The Elgin Marbles controversy centers on a collection of classical Greek marble sculptures removed from the Parthenon in Athens by Lord Elgin, the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, in 1802, during a period when Greece was under Ottoman rule.

Elgin claimed to have obtained legal permission from the Ottoman authorities to remove the marbles, a position later supported by a British parliamentary select committee in 1816 and maintained by the British Museum, which has housed the marbles since their arrival in the UK .

The UK government, including Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, continues to assert the legality of the acquisition and emphasizes the British Museum’s custodianship, ruling out any permanent return and underscoring the marbles’ significance as a British cultural asset .

Greece, on the other hand, has consistently demanded the return of the marbles, arguing that they were effectively stolen during a period of foreign occupation and are integral to Greek heritage and national identity .

Greek officials, including Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, have described the marbles as “stolen in the 19th century” and insist that they belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens, which was specifically designed to house them alongside other Parthenon artifacts .

The Greek government frames their return as a matter of cultural justice and historical rectification, proposing cultural exchanges such as loaning Greek treasures to the British Museum in return for the marbles .

The marbles’ cultural significance to Greece is profound, symbolizing national identity, heritage, and the artistic achievements of ancient Greece .

They are deeply embedded in Greek national consciousness and are seen as vital to the country’s cultural integrity .

The Greek public overwhelmingly supports their return, viewing it as a matter of national pride and justice .

In the UK, public opinion has shifted in recent years, with a majority now supporting repatriation, influenced by increased awareness of cultural heritage ethics and colonial legacies .

The legal landscape is complex.

The British Museum Act of 1963 prohibits the museum from permanently disposing of items in its collection, making outright return of the marbles legally difficult without legislative change .

This has led to proposals for temporary loans or cultural exchange agreements, which some in Greece view as insufficient or even insulting .

The British Museum maintains that the marbles were legally acquired and are best preserved in the UK, while the Greek government references international conventions and agreements advocating for the return of cultural property taken during colonial times .

International organizations, particularly UNESCO, have played a significant role in the dispute.

A UNESCO committee has urged the UK government to reconsider its position, criticizing the conditions under which the marbles are held and affirming Greece’s valid legal claim .

UNESCO’s International Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property has emphasized the need for intergovernmental dialogue and international mediation .

The 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property is frequently cited in repatriation claims, though its retroactive application is limited .

The Elgin Marbles controversy is emblematic of a broader international movement for the repatriation of cultural artifacts taken during colonial times.

Similar cases include Nigeria’s Benin Bronzes and Egypt’s Rosetta Stone, reflecting a growing global recognition of the impacts of colonialism on cultural heritage .

Legal scholars and international forums have called for a redefinition of cultural property laws to facilitate the return of artifacts taken during colonial periods, emphasizing their significance to source cultures .

Recent developments indicate that discussions between the British Museum and Greek officials are ongoing, with some sources suggesting that a deal for the marbles’ return is at an “advanced stage” .

These talks have been taking place since at least November of the previous year, and Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis has sought dialogue with UK leaders, including Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Labour leader Keir Starmer, to explore solutions .

Mitsotakis has also proposed cultural exchanges, such as Greece loaning other artifacts to the British Museum in return for the marbles, potentially circumventing legal restrictions .

The recent return of a Parthenon fragment from Italy to Greece is viewed as a significant precedent that may increase pressure on the UK to follow suit .

Technological innovations have been proposed as potential diplomatic tools.

Augmented reality (AR) and virtual experiences could allow the British Museum to offer digital engagement with the marbles while the originals are returned to Greece .

Public figures such as Stephen Fry have advocated for such solutions, suggesting that the British Museum could develop digital experiences to maintain public access and engagement .

Snapchat has also initiated conversations about using AR to create virtual exhibitions of the marbles, allowing wider access without physical relocation .

The controversy is deeply rooted in the legacy of colonial history, with the removal of the marbles seen as part of a broader pattern of cultural appropriation by colonial powers .

Legal frameworks in former colonial powers often favor the institutions currently holding such artifacts, complicating restitution efforts .

The global movement for repatriation emphasizes that these artifacts are not mere historical objects but carry profound cultural significance and identity for their communities of origin .

The removal of artifacts like the Elgin Marbles is often seen as a form of cultural erasure, impacting the collective memory and identity of the originating cultures .

Public opinion in the UK is increasingly supportive of returning the marbles, influenced by cultural diplomacy, advocacy from public figures, and a growing recognition of ethical considerations surrounding cultural heritage .

Despite this, legal and institutional barriers remain significant, prompting exploration of innovative solutions such as loan agreements, cultural exchanges, and augmented reality experiences .

The Elgin Marbles controversy has had a profound impact on international cultural heritage law, highlighting the challenges in reconciling historical injustices with contemporary legal frameworks .

It has prompted calls for new agreements or cultural partnerships that respect both the cultural significance of the marbles and the legal frameworks involved .

The case is frequently cited in discussions about the responsibilities of museums to return artifacts taken during colonial periods and the need for international cooperation to address historical grievances [689

The Elgin Marbles controversy centers on a collection of classical Greek marble sculptures removed from the Parthenon in Athens by Lord Elgin, the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, in 1802, during a period when Greece was under Ottoman rule.

The Elgin Marbles controversy centers on a collection of classical Greek marble sculptures removed from the Parthenon in Athens by Lord Elgin, the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, in 1802, during a period when Greece was under Ottoman rule.

The Elgin Marbles controversy centers on a collection of classical Greek marble sculptures removed from the Parthenon in Athens by Lord Elgin, the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, in 1802, during a period when Greece was under Ottoman rule.

Elgin claimed to have obtained legal permission from the Ottoman authorities to remove the marbles, a position later supported by a British parliamentary select committee in 1816 and maintained by the British Museum, which has housed the marbles since their arrival in the UK .

Title:

Content: Get more Mail & Guardian
Subscribe or Login

Ghosts of colonial looting haunt Europe’s museums

With France on Tuesday returning a number of royal treasures taken from Benin in the 19th century, here is a recap of other disputes over artefacts looted from Europe’s former African colonies.

France

In 2016, Benin demanded the repatriation of a part of its treasures from the Kingdom of Dahomey. They include totems, sceptres and sacred doors from the Royal Palaces of Aboma, which are held at the Quai Branly Museum in Paris. French troops took them between 1892 and 1894.

On Tuesday France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, hosted his Beninese counterpart, Patrice Talon, for a ceremony to return 26 of the treasures.

A 2018 report by French experts recommended a change in the law and the return of artefacts held in museums to Africa.

Côte d’Ivoire and Senegal

Côte d’Ivoire has also requested the return of more than 100 works of art, and Senegal has asked France to return all works taken from there.

United Kingdom

In the first such move by a British institution, a Cambridge University college last month handed back a bronze cockerel to Nigerian officials that had been looted in the 19th century. It was taken along with hundreds of sacred sculptures and carvings known as the Benin Bronzes during a British military expedition in the former kingdom of Benin in southern Nigeria in 1897.

A day after the Cambridge move, the University of Aberdeen in Scotland handed another Benin bronze to the same Nigerian delegation.

Thousands of Benin bronzes are held in museums across the US and Europe.

The British Museum, which has the largest collection, refuses to return any of its bronzes. It has long argued that its vast trove of foreign artefacts, such as the Elgin Marbles taken from the Parthenon in Athens, are best housed there.

Germany

Nigeria has also pushed for about 1 000 Benin Bronzes to be returned from Germany. In September, Berlin agreed to give back hundreds, starting next July.

Belgium

Belgium, which amassed thousands of objects during its brutal colonisation of what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo, is looking at ways of returning artefacts. The process could take years. — AFP

Keep the powerful accountable

Subscribe to the M&G today for just R30 for the first three months (then R250/quarter).

Subscribers get access to all our best journalism, subscriber-only newsletters, events and a weekly cryptic crossword.

Join the M&G community

Agence France Presse
Agence France Presse works from worldwide. AFP Photo's official Twitter account. Tweeting news and features from Agence France-Presse's global photo network Agence France Presse has over 120540 followers on Twitter.

Related stories

WELCOME TO YOUR M&G

Already a subscriber? Sign in here

Advertising

Latest stories

Aunty Mina’s matric breakfasts a boost for Delft’s grade 12s

Learners writing their final exams are motivated by the delicious fare served at an oasis in Delft, Cape Town

Mothers: ‘Stop funding fossil fuels’

Millions of parents tell world leaders that children are poisoned by toxic pollution with every breath they take

Independents’ gains in local government polls signal ‘success’

Small players’ voices were heard in many provinces where they will form part of coalition governments

More than an allergen, pollen can be used to diagnose...

Monitoring has focused on health risks, but palynologists are now using it to study climatic changes in various landscapes
Advertising

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…
×

Title:

Content: Main content

Reports say a deal to return Elgin Marbles to Greece is at an "advanced stage"

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

Also on the programme: an alternative to plastic; and the story of how a fossil, which lay unnoticed in a drawer for over half a century, has advanced our understanding of the origins of reptiles.

(Picture: One of the Parthenon Statues, also known as the Elgin Marbles. Credit: Reuters)

29 days left to listen

50 minutes

Last on

Yesterday 21:06GMT

Broadcast

  • Yesterday 21:06GMT

Podcast

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

Title:

Content: Beyond Politics
Check out all the latest trending news and stories from across the globe and the Internet! Lifestyle, cultural stories, social media hits, latest science and technology news, photos, videos, and much more!

Looted Ancient Relics Return to Greek Soil After Lengthy Legal Tussle

© AFP 2023 / LOUISA GOULIAMAKIThis photograph taken in Athens on February 8, 2022 shows a rainbow appearing over the Ancient Acropolis.
Subscribe
Greece's recent recovery of ancient artefacts comes against the protracted legal ownership tug-of-war between the UK’s British Museum and the Greek government regarding the fate of the "Elgin Marbles" - Parthenon carvings, which were removed from the Acropolis over 200 years ago.
A batch of ancient artefacts spanning historical periods from the Neolithic to Byzantine era are being repatriated to Greece after a 17-year-long legal battle, Greek Culture Minister Lina Mendoni announced on Friday.
The 351 antiquities in question include a white stone Neolithic-era statuette dating to the 4th millennium BC, an Early Cycladic figurine from between 3200 and 2700 BC, a bronze statue of Alexander the Great from the second half of the 2nd century AD.
Without going into any specific details, Mendoni hailed the joint efforts by Culture Ministry officials, the legal department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the country’s judiciary, and archaeologists to wrest the vast collection from the company of a UK antiquities dealer - Robin Symes Limited - which is undergoing liquidation at the moment.
Symes is said to have put together the collection with the help of a sweeping network of illegal traders.
The current repatriation comes after back in 2006 an investigation was launched into the company owned by the now-disgraced British antiquities' dealer. Acting in close cooperation, Italian and Swiss police in 2016 recovered archaeological artefacts, from Symes’ possession, found to have been stolen from Italy. Symes, once a famous London dealer in artefacts, was suspected of being in cahoots at the time with Italian tomb raiders. There has not been any clarification from Mendoni whether the batch of items coming home to Greece now is somehow linked to that discovery at the Geneva Freeport warehouse complex.
World
Removal of Greek Parthenon Marbles Likened to Stripping Salisbury of Stonehenge by UK's Stephen Fry
Greece has been on a crusade to return looted artefacts across the globe. The most high-profile artworks in this case are the Parthenon Sculptures. Originally part of the temple of the Parthenon at the Acropolis in Athens, they were removed by British diplomat Lord Elgin during the Turkish occupation in 1802. They were brought to Britain and are now on display in the British Museum in London. The UK has long argued that Elgin was given permission to take them by local Ottoman rulers. Greece has consistently demanded the return of the sculptures on display in the British Museum, claiming they are "the product of theft." The campaign to return the artworks continue. Meanwhile, at a reunification ceremony in Athens, three fragments of the Parthenon were brought to the Greek capital and its Acropolis Museum from the Vatican.
World
Vatican Returns Three Fragments of Parthenon to Greece
Newsfeed
0
To participate in the discussion
log in or register
loader
Chats
Заголовок открываемого материала

The UK government, including Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, continues to assert the legality of the acquisition and emphasizes the British Museum’s custodianship, ruling out any permanent return and underscoring the marbles’ significance as a British cultural asset .

Title:

Content: Pressure grows on other restitution cases ahead of first Benin bronze return - Museums Association

Pressure grows on other restitution cases ahead of first Benin bronze return

Several breakthroughs this year have put long-running disputes under the microscope
Geraldine Kendall Adams
Share

Later this month the University of Cambridge will become the first institution in the UK to officially repatriate a Benin bronze to Nigeria.

Delegates from the country's Benin City, where the sculptures were looted by British forces in the punitive expedition of 1897, will be present for a handover ceremony at Jesus College on 27 October, where they will receive a bronze cockerel that was acquired by the university in 1905.

The milestone is the latest in a year of significant breakthroughs in the dispute over the sculptures; in March, the Ethnological Museum in Berlin's Humboldt Forum announced that it would enter talks with Nigeria to fully repatriate its Benin bronze holdings, and shortly after the University of Aberdeen said it would unconditionally return a Benin sculpture from its collections.

With the issue of restitution under the spotlight like never before, pressure has grown on UK institutions to resolve other long-running disputes over objects acquired in the colonial era.

Last month, a Unesco committee issued a resolution urging the UK Government to revisit its stance on the Parthenon Marbles, which have been the subject of a longstanding repatriation claim by the Greek government. Unesco's International Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property criticised the conditions in which the sculptures are held at the British Museum.

Following the committee session, Greece’s culture minister Lina Mendoni said: “Together with the recommendation that was issued – referring to the poor conditions of exposure that the sculptures are kept in at the British Museum – Greece also achieved a decision from the Intergovernmental Committee that pertains specifically to the return of the Parthenon sculptures.”

Advertisement

She added: “The committee urgently calls on the United Kingdom to review its position and enter into a discussion with Greece, recognising that the issue is of an intergovernmental nature – in contrast to claims from the British side that it is a matter for the British Museum – and mainly that Greece has a valid and legal claim to demand the return of the sculptures to their place of birth.”

Museums Journal understands that the resolution was met with anger at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), where relations with Unesco have been strained by the international heritage body's decision earlier this year to strip Liverpool’s waterfront of world heritage status, as well as its criticism of the planned Stonehenge tunnel.

A statement from the DCMS said: “We disagree with the committee’s decision adopted in the closing minutes of the session and are raising issues relating to fact and procedure with Unesco. Our position is clear – the Parthenon Sculptures were acquired legally in accordance with the law at the time. The British Museum operates independently of the government and free from political interference. All decisions relating to collections are taken by the museum's trustees.”

British Museum trustees have also made clear that they believe Unesco involvement “isn't the best way forward”. A statement from the institution said: “The British Museum has a long history of collaboration with Unesco and admires and supports its work. The trustees of the British Museum have a legal and moral responsibility to preserve and maintain all the collections in their care and to make them accessible to world audiences.

“The trustees want to strengthen existing good relations with colleagues and institutions in Greece, and to explore collaborative ventures directly between institutions, not on a government-to-government basis. This is why we believe that working in partnership across the world represents the best way forward. Museums holding Greek works, whether in Greece, the UK or elsewhere in the world, are naturally united to show the importance of the legacy of ancient Greece. The British Museum is committed to playing its full part in sharing the value of that legacy.”

Campaigners have also called on the British Museum to return a collection of sacred altar tablets – which have never been displayed or studied due to their sanctity – to the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The items were taken during the British military assault on Maqdala in 1868.

Advertisement

A letter to British Museum trustees this month, signed by high-profile figures including writer Lemn Sissay and former archbishop of Canterbury George Carey, said: “We believe that today the British Museum has a unique opportunity to build a lasting and meaningful bridge of friendship between Britain and Ethiopia by handing the tabots back to the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.”

The museum’s longstanding position is that the British Museum Act of 1963 legally prevents it from restituting objects, but a new legal opinion, which was sought by campaigners, claims that the tabots could be lawfully returned under a provision in the act allowing for the disposal of objects “unfit to be retained” that can be disposed “without detriment to the interests of students”.

The British Museum is also facing questions about its Benin bronze holdings. A group of contemporary Nigerian artists made headlines worldwide last month when they offered to exchange the historic sculptures for their own works.

“We never stopped making the bronzes even after those ones were stolen,” Osarobo Zeickner-Okoro, a founding member of the Ahiamwen Guild, told Reuters news agency at the time. “I think we make them even better now.”

The British Museum says it is engaged in “sustained and open dialogues” with Nigeria concerning the Benin collections. It is part of the Benin Dialogue Group assisting with the development of the new Edo Museum of West African Art in Benin City, and is also involved in an archaeology project in the city. The British Museum has committed to long-term loans but has not changed its stance on restitution.

Regarding its Maqdala collections, the institution says: “Discussions with Ethiopian partners concerning the Maqdala collections are continuing and the museum is actively invested in these.”

Some heritage professionals have hit back at simplistic media coverage of the issue. In a letter to the Guardian this week, Mike Pitts, editor of British Archaeology magazine, wrote: “The futures of museum collections and public statues are often portrayed by lobbyists and media as a fight between retainers and disposers. The real work is happening behind the scenes: people building new communities on the back of new engagements and research.”

Conference 2021: Brave New World

How can museums change lives in a post-pandemic world? Our inspiring conference programme will explore the ideas and vision we need to not only survive, but to thrive in the future. Online places start from just £45, or attend in person for as little as £190.

Join us in Liverpool this November

Discover

Advertisement

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

Title:

Content: Last show of Benin Bronzes in Cologne before their return | Arts | DW | 15.05.2022

Visit the new DW website

Take a look at the beta version of dw.com. We're not done yet! Your opinion can help us make it better.

  1. Inhalt
  2. Navigation
  3. Weitere Inhalte
  4. Metanavigation
  5. Suche
  6. Choose from 30 Languages
Advertisement

Arts

Last show of Benin Bronzes in Cologne before their return

Before the Benin Bronzes are restituted to Nigeria, the Rautenstrauch-Joest Museum is showing the works from its collection. Nigerian Ambassador Yusuf Tuggar hopes a return date will be found by June.

The Kingdom of Benin was founded in 1200. The works in the exhibition date from the 16th and 17th centuries

Peju Layiwola carefully removes the inventory labels from the Benin Bronzes; her movements are deliberate, almost reverent. The moment is captured in a film that is shown at the Rautenstrauch-Joest Museum in Cologne, as part of the "I miss you" exhibition.

When she touched the objects for the first time, the Nigerian artist and art historian says she felt nostalgic, knowing the history of these works. While she says that she felt captivated by the beauty of the Benin Bronzes, she could not forget "that these works were removed in the context of killing people — that people died in the process of the works coming down here," she told DW.

The Rautenstrauch-Joest-Museum (RJM) houses the world's fourth largest collection of the so-called Benin Bronzes, works of art made of brass, ivory, coral and wood in the former Kingdom of Benin (modern-day Nigeria).

In 1897, they were stolen from the royal palace in Benin City. Under the command of Admiral Sir Harry Rawson, 1,200 British elite soldiers attacked the former royal city, killing countless people and burning the city down to its foundations.

Admiral Sir Harry Rawson (center) with 'his' loot

The destruction of a mighty kingdom

Until that attack, the Kingdom of Benin was independent from the rest of Nigeria, which had already become a British colony.

With the devastation of the city and the exile of the king, the British were able to expand their colonial territory and destroyed one of the most important and powerful kingdoms in African history.

A large part of the looted art treasures ended up at auctions in London at the beginning of the 19th century, from where they made their way to Europe and America — 96 of them landed in the collection of the RJM in Cologne.

Peju Layiwola already wanted to become an artist as a child

Peju Layiwola's great-great-grandfather, Ovonramwen Nogbaisi, was the "Oba" — as the kings are traditionally called there — of the Kingdom of Benin when the British invaded Benin City.

Her grandfather, Evewka II, rebuilt the palace in the mid-20th century.

"My mother grew up in the king's palace," Layiwola explains. And since her mother was very interested in her origins, she told her daughter many stories about Benin, allowing Layiwola to develop her awareness of the kingdom's art and culture.

Encouraged by her mother, who was an artist herself, Layiwola studied fine arts in the Nigerian cities of Lagos and Ibadan. She focused on the history and art of the Kingdom of Benin during her studies.

She had already learned about the 1897 British invasion of Benin as a child, but she actually understood the impact of it "much later, when I began to study art and the history and to see how very violent that event was."

'Historical injustices'

Layiwola has curated several exhibitions on the history of Benin in recent years. Among other projects, she designed a room for the RJM exhibition "Resist! The Art of Resistance," an exhibition told from the perspective of the colonized.

In her artistic work, she also aims to draw attention to "historical injustices," because the effects of colonial rule can still be felt to this day.

This is also the topic of the current exhibition in Cologne, "I miss you," for which Layiwola worked closely with museum director Nanette Snoep. "'I miss you' is about broken memories, about colonial phantom pains and trauma caused by archaeology, by the colonial legacy of devastation and dispossession and passed down through generations," says Snoep, who has directed the RJM since 2019. "In this way, 'I miss you' serves as a platform for mourning, for an ongoing and never-ending process of healing colonial rifts in our society."

A cartoon by Jimga Jimoh Ganiyu, part of the 'I miss you' exhibition

Africa has 'lost' most of its cultural heritage

The Benin Bronzes are the most prominent example of looted colonial art, but throughout the African continent during the colonial period, many more artworks and cultural assets were stolen or misappropriated through injustice such as blackmail or deception.

Many sacred objects were also stolen. Experts estimate that between 80-90% of Africa's cultural heritage is outside the African continent. For many Africans, the loss of culture is accompanied by a loss of identity.

Turning point in the restitution debate

The debate about the return of these objects has been gaining momentum throughout Europe for several years.

Germany wants to make "substantial returns" to Nigeria this year. That's why the exhibition in Cologne has a starting date, but it is not yet determined when it will end. The idea is that the bronzes will go from Cologne directly to the West African country.

The negotiations between all the parties involved have made major progress, according to Nigerian ambassador Yusuf Maitama Tuggar: "Our hope is that we will be able to sign before June," he told DW at the opening of the exhibition.

A vibrant art scene

Peju Layiwola longs for the day when the objects will return to their home.

She points to a traditional sword in the exhibition: "That's the 'Eben.' It belongs to the king, but is also carried by high chiefs in Benin." The sword is forged from steel, but various other materials such as cloth, plant matter, ivory and leather were also used to make it, the art historian said. "It's a unique piece that demonstrates the artist's ability to work with a wide variety of materials and reflects just how demanding art was at the time."

The 'Eben' sword is shown here left

Such swords are still made today in Benin City, which is home to important guilds such as ivory carvers and bronze casters.

During the annual Igue festival held in honor of the King of Benin, the sword is twirled by the chiefs in honor of the king and his ancestors, and the ceremony ends with the king himself waving the sword.

"Benin is therefore a living culture. It is a culture that is evolving and that will not die out," says Peju Layiwola.

The absence of the various cultural assets has inspired artistic practices on site; their return will definitely generate even more art and culture, believes Layiwola.

To date, it has not yet been decided to whom the objects will be returned. To the state of Nigeria, the current king of Benin or the state museum in Benin City? Or maybe all three?

No matter what the solution is, museum director Nanette Snoep wants to continue working with Nigeria and start new collaborations.

This article was originally written in German.

Greece, on the other hand, has consistently demanded the return of the marbles, arguing that they were effectively stolen during a period of foreign occupation and are integral to Greek heritage and national identity .

Title:

Content: ISSN 2330-717X

How Indian Liberalism Aided The Rise Of The Right – OpEd

By

India’s Liberal front is floundering in the deep waters of confusion and inaction. The rapid rise of the right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has caught it off-guard, creating a political moment characterized by what an editorial of “Krisis” journal has called “the feeling of being caught in a wave, heading somewhere dangerous, yet feeling unable to change its direction.” An important feature of this “image of citizens seized in a right-wing wave” is that it includes “those repulsed by it but unable to find anchors for resistance or to imagine viable alternatives.” What accounts for the failure to construct a strong counter-narrative? In India, the Liberal political class – instead of adapting to the changing realities – has resigned to its tradition of smug righteousness, unwilling to understand the worth of its electoral bromides.

