Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Elgin Marbles debate: 'We need all the friends we can GET after you took us out the EU!'" video.

@georgesdelatour Sorry. It is a fatuous argument. Elgin purchased the Marbles in 1812, after Greece had been an Ottoman province since 1456.
2
Perhaps not everyone has your total lack of curiosity?
1
Ironic, then, that the Greek PM made such an unfortunate reference to the Mona Lisa. A painting created in Italy, which now resides in France.
1
You could do a similar poll about Capital Punishment, of course. You would get, I suspect, a similar result.
1
@ANonymous-p5x5n Of course not. It is, however, a statement of fact. Just as yours was.
1
They were not stolen. Had Elgin not purchased them from the Ottoman governor of a Turkish province, they would no longer exist. They never, by the way, belonged to Greece, but to the city state of Athens, which has as much in common with the Greece of today as Britain has with the Roman province of the 4th century.
1
'From the illegal occupation of Greece from the Ottoman empire.' What does that even mean? Illegal ( in yout mind) or not, it was a fact. It was also a fact that the Ottoman governor was permitting them to be broken up. Elgin, whether you like it or not, rescued them from destruction. A shame that the Greek PM cannot acknowledge this, choosing to refer instead to the Mona Lisa. Incidentally, an artwork created in Italy, which is now in France.
1
@jpaokx 'So, the Nazis could have sold half of Europe to America, yeah?' I don't recall writing that. The reality is, however, that when Elgin purchased the Marbles, Greece had been an Ottoman province for around 350 years. Would you prefer that Elgin had left them alone, even though they were being steadily broken up for hard core, among other uses? Presumably, had they only existed as memories in sketchbooks, that would have been preferable? Is that what you really think? The Marbles are greater than simple a part of Greek history. They are part of the origins of European civilisation. The same civilisation which freed Greece from occupation by the Ottoman Empire in 1827 -1832. Sad that you feel the need to resort to obscenities, as they are never a credible alternatve to debate.
1
@jpaokx 'The passage of time doesn't necessarily legitimise actions taken during an era of imperial dominance. The fact that Greece was under Ottoman rule does not justify the removal of cultural artifacts without the consent of the local population (conscious the ongoing war and rebellions for their independence).' Imperial indeed, by the Ottoman Empire. I wonder if you can cite any actual evidence that the inhabitants of Athens were interested in the Parthenon at all, as they survived after 350 and more years of Moslem rule? Certainly, there is precisely no evidence to suggest that any attempts, other than that of Elgin, were made to preserve the sculptures. 'Also, returning the Parthenon Marbles to Greece is an opportunity for the UK to fix the historical wrongs and become an example to the rest of the world!' What historical wrongs? You mean sending forces to free Greece from Ottoman control between 1827 & 1832, along with France & Russia? Is the Battle of Navarino a wrong the British should seek to correct?
1
@jpaokx 'Re your first point, you'd need to consider the challenging circumstances of that time and it doesn't negate the principle that cultural heritage should be protected with the consent of the local population.' This would be the Greek population which had been subjected to Ottoman rule for 350 years, and had seen ancient structures being systematically degraded by their rulers without any objection, I assume? 'Re your other point, the Battle of Navarino and the subsequent liberation of Greece from Ottoman control are separate historical military events from the removal of the Elgin Marbles.' Except, of course, that Greece regained her independence, after a greek revolt had been defeated by 1826, by the involvement of British, French, & Russian forces. Indeed, Philhellenism ("the love of Greek culture") was an intellectual movement prominent mostly early in the 19th century, and items such as the Marbles, when seen for the first time by intellectuals in London & Paris, played no small part in the growth of this movement.
