Filenews 2 August 2022
By Guy Martin
It is the most well-known and, unfortunately, one of the greatest appropriations of art by the British Empire during the 19th century. The reason for the cutting and removal of large parts of the frieze and priceless sculptures of the Parthenon, as well as other treasures of the Acropolis, and their sending to Britain, during the period 1801-1812.
This appropriation, almost from the outset, has sparked a debate in Parliament, and not only, about whether Britain - or the owner and consignor of the marbles, Lord Elgin, aka Thomas Bruce - should return the priceless parts of the frieze and other sculptures. A conversation that began and continues perpetually from that time and is becoming more and more intense and more acute.
During the current century, the British Museum has calmly and steadily "repelled" all demands for return and related protests. After all, the "Elgin Marbles", which the British government bought from Lord Elgin in 1816, have become the core of the museum's world-class collection of classical sculptures.
The main argument, for many years, of the British Museum for the preservation of marbles is that they attract six million visitors annually, but this reduces the number of visitors that the Acropolis Museum attracts to Athens by four times.
On the evening of Saturday, July 30, in London, more than 200 years since Elgin sent the last marbles from Athens to the British capital, the ongoing, and now international, debate about Britain's cultural "debt" to Greece took a particularly positive turn thanks to an interview published by the Sunday Times in London. In the interview in question, the British Museum's current deputy director, Jonathan Williams, made a bold proposal for "active cooperation of the Parthenon, with our friends and colleagues in Greece".
Citing the British Museum's willingness to "tone down", the honourable Mr Williams said: "I firmly believe that there is room for a truly positive debate through which new ways of working together can be found. There are many masterpieces that we will be happy to borrow and lend. That's what we're doing."
Of course, no details were given, as the potential collaborators of the British Museum, the cultural institutions and the government of Greece did not have the opportunity to be informed about this by the museum, nor to submit their own proposals. At this point it should be noted that the museum's collection contains many exhibits whose origins are not disputed (for the time being), while neither the Times article nor anything else indicates that the British Museum is planning such a thing. However, there is an important opportunity in contrast to the decisive stance that the museum has taken for two centuries, with the carefully formulated denials and rejections of the respective requests.
However, one could say that a door was opened. Of course, the British Museum has many doors. Which door leads to some kind of talks or a substantial exchange with the Greek authorities is not known, however it is reasonable to assume that the formulation of the above opinion in the weekend edition of the Times shows that the directors of the museum have at least begun to draw up some initial plans, even if their basis is only "what we really have to lose".
After all, why report it to the Times if they are just "words of the air"? Of course, there is always the possibility that it may be a way for the museum to "play delays" - that is, as it has been doing for more than two centuries, he may have thought "why not freeze the Greek demands by enticing them with the Apple of Discord"?
However, in the long run, the benefit of the museum from this game seems negligible, since proposals that offer "crumbs", or essentially nothing, will not ensure the presence of the sculptures in the halls of the British Museum. Most likely, the museum clearly states what it is that it wants from the Greeks, a continuous dialogue through substantial inter-museum collaborations and loans.
Source: Forbes