The volatile shifts of politico-historical tectonic plates in India make it amply clear that the extreme Right emerged from the womb of a defective liberal ideology that slowly became antithetical to the people’s interests. In response to the imperialist depredations of the British empire, a sustained anti-colonial struggle was launched which – to acquire a certain effectiveness – had to foster mass participation and that in its turn required a degree of accommodation of alternative perspectives. Thus, mainstream Indian nationalism developed a relatively unificatory and subaltern stream – though it was kept in check by a Congress leadership of high-caste, middle-class professionals with sizeable properties and business clout.

Through the dynamic interaction between the overflowing energy of a genuinely grassroots movement and the calibrating control exercised by a conservative domestic elite, modern pathologies of communalism were born. While the oppressed sectors of the independence movement advanced a broadly socialist and secular agenda, the bourgeois nationalist establishment weakened the potency of these programmatic horizons by de-coupling politics from economics. In this way, secularism was emptied of its radical message of the civil equality of denominationally different individuals and communities.

What was the necessity of this ideological operation? Aijaz Ahmad writes:

“the idea of one kind of equality leads, necessarily and logically, to other ideas of equality: the idea of secularism leads to ideas of political democracy; the idea of political equality leads to the idea of economic equality; the idea of socio-economic equality among men leads to similar ideas about equality between men and women, between individuals of one caste and another, one race or nation and other…ideas of equality in one domain lead necessarily to ideas of equality in other domains; that the logic of such ideas would take us – and should take us – far beyond the conventional confines of democracy or socialism or secularism; that the logic of secularism, the logic of democracy would take us, step by step, to communism itself”.

After the defanging of secularism, what was left was the half-hearted notion of tolerance – castigated by K. N. Panikkar as a “doubtful” alternative to secularism. In his words: “tolerance is sufferance or endurance and can even turn into tyranny, when exercised by a religious majority. The ‘tolerance’ of Hindutva, for instance, concedes to the non-Hindus a subordinate position, devoid of rights and privileges.” The practical failures of this strategy of tolerance were evident in the bloody partition of the subcontinent that accompanied the transition to independence.

In the immediate post-partition years, then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru contained these communal explosions by stitching a social contract dominated by modernist developmentalism. Economic planning and sovereignty, the provision of some basic services for the poor and the illiterate, the principle of affirmative action for Dalits, and subsidies for farming came to be accepted as standard fare. However, actual implementation was lacking. Tanika Sarkar comments: “Most of these policies remained solely on paper, while the poor continued to live their lives without the protection of any safety net whatsoever. Nonetheless, the tenacity of certain principles cleared a space for the contestation of poverty and class exploitation. Rights and equality were given the status of absolute goods, of desirable norms.”

Although the normative consensus around the need for eradicating poverty was politically progressive, the cultural field was not incorporated in this framework. A civilizational discourse of multiculturalism – built on the myth of an enduring Indian nation, from the Vedic times to the modern – inadvertently promoted Hindu religiosity and symbolism. Through his inclusive notion of “unity in diversity”, Nehru constructed the contours of what Anna Guttman has called “nationalist classicism”. It is worth quoting her at length:

“Nationalist classicism opposes colonial classicizing discourses, however, in that it seeks to conceive of ancient civilizations as alive, rather than dead, in emphasizing the connection between the land’s ancient and contemporary inhabitants…this assertion is double-edged—the proximity of ancient and modern Hinduism might point just as convincingly to the backwardness of the modern form as to the enlightened nature of the ancient. A reliance on classicism can also lead to a distortion of history that privileges certain kinds of identity. In India, the consequences of this are particularly problematic. Though Nehru rejects the British periodization of Indian history and its creation of distinct Hindu and Muslim eras, there can be no doubt that he is especially interested in ancient India. The classical period precludes not only Indian Muslims per se, but Islam itself, and, by extension, their entire way of life. Any insistence on continuity between the Indus Valley civilization and contemporary South Asia inevitably made non-Hindus uneasy.”

Thus, Nehru – in his efforts to highlight the achievements of the colonized people in response to the ideological violence unleashed by the British rulers – adopted a rather static view of Indian history, frequently allowing culture to pervade the entire arena of the country’s history. This was linked to the need he felt for erecting a strong nation. Pritam Singh notes

“Nehru was not a believer…but his almost romantic notion of India’s oneness since time immemorial meant that he equated the religion with the nation. In his much celebrated book “The Discovery of India”, Nehru writes: ‘Hinduism became the symbol of nationalism. It was indeed a national religion, with all those deep instincts, racial and cultural, which form the basis everywhere of nationalism today’. He held contradictory positions on the Hindu institution of caste, praising it as a great historical institution at one point and considering it outdated at another point but avoiding the subject of untouchability all together. Nehru’s Hindu bias was not religious per se but was closely entwined with his passion for building a strong united India with a highly centralized power structure.”

Though Nehru harbored Hinduist assumptions, these strands of his thought were marginal due to the overwhelming influence exercised by political society. It was only in the Nehruvian era that the Indian state performed an educational and ethical function, trying to spread modern and progressive values, evident in the new textbooks of the period. This ability of the Indian state to transcend the divisions of civil society and propagate the figure of the abstract universal citizen proved to be phenomenal. This was bound to happen because the rugged realities of civil society constitutively shape the texture of the state, which derives its contingent legitimacy from the internal motions of civil society.

Beginning from the 1980s, the Congress party started abandoning the post-colonial ethos of sovereignty and secularism in favor of a more overtly communal politics. Themes of aggressive national unity – arising due to the turmoil in the states of Assam, Kashmir and Punjab – were routinely highlighted and given a religious form by the insistence that unity could only be maintained by Hindus. The 1984 general elections, held after Indira Gandhi’s assassination, were won due to the undertow of Hindu chauvinism cultivated in different regions. When this focus on identitarian specificities combined with the immiserating effects of neoliberalism, the fortunes of liberalism drastically declined.

Whereas the Right used its network of overlapping fronts and tightly-knit cadre organizations to provide its support base with a sense of political belonging and social coherence, the Liberal camp stuck to its mode of haphazard politicking. Opportunist deployment of religious themes could not compete with the systematic communalism of the Right. Hypocritical adherence to the precepts of democracy appeared argumentatively inferior to the concrete claims of exclusionary glory offered by neo-fascists. In short, the Congress’ incomplete political prioritization of the conservative ideological elements of the anti-colonial struggle was fully carried forward by the Indian Right. Today, we need to honestly acknowledge this dimension of the present-day political crisis so that the battle for democracy and secularism can be rejuvenated.

Click here to have Eurasia Review's newsletter delivered via RSS, as an email newsletter, via mobile or on your personal news page.

Yanis Iqbal

Yanis Iqbal is an independent researcher and freelance writer based in Aligarh, India and can be contacted at [email protected] His articles have been published by different magazines and websites such as Monthly Review Online, Tehran Times, Modern Diplomacy, ZNet, Canada Files, Anti-war, Midwestern Marx, Anticonquista, Anti-Capitalist Resistance, Challenge, Big News Network, CGTN, Quint, Federación Anarquista, Akademi, South Asia Journal, International Magz, Green Social Thought, New Age, Frontier Post, Green Left, Palestinian Media Center in Europe, Rebelion, Newsclick, Committee for the Abolition of Illegitimate Debt, Weekly Worker, Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières, News and Letters Weekly, Economic and Political Weekly, Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal, Counterfire, Journal of People, Peasants and Workers, The Greanville Post, Plateforme altermondialiste, Dandelion Salad, Scribe, Arena, Eurasia Review, Coventry University Press, Culture Matters, Press TV, Global Research, Independent Australia, Dissident Voice, Axis of Logic, Marxism-Leninism Today, Scoop, United National Antiwar Coalition, Gauri Lankesh News, Kashmir Times, Good Morning Kashmir, Countercurrents, Counterview, Syria 360, Revolutionary Strategic Studies, Socialist Project, Hampton Institute, Orinoco Tribune, Intrepid Report, Ecuador Today, People’s Review, Eleventh Column, Pressenza, Karvaan India, Clarion India, OpEd News, Janata Weekly, The Iraq File, Iraq Sun, Portside and the Institute of Latin American Studies.

Title:

Content: Skip to main contentSkip to navigation

Italy returns Parthenon fragment to Greece amid UK row over marbles

Loan deal could renew pressure on Britain to repatriate ancient Parthenon marbles to Athens

Italy is returning a fragment belonging to the Parthenon’s eastern frieze to Greece in a breakthrough deal that could renew pressure on Britain to repatriate the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles removed by Lord Elgin in the early 19th century.

The marble fragment, which depicts the foot of a goddess, either Peitho or Artemis, peeking out from beneath an elaborate tunic, is currently held at the Antonino Salinas Regional Archaeological Museum in Palermo, Sicily. It was originally bought by the University of Palermo from the widow of Robert Fagan, the British consul for Sicily and Malta, after his death in 1816.

The artefact is being returned on a four-year loan as part of a cultural exchange agreement between Sicily and Greece, with the intention for the loan period to be extended by a further four years. However, the move back to Greece could eventually become permanent.

In return, the Acropolis Museum in Athens will loan the Palermo museum a 5th-century BC headless statue of the goddess Athena, as well as an 8th-century BC amphora.

The deal, which includes an exchange of cultural initiatives between the two museums, comes after several years of negotiations between Sicilian and Greek authorities.

“Sending back to the context of its origins a small, but significant, fragment belonging to the Parthenon has a very strong symbolic value,” said Sicily’s councillor for culture, Alberto Samonà. “It is also a response to the international debate [about the Parthenon artefacts]. But I don’t want to get into that debate. For us, this is a gesture of friendship – Greece and Sicily are two areas of the Mediterranean that share a common story.”

The fragment was loaned to Greece in 2002 and in 2008. Samonà said the latest transfer could become permanent, but that it would be up to the Italian culture ministry to take the measures needed to make that happen.

It is not known how Fagan, an amateur archaeologist, acquired the fragment, although one theory suggests it might have been given to him by Elgin, the British aristocrat who excavated the bulk of the ancient Parthenon marbles between 1801 and 1804 before selling them to the British Museum in 1816, where the artefacts are currently on display.

Greece has long fought for the marbles to be repatriated from the UK. In November, the Greek prime minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, demanded that Britain return the marbles to Greece, while at the same time offering to loan some Greek historical treasures to the British Museum. In response, Downing Street said returning the marbles was a matter for the British Museum. The UK prime minister, Boris Johnson, had previously said the marbles would remain in Britain, arguing that they were legally acquired.

Title:

Content: Stephen Fry calls returning Elgin Marbles to Greece 'A classy thing at last'

THE ELGIN Marbles' return to Greece would be "a classy act" by the UK, says Stephen Fry.

Link copied

UK has 'no obligation' to return Elgin Marbles says Widdecombe

Greece has called for the repatriation of the collection of Elgin Marbles for more than 200 years – ever since they were taken from the Parthenon in 1802 on the order of Lord Elgin, Britain's then-ambassador to the Ottoman Empire. Mr Fry, who said he is "very keen" to see the sculptures be returned to Athens, has been the latest to join the debate over the home of the monumental artwork.

The actor and broadcaster suggested the marbles be replaced with a virtual experience.

He stressed that with modern technology the carvings can be replicated using lasers.

He said: "So the British Museum would have a Parthenon experience and you go in and see this fabulous technology using AR helmets or whatever you want to wear and you see how the originals were perfectly reproduced and out in place and you watch them being packed up and put on the train."

The sculptures, which sit at the London-based institution, have not been available to be publicly viewed for nearly a year due to ongoing maintenance work and the coronavirus pandemic.

The British Museum is to reopen its Greek galleries to the public on Monday, December 13.

READ MORE: Boris in lockdown warning: 'Tidal wave' of Omicron to hit UK - PM unveils new jabs plan

Critics argue the Elgin Marbles, which sit at the British Museum, should be repatriated to Greece (Image: Getty)

Mr Fry, 64, said: "I know a lot of people say 'we've looked after them' and it's certainly true we've looked after them, but it would be such a classy act.

"I promise you one million Athenians would come on to the street to welcome them.

"They mean so much to the Greeks, they are part of the nature of what Athens is."

The British Museum houses 15 metopes, 17 pedimental figures and 75 metres of the original frieze.

50 metres remain in Athens and other parts are in museums across Europe.

Comedian Stephen Fry called returning the artwork would be 'a classy act' from Britain's side (Image: Getty)

The sculptures have been a subject of debate ever since the were taken from Greece in 1802 (Image: Getty)

Mr Fry claimed a move such as returning the Elgin Marbles is what the country needs: "There would be a hand-shake ceremony and suddenly people would for once look at Britain and say that was a classy act.

"It would be a classy thing and Britain hasn't done a classy thing for some time."

Greek prime minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, speaking to the FT ahead of a foreign policy trip to the UK last month, said: "If I were in the PM's shoes and I were thinking out of the box in terms of global Britannia, and the idea of Britain really playing a role in the post-Brexit world, [it] would be a fantastic coup for public diplomacy if they were to look at this from a different perspective."

DON'T MISS
Brexit Britain could avoid energy shortages with breakthrough renewable source [INSIGHT]
Danny Miller crowned I’m A Celebrity 2021 winner ‘I’m speechless for once!’ [REPORT]
Enraged Brit calls Macron 'jumped-up Napoleon' and urges Boris to 'get in ring' over fish [ANALYSIS]

Kyriakos Mitsotakis advocates for 'reunification' of Elgin Marbles

Greek prime minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis has urged Boris Johnson to return the marbles to Athens (Image: Getty)

Then, during his visit to London, he urged Prime Minister Boris Johnson to return the priceless ancient sculptures to Greece, again presenting it as a chance for the UK to strengthen its Global Britain standing.

Mr Johnson has so far not shown signs he intends to return the Elgin Marbles.

Speaking to the Greek paper Ta Nea earlier this year, he claimed: "The UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures.

"They were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition."

This aligns with the view outlined on the British Museum’s website, which backs Lord Elgin's efforts to bring the marbles to the UK in the early 19th century: "His actions were thoroughly investigated by a parliamentary select committee in 1816 and found to be entirely legal, prior to the sculptures entering the collection of the British Museum by act of parliament."

Greek officials, including Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, have described the marbles as “stolen in the 19th century” and insist that they belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens, which was specifically designed to house them alongside other Parthenon artifacts .

Title:

Content: Main content

Reports say a deal to return Elgin Marbles to Greece is at an "advanced stage"

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

Also on the programme: an alternative to plastic; and the story of how a fossil, which lay unnoticed in a drawer for over half a century, has advanced our understanding of the origins of reptiles.

(Picture: One of the Parthenon Statues, also known as the Elgin Marbles. Credit: Reuters)

29 days left to listen

50 minutes

Last on

Yesterday 21:06GMT

Broadcast

  • Yesterday 21:06GMT

Podcast

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

The Greek government frames their return as a matter of cultural justice and historical rectification, proposing cultural exchanges such as loaning Greek treasures to the British Museum in return for the marbles .

Title:

Content: Skip to main contentSkip to navigation

Italy returns Parthenon fragment to Greece amid UK row over marbles

Loan deal could renew pressure on Britain to repatriate ancient Parthenon marbles to Athens

Italy is returning a fragment belonging to the Parthenon’s eastern frieze to Greece in a breakthrough deal that could renew pressure on Britain to repatriate the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles removed by Lord Elgin in the early 19th century.

The marble fragment, which depicts the foot of a goddess, either Peitho or Artemis, peeking out from beneath an elaborate tunic, is currently held at the Antonino Salinas Regional Archaeological Museum in Palermo, Sicily. It was originally bought by the University of Palermo from the widow of Robert Fagan, the British consul for Sicily and Malta, after his death in 1816.

The artefact is being returned on a four-year loan as part of a cultural exchange agreement between Sicily and Greece, with the intention for the loan period to be extended by a further four years. However, the move back to Greece could eventually become permanent.

In return, the Acropolis Museum in Athens will loan the Palermo museum a 5th-century BC headless statue of the goddess Athena, as well as an 8th-century BC amphora.

The deal, which includes an exchange of cultural initiatives between the two museums, comes after several years of negotiations between Sicilian and Greek authorities.

“Sending back to the context of its origins a small, but significant, fragment belonging to the Parthenon has a very strong symbolic value,” said Sicily’s councillor for culture, Alberto Samonà. “It is also a response to the international debate [about the Parthenon artefacts]. But I don’t want to get into that debate. For us, this is a gesture of friendship – Greece and Sicily are two areas of the Mediterranean that share a common story.”

The fragment was loaned to Greece in 2002 and in 2008. Samonà said the latest transfer could become permanent, but that it would be up to the Italian culture ministry to take the measures needed to make that happen.

It is not known how Fagan, an amateur archaeologist, acquired the fragment, although one theory suggests it might have been given to him by Elgin, the British aristocrat who excavated the bulk of the ancient Parthenon marbles between 1801 and 1804 before selling them to the British Museum in 1816, where the artefacts are currently on display.

Greece has long fought for the marbles to be repatriated from the UK. In November, the Greek prime minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, demanded that Britain return the marbles to Greece, while at the same time offering to loan some Greek historical treasures to the British Museum. In response, Downing Street said returning the marbles was a matter for the British Museum. The UK prime minister, Boris Johnson, had previously said the marbles would remain in Britain, arguing that they were legally acquired.

The marbles’ cultural significance to Greece is profound, symbolizing national identity, heritage, and the artistic achievements of ancient Greece .

Title:

Content: Main content

Reports say a deal to return Elgin Marbles to Greece is at an "advanced stage"

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

Also on the programme: an alternative to plastic; and the story of how a fossil, which lay unnoticed in a drawer for over half a century, has advanced our understanding of the origins of reptiles.

(Picture: One of the Parthenon Statues, also known as the Elgin Marbles. Credit: Reuters)

29 days left to listen

50 minutes

Last on

Yesterday 21:06GMT

Broadcast

  • Yesterday 21:06GMT

Podcast

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

They are deeply embedded in Greek national consciousness and are seen as vital to the country’s cultural integrity .

Title:

Content: She is Dead Now, You Can Tear the Crown Apart

The Argument for Cultural Restitution Through the Kohinoor Diamond

When the British took the Kohinoor diamond from Punjab, more than half of it was cut without hesitation, to fit within Queen Elizabeth’s crown.

Stolen, fragmented and appropriated by British legacy—a fitting analogy of their role in the subcontinent.

B-but the diamond has become a part of British culture! You’re absolutely right, a culture that is still proud of its imperialist past, and nothing beyond this in relation to the stone.

In Paul Young’s The Kohinoor, the Crystal Palace, and the Mission to Make Sense of British India, the diamond was placed on display in Britain in the 19th century to symbolize the nation’s “strength, economic prowess and imperial dominance” and its ability to impose it onto others. According to Young, the Kohinoor was famously known for its size and martial history as it depicted the “incalculable wealth, mystery, monarchical power, and strength of the British Empire.”

For Britain, their conquests and exploits were believed to have brought unprecedented economic and lifestyle improvements wherever they held influence, in this particular case, the territory known as the British Raj. This narrative was what the British advanced and by remodeling the history of South Asia as one supposedly saved by the British Empire, the historical and cultural value of the Kohinoor and many other cultural artifacts, were diminished and revamped to fit this account.

What is interesting about the gemstone is that although it is shrouded in a complex history of varying origins, ownerships, wars and bloodshed, the Kohinoor’s existence refutes many arguments against the repatriation of cultural artifacts.

The term Koh-I-Noor was originally coined 300 years ago translating to the Persian “Mountain of Light” after Emperor Nader Shah had been mesmerized by its size and beauty. Often cited in popular culture as the 5,000 year old “Symantaka” jewel from Hindu mythology, it was said to have been found in the Kollur Mine. Earliest records date back to ownership by King Porus in 325 BC and continue with Persian dynasties in the 13th century, Babur’s Mughal Empire in the 16th century and finally with the Sikh Empire in 1813.

Over hundreds of years, the diamond passed through the hands of a multitude of Afghan, Indian, Mughal and Persian families, remaining in Punjab until the “Treaty of Lahore” of 1849. As British troops surrounded the 10 year old Maharajah Duleep Singh, the young king was forced to cede it to the British as part of the annexation of the Punjab region, marking the end of the Anglo-Sikh Wars.

With the conquest of the land, Britain’s attitude towards the territory was that without its own economic presence, the Indian subcontinent would remain culturally backward. For them, European policies had to be forced onto uncivilized peoples and that it was the English duty to make them productive. This resulted in a mercantilist ideal for the colony that sought to maximize its economic potential. The Kohinoor became a symbol of glorified economic exploitation only to be later removed from the Crystal Palace, as it was deemed an item of “mere curiosity and rarity” by British institutions. This perverse and shallow cultural significance the jewel held to Britain cannot be compared to the nations of South Asia—the subject of religious texts, fables, myths and long-held allegories in South Asian culture to this day.

Despite its forceful acquisition and cultural appropriation, mainstream legal bodies uphold the British claim under contradictory premises that quite conveniently encourage repatriation yet systematically prevent any form of it. The British under current international law have no legal obligation to return the stone to the subcontinent because its attainment had occurred before modern international agreements. In the case of the Kohinoor, and every other cultural artifact stolen during the colonial period, prior conquest is a perfectly legal means of justifying the acquisition of property.

To challenge this purposefully biased structure, legal scholars such as Saby Ghoshray have argued that a new framework must be created to redefine cultural property to facilitate their rightful return. This can be done by raising the fact that the Kohinoor diamond’s history demonstrates that it is cultural heritage for South Asians and not simply a symbolic object that was transferred from one bloody hand to the next, as Britain. By reassessing the object as cultural heritage, the international community would recognize its value that transcends both time and its status as merely an object. Heritage also entails collective ownership rather than individual ownership.

Therefore, declaring the Kohinoor as an artifact of cultural heritage to the peoples of South Asia would invalidate the individual ability to cede it, making its succession to the British after the Treaty of Lahore in 1849, illegitimate. The diamond, under the banner of cultural heritage, cannot be placed under temporal limits as its cultural value rooted in thousands of years of history cannot be quantified or measured in time. Re-labeling and reworking the current framework regarding cultural property as cultural heritage allows for the just repatriation of artifacts that were wrongfully taken during colonial eras through violent and coercive means, that are, to this day, being patronized as imperial accomplishments.

With the passing of Queen Elizabeth II, inaction or action against restitution of cultural heritage propagates and tolerates the consequences of Britain’s colonial past and their effects on former colonies. If Britain dismisses its oppressing history and chooses to celebrate its progress in the wake of the Queen’s death, it must acknowledge its implications as well, including restoring cultural objects to reverse the acts of imperialism while respecting the self-determination of countries. Refusing to address the impact of colonial claims on cultural artifacts constitute social and cultural injuries on the welfare of formerly colonized nations. Until such cultural justice is initiated, conversations surrounding Britain’s moral advancements are performative, hypocritical and further injurious.

This article originally appeared in Volume 43, Issue 2, published September 13, 2022.

The Greek public overwhelmingly supports their return, viewing it as a matter of national pride and justice .

Title:

Content: Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Greek prime minister tries to broker deal for return of Parthenon marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis offers to loan Greek treasures to British Museum if ‘stolen’ sculptures are returned to Acropolis

The Greek prime minister has demanded that the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles, which he accuses Britain of stealing, be returned to Greece, and even offered to loan some of his country’s treasures to the British Museum in an attempt to broker a deal.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis told the Daily Telegraph that the sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens.

However, Boris Johnson has previously ruled out returning them on the grounds that they were acquired legally.

Mitsotakis said: “Our position is very clear. The marbles were stolen in the 19th century; they belong in the Acropolis Museum and we need to discuss this issue in earnest.

“I am sure that if there was a willingness on the part of the government to move we could find an arrangement with the British Museum in terms of us sending abroad cultural treasures on loan, which have never left the country.”

The marbles were removed from the Acropolis more than 200 years ago by Lord Elgin in circumstances that have spurred one of the world’s most famous cultural rows and have long been the subject of dispute.

Mitsotakis said he would raise the issue with Johnson when the two meet next week for talks that could shape future relations between the two countries.

“Refusing to discuss the topic seems to me, given the context of everything that has been happening in terms of the return of cultural treasures, to be rather an anachronistic approach,” he added.

“It would be a fantastic statement by what Boris calls Global Britain if they were to move on this and look at it through a completely different lens.”

But Johnson dismissed the appeal for their return to Greece earlier this year, telling the Greek newspaper Ta Nea: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed prime minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.

“But the UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition.”

Greece has long called for the reunification of the sculptures, displayed in museums across Europe but mostly in London, and says it is integral to understanding the artworks in the context of the Acropolis.

