The Parthenon Marbles
The Parthenon Marbles/Sculptures are works of art originally created in Greece in the 400s BCE. They are now on display at the British Museum in London and have been there since the early 1800s. Why you might ask? Let’s investigate.
For anyone who doesn’t recognize this title, pssst they’re also known as the Elgin Marbles but don’t call them that, don’t give any recognition to their thief and instead reference their origins. The ‘marbles’ refer to a group of statues and carvings made out of marble which originally lived on the Parthenon, and other buildings, on the Acropolis in Athens UNTIL they were rudely ripped from their homes and relocated to England by Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin.
The Sculptures
A little context for you on these works of art before we get into the thick of it. The Parthenon Marbles were designed and created by the architect and sculptor Phidias and his assistants between 447 - 438 BCE. They depict scenes from Greek mythology like processions dedicated to various Gods and Goddesses, important events like the birth of Athena herself (who the temple is dedicated to), battles, celebrations, etc.
Unfortunately, these sculptures, along with the Parthenon itself, were badly damaged during the Great Turkish War from 1683 - 1699. The Turks were trying to defend Athens, which was theirs at the time, from the Republic of Venice and they decided to use the Parthenon as a storage space for gunpowder. So when the Venetians fired into the building, you guessed it, it exploded and permanently damaged the structure as well as the carvings, sculptures, and artwork.
Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin
Ol’ Thommy boy was appointed the - are you prepared for this title - Ambassador Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Britannic Majesty to the Sublime Porte of Selim III, Sultan of Turkey (at that point Greece was part of the Ottoman empire). So he pranced on over to Greece and up the Acropolis in Athens. He brought with him artists from London to take drawings and make casts of the sculptures he saw there however it quickly went from drawing to, between 1801 - 1812, just taking the sculptures and friezes with him to decorate his private home. Unfortunately, he had a costly divorce shortly after and had to sell the marbles to the British government for less than it had cost him to remove and transport them over (boo hoo).
The legality of all this is HIGHLY questionable so let’s dive into it. Elgin claimed that he received a firman (a royal decree from the leader of the Ottoman Empire) allowing him to access the site of the Parthenon as well as permission to remove sculptures from it. However, very conveniently, when asked to produce this document he couldn’t find the original. He did hand over what he claimed was the English translation of the Italian copy made at the time, this document is displayed at the British Museum today.
There is major controversy over this document, it lacks the usual hallmarks of an official firman from the Sultan and most importantly there is NO RECORD of it in the Ottoman archives even though these official decrees were meticulously recorded as part of their process and many documents from this same time period still exist in the archive.
Assuming, for a second, that the document is legit, there is also controversy surrounding what it actually gave Elgin permission to do. He obviously understood it to give him free rein and to take whatever he wanted. Upon closer inspection, it actually gave him permission to make drawings and moulds of the friezes and sculptures, to measure the remains of the ruined buildings, and to remove any gravel or debris from around the foundations. It also stated that if they wanted to take a few pieces of stone with carvings or inscriptions they wouldn’t be stopped. People often cite this when saying that Elgin was in the right. Personally, I would take this to mean that if there are some rocks you find on the ground with a cool carving then take it, not go ahead and steal intact sculptures and friezes to decorate your home in another country.
Restitution?
Obviously, there are two groups of people here, I think by now you can tell which group I fall into. But I guess I can show you both sides.
Non-restitutionalists argue that Elgin had all the permission he needed from the questionable document and besides if we started giving back all the art that was looted from other countries what would be left for us?? And to add to that the West is exclusively entitled to all the art and antiquities in the world. Also, we want to keep these precious objects here where we can care for them and preserve them for generations (of Westerners) to see because we’re the only experts that exist. (I truly hope you read that in a tone dripping with sarcasm because that’s how I wrote it).
On the other side are restitutionalists who argue that these sculptures were stolen from their rightful country and that they should be returned. Even at the time that Elgin brought them to England, there was pushback from public figures like Lord Byron, Sir John Newport, and Edward Daniel Clarke. All of these people argued that the marbles should not have been removed in the first place and denounced Elgin as a vandal and a looter. Saying that he should have cleaned up the site, removed the debris and left the artwork as it was meant to be.
Other arguments for returning them include:
The ability to see them in the setting they were intended to be seen in and therefore gain a fuller understanding of the work
Precedents have been set by other museums who have returned work to their rightful home countries
The marbles would be exceptionally well cared for at the New Acropolis Museum which, along with state of the art preservation technology, was designed to hold the sculptures in natural sunlight and arranged in their original format
The British Museum could keep casts and moulds of the sculptures
The British government sure doesn’t seem to care about all of these reasons because in 2013 the Assistant Director-General for Culture at UNESCO dropped a line to just a few people including the Director of the British Museum, the UK Foreign Secretary, and the Minister for Culture, Media, and Sport. He asked for mediation between England and Greece on the subject of the Parthenon Sculptures, seems like a reasonable request. The government and the Museum officials sat on this request for TWO YEARS before responding and ‘respectfully’ declining the proposal…………..wtf.
From everything I’ve read, it looks like there is largely popular support for repatriation of the sculptures however the museum and the government are scared that it will result in an opening of the floodgates for all Western museums and all of their stolen artwork (along with their profits) will be taken from them. It is obvious what I think here but I honestly don’t understand how one could argue that returning something that was stolen to its rightful owner isn’t the ethical thing to do.