Guest article written by
Leila Amineddoleh
On December 5, the British Museum announced that it would lend a piece of the Elgin Marbles to the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg to commemorate its 250th anniversary. While a kind gesture towards Russia, it was also a scathing insult to Greece – the country has been demanding the return of the Elgin Marbles for decades.
(Disclaimer: This article was not written on behalf of LCCHP.)
The Parthenon Marbles, a group of sculptures, statues, inscriptions and architectural elements depicting scenes from Greek mythology, were once part of the Parthenon. Built in the 5th century BC to honor Athena, the temple has become one of the most recognized symbols of Western civilization and is considered the highest architectural achievement of the ancient Greeks.
About half of the marbles were removed from the temple between 1801 and 1802 by the Earl of Elgin, while Athens was under Ottoman occupation. According to most historians, Elgin received an official decree (firman) to remove the sculptures. Although the document no longer exists, a translation of an Italian copy suggests that Elgin was allowed to take “a few stones”, not half of the Parthenon’s engravings. Some historians argue that Elgin never received the required permission for its removal, as there is no documentary evidence of the firman’s existence. What is known is that the removal of the objects damaged the Parthenon, even though that was not Elgin’s intention. Then in 1816, the British Parliament purchased the marbles and presented them to the British Museum.
Lord Elgin’s actions have been contested from the start
From the beginning, the legality and morality of Elgin’s actions have been contested. Lord Byron was one of Lord Elgin’s most vocal critics, calling him a “looter”. Greece gained independence in 1832 and in 1837 the Greek Archaeological Society was founded. At his first meeting, the president requested the return of the marbles. The Greek people view sculptures as a symbol of their culture, heritage and past. In the same vein, art historians and archaeologists claim that the sculptures are an integral part of the ancient temple structures still standing in Athens. There is a call for the marbles to be unified as they were intended to be seen. On the other hand, the British Museum argues that the objects should be seen in a broader framework, presenting Greek art in a chronological narrative. The British Museum says the Parthenon sculptures “are an integral part of the museum’s purpose as a museum.” world museum tell the story of human cultural achievement. And having been housed at the museum for almost two centuries, the sculptures form an important part of British cultural identity. ButSome view the sculptures’ location in London as a sad reminder of British imperialism – an attempt to turn London into “New Athens” in the same way that Napoleon attempted to convert Paris into “New Rome.”
The British Museum opened in 1759, a few years before the Hermitage. These are two of the first great museums of the Enlightenment, created in the public interest, educating and exposing the masses to art. These encyclopedic museums aim to introduce visitors to a variety of cultures and display art in a broader context, thereby giving the feeling of a shared human cultural heritage. However, is this the best context for art? Is it appropriate to remove a work from its original cultural framework, thereby losing its context? While millions of people visit the British Museum each year, it is still disheartening to see the London Marbles after learning that their removal has undermined one of humanity’s greatest achievements.
The moral solution is to return the marbles
The British Museum says the removal of the objects saved them from destruction, as they were not protected at the time. However, times have been busy; if the marbles are returned to Greece, they will be in a museum. (Interestingly, the marbles were damaged while in the care of the British Museum, where restorers used harsh cleaning products.) Greece built the new Acropolis Museum, complete with ‘state-of-the-art design and technology that ensures the protection of its collection. Additionally, the New Acropolis Museum is just 300 meters from the Acropolis, making it possible to view the marbles as intended, enjoying the Greek sun. To fully appreciate the artistic and historical importance of the friezes, they must be placed in their context of the Acropolis Mount, a hill covered with works of art venerating the gods watching over Athens.
As a lawyer, my position is troubling: Greece does not have a strong legal argument in favor of restitution. If Lord Elgin had not received the appropriate permit for the removal of the marbles, the British Museum would not have been able to purchase legitimate title. However, there are time limits for taking legal action. The Greek government has known about this removal for almost two centuries now and has never taken legal action against Elgin or the British Museum. The statute of limitations may prevent any lawsuit from moving forward. Yet even if the legal response does not support restitution, the moral solution is to return the marbles. The sculptures are a symbol of the Greek people: their violent removal took the objects away from their rightful home.
The British Museum undermined its own argument with its own actions
In 2013, UNESCO asked the British government to begin mediation, and the deadline for a response is March. In the meantime, the British Museum has loaned one of the statues to the Hermitage. For years, the museum argued that it would not move the Parthenon Marbles because of their delicate nature, the risk being too great. The British Museum claimed the sculptures were the safest in London. This argument was contradicted by the museum’s own actions. But what is most surprising is the recipient, especially in the context of growing tensions between Russia, the United States and Europe. Russia has a poor reputation when it comes to handling looted art. Russian authorities are not cooperating in returning Nazi-looted artworks to their rightful owners, saying items seized during World War II constitute reparations for lives lost. It is ironic that the Hermitage is the first to benefit from a loan covering the most controversial cultural heritage objects. The museum, long accused of retaining stolen Greek works of art, is now lending its inventory to a country that refuses to return stolen works of art. Greek indignation is understandable.
The British Museum has unequivocally stated that it will not return the marbles to Greece, but the country may have options. Just as Italy exploited its vast collections and rich archaeological resources against American museums, perhaps Greece could do the same. Over the past decade, museums across the United States have returned looted artifacts to Italy after Italian authorities threatened to suspend all Italian loans. Fear of losing access to Italian objects has pushed museums to comply with Italian requirements. As Greece has a rich archaeological treasure, the negotiations could be successful. International fervor is mounting around excavations at Amphipolis, a complex burial site in northern Greece that may contain the remains of a relative of Alexander the Great. Banning British archaeologists from the site and barring any finds from reaching British institutions could be a way of putting pressure on some of the Parthenon marbles to be returned. This type of action is necessary. The Parthenon is not only a cultural heritage, but a symbol of Greece and the glory of Athens.