In the UK, public opinion has shifted in recent years, with a majority now supporting repatriation, influenced by increased awareness of cultural heritage ethics and colonial legacies .

Title:

Content: ‘They were stolen’ Greek PM demands return of the Elgin Marbles ‘Don’t belong to British’

GREEK Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis joined Good Morning Britain on Tuesday morning to demand the return of the Elgin Marbles ahead of meeting with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

Link copied

Richard Madeley announces break from Good Morning Britain

Joining Good Morning Britain presenters Susanna Reid and Ed Balls, Kyriakos Mitsotakis spoke on a variety of topics surrounding the actions of Greek policies. When probed by Balls about the Elgin Marbles and how the Prime Minister should be thinking differently about them, Mitsotakis stated they were stolen from their origins, and they didn’t belong in British museums.

Greek PM demands for the Elgin Statues to be returned after saying they were stolen (Image: ITV/GETTY)

Balls introduced the topic and asked the PM: “Our Prime Minister likes his holidays so I’m thinking a Greek trip next year when you meet him.

“He also likes Greek history, I’m sure you’ll be discussing the Elgin marbles is there a chance in persuaded this classicist Prime Minister here in Britain to start thinking in a different way about the Elgin Marbles?”

Mitsotakis explained: “Well he should, he’s a lover of classical sculptures,” however Balls interrupted and asked him why they were here.

“They’re here because they were stolen by Lord Elgin!” Mitsotakis exclaimed to which Balls retaliated: “That’s debated, stolen or legal?”

“But at the end of the day this is not a legal argument, and I don’t like to talk about the return of the marbles.”

More to follow…

Title:

Content: Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Greek prime minister tries to broker deal for return of Parthenon marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis offers to loan Greek treasures to British Museum if ‘stolen’ sculptures are returned to Acropolis

The Greek prime minister has demanded that the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles, which he accuses Britain of stealing, be returned to Greece, and even offered to loan some of his country’s treasures to the British Museum in an attempt to broker a deal.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis told the Daily Telegraph that the sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens.

However, Boris Johnson has previously ruled out returning them on the grounds that they were acquired legally.

Mitsotakis said: “Our position is very clear. The marbles were stolen in the 19th century; they belong in the Acropolis Museum and we need to discuss this issue in earnest.

“I am sure that if there was a willingness on the part of the government to move we could find an arrangement with the British Museum in terms of us sending abroad cultural treasures on loan, which have never left the country.”

The marbles were removed from the Acropolis more than 200 years ago by Lord Elgin in circumstances that have spurred one of the world’s most famous cultural rows and have long been the subject of dispute.

Mitsotakis said he would raise the issue with Johnson when the two meet next week for talks that could shape future relations between the two countries.

“Refusing to discuss the topic seems to me, given the context of everything that has been happening in terms of the return of cultural treasures, to be rather an anachronistic approach,” he added.

“It would be a fantastic statement by what Boris calls Global Britain if they were to move on this and look at it through a completely different lens.”

But Johnson dismissed the appeal for their return to Greece earlier this year, telling the Greek newspaper Ta Nea: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed prime minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.

“But the UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition.”

Greece has long called for the reunification of the sculptures, displayed in museums across Europe but mostly in London, and says it is integral to understanding the artworks in the context of the Acropolis.

The legal landscape is complex.

The legal landscape is complex.

The British Museum Act of 1963 prohibits the museum from permanently disposing of items in its collection, making outright return of the marbles legally difficult without legislative change .

Title:

Content: Explainer

Beyond the Elgin Marbles: Which other famous artefacts has the UK been urged to give back?

British museums are bulging with items taken from other countries with - or in many cases without - permission. Greece has made high-profile demands for the return of the Elgin Marbles. Sky News looks at some of the other countries calling for the UK to hand back precious items.

Why you can trust Sky News

Greece has long called for Britain to hand back the Elgin Marbles - 17 sculptures controversially removed from the ancient Parthenon temple 200 years ago.

UK officials have discussed legal ways they could block any export of the sculptures, Sky News understands, as Downing Street cancelled a meeting between Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and his Greek counterpart.

But Greece is not alone in demanding the return of artefacts held by British museums.

Here, Sky News looks at some of the other countries calling for the UK to hand back precious items.

Benin Bronzes - Nigeria

Nigeria has called for the return of the Benin Bronzes - and renewed its demand after it emerged earlier this year that 2,000 artefacts had been stolen from the British Museum.

The artefacts, which date back as far as the 16th century, were taken from Benin City after British forces invaded the Kingdom in modern day Nigeria in 1897.

"They are the subject of loot. They were illegally taken out of the country," said Abba Isa Tijani, director of Nigeria's National Commission for Museums and Monuments, speaking to Sky News in August.

"It is irrespective whether they are safe there. That is not an issue. The issue is that these are stolen artefacts, and they should be returned to Nigeria to the communities that they belong to."

Mold gold cape and Moel Hebog shield - Wales

Thefts at the British Museum also prompted demands for Welsh artefacts to be returned to Wales.

The Mold gold cape, which is around 4,000 years old, and the Moel Hebog shield, thought to be from between the 12th and 10th centuries BC, were among the items in the museum's collection with a Welsh connection.

Liz Saville Roberts, Plaid Cymru MP for Dwyfor Meirionnydd, said the argument that items were safer in London "no longer holds water".

She added: "These items belong to everyone but they belong especially to us in Wales and we have the means for them to play a part in the way we interpret our history."

The Rosetta Stone - Egypt

Egypt petitioned for the return of the Rosetta Stone, saying the "key to the decipherment of hieroglyphs is an icon of our Egyptian identity".

The demand for the British Museum to hand back the artefact, which was taken by the British in 1801 after being uncovered by the French, gained more than 200,000 signatures.

The Maqdala collection - Ethiopia

Crosses, religious texts and a shield were among the items of the Maqdala collection returned to Ethiopia in 2021.

But more artefacts looted by British soldiers during the Battle of Maqdala in 1868 remain in British museums.

Receiving the items, Ethiopia's ambassador to the UK ambassador, Teferi Melesse Desta said: "To honour the memory of Maqdala, I once again renew the calls made by countless Ethiopians before me for museums, collectors and holders of Maqdala heritage to return [these items].

"It is my hope that in the Maqdala returns to come, the relations between our two nations and people can deepen and grow from strength to strength."

Hoa Hakananai'a sculpture - Easter Island/Rapa Nui

In 2018, a delegation from Easter Island asked the British Museum to return a seven-foot tall basalt sculpture known as Hoa Hakananai'a, which means "the stolen or hidden friend" in the Rapa Nui language.

It is believed to date from around 1200 AD. It was removed from the island in 1868 and given as a gift to Queen Victoria.

"This is no rock," Carlos Edmunds, president of the Council of Elders, told the Guardian. "It embodies the spirit of an ancestor, almost like a grandfather. This is what we want returned to our island - not just a statue."

Items from Omdurman battlefield - Sudan

Sudan has demanded the return of artefacts and body parts taken by British soldiers at the Battle of Omdurman in 1898.

Two skulls, a banner and a suit of armour were among the items Sudan want returned.

Cultural relics - China

China joined demands for the return of artefacts after the British Museum theft scandal with an editorial in state-run newspaper The Global Times.

It said there were 23,000 Chinese cultural items in the museum's collection, including statues, bronzes, scrolls "and other extremely valuable national treasures".

"It's difficult to trace how exactly China lost them to the British Museum, but most Chinese collections were certainly looted or stolen by Britain when it created and later took advantage of China's crisis, or even directly robbed China," the editorial said.

"As long as Britain cannot prove which collection was acquired legally and honestly, then the mother country of these collections has the right to seek their repatriation."

Read more:
What are the Elgin Marbles?
British Museum reveals types of items believed to have been stolen

Neanderthal skulls - Gibraltar

In 2018, Gibraltar asked for the return of two Neanderthal skulls display at the Natural History Museum.

The skulls, belonging to an adult woman and a child, are the "best-studied human fossils in the world", according to the Natural History Museum.

"It is only right that such significant items come back home where they will be cherished and well looked after," Gibraltar's minister for heritage said at the time.

Title:

Content: Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Greek prime minister tries to broker deal for return of Parthenon marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis offers to loan Greek treasures to British Museum if ‘stolen’ sculptures are returned to Acropolis

The Greek prime minister has demanded that the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles, which he accuses Britain of stealing, be returned to Greece, and even offered to loan some of his country’s treasures to the British Museum in an attempt to broker a deal.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis told the Daily Telegraph that the sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens.

However, Boris Johnson has previously ruled out returning them on the grounds that they were acquired legally.

Mitsotakis said: “Our position is very clear. The marbles were stolen in the 19th century; they belong in the Acropolis Museum and we need to discuss this issue in earnest.

“I am sure that if there was a willingness on the part of the government to move we could find an arrangement with the British Museum in terms of us sending abroad cultural treasures on loan, which have never left the country.”

The marbles were removed from the Acropolis more than 200 years ago by Lord Elgin in circumstances that have spurred one of the world’s most famous cultural rows and have long been the subject of dispute.

Mitsotakis said he would raise the issue with Johnson when the two meet next week for talks that could shape future relations between the two countries.

“Refusing to discuss the topic seems to me, given the context of everything that has been happening in terms of the return of cultural treasures, to be rather an anachronistic approach,” he added.

“It would be a fantastic statement by what Boris calls Global Britain if they were to move on this and look at it through a completely different lens.”

But Johnson dismissed the appeal for their return to Greece earlier this year, telling the Greek newspaper Ta Nea: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed prime minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.

“But the UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition.”

Greece has long called for the reunification of the sculptures, displayed in museums across Europe but mostly in London, and says it is integral to understanding the artworks in the context of the Acropolis.

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

This has led to proposals for temporary loans or cultural exchange agreements, which some in Greece view as insufficient or even insulting .

Title:

Content: Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Greek prime minister tries to broker deal for return of Parthenon marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis offers to loan Greek treasures to British Museum if ‘stolen’ sculptures are returned to Acropolis

The Greek prime minister has demanded that the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles, which he accuses Britain of stealing, be returned to Greece, and even offered to loan some of his country’s treasures to the British Museum in an attempt to broker a deal.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis told the Daily Telegraph that the sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens.

However, Boris Johnson has previously ruled out returning them on the grounds that they were acquired legally.

Mitsotakis said: “Our position is very clear. The marbles were stolen in the 19th century; they belong in the Acropolis Museum and we need to discuss this issue in earnest.

“I am sure that if there was a willingness on the part of the government to move we could find an arrangement with the British Museum in terms of us sending abroad cultural treasures on loan, which have never left the country.”

The marbles were removed from the Acropolis more than 200 years ago by Lord Elgin in circumstances that have spurred one of the world’s most famous cultural rows and have long been the subject of dispute.

Mitsotakis said he would raise the issue with Johnson when the two meet next week for talks that could shape future relations between the two countries.

“Refusing to discuss the topic seems to me, given the context of everything that has been happening in terms of the return of cultural treasures, to be rather an anachronistic approach,” he added.

“It would be a fantastic statement by what Boris calls Global Britain if they were to move on this and look at it through a completely different lens.”

But Johnson dismissed the appeal for their return to Greece earlier this year, telling the Greek newspaper Ta Nea: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed prime minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.

“But the UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition.”

Greece has long called for the reunification of the sculptures, displayed in museums across Europe but mostly in London, and says it is integral to understanding the artworks in the context of the Acropolis.

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

The British Museum maintains that the marbles were legally acquired and are best preserved in the UK, while the Greek government references international conventions and agreements advocating for the return of cultural property taken during colonial times .

Title:

Content: UK museums strike loan deal to return Asante Gold to Ghana that was looted over 100 years ago

25 January 2024, 07:25 | Updated: 25 January 2024, 07:27

By Jenny Medlicott

The UK is returning a selection of Asante Gold looted from Ghana over 100 years ago in a historic loan deal.

Listen to this article

Loading audio...

The British Museum has struck a deal to return 15 pieces of the gold to Ghana and the Victoria & Albert Museum (V&A) 17 pieces, under a new three-year loan deal.

Loan deals are used as a way to enable collections to return to their countries of origin.

The Ghanian loan deal, which can be extended by an additional three years, was agreed with Otumfo Osei Tutu II, the current Asante king known as the Asantehene.

Some national museums in the UK, including the V&A and British Museum, are prohibited from permanently returning such items to their countries of origin.

The items will reportedly go on display at the Manhyia Palace Museum in Kumasi, the capital of the Asante region, to celebrate the Asantehene's silver jubilee.

Tristram Hunt, director of the V&A, said the gold items taken from the court of the Asante King are the equivalent of "our Crown Jewels".

Mr Hunt also said when museums "hold objects with origins in war and looting in military campaigns, we have a responsibility to the countries of origin to think about how we can share those more fairly today.

Read more: British military drawing up plans for 500,000-strong 'citizen army' as top general warns UK 'stumbling into war'

Read more: Home Secretary defends Govt record on 'zombie knives' as Labour sets out £100m plan to tackle knife crime

"It doesn't seem to me that all of our museums will fall down if we build up these kind of partnerships and exchanges,” he told the BBC.

It is hoped the historic deal will pave the way for handling other repatriation disputes - potentially including the long-running dispute over the Elgin Marbles.

Ghana’s chief operation said he hoped the deal would bring a “a new sense of cultural co-operation” following years of anger.

However, some have expressed concern that accepting the items on loan could be seen as acceptance of the UK’s ownership of the contested items.

Most of the items were taken during 19th-century wars between the British and the Asante.

A sword of state and gold badges worn by officials charged with cleansing the soul of the king are among the items to be returned.

The artefacts are seen as a symbol of the Asante royal government and are believed to hold the spirits of former Asante kings.

As for other contested artefacts held by British museums, in the case of the Elgin Marbles, a senior British Museum has source said the museum was “still exploring if there is an arrangement that would allow some of the Parthenon sculptures to travel to Greece”.

It is hoped deals such as these could help provide a solution to former colonial nations requesting the return of their cultural treasures.

International organizations, particularly UNESCO, have played a significant role in the dispute.

International organizations, particularly UNESCO, have played a significant role in the dispute.

International organizations, particularly UNESCO, have played a significant role in the dispute.

A UNESCO committee has urged the UK government to reconsider its position, criticizing the conditions under which the marbles are held and affirming Greece’s valid legal claim .

Title:

Content: Parliament Panel Recommends Dedicated Squad To Recover Stolen Antiquities

The department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture said this in a report tabled in both Houses of Parliament on Monday.

A parliamentary panel has recommended setting up a "dedicated cultural heritage squad"

New Delhi:

A parliamentary panel has recommended setting up a "dedicated cultural heritage squad" for the recovery of stolen antiquities, with a team of officers who can be trained on various aspects of retrieval, as followed by various countries.

The department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture said this in a report tabled in both Houses of Parliament on Monday.

In its "Three Hundred Forty Eighth Report on the subject 'Heritage Theft - The Illegal Trade in Indian Antiquities and the Challenges of Retrieving and Safeguarding Our Tangible Cultural Heritage'", the committee suggested that the government could set up a "multi-departmental task force" to speed up the retrieval process.

The task force should include senior officials from the Ministry of Home Affairs (police and investigation), Ministry of External Affairs (for coordination with foreign governments), Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and senior scholars and experts.

The panel noted that besides undertaking archaeological research and conservation, the ASI is tasked with the huge responsibility of recovering stolen antiquities, according to a statement issued by the Rajya Sabha Secretariat.

Several countries, such as Italy, Canada, the Netherlands, the United States, Scotland, Spain and France, have established dedicated cultural heritage squads with "a team of experts that focus their efforts singularly on tracking and recovering stolen antiquities", it said.

"The committee recommends that establishing a dedicated cultural heritage squad for the recovery of stolen antiquities with trained officers shall prove to be highly advantageous for ASI. The team may be trained on various aspects as per requirement of set procedures of retrieval, followed by different countries," the panel said in its report.

It also "recommended to the ministry to examine the proposal for creating a central sector scheme to ensure handholding and encouragement of the state governments for creation of a master database of antiquities in the country".

"The ministry may also formulate an incentivisation scheme for the involvement of interested and relevant agencies/stakeholders for record keeping of our tangible cultural heritage," it added.

On the National Mission on Monuments and Antiquities (NMMA) front, the committee noted that in the 15 years since its inception, "only about 16.8 lakh antiquities out of a total estimated 58 lakh antiquities i.e. about 30 per cent have been documented as on date".

The committee was informed by the ASI director general in the deposition that the figure of 58 lakh is only an estimate and there may well be many more antiquities existing in India.

"If so, it makes the slow pace of documentation under NMMA all the more alarming," the statement said, quoting from the report.

The parliamentary committee further said it would like to know "the reasons behind the concerning observations made by CAG even after nine years having passed since the publication of its original Report in 2013. The Committee feels that documentation and maintenance of database of the country's antiquities is urgently needed and recommends that all-out efforts should be made to complete the documentation process on a mission mode".

The panel said it has been informed by the ASI that documentation in the 55 ASI site museums all over the country has been initiated and is likely to be completed by the year-end.

The committee felt that the documentation in the "ASI-owned sites" should have been accomplished "much before". It learned from media reports that ASI sites, such as Chandraketugarh in West Bengal, are sources of numerous artefact that are sold worldwide in the illegal antiquities markets while the sites lie abandoned, the statement said.

The committee found it perplexing that with all the emphasis on documentation as one of the major preventive measures against the theft of antiquities, the ASI has not documented the antiquities in its own site museums. It noted that the Ministry of Culture has been in existence since 1961 and the ASI predates the ministry by a century.

The panel also noted the observation of the Public Accounts Committee in its report regarding the huge amount of public money spent over the years on preservation and conservation. Despite the antiquity of these two organisations, the years of efforts made towards conservation of Indian heritage and the funds allocated, the documentation work, which is the preliminary step in conservation, has "not shown satisfactory progress", it said.

The committee also recommended that the ministry or the ASI may "explore the possibility" of involving state governments and relevant bodies such as the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH), Indian Council for Cultural Relations (ICCR), Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts (IGNCA), National Culture Fund (NCF) and the French Institute of Pondicherry, among others, in the process of documentation of India's antiquities, the statement said.

The panel recommended that a dedicated team be formed in the ASI for better collaboration with such civil society organisations to enhance the documentation and recovery.

It noted in its report that the overall budget allocation for the Ministry of Culture is "only 0.075 per cent of the total budget, which is grossly inadequate", the statement said.

The panel observed that countries, such as China, the United Kingdom, the US, Singapore and Australia, spend "roughly 2-5 per cent of their budget on the promotion of art and culture, and a majority of the amount spent by these countries on art and culture is sourced from non-government sources, which is not the case in India".

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Featured Video Of The Day

"Hopeful For First Time In 8 Years": 7 Lakh Register On Sahara Refund Portal
.

UNESCO’s International Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property has emphasized the need for intergovernmental dialogue and international mediation .

The 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property is frequently cited in repatriation claims, though its retroactive application is limited .

Title:

Content: After a long court battle with a well-known art dealer from Britain, Greece's valuable artefacts are finally returning home. As many as 351 rare statues had been found in the possession of British art dealer Robin Symes. The objects were first traced to Symes back in 2006 and since then the country has been fighting to get them back to their territory.

It took 17 years, but finally, the artefacts are returning to Greece. Most of the artefacts are from the Neolithic era and the Byzantine era, however, some are from in between. Of these, the most important one is a statue of Alexander the Great. The statue is entirely made of bronze and dates back to the 2nd century.

History of plundering and supplying to museums

Robin Symes has been accused of plundering antiquities from countries like Italy, Greece etc for decades. Symes has been linked to looting artefacts from excavations in countries like Italy and Greece in the 70s and 80s. In fact, Symes has been served a prison sentence over his illegal sale of an Egyptian statue worth £3 million in 2005.

He has been known to gather antiquities from these companies and sell them for display in the best museums in the world. There isn't any estimate of how much his looted items from the 70s Italy expedition are worth, says the Association for Research into Crimes Against Art (ARCA). Known to the world's leading art curators and having served as a trustee to the British Museum, Symes formed a powerful network that had access to antiquities in Egypt, Greece, Italy and Asia.

The fight to recover the assets

As such the Greek authorities started investigating Symes' company to repatriate the items including a Neolithic statuette from the fourth century BC. They were chased by the Greek, Swiss, and Italian Police.

In 2016, the Swiss and the Italian team could nab some of the archaeological artefacts from Robin Symes and his company after years of work. All these artefacts were from illegal excavations in Italy. The police tracked the stolen Italian artefacts to a storage unit in Geneva Freeport.

As for the Greek artefact, it's not clear if they came from the same haul or whether it has any link to Italian excavations and artefacts. In the Greek collection, the 4th century BC white stone Neolithic era statuette has been found.

Other missing valuable items from Greece have been also found. The list includes a 3200-2700 BC early Cycladic figure, a 550-500 BC archaic sculpture made of marble, and another 550-500 BC archaic marble head probably from a sphinx or a sculpture.

Other Greek artefacts waiting for recovery

The Greek government has been trying to recover these artefacts from private collectors and museums worldwide. The process has been strenuous legal battles. Only recently, the Vatican returned fragments of the Parthenon temple.

The act of returning the three fragments to Greece in March this year was labelled a "gesture of friendship" by Pope Francis. Even today, many of the Parthenon's temple fragments are in the most prestigious museums in the world, most famously the Elgin marbles in the British Museum.

The Elgin Marbles controversy is emblematic of a broader international movement for the repatriation of cultural artifacts taken during colonial times.

The Elgin Marbles controversy is emblematic of a broader international movement for the repatriation of cultural artifacts taken during colonial times.

The Elgin Marbles controversy is emblematic of a broader international movement for the repatriation of cultural artifacts taken during colonial times.

Similar cases include Nigeria’s Benin Bronzes and Egypt’s Rosetta Stone, reflecting a growing global recognition of the impacts of colonialism on cultural heritage .

Title:

Content: Skip to main contentSkip to navigation

Italy returns Parthenon fragment to Greece amid UK row over marbles

Loan deal could renew pressure on Britain to repatriate ancient Parthenon marbles to Athens

Italy is returning a fragment belonging to the Parthenon’s eastern frieze to Greece in a breakthrough deal that could renew pressure on Britain to repatriate the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles removed by Lord Elgin in the early 19th century.

The marble fragment, which depicts the foot of a goddess, either Peitho or Artemis, peeking out from beneath an elaborate tunic, is currently held at the Antonino Salinas Regional Archaeological Museum in Palermo, Sicily. It was originally bought by the University of Palermo from the widow of Robert Fagan, the British consul for Sicily and Malta, after his death in 1816.

The artefact is being returned on a four-year loan as part of a cultural exchange agreement between Sicily and Greece, with the intention for the loan period to be extended by a further four years. However, the move back to Greece could eventually become permanent.

In return, the Acropolis Museum in Athens will loan the Palermo museum a 5th-century BC headless statue of the goddess Athena, as well as an 8th-century BC amphora.

The deal, which includes an exchange of cultural initiatives between the two museums, comes after several years of negotiations between Sicilian and Greek authorities.

“Sending back to the context of its origins a small, but significant, fragment belonging to the Parthenon has a very strong symbolic value,” said Sicily’s councillor for culture, Alberto Samonà. “It is also a response to the international debate [about the Parthenon artefacts]. But I don’t want to get into that debate. For us, this is a gesture of friendship – Greece and Sicily are two areas of the Mediterranean that share a common story.”

The fragment was loaned to Greece in 2002 and in 2008. Samonà said the latest transfer could become permanent, but that it would be up to the Italian culture ministry to take the measures needed to make that happen.

It is not known how Fagan, an amateur archaeologist, acquired the fragment, although one theory suggests it might have been given to him by Elgin, the British aristocrat who excavated the bulk of the ancient Parthenon marbles between 1801 and 1804 before selling them to the British Museum in 1816, where the artefacts are currently on display.

Greece has long fought for the marbles to be repatriated from the UK. In November, the Greek prime minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, demanded that Britain return the marbles to Greece, while at the same time offering to loan some Greek historical treasures to the British Museum. In response, Downing Street said returning the marbles was a matter for the British Museum. The UK prime minister, Boris Johnson, had previously said the marbles would remain in Britain, arguing that they were legally acquired.

Legal scholars and international forums have called for a redefinition of cultural property laws to facilitate the return of artifacts taken during colonial periods, emphasizing their significance to source cultures .