1
@jpaokx You seem to avoid the salient point, which is that EWlgin spent much of his personal wealth in purchasing the Marbles from the Ottoman administration. You might now call it 'illegal' but it was regarded as legitimate at the time, and had been there for over three and a half centuries. I don't doubt that a number of Royalist types in France regard the events of 1789 onwards as 'illegal' but that doesn't make them any the less facts. Unless of course you believe that France should be liberated and restored to the Bourbon monarchy? Of course you don't. You accept the current government of France as the de facto one. Just as the world accepted the Ottoman Empire as a fact. 'Re the Battle of Navarino and the subsequent liberation of Greece, you need to distinguish military interventions and cultural artifacts.' Just as you need not to view such events in isolation. The allied forces which expelled the Turks from Greece did not do so on a whim, but because of a surge in respect for Classical Greece, which was generated in part at least by appreciation of ancient Greek culture, after artifacts from that culture began arriving in the west. A shame that you are unable to attribute higher motives to Lord Elgin, instead of simply viewing him as a doubtful chancer on the make.
1
@edek816 Someone certainly needs educating. 'Dying days of the Empire?' 1812?
1
Yet you seem very concerned. Although, sadly, not enough to find out a few actual facts.
1
@johngreenall1818 Aren't 'Would haves' handy? 'If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.'
1
Actually, they are part of European History. Their relevance transcends national claims.
1
@ΆντριαΕ 'WHO BUILT THE PARTHENON ????!!? THE GREEKS DID !!!! ' Capital letters and exclamation letters do not increase the validity of a comment. Actually no, the Greeks didn't. The city state of Athens did. After Athens, and the rest of Greece, had been an Ottoman province for around 350 years, and the Pathenon Sculptures were being slowly but steadily destroyed by a series of Moslem governors who had no interest in them, Elgin paid one of these governors in order to remove much of what still survived. Frankly, had he not acted as he did, there would have been no problem, as the sculptures would probably have existed only as curiosities in old sketchbooks. Would that have made you happier?
1
@ΆντριαΕ Don't be a fool. The state of Greece simply did not exist in the 5th Century B.C.. It was a loose grouping of small staes, more or less permanently warring with each other. I assume you have heard of Thucydides? The Koh-i-noor diamond has a chequered history, having been acquired by conquest on several different occasions. When it was presented to Queen Victoria, that was the first time it had changed hands by anything other than military means. Oh, and the Benin Bronzes were yaken after a British military expedition to abolish slavery in the last African country openly to practise it. '"The sculptures would have existed as curiosities in sketchbooks"???!!! Eeeerrrrm, there's a place TODAY in Athens called the Acropolis. It's a high mountain on top of which lies the PARTHENON.' Very good. Just as there were a series of Ottoman governors who had used it for a variety of things, including a munitions store and an artillery target, before breaking up some of the stones for hard core.
1
@eightblack8357 One of us needs to go back to school certainly. The Athenians were indeed ethnically Greek, but Greece as a state did not exist, except as a conglomeration of independent city states, more or less constantly at war with each other. Read Thucydides - there are plenty of excellent translations available, for further information. Indeed, I know of the development of the Byzantine Empire. I also know that, for over 350 years, Greece was an Ottoman province, and the Parthenon was a ruin, used at various times as a munitions store, a gunnery practice target, and finally, as Elgin discovered, a source of hard core. Put simply, without Elgin, who appears to have negotiated the purchase of the Marbles with the only recognised authority in Greece at the time, the problem would have been solved long ago, as they would no linger exist. 'Greece became a Ottoman province until it recovered some of its land and became independent again.' Not quite, Greece became independent because of the intervention of Britain & France between 1827 & 1832. In 1826, Egyptian forces had conquered almost all of Greece, including Athens, after a Greek rebellion collapsed into war between two different Greek factions. In 1827, Russia, Britain & France intervened, sending a fleet and troops. I wonder if you have even heard of the Battle of Navarino? In 1828, the Egyptian army withdrew under pressure from a French expeditionary force. The Ottoman garrisons in the Peloponnese surrendered and the Greek revolutionaries proceeded to retake central Greece. The Ottoman Empire declared war on Russia allowing for the Russian army to move into the Balkans, near Constantinople. This forced the Ottomans to accept Greek autonomy in the Treaty of Adrianople and autonomy for Serbia and the Romanian principalities. Would you like me to recommend a book or two, to educate you?
1