Believe it, baby. At the time (late 18th/early 19th century, as I recall) the Parthenon was a complete dump, ignored by the populace and routinely blown up/ransacked/metaphorically shit upon. The Ottoman Turks, who ruled Greece at the time and had ruled there for centuries, were plenty happy to take Lord Elgin’s cash for those crappy old relics. And nobody bitched about it for darn near two centuries.
Yeah, and we want the Peacock Throne and the Kohinoor Diamond back too 
Minty, I am being somewhat facetious and do not intend my posts to be taken very seriously although I may have a point which is that I think there has to be some statute of limitations or we can go back forever. It also seems a bit silly that was was taken by force in war is ok to keep and what was taken nicely after saying pretty please and paying for it is not. I say everybody gets to keep what they have had for a reasonable period of time. And if there is a dispute and they can’t learn to share then I get to keep it _
BTW, Florida was “bought” from Spain by the expedient bargaining method of invading it and then saying “what do you prefer, five bucks or nothing?” so its not like it was a voluntary sale. Also, I believe some of the galleons are in international and not US waters but, again, I am not seriously advocating that anybody return anything. If your grandfather stole it and you got it, it’s yours to keep.
Regardless of the legality of keeping the Elgin Marbles, I think that the British should give them back as a show of good will. IMO they probably will someday (perhaps not anytime soon though).
Minty:
Ottoman Turks were not Greeks. But you knew that.
Yes, I did know that, and I didn’t think anybody would be confused by it. But the Greeks themselves didn’t give a damn about the Parthenon and its sculptures, either–that’s why the whole place was in such sorry shape. The modern Greeks should stop being such a bunch of ingrates in this matter and praise the name of Lord Elgin, who saved a priceless chunk of their cultural heritage from destruction.
Not so. Florida was purchased for $5 million; the entire Louisiana Purchase was only $15 million, even though it was 12 times larger. Spain was happy to sell, as its colonies were in revolt all over the world. Florida was not “invaded” by the U.S., though people in Georgia routinely took their battles against the Seminoles into Florida.
Quite true. Spain has, in recent years, started asserting claims over such vessels, particularly military ships. Merchant ships may be freely salvaged under international law whenever the owner abandons recovery efforts, but sunken military vessels remain the property of the nation that owned them when they were sunk. All that’s beside the point, however, which is that the ownership of those shipwrecks is in fact governed by international treaties, and those laws are indeed enforced by the federal government and the courts.
re: the title.
Britain. Not England. A big and important difference.
No time to get involved but just enough time to say …
It is nice that Greece has managed to stay out of the hands of Generals and remain a democracy for a while now. One can’t help but wonder, however, what domestic political capital is made by raising the issue of the Marbles periodically – certainly no Greek political party would lose support by raising the issue; spot the guaranteed win (with no possible down side) in the Greek political popularity contest.
Of course, there maybe a genuine argument (in relation to their return) but not if the source of the argument is a party politician, IMHO.
I wonder if the Generals would have sold them or, like the Egyptian army and the nose of the Sphinx, shot it to obliteration as target practice … ?
“Yes, I did know that, and I didn’t think anybody would be confused by it. But the Greeks themselves didn’t give a damn about the Parthenon and its sculptures, either–that’s why the whole place was in such sorry shape. The modern Greeks should stop being such a bunch of ingrates in this matter and praise the name of Lord Elgin, who saved a priceless chunk of their cultural heritage from destruction.”
Minty: Yeah, a lot of of what you say here is true. I’m not sure how you have determined what the Greeks did or didn’t give a damn about, but one can certainly argue that the marbles in question may have been damaged or destroyed had the remained in Greece.
I’m not going to argue who owns the stuff-- that’s obviously a legal tangle for minds better than mine to figure out. The way I see it, is that Europe is supposed to be comming together, and have gotten over the Wars of the last few centuries, and with people travelling as much as they do nowadays, it sure would seem to be a gesture in tune with the times to set Marbles back in their place of origin. That’s all.