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

Title:

Content: News, Views and More

Could Snapchat have a solution to the Elgin Marbles dispute? | Science and technology news

The developers of the popular app that most people associate with wearing silly filters specialize in culture and art, offering museum visitors new ways to experience history in some of the world's most famous museums and galleries.

From Tom Acres, technology reporter

Saturday 2 December 2023, 2:50am, UK

Rishi Sunak is known for loving technology. So could it offer him a way out of his unpleasant diplomatic dispute with Greece over the Elgin Marbles?

Augmented Reality (AR) is exciting Snap think it could.

The developers of the app that most people associate with wearing silly filters specialize in culture and art, offering visitors new ways to experience history in some of the world's most famous museums and galleries.

Snaps AR has been used to reinvent exhibitions Amsterdam's Rijksmuseum, Miami's trendy Art Basel fair, London's Design Museum and most recently the legendary Louvre in Paris.

The museum's Egyptian Antiquities Department now offers 3D reconstructions of long-lost works of art and other historical monuments, viewable via QR codes or the Snapchat camera on mobile phones.

If it's good enough for the Louvre, could it be good enough for the British Museum and enable the return of the Elgin Marbles? Greece?

Read more:
What are the Elgin Marbles and why are they in the British Museum?

What is the Elgin Marbles dispute about?

History in your hands

“We started conversations,” jokes Donatien Bozon, head of Snap’s AR studio in Paris.

Its 14-person team was founded last year with a mission to bring AR to arts, culture and education and prove that Snapchat's technology can go far beyond giving your friends virtual dog-ears.

Cultural institutions expressed interest in tapping into the app's 750 million user audience and offering new experiences to regular visitors – all without requiring additional physical space.

“We felt confident that we could leverage not just the front camera of the phone,” he says, pointing to Snapchat’s common use case as a selfie-driven messaging app, “but also the back camera.”

“You can expand the world,” he adds. “And it opens up so many possibilities.”

Also in the Louvre is a digital twin of the 222-ton granite Luxor Obelisks. Built during the reign of Ramses II for the Egyptian Luxor Temple, one was later moved to the Place de la Concorde in Paris.

However, a spot in the Louvre's courtyard was originally considered. And so, in its own attempt to rewrite history, the museum worked with Snap to “remove the constraints of physics” and have one installed virtually.

Point your phone's camera at the spot where it might have been standing and this is how it appears.

Picture:
A Luxor obelisk stands in the Louvre and uses augmented reality technology. Image: Snap

Where tradition meets technology

Not that AR could ever really replace the original.

“It’s in the name,” says Bozon. “It enhances the experience, not replaces it.”

Probably not a truly satisfactory solution to the Elgin-Marbles dispute.

But the British Museum has dabbled in AR. Aimed primarily at children, it allows guests using Samsung tablets to take AR-controlled tours of the Roman Empire and Parthenon.

The British Library has also used the technology for your own exhibitionsas some of the world's oldest institutions are proud of their traditions and try to keep up with the times.

Qi Pan, director of computer vision at Snap, says AR allows them to “do things that weren’t possible before.”

Its London team is responsible for how the company's technology actually works, both on phones and in a hypothetical future where millions of us walk around wearing futuristic glasses.

“Nowadays, a lot of AR happens on mobile devices, where we are limited by the view of a small rectangle,” he says.

“With AR glasses you can see it directly in the world around you.”

Unfortunately, as this is a limited version of the story, this content is not available.

Open the full version

Accessible artwork

Despite previous attempts with such lenses from people like Google And Snap yourself Pan is confident that AR is on the cusp of a “hardware paradigm shift” as it has failed to achieve mainstream breakthrough.

Apple's upcoming mixed reality headset might prove him right, although at a price of £2,800 probably not.

The appeal of AR artworks, for now, lies in their accessibility — not just to users who only need a phone to experience them, but also to the creators behind what they see.

By teaching himself how to create AR art at home during the COVID-19 pandemic, British artist Doddz managed to earn a six-figure salary after struggling at school.

Traditionalists may cry foul, but his success seems to be evidence of a new interpretation of artwork that people can view and take with them wherever they go.

Bozon says, “Ten years ago, you wouldn’t have bet that being a YouTuber was a real job.”

“In ten years, building in AR will be a real job for thousands of people.”

Let's hope the series of marbles is over by then.

Recent developments indicate that discussions between the British Museum and Greek officials are ongoing, with some sources suggesting that a deal for the marbles’ return is at an “advanced stage” .

Title:

Content: Opinion

Bring them home

At the end of August, it was reported that around 2,000 artefacts, including gold jewellery and gems, had been stolen from the British Museum over a long period of time.

Chairman of the trustees, George Osborne acknowledged that the museum’s reputation has suffered as a result of its mishandling of the thefts, which sparked outrage after it was revealed that most of the stolen antiquities may never be recovered due to the museum’s poor record keeping, raising questions about security and leadership.

For decades, the British Museum has argued that the Parthenon Marbles should not be returned to Greece since the country lacks a suitable location for their display.

The Acropolis Museum, on the other hand, has solidified its place among the world’s top ten best museums and is the go-to museum in Athens where one can readily understand why Greece is considered the cradle of Western civilization. So, why not return the Parthenon marbles to their rightful home, and how did they end up in the British Museum in the first place?

In the early 1800s, when British aristocrat Lord Elgin sailed home from Greece, he also shipped to England some of the greatest treasures of antiquity, which included a collection of Greek statues and carved frieze panels that once decorated the Parthenon in Athens.

The so-called Elgin Marbles were later sold to the British government with the approval of the Ottomans who ruled Greece at the time and became the most storied artefacts in the British Museum’s collection. They also became the subject of perhaps the world’s most notorious cultural dispute.

The British maintain that the marbles were legally acquired and they belong in a universal museum alongside other artefacts, excluding the 2,000 that were now reportedly stolen. The Greeks, on the other hand, view them as looted treasures that form the cornerstone of their national heritage.

For decades, the issue of the Parthenon Marbles has been on the agenda of the Unesco Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property (ICPRCP). In fact, it was Melina Mercouri, the Greek Minister of Culture at the time, who raised the matter of their return during the 1982 Unesco World Conference.

Although the forum ruled in favour of the cause, stating that restitution of works illegally removed from their countries of origin is a fundamental principle of people-to-people cultural relations, Mercouri’s British counterpart responded that the UK Government “could not intervene in the affairs of a private establishment like the British Museum.”

While efforts are underway to retrieve the stolen antiquities, the British Museum’s collections may never be recovered because the museum’s records only identify the collection as a whole and fail to list the individual pieces.

This is not the first time the museum’s image as a safe keeper of global treasures has been called into doubt. The poor condition of the British Museum’s western block has been recorded numerous times. Images of water leaking into the Parthenon gallery were broadcast on Greek television in 2018, resulting from a cracked glass ceiling pane. Although the glass was replaced with new fixings and no sculptures were destroyed, a leaking roof in 2021 resulted in water seeping through, once again, delaying the reopening of the Greek galleries following the pandemic.

The British Museum claimed that none of the statues had been damaged and the issue was addressed. However, for Greece, these events demonstrate that the British Museum is failing to care for the Parthenon Marbles, reinforcing the country’s legitimate claim that the sculptures be permanently returned to Athens.

Earlier this year, the British Museum moved closer to a landmark agreement with Athens that could result in the return of the marbles. Although existing legislation makes it illegal to give away treasures, Osborne is reportedly seeking to repatriate the Parthenon Marbles as part of a cultural exchange that would see other Greek antiques displayed at the British Museum. Over half of the British people support their repatriation to Greece.

Hundreds of statues from the Archaic and Classical periods can be found at the ultramodern Acropolis Museum. The top level is the museum’s showcase, which provides a visual link to the Acropolis and allows visitors to view both the monument and its sculptures. The majority of the Parthenon Marbles will be displayed there upon their anticipated return.

The Parthenon Sculptures were made in Greece by Greeks to honour the glory of Greece. They represent millions of people’s cultural identities. Greece is their true home. It is where they belong.

Related Posts

Armenia is making a mistake

Gwynne Dyer

Our View: Disy must stay in opposition

CM: Our View

Questionable performances of Cyprus banks

Les Manison

Jack Straw has very little credence

CM Reader's View

Technical Committees show two sides on the island can work together

CM Guest Columnist

No-one should care what Jack Straw has to say

CM Reader's View

These talks have been taking place since at least November of the previous year, and Greek Prime Minister Mitsotakis has sought dialogue with UK leaders, including Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Labour leader Keir Starmer, to explore solutions .

Title:

Content: Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Greek prime minister tries to broker deal for return of Parthenon marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis offers to loan Greek treasures to British Museum if ‘stolen’ sculptures are returned to Acropolis

The Greek prime minister has demanded that the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles, which he accuses Britain of stealing, be returned to Greece, and even offered to loan some of his country’s treasures to the British Museum in an attempt to broker a deal.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis told the Daily Telegraph that the sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens.

However, Boris Johnson has previously ruled out returning them on the grounds that they were acquired legally.

Mitsotakis said: “Our position is very clear. The marbles were stolen in the 19th century; they belong in the Acropolis Museum and we need to discuss this issue in earnest.

“I am sure that if there was a willingness on the part of the government to move we could find an arrangement with the British Museum in terms of us sending abroad cultural treasures on loan, which have never left the country.”

The marbles were removed from the Acropolis more than 200 years ago by Lord Elgin in circumstances that have spurred one of the world’s most famous cultural rows and have long been the subject of dispute.

Mitsotakis said he would raise the issue with Johnson when the two meet next week for talks that could shape future relations between the two countries.

“Refusing to discuss the topic seems to me, given the context of everything that has been happening in terms of the return of cultural treasures, to be rather an anachronistic approach,” he added.

“It would be a fantastic statement by what Boris calls Global Britain if they were to move on this and look at it through a completely different lens.”

But Johnson dismissed the appeal for their return to Greece earlier this year, telling the Greek newspaper Ta Nea: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed prime minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.

“But the UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition.”

Greece has long called for the reunification of the sculptures, displayed in museums across Europe but mostly in London, and says it is integral to understanding the artworks in the context of the Acropolis.

Mitsotakis has also proposed cultural exchanges, such as Greece loaning other artifacts to the British Museum in return for the marbles, potentially circumventing legal restrictions .

The recent return of a Parthenon fragment from Italy to Greece is viewed as a significant precedent that may increase pressure on the UK to follow suit .

Technological innovations have been proposed as potential diplomatic tools.

Technological innovations have been proposed as potential diplomatic tools.

Technological innovations have been proposed as potential diplomatic tools.

Augmented reality (AR) and virtual experiences could allow the British Museum to offer digital engagement with the marbles while the originals are returned to Greece .

Title:

Content: International association demands that colonialists return looted items

MEXICO— The Mexico office of the Association for the Reparation of Colonialism (ARC), aka “Colonialism Reparation,” called for the definitive restitution of the treasures looted by excolonizers from Mexico and other countries.

The office pointed out on its website that as a first step in the direction of repairing the damage caused by colonialism, the former colonists must stop hindering the return of tangible elements that are evidence of human evolution to their countries of origin.

The institution recalled that at the 6th Summit of the European Union-African Union, the heads of State and Governments of the Member States committed to restituting cultural property and promoting access to and protection of the cultural heritage of the former colonies.

The ARC pointed out that, on the sidelines of the meeting, Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo handed over to his counterpart from the Democratic Republic of the Congo some 84,000 objects of Congolese origin currently present in the Royal Museum of Central Africa in Tervuren.

On Feb 21, 2022, on the occasion of the return of two “Benin Bronzes”, Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari appealed to nations, institutions, and entities, both private and public, to return the artifacts Nigerians in their possession.

The ARC added that the Belgian House of Representatives approved on July 3, 2022, a law that recognizes the alienable nature of assets linked to the colonial past of the Belgian State and establishes a legal framework for their restitution and return, thus paving the way to the definitive restitution of all the treasures looted during the colonial period.

Colonialism Reparation called for the repatriation of the remains and the definitive restitution of the treasures stolen by colonizers from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, and others, to the looted countries, as a first step in the direction of repairing the damages of colonialism.

Source: NAM NEWS NETWORK

Title:

Content: Why we need a G20 League of Looted Nations to take on the museums

As G20 has members from both sides — the looted and the looters — there is a wonderful opportunity to form an official consensus regarding fast repatriation of items of invaluable cultural significance. Pooling information and devising mechanisms that can cut red-tape would be a huge achievement

Reshmi Dasgupta May 18, 2023 21:27:30 IST

Replica of the Koh-i-Noor diamond. Image courtesy: Wikimedia Commons/ aiva

When it comes to looted antiquities, it is not often that the looters and the looted gather in the same forum. The G20 is one such, and serendipitously India — one of the most looted — is the chair this year. China, another nation whose treasures repose in museums around the world, is also a member. And despite the ongoing froideur over borders and other issues, looted antiquities is one point on which they cannot but agree. Is it not time, then, for a bold new initiative?

It could be called the League of Looted Nations. And given the widespread belief that the United Nations is now just a tax-free sinecure rather than a body that makes a real difference anymore, India’s move for a consensus on repatriation of important items of cultural heritage to the countries they belong to could be just what is needed. More so as repositories of these treasures — whether publicly or privately owned — have been able to fob off single-nation efforts.

On #InternationalMuseumDay, it is time to rethink the role of museums in this. Tourists marvel at displays in museums and galleries, sparing little thought as to how they got there. Museums and universities have recently been erasing the Sackler name from galleries, libraries and halls donated by the family as their fortune came from opioids. Benefits begotten from slavery are also being rejected. Why is there no similar protest against illegal antiquities in museums abroad?

Mainly because there has been no concerted effort by looted nations to publicise the stealing of their cultural heritage — and its ramifications. The issue has so far been conveniently regarded as the domain of individual nations not a common problem that unifies many. So each looted country takes its case to the offending nation, with limited success. The public of the nations where looted cultural heritage is displayed in museums remains largely unaware of the issues.

Take the long and so far futile battle of Greece to get back the so-called Elgin Marbles — segments of the Parthenon — from the British Museum. Such has been the difficulty to get the British to budge that a move by the current BM head George Osborne to “loan” the priceless friezes back to Greece is being seen as a victory. No one is calling out the brazenness of the British! How can something that belongs to Greece be “loaned” to it by those who carted it off?

India has also been fighting for the return for antiquities, although the Kohinoor gets most of the publicity on this count. The fact is that the diamond is just the most blingy of the treasures that the British got from India via questionable means during the Raj. There are many more Indian treasures in their clutches, including huge sections of the Amaravati Stupa, Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s throne, the copper Sultanganj Buddha and Tipu Sultan’s sword, ring and wooden tiger.

The then British Prime Minister David Cameron wasn’t kidding when on a visit to India in 2010 he ruled out the return of the Kohinoor saying. “If you (Britain) say yes to one, you suddenly find the British Museum would be empty. I think, I am afraid to say… it is going to have to stay put.” Some Indian artefacts have indeed been returned by the UK since 2010, but notably, none of those mentioned above. Clearly wider and more sustained action is needed to get results.

That is why India’s emphasis on righting wrongs in the cultural space at G20 is timely. In the 21st century there is no basis for the old canard that museums and private collections (mostly in Western nations and former colonial powers) offer more secure spaces than the countries’ treasures had been “obtained” from. As these columns have always asserted, such institutions have been committing a crime against nations by continuing to keep their cultural heritage.

The West so far has done mostly lip service on the matter of protecting and returning looted cultural artefacts. And bureaucratic red-tape has ensured that the return of antiquities is delayed. Meanwhile, priceless “collections” in museums that clearly have no business to be there rather than in the places of worship or other monuments they were looted from, continue to be displayed and “studied” by scholars. Including those from the countries they were looted from!

The Paris Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property signed in 1970 under the aegis of UNESCO (and endorsed by 143 nations so far) laid down admirably specific conditions. But antiquities of many nations including India are still in museums and collections when they could not have been procured by means acceptable by today’s standards as looting no longer qualifies.

Article 2 of the convention says, “Parties to this Convention recognize that the illicit import, export and transfer of ownership of cultural property is one of the main causes of the impoverishment of the cultural heritage of the countries of origin of such property and that international co-operation constitutes one of the most efficient means of protecting each country’s cultural property against all the dangers resulting there from.” What has this “recognition” achieved?

The document also virtuously states that “Parties undertake to oppose such practices with the means at their disposal, and particularly by removing their causes, putting a stop to current practices, and by helping to make the necessary reparations…The import, export or transfer of ownership of cultural property effected contrary to the provisions adopted under this Convention by the States Parties thereto, shall be illicit.” More sound and fury signifying nothing.

Obviously so, as the notorious Subhash Kapoor’s trade in illegal antiquities from India and elsewhere flourished abroad after 1970. He and many others cocked a snook at these toothless pronouncements, particularly Article 7 which said member states would take “necessary measures…to prevent museums and similar institutions… from acquiring cultural property originating in another State Party which has been illegally exported” after this convention “took effect”.

The convention also says that at the request of an aggrieved country (via diplomatic channels and with supporting documents), the nation to which cultural property had been illegally imported should “take appropriate steps to recover and return” those items but with a caveat that “the requesting State shall pay just compensation to an innocent purchaser or to a person who has valid title to that property”. How can any title be ‘valid’ if it belongs to another country?

By that logic, of course, Greece should simply pay Britain for the return of the Parthenon pieces carted off by Lord Elgin and India should do the same to get the Kohinoor back — after some solid haggling, presumably. Of course, given Britain’s dire economic situation at present, this may seem an attractive proposition—monetise the treasures Britons stole in centuries past, to tide over its crisis today. But there is little reason for looted nations to oblige.

As G20 has members from both sides — the looted and the looters — there is a wonderful opportunity to form an official consensus regarding fast repatriation of items of invaluable cultural significance. Pooling information and devising mechanisms that can cut red-tape would be a huge achievement. Of course then institutions like the British Museum will have to come to terms with their own past — and display non-looted alternatives in their emptied galleries.

The author is a freelance writer. Views expressed are personal.

Read all the Latest NewsTrending NewsCricket NewsBollywood News,
India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on FacebookTwitter and Instagram.

Updated Date:

Title:

Content: Main content

Reports say a deal to return Elgin Marbles to Greece is at an "advanced stage"

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

Also on the programme: an alternative to plastic; and the story of how a fossil, which lay unnoticed in a drawer for over half a century, has advanced our understanding of the origins of reptiles.

(Picture: One of the Parthenon Statues, also known as the Elgin Marbles. Credit: Reuters)

29 days left to listen

50 minutes

Last on

Yesterday 21:06GMT

Broadcast

  • Yesterday 21:06GMT

Podcast

Public figures such as Stephen Fry have advocated for such solutions, suggesting that the British Museum could develop digital experiences to maintain public access and engagement .

Title:

Content: International association demands that colonialists return looted items

MEXICO— The Mexico office of the Association for the Reparation of Colonialism (ARC), aka “Colonialism Reparation,” called for the definitive restitution of the treasures looted by excolonizers from Mexico and other countries.

The office pointed out on its website that as a first step in the direction of repairing the damage caused by colonialism, the former colonists must stop hindering the return of tangible elements that are evidence of human evolution to their countries of origin.

The institution recalled that at the 6th Summit of the European Union-African Union, the heads of State and Governments of the Member States committed to restituting cultural property and promoting access to and protection of the cultural heritage of the former colonies.

The ARC pointed out that, on the sidelines of the meeting, Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo handed over to his counterpart from the Democratic Republic of the Congo some 84,000 objects of Congolese origin currently present in the Royal Museum of Central Africa in Tervuren.

On Feb 21, 2022, on the occasion of the return of two “Benin Bronzes”, Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari appealed to nations, institutions, and entities, both private and public, to return the artifacts Nigerians in their possession.

The ARC added that the Belgian House of Representatives approved on July 3, 2022, a law that recognizes the alienable nature of assets linked to the colonial past of the Belgian State and establishes a legal framework for their restitution and return, thus paving the way to the definitive restitution of all the treasures looted during the colonial period.

Colonialism Reparation called for the repatriation of the remains and the definitive restitution of the treasures stolen by colonizers from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, and others, to the looted countries, as a first step in the direction of repairing the damages of colonialism.

Source: NAM NEWS NETWORK

Title:

Content: Main content

Reports say a deal to return Elgin Marbles to Greece is at an "advanced stage"

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

Also on the programme: an alternative to plastic; and the story of how a fossil, which lay unnoticed in a drawer for over half a century, has advanced our understanding of the origins of reptiles.

(Picture: One of the Parthenon Statues, also known as the Elgin Marbles. Credit: Reuters)

29 days left to listen

50 minutes

Last on

Yesterday 21:06GMT

Broadcast

  • Yesterday 21:06GMT

Podcast

Snapchat has also initiated conversations about using AR to create virtual exhibitions of the marbles, allowing wider access without physical relocation .

Title:

Content: International association demands that colonialists return looted items

MEXICO— The Mexico office of the Association for the Reparation of Colonialism (ARC), aka “Colonialism Reparation,” called for the definitive restitution of the treasures looted by excolonizers from Mexico and other countries.

The office pointed out on its website that as a first step in the direction of repairing the damage caused by colonialism, the former colonists must stop hindering the return of tangible elements that are evidence of human evolution to their countries of origin.

The institution recalled that at the 6th Summit of the European Union-African Union, the heads of State and Governments of the Member States committed to restituting cultural property and promoting access to and protection of the cultural heritage of the former colonies.

The ARC pointed out that, on the sidelines of the meeting, Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo handed over to his counterpart from the Democratic Republic of the Congo some 84,000 objects of Congolese origin currently present in the Royal Museum of Central Africa in Tervuren.

On Feb 21, 2022, on the occasion of the return of two “Benin Bronzes”, Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari appealed to nations, institutions, and entities, both private and public, to return the artifacts Nigerians in their possession.

The ARC added that the Belgian House of Representatives approved on July 3, 2022, a law that recognizes the alienable nature of assets linked to the colonial past of the Belgian State and establishes a legal framework for their restitution and return, thus paving the way to the definitive restitution of all the treasures looted during the colonial period.

Colonialism Reparation called for the repatriation of the remains and the definitive restitution of the treasures stolen by colonizers from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, and others, to the looted countries, as a first step in the direction of repairing the damages of colonialism.

Source: NAM NEWS NETWORK

The controversy is deeply rooted in the legacy of colonial history, with the removal of the marbles seen as part of a broader pattern of cultural appropriation by colonial powers .

Title:

Content: School Capture: “Cultural Appropriation”, Heritage Day & Cancel Culture at St John’s College – Richard Wilkinson

As South Africa’s St John’s College prepares for Heritage Day celebrations, the school’s decision to address the concept of “Cultural Appropriation” has ignited a lively debate. In an email to parents, the Deputy Headmaster, Mr. Allan Magubane, encouraged students and staff to embrace their cultural heritage but also highlighted the need for respectful celebration. The term “Cultural Appropriation” has its origins in Critical Race Theory, and it raises questions about who can wear or use elements of other cultures. This contentious issue has sparked controversies worldwide, including the 2018 Utah prom dress incident. Richard Wilkinson delves into the school’s stance, the broader context of “Cultural Appropriation,” and the evolving landscape of cultural expression and identity in South African schools.

Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.

HERITAGE DAY AND “CULTURAL APPROPRIATION” AT ST JOHN’S COLLEGE

By Richard Wilkinson*

St John’s College in Johannesburg is due to mark Heritage Day tomorrow, Friday 22 September 2023. As is customary, the boys and staff are encouraged to celebrate the day by wearing clothing and accessories of cultural significance.

Last week, the school sent an email to parents which included the following message from the Deputy Headmaster, Mr Allan Magubane:

“While we encourage everyone to wear their cultural dress and share their heritage, it’s equally vital to do so with respect and sensitivity. Cultural appropriation occurs when elements of one culture are used or borrowed by individuals from another culture, often without proper understanding or reverence for their own benefit. It’s essential for our students and staff to be mindful of this, especially during our Heritage Day festivities.”[1]

The trouble with “Cultural Appropriation”

“Cultural Appropriation” is a concept that originates in the world Critical Race Theory. Essentially, it uses Marxist analysis to tie cultural symbols to identity politics[2] and, in so doing, seeks to dictate that people from an oppressive group (this almost always means white people) are not permitted to make use of clothing, food, music, hairstyles etc which originate in other cultures.[3] Typically, the perpetrator of “Cultural Appropriation” is accused of being “racist”.

