Elgin Marbles

[Michael Palaeologus]

Sod 'em. Finders keepers. We have looked after them for all these years. We should be charging the Greeks storage costs.

If Lord Elgin hadnt recued them, the marbles would be covered in atmospheric acid or more probably, nicked by the Nazis.

[????]

Didn't we buy them in the first place too?

[Michael Palaeologus]

Technically, we may have just picked them up. I dont think the nation of "Greece" existed at the time so they didnt belong to anybody.

[????]

I thought he paid the Turks for them

[Jah Lush]

Sod Lord Elgin and his blooming marbles. Where's mine? I lost my marbles years ago and I'd like them back please.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Will Carnelli be reprising his headless river god statue this summer?

[EDOldie]

They do look fantastic in the British Museum but you can't help having a slightly uncomfortable feeling.

The argument that we have looked after them is a bit thin. I heard a guy on the radio this morning likening it to you saving you neighbours possesions if their house is burnt down. You don't continue to 'look after' them afterwards that would be theft in most peoples book.

As the builders say, the larger stones do not lie well without the lesser. Plato

ED 'intelectual' Oldie

[Santerme]

I think the Indians want Tipu Sultan's tiger back too, the V&A will be pretty much empty if this becomes a trend

[EDOldie]

Well, it does all question our imperialist past. I mean what right do we (or any other country for that matter) have to hang on to the historic treasures of another state? If it were the Chinese, the French or any other number of countries we would have given them back ages ago. It's only because it's the Greeks that we feel powerful enough to say get stuffed.

Lord Elgin might have done the world a great service years ago but things have moved on and we need to think about what the Greeks want. It's incredibly condecending to pretend that they are somehow less responsible or less able to look after the Marbles than us.

[AllforNun]

No send them back they don't belong to us.

[Huguenot]

The argument over 'restitution' isn't straightforward, there are four facets to the argument:

* Cultural Property Internationalism (Universalism)

* Nationalist sentiment

* Legality

* Morality

In practice the most broadly influential principle in the academic world is the first: it embodies the idea that art is universal, not national, and questions about restitution should revolve around access, education and preservation not ownership.

The second is fairly obvious, revolving around the importance of a piece of art to national cultural identity

The third is not quite so obvious, as it reflects the legality of the world at the time the artwork was acquired, not the legal system of the present day.

Morality is also a grey area, as morals and public opinion change across time. This creates questions about which ethical standard to apply. Nearly every lawyer would insist that it has to be the time of acquisition not the present day.

[Huguenot]

Most arguments about restitution of the Elgin Marbles revolve around the second point alone (Greek Nationalism), but the reason why this has not prevailed is because the art community is manifestly not responsive to political administrations.

In the case of the Elgin Marbles when the other three elements are taken into account there's a fairly strong case for them to remain where they are.

The building of the Parthenon museum is clearly a step to address access, education and preservation - but there is still an affront to the art community in that the Greek position is overtly nationalist. The art community would argue that present day Greece has nothing more to do with the bronze age mediterranean city states than an accident of geography.

[Huguenot]

I should add EDOldie, that this has applied universally, with museums still retaining vast quantities of items Chinese, French and others regardless of the nation's size or political influence. Check out this story here, and you might recognise the arguments ;-)

[AllforNun]

In practice the most broadly influential principle in the academic world !

er ....what about the real world ? and as for..... but there is still an affront to the art communitny ! have you canvased them all ?

[Huguenot]

Erm regarding the real world... yes AfN

A Mori poll in 1998 found only 39% of the British public in favour of returning the Elgin Marbles. So that'll be a minority then.

Mind you, the general public also believe in capital punishment, so they're not particularly to be trusted.

I think the question you really raise here is whether a lifetime of study and application can confer expertise on a person, and make their opinion carry correspondingly greater weight.

You undoubtedly would consider a plumber to have more expertise than a drama student when it comes to installing a boiler, so I'm sure that applies even in the rarified world of Nunhead.

As a consequence we should consider that the art world has thought longer and harder about the Elgin Marbles than a plumber. This does entitle them to make a more considered response.

God forbid that the Nunhead massive would instigate such a cultural revolution (come the revolution) that the academics would be banished to work camps eh?

[Huguenot]

Erm regarding the 'art community'... yes AfN

In 2006, eighteen of the largest museums in the world came together as co signatories on a document entitled 'Declaration on the Importance and Value of Universal Museums'

This included the Getty Museum, the Guggenheim, the Louvre, the Metropolitan Musem of Art and the British Museum

You can find the full document here.

