of looted cultural objects onto the international art market. Many of these objects are removed from ancient sites under cover of darkness by local people seeking to scrape a meagre living for themselves and their families. Such subsistence looting destroys what archaeologists refer to as an object's 'provenience', that is the specific positional coordinates and context in which the object was located in the ground, tomb or temple site. Having been extracted, the objects and artefacts are moved up the art market food-chain, so to speak, before finally ending up in the home of wealthy collectors or museums.

Most museums now know better than to acquire objects of uncertain ownership history and the UNESCO guidelines have set down clear markers on acquisition. Moreover, thanks to the Internet and related communications technologies the world's encyclopaedic museums are now vigilantly monitored by well-informed individuals and interested parties for any hint of a problematic acquisition. The social network has become a critical filter surveying the movement of cultural heritage goods and no longer can museums acquire or display suspect objects without risking public exposure and widespread condemnation.

Nevertheless, so profound and widespread is the political turmoil ravaging the Middle East that the traffic in cultural objects is now arguably out of control. It is unlikely to improve until peace and economic stability return to the nations affected. Museums are implicated in this 'food-chain', partly as a consequence of their historical development as the repositories of cultural objects and partly because of their self-imposed obligation to continue collecting. In the last few months a major Australian museum was found to have acquired an important temple statue of Shiva that had been looted from a site in South Asia. It now seems likely that other museums were recipients of objects from the same supply chain. That said, on the other side of the equation, many museums have taken it upon themselves to return objects that have been recognised as being of specific sacred or ritual value to the source nations and communities from which they were originally expropriated during earlier times.

It is against the background of ongoing cultural upheaval that the British Museum now has an opportunity make an extraordinary gesture of reconciliation by reunifying the Parthenon Marbles. This would set an example to other museums around the world and would confirm that contrary to what many people have been led to believe, the British Museum DOES appreciate and respect the architectural significance of the Parthenon Marbles in relation to the Acropolis monument. It would be an acknowledgement that their very uniqueness justifies an amendment to the British Museum Act that has hitherto obstructed substantive progress on the issue. Our most eminent cultural heritage lawyer, Professor Norman Palmer of University College London, has pointed out that such an amendment would be perfectly achievable. This would clear the way for both parties to enter with open minds into a constructive mediation process. Instead of cleaving to an anachronistic legal instrument that will merely perpetuate the impasse, the British Museum now has an opportunity to demonstrate that Europe — and indeed the rest of the world — is unified by cultural objects, not divided by them.

Dr Tom Flynn FRICS

15 October 2013, Brussels

Cultural heritage and its symbols undoubtedly constitute the main capital of European peoples and the soul of the European Union. Respecting and restoring them is a European obligation and concern.

Rodi Kratsa MEP, European Parliament.

 http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/henry-porter/parthenon-sculptures-its-about-liberty-too

Henry Porter : "One of the reasons I am here is the late Christopher Hitchens, a good friend with whom I worked and argued for twenty years. 

I disagreed with Christopher on practically everything - his belief in the innate corruption of Mother Teresa, for example, his enthusiasm for the Iraq invasion and for gun ownership in the United States.  

But on the return of the Parthenon Marbles to Athens, Christopher was right, and I want to take the opportunity to salute the work he did in pressing the case for restitution. To some extent my contribution today is in memory of his stimulating company and his ability to make us all think and argue better, however crazy some of his notions.  In his book, The Parthenon Marbles, he was at his most forensic, passionate and brilliantly polemical."

And indeed as Henry went onto say.... 'it's never too late'.

Coverage in the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/Greece

18 December 2021, TA NEA,  Yannis Andritsopoulos, London Correspondent for the Greek daily newspaper

Boris Johnson as student in 1986 wrote that the Parthenon Marbles were pillaged and should be returned to Greece. A position the British PM has recently rejected when Greece requests the reunification of these antiquities, and insisting they were 'legally acquired'.

Boris Johnson’s insistence as Prime Minister that the Parthenon Marbles were legally acquired by Lord Elgin and should remain in the British Museum is a complete reversal of the position he previously held, Greek daily newspaper Ta Nea can exclusively reveal.