“Cultural Appropriation” has been used by Woke activists as a means of setting up a target for public destruction, or what is commonly referred to as being “cancelled”.

One of the most sensational examples of a “Cultural Appropriation” scandal occurred in Utah in the United States in 2018. Keziah Daum, a white, 18-year-old high school student was the subject of an avalanche of vicious online attacks after she posted photos of her attending her “prom” (what is referred to as a “Matric Dance” in South Africa) dressed in a traditional Chinese dress known as a qipao.

Keziah Daum wearing a qipao dress at her prom in Utah, United States

The controversy kicked off when one Twitter user posted the following inflammatory comment which received a truly staggering 39,000 retweets and 168,000 likes.

Daum’s critic expanded on his point, stating that “for [the dress] to simply be subject to American consumerism and cater to a white audience, is parallel to colonial ideology.”[4]

To her enormous credit, Daum refused to genuflect before the Woke mob. She stated that she did not regret her decision and would happily wear the dress again. She noted the rich cultural significance of the qipao which is a symbol of female empowerment in Chinese culture. Daum said that this made her “love it even more.”[5]

Earlier this week I emailed the Headmaster of St John’s College, Mr Stuart West, and expressed my view that it was disturbing and disheartening that the school had warned parents that their children should not wear items which originate in other cultures. I asked him to confirm that St John’s College unreservedly rejects the concept of “Cultural Appropriation” and that boys and staff would be free to wear cultural attire of any description on Friday.

Mr West did not respond to my email.

Fortunately, other South African schools have been able to see through the nonsense that is “Cultural Appropriation”. Leading the way is Curro in Edenvale:

Woke rules for thee, but not for me

The “Iron Law of Woke Projection”[6] states that Woke activists always accuse their targets of transgressions or wrongdoing of which they are themselves guilty. For example, those who demand censorship of “misinformation” are often guilty of spreading misinformation. Those who condemn “extremism” and “racism” are often guilty of promoting extremism and racism. Those who denounce “hate” are often filled with loathing towards their political enemies.[7]

The Iron Law of Woke Projection never misses – and, at St John’s College, we don’t have to look far to find evidence of hypocrisy and double-standards.

As far as I am concerned, Mr Magubane is perfectly free to dress as he wishes. I would never accuse him of committing “Cultural Appropriation” for wearing clothing of British or Nigerian origin. But it is hard not to chuckle at the irony of the situation, for it demonstrates clearly why the whole concept of “Cultural Appropriation” is complete nonsense. If Mr Magubane is allowed to “appropriate” clothing from other cultures, well, then so should everyone else.

In short, Woke activists never intend for their own rules to be applied equally to everyone, and they certainly do not envisage that they will ever be subjected to the same standards and accountability that they apply to everyone else.

In fact, the double-standards and hypocrisy are so blatant that they may well be committed intentionally. Perhaps the whole point of this exercise is to rub it in the face of white staff and children: to demonstrate that they are second-class citizens, subjected to peculiar rules which are invented and enforced by a self-appointed Woke ruling class?

Perhaps hypocrisy is not the right word? Perhaps what is happening here is social hierarchy – with Wokes at the top and everyone else very much at the bottom?

The sinister creep of Woke Justice in South African schools

Of course, it is fun to laugh at the petty self-importance and ludicrous hypocrisy of the Wokes. Not only is it fun, but it is also important, for there are only two things that Woke activists cannot cope with. The first is blatant defiance of their authority. And the second is laughter. We need to normalise both.

But there is a very serious side to all of this. Last month, I published an essay entitled “The Trouble with Roedean’s Woke Anti-Discrimination Policy”. I explained how St John’s College’s sister school now explicitly recognises “microaggressions” as being a form of racist conduct. According to the University of Minnesota, the following remarks or situations would constitute “microaggressions”:

  • Asking someone where they are from or where they were born.
  • Complimenting a “person of colour” on being articulate.
  • Promoting colour-blindness or identity-blindness.
  • Promoting meritocracy, for example, by stating that the most qualified person should be given a job.
  • Promoting hard work, for example, by stating that everyone can succeed in this society if they work hard enough.
  • An educational institution which has buildings named after white, heterosexual, upper class males commits what is referred to as an “environmental microaggression.”
  • White people who deny their racial biases also commit a “microaggression”.

The concept of “microaggressions” mandates that people and institutions adopt an explicitly Marxist worldview. It does this most notably by prohibiting the promotion of meritocracy and identity blindness. In my opinion, “Cultural Appropriation” needs to be filed alongside “microaggressions” (and a host of other concepts such as “unconscious bias”, “white privilege” and “white fragility”) as being nothing more than fragments of the folklore of Wokeness, concepts that are as dangerous as they are academically dubious.

Indeed, until about 20 minutes ago, nobody in South Africa even knew that “Cultural Appropriation” or “Microaggressions” even existed, much less that we should all be extremely concerned about them. After all, this is a country that decades ago smiled with pride as Johnny Clegg sang in Zulu and danced wearing African clothing. In an earlier essay, I explained how these concepts were invented by crackpot Marxist academics like Robin DiAngelo and then imported from North America into our universities and schools via a network of self-described “diversity-and-transformation consultants” – most notably Lovelyn Nwadeyi, Teresa Oakley-Smith and Asanda Ngoasheng. They are now being embedded into school policies and school culture by Woke Commissars such as Mr Magubane.

The key thing to understand is that none of this is done with any real sincerity. Absolutely nobody is genuinely offended by a white child who wears Ndebele-print clothing or a white teacher who wears a Zulu umqhele (a traditional headdress) or umgeko (a beaded necklace). In fact, many people often feel great pride when they see their culture reflected by others.

Ultimately, this is nothing more than performative activism. It is about power and control. The purpose of “Cultural Appropriation” is the same as every other Woke tactic: to frighten, intimidate and demoralise white people; to make them fear cancellation and thus encourage self-censorship; and to remind them that their faceless Woke overlords regulate what they may and may not say and what they may and may not wear. The message is as clear as it is sinister:

“We have captured this institution. We are in control now. Remember what we did to that Geography teacher when Panyaza Lesufi came round and demanded that he fired by 1pm? Remember what happened to that former headmaster on 702 radio? Remember what we tried to do to that boy at Michaelhouse? Every move you make is being monitored. You could be next. You will obey our commands and submit to our authority – or else you will be singled out and destroyed.”

From “Cultural Appropriation” to Cultural Appreciation

For many people, it is tempting to simply comply with the latest Woke diktat. Blue jeans and a Springbok rugby jersey should be a safe option that will allow you to participate in the day’s festivities without risking your job or career.

This may be tempting – but it is wrong. For when you comply with Woke demands to refrain from committing “Cultural Appropriation” you yield far more than just your choice of clothing for the day. British author Douglas Murray says it best:

“The bare minimum that people should do in this era is not to go along with mobs, not to go along with crowds, because you never know what you will be asked to do next. Today you will be asked to take a knee or raise a fist. Tomorrow you will be told to dance, the next day to jump.

Somewhere down the line you have no control over your own life. You don’t have your own words because someone else gave you the words to say. And you don’t have your own actions because someone else told you how to act. Before you know it you have disappeared as an individual and have given yourself over to the crowd.

Get some self-respect. Say no.[9]

Say you won’t do it, in matters large or small. You won’t have mobs come to you and tell you how to behave. You won’t have your bosses tell you what you should read and how you should think and try to tinker in your mind. That is not how we operate in a free society. That is how people behave in totalitarian societies.

There is no reason for people in a free society to behave in a way that people have to in totalitarian societies. No reason at all.”[10]

All I can say is that I encourage teachers at St John’s College (and every other school) to wear whatever they like tomorrow – and I encourage parents to let their boys do the same.

If Mr Magubane or Mr West tells you to remove certain clothing or accessories because they do not form part of “your culture”, you should politely decline to do so. If they persist, then you should invite the school to take disciplinary action against you for committing the offence of “Cultural Appropriation”. I repeat the offer that I made to the teachers of Roedean: that I will gladly take a day’s leave and turn up to assist you at a disciplinary hearing. I won’t send you an invoice – but I do need to caution that I might struggle to keep a straight face throughout proceedings.

I doubt that any of this will be necessary, though. Last year, at the height of the public scandal that occurred when a boy at Michaelhouse was accused of using a racial slur against a St John’s College boy, I received information from a source inside of St John’s College that, on the afternoon before the trip to Michaelhouse a senior black pupil met with the St. John’s College headmaster, Mr West. The pupil related that he had been contacted by a Michaelhouse boy who suggested that something untoward could occur on the upcoming trip and that he (the black pupil) could be the target of personal abuse. Apparently, by the time of their arrival at Michaelhouse there was already chatter among the St. John’s College boys that some kind of racial incident could be expected to occur.

This information was corroborated by three other sources.

I emailed Mr West, asking him whether this version of events was true. Mr West declined to respond to my emails. I subsequently published an article in which I publicly revealed this rather crucial information.[11] Less than 48 hours later, St John’s College effectively chickened out of the disciplinary hearing which it had previously demanded and instead opted for a “mediated settlement”. (Disgracefully, despite lacking the courage to have their allegations subjected to proper scrutiny and cross-examination, St John’s College has repeatedly asserted, in subsequent communications, that the racial slur was, in fact, uttered by the Michaelhouse boy).

The lesson from the Michaelhouse debacle is that Woke bullies – and their weak enablers – will always back down when confronted. They crumble at the first sign of steadfast resistance.

So have some self-respect. Get off your knees. Stand up tall. Be proud of your culture – and be proud our collective national heritage.

Above all, be worthy of the freedoms that are our birthright as South Africans. Take advantage of the Constitution’s Bill of Rights which explicitly protects freedom of belief, freedom of expression and the freedom to “participate in the cultural life of [your] choice”. Be the living embodiment of our founding creed: that out of many, we are one, that the many peoples who form the diverse South African nation are united in our diversity.

Do not allow our freedoms to be sacrificed so cheaply on the altar of Wokeness.

In short: wear whatever you like tomorrow – and have a fabulous Heritage Day.

Notes:

Read also:

*Richard Wilkinson is on X.com (formerly Twitter) @wilkinsoncape

Visited 1,926 times, 1,926 visit(s) today

Title:

Content: Africa-France Summit

Bring African art and history back to Africa, panelists tell France’s Macron

A roundtable discussion on the French restitution of African art in its museums created a stir at the Africa-France summit on Friday, culminating in an appearance by the French President Emmanuel Macron, who spoke of “going forward from the wounds of the past to look towards the future.”

Advertising

Various panelists from different museums in France, including the top ethnographic museum, Quai Branly, spoke at the summit in Montpellier, as well as Cameroonian curator Koyo Kouoh, director of the Zeitz Museum of Contemporary Art Africa in Cape Town, South Africa.

“Africa has been in a forced marriage with France for at least 500 years,” Kouoh told Macron when he spoke during the art restitution topic, adding that while a discussion was welcome, the timing in respect of Africa-France relations was very late.

Some of the most pointed criticisms came from young Africans in the diaspora who live in France.

A group of youths from Alter-Natives, a Paris-based organization that questions the role of cultural heritage, and opens the discussion on diversity to make museums more inclusive, spoke to the audience.

“Eighty percent of Africa’s cultural heritage is outside the continent— I can’t see any of the objects of my people,” said Mohamed Loum Gning, 19.

Although they come from, or have origins in, the African continent, the plunder of African heritage at school here in France was not part of their curriculum.

Zoul Iscandar, originally from the Central African Republic, said that there was a tendency at school and in French society to think that Western culture is more important than African culture.

“Our history is scattered,” he said. “I want to see African objects in Africa so that the youth on the continent can be proud of their history. Of course, our ancestors aren’t here anymore and can’t testify as to what happened (in the past),” added Iscandar.

Manasseh Agbonlahor, a youth delegate from the ancient city of Benin, in Edo State, Nigeria, spoke to RFI about how objects that remain in Western custody do not help discussion of African history.

“It’s obvious that whoever the conqueror is, they write the history of our conquered territory. The world has been given another narrative of what Africa is, and it’s important that the French government begins to change the narrative on Africa,” said Agbonlahor.

On the sidelines of the panel, Oluwatoyin Sogbesan, a Nigerian cultural historian and architect, told RFI that she believes pieces like the iconic Benin bronzes are important, but it’s the everyday objects such as calabashes, fish baskets, and spears that need to be given  back. Furthermore, the often-used argument that African countries are not equipped to deal with artifacts is not valid either, she said.

“Where were the objects before they were collected, stolen or pillaged? They were with Africans, Africans know how to use these objects, they are not just art objects, they are objects that represent culture, identity and history,” said Sogbesan.

Depriving an African audience of these items leaves them without history, she maintained. “They are completely alienated from what represents them or what can be shown to their children,” she added.

The whole concept of a museum as a place to look at artifacts under glass boxes is a colonial concept, when the African definition of museum predates anything in Western culture, according the Nigerian expert.

“You have your own museum within your home, with African relics, that is about your family and where you’re from, what you do, what you worship,” she said. The second African concept of museum relates to the display of the public shrine that you only see when you go worship.

And thirdly, the palace, where the king would display the wealth of the people.

“The idea of museum in this sense is not new to Africa-- we always showcased what we had in one way or the other. But having a building locked up with glass cases to show an artifact is not the way Africa would show theirs,” she added, explaining that the West’s whole philosophy for museums goes against how such relics would be displayed on the African continent.

Determining provenance

Nevertheless, there are some efforts underway in France and in Europe, to tackle the question of restitution. These efforts, however, face challenges in establishing the origin of some of the items.

“We had no archive before—we didn’t know where they got them, there were no documents. What we’re trying to do is find out the provenance of the objects with four other museums in France,” said Emilie Salaberry, director of the Angouleme Municipal Museums in France.

Attitudes and perspectives are changing, according to Barbara Plankensteiner, director of the Rothenbaum Museum in Hamburg, and member of the Benin Dialogue Group of five German museums working directly with their Nigerian partners, including Edo elders, the ministry of culture in Nigeria. The Benin works, the second largest in Europe after the UK, will be returned by the end of 2022.

She maintains that when the working group began in 2010, there was not a lot of discussion regarding art restitution. But things have changed. “It’s not a political agreement, not part of discussions in society or ‘permanent loans’ but a change in climate with African intellectuals, youths and others on the African continent calling for the return of artifacts,” she said.

Meanwhile, President Emmanuel Macron announced that France would return the “Treasures of Béhanzin”, works that were looted at the Royal Abomey Palace, in what is now Benin, in 1892 during the colonial wars.

Daily newsletterReceive essential international news every morning

Legal frameworks in former colonial powers often favor the institutions currently holding such artifacts, complicating restitution efforts .

Title:

Content: Categories
News Snapchat YouTube

Exploring the Intersection of Technology and Art: Augmented Reality Enhances Museum Experiences

Snapchat, a social media platform primarily known for its fun filters, is expanding its reach beyond entertainment and into the world of culture and the arts. With its augmented reality (AR) capabilities, Snapchat is transforming the way visitors experience museums and galleries around the globe.

Through the use of AR, Snapchat has collaborated with prestigious institutions such as the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, the Art Basel fair in Miami, the Design Museum in London, and most recently, the Louvre in Paris. At the Louvre, the department of Egyptian antiquities has been rejuvenated with 3D reconstructions of long-lost artwork and historic monuments, accessible to visitors through QR codes or the Snapchat camera.

Snapchat’s foray into the art world raises an intriguing question: could this technology provide a solution to diplomatic disputes surrounding cultural artifacts, such as the Elgin Marbles?

Donatien Bozon, the director of Snap’s AR studio in Paris, reveals that the company has initiated discussions on the matter. Snap’s AR team, consisting of 14 experts, was established with the goal of integrating AR into art, culture, and education. Bozon emphasizes that Snapchat’s technology offers more than just entertainment value, as it has the potential to enhance museum experiences, attract new audiences, and optimize existing physical spaces.

By leveraging the capabilities of the front camera on users’ phones, Snapchat’s AR empowers cultural institutions to offer interactive and immersive encounters with history and art. This innovative approach not only adds depth to museum displays but also enables visitors to engage with artifacts in unprecedented ways.

While the Elgin Marbles controversy remains a complex diplomatic issue, AR technology presents a promising avenue for bridging cultural divides and fostering understanding. Through AR-enhanced exhibitions, audiences around the world can virtually explore and appreciate the historical significance of these artifacts — a significant step toward a more inclusive approach to preserving and celebrating our shared cultural heritage.

FAQ

What is augmented reality (AR)?

Augmented reality (AR) is a technology that overlays digital information, such as virtual objects or data, onto the real world. It enhances the user’s perception and interaction with their environment, blending virtual elements with the physical world.

How does Snapchat’s AR work?

Snapchat’s AR technology operates through the use of the smartphone’s camera. It recognizes the user’s surroundings and can place virtual objects, effects, or filters onto the real-world view displayed on the screen. This allows users to interact with virtual content and explore creative possibilities in their everyday surroundings.

Can AR technology resolve diplomatic disputes over cultural artifacts?

While AR technology cannot solve diplomatic disputes directly, it has the potential to facilitate a deeper understanding and appreciation of cultural artifacts. By virtually showcasing these treasures and making them accessible to a wider audience, AR technology promotes cultural exchange and encourages dialogue between countries involved in such disputes.

Title:

Content: Why do we even have art museums? This was a question that Alexander Dorner began asking in the 1920s. He can’t have been the first to pose such a question, but as director of the Provincial Museum in Hanover, Germany, he was in a position to do something about it. In 1927, he commissioned Russian artist El Lissitzky to upend the conventional style of displaying art at the time by installing an “abstract cabinet”—a modular space that was flexibly responsive to the art on display but that also challenged the art with its own striped patterns and color. Dorner and Lissitzky’s experimental structure was provocative enough in the 1920s. But when the Nazis came to power in 1933, such ideas became heresy: The abstract cabinet was dismantled, and Dorner was forced to emigrate to the United States.

There, the question of art’s function in modern society continued to consume Dorner, who became director of the Museum of Art at the Rhode Island School of Design in 1938. He wrote a treatise on the subject, “Why Have Art Museums?” It was intended for publication by the RISD museum’s press, but Dorner was dismissed by the museum board before it was published, accused of “carelessness with objects, lack of consultation about decisions with other members of the museum and school staff, disregard for donors, and the falsification of visitor numbers.” Yet the pamphlet raised a set of questions that still haunt museums today. Dorner accused the museum world of flattering and serving elites while dabbling in an incoherent eclecticism, thanks to an outmoded philosophy that, he argued, “prevents them from becoming a functioning part of an integrated working culture.” The museum, he proclaimed, needs to “change its character from a storehouse into an active, functioning molder of our future culture.”

Since then, museums have mostly remained the same; if anything, they are storehousing more than ever before. Worldwide, the number of new museums, and in particular those devoted to modern and contemporary art, has skyrocketed: In China alone, more than 1,000 new museums were constructed between 2000 and 2011. Existing ones in the United States and elsewhere have expanded exponentially as well. Consider the Museum of Modern Art in New York. Housed in temporary quarters after it was founded in 1929, it gained a permanent home 10 years later on 53rd Street, where it has continued to reside to this day. Over the past 50 years it has grown rapidly. A 1984 expansion by César Pelli more than doubled its gallery space, followed by another, completed by Yoshio Taniguchi in 2004, which doubled the space again, and yet another in 2017, with an additional 30 percent increase in exhibition space.

Museums have perhaps begun to accept their role as agents of change—if anything, they’ve been trying to write history in advance through their acquisitions of contemporary art—but in doubling down on sheer acquisition at the same time, they risk committing themselves to a future that never comes to pass. At least among those who have had the means to build them, the only question put to a museum has been “How much more and how much bigger?” Oh, and also “How much money can we get, and from whom?” “Raise a lot of money for me, I’ll give you good architecture,” Taniguchi apparently told the MoMA board before he received his commission to expand the museum. “Raise even more money, I’ll make the architecture disappear.”

How long ago and far away that expansionary era seems now. Today, Dorner’s question about the role of museums and whether they should, in fact, have any cultural authority is being asked more loudly than ever. In 1941, Dorner preached that “growing ambitions and responsibilities” had led museums to “their present crisis”—which finally seems to have arrived some 80 years later—and that they would survive only “if they are willing to begin a new chapter in their life story.” These days, museums don’t appear to have growing ambitions or responsibilities; they instead seem stricken by a deep malaise. Dorner, at least, still had great faith in his own supposedly authoritative analysis of what had made museums outdated. Those in charge of museums seem much less sure of themselves; museums and their curators are all on the back foot. They may continue to grow and grow in terms of their footprints, but their curators and directors no longer have confidence in their standing to make judgments of value.

Such a crisis is not primarily aesthetic or philosophical; it is above all social and political, and therefore also economic. Philippe de Montebello, the former director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, remarked in the recent book Living Museums: Conversations With Leading Museum Directors, by the curator Donatien Grau of the Metropolitan, that when he was growing up, “the museum was that grand, neoclassical façade to that enormous building that projected a sense of authority, of luxury, of grandeur, and of a higher experience within.” It’s telling, and I think very true, that in the past—even the still recent past—“luxury” and “higher experience” were linked. That’s no longer true. As Peter-Klaus Schuster, former director of the Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, points out in the same book, “Museums are no longer able to hide behind an authority, not even their own…. We have become more cautious, perhaps also more insecure, but certainly more thoughtful and calmer in relation to the masses of controversial opinions that public institutions today increasingly have to contend with.” He concludes that museums “have to be able to justify in detail what we do and why we do it.” The difficulty in doing this may be reflected in the fact that, as Artnet recently reported, 22 American museums are currently seeking new directors, and what they have found is, according to former Queens Museum executive director Laura Raicovich, “People really don’t want to be directors right now because the jobs are emotionally unsustainable.”

This loss of authority takes a number of forms. While I have been focusing mostly on museums of contemporary and modern art, the crisis goes far beyond that, encompassing institutions concerned with other periods of art and, perhaps above all, those that frame themselves as “encyclopedic” museums. Regarding the latter, there is a growing realization that their collections were to a great extent amassed by means that are now self-evidently disreputable, even criminal—in short, by (sometimes legalized) looting via conquest and plunder. While Greece’s calls to the British Museum for the return of the so-called Elgin Marbles continue to fall on deaf ears, the Musée du Quai Branly–Jacques Chirac in Paris, the National Museum of African Art in Washington, D.C., and the Humboldt Forum in Berlin are—at the time of writing—making promising noises about the return of the Benin Bronzes, which were looted from the Royal Palace of Benin in present-day Nigeria in 1897. Closer to home, American museums (albeit not necessarily art museums) have for decades been working to return sacred artifacts (and even human remains) taken from Native peoples.

However late or little, such restitutions can only be applauded. I’d like to think the erstwhile keepers of those returned objects will realize they’ve been relieved of a moral burden. But there’s a deeper implication here: that European and North American institutions should no longer aspire to their long-held fantasy of universality. London, Paris, Berlin, and New York are rightly no longer understood to be the panoptic nodes from which all the world’s arts and cultures can be surveyed, systematized, and accounted for. Some things need to be kept close to home. Yet even at the more local levels, there is now a doubt among museums as to what they can properly display, so that the director of the Uffizi in Florence, Eike Schmidt, for instance, has floated the idea that devotional paintings of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance might be returned to the churches where they formerly resided—that Duccio’s Rucellai Madonna (c. 1285) might be sited again in the church of Santa Maria Novella across town. But then the great churches of Florence already function more like museums than places of worship, catering more to art lovers than to the devout. Schmidt’s proposal is an admission that museums no longer feel up to the task of housing art and, more importantly, facilitating personal and critical experience with these objects and, in the process, expanding the range of their meanings.

The idea of sending the Rucellai Madonna back to the chapel where it used to hang evokes yet another historical issue—one that happens to resonate with contemporary concerns. This Madonna was not painted for the Rucellai, a Florentine mercantile family, or for the chapel they had built long after Duccio’s death; it hung in a smaller chapel in the same church until the Rucellai commissioned a grander one centuries later. But why were those Florentine merchants so keen on endowing chapels anyway? One answer is guilt: Their financial activities were dangerously similar to usury, which was condemned as a sin; and so, in order to assure a happy afterlife and respectability in this one, it was politic to spend lavishly on ecclesiastical architecture and art. Today this is called “artwashing”—using the cultural capital attained through conspicuous patronage to burnish one’s social image despite the harm caused in amassing the wealth that makes such patronage possible.