Yup, they did. Didn’t give a damn about it. twas that big rocky place over yonder, to them. Don’t undrstand it myself, but hey…
As far as US law is concerned, finders keepers. The state of Florida likes to try and steal some, and so does the government at the top, but usually the courts deny that, as well as any attemot by Spain to grab some cash.
Sorry, but that’s incorrect. There is a substantial body of law regarding the salvage of sunken ships, and very little of it can be described as finders-keepers. I’ll try to give you a nutshell, as best as I can remember it:
Merchant/private ships, not abandoned: The owner of the ship retains title to the property so long as the owner has not abandoned attempts to salvage it. Another salvor may may attempt to recover the vessel or its cargo, and, if successful, is due a reasonable salvage fee or portion of the recovered cargo, but the property goes back to its original owner. See Columbus-America Discovery Group v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Co., 974 F.2d 450 (4th Cir. 1992) (a terrible decision holding that insurers of the 1857 shipwreck S.S. Central America had not abandoned the vessel and its billion-dollar cargo of gold, despite not doing a goddamned thing to search for or recover it in all the intervening years, and remanding the case to the district court to determine the appropriate salvage fee for the company that located and salvaged the gold from 8,000 below the surface of the Atlantic); opinion on remand at Columbus-America Discovery Group v. Unidentified, Wrecked & Abandoned Sailing Vessel, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18482 (E.D. Va. Nov. 18, 1993) (awarding the salvors a 90% salvage fee, with only 10% to the insurers).
Merchant/private ships, abandoned in international waters: If the owner of the vessel has abandoned efforts to recover the ship and/or its cargo, it may be salvaged by anybody who feels like it on a first come, first served basis. So long as the salvage operation continues,* that salvor retains superior rights in the vessel over all others, including the original owner and any other salvors. The salvor gains title to everything he recovers, if he can demonstrate it was in fact abandoned–and that can be tough to prove. Again, see the Brother Jonathan case.
Merchant/private ships, abandoned in U.S. waters: This is more complicated, as the abandoned vessel may be subject to any number of state and federal laws vesting interest or ownership in the state or federal governments. This is particularly true in the case of historic shipwrecks.** The federal Abandoned Shipwrecks Act of 1987 asserts federal title over all abandoned shipwrecks that are “embedded” in the seafloor, then (generally) transfers that title automatically to the states. All in all, get yourself a good maritime lawyer before you even start searching for a ship you think is in U.S. waters.
Military ships: Such vessels belong, whether abandoned or not, and whether in international waters or not, to the nation that owned the ship when it went down. This is international law, not merely U.S. law. Those nations can, of course, decide what they want to do with those vessels, and that can include handing them over to another nation or cutting a deal with salvors, or just leaving them alone as grave sites.
There’s a really cool case on point out of the Fourth Circuit: Sea Hunt, Inc. v. Unidentified Shipwrecked Vessel, 221 F.3d 634 (4th Cir. 2000). That case involved two frigates in the Spanish Navy that had been lost off the coast of Virginia in 1750 and 1802. The 4th Circuit held that Spain had not expressly abandoned*** either ship, so the salvor had no rights to either of them.****
*Salvage efforts need not be continuous to preserve the salvor’s rights, but it must be clear that the salvor intends to continue recovery efforts or somebody else can swoop in and gain title to anything they grab. A couple decades ago, a salvor on the Andrea Doria who was attempting to recover some valuable art from the ship left a note underwater near the entrance laying claim to the objects and saying he intended to return the next season to finish the job. The courts upheld it as a valid way to preserve the salvor’s rights.
**When Mel Fisher originally found the Atocha and its insanely valuable cargo, it was believed to lie in Florida waters, so they had worked out an arrangement where Fisher got 75% of the appraised value of what was recovered and the state would get 25%. It turned out, however, that the wreck was actually in international waters, so that contract didn’t apply–Fisher and his company got to keep the whole thing. See Florida Dept. of State v. Treasure Salvors, Inc., 458 U.S. 670 (1982).
***With merchant ships, abandonment may be either express or implied. With naval vessels, abandonment may only be express; the failure or indifference of the nation to locate or recover its naval vessel cannot relinquish the nation’s ownership of that ship, even if it is in the territorial waters of another nation.
