Losing Our Marbles
Some of the most central stories of art history are buried within the narratives of the rest of history as well. They disappear beneath the details of their story or are eclipsed by bigger events. The story of the Elgin - or more correctly - the Parthenon Marbles is one of these hidden moments in history that should be given some more attention. For art historians and archaeologists these Marbles are a critical point of discussion, and an interesting conversation to answer the question, "who does art belong to?"
What’s the story
In the early 1800s, the Ottoman Empire occupied Greece and the British Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire was Lord Elgin, also known as Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin. Elgin loved Ancient Greek culture and history, and so we can conclude that Elgin was happy to have a job where he could safeguard the art and architecture of the ancients. As a result of his position and power, Elgin decided that he would buy the Parthenon Marbles from the Ottoman Empire in 1815. The Parthenon Marbles that he purchased were the sculptures and friezes that made up the top portion of the Parthenon, the pediment [figures 1-3]. So, because Lord Elgin purchased the Marbles, they are often referred to as the Elgin marbles, but we will continue to call the Parthenon Marbles for the rest of this article. After returning to England, Lord Elgin eventually gifted the Marbles to the British Museum. A special room was created for them, and the Marbles reside there today
[figure 1] Phidias, Parthenon Marbles, c. 447-438 BCE, marble, British Museum, London, details from the Eastern Pediment
[figure 2] Phidias, Parthenon Marbles, c. 447-438 BCE, marble, British Museum, London, details from metopes on the temple frieze
[figure 3] Phidias, Parthenon Marbles, c. 447-438 BCE, marble, British Museum, London, details from the Eastern Pediment
To provide some background, the Parthenon is the temple to Athena, the patron goddess of the Greek capital city of Athens. It is located on the original acropolis of the city, which served as the central meeting place for the Ancient Greeks. For this reason, the Parthenon was an important landmark in ancient times and today is a central part of Greek identity because it is one of the most intact temples. Overall, the Parthenon is one of the biggest things Greece takes pride in [figure 4].
[figure 4] Phidias, Parthenon, c. 447-438 BCE, marble, 75m, Athens, Greece
However, not every Englishman was excited about this acquisition of Ancient Greek art. One person, in particular, Lord Byron, was quite vocal about how wrong it was for Lord Elgin to take the Marbles from the Parthenon, even if he bought them. Lord Byron even said that Elgin's removal of the Marbles could be considered looting. Elgin’s main defense and reply to those who disagreed with his purchase of the Marbles was that they were unsafe within the Ottoman Empire. This was supported by the Greek War of Independence which began in 1821, and because one of the other temples on the acropolis, neighboring the Parthenon, was being used to store ammunition.
As soon as the Greeks gained their independence in the 1830s they began to petition to bring the marbles back to Athens and the Parthenon, and they are still trying today. As time has passed, the Greeks have become more and more vocal about why the Parthenon Marbles should be returned. In 1986, the Greek Minister of Culture, Melina Mercouri, gave a speech at the Oxford Union giving the case for why the marbles should come back to Athens. During this speech, she discussed why Elgin thought it was okay to take the Marbles from the Parthenon and explained why the Marbles should be returned. The biggest reason she gave for their return was that Greece is now fully prepared to take care of the Marbles in their home territory. Still, because the Marbles have not been returned, there is an ongoing debate about where the Marbles should be kept now.
The Two Sides
To preface, these breakdowns are just thoughts that have been presented by either side. They are not necessarily facts and it is perfectly reasonable to disagree with some of these points.
The Case for Staying in London:
The Marbles were, technically, legally bought by Lord Elgin from the ruling powers of Greece at the time.
The Marbles are safer in the gallery that has been specially made for them at the British Museum
The British also point out that the repatriation of the Marbles would set a precedent for returning all other ancient art to its country of origin. Doing so would decimate collections of museums around the world.
In their 200 years in the British Museum, the Marbles have become of the British Culture.
Along the same lines, the Marbles would hypothetically have more visitors to the British Museum than they would in Athens, according to tourism statistics for both countries.
A non-Greek location for the Marbles allows everyone to appreciate them as art first.
The Case for Returning to Athens:
Returning the Marbles to their original location will help create a complete and genuine monument out of the Parthenon, which has not been whole since before 1815.
This is to say that the Greek would like for all of the Parthenon Marbles to be returned, even those that may not be part of the collection at the British Museum
The Marbles were bought illegally since they were not for the Ottoman Empire to sell, even if they were the ruling power at the time.
Greece has built a new museum specifically to house the Marbles so that they can be seen and understood in their original location.
More people, on average, would like the Marbles to be returned to their original location because returning the marbles would set a precedent for returning stolen objects and art to their original location.
Although the Marbles are from Ancient Greece, does not mean that they are not important to the modern Greek culture. Keeping them away from Greece takes away a part of their heritage that they would like to protect.
The political and economic situation of Greece is more stable now than it has been in the past.
There is a "third side", that is, there should be a case for what is best for the art. One thing that neither of the other sides talks about is the physical state of the Marbles. If they were to actually be moved, there should be a thorough examination of the structural integrity of the statues and friezes. This is important because if the Marbles are not structurally sound, they could disintegrate in the process of transportation from one country to the other. Beyond that, the Marbles should be kept in a location that will best protect and preserve the Marbles. Also, while thinking about the art as the "third side", maybe we should ask where does the art want to live?
Why is it important to art history?
This story is an integral part of art history because it has been an ongoing controversy since the 1830s. The question of who owns the Marbles has been asked over and over again, without a definitive answer. The way that England and Greece have continued to handle this issue also makes it into a case study for any other occasion of stolen art. With two sides who feel like they rightfully own the work, which one will yield first, and how do they yield correctly?
Another notion that should be considered what location is actually best for the art to be viewed in? It is clear that the two sides have opinions on why their location is a better space for the Marbles to be seen and understood. However, how do we determine which side is correct? The British argue that the British Museum is the best place for the Marbles because it allows them to stand as their own work, apart from the architectural magnificence of the Parthenon. The Greeks, on the other hand, argue that bringing the Marbles back to Athens will add a context that the Marbles are currently lacking in their current exhibition. So, the real question is, which situation makes the Marbles more understandable and accessible to the general public? Unfortunately, no one is willing to come to a conclusive answer to this question, which is why this issue is so important.
How can you form your own perspective?
To form your perspective I would recommend answering the question that Melina Mercouri posed to her audience during her speech in 1984:
"Were the marbles seized wrongly? And if they were wrongly seized, can it be right that they be kept?"
"If there was right in their being seized, is it wrong that they be returned?"
"What value should be given to the argument that if Elgin hadn't taken the marbles, other Englishmen or the French would have done so?"
"Does it matter that 95% of the Greek people might never see the finest of Greek creation?"
"Is it conceivable that a free Greece would have permitted the removal of the marbles?"
"Losing Our Marbles" was written with reference to Gavin Stamp's "Keeping our Marbles"from Critical Perspective on Art HIstory ed. John C McEnroe and Deborah F. Pokinski (Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc., 2002) and with direct quotes and references to Melina Mercouri's “1986 Speech to the Oxford Union,” in Critical Perspectives on Art History, ed. John C. McEnroe and Deborah F. Pokinski (Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education Inc., 2002).
