New Delhi: British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak called off a meeting with his Greek counterpart Kyriakos Mitsotakis Tuesday over a dispute on the Parthenon sculptures — a collection of marble artworks from the ancient temple of Athena (the Parthenon) in Greece, that is currently housed at the British Museum in London.
The cancellation of the meeting came after Mitsotakis, during an interview with the British broadcaster BBC Sunday said that the marble works should be returned to Greece and that keeping them divided between London and Athens is like “cutting the Mona Lisa in half”.
The sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, are named after Thomas Bruce — the 7th Earl of Elgin and 11th Earl of Kincardine (Lord Elgin) — who transported them from Greece to the United Kingdom in 1803. They have been part of the British Museum’s collection since 1816 and have long been demanded by the Greeks to complete their series at the Acropolis Museum in Athens.
“This is not a question of returning artefacts whose ownership we question. We feel that these sculptures belong to Greece and that they were essentially stolen. But this is not in my mind an ownership question, this is a reunification argument,” Mitsotakis told the BBC.
The Greek Prime Minister added: “Where can you best appreciate what is essentially one monument? It’s as if I told you, that you would cut the Mona Lisa in half and you would have half of it at the Louvre and half of it at the British Museum. Do you think your viewers would appreciate the beauty of the painting?”
This is why Greece has been “lobbying” for a partnership between Greece and the British Museum, which would allow for the sculptures to be seen in their original setting, Mitsotakis explained during the interview.
His comments, however, were received poorly by the British government, with the scheduled meeting between the two NATO allies and former European Union allies cancelled a few hours before the scheduled time.
According to media reports, Mitsotakis was offered an alternative meeting with British deputy Prime Minister Oliver Dowden. The Greek PM, however, rejected the offer.
“Those who firmly believe in the correctness and justice of their positions are never hesitant to engage in constructive argumentation and debate,” Mitsotakis said in a reference to Sunak after the cancellation of the meeting.
According to the BBC, Sunak, during the Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQ) in the House of Commons Wednesday, said of the ill-fated meeting, “Of course, we’re always happy to discuss important topics of substance with our allies, like tackling illegal migration or indeed strengthening our security”.
He added: “But when it was clear that the purpose of a meeting was not to discuss substantive issues for the future, but rather to grandstand and relitigate issues of the past, it was inappropriate.”
Meanwhile, speaking to ThePrint Thursday, Vijay Kumar, the co-founder of the India Pride Project, a group of art enthusiasts who identify stolen artefacts from India and secure their return, also said that “art needs to be appreciated in the form they were created”.
“The Parthenon frieze was created to be viewed at a certain height. Not at the height seen in the British Museum. Are they really better viewed in the British Museum or where it was meant to be viewed from?” asked Kumar.
ThePrint explains how the sculptures at the centre of the diplomatic row ended up in London and the current status of negotiations over its return to Athens.
Also Read: Ancient statues, scroll, portraits — Full list of 29 antiquities Australia returned to India
History of Parthenon sculptures
The Parthenon sculptures consist of 15 metopes (sculpted relief panels), 17 pedimental figures (sculptures from the triangular space that forms the gable of a low-pitched roof) and 247 feet of the original frieze commemorating the birthday of goddess Athena, according to the website of the British Museum.
The website added that Lord Elgin, the then British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire (which at the time was the governing authority of Athens) had received a firman (permit) from the Ottoman sultan Selim III to remove about “half the sculptures” from the ruins of the Parthenon. However, the legality of the permit is questionable.
A report published in the National Geographic History magazine in its March/April 2017 issue noted that British historian William St. Clair in a 1967 study ‘Lord Elgin and the Marbles’ had concluded that there was no permission given for the removal and export of the frieze and sculptures from the Parthenon.
As republished in the report in the National Geographic History the specific passage of the controversial permit that is often cited as legal proof for the export of the sculpture read, “When they wish to take away some pieces of stone with old inscriptions and figures, no opposition be made.”
According to Kumar, the permit probably allowed for the removal of “loose rubble” in the Parthenon.
He pointed out that the current version of the permit that exists is the Italian translation of the original. The original was lost, further raising questions about the “title ownership” over the sculptures.
However, the British Museum on its website states that the removal of sculptures was “thoroughly” investigated by the British Parliamentary Select Committee in 1816 and the process was considered to be “entirely legal”.
The sculptures eventually reached London after a perilous journey that involved a shipwreck and Lord Elgin being imprisoned in France, near the Spanish border for three years, according to National Geographic.
The collection comes to the British Museum
According to the National Geographic History report, Lord Elgin paid 74,000 pounds — roughly over a million dollars in today’s terms — from his pocket for the retrieval and export of the marbles from Greece to the UK.
In 1808, while going through an expensive divorce settlement, Elgin put pressure on the British government to purchase the sculptures, the report added.
The negotiations unleashed a frenzy in the British public, with a few believing that it should be bought with public money, while others, like the poet George Gordon Byron, were against the removal of the sculptures from Greece in the first place, said the report.
Later, in 1816, the British Parliament created a commission to value the collection and finally agreed to offer Elgin 35,000 pounds for the whole collection. The Parliament voted on the proposal and approved the sale by a close margin — 82 to 80.
The sculptures were eventually moved to the Elgin room in the British Museum in 1832.
Greece requests it return
In 1832, the Kingdom of Greece secured its full independence from the Ottoman Empire, and since then, successive governments have reportedly petitioned for the return of Parthenon sculptures. The British Museum has so far refused all requests for its return, the National Geographic History reported.
According to the British Museum website, a formal request for the return of the Parthenon sculptures was first made in 1983.
“There have been various meetings and discussions since then. Media coverage has referred to Greek government requests to borrow the sculptures, but a loan request (a request for the sculptures to be loaned to another museum) has never been received,” the website added.
Any permanent return or restoration of ownership to Greece is currently prohibited by the British Museum Act, 1963.
Sections 4 and 5 of the Act allows for the Museum to lend its collection or dispose of it under specific conditions — if the object is “a duplicate of another object”, was made “not earlier than 1850″ and substantially consists of a copy, and if it is considered to be “unfit to be retained” by the Museum.
Museums globally return colonially stolen objects
There exists a precedent for museums even within the UK to return objects with questionable pasts.
In 2022, the Glasgow Museums agreed to return seven artefacts to India, including six items from the 14th century and 11th century stone door jams, which were stolen during the 19th century, according to media reports.
The Glasgow Museums has a history of repatriating stolen artefacts to their source nation, starting from at least 1998. It reportedly agreed to return 19 bronzes stolen from the sacked Benin city in Nigeria in 1897.
Similarly, hundreds of objects stolen during the Dutch colonisation of Indonesia and Sri Lanka were reportedly announced to be returned to their source nations earlier in July this year. The objects were returned by the Museum Volkenkunde located in the city of Leiden in the Netherlands.
According to Kumar, the concept of world museums is dead.
“These artefacts can be viewed online today, and if there are questions regarding the title of ownership, the museums should work to repatriate the objects to their source nations,” he said.
Kumar went on to add how these sculptures were often taken by force from their source nations. “Local communities were often given the opportunity to part with priceless artefacts of their heritage by gunpoint. Would this be considered a fair sale?” he added.
(Edited by Richa Mishra)
Also Read: How India-US agreement for stolen art can help nab ‘small-ticket items’, tackle smuggling at borders