In fact, as a university student, Johnson urged the British government to return the artefacts to Greece, arguing that they had been unlawfully removed from the ancient temple in Athens.

It is the first time evidence has emerged that the British Prime Minister advocated the reunification of the 2,500-year-old sculptures, a request he has repeatedly rejected publicly in recent years.

In an article written in April 1986 for the Oxford Union’s magazine, Johnson, then an undergraduate at Oxford University, accused Lord Elgin of ‘wholesale pillage’ of the Parthenon.

As British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, Elgin removed the sculptures from the Parthenon in the early 19th century, when Greece was under Ottoman rule. He then sold them to the British government which passed them on to the British Museum in 1817.

Writing as president of the Oxford Union 35 years ago, Johnson claimed in his article that an Act of Parliament to hand the Marbles back “could be passed in an afternoon.”

The future Prime Minister went on to accuse the British government of ‘sophistry and intransigence’, saying that Whitehall’s claim that the ‘transaction had been conducted with the recognised legitimate authorities of the time’ is “invalid”.

“A letter from Elgin of 1811 reveals that the Turkish authorities denied ‘that the persons who had sold those marbles to him had any right to dispose of them’,” Johnson wrote.

He added that Elgin “secured from the Sultan a firman to remove 'qualche pezzi di pietra’ - a few pieces of stone - that happened to be lying about on the Acropolis. Elgin's interpretation of this phrase was liberal to say the least.”

This statement contradicts Johnson’s recent remarks regarding the legality of Elgin’s actions. In an exclusive interviewwith Ta Nea published in March, the British Prime Minister claimed that the Parthenon Marbles “were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s Trustees since their acquisition.” He stressed that this view is “the UK Government’s firm longstanding position on the sculptures”.

“It seems that Boris Johnson was aware of concrete evidence that Lord Elgin’s actions were unlawful from as early as 1986. This begs the question: did he mislead the public when he recently claimed that the sculptures were legally acquired by Elgin?”, a Greek official told Ta Nea.

It is the first time since its publication in 1986 that this article has been made public.

The Daily Telegraph reported last month that Johnson “wrote an article for a student magazine arguing that (the Marbles) should stay here”. In actual fact, though, it is now clear that he argued the exact opposite.

Titled “Elgin goes to Athens – The President marbles at the Grandeur that was (in) Greece …,” the 978-word article was published in Debate, the official magazine of the Oxford Union Society (Vol. 1, No. 3, Trinity Term 1986, p. 22).

Ta Nea found the an unknown article in an Oxford library last week. It is not available online, nor is there any reference to it in the press or on the Internet. Two Oxford sources confirmed its authenticity.

Greece has repeatedly called for the return of the Parthenon Marbles, arguing that Lord Elgin had not secured permission to remove them from the ancient temple. Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis and Culture Minister Lina Mendoni have said that the sculptures were 'stolen'. In his 1986 article, Mr Johnson appears to accept that view.

However, when he met with his Greek counterpart in Downing Street last month, the British leader rebuffed Mitsotakis’s request for the Marbles to be returned. He claimed that the issue was "one for the trustees of the British Museum".

This is inconsistent with the view he expressed in his 1986 article, in which he said that it is for the British Parliament to decide the Marbles’ fate.

“In 1816 (Elgin) sold them to the British government for £35,000. Therefore, it would require an Act of Parliament to hand them back. This, needless to say, seems to be a more or less insuperable brake on the process of return - yet it could be passed in an afternoon,” Johnson, who graduated from Balliol College with a BA in Classics, wrote.

The sculptures held in the British Museum make up about half of the 160-metre frieze which adorned the Parthenon, a 5th century BC architectural masterpiece. Most of the other surviving sculptures (around 50 metres) are in Athens.

Britain has repeatedly rejected Greece's request to hold talks on returning the Marbles. Earlier this year, a UNESCO committee said that Greece’s request for the return of the Parthenon Sculptures is “legitimate and rightful,” stressing that “the case has an intergovernmental character and, therefore, the obligation to return the Parthenon Sculptures lies squarely on the UK Government”. It also called on Britain “to reconsider its stand and proceed to a bona fide dialogue with Greece on the matter”.

