Talk:Elgin Marbles/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Name

Hello all

I’ve moved this section to the beginning where is logically belongs. The previous version was recently added and wasn’t supported by the sources. Happy to discuss. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 09:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I think the confusion is because, for better or worse, the term "Parthenon marbles" is now used in the press as a more "politically correct" term for the totality of the "Elgin marbles", even though this term is of course inaccurate. The position of the Greek government is that the entirety of the objects taken by Elgin from the Acropolis was obtained illegally and thus does not recognise the British Museum's claim to own any of those, including things taken from the other temples, e.g. the Karyatid taken from the Erectheion, and it fully expects this to also be returned. I don't think the source for the Greek government position should be the British Museum's website! 94.66.58.52 (talk) 10:32, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Do you have a good source stating explicitly that the Greek government wants all the things taken by Elgin returned? (Better than a newspaper.) I remember reading a Greek statement somewhere that they weren't concerned about some specific minor pieces. But I couldn't find it. I looked on the UNESCO website but I couldn't find a document giving the specifics of the Greek claim. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 11:19, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

This is a reference to the general clear legal position from the website of the ministry of culture: https://www.culture.gov.gr/el/Information/SitePages/view.aspx?nID=4460

"We repeat once again the fixed position of our country that it does not recognise the British museum's control, possession or legal ownership of the sculptures because they are the object of theft." Again, the phrase "the Sculptures" is to be understood as meaning the "Elgin marbles", as this is always the usage in Greek officialdom, and it is clear that the legal position could never be that those objects from the Parthenon were stolen but those from the Erechtheion, say, were not. In any case, my comments were more on the legal position, not on whatever agreement will be reached. One can certainly imagine an agreement, for instance, that would allow some of the sculptures not associated with the Parthenon metopes or frieze to remain in London as a loan from Greece to the UK. 94.66.58.52 (talk) 11:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

My goodness, that statement was harsher on the Greek opposition than on the British! The problem is that politicians say one thing for public consumption and another thing in private. I will hunt around for a more considered statement of the official Greek position. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 11:51, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Rationales for return to Athens or retaining in London

Hello all

I have tried to reduce this to the key current arguments used by informed participants in the current controversy. I have removed a number of “arguments” which were outdated, fringe, or simply variations on a theme. I’ve used more neutral language. I’ve added a few new ones which are doing the rounds and have summarised arguments scattered throughout the article here. I think a list of key arguments is a good idea to avoid tedious to-ing and fro-ing and point scoring. I think I’ve covered the key sensible arguments, but would be happy for suggestions about anything I’ve missed. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 09:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

In general I think shortening this was good, but I have one point: Historically, many of the arguments for retaining the sculptures in London would today be considered racist. We would not consider these to be "sensible" arugments, but they are arguments that have been put forth (and even still appear in the conservative British press) and I would think they should still appear prominently as arguments for the retention of the sculptures in London so the nature of the actual debate is clear, not censored by what we might think are actually sensible arguments. 94.66.58.52 (talk) 10:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't think the racist arguments are so prominent nowadays, and I don't think we should give them oxygen here. Each side has its lunatic fringe and some of the statements from Greeks have been pretty bad too. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 11:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I think there's a difference between POV and trying to keep equal distances between two sides whatever the merits of the case. One should remember that there is a clear majority in favour of reunification even in the UK. If one looks internationally, it's not even close. I think many arguments on the Greek side were put forth in an unsophisticated way, not surprising for a small country in a previous era, but there's a big difference between that and the historic racism of the British Museum side, which they themselves are trying to distance themselves from, but which one still sees, thankfully now more restricted to the fringe, in a segment of the British press. I still think that the racist aspect of the discussion is historically one of the most interesting, and, when the sculptures are finally back in Athens (as I believe they will be!), I think this is probably what will be remembered most. So, I think for historical purposes, it is important for these arguments to be documented. But that's just my view and I don't want to impose it. 94.66.58.52 (talk) 11:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Return controversy

I’ve renamed this section because it is a international controversy rather than a polite debate. I’ve added a subsection “Greek requests for return“ to put the controversy and following information into context and have moved relevant information scattered throughout the article to this section. Happy to discuss. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 09:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Aemilius Adolphin, I'm glad you've stepped in to try and sort out the battleground that this article has been made over time with its WP:UNDUE emphasis on the present return controvery. In my view, what was badly needed was a seperate article just on that, leaving the originally named article on the Elgin Marbles to perform its encyclopedic function of describing contents and history. The only trouble was that such a proposal was bound to be controversial and would probably have needed a prolonged internal discussion beforehand. With some kind of solution probably imminent, perhaps your approach is better for the moment. My only regret is that the talk page has proliferated into multiple headings, allowing biased ideologues like 94.66.58.52 to wear down the opposition with the repetition of their blinkered views, when what is required is a clear focus. Sweetpool50 (talk) 16:47, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Parthenon Marbles / Elgin Marbles conflation