Today such artwashing is less readily passed over. Just ask Warren Kanders, who left the board of the Whitney Museum, of which he was vice-chairman, after vociferous protests from artists over his involvement with the institution when it became known that among the companies he owned was one that produces military and law enforcement equipment, including tear gas grenades that have been used at the border between the United States and Mexico, and allegedly also in Palestine and elsewhere. (Subsequently, Kanders announced that his company, Safariland, would divest itself of the part of its business that produces tear gas.) Then there’s Leon Black, who stepped down from his position as chairman at MoMA because of his ties to Jeffrey Epstein. And most notorious of all, the Sackler family, patrons of the Met, the Tate, the Louvre, and so many more, who disclaim all responsibility for the opioid crisis they fostered, which killed almost half a million Americans.

These are not just a few bad apples in an otherwise spotless system. Rather, the Sacklers and the rest have come to exemplify a world in which the unseemly and amoral ultrarich dominate museums. And while these may technically still be nonprofit educational institutions, they are governed according to corporate values and operate according to political principles that the artists whose work is exhibited in them tend to find repugnant. The artist Michael Rakowitz, who called for Black’s removal from the MoMA board, wrote, “I look forward to collectively imagining an ecosystem that does not enlist our content to go on display in institutions whose board members create the very conditions in the world that many of us are devoted to dismantling.” While there are few artists as ardently activist as Rakowitz, it is not a stretch to say that many believe their work embodies values that are in conflict with those of the people who hold financial power over museums.

Yet artists are not the only ones increasingly disaffected with the current museum ecosystem: Many of the people who do the hard work of keeping museums running are at odds with their bosses. Unionization efforts have been ramping up—and so has union busting. At the New Museum of Contemporary Art, one worker even compared conditions there to those of a sweatshop. Employees found, after a hard-won fight for a union contract, that layoffs and furloughs in response to the Covid-19 pandemic were aimed at workers who had been most active in union organizing. The rhetoric from the top remained the same: The New Museum was “a diverse, exciting, and creative space for experimentation for team members and visitors.” But the carefully professed and cultivated progressive image that it and many other museums hope to project was belied by the crushing hierarchy and inequality that defines these organizations.

Such a reality has made curators and directors the targets of protest, sometimes leading to their departure. In 2020, for instance, the Guggenheim Museum in New York faced a call from a group of current and former employees for the departure of its three top executives—the director, the chief operating officer, and the chief curator—on account of the institution’s “systemic racism.” The museum’s well-respected longtime chief curator, Nancy Spector, resigned shortly afterward. In a second instance the same year, another widely admired figure, Gary Garrels, the senior curator of painting and sculpture at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, resigned after making an aside that the museum would not be freezing out white male artists; his use of the phrase “reverse discrimination”—one that has a very bad history—turned out to be a terminal offense.

Are there any solutions to the malaise and crisis of authority faced by today’s museums? In many ways, such solutions have to come from outside the museum world first. Contrary to appearances, the problems museums face are not essentially internal ones: They have to do with the contradictions inherent in the museum’s relation to society at large, and there is a long history behind them. What has brought these problems to the fore is the ever-increasing inequality with which we live, in terms of both race and class, and for this reason, one answer to the problems of museums might simply be: socialism. Even if that’s not in the cards, however, anything to curb the power of the 1 percent will help.

But what can museums themselves do? It’s noticeable that young people, including artists, bring different questions, different demands, to artworks than do many of their elders. The change is deeper than it may seem—perhaps a tectonic shift in art itself, which will mean rethinking the very idea of the museum. Jacques Rancière, in his 2011 book Aisthesis, speaks of how an “aesthetic regime of art” began to dominate in Europe in the late 18th century, succeeding earlier representational and ethical regimes of art and leading to the emergence of museums such as the Louvre. This aestheticization of art, he argued, was the result of the French Revolution: The king had been overthrown, and his works of art now belonged to the people by way of the state. But many of these works were essentially visual paeans to royalty, and more still were devotional works, testaments to the power of the church, which the revolutionaries were determined to suppress. How could these royalist and clerical images be considered glories of a free and secular nation?

The solution was radical: These objects made to honor king and church were recast, simply, as examples of sublime art—that is, of beautiful form and transcendent skill. Precisely for political reasons, an essentially aesthetic vision had to prevail. “Only one solution was available,” Rancière insisted, “to nullify the content of the paintings by installing them in art’s own space,” thereby “training a gaze detached from the meaning of the works.” In other words, through what later came to be known as formalism, any subject, even when the content of the work was one that could no longer be supported, could be admired for the sake of art. And therefore art comes from art: “Painters, from this point onward, imitate painting.”

But today, that “aesthetic regime” seems to be receding—perhaps because the authorities that inculcated it seem less credible. I keep hearing friends who teach in art schools complain that fewer and fewer of their students are prepared to approach art as a matter of form, and the same thing from art historians about the students they teach. What young artists seem most concerned about is their subject matter, the message they want to convey—and likewise, in their appreciation of others’ art, these young people look for content that appeals to their ethical aspirations.

This shift in the sense of what art should be may represent a passing generational blip or, quite the contrary, a sea change of the sort that has not been seen for a couple of centuries. And it poses a considerable challenge for museums, which can no longer present themselves as neutral arbiters of the world’s wealth of visual forms. I don’t mind admitting that I hope it’s a blip, despite my wish for a more ethical role for museums. I’d prefer a greater role for those who have the highest stakes in both the history and the future of art—that is, the artists themselves—but I suspect my hopes are vain. What Rancière called the “aesthetic regime of art” and the art museum made each other possible, and no one knows how to have one without the other. What if today we are witnessing a return to a time when art is valued for its social utility, its edifying effect on the viewer, more than for its aesthetic valence? Art may turn out to be something very different from what it has been, and museums will have to become no less different—perhaps quite unlike those we know today. The malaise of the museums could be just beginning.

The global movement for repatriation emphasizes that these artifacts are not mere historical objects but carry profound cultural significance and identity for their communities of origin .

Title:

Content: Latest
Latest
37m agoThe Elgin Marbles and the UK-Greece row, explained
Latest
1h agoRescuers reach 41 trapped Indian tunnel workers after 16 days underground
Latest
3h agoGove says Cabinet Office was 'not fit for purpose' during early Covid pandemic

Nurses consider new strikes after senior doctors secure pay rise of up to 13%

Deal will see consultants get a much higher increase than the 5 per cent agreed for nurses and other NHS staff

Nurses in England could return to the picket lines after reacting with fury to the Government offering consultants a double-digit pay rise with the promise of another salary boost to follow.

Officials have agreed a deal which will see consultants get an up to 13 per cent rise for this financial year, although it will not be paid until April 2024. They will receive another boost in 2024/25 with the figure yet to be decided.

Consultants are some of the highest paid NHS staff with a starting salary of just under £94,000 rising to more than £126,000. They went on strike alongside junior doctors this year after being awarded a 6 per cent pay rise.

The new deal sets aside another 4.95 per cent in the pay budget, but the total rise an individual consultant will get will vary from zero to nearly 12.8 per cent for the majority as part of an overhaul of their contracts.

The offer will now be put to British Medical Association (BMA) members, as well as those who are part of the much smaller Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association (HCSA) union. If the deal is agreed, strikes by top hospital doctors in England will end, although talks between the Government and specialist, associate specialist and specialty doctors (SAS) and junior doctors are ongoing.

The consultants’ deal will put pressure on junior doctors to bring their industrial action action to an end and agree a deal. They have been demanding a 35.3 per cent pay rise, a much higher figure than consultants had called for.

Rishi Sunak said: “Ending damaging strike action in the NHS is vitally important if we want to continue making progress towards cutting waiting lists while making sure patients get the care they deserve.

“This is a fair deal for consultants who will benefit from major reform to their contract, it is fair for taxpayers because it will not risk our ongoing work to tackle inflation, and most importantly it is a good deal for patients to see the end of consultant industrial action.”

However nurses, who had only been offered a 5 per cent pay rise this year after months of strikes, said they were “appalled” at the consultants’ deal.

Professor Nicola Ranger, the Royal College of Nursing’s Chief Nurse, said: “The Government has shown it has the political will to reform pay for some of the highest earners in the NHS – while our members are left with the lowest pay rise in the public sector.

“Nursing staff work closely with consultants, and we too have campaigned for years to have quicker progression through the pay scale. This would help recognise nurses’ safety-critical and life-saving skills, and yet many spend most of their career stuck on the same NHS pay band.

“It’s galling that almost 12 months since nursing staff took the unprecedented decision to strike, our pay dispute remains unresolved, and the Government continues to undervalue our profession. Today’s news will ignite our members’ fury further, making nursing strikes more likely in the future.”

Victoria Atkins, who took over as Health Secretary two weeks ago, said that the core consultant contract had not been updated for 20 years, so the new offer would “modernise” the contract, including by offering enhanced shared parental leave, in line with other NHS staff.

There would be an increase to the starting salary for a consultant, and to the salary at the top of the new pay scale structure, the BMA said. The union said that consultants would reach the top of the pay scale five years sooner than under the current scheme.

Officials said that pay-scale reforms in the deal would also help mitigate the gender pay gap seen between hospital consultants.

Dr Vishal Sharma, BMA consultants committee chair, said: “We are pleased that after a month of intense talks and more than six months of strike action we never wanted to take, we have now got an offer we can put to members.

“It is a huge shame that it has needed consultants to take industrial action to get the Government to this point when we called for talks many months ago.

“How each consultant will benefit will depend on their individual circumstances, and we will be providing them with as much detail as we can, so they are able to look carefully through the details to help them decide whether to accept the offer.”

Officials believe the consultants’ deal will cost less than allowing strikes to continue, with NHS England estimating that industrial action has cost about £1.5bn and pushed hospitals into financial crisis.

Most Read By Subscribers

Title:

Content: You are here
Home > News > Parthenon marbles are to remain in the British Museum

Parthenon marbles are to remain in the British Museum

The museum might yet arrange for the sculptures to be loaned. But Sunak stated that there are no plans to change the statute, which specifies that the museum can only dispose of pieces in its collection under certain circumstances.

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has ruled out amending a regulation that prevents the British Museum from permanently returning the Parthenon marbles to Greece.

Sunak confirmed that they have no intention of altering the existing regulations, which limit the museum’s ability to sell or dispose of pieces in its collection except under specific circumstances.

Sunak is unlikely to break with the stances of his two predecessors, who were both against any kind of loan of the marbles to Greece.

“The UK has cared for the Elgin Marbles for generations. Our galleries and museums are funded by taxpayers because they are a huge asset to this country,” Sunak told reporters on his plane as he flew to the United States on monday

“We share their treasures with the world, and the world comes to the UK to see them. The collection of the British Museum is protected by law, and we have no plans to change it.”

Since its independence in 1832, Greece has repeatedly demanded the return of the statues known as the Elgin Marbles, which were stolen from the Parthenon temple in Athens by British ambassador Lord Elgin in the early nineteenth century, while Greece was under Ottoman domination.

George Osborne, a former finance minister and the chair of the British Museum, has been collaborating with Greece to develop a new agreement that would enable the Parthenon sculptures to be displayed in both Athens and London. The Parthenon Project, which has received support from politicians across various parties in the UK, announced on Sunday that a long-term cultural partnership agreement could potentially facilitate the return of the British Museum’s Parthenon collection to Greece.

Top

Title:

Content: In recent years, Native activists have challenged national mythologies long associated with the Thanksgiving holiday. Rejecting the caricatured version of the peaceful origins of the celebration, activists and historians have highlighted European settlers’ often violent interactions with the Native peoples of what would eventually become the United States.

Educators have accordingly sought to transform their curriculums to offer a more accurate view of the early years of conquest and include information about Native peoples today who are very much alive and resilient. Even pop culture has jumped into the act. Native comedians such as Dallas Goldtooth have effectively challenged racist tropes through their humor, while he and the rest of the cast of the acclaimed new television series “Reservation Dogs artfully represent the diversity and vibrancy of Native people.

These developments are an important step toward fully reckoning with the history of conquest in this country and how it shapes our present. Yet that conquest was not only a national process but also a hemispheric one. The settlers who founded what would become the United States were just one piece of a wave of European colonization of the western hemisphere. With Thanksgiving upon us, it is worth reckoning with that history beyond the borders of the United States as well.

Our neighbor to the south, Mexico, is grappling with its own relationship to conquest. While the country has long celebrated its ancient Mesoamerican civilizations and invoked mestizaje, racial and cultural mixture, as central to national identity, it too has marginalized and denigrated Indigenous voices that advocated for full equality and liberation.

This past August marked the 500th anniversary of the military defeat of the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan by Spanish forces. In 1521, Tenochtitlan, the ruins of which now lay under Mexico City, was an impressive urban metropolis with a population of between 200,000 and 300,000 inhabitants. The Aztecs, whose influence and tribute networks covered much of what is now southern Mexico and Central America, were a powerful imperial force at the time of European arrival.

To mark the anniversary, the Mexico City government organized a series of events, including a replica of the Aztec Templo Mayor pyramid in the capital’s zócalo, or central plaza. Crowds gathered to watch dances and colorful replicas of Aztec gods, such as Quetzalcoatl, the plumed serpent. And Mexico’s president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has asked the Spanish crown as well as Pope Francis for an official apology for their institutions’ respective roles in European conquest of the Americas.

But the government’s commemoration, officially dubbed “500 Years of Indigenous Resistance,” has sparked debate among historians and Indigenous intellectuals in Mexico. Authorities have situated contemporary Mexico as the inheritor of the Aztecs, but that obscures the uncomfortable fact that the Mexican state is both a product and perpetuator of colonial exploitation. And as the Mixe writer Yásnaya Aguilar argues, the inequalities and racism unleashed by the conquest are ongoing.

Yet the relationship between Native peoples and modern nation states is not a simple dichotomy of oppressor and victim. Native people in Mexico and throughout the Americas have shaped the politics and policies of the countries in which they find themselves. Often, they have done so by rejecting the national divisions produced by conquest and imagining a politics beyond them. We would do well to listen to those voices.

The Mexican state has a long history of speaking in the name of Native peoples. In contrast to the United States, 19th-century Mexican elites invoked pre-conquest Indigenous civilizations as a way to distinguish themselves from their former colonial masters. Indeed, López Obrador’s rhetoric forms part of this long-standing nationalist tradition that tends to paper over the fact that Mexico’s history, like that of the United States, involved the dispossession of Native land.

Indigenous peoples in what became Mexico have never been silent in confronting colonial power. During the early days of colonialism, as the Spanish Crown’s agents divided up Native land to distribute among conquistadors, Native peoples assembled along the proposed property lines and stated for the official record: “venimos a contradecir,” or “we come to object.” And during the struggle for Mexican independence (1810-1821), Native peoples waged a two-pronged fight, to liberate their country from Spanish rule and defend their communal lands against Creole elites’ efforts to privatize them. That opposition and advocacy, voiced in some of the darkest days of conquest and civil war, continues to the present.

The Mexican Revolution of 1910, which involved mass mobilizations of rural society, including Native peoples, marked another shift in official rhetoric. The struggle against the unpopular dictator Porfirio Díaz struck a blow against the explicit and official racism of the Díaz regime. The postrevolutionary state that emerged in the aftermath sponsored public art projects that celebrated indigenous culture and history, commissioning Diego Rivera’s murals in the National Palace and Ministry of Education. And the government’s policies went beyond artistic portrayals of the Aztec capital and Indigenous peasant revolutionaries. In 1948, Mexico created a new federal agency, the Instituto Nacional Indigenista, charged with the material uplift of the Native population.

Again, Native peoples actively participated in and challenged government policy. While their communities were targeted for public health, education and agricultural initiatives, Indigenous individuals worked within the federal agency, from low-level functionaries and anthropologists to bilingual teachers. Many, such as the Mixtec (Ñuu Savi) teacher Ramón Hernández López, defied the paternalism of federal policy by seeking to defend Native communities against economic exploitation and advocate for the equal value of Native languages to the national language, Spanish.

In the early 1970s, Indigenous youths in Mexico, like their counterparts throughout the hemisphere, seized on new theories of anti-colonialism and revolution to advocate for themselves and their communities. On a national level, they fought for positions as bilingual teachers and challenged the repression of social movements in rural Mexico. In the southern state of Oaxaca, a diverse array of Indigenous peoples had persisted for centuries. A group of radical youths there put these global theories of revolution in dialogue with local traditions of communal self-government and mutual aid. Activists such as Floriberto Díaz and Jaime Martinez Luna articulated a theory they termed “comunalidad” or “communality.” They called for a politics of liberation that drew on Indigenous traditions, not as a way of looking backward, but as a way of imagining alternative futures based on equality and reciprocity.

Oaxaca remained a place of Indigenous self-governance in the second half of the century. Yet the way Oaxaca was incorporated into the global economy was primarily through low-wage, seasonal work outside the state. A Oaxacan diaspora spread north to Mexico City, and beyond to the fields of Baja California and the Pacific Northwest of the United States.

These Oaxacans brought with them traditions of community support and self-reliance. They built relationships of solidarity with Native communities in the United States. Back in Oaxaca itself, Indigenous teachers remained a powerful political force and in 2006 led a social movement to oust a corrupt and violent governor. That movement, cut down by government repression and political compromise, offered an alternative to what would soon engulf Mexico, a brutally violent drug war.

As we reflect on Thanksgiving and the history of conquest and violence against Indigenous people of the Americas, we would do well to listen to Native voices. Mexico, like the United States, has begun a renewed conversation regarding institutions and economies built on colonial violence. Reckoning with this past is a way to imagine a better future. Native history is central to our modern political dilemmas of marginalization and racism. And as Oaxacan radical traditions demonstrate, they are also central to their solutions.

The removal of artifacts like the Elgin Marbles is often seen as a form of cultural erasure, impacting the collective memory and identity of the originating cultures .

Title:

Content: Categories
News Snapchat YouTube

Exploring the Intersection of Technology and Art: Augmented Reality Enhances Museum Experiences

Snapchat, a social media platform primarily known for its fun filters, is expanding its reach beyond entertainment and into the world of culture and the arts. With its augmented reality (AR) capabilities, Snapchat is transforming the way visitors experience museums and galleries around the globe.

Through the use of AR, Snapchat has collaborated with prestigious institutions such as the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, the Art Basel fair in Miami, the Design Museum in London, and most recently, the Louvre in Paris. At the Louvre, the department of Egyptian antiquities has been rejuvenated with 3D reconstructions of long-lost artwork and historic monuments, accessible to visitors through QR codes or the Snapchat camera.

Snapchat’s foray into the art world raises an intriguing question: could this technology provide a solution to diplomatic disputes surrounding cultural artifacts, such as the Elgin Marbles?

Donatien Bozon, the director of Snap’s AR studio in Paris, reveals that the company has initiated discussions on the matter. Snap’s AR team, consisting of 14 experts, was established with the goal of integrating AR into art, culture, and education. Bozon emphasizes that Snapchat’s technology offers more than just entertainment value, as it has the potential to enhance museum experiences, attract new audiences, and optimize existing physical spaces.

By leveraging the capabilities of the front camera on users’ phones, Snapchat’s AR empowers cultural institutions to offer interactive and immersive encounters with history and art. This innovative approach not only adds depth to museum displays but also enables visitors to engage with artifacts in unprecedented ways.

While the Elgin Marbles controversy remains a complex diplomatic issue, AR technology presents a promising avenue for bridging cultural divides and fostering understanding. Through AR-enhanced exhibitions, audiences around the world can virtually explore and appreciate the historical significance of these artifacts — a significant step toward a more inclusive approach to preserving and celebrating our shared cultural heritage.

FAQ

What is augmented reality (AR)?

Augmented reality (AR) is a technology that overlays digital information, such as virtual objects or data, onto the real world. It enhances the user’s perception and interaction with their environment, blending virtual elements with the physical world.

How does Snapchat’s AR work?

Snapchat’s AR technology operates through the use of the smartphone’s camera. It recognizes the user’s surroundings and can place virtual objects, effects, or filters onto the real-world view displayed on the screen. This allows users to interact with virtual content and explore creative possibilities in their everyday surroundings.

Can AR technology resolve diplomatic disputes over cultural artifacts?

While AR technology cannot solve diplomatic disputes directly, it has the potential to facilitate a deeper understanding and appreciation of cultural artifacts. By virtually showcasing these treasures and making them accessible to a wider audience, AR technology promotes cultural exchange and encourages dialogue between countries involved in such disputes.

Title:

Content: Skip to Content

Greek leader, in London, seeks return of ancient sculptures

LONDON (AP) — British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has held talks with Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis amid a renewed push by Athens for the return of marble statues that once stood in the Parthenon. Johnson said he “understood the strength of feeling of the Greek people” about the sculptures after Mitsotakis raised the issue during talks. But the British leader stressed that decisions about the issue rest with the British Museum, where the marbles are held. The 17 figures and part of a frieze were taken by the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire in the early 19th century. Britain maintains Lord Elgin acquired the sculptures legally. Greek government says they were stolen and wants them returned for display in the Acropolis Museum.

Associated Press

Skip to content

Title:

Content: Greek premier to meet Starmer and Sunak in renewed push to return Elgin marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis due to meet Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer in London next week

Matt Mathers
Saturday 25 November 2023 23:43
Comments
Elgin Marbles: British Museum lends statue

Greek prime minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis is set to raise the issue of the Parthenon sculptures with the UK next week.

He is reportedly due to hold talks with Labour leader Keir Starmer on Monday and prime minister Rishi Sunak on Tuesday and will raise the subject with both.

The Financial Times reported that Mr Starmer was open to a potential loan deal that would see parts of the ancient sculptures returned. Labour declined to comment.

The 2,500-year-old sculptures, also known as the Eglin Marbles, were taken from Athens to Britain by agents of Thomas Bruce, the 7th Earl of Eglin, in the early 19th century and never returned. Greece says they were stolen, sparking a bitter and long-running dispute with the UK.

Housed in their own dedicated room, the sculptures of Olympian gods and goddesses, centaurs and warriors are among the greatest at the British Museum.

A 1963 Act of Parliament stops the British Museum from permanently handing them back.

George Osborne, the museum’s chair and the former Conservative Party MP and chancellor, has backed a loan deal.

“I hope we’ll find a way to partner with Greece so that a portion of the Marbles spend part of their time in Athens . . . and we see more of their treasures in return,” he wrote in The Spectator last week. Mr Osborne conceded that “we may well not succeed” but that it was “surely worth the effort”.

The proposed deal, which Mr Osborne and Mr Mitsotakis have held secret talks over, would allow the sculptures to return to Athens in exchange for Greek treasures being displayed in London.

Many of the artworks in question are in storage in museum vaults and have never before been seen.

Mr Mitsotakis, who has said it is his “passion” to get the sculptures back, is scheduled to meet both party leaders next week. He intends to raise the issue in both meetings, a person close to him told the FT.

Mr Sunak is said to be not opposed to the idea of a loan deal but sceptical that the sculptures would ever be returned if they were loaned to Greece, according to the paper.

No 10 has been contacted for comment.

A UK government spokesperson told the FT: “The UK has cared for the Elgin Marbles for generations.

“Our galleries and museums are funded by taxpayers because they are a huge asset to this country. “

We share their treasures with the world, and the world comes to the UK to see them. The collection of the British Museum is protected by law, and we have no plans to change it.”

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in

Title:

Content: Sen. Nwoko Writes Former Colonial Powers, Demands Apology, $5 Trillion Reparation For Slavery, Other Historical Injustices Against Africa, Nigeria

A DEMAND FOR APOLOGY AND REPARATIONS FOR SLAVERY, INHUMAN AND DEGRADING TREATMENTS AND EXPLOITATION OF AFRICANS AND AFRICAN RESOURCES

I write with a solemn duty that transcends political boundaries and historical narratives. It is with unwavering conviction that I convene this crucial discourse to address the weighty issues of historical injustices exploitation and neocolonialism that have left an indelible mark on our beloved continent.

As we reflect on the dark era of the transatlantic slave trade, Africa, particularly Nigeria, bore witness to an unimaginable saga of human suffering and exploitation. The transatlantic slave trade tore families apart and scarred our collective memory, inflicting anguish and despair across generations. Our own city of Lagos, now vibrant and thriving, once witnessed the heart-wrenching departure of enslaved individuals, torn from their homes and subjected to unthinkable horrors in foreign lands. This chapter, marred by pain and degradation, is etched in our history.