****Pursuant to the Abandoned Shipwrecks Act, Virginia had claimed title to both ships (remember, under the ASA, the feds automatically claim title then transfer it to the state). Virginia had then authorized the salvor to locate and salvage the wrecks, cutting the state in on a share of any of the proceeds. The 4th Circuit’s opinion basically determined that the ASA didn’t apply to the Spanish naval shipwrecks because they were never “abandoned” as required by the ASA.
If nothing else, the precedent of returning items like this is astounding. I can just imagine the courts of the world being clogged by numerous lawsuits as every country tries to reclaim every item in foreign museum, regardless of the legality or chain of claim involved.
I’ve found that most people who want the marbles returned do not in fact know their history. The Greeks really did not give a damn about them at the time, and large parts of the parthenon and other temples were routinely plundered and sold for everything from museum pieces to garden ornaments. And in looking at a picture book of sketches/drawings of the Parthenon over time, it clearly deteriorated substantially from the time of the removal of the marbles. It’s impossible to say, of course, but if the marbles had remained, there ironically might not be any today.
I’ve been to the Parthenon with Fierra, and to the BM with Fierra as well. I think it’s likely the marbles would be safe and well taken-care of in Greece, but that’s just not really relevant enough at this time.
The modern Greeks have no real authorative claim to such important cultural artifacts, or no better claim than anyone else, controversial, you bet!
The civilisation that produced thse works has as much connection to most of the rest of the world as Greec, there are no known living ancestors or families of those who produced them and the nation that did so ceased to exist thousands of years ago.
These are work of equal importance to the whole of humanity and thier preservation is of paramount importance. Greece and other nations in the region have taken a cavalier disregard as to the importance to the rest of the world of these artifacts, and now they are safe they want them back ?
No, sorry, they were never yours in the first place, they belonged to humanity, and you should be glad that someone was able to see their importance and take them into care.
The Greece of the past 150 year would have damaged them beyond recognition, and no nation can claim the right to act in such an atrocious way, impoverishing world culture for the sake of national pride.
Greece did not care about the Elgin marble when they were removed, and testament to that is the state of the Parthenon today which is suffering seriously deletarious effects from pollution, from neglect and vandalism.
You don’t know what you got till its gone, its that simple. maybe Greece will take more care of other artifacts, but somehow I think that if it had not been for tourist dollars much of the remainder would be in jeopardy.
Does this mean that Greece will have to get the Elgin Marbles back from Germany? – Brits lose their marbles to Germans again
Actually, I think it is possible to say. What remains of the Parthenon couldn’t support more than about one-tenth of the Marbles. Clearly, if they had remained in situ, they would have crumbled to the ground at some point during the Nineteenth Century. This isn’t Greece’s “fault”–they can hardly be blamed for having to endure a brutal Turkish occupation and fight for decades for their independence–and it doesn’t necessarily mean the Marbles shouldn’t be returned. But it does mean that we owe a debt of gratitude to Elgin and the British for saving what would otherwise have been lost.
The British Museum’s case is actually stronger than this, precisely because much of if it had crumbled to the ground by the 19th century. The exact terms of the deal Elgin negotiated can be argued about, but what seems fairly clearcut is that he’d legitimately bought up the stuff that had fallen off and was lying about. Judging from the contemporary illustrations, this is the majority of the material that’s in Bloomsbury. The more controversial aspect is the extent to which his men were levering pieces off the monument itself.
The argument that what remained suffered disproportionately during the 19th and 20th centuries is separate.
Actually Bonzer most of the Elgin marbles hadn’t fallen off, they were sawn off by his retinue, the saw marks are still visible on the backs of the marbles themselves.
Well, I appear to have been wrong about salvage. But I had thought there was a case of a treasure hunter to whom the US courts granted the whole claim voer the objections of the US government, the Florida gov, and Spain.
Not even 20 years after this thread was started:
Maybe some of us will still be alive when it happens!
Doesn’t matter; the Puppeteers are just going to steal them from whatever nation has them, anyway.