Skip to main content

The Parthenon Marbles: Athens or London?

Here are some thoughts on the display of the Parthenon marbles recorded live on the Athenian Akropolis.

Is a video blog helpful? Please leave your thoughts.


Tarquin said…
Yes, I liked the video blog (although it must be quite a lot more work). Thanks!
Agreed. I also like the video blog.
Maybe its a problem with my browser (Firefox) though - I don't know - but the video window is larger than the blog frame and covers the information on the sidebars.

Excellent presentation. It is difficult to see how anyone can objectively disagree with the view you put forward. Kwame Opoku.
CaliforniaKat said…
Hi David, I've visited before but not left a comment. Today I will.

I've lived in Athens for 11 years, visited the Acropolis on my birthday for a good part of them. While in London, I saw the marbles for the first time and admired them, but only to the extent they were exhibits, not parts of a whole.

Many people wondered, "If so many of them are here, what is left of the Parthenon?" Well, not much. I was particularly saddened to see metopes literally sawed in half, with no respect at all for an arm or horse head. That's like cutting off part of the Mona Lisa's head, I think.

And while I honor and am grateful that the UK took invaluable care of them all these years, how can we deny that Elgin was sold these marbles by the Turks when Greece was occupied?

Did you see the Christopher Hitchens op-ed?

Thank you for sharing your video :)
Paul Barford said…
I liked the video presentation too. A compelling case indeed. Thanks David.
David Gill said…
Thank you all for this response. The full version can be watched on YouTube. I did indeed read the Hitchens post.

There is more to come on this topic.
Tom Stephenson said…
Interestingly, only a few days ago someone in London came up with conclusive proof that the marbles were originally painted with vibrant colours, as a lot of early sculpture was (photo technique which picks up on Egyptian Blue particles giving off strong infra-red radiation under light).

So it looks as though the white surface of the marble was never intended to be seen in any case. Whether or not this has any bearing on the moral rights of ownership is another thing, I suppose, but the 'original light' striking the surface of them would not have reflected back in the same way as it would now in the new museum.

Popular posts from this blog

Codename: Ainsbrook

I have been watching (UK) Channel 4's Time Team this evening. The programme looked at an undisclosed field (under a potato crop) where a Viking burial had been found. The location in Yorkshire was so sensitive that it was given a codename: Ainsbrook. Here is the summary:
In late 2003 two metal detectorists were working in a field in Yorkshire. They found 'treasure' buried just beneath the surface – a collection of Viking material next to a body. Although they had been detecting on the site for a number of years, during which time they had made large numbers of finds, nothing they had uncovered previously compared with this. They decided to share their discovery with archaeologists.The programme explored the tension between metal-detectorists and the English Heritage sponsored archaeologists putting six trenches into the field based on a geo-physical survey. Finds made by the metal-detectorists did not easily map onto the archaeological features.

Part of the programme had an …

George Ortiz collection to be displayed in London

Christie's is due to display part of the former collection of the late George Ortiz in London in a non-selling show to mark the 25th anniversary of the exhibition at the Royal Academy. There is a statement on the Christie's website ("The Ortiz Collection — ‘proof that the past is in all of us’"). Max Bernheimer is quoted: ‘Ortiz was one of the pre-eminent collectors of his day’.

We recall the associations with Ortiz such as the Horiuchi sarcophagus, the Hestiaios stele fragment, the marble funerary lekythos, and the Castor and Pollux.

Bernheimer will, no doubt, wish to reflect on the Royal Academy exhibition by reading Christopher Chippindale and David W. J. Gill. 2000. "Material consequences of contemporary classical collecting." American Journal of Archaeology 104: 463-511 [JSTOR].

Bernheimer will probably want to re-read the two pieces by Peter Watson that appeared in The Times: , "Ancient art without a history" and "Fakes - the artifice b…

Tutankhamun, Christie's and rigorous due dligence

It was announced today that the Egyptian authorities would be taking legal action against Christie's over the sale of the head of Tutankhamun ("Egypt to sue Christie's to retrieve £4.7m Tutankhamun bust", BBC News 9 July 2019).

The BBC reports:
Egypt's former antiquities chief, Zahi Hawass, said the bust appeared to have been "stolen" in the 1970s from the Temple of Karnak. "The owners have given false information," he told AFP news agency. "They have not shown any legal papers to prove its ownership." Christie's maintain the history of the piece as follows:
It stated that Germany's Prince Wilhelm von Thurn und Taxis reputedly had it in his collection by the 1960s, and that it was acquired by an Austrian dealer in 1973-4. However the family of von Thurn und Taxis claim that the head was never in that collection [see here].

Christie's reject any hint of criticism:
"Christie's would not and do not sell any work whe…