I don't know if there's a version of it with large print and pictures so you may struggle - but the essence of the declaration is that museums hold art in trust for all mankind, and are not subject to transitory nationalist disputes.

[AllforNun]

oooh .........A Mori poll in 1998 found only 39%

christ on a bike are you serious - an 11 year old Mori Poll ? ............

That's how politicians lose touch my friend , polls.....please

as for 'Declaration on the Importance and Value of Universal Museums' thats rather like politicians voting on their own wage increase.

So stick that in your U-bend

NEXT

[Huguenot]

For sure AfN

If you feel that public opinion on this has moeved significantly in the last ten years then show me the figures. I'm sure that you're much more in touch.

Regarding the declaration, well you simply asked me how I had insight into what the art world thought, so I showed you. That the art world thinks that art is important is a bit of a non sequitor.

[AllforNun]

yer half deese yoots on da streets today don't na fuck about dem marbles man !

[EDOldie]

Huguenot you are surely suggesting that we are somehow saving the Greeks and others) from themselves. What possible right do we have to comment?

This is not a question of simple nationalism it is a question of major artefacts being in their correct home. It is no good some selfish meuseum or group of them, claiming the moral high ground.

[Huguenot]

We have a misunderstanding EDOldie, I'm not saying anything of the sort.

The art community, as represented by the signatories to the 'Universal Museum' declaration, claim all works of art for all mankind, they feel that the question of nationalism should come secondary to the needs of the academic world.

A natural conservatism means that this manifests itself in leaving things where they are, so long as academics have access.

Legal and moral claims are hazy because broadly speaking there's agreement that the rules that apply should be those of the time of acquisition, not of the present day.

Nationalist claims are not necessarily given precedence, because they're subject to political interference. Consider the Taliban's destruction of the Afghanistan Bamiyan Buddhas - whilst this was the memorable event, it was actually part of an instruction to destroy all artisitic relics. It makes academics wary.

Specifically regarding the Elgin Marbles:

Greece did not exist when the marbles were purchased. In a loose history we had locally unconnected city states periodically formed into empires. In the region this meant the Byzantine followed by the Ottomans

A the time of the purchase the Ottomans ruled the region and carried legal responsibility for the ownership and distribution of their resources - just as the UK does now for its own resources.

Some decades after the sales of the marbles the Ottoman Empire segregated along religious lines and the various Greek wars of independence were fought. You could probably argue that Greece as we know it, islands and all, wasn't recognisable until 1923. At least a century after the sales of the marbles.

Hence legally they were bought and sold in good faith.

It's clearly not practical to start demanding back items sold by your predecessors, or you'll be claiming everything your own Dad ever sold as your own birthright and demanding it back from the current owners.

Hence your own concept of 'correct home' is arbitrary and ill thought-through. Should every Gaugin be returned to Tahiti? Should every plastic knife be returned to China?

In particular you can't expect museums to do this as it would be an act of calculated suicide, everything they own came from somewhere else...

Hence to see this as a colonial theft enacted by a patronising imperial agressor (Britain) is both wrong, and ridiculously sentimental. You can understand why the Greeks would play up this argument because it appeals to Brits apologetic for our past, and willing to believe in subterfuge from our government.

Finally, the British Museum does accept that it would be rewarding and spiritually uplifting to see the marbles in the context of the Parthenon. They do not doubt that the Greeks would look after them well.

The Museum has accepted the international precedent that so long as ownership is not contested, the marbles could be returned on loan to Greece indefinitely. This is the same precedent that has filled Rome with the relics of it's own heritage that have been returned from the four corners of the world.

The issue is that the Greeks won't accept this measure.

[Crona]

I?ve never heard so many weak arguments and especially the one that the Ottoman Empire sold ?legally? the marbles.

Very cleverly you are hiding or ?missing? one point. Greece was occupied during the exchange.

Lets see the bigger picture. The reason the marbles exist (i.e. in pieces) is because the Ottoman?s used the Parthenon for storing their arsenal which eventually one day blew off thus destroying one of the old 7 wonders of the world. The same occupying force agreed to give away the marbles to Lord Elgin.

?A the time of the purchase the Ottomans ruled the region and carried legal responsibility for the ownership and distribution of their resources - just as the UK does now for its own resources?

