I've got no respect for Lord Elgin's integrity, but you can't not respect his balls. Come on. Getting a permit for drawings and casts, and then going in with hacksaws on the sly? People knew what was going on, this was no mere burglary - more burglary through diplomacy, by way of bribery. The fact that the spoils remain sitting in the British Museum is a terrific black eye for the supposed class and dignity of the erstwhile Empire, frankly. This smooth criminal moonwalks up to the Parthenon, sly as you please with a wrecking crew in the dead of night so to speak over a period of weeks, and waltzes off with the whole damn frieze! - aided and abetted by a few choicely greased palms, the price paid for long, loving looks the other way. And then to add insult to burglary, the English government proceeds to buy the marbles off of him and English popular custom and usage proceeds to name the marbles after him. As if this disreputable specimen had any legitimate claim of ownership or title to these ancient works!
This is not finders keepers. Elgin didn't unearth these treasures from some hidden tomb long buried, long lost. The Greeks kind of knew where the frieze was when they told him he could have a look at it. And it doesn't matter if the theft may have saved them from some degree of damage. Although it does seem likely that the sculptures would've suffered some further incremental defacement between the theft and Greece's independence, it's a fact that Elgin's salvage operation - in the course of hacking the figures free from their housings - smashed and destroyed much magnificent masonry and cornice work, along with much of what was left of the building. Whether the damage that we know was done offsets the damage that we think might have been done is an unprovable point, and moot. Either way, it doesn't justify keeping them now.
Hey, I gave it to him already, and I give it to him again! It was one hell of a stunt, and a fine prank besides. But a joke's a joke, guys. It's time to make good on this deal. Execute the original permissions. Take some casts. Make some drawings. And then give the damn rocks back.
That's Lord Byron. I don't go around quoting Lord Byron often or without strong cause, you may be assured of that.
This is not finders keepers. Elgin didn't unearth these treasures from some hidden tomb long buried, long lost. The Greeks kind of knew where the frieze was when they told him he could have a look at it. And it doesn't matter if the theft may have saved them from some degree of damage. Although it does seem likely that the sculptures would've suffered some further incremental defacement between the theft and Greece's independence, it's a fact that Elgin's salvage operation - in the course of hacking the figures free from their housings - smashed and destroyed much magnificent masonry and cornice work, along with much of what was left of the building. Whether the damage that we know was done offsets the damage that we think might have been done is an unprovable point, and moot. Either way, it doesn't justify keeping them now.
Hey, I gave it to him already, and I give it to him again! It was one hell of a stunt, and a fine prank besides. But a joke's a joke, guys. It's time to make good on this deal. Execute the original permissions. Take some casts. Make some drawings. And then give the damn rocks back.
"Cold is the heart, fair Greece! that looks on thee,
Nor feels as lovers o'er the dust they lov'd;
Dull is the eye that will not weep to see
Thy walls defac'd, thy mouldering shrines remov'd
By British hands, which it had best behov'd
To guard those relics ne'er to be restor'd.
Curst be the hour when from their isle they rov'd,
And once again thy hopeless bosom gor'd,
And snatch'd thy shrinking Gods to northern climes abhorr'd."
That's Lord Byron. I don't go around quoting Lord Byron often or without strong cause, you may be assured of that.
Comments
To me the real villain of the piece was then, is now, and continues for the foreseeable future to be not Elgin, but England. They had no business buying stolen goods in the first place! Elgin had neither right nor title to these treasures, and they didn't even demand he produce any.
The British Museum has safeguarded these treasures and allowed millions to be enriched by studying them. At least Lord Elgin saved them from destruction.
Every museum in the world would have to gut their collections if this dangerous precedent were set. What about Nefertiti's bust in Berlin?
The British Museum ROCKS! Have you been in the Reading Room?
"Icons of our identity and heritage" don't belong buried in the fucking ground and forgotten for thousands of years. There is NO comparison to be made between the one and the other.
Wow, it's totally justified!
I like the Bond gig, though.
And the Reading Room is worth the trip. But so is the Temple of Artemis, Halicarnassus, etc.
No need to use curses. :)
Some people salt their food. I personally don't see the need, but I'm not going to tut-tut their shaker-shake. I curse my ass off - if that's your problem, well t.d.b., go read the Pope's blog.
Man. I am always, always in a bad mood today. But the fact that it's truth is a better excuse.
Now. Compare that with any number of artifacts that were absolutely lost to time, only recovered by dint of archaeological expeditions undertaken mostly with the blessing and cooperation of the local authorities, in digs whose explicit purpose was to recover artifacts to be taken back to the sponsoring museums, in a time when that was common and accepted practice, and most authorities were quite happy to have junk that they would hardly have uncovered otherwise be unearthed and enshrined around the globe raising the profile of their land's ancient history, promoting tourism and generally boosting the importance and esteem of the region.