In his magazine article, Johnson, then 21, called on the UK to return Phidias’s masterpieces to Greece so that they can be “displayed where they belong”.
“The reasons for taking the marbles were good. The reasons for handing them back are better still,” the future Prime Minister and Tory leader stressed.

“They will be housed in a new museum a few hundred yards from the Acropolis. They will be meticulously cared for. They will not, as they were in the British Museum in 1938, be severely damaged by manic washerwomen scrubbing them with copper brushes,” he wrote.

It had been claimed that as a student Johnson was "sympathetic" to the Greek request, but no evidence to support this had been presented until now. All his past public comments express the view that the Marbles should stay in the UK.

In 2014, he criticised George Clooney for suggesting Britain should return the Parthenon marbles to Greece. Johnson said at the time the actor needed his “marbles” restored, claiming Clooney was “advocating nothing less than the Hitlerian agenda for London's cultural treasures”.

In a 2012 letter shared with the Guardiannewspaper, Johnson, then mayor of London, wrote that “in an ideal world, it is of course true that the Parthenon marbles would never have been removed from the Acropolis,” but concluded that if the sculptures were removed from London, it would amount to “grievous and irremediable loss”. Therefore, he added, “I feel that on balance I must defend the interests of London.”

In March, the Prime Minister posed for Ta Nea in his parliamentary office next to a plaster cast bust of his “personal hero”, Pericles. The Athenian statesman is credited with ordering the design and construction of the Parthenon from which Elgin took the marbles.

As president of the Oxford Union, Johnson invited the then Greek Culture Minister Melina Mercouri to participate in a June 1986 debate titled: “[This House believes] that the Elgin Marbles must be returned to Athens.” She won the vote.
The Greek government says that the sculptures were illegally removed during the Ottoman occupation of Greece in the early 1800s.

It seems Greece has found an unlikely ally in its quest to reunite the Marbles in the form of the 21-year-old Johnson, who thought that “the Elgin Marbles should leave this northern whisky-drinking guilt-culture” and be displayed “where they belong: in a country of bright sunlight and the landscape of Achilles, 'the shadowy mountains and the echoing sea'.”

Boris Johnson’s article in full:

Elgin goes to Athens

The President marbles at the Grandeur that was (in) Greece …

On Thursday 12 June Melina Mercouri, the Greek Minister of Culture, is coming to the Oxford Union. Her subject, thanks to dynamic lobbying has a ring of familiarity all around the world: the return of the Elgin Marbles. Powerful forces will cause her to fly to Britain. They are on the one hand the passionate national feeling of the Greek people, and on the other the sophistry and intransigence of the British Government. And caught between these forces is, not a sack of old balls, but the supreme artistic treasure of the ancient world. The debate on 12 June will mark the climax of a renewed campaign by the Greek government to restore to Greece the sculptural embodiment of the spirit of the nation. The vote in Oxford - the centre of British Classical scholarship - will without question affect the decision in Whitehall. To put it crudely, your choice will count.

The background
In 450 BC Pericles, the ruler who steered Athens to her greatness, launched an ambitious programme of monumental public works. The Acropolis, the ancient citadel of Athens, was to become the glory and envy of the world. Puritan spirits objected, claiming that he was wrongfully using tribute from Athenian dependencies to ‘tart up the city like a whore'. But posterity has faulted their judgement. The craftsmen Phidias, Ictinus and Callicrates, with the personal encouragement of Pericles, created buildings and sculpture which are wholly emblematic of the pride and intellectual vigour of Athens. It is on the Panathenaic frieze, which ran along the wall behind the Parthenon's columns, that we see classical art at its most sublime. The technical control is minute, the features calm and passionless. The detachment and self-control of the figures are in harmony with the Periclean vision: of the city and citizens of the virgin goddess independent, self-reliant, and superior to the common calls of the flesh. The Panathenaic Frieze consisted of 111 panels. 97 survive. 56 of them are in the British Museum.

The Parthenon, the temple of Athena the Virgin, has suffered two major catastrophes in its history. The first was in 1678, when a cunning Turkish general, under siege from the Venetians, decided to use it as a munitions dump - like hiding a tank in a Red Cross tent. But the Venetian general Morosini reached for his gun, like Goering, at the mention of culture, shelled it, and blew up most of the central portion. The second major catastrophe was the wholesale pillage of the ancient shrine by Lord Elgin from 1801 to 1811.