After hundreds of years of depletion of our human capital through slave trade, colonialism followed, with the mindless scramble for and partition of African territories by European powers, who imposed dominion over vast African territories, reshaping borders, exploiting resources, and disrupting our societal structures. Nigeria, a land of diverse cultures and kingdoms, fell under British rule, enduring foreign norms, governance systems, and exploitative economic practices.

I express deep concern that neocolonialism, characterized by economic dependency, unequal trade relations, and political interference, still casts its shadow over us even after attaining political independence. This impedes the realization of our sovereignty and self-determination, perpetuating exploitation and inequality.

I call upon former colonial powers and the international community to acknowledge the grave consequences of these historical injustices on African nations, particularly Nigeria and expressly apologise to the peoples and countries of the continent. Britain and other colonial powers must sooner than later openly address the specific wrongdoings and the blatant rape and exploitation of Africa’s peoples and resources. It is not enough to issue blanket statements as tokens to assuage their conscience(s). It would entail addressing the specific atrocities visited on the diverse peoples of the continent and the implementation of appropriate regimes of reparation commensurate with the damage done to each African territory and its people. It would be imperative for the colonial powers to rethink and adjust the dynamics of their relationships with African territories who still struggle with the after effects of their atrocities.
I urge for reparations of at least $5 trillion dollars, not as an act of vengeance, but as a pathway to healing and restoration. A comprehensive framework for reparations must be established, to meticulously assess the damages inflicted by centuries of injustice.

Furthermore, I beseech former colonial powers to invest in education, healthcare, infrastructure, and economic empowerment within African nations, especially those that have borne the brunt of exploitation. I also urge the repatriation of culturally significant artifacts that were taken from the African continent during the colonial period. In recent years there have been a few instances of selective return of stolen artifacts to the Benin Kingdom, but what justice demands is wholesome restoration of these items to the peoples and places from which they were forcefully and illegally removed.

I also challenge the terminology that simplifies the rich tapestry of Africa into a single label “blacks”. Especially when used in a derogatory and abusive manner. If people from the Asia continent can be referred to as Asians, Europe – Europeans, America – Americans, then people from Africa continent should be referred to as Africans not “blacks”.

—Senator Prince Ned Munir Nwoko

Public opinion in the UK is increasingly supportive of returning the marbles, influenced by cultural diplomacy, advocacy from public figures, and a growing recognition of ethical considerations surrounding cultural heritage .

Title:

Content: Comment

Welsh Labour is writing the white working class out of history

Coal miners, who sweated and sometimes died down the pits, deserve better than to be airbrushed out of the Industrial Revolution

Is Wales a racist nation? The evidence would seem to be against it. Repeated studies, including by the European Union and King’s College London, find that Britain is one of the least racist countries in the world. Could Wales be a benighted exception?

The Welsh Labour government apparently thinks so, as it has a policy of making Wales “an anti-racist nation” by 2030. In pursuing this ambition, it intends to turn local authorities, other public bodies, museums, art galleries and even pubs into instruments of propaganda, to ensure that “the right historic narrative” (the phrase used in the “Anti-Racist Wales Action Plan”) is everywhere proclaimed.

What is the “right historic narrative”? It is “a decolonised account of the past, one that recognises both historical injustices and the positive impact of ethnic minority communities”.

Commemorative items in public view – presumably pictures in galleries, statues, commemorative plaques, street names and it seems even pub signs – must not “insult or hurt”, and must project “present values”.

Defenders of such policies will say, what could be wrong with preventing hurt and insult and projecting “present values”?
First, it is undesirable that a government should attempt to impose its own politically orthodox view of the past on the rest of us.

Second, the past should be “contentious”: it is intellectually dishonest and damaging to simplify it into a politically approved fable.

Third, even if such policies are presented as nothing to worry about—just aiming at “authenticity and balance”, a Welsh government spokesman has stated – ample experience shows that those carrying them out cannot be trusted to provide accurate, balanced or even truthful information. In numerous instances an ideological agenda has been pushed seeking to stigmatise or erase those not fitting woke orthodoxy.

The present Conservative government tried to rein in the statue-toppling with a policy called “retain and explain”, something that has been reaffirmed in the party’s manifesto. An advisory committee (of which I was a member) produced guidelines to encourage restraint and reflection, rather than knee-jerk iconoclasm.

But in Wales we have the government requiring “contentious” works of art or other objects to be removed or “concealed”. A mixture of censorship and propaganda, explicitly to promote “a decolonised understanding of the world” is being pushed.

“Decolonisation” has little to do with the dismantling of empires. It now means a relentlessly negative portrayal of our history, the denial of its achievements, and – in extreme but sadly not rare cases – the attempt to trash the intellectual and moral foundations of modern Western culture.

The Welsh government’s animus is targetted at what it calls “powerful, older, able-bodied white men”. This category seems even to include Welsh coal miners, for Wales’s National Coal Museum is also to “decolonise” and emphasise the role of ethnic minorities.

Where does that leave the real coal miners – overwhelmingly white – who sweated and sometimes died down the pit, and on whose labours the Industrial Revolution and our subsequent prosperity largely depended?

Once, Labour would have celebrated them. It now seems willing to devalue those who created the Labour movement and were one of its most loyal and dynamic elements. Is this what we can expect too from a future Labour government in Westminster? “He who controls the present controls the past …”

We know the rest.

License this content

Title:

Content: Main content

Reports say a deal to return Elgin Marbles to Greece is at an "advanced stage"

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

The Greek daily newspaper, Ta Nea, says talks have been taking place between the British Museum and the Greek prime minister since November last year.

Also on the programme: an alternative to plastic; and the story of how a fossil, which lay unnoticed in a drawer for over half a century, has advanced our understanding of the origins of reptiles.

(Picture: One of the Parthenon Statues, also known as the Elgin Marbles. Credit: Reuters)

29 days left to listen

50 minutes

Last on

Yesterday 21:06GMT

Broadcast

  • Yesterday 21:06GMT

Podcast

Title:

Content: Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Greek prime minister tries to broker deal for return of Parthenon marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis offers to loan Greek treasures to British Museum if ‘stolen’ sculptures are returned to Acropolis

The Greek prime minister has demanded that the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles, which he accuses Britain of stealing, be returned to Greece, and even offered to loan some of his country’s treasures to the British Museum in an attempt to broker a deal.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis told the Daily Telegraph that the sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens.

However, Boris Johnson has previously ruled out returning them on the grounds that they were acquired legally.

Mitsotakis said: “Our position is very clear. The marbles were stolen in the 19th century; they belong in the Acropolis Museum and we need to discuss this issue in earnest.

“I am sure that if there was a willingness on the part of the government to move we could find an arrangement with the British Museum in terms of us sending abroad cultural treasures on loan, which have never left the country.”

The marbles were removed from the Acropolis more than 200 years ago by Lord Elgin in circumstances that have spurred one of the world’s most famous cultural rows and have long been the subject of dispute.

Mitsotakis said he would raise the issue with Johnson when the two meet next week for talks that could shape future relations between the two countries.

“Refusing to discuss the topic seems to me, given the context of everything that has been happening in terms of the return of cultural treasures, to be rather an anachronistic approach,” he added.

“It would be a fantastic statement by what Boris calls Global Britain if they were to move on this and look at it through a completely different lens.”

But Johnson dismissed the appeal for their return to Greece earlier this year, telling the Greek newspaper Ta Nea: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed prime minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.

“But the UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition.”

Greece has long called for the reunification of the sculptures, displayed in museums across Europe but mostly in London, and says it is integral to understanding the artworks in the context of the Acropolis.

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

Despite this, legal and institutional barriers remain significant, prompting exploration of innovative solutions such as loan agreements, cultural exchanges, and augmented reality experiences .

Title:

Content: Call for Partnership: Digital Heritage Collection – Resource Site Management and Promotion

Call for Partnership: Digital Heritage Collection – Resource Site Management and Promotion

Deadline for application: 11 Dec 2022

From British Council:

1. About the British Council

The British Council is the UK’s international organisation for cultural relations and educational opportunities. We build connections, understanding and trust between people in the UK and other countries through arts and culture, education and the English language. Last year we reached over 80 million people directly and 791 million people overall including online, broadcasts and publications. Founded in 1934 we are a UK charity governed by Royal Charter and a UK public body. We receive a 15 per cent core funding grant from the UK government.

2. Introduction

A British Council programme taking place in Colombia, Kenya and Viet Nam, Cultural Heritage for Inclusive Growth is an action research initiative exploring the use of cultural heritage for growth that benefits all levels of society. Cultural heritage in this context means many things, from the built environment through to cultural traditions such as music and language. Inclusive growth means working with and for all levels of society in order to reconcile the divide between economic growth, and rising poverty and inequality. In Viet Nam, the in-country Cultural Heritage for Inclusive Growth project – known as Heritage of Future Past – works with music and film heritage, in particular valuable aspects that are under-represented or at high risk of disappearing. For more information about Heritage of Future Past, please visit here

3. A Project Proposal

The British Council is developing Digital Heritage Collection, a small digital collection of heritage assets, both tangible and intangible, of diverse groups who have participated in Heritage of Future Past project over the past four years. These groups include various ethnic communities of the Central Highlands, such as the Bahnar, Ede, and Jrai, Chăm communities in the South Central Coast, and the communities of artists and audiences of southern performing arts, such as Cải lương, Hát bội, and other Diễn xướng Nam bộ forms, of the Mekong Delta, mainly in Hồ Chí Minh City.

The overall objective of this collection is to ensure that valuable living cultural heritage assets of diverse communities, particularly those at risk of disappearing, as well as the stories, communities, and people behind these heritage assets, are authentically recorded and creatively presented in digital forms which can be shared amongst these communities and beyond.

In 2021-2022, the first content for this collection with 17 heritage assets has been developed through nomination of heritage assets by local community members and groups in Gia Lai, Ninh Thuận, Kon Tum and Hồ Chí Minh City. For more information, please visit here.

By 2025, the Digital Heritage Collection is expected to be an inclusive platform in heritage sector for diverse groups of community members across Viet Nam with the following key purposes:

Learning: presenting creatively the first content of 17 set of digital heritage assets, all associated interactive elements. Each set includes narratives, photographs, hand drawings, videos, and/or audio recording. These will be useful resources, enabling people who are either already working in the field of heritage or are interested in the sector to learn about living cultural heritage assets of diverse communities in Viet Nam, in particular valuable aspects that are under-represented or at high risk of disappearing. Click on the mapping for more information about these digitalized assets.

Sharing: allowing community members and heritage practitioners to create and share any form of content about their cultural heritage, such as images, videos, text and audio. In other words, the platform can be built as to be wiki-like, featuring user-owned and user-created content.

Growing: offering a wide range of activities including press meet, online talk, sharing session, storytelling workshop, and/or online competition to encourage wide promotion of valuable living cultural heritage assets to the public. These have the potential to be further developed and benefit a network of creative professionals, cultural heritage professionals, development professionals, heritage practitioners, community members in Viet Nam.

We are looking for a partner who is interested in developing a vision and a plan, and to implement this plan to best manage and promote this digital heritage collection over the course of the next three to five years.

Ideally, the partner would be a creative team with expertise and experience in the heritage sector, communications, and digital technologies. Our target is that the platform will be promoted and accessible widely, estimated to reach 80,000 digital audiences during the first year.

Please note that this partnership will involve extensive data management which will need to comply with the British Council’s Information Governance and Risk Management policy. It will also need to respect Intellectual Property terms and conditions that are applied to all existing content. Details of these will be discussed and reflected clearly in the partnership agreement in due course.

4. Timeline

We are looking to engage a suitable partner following this timeline:

– 16 Nov 2022: Call for Partnership
– 01 Dec 2022: Deadline for inquiries
– 11 Dec 2022: Deadline for responses
– 16 Dec 2022: Information to successful candidate
– 23 Dec 2022: Grant award start date
– Grant completion date: three to five years from the grant award start date

5. Grant Awards

We will offer a maximum grant of VND 720,000,000 (approximately GBP 25,000), inclusive of all applicable taxes, for the presentation of Digital Heritage Collection in digital platform, the management and promotion of this resource site over the next three-five years. We do not expect this grant amount to be used for development of new content for the site. However, we welcome candidates with a vision for further development of new content using funding from other sources. This amount should include technical costs such as domain, host, and maintenance of existing content over 3-5 years.

6. Award Criteria

Responses from potential partners will be reviewed and awarded based on an assessment of the presentation and communication plan for the resource site as proposed by potential partners, considering the following criteria:

– Benefits to the heritage sector in Viet Nam, particularly in terms of:

+ innovative ideas for the presentation, management and promotion of the site content;
+ extensive communications and reach to the key target audiences, who are creative professionals, cultural heritage professionals, development professionals, heritage practitioners, community members; and
+ attention to deliver benefits to community members, including women and girls, indigenous peoples, young people, from urban and rural communities

– Value for money – how the grant award will be used to achieve the intended purpose of best possible management and promotion of the resource site.

– Relevant expertise and experience of the potential partner.

7. Instructions for Responding

All interested candidates are invited to express their interest using the response form and budget plan template as below and send to [email protected] by 11:59 pm Viet Nam time, 11 December 2022.

8. Clarification Requests

All clarification requests should be submitted to [email protected] before 01 December 2022.

British Council
20 Thụy Khuê
Tây Hồ, Hà Nội
Tel: 84 (0)4 8436780
Fax: 84 (0)4 8434962
Website: http://www.britishcouncil.vn

The Elgin Marbles controversy has had a profound impact on international cultural heritage law, highlighting the challenges in reconciling historical injustices with contemporary legal frameworks .

Title:

Content: Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Greek prime minister tries to broker deal for return of Parthenon marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis offers to loan Greek treasures to British Museum if ‘stolen’ sculptures are returned to Acropolis

The Greek prime minister has demanded that the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles, which he accuses Britain of stealing, be returned to Greece, and even offered to loan some of his country’s treasures to the British Museum in an attempt to broker a deal.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis told the Daily Telegraph that the sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens.

However, Boris Johnson has previously ruled out returning them on the grounds that they were acquired legally.

Mitsotakis said: “Our position is very clear. The marbles were stolen in the 19th century; they belong in the Acropolis Museum and we need to discuss this issue in earnest.

“I am sure that if there was a willingness on the part of the government to move we could find an arrangement with the British Museum in terms of us sending abroad cultural treasures on loan, which have never left the country.”

The marbles were removed from the Acropolis more than 200 years ago by Lord Elgin in circumstances that have spurred one of the world’s most famous cultural rows and have long been the subject of dispute.

Mitsotakis said he would raise the issue with Johnson when the two meet next week for talks that could shape future relations between the two countries.

“Refusing to discuss the topic seems to me, given the context of everything that has been happening in terms of the return of cultural treasures, to be rather an anachronistic approach,” he added.

“It would be a fantastic statement by what Boris calls Global Britain if they were to move on this and look at it through a completely different lens.”

But Johnson dismissed the appeal for their return to Greece earlier this year, telling the Greek newspaper Ta Nea: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed prime minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.

“But the UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition.”

Greece has long called for the reunification of the sculptures, displayed in museums across Europe but mostly in London, and says it is integral to understanding the artworks in the context of the Acropolis.

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

It has prompted calls for new agreements or cultural partnerships that respect both the cultural significance of the marbles and the legal frameworks involved .

Title:

Content:
Send Them Home

The Elgin Marbles, actually the Parthenon Marbles, have been Greek for over two thousand years and still are in every way except location. They were taken, realistically stolen, by Lord Elgin in the early 1800s and most people believe should be returned but that is actually illegal under British Museum Act 1963 and offers to ‘lend’ them are insulting.

One of the most obvious concerns that many museums have is that they would be emptied of items that were acquired, a weasel word for stolen, during times when the attitudes were different. Different attitudes do not condone theft.

Let’s return the thefts of the past to their rightful owners and put the past attitudes in the rubbish bin of time.

Dennis Fitzgerald,
Melbourne, Australia

Related Articles

The case is frequently cited in discussions about the responsibilities of museums to return artifacts taken during colonial periods and the need for international cooperation to address historical grievances [689

Title:

Content: Categories
News Snapchat YouTube

Exploring the Intersection of Technology and Art: Augmented Reality Enhances Museum Experiences

Snapchat, a social media platform primarily known for its fun filters, is expanding its reach beyond entertainment and into the world of culture and the arts. With its augmented reality (AR) capabilities, Snapchat is transforming the way visitors experience museums and galleries around the globe.

Through the use of AR, Snapchat has collaborated with prestigious institutions such as the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, the Art Basel fair in Miami, the Design Museum in London, and most recently, the Louvre in Paris. At the Louvre, the department of Egyptian antiquities has been rejuvenated with 3D reconstructions of long-lost artwork and historic monuments, accessible to visitors through QR codes or the Snapchat camera.

Snapchat’s foray into the art world raises an intriguing question: could this technology provide a solution to diplomatic disputes surrounding cultural artifacts, such as the Elgin Marbles?

Donatien Bozon, the director of Snap’s AR studio in Paris, reveals that the company has initiated discussions on the matter. Snap’s AR team, consisting of 14 experts, was established with the goal of integrating AR into art, culture, and education. Bozon emphasizes that Snapchat’s technology offers more than just entertainment value, as it has the potential to enhance museum experiences, attract new audiences, and optimize existing physical spaces.

By leveraging the capabilities of the front camera on users’ phones, Snapchat’s AR empowers cultural institutions to offer interactive and immersive encounters with history and art. This innovative approach not only adds depth to museum displays but also enables visitors to engage with artifacts in unprecedented ways.

While the Elgin Marbles controversy remains a complex diplomatic issue, AR technology presents a promising avenue for bridging cultural divides and fostering understanding. Through AR-enhanced exhibitions, audiences around the world can virtually explore and appreciate the historical significance of these artifacts — a significant step toward a more inclusive approach to preserving and celebrating our shared cultural heritage.

FAQ

What is augmented reality (AR)?

Augmented reality (AR) is a technology that overlays digital information, such as virtual objects or data, onto the real world. It enhances the user’s perception and interaction with their environment, blending virtual elements with the physical world.

How does Snapchat’s AR work?

Snapchat’s AR technology operates through the use of the smartphone’s camera. It recognizes the user’s surroundings and can place virtual objects, effects, or filters onto the real-world view displayed on the screen. This allows users to interact with virtual content and explore creative possibilities in their everyday surroundings.

Can AR technology resolve diplomatic disputes over cultural artifacts?

While AR technology cannot solve diplomatic disputes directly, it has the potential to facilitate a deeper understanding and appreciation of cultural artifacts. By virtually showcasing these treasures and making them accessible to a wider audience, AR technology promotes cultural exchange and encourages dialogue between countries involved in such disputes.

Title:

Content: The traumatic legacy of British colonialism lingers in Kenya to this day, and this is why Kenyans were demanding an apology from King Charles.

By Rasna Warah

Many British people are surprised that King Charles’s visit to Kenya was not welcomed by many Kenyans and human rights organizations. People whose families had suffered at the hands of British colonialists during his mother’s reign demanded an apology for crimes committed. Although the British monarch expressed “deepest regret” for the atrocities committed by the British in Kenya, he fell short of making a public apology.

However, many Brits believe that there is nothing the king needed to apologize for. One presenter on Sky News even wondered why Kenyans were calling for an apology from the king given that Britain had done much “good” in the country. After all, he said, without any hint of irony, the British Empire had brought democracy to Kenya (how he equated imperialism with democracy beats me) and given Kenyans “the gift of the English language”.

It was obvious that the presenter had been taught British imperial history, that has whitewashed the atrocities that the British Empire committed in its colonies around the world. British children are to this day taught that British colonialism was a “civilizing mission” that brought modern education and infrastructure, in addition to Christianity, to regions that were steeped in ignorance and backwardness.

Apologists for the British Empire, such as the historian Niall Ferguson, author of Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World, argue that Britain should be congratulated for conquering the world because British civilization brought science and technology to people who held superstitious beliefs and injected a “work ethic” in populations that were lazy and lacking in imagination.

This is sort of like saying that slave owners did slaves a favor by shipping them to the Americas and forcing them to work for free because these slaves are now US citizens and enjoy all that America has to offer (even though it took them four centuries to gain rights as equal citizens).

A few months ago, the editor of a German magazine contacted me to ask whether I could submit an article on the atrocities the British had committed in Kenya during colonialism.

He told me that while his magazine had documented human rights violations by German and Belgian colonialists in places like Namibia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, it had largely ignored the violations committed by Britain in places like Kenya because the majority of Germans believed that British colonialism was not as brutal as that of other European powers and that its net impact on its colonies in Africa had been positive. It dawned on me that perhaps Europeans are not being told the true story about colonialism and its horrific impact on Africans. So, here’s the primer.

Erasure of memory

Kenya officially became a British colony in 1920, but prior to that, from 1895, it was deemed a “protectorate” – a term suggesting that the colonizers who grabbed the land were there to protect the interests of the “natives” who would benefit from being colonized.

A widely held belief is that because Britain spearheaded the abolition of slavery, the British were “benevolent” colonizers, unlike the French and the Belgians who plundered and looted their African colonies. (In addition to extracting raw materials and exporting items such as ivory and rubber, the French and the Belgians also stole invaluable artefacts from their colonies in West and Central Africa, which today are displayed in museums across Europe, including in Britain, despite efforts by African governments to have these artefacts returned to where they were stolen from.)

Yet, those who care to join the dots between the anti-slavery movement and the colonization of Africa are acutely aware of the fact that the Berlin Conference of 1884-85 (dubbed the “Scramble for Africa”) that carved up Africa among European nations, including Britain, took place just a few years after slavery ended. Because slavery was no longer legal and was costly to maintain, the only other way Europeans could extract cheap labor and highly profitable resources from Africa was by colonizing the continent.

In order to justify colonization in settler colonies like Kenya and Zimbabwe (formerly known as Rhodesia), it was necessary to erase evidence of atrocities committed by the Europeans. Many of these atrocities remained unacknowledged and unreported for decades because archival documents were either destroyed or deliberately concealed.

British historian David M. Anderson, author of Histories of the Hanged: The Dirty War in Kenya, discovered that thousands of documents belonging to the British colonial administration were flown to London in 1963 on the eve of Kenya’s independence and remained hidden from the public for decades, despite attempts by successive post-independence Kenyan governments to have these “stolen papers” returned to Kenya.

The magnitude of these atrocities was finally revealed in 2005 when the Harvard historian Caroline Elkins’ book, Britain’s Gulag: The Brutal End of Empire in Kenya, was published. The book documents the many crimes that British colonial officers committed in Kenya in their relentless pursuit of wealth, land and power for themselves and in the name of the British Empire. Mau Mau fighters and their supporters were subjected to extreme forms of torture, including castration, whipping, waterboarding and electric shocks.

The areas where these Mau Mau revolutionaries were arrested, detained, tortured, or killed in the 1950s were in and around the Aberdares mountain range in Central Kenya, where Queen Elizabeth, during an official visit to Kenya, ascended to the throne after the death of her father, King George VI, in February 1952.

Eight months after she became Queen of England and head of the British Empire, a state of emergency was declared in Kenya that allowed the British Colonial Office to detain people without trial. Many freedom fighters languished in camps or jails where they were subjected to torture.

Mau Mau fighters and their supporters were subjected to extreme forms of torture, including castration, whipping, waterboarding and electric shocks.

The Mau Mau rebellion was a reaction to the expropriation of some 7 million acres of the most fertile land in Central Kenya and the Rift Valley—dubbed the White Highlands—in the early part of the 20th century after the building of the Uganda Railway, which opened up the interior of East Africa for British colonization and settlement. The indigenous population was pushed into so-called reserves while others became squatters on land that was once theirs, working for white farmers for very little wages.

Elkins estimates that between 160,000 and 320,000 detainees, mostly from the Kikuyu, Meru and Embu ethnic groups, were tortured or maimed by the British at the height of the Mau Mau rebellion in the 1950s, although official figures state that the number of detainees was no more than 80,000. It is estimated that more than 20,000 Mau Mau militants were killed.

Further, more than a million people, mainly in central Kenya, were detained in camps or confined in villages known as “reserves” (which have been described as “concentration camps”) surrounded by barbed wire. Tens of thousands of people held in these dense and unsanitary guarded camps and villages died from hunger or disease.

To justify these atrocities, British officials painted the Mau Mau as savage “terrorists” because of the violent and brutal methods they used to hunt down and kill white settlers and local informers. Official figures show that Mau Mau fighters killed 32 British settlers and 1,819 indigenous people whom they believed to be spies for the British.