This is not a case of: wow, it's really hard to differentiate. It is rather a case of: it is almost IMPOSSIBLE to compare the two! "What were the circumstances under which the transaction happened? In what manner did the item change hands?" Those are sensible questions to guide us. If it was considered a clean transaction according to the custom of the time, then you can't claim take-backs just because some of the people now living on the same basic dirt want to revoke the whole original circumstance.
And don't give me that "the whole thing went down under the auspices of a rapaciously imperial hegemony of Western Powers!" Whoever was in the area at the time was generally happy to cooperate. To the contemporary inhabitants of those regions, what did they care about some buried crusty bits from thousands of years ago, the moldered remains of a civilization that's got fuckall to do with me and my needs, in my hut today? Junk that might or might not be out there somewhere? Priceless? Worthless, more like! Whereas here we have a whole troop of these hoity toity explorers who want to bring in expeditions, dig up the landscape hither and yon, and all they want in return is whatever junk they dig up, which we weren't going to find anyway? GREAT DEAL! We will sell them food and wine for the next 10 years while they dig!
I'd rather they were STILL IN EXISTENCE and have the debate than to have had them destroyed because Greece couldn't protect them. Preservation is pretty strong justification.
BTW, I'd rather see that fine mind of yours engaged than kiss your ego.
Now, I've got Turks on my mind...did you read The Historian by Elizabeth Kostova? Vampires...I've always wanted to visit Budapest.
Does the Guy in The Pointy Hat REALLY have a blog? Wow.
What is that, a reverse ad hominem? "Smart people disagree on it, so there must be some grounds." It's no surprise you can't muster a decent point from out from under the weight of all those fine minds you cite in lieu of any sound argument of your own. I hate to be the one to break it to you: fine legal minds make their living by creating ingenious and plausible ways to disagree. The minds hired by the status quo never have to prove a thing, they only need to use their sophistics to stretch it out indefinitely. Which is nice work, if you can get it.
Yeah, what a hero Elgin was to "rescue" the frieze! He bribed the occupying force and took what he wanted. By the 1820s the Greeks had their nation back, the Turks were ousted, and thank God their marbles were safe and sound in England. The heroic wrecking and robbing of what was left after thousands of years of wear and tear, to "save" it from a historical eyeblink's worth of the same.
I'm not interested in conversation with you, stalker. Buzz off, okay?
Countries list relics they want back
A CONFERENCE of countries that want antiquities returned from abroad ended today with a wish list of priceless relics housed in Western museums, but it fell short of drafting an action plan.
The two-day conference in Cairo drew representatives from 25 countries, many of them former colonies, who say their heritage has been stolen.
Egypt's antiquities chief Zahi Hawass said seven of the countries drew up a list of artefacts they wanted back, and the remaining countries were given one month to add items to the list.
"I consider today a historic conference for all the world's countries that have lost artefacts," he said.
"We agreed to fight together," he said. "Cultural heritage has to return to its country."
"Seven countries have made a wish list. Some have to go back to their governments; they have a period of one month," he said.
Many of the relics included in the list are in European and North American museums. Egypt demanded six items, including the Rosetta stone in the British Museum and the Dendara temple ceiling in France's Louvre Museum.
Greece listed the Elgin Marbles, a collection of marble structures removed from the Parthenon in the beginning of the 19th century by Thomas Bruce, Earl of Elgin and ambassador to the Ottoman Empire.
Syria demanded five relics, one of them in housed in the Louvre, and Libya listed a statue of Apollo in the British Museum and a marble statue of a woman in the Louvre, according to a copy of the list sent by Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities.
The other countries were Nigeria, Guatemala and Peru.
"We are waiting for the other countries to present their wish list. Then we can go and fight," Mr Hawass said.
"It doesn't mean that if you have a statue in the museum, you own the statue. No, it belongs to us," he said.
But the conference, touted as the first of its kind, fell short by not laying out an action plan to retrieve the items.
Mr Hawass described international regulations on antiquities as "insufficient" but the conference did not call for an amendment to a UN convention on stolen antiquities that applied to thefts after 1970.
Mr Hawass said the countries had to confer again before drawing up steps they would take but warned of apparently drastic measures.
"I am not going to talk to you about what we are going to do; we have to decide together. Some of us will make the lives of some of those museums that have artefacts miserable," he said.
It was not clear whether he was talking about museums that housed stolen goods or those that displayed relics long excavated from their countries of origin.
The flamboyant archaeologist, who says he has overseen the return of 5000 relics since he became head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in 2002, suspended ties with the Louvre last year to win the return of five fragments stolen from an ancient Egyptian tomb.
He said he hoped to reach agreements on such relics as the bust of Queen Nefertiti and the Rosetta Stone through negotiations.
Both Berlin's Neues Museum which has the bust on display and the British Museum have so far refused to even lend the artefacts to Egypt.
Stipulation: it must be a KICK-ASS SONG.