Greece was at this time a tumbledown outpost of the Ottoman Empire. The national identity which Pericles glimpsed, and which has returned so conspicuously in the 20th century, had shimmered and vanished. Lord Elgin was Ambassador to the Sublime Porte, and had left behind him in England a young and skittish wife, with a pampered girl's insatiable desire for presents. It was in the Acropolis that he realised he had found a few things that might amuse here. Manipulating Turkish dependence in Britain for military support, he secured from the Sultan a firman to remove 'qualche pezzi di pietra’ - a few pieces of stone - that happened to be lying about on the Acropolis. Elgin's interpretation of this phrase was liberal to say the least. For ten years a team of labourers, under the direction of a rapacious Italian called Lusieri, sawed and hacked at the sculptures of Phidias. Huge ox-wagons daily lumbered down to the Piraeus laden with their pathetic cargo: Hermes’ Knee is still in Athens. The rest of him is in the British Museum.

It was the near-anarchy of the Ottoman Empire that allowed Elgin to get away with it. ‘Do you mind if I borrow these bits of stone for a while?’ was how he might have put it to the local sergeant, and the man would have shrugged and returned to his harem in the Erechtheum. And yet it was on precisely this point that the Whiteheall mandarins rejected, in 1983, the formal request of the Greek government for the return of the marbles: that ‘transaction had been conducted with the recognised legitimate authorities of the time.’ As it turns out, even this paltry defence is invalid: a letter from Elgin of 1811 reveals that the Turkish authorities denied ‘that the persons who had sold those marbles to him had any right to dispose of them.’

To be fair, Elgin did humanity a service by bagging the sculptures before they could be quarried for the construction of Turkish hovels. He lost a fortune on the enterprise, and his wife, who probably found them too cold and immodest, was not happy with them either. In 1816 he sold them to the British government for £35,000. Therefore it would require an Act of Parliament to hand them back. This, needless to say, seems to be a more or less insuperable brake on the process of return - yet it could be passed in an afternoon. The reasons for taking the marbles were good. The reasons for handing them back are better still.

The Elgin Marbles should leave this northern whisky-drinking guilt-culture, and be displayed where they belong: in a country of bright sunlight and the landscape of Achilles, 'the shadowy mountains and the echoing sea'. They will be housed in a new museum a few hundred yards from the Acropolis. They will be meticulously cared for. They will not, as they were in the British Museum in 1938, be severely damaged by manic washerwomen scrubbing them with copper brushes. Legend tells that the statues of the gods shrieked as they were torn from the Parthenon. It is now almost two centuries since Lord Elgin's deed, and the gods are not mocked.

Boris Johnson
Balliol

1986

 Guardian 18 December 2021

Helena Smith writes: 'The extent of Boris Johnson’s U-turn on the Parthenon marbles has been laid bare in a 1986 article unearthed in an Oxford library in which the then classics student argued passionately for their return to Athens.

Deploying language that would make campaigners proud, Johnson not only believed the fifth century BC antiquities should be displayed “where they belong”, but deplored how they had been “sawed and hacked” from the magisterial edifice they once adorned.

“The Elgin marbles should leave this northern whisky-drinking guilt-culture, and be displayed where they belong: in a country of bright sunshine and the landscape of Achilles, ‘the shadowy mountains and the echoing sea,’” he wrote in the article, republished by the Greek daily, Ta Nea, on Saturday.'

To read the article in full, follow the link here

Telegraph 18 December 2021

Steve Bird also took up the story: 'Thirty-five years ago, Johnson wrote how the UK’s claim to the artefacts relied on the “invalid” suggestion that Elgin had received the approval to remove them from “the legitimate authorities of the time”.

Johnson wrote: “As it turns out, even this paltry defence is invalid: a letter from Elgin of 1811 reveals that the Turkish authorities denied ‘that the persons who had sold those marbles to him had any right to dispose of them.’”

Greece has repeatedly insisted that because the Ottomans were an occupying force in Greece they had no right to sanction the removal of the frieze to anyone.

To read the Telgraph article, follow the link here(there is a paywall). 