The introductory section of this article, including the caption of the main photograph and "location" field, is really confusing and quite misleading, because it continuously conflates the "Elgin" marbles and the "Parthenon" Marbles. As I understand it, the former refers to those sculptures in the British Museum, while the latter refers to those dispersed among that institution and others, including the New Acropolis Museum. Therefore statements like "Elgin Marbles - Parthenon Marbles ... Location: British Museum" are inaccurate. Is there a way to tidy this up? Lt1896 (talk) 22:41, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it's confusing. I tried to clarify matters in the "Name" section but haven't yet had the change to go through the entire article and apply the names consistently. In brief, the Elgin Marbles refers to all the artefacts from the Elgin Collection including those not from the Parthenon. The British Museum uses the term Parthenon Sculptures more accurately to refer to those sculptures which are specifically from the Parthenon where ever they may be held. The Greek government and its supporters often uses the term Parthenon Sculptures inaccurately to refer to all the sculptures from the Acropolis. I don't think anyone uses the term Parthenon Marbles anymore, and I think we can safely remove it from the article. The names are a political issue as well so in order to get a consensus I would suggest labelling anything from the Elgin collection which is a sculpture from the Parthenon "Elgin Marbles (Parthenon Sculptures)". Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 02:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I made a few changes over the last couple of days which I think help with disambiguation, but there is definitely room for improvement. Let's see how it goes. Lt1896 (talk) 11:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

The lead certainly reads much better now thanks to your edits, and your other changes look good. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 12:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Legality of removal

Hello all

I have summarised this section because it was difficult to read, overly-detailed and contained too much tangential information. I have added some new material with improved sources. I believe I have retained the key legal points raised by scholarly commentators, but please let me know if you think I have missed anything important. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 04:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I have just moved some information on the February 1816 House of Commons Select Committee from the "Contemporary Reactions" section to this section where it more logically belongs. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 05:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Explanation Edit undone

I undid an edit that removed new text and citation of a book dedicated to the topic of the Elgin marbles. It seems to me more appropriate to cite a book on the Elgin Marbles, than a couple of short articles. Hominid000 (talk) 16:19, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Scholarly articles in peer reviewed journals are reliable sources and there is no need to replace them with a book making the same point. My other concern is that at least three users have registered in the last day in order to cite works by Catharine Titi in various articles. Most weren't properly cited (no page numbers) and, like your one, didn't improve the article. Please note that if you are Catharine Titi or in any way associated with her or her works you should abide by the conflict of interest policy. Wikipedia should not be used to promote authors or their works. This also applies to @David78678 and @Dannyboy234990 Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 22:29, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Further reading

Further reading suggestion: Catharine Titi, The Parthenon Marbles and International Law, Springer, 2023 ISBN: 978-3-031-26356-9 David678678 (talk) 19:52, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

This book is already in the further reading section. Please also see the discussion below. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 22:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Recent citations of Catharine Titi book

There has been a spate of newly registered accounts whose only apparent purpose is to add citations to a new book by the Greek academic Catharine Titi (which is already listed in the article). There is nothing wrong with this as long as the added material improves the article and the multiple new accounts don't belong to the author or anyone associated with the book. Unfortunately, almost all the added material so far lacks full citations (eg page references) and doesn't add anything to points which are already adequately supported by citations to reliable sources. I ask newly registered editors to carefully read the guidelines on conflict of interest and single purpose accounts before adding material. @David78678 and @Dannyboy234990 @Levant2trio @Hominid000 Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 10:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Title should be changed to Parthenon sculptures

the title 'Elgin marbles' is controversial and insulting for many people and scholars. According to most researchers, Elgin has actually damaged the Parthenon temple in order to extract the decorative marble sculptures and he sold them to British Museum after a very short period. The conditions under which Elgin removed the sculptures are at least nefarious; no original Ottoman firman has been produced to this day to legitimise Elgin's actions. therefore it is not reasonable to continue to call them Elgin's. Regardless, these are sculptures, not marbles (marble is a material). I propose to rename the article to Parthenon sculptures as is the norm among classicist scholars and redirect 'Elgin marbles' to the same wikipage. Ipodamos (talk) 23:38, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

There is a difference between the Elgin Marbles, ie the marbles acquired by Elgin, and sculptures from the Parthenon. The article explains the difference. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:00, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