It?s like you are saying to us that since UK and US occupy Iraq and Afghanistan at the moment we are entitled to their artefacts.

Since when an occupying force adopts the ?legal responsibility? of the land and their people? They can do whatever they want with them (sell, destroy etc) but IMHO they are in a position to act legally.

Lord Elgin was trading with an Occupying force while Lord Byron helped the Greeks to liberate themselves.

?The Museum has accepted the international precedent that so long as ownership is not contested, the marbles could be returned on loan to Greece indefinitely. This is the same precedent that has filled Rome with the relics of it's own heritage that have been returned from the four corners of the world.?

Replicas will be in their place in British museum so people will still have access.

(The point that the big museums agreed to have a ?Universal museum? is so obvious it speaks of itself)

[Brendan]

I don?t know much about this so I chased up a couple of wikipedia references to see what academic work there is on it. This article summarises it well I think: http://ww2.jhu.edu/foundations/?p=8 especially the section on the acquisition of the marbles.

Few interesting points:

It was never Lord Elgin?s intention to remove the marbles. He intended to make casts of them but when he found out they were being broken down and used to make mortar he decided to remove them.

Although this was a controversial decision it was agreed to and he paid a considerable amount out of his own pocket for them. It was by no means a British funded act of cultural conquest.

Elgin then had to petition the British government to buy them off him which happened eventually to a degree.

The British themselves were quite critical of the acquisition of the marbles. Some because they felt they should stay in Greece but most because they thought they weren?t pretty enough.

So from what I can make out they were under threat and bought, legally by a wealthy diplomat with a concern for their historical value* from an empire that was by all accounts just as powerful as Britain at the time and they now belong to academia not the Greeks or the British.

So the two schools of thought that are sold to the Prat on the Clapham Omnibus i.e:

?They?re ours we own them, Bloody Greeks, Britain you?re the best, whoo hoo, Ingerland, Ingerland, we brought them back on the boats during Dunkirk didn?t we? Where?s the Partereen anyway, is it in Faliraki??

or

?This is another example of our shameful colonial past, I?ve been wringing my hands so much over this morning?s paper that my latte?s gone cold. What was it we did to the Greeks again? It must have been terrible as everything is so cheap when I go there on holiday**?

are both nonsense as usual. Nationalistic fervour on the part of the Greeks is just as misplaced.

*Although reading between the lines it was arguably also an ill thought-out business venture.

**Believe me there are a lot of things taught in your history curricula which are more recent, shameful and worthier of your guilt if you insist on filling your liberal boots with the sins of your fathers.

[Crona]

I don?t disagree with your points Brendan,

If you see an artefact destroyed in the hands of an oppressor who doesn?t care the best action is to remove it and keep it safe. Someone above made the point that you keep the belongings of you neighbour when their house is burning and return them when it is built again.

What I don?t get is that since replicas will be in their places why not return the real ones back? My favourite museum room in London is the one at V&A where they keep all the replicas. Imagine if we had Michelangelo?s David here?just imagine

[Huguenot]

I haven't offered my own view, merely expressed the arguments at play in this arena.

However, Greece wasn't occupied, it had never existed. You're simply showing a poor grasp of history. A better understanding of the Ottoman Empire would be comparison with a modern USA and it's various vassal nations across the Americas. As with the USA, the Ottomans were quite happy to employ military might to ensure economic cooperation.

I'm not sure if that then negates the rest of your arguments, but on the assumption it doesn't:

You're then comparing it with Iraq using contemporary social mores. Again quite impossible, the idea of an independent nation state or the preservation of cultural artefacts associated with this is nonsense considering the period and the location.

Empires were built as coalitions of tribes for whom involvement was of varying benefit. 'Occupying armies' were as often local residents affiliated to a new political order.

Interest in archaeological artefacts was a consequence of European enlightenment, the Parthenon was used as a storage depot because it had a useful geography and no-one was bothered with all the old sh*t. It had the local appeal of a derelict council house.

It could hardly even have been considered national cultural property. Major buildings like these were sponsored and created by prestigious local families ('royalty') using imported slave labour. They could sell the property as they wished.

Modern Greece is on a search for a cultural identity that can link its disparate tribes together. This is important to the future of the nation, as the recent furore about the use of the term Macedonia to describe one of the new Balkan states demonstrates.

As a result there is an overhyped belief that there is an actual Greek identity, and that it revolves around ownership of 'national' treasures such as the Elgin Marbles.