THE PARTHENON MARBLES DISPUTE: Heritage, Law, Politics
Alexander Herman

The Parthenon Marbles are hot. Not in the sense that they are to be lusted after, as was Praxiteles’s also marble sculpture, the Aphrodite of Knidos, but because the question of whether the extant members should—ever—be reunified in Athens is a hot-button political issue, hot enough to set the Prime Ministers of Greece and the U.K. at each other’s throats. Into the fray intrepidly steps Alexander Herman, Director of the Institute of Art and Law, UK.

His otherwise estimable work suffers in one regard, however, the timing of its publication. It unfortunately finds itself up against that of Professor Catharine Titi, The Parthenon Marbles and International Law (Springer Verlag, 2023). Titi is an international human rights lawyer-academic of Greek origin based in Paris. Her magisterial work is truly groundbreaking and superior to the first four chapters of Herman’s (pp. 1-65). Those cover the original acquisition—or theft—of what ‘our man in Constantinople’, the Seventh Lord Elgin, UK ambassador to the Ottoman Sublime Porte, had removed by force and fraud from the ruined temple on the Athenian Acropolis to—eventually—London in the first decades of the 19th century. As Titi demonstrates beyond a peradventure, Elgin had no good legal title to what he claimed to own and sold to the British government in 1816 for £35,000. A fortiori, the British government had none either: it is only in UK domestic law that we the British people ‘own’ Parthenon sculptures.

H.’s book is, however, a useful and usable complement to Professor Titi’s. Like her, he rightly raises the crucially moral—as well as cultural, political, aesthetic etc.—issue at stake in the original Elgin (ad)venture—see ‘Law and Morality’ (pp. 51-3, concluding Chapter 3, ‘A Firman by Any Other Name’). He then proceeds in his remaining six chapters to give, as claimed, a thorough and no less importantly a balanced and critical account of the Elgin ‘dispute’, almost blow-by-blow.

Between 1816 and 2024 there have been several notable crunch-points: among them the newfangled Greek state’s original request for return of the BM’s marbles in the 1830s, and the passage in 1963—again, as in 1816, by a Tory government—of an Act of Parliament forbidding with only a couple of exceptions the BM ever to de-acquisition any of its now about 8 million (minus of course the 2000 or so recently liberated by a rogue curator) holdings. Look to the end, as Herodotus has one of his characters (Solon) presciently say …

Herman’s book is provided with a truly wonderful index, which has no fewer than ten ‘Parthenon’ entries, extending over almost 4 double-column pages. These start with: Parthenon centrality of, and proceed by way of … construction of (447-438) (Periclean Project); … Marbles (after arrival in Britain); … Marbles (history of the claim: British arguments against return/counter-arguments); … Marbles (history of the claim: legal action (IARPM)); … Marbles (history of the claim) (in date order); … Marbles (resolving the dispute); ‘Parthenon Partnership’; and Parthenon Project; to, finally, Parthenon sculptures.

Another special feature of H.’s book besides its index is its incorporation of the views of—among other interviewees—curators, museum directors, lawyers, archaeologists, and politicians in both London and Athens. Yet another are its suggestions for new ways of resolving all such cultural-heritage disputes going forward. If only….

Readers will no doubt wish to be selective in what claims and arguments they choose to focus upon. The very construction of the original Parthenon (not the whole temple’s name) was controversial, and the temple’s function or rather functions, and the interpretation of some or all of its many and polyvalent adornments, remain controversial to this day. H. gives a helpful dateline of the history of the ultimately Greek claim to reunification and the mainly British government/Museum’s counter-claims.

But what of his own views? There is a clue in the fact that he is not in favour of modifying, let alone rescinding, the 1963 Museums Act, and on p. 155 there is perhaps a sketch in miniature of his own, studiously neutral, formally apolitical position: ‘Perhaps it may be better … to leave the ultimate question of resolution to the museums themselves’. That will not be music to those of us who firmly believe the rightful permanent home for those Parthenon sculptures that the British Museum currently holds in trust for the British nation is the (specially dedicated, opened in 2009) Acropolis Museum in their native Athens.

Paul Cartledge

Vice-Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles (BCRPM), a non-profit campaign group established in 1983, and an elected Vice-President of the International Association for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures (IARPS).