Today what the British Empire did in Kenya might be perceived as a form of ethnic cleansing, but because colonization was not unfashionable then, the atrocities were not condemned, nor was anyone tried. It was only in 2011, during a landmark court case brought against the British by a group of Mau Mau veterans, that the British government, under legal pressure, admitted that the documents were in a high-security facility that also contained files from 36 other former British colonies.

(In 2013, 5,228 Mau Mau veterans were awarded £20 million in compensation by a UK court, which amounts to roughly £3,000 per victim, a paltry sum given the suffering they endured.) One of these documents contained details of eight colonial officers stationed in Kenya “roasting detainees alive”. All of the accused officers were granted amnesty.

Official amnesia

Official amnesia and disinformation were not just part of a deliberate campaign by the British Empire to whitewash the crimes it committed in its colonies in Africa and elsewhere, but also a strategy employed by post-colonial governments in Kenya to cloak their own complicity in ensuring that the British interests in the country were preserved.

Post-independence Kenyan elites benefitted from colonial policies that alienated Africans from their own land and became the biggest beneficiaries of post-independence land grabs disguised as land redistribution or adjudication. After independence, the so-called home guards or loyalists became the biggest beneficiaries of land and political power. According to Kenya’s 2013 Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission report, “Rich businessmen and businesswomen, rich and powerful politicians who were loyal to the colonial administration, managed to acquire thousands of acres at the expense of the poor and the landless.”

Hence, “instead of redressing land-related injustices perpetrated by the colonialists on Africans, the resettlement process created a privileged class of African elites, leaving those who had suffered land alienation either on tiny unproductive pieces of land or landless.” Even today in Kenya, members of freedom-fighting movements like the Mau Mau remain landless and poverty-stricken while those who sided with the colonialists are among the richest people in the land.

After independence, the so-called home guards or loyalists became the biggest beneficiaries of land and political power.

The Mau Mau remained a proscribed organization for four decades after independence. It was only in 2003, when Mwai Kibaki became president, that the Mau Mau were recognized for the role they had played in Kenya’s struggle for independence. Kenyatta Day on October 20 was renamed Mashujaa Day (Heroes Day) to commemorate all those who died while fighting for freedom.

In 2007, a statue of Dedan Kimathi was erected in Nairobi’s central business district, and in 2015, following the 2013 UK court decision to compensate Mau Mau veterans, the British government put up a Mau Mau memorial sculpture in Nairobi’s Uhuru Park “as a symbol of reconciliation between the British government, the Mau Mau and all those who suffered”.

Despite these symbols of reconciliation and healing, the traumatic legacy of British colonialism lingers in Kenya to this day. This is why Kenyans were demanding an apology from the King – because the wounds have not yet healed. While a public apology might not have been enough to completely heal the wounds and traumas of the past, it would have been an important first step.

About Rasna Warah

Rasna Warah is a Kenyan writer and journalist. In a previous incarnation, she was an editor at the United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-Habitat). She has published two books on Somalia – War Crimes (2014) and Mogadishu Then and Now (2012) – and is the author of UN-silenced (2016), and Triple Heritage (1998).

Title:

Content: After a long court battle with a well-known art dealer from Britain, Greece's valuable artefacts are finally returning home. As many as 351 rare statues had been found in the possession of British art dealer Robin Symes. The objects were first traced to Symes back in 2006 and since then the country has been fighting to get them back to their territory.

It took 17 years, but finally, the artefacts are returning to Greece. Most of the artefacts are from the Neolithic era and the Byzantine era, however, some are from in between. Of these, the most important one is a statue of Alexander the Great. The statue is entirely made of bronze and dates back to the 2nd century.

History of plundering and supplying to museums

Robin Symes has been accused of plundering antiquities from countries like Italy, Greece etc for decades. Symes has been linked to looting artefacts from excavations in countries like Italy and Greece in the 70s and 80s. In fact, Symes has been served a prison sentence over his illegal sale of an Egyptian statue worth £3 million in 2005.

He has been known to gather antiquities from these companies and sell them for display in the best museums in the world. There isn't any estimate of how much his looted items from the 70s Italy expedition are worth, says the Association for Research into Crimes Against Art (ARCA). Known to the world's leading art curators and having served as a trustee to the British Museum, Symes formed a powerful network that had access to antiquities in Egypt, Greece, Italy and Asia.

The fight to recover the assets

As such the Greek authorities started investigating Symes' company to repatriate the items including a Neolithic statuette from the fourth century BC. They were chased by the Greek, Swiss, and Italian Police.

In 2016, the Swiss and the Italian team could nab some of the archaeological artefacts from Robin Symes and his company after years of work. All these artefacts were from illegal excavations in Italy. The police tracked the stolen Italian artefacts to a storage unit in Geneva Freeport.

As for the Greek artefact, it's not clear if they came from the same haul or whether it has any link to Italian excavations and artefacts. In the Greek collection, the 4th century BC white stone Neolithic era statuette has been found.

Other missing valuable items from Greece have been also found. The list includes a 3200-2700 BC early Cycladic figure, a 550-500 BC archaic sculpture made of marble, and another 550-500 BC archaic marble head probably from a sphinx or a sculpture.

Other Greek artefacts waiting for recovery

The Greek government has been trying to recover these artefacts from private collectors and museums worldwide. The process has been strenuous legal battles. Only recently, the Vatican returned fragments of the Parthenon temple.

The act of returning the three fragments to Greece in March this year was labelled a "gesture of friendship" by Pope Francis. Even today, many of the Parthenon's temple fragments are in the most prestigious museums in the world, most famously the Elgin marbles in the British Museum.

Title:

Content: African nations want their stolen history back, and experts say it's time to speed up the process

Johannesburg — Much of Africa's cultural treasure was looted during colonial times and has remained in museums and private collections in Europe and North America ever since. For the last few decades, however, African nations have been asking for the stolen treasures to be returned.

Last week, 39 artifacts were formally handed back to the government of Uganda by Britain's famed University of Cambridge. While the return is technically a three-year loan between museums, it is extendable, and could see them remain in their country of origin.

Martin Mugarra, the minister of tourism, said that while many important artifacts remain overseas, it was still a significant return of cultural objects. In a social media post, he said the process to get the pieces back started in 2016 under the "rethinking Uganda Museum" project, in collaboration with the University of Michigan.

"These invaluable pieces were taken from Uganda during the 1890s and early 1900s by British colonial administrators, anthropologists, missionaries and soldiers," he said.

The pieces had been kept at the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology at Cambridge for more than 100 years. The collection includes human remains taken from the Wamala tombs, a headdress made of human hair and a traditional Bunyoro drum.

Ugandan heritage specialists say the pieces will be acclimated to Ugandan conditions before being put on display in 2025 or 2026.

Restitution remains a common issue for many African governments and communities. More and more are seeking accountability and the return of items of cultural value looted either before or during colonial rule.

In April, the popular Victoria and Albert Museum in London loaned 32 artifacts that were taken from what is now Ghana more than 150 years ago back to the country's current king. The objects were stolen from the court of the Asante king during conflicts between his people and British soldiers.

A gold peace pipe, a sword and other significant pieces were returned, again on a long-term loan from the museum to the king. In the Asante culture, the gold artifacts are believed to be invested with the spirit of former kings, so the return of the treasures was described as the return of "the soul of the people."

Why are artifacts loaned and not just returned?

In February, the Fowler Museum at the University of California, Los Angeles permanently returned seven looted objects to the Asante people in Ghana. In a statement issued at the time, the museum's management said they considered themselves "temporary custodians of the objects in our collection."

"In the case of pieces that were violently or coercively taken from their original owners or communities, it is our ethical responsibility to do what we can to return those objects," said Erica Jones, the senior curator of African arts and manager of curatorial affairs at the Fowler Museum.

The collections in many European museums tend to be owned by the state, however, with laws in place to govern their care — and in many cases, bar them from being removed, even to return to original owners, which is referred to as deaccessioning. To permanently give back contested antiquities from their collections, those countries would need to change their laws.

A 1963 law bans the British Museum in London from removing an artifact from its collection unless it is a duplicate, is damaged or is deemed "unfit" for the collection.

The National Heritage Act of 1983 prevents the V&A from legally returning its artifacts.

More museums in the United States are privately owned, with the notable exception of those run by the state-owned Smithsonian Institution. That means institutions like the Fowler Museum can more easily and quickly repatriate artifacts back to their original owners.

"I agree that in order to maintain public trust in museums, deaccessioning should not be taken lightly," Ngaire Blankenberg, a museum specialist with the Creative Repair Studio and the former director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African Art, told CBS News.

She added, however, that "where there is will, legislation can be changed."

"Most of the laws prohibiting restitution were enacted long after the work in question was taken, or in some cases, in order to justify criminal activity," Blankenberg said. "If a law can be made only in 1983, for example, there surely is a mechanism to repeal or amend it in 2024?"

Within a few weeks of her arrival at NMAFA in Washington D.C., Blankenberg launched the process to hand back Benin bronzes that had long been in the museum's collection.

"As an African, it is personally offensive to see looted African work displayed as a trophy, even if the text below it acknowledges the circumstances of its removal from its source," she said. "So, I immediately took them off display and began a conversation with the Nigerian Commission of Museum and Monuments about what they would like to do with the Bronzes. They indicated they wanted them back, and so began the process."

"It's not just a question of ownership"

How contested artifacts are displayed is an issue unto itself.

There are tens of thousands of African artifacts spread across the Western world, most of which are unlikely to be returned anytime soon given the slow pace of deaccessioning thus far.

Blankenberg said it was important for museums and galleries to consider how such works are displayed, including whether there are accompanying explanations of why ownership is contested, and what words are used to describe them and their significance.

"It's not just a question of ownership, but spiritual significance," she said. "In some cases, what are referred to as 'inanimate objects' described only by the material they are made with, are in fact considered living beings or 'with spirit' by their societies of origin. Using eurocentric reference points robs these works of their context and meaning and results in misunderstandings, assumptions and stereotypes about the cultures they originate from. So the issue is not only about who owns these, but also who gets to decide who sees them, how they are displayed, how they are documented and the role they play in our understanding of the world."

Looted artifacts have been controversial for decades, but many museums in the West might not exist in their current forms if it wasn't for these collections.

While countless researchers, conservators, registrars, scholars, administrators and curators have built their careers on their expertise in managing these collections, African institutions and scholars suffer from a chronic lack of resources and often need to go to the West to access work from their own cultures.

"We need to recognize not just the harm of the original theft, but the ongoing harm that depriving cultures of their masterpieces, their spiritual guides, their cultural icons does to a people. What has undoubtedly added value to Western museums, has been to the detriment of African societies and scholarship," Blankenberg said.

Moving forward to make amends for the past

There is a growing movement among antiquities experts, who feel reparative restitution must include more than just a handover, and incorporate an acknowledgement of the harm that's been done as well as financial reparations in the form of money and other resources.

They believe fundamental apologies are also warranted, along with commitments to never repeat the crimes of the past.

As the Ugandan art returned last week is studied and prepared to be put on display back on its home soil next year, experts in the field agree it should not be seen as an end, but the beginning.

Blankenberg and others hope there's an opportunity to start building strong, sustainable, well-resourced institutions in Africa to rebalance the relationship between African art and knowledge and the continent's former colonizers.

Molemo Moiloa is the co-founder of Open Restitution Africa, which is looking at the restitution process and gives small grants across the continent to activists and other researchers involved in returning artifacts to their rightful owners.

The group compiled a report in 2022 that did show "a massive shift in the discourse and action — but this is only from a zero base, a total refusal, disengagement, up to now," Moiloa told CBS News.

"We are just starting to see policy developments in practice, and people acknowledging that there is a need for return, but not actually returning it yet," she said, noting that experts estimate as much as 90% of Africa's cultural and historical material has been held outside the continent for hundreds of years.

The decision to return artifacts currently depends entirely on the leadership of Western museums and their owners.

"Africans need to be given the resources to deal with returns, and ultimately allowed to be in charge of every aspect of the decision making," said Moiloa.

"What we have found is that many museums have many African art pieces in storage, and as they open new wings or put work out on public display it creates a certain visibility that then requires accountability," she said. "It's just one step in a conversation; where many museums see the opening of a wing as the end, it should be seen as an opening to the public for a conversation — a transparent engagement with what is in their collections, and that could lead to what Africans want back."

Several recent visits to the continent by Max Hollein, from the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, and Emmanuel Kasarherou, from the Quai Branly Museum in Paris, were taken as potential good signs of a new approach toward Africa.

It might be an indication that France, for example, will make good on the promise issued by President Emmanuel Macron in 2018 to repatriate all African artifacts held in French museums.

Artifacts being returned to their home countries on loan is, in the end, just an exercise in diplomacy. The real test will be what happens next.

Will the hundreds, if not thousands of contested works from Africa in the Quai Branly actually find their way back home? How will the Met deal with the contested works in its collection when it opens its new gallery of African art next year?

"We need to go beyond lip service and see some concrete and speedy action," said Blankenberg.

View CBS News In
CBS News App Open
Chrome Safari Continue
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.

Title:

Content: / 8 Jul 2023

Arts fest is duct-tape for our broken times

Msaki performed a series of concerts at the festival. (Photo by Gallo Images/Oupa Bopape)

These are anxious and broken times. An epoch when democracies are failing people, who are failing each other, as we withdraw further into personal digital sarcophaguses.

Fascism and populism are surging, while the left dithers. Inequality is untrammelled in South Africa and an entire generation of children who never knew apartheid appear set never to know human dignity, equality, a healthy living environment or an education, which would enable them to fulfil their human potential.

That much was clear in Makhanda during the 10 days of the National Arts Festival which concluded on 2 July. It was obvious on the streets, where beggars and car guards clamoured around punters more than usual and the material dysfunction was plain to see. And on the stage and in galleries, where artists explored the past, and grappled with the present, to find solutions and provocations for the future.

That our unreconciled past poisons the water of our present was clear in Droomwerk, a play written by Pieter Odendaal, which explores the secret mixed-race history of his family, whose bloodline includes that of a slave, Diana of Madagascar.

A feverish production accentuated by on-point sound design and composition by Jannous Aukema, Droomwerk exposes the “original lie” of South Africa’s democracy — we are not a “Rainbow Nation” burnished by listening and negotiating. Instead, we are a country where truth is never reconciled and secrets and skeletons are conveniently buried in silence.

There is a violence in that silence. One that causes intergenerational haunting as the young, strung-out Odendaal observes while in a psychiatric hospital: “The black dog won’t let me go.”

For South Africans, this is as much the black dog of all the Truth and Reconciliation Commission cases that were deemed prosecutable but never were, as it is about the quiet continuation of the socio-economic apartheid reality, under which the impoverishment of black people has only worsened.

Our histories, whether destroyed, omitted or revised to fit colonial and apartheid historiographies, was the focus for three of the Standard Bank Young Artists: Msaki (for music), Koleka Putuma (for poetry) and Lady Skollie (visual arts).

Both Msaki, who performed a series of concerts, and Putuma made forays into the fine art gallery space where they explored indigenous knowledge, plants and rituals to reinsert marginalised or forgotten histories into the present. This is a phenomenon that has gained momentum in decolonial and environmental spheres.

Lady Skollie’s Groot Gat exhibition at the Gallery in the Round addressed the erasure of Bushman paintings and consequent “holes” in history — personal and national — through a series of drawings. Three of these drawings were also projected onto a “cave” in the gallery space, releasing them into a new sense of life.

Beautifully rendered, the exhibition was an evocation of the supernatural, of motherhood (of knowledge, history and future generations), folklore and a culture too easily dismissed as primitive.

According to the artist’s statement the works were “deeply inspired” by the Bushman artist Coex’ae Qgam or Dada: “Qgam’s paintings were a powerful expression of his people’s connection to the land, their spiritual beliefs, and their daily lives.”

From the past and into the present … with a shudder and Text Me When You Arrive. Written and performed by Aaliyah Matintela, Thulisile Nduvane and Sibahle Mangena, the play is an excoriating take-down of South African men and the society that produces abusers and murderers of women.

The actors went through a list of things women need to do every day to avoid being raped. These included “embracing the cat-calling when you walk down the streets of Mzansi”, “never say no when he wants it” and “never leave your drink unattended” when you are in a bar or club.

The irony and satire was searing as the trio weaved banal yet perilous everyday experiences, such as taking taxis to work and being hit on by passers-by and drivers or going to a government clinic for the morning-after pill only to encounter sanctimonious conservatism, to expose the country’s entrenched rape culture.

Matintela, Nduyane and Mangena performed formidably, especially when capturing the leery swagger and menace of men on the streets, whether in Joburg or Lephalale.

All three performers were energetic but maintained perfect timing to ensure the satirical punches in the script landed. People laughed without losing sight of the abhorrent reality of the subject matter. The acting was pitch-perfect.

For the reasons behind our failures to transform men who break women, the unequal economic landscape, our traumatised national psyche, land ownership, the imaginations and dreams of South Africans and even just to provide the basics such as running water and electricity to people, look no further than the play Khongolose Khommanding Khomissars (KKK).

KKK is a political satire written by 2020 Standard Bank Young Artist for Theatre, Jefferson Bobs Tshabalala and directed by The Theatre Duo (the 2023 Standard Bank Young Artists for Theatre Billy Langa and Mahlatsi Mokgonyana).

The hilarious script uses wordplay, puns and rhyming couplets that are almost Shakespearean in their farcical tragedy, to poke fun at the political elite’s penchant for opaque, obsequious, dogmatic and bombastic language that is more long-winded than one of Mineral Resources and Energy Minister Gwede Mantashe’s farts during a study group on renewables.

The premise is simple. Three members of a political party that was “the rain that washed away the hail of subjugation to usher in the new Rainbow Nation” (yes, a thinly veiled reference to the governing ANC) are scrambling to ensure an overzealous investigator does not expose their syphoning of millions from a national government department.

Through the tried and tested method of “Bribe. Blackmail. Threaten”, the trio co-opt a young upstart, Mr Hako, into their lives of “just a little bit more” fine whiskey, overseas travel and opulent consumerism.

As Mr Nxumalo, the head kleptocrat (“Honourable Chairperson/ Distinguished Head of Operations/ Leader of Leaders/ Leader of Leaders Leading the Leadership/ Top Mtshana wabaShana etc”) observes: “Everyone has a price, Mr Hoko, a secret to hide, or a debt to settle.”

The piece was side-splittingly funny but a razor-sharp reminder of how easily and quickly corruption can be normalised in society and how easily people can be turned.

Corruption in South Africa is ubiquitous, from unionist teachers selling positions at schools to hospital clerks controlling nursing appointments in government facilities.

As described by former deputy chief justice Dikgang Moseneke and constitutional court justice Edwin Cameron in their minority dissent in the apex court’s first Glenister judgment, “corruption in the polity corrodes the rights to equality, human dignity, freedom, security of the person and various socio-economic rights”. These are being starkly felt by the majority of South Africa’s citizens.

But as jazz drummer Kesivan Naidoo observed during a roaring big band performance (during which he punished the drums as per usual) to close the Jazz Festival (which has had to be especially nimble following a second year without sponsorship from Standard Bank — an achingly sad decision for audiences): “We are all in this together.”

A point to remember when the young protagonist in The King of Broken Things, a wondrous, unfiltered savant inventor-restorer yet to reach teenagehood reflects on a sentiment heard on the radio: “We can’t fix the country, it’s broken.

“Why would one say that? The land is still here. The people are still here,” observes the young boy who, mindful of kasa-obake (Japanese folklore about old umbrellas returning as ghosts after a century), believes it is worth it to fix things and to carry on, especially “with the scars to show what we have been through”.

The King of Broken Things, which won a Gold Ovation Award at the festival, takes a poignant approach to being broken in a one-hander full of wonderment. Material things, metaphorical hearts, a discarded flask which is transformed into a vase and a magical cape made with “light” words (such as “believe” and “dream”) are just some of the things the young protagonist considers as he longs for a father he hopes will return.

Cara Roberts delivered a gripping performance as the pre-teen boy in a production that was carefully staged, and smartly written by director Michael Taylor-Broderick.

Certainly, life is never simple. And people are full of contradictions and hypocrisies. This was made plain in the consummate staging and performance of Hold Still, winner of the Fleur du Cap Best New SA Script and Best Actress awards.

A play written by Nadia Davids and directed by Jay Pather, it focuses on the choices a London couple have to make when their teenage son harbours a Pakistani friend who the courts have decided must be returned home.

Ben (Andrew Buckland) is a journalist whose grandfather escaped the Nazi concentration camps; Rosa (Mwenya Kabwe) is the daughter of South Africans exiled during apartheid. The couple pride themselves on their leftwing credentials but soon fractures start to appear in their relationship and who they purport to be.

Do they pay the young boy to disappear or do they turn him in with “faith in the system” that he will be taken care of?

The latter “optimism” in the system is denounced by the young Pakistani, Imraan (Tailyn Ramsamy) as “your privilege”. Later, when he confronts them about their hypocrisies, the couple recount the kindness they have shown him over the years, even paying for his new sneakers and considering him “part of the family”.

“You have had nothing but kindness from us,” they bleat. “That is the lie,” Imraan observes. “The kindness.”

There was a blur of excellence over the festival. The choreographer and dancer Gregory Maqoma swirling and floating on the NAF stage in Exit/Exist for what is likely to be the last time. Swiss artist Simon Senn’s thought-provoking and sensitive reflection on the use (and ethics) of the 3D rendering of humans, available for sale online, in what was part-lecture, part augmented-reality experience and part dance performance.

However, there were duds too.

Sitting in the Village Green on Sunday afternoon, the inevitability of the end of the National Arts Festival was writ large on chalkboards of the food outlets. One by one, menu items such as the local Rotary Club’s famous kudu burger were struck out. No longer available. Nothing more to sell. Not until next year.

It felt much like humankind’s menu for the future: climate change dead- lines passed and crossed out; politi- cal options diminishing like pizza choices; another mining-affected community’s agency crossed off by a state in cahoots with traditional authorities and multinationals…

What is to be done? A nagging question. Maybe part of that answer can be found in the anxiety of the young protagonist in The King of Broken Things who is afraid to grow up and lose his sense of awe about the world: “I am worried that things will look different when I am older and I wouldn’t recognise them.”

Kesivan Naidoo’s Big Band will perform at the Star Theatre in Cape Town tonight at 7.30pm and in Johannesburg at the Market Theatre on 8 July at 7pm. Tickets at Quicket.

Title:

Content: Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Greek prime minister tries to broker deal for return of Parthenon marbles

Kyriakos Mitsotakis offers to loan Greek treasures to British Museum if ‘stolen’ sculptures are returned to Acropolis

The Greek prime minister has demanded that the 2,500-year-old Parthenon marbles, which he accuses Britain of stealing, be returned to Greece, and even offered to loan some of his country’s treasures to the British Museum in an attempt to broker a deal.

Kyriakos Mitsotakis told the Daily Telegraph that the sculptures, also known as the Elgin marbles, belong in the Acropolis Museum in Athens.

However, Boris Johnson has previously ruled out returning them on the grounds that they were acquired legally.

Mitsotakis said: “Our position is very clear. The marbles were stolen in the 19th century; they belong in the Acropolis Museum and we need to discuss this issue in earnest.

“I am sure that if there was a willingness on the part of the government to move we could find an arrangement with the British Museum in terms of us sending abroad cultural treasures on loan, which have never left the country.”

The marbles were removed from the Acropolis more than 200 years ago by Lord Elgin in circumstances that have spurred one of the world’s most famous cultural rows and have long been the subject of dispute.

Mitsotakis said he would raise the issue with Johnson when the two meet next week for talks that could shape future relations between the two countries.

“Refusing to discuss the topic seems to me, given the context of everything that has been happening in terms of the return of cultural treasures, to be rather an anachronistic approach,” he added.

“It would be a fantastic statement by what Boris calls Global Britain if they were to move on this and look at it through a completely different lens.”

But Johnson dismissed the appeal for their return to Greece earlier this year, telling the Greek newspaper Ta Nea: “I understand the strong feelings of the Greek people – and indeed prime minister Mitsotakis – on the issue.

“But the UK government has a firm, longstanding position on the sculptures, which is that they were legally acquired by Lord Elgin under the appropriate laws of the time and have been legally owned by the British Museum’s trustees since their acquisition.”

Greece has long called for the reunification of the sculptures, displayed in museums across Europe but mostly in London, and says it is integral to understanding the artworks in the context of the Acropolis.