The difference is actually erroneous and is not backed up by the literature. There is no such thing as marbles and sculptures: they are all sculpted marble pieces. Also, the part about the drowning of Elgin's ship with the sculptures on his first trip from Athens is missing: this is a crucial piece of the history of the sculptures. Ipodamos (talk) 00:05, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

sinking* not drowning Ipodamos (talk) 00:06, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

There is no such thing as ships drowning. You need consensus for your changes. Please see Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:08, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

thank you for pointing out that ships are not drowning. Ipodamos (talk) 00:13, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

To reach consensus, I guess I have to convince you to address all marbles as sculptures as a beginning: do you disagree or you think that a material describes perfectly well these pieces of art? Ipodamos (talk) 00:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Have a look at the Further Reading section of this article and you will see that in English it is common to refer to ancient sculptures as marbles. It's a bit old fashioned but is still in use, especially for the Elgin Marbles. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:17, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Aemilius: Absolutely, this terminology is quite outdated and has mainly persisted in usage within the UK. I'm curious whether this Wikipedia page is accessible solely to readers in the UK or if it's intended for a broader audience. Even within the UK, the contemporary and more current term for them is "sculptures." Ipodamos (talk) 00:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

even the British Museum refers to them as The Parthenon Sculptures: https://www.britishmuseum.org/about-us/british-museum-story/contested-objects-collection/parthenon-sculptures Ipodamos (talk) 00:24, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Moreover, I contend that the persistence of the term "Elgin's Marbles" reflects a political position rather than a scholarly one. Ipodamos (talk) 00:33, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Regarding the sinking of the Mentor ship which carried the sculptures on Elgin's first trip back to Britain, I am happy to write a section based on this source: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/new-treasures-discovered-wreck-lord-elgins-ship-180973385/

there is already an item on wikipedia: Mentor (brig) Ipodamos (talk) 00:36, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

They refer to sculptures from the Parthenon as Parthenon sculptures. But the Elgin Marbles refers to the entire collecion of marbles acquired by Elgin. They are from the Parthenon, the Erechtheion, the Temple of Athena Nike and the Propylaia. I'm sure you agree that a marble from the Propylaia isn't a Parthenon sculture? I reiterate that this is an article about the marbles acquired by Elgin. There is already another article about the Metopes of the Parthenon and the Parthenon Frieze. I'm not sure whether there is one about the pediment sculptures. There is also an article about the Parthenon which discusses the sculptures. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

(ec) Nobody has ever called them "Elgin's Marbles". As was pointed out to you above, but you failed to grasp, the British Museum has only some of the surviving sculptures. You should read Parthenon#Sculpture, Metopes of the Parthenon, Parthenon Frieze and Pediments of the Parthenon, not to mention Acropolis Museum. It would be misleading to call this article Parthenon sculptures, which covers a much larger group. Johnbod (talk) 00:43, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

The article already sufficiently covers the sinking of the Mentor and the recovery of the marbles from it. Please read the article carefully before you propose changes. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:44, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

there is only one phrase describing the sinking of the sculptures- Dont you think that sinking of a ship and remaining of the sculptures in the sea for 2 years deserve more discussion? Ipodamos (talk) 00:53, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

There is a whole sentence about the sinking of the Mentor and the recovery of the marbles in it. I think that is enough for a general article like this, unless you have new evidence that the damage to that shipment was more extensive than previously thought. I am more surprised that the section on damage doesn't discuss the damage wrought by Christian fanatics when the Parthenon was converted into a Church. This damage was far worse than anything inflicted on the marbles by the Venetians, Turks, Elgin or anyone else. The section on the subsequent damage to other sculptures Elgin left behind probably should be moved to the article on the Parthenon. It has nothing to do with the marbles removed by Elgin. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 01:22, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Your argument is invalid- If you arguing the case for distinction between 'Elgin's' and all other sculptures, why the 'Parthenon sculptures' or 'Parthenon marbles' search redirects to 'Elgin marbles'? The article needs to be rewritten. Ipodamos (talk) 00:46, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Regardless, do we have consensus that 'marbles' should change to 'sculptures'? Ipodamos (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

I oppose changing marbles to sculptures. The article is fine as it is. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 00:58, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Can you elaborate why you think marbles Marble (toy) is a more appropriate term for the sculptures? The crux of the matter is to employ the term "sculpture" rather than "marble," as the latter inadvertently suggests a decorative detachment from the temple's integral structure, which is not the case. Ipodamos (talk) 01:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Not sure what's happening here; is this how consensus is reached? by trying to convince someone that the 'article isn't fine' and he/she makes the decision? where are the arguments? and who gives you alone the power to decide these things? Ipodamos (talk) 12:29, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Furthermore, you replaced 'sculptures' throughout the text and replaced it inexplicably with 'marbles' even when you state that the Greek government has requested the 'marbles' back (they never use this term): this is inaccurate and frankly inexplicable: we are talking about pieces of art. I would like to raise this issue further because I think there are bias here. Ipodamos (talk) 12:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Currently the article uses "marbles" 158 times (many book titles etc) and "sculptures" 50 times. I'm sympathetic to boosting the "sculptures" count, especially in art historical rather than historical sections, but I suppose there is an advantage in a consistent vocabulary. Johnbod (talk) 14:17, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