This review was published in Classic for All.

"I was deeply moved during a recent visit to the Acropolis Museum in Athens", writes Alfredo Cafasso Vitale. His article was first published in ekathimerini on Thursday 02 June 2022.

With the kind permission from Alfredo Cafasso Vitale, the remainder of the article can also be read below:

This fragment, which is part of the eastern frieze of the Parthenon, depicts a foot and a part of the peplos of Artemis, and was acquired in 1816 by the British consul in Sicily, Robert Fagan. After his death in 1820, it was sold to the Museum of the Royal University of Palermo and from there it was then passed to the Salinas Museum.

The top floor of the Acropolis Museum is a virtual reconstruction of the Parthenon, and the area has been designed, with its position and glass, to reflect, and to not only display this reconstruction, but to also visually link it to the original near 2,500-year-old structure on the Acropolis hill. The Fagan fragmentis now displayed in a glass case, within its place in the reconstruction and also looking out at the actual historical site.

I hope this trip paves the way for a much more important and long-awaited journey of the marbles from the British Museum, “stolen” in the early 1800s by Thomas Bruce, then made Lord Elgin, ambassador of Great Britain to Constantinople.

During the period of Ottoman occupation in Greece, Elgin apparently obtained the permission of the sultan to remove the marbles. These were then dispersed in different locations (the same Fagan fragment came directly from Elgin). Some marbles were lost at sea, during transport, but most eventually arrived at the British Museum.

This process, which is not, in some quarters, considered to be a valid and genuine method of acquisition, has triggered fierce international debates, and has initiated official requests for restitution of the marbles by various Greek governments.

The Nobel Prize winner Nadine Gordimer, in the preface to the splendid book by Christopher Hitchens, “The Parthenon Marbles,The Case for Reunification” underlined how the presence of the marbles in London represented the stone manifesto of British colonial arrogance, and how much the marbles belonged, representing their DNA in art, to the Greek people.

These sculptures by Phidias have been requested in vain for almost 40 years by various Greek governments (the first was Minister of Culture Melina Mercouri in 1984), and most recently by Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis in an interview on British television.

It should be noted that, as a student, Boris Johnson wrote, in an article in Oxford, “…it is evident to me, how much [these marbles] are woven into the Greek identity. It would be a wonderful thing if they could be returned.” Latterly, Ed Vaizey, former minister of culture of the Cameron government, recently stated that they should be in Athens.

The National Archaeological Museum of Athens has transferred its 10 fragments of the Parthenon to the Acropolis Museum, strengthening the reunification process and sparking a fresh discussion about the never dormant request for the return of the marbles.

I hope that the exchange program with Sicily will lead the way to a solution for the return of the marbles, which would, in turn, strengthen Greece’s cultural identity, and perhaps help reinforce it politically and economically. The country has been trying with all its strength and succeeding in re-emerging from the profound crisis of the last decade.

In another indication that perhaps the tide is turning in favor of the return of the marbles, the Musee des Civilizations du Quai Branly in Paris and the Berlin Ethnologisches Museum have initiated the return of African artifacts to Nigeria, improperly taken away during the colonial period from Benin City.

As a footnote, upon exiting the museum, I entered the metro, heading home, at the Acropolis station. Going down to the platform, I was greeted by the giant picture of Melina Mercouri in front of the Parthenon, wrapped in an elegant trench coat, a bundle of wild flowers in her hands, and an immense and radiant smile, which today seems even more radiant. The return process, dreamed of and initiated by her, seems to have perhaps gained some momentum.

What do the Parthenon and a weird Brazilian dinosaur known as “Ubirajara jubatus”* have in common? Apparently, not much. Yet, they are both protagonists of international restitution claims. On one side, Greece’s claim for the return of the Parthenon sculptures held in the British Museum, which will soon become a bicentenary dispute. On the other, Brazil’s claim for the restitution of a fossil holotype previously held in the State Museum of Natural History in Karlsruhe and demanded since early 2021. While Brazilians got to see their fossil return home this month, Greece’s claim remains the longest-standing dispute in the field.