In addition to using the term 'sculptures,' I suggest that the article be renamed as "The British Museum Collection of Acropolis Sculptures (commonly referred to as the Elgin Marbles)" or a similar title accompanied by relevant redirects. This non-controversial title would likely be acceptable to all parties involved. Elgin's reputation as a controversial figure, often regarded as a plunderer outside of the UK, makes the title "Elgin Marbles" contentious and potentially insulting to the monument and Greek history. Furthermore, it can perpetuate the misconception that they rightfully belong to Elgin. Ipodamos (talk) 17:50, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

There is no basis in policy for such a name change. The names for articles are supposed to be concise and reflect the most common English language usage. See: Article titles. The NYT article you recently added states that the relevant marbles in the British Museum are "commonly known as the Elgin marbles." This N-GRAM also shows that Elgin Marbles is far more commonly used than Parthenon Marbles.

As for replacing "marbles" for "sculptures" in the article, I really don't see why we should be boosting the word count for one of the alternatives for the sake of it. I suggest that whenever a source specifically refers to the artefacts collected by Elgin as "marbles" we use "marbles" as shorthand for the Elgin Marbles. Whenever a source specifically refers to "sculptures" or "Parthenon sculptures" we use "sculptures" as shorthand. We need to be flexible though because sometimes in the context of a particular sentence it's simply more natural and concise to use one word in preference to the other. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 01:19, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

The term 'Elgin Marbles,' while commonly used in Anglo-Saxon countries, faces substantial scholarly and international dispute. This extends to countries such as Greece and Cyprus, where the name is perceived as disrespectful. It's important to consider an alternative perspective: why perpetuate the use of the term 'marbles' when it inherently misrepresents the nature of these artifacts? The word 'marbles' implies detached decorative objects rather than integral parts of a historical monument. By renaming the collection to something like "The British Museum Collection of Acropolis Sculptures (often referred to as the Elgin Marbles)," a more accurate representation is achieved without glossing over the controversy or promoting an incorrect portrayal. This revised title acknowledges both the commonly used term and the need for precision and respect in discussing these culturally significant artifacts. 62.38.221.177 (talk) 20:24, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

To start off, numerous articles outside the Anglo-Saxon world refer to these artworks as Parthenon marbles or sculptures, distancing them from Elgin's name. We might want to consider preserving this international perspective on Wikipedia. Check out these sources:

- Euronews: "Greece Renews Calls for British Museum to Return Parthenon Marbles"

(https://www.euronews.com/culture/2023/08/23/greece-renews-its-calls-for-british-museum-to-return-parthenon-marbles-in-wake-of-priceless-discovery)

- The Evening Standard: "British Museum Faces Renewed Pressure from Greece Over Parthenon Marbles"

(https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/british-museum-greece-parthenon-elgin-marbles-archaeologists-b1102369.html)

- Ekathimerini: "Cycling 3,500 km for the Reunification of Parthenon Sculptures"

(https://www.ekathimerini.com/multimedia/images/1217348/cycling-3500-km-for-reunification-of-parthenon-sculptures/)

- BBC News: "British Museum Faces Calls to Return Parthenon Marbles to Greece"

(https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-66239150) Ipodamos (talk) 00:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

And here are some recent articles calling them the Elgin Marbles: [1]https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/20/greece-may-refuse-give-back-elgin-marbles/

[2]https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/elgin-marbles-rishi-sunak-has-no-plans-to-return-them-to-greece-rchdb3xqf

[3]https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/08/science/elgin-marbles-3d-print.html

I, and others, have already explained to you that:

1) The terms "Elgin Marbles" and "Parthenon Sculptures" refer to two different sets of things. The article explains the difference.

2) Elgin Marbles is the most common English term for the collection of marbles acquired by Lord Elgin and now in the British Museum.

3) Your suggested name change for the article does not accord with WP naming policy, for the reasons I detailed above. Aemilius Adolphin (talk) 03:32, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Ignore this comment- I can see the links and the logic of the distinction Ipodamos (talk) 00:57, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

but I still argue for the term 'sculptures' and a section on Mentor Ipodamos (talk) 00:57, 19 August 2023 (UTC)