Despite the obviously distinct nature of both claims, they complete each other so as to form a perfect example of how relentlessly repetitive and fallacious the “arguments” presented by retentionists are. In my Master's Thesis (Munich, 2020) I analyzed Greece’s claim against the British Museum and the United Kingdom under the International Human Rights Law framework. For that, I had to deconstruct a recurrent argument for dismissing Greece’s stance: that Lord Elgin had the authorization to remove and export the sculptures.

The argument goes: Elgin obtained a written authorization (the famous “firman”) to remove and export the Parthenon Sculptures, issued in 1801 by the competent Ottoman authority, as Greece was under Ottoman rule. This claim is deeply flawed for a myriad of reasons I explored in the Thesis, but let us assume, for argument’s sake, that the surviving versions of the “firman” do reflect the content of a real document issued prior to the Parthenon’s dismemberment and the dispatch of the sculptures.

Under Ottoman Law in the early 1800s, the Sultan had absolute control over antiquities and only he could authorize such removal. Nonetheless, the document so often relied upon by the UK and the British Museum is signed by Caimacan Seged Abdullah, an acting Grand Vizier who, regardless of his high status in the Ottoman Government, had no authority to issue a firman – definitely not one concerning the export of antiquities.

Likewise, when arguing that the “Ubirajara” fossil was legally exported from Brazil, the authors that described the species claimed they had a written export authorization from an agent of the National Department for Mineral Production. The claim completely ignores that Brazilian Law forbids any export of holotypes (as the “Ubirajara”) and that, even if it were a regular fossil, the competent authority to issue such an authorization would be the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq).

Back to the other side of the Atlantic, let us look at what this “firman” actually states. The supposed text of the 1801 Document (as the original has never been found) begins with a description of the activities Elgin wanted his workers to conduct – with no indication that he sought permission to remove any sculptures. The second part of the document expresses that it is the desire of the Ottoman Court to favor Elgin’s requests. The widespread argument that the “firman” authorized the removal of the Parthenon Sculptures relies on an extract from the last paragraph: “[no one should] hinder them from taking away any pieces of stone with inscriptions or figures”. The decontextualized interpretation of this quote ignores that, just above, the document presents an express condition to the authorization: “particularly as there is no harm in the said figures and edifices being thus viewed, contemplated, and designed”.

The sculptures were affixed to the Parthenon and were an integral part of the building. There is simply no good faith interpretation that could lead to the conclusion that the document allowed for the Parthenon’s dismantling. This quote, when properly contextualized, clearly refers to objects dug from the rubble of the Parthenon’s surroundings, which is compatible with what Elgin requested. Thus, even if we were to deem this document reliable, there is no way it authorized the export of the sculptures. What probably happened is that they left Greece in packages with misleading content descriptions (and under heavy bribes, but that's a story for another day...).

Now, it is time to zoom in on the authorization that supposedly allowed for the “Ubirajara” fossil to be exported from Brazil. As explained by Aline Ghilardi, a leading Brazilian paleontologist in the #UbirajaraBelongstoBR campaign, the “authorization” presented by the authors does not mention anything about definitively exporting the materials and does not specify the boxes’ content. In her words, “as it was written, the authors could continue to describe new species for the next 20 years alleging that all holotypes were inside of it”. In any event, the narrative by the authors was considered untrue by German authorities (but that’s another story for another day...).

Almost 200 years separate Greece's first claim over the Parthenon Sculptures and the #UbirajaraBelongstoBR campaign. Apparently, not enough to come up with better excuses for illegal and unethical behavior. Their arguments are old, weak, and honestly – and I say this as a Brazilian – offensive. We will continue to counter them all.

I end this brief commentary by drawing a last parallel between Greece and Brazil, Sculpture and Dinosaur. Two obvious statements that somehow still must be echoed:

#UbirajaraBelongstoBR

#ParthenonBelongstoGreece.

* In case you are wondering about the quotation marks, the article describing the species has since been retracted, which means that this name currently holds no taxonomic value.

Letícia Machado Haertel, Master of Laws (LMU), Specialist in Int. Cultural Heritage Law

BCRPM would like to thank Letícia  for this excellent article.

Editorial Footnote: on the pseudo-legality of Elgin’s in fact theft, see now, definitively, Catharine Titi The Parthenon Sculptures and International Law(Springer, 2023).