top of page
  • Writer's pictureJim Mellas

A short term return could have longer term benefits for permanent Return of the Parthenon Sculptures

There has been significant controversy over the last week as a result of a proposal by the Greek Prime Minister, Kyriakos Mitsotakis seeking the return of Parthenon Sculptures from the Louvre and from the British Museum for the bicentennial of the commencement of the Greek War of Independence in March 2021. Prime Minister Mitsotakis has proposed that they be returned or Loaned for a period of time and that in return he was willing to allow Ancient Greek treasures that have never been shown abroad before to be exhibited both in the Louvre and the British Museum.

The controversy stems from the proposal for a short term “loan” or return. Those concerned about the proposal are arguing that by seeking a loan of the Sculptures the Prime Minister is in effect admitting or conceding that the British Museum or the Louvre have ownership of the Sculptures. Others argue that the only way the sculptures should be returned is on a permanent basis.

I totally understand both arguments and in principle agree with both.

To add to the controversy, it has also been reported tonight by Yannis Andritsopoulos, the London correspondent for Ta Nea that a Museum representative has told him that “The Greek government must acknowledge the British Museum’s ownership of the Parthenon Sculptures before its Trustees consider whether or not to lend the Sculptures to Greece

I do not agree to any concession by the Greek Government as to the ownership of the Parthenon Sculptures by either by the British Museum or the Louvre. In my view however, a concession does not need to be made as to their ownership to have the Sculptures return for the 2021 celebrations. This will depend on the ‘fine print’ of any agreement reached between the respective countries for the return. For example, if the agreement is made for the short term return of the Parthenon Sculptures without any acknowledgment as to ownership of the Sculptures and on the basis that the demand for the permanent return of the Sculptures will continue then there is no concession as to ownership. Terms and Conditions can be agreed to protecting the Sculptures that are to be exchanged between the two counties. This would be a matter of cultural diplomacy between Greece and Britain. On that basis the Sculptures can return in 2021 without any concession as to ownership having been made.

I do not disagree with the second argument either. The Sculptures were illegally removed and taken by Elgin and are being illegally kept in the British Museum and therefore should be returned to Greece unconditionally. On further consideration, however, there may be a number of advantages and benefits to be gained by seeking to have some or all of the Parthenon Sculptures returned for a short term period for the 2021 celebrations whilst the permanent return demands continue. Those advantages as I see them are as follows:

1. It allows some of the Sculptures to be returned to Athens for the first time in over 200 years;

2. The Sculptures can finally be reunited and be seen in their original context or in situ in the Acropolis Museum overlooking the Acropolis;

3. It will focus worldwide attention on the issue as the world will be able to see the Sculptures reunited at the Acropolis Museum during a period of time where World attention will be focused on Greece for the 2021 celebrations;

4. In addition to world attention it will also focus attention of the Greek people to this issue and help galvanise further support for the return of the sculptures both in Greece and the throughout the world;

5. Having some of the Parthenon Sculptures returned for a period will strengthen the arguments and the campaign for the permanent return of the Parthenon Sculptures in the future. It allows the word to see how the sculptures should be displayed at the same place, reunified in the Acropolis Museum;

6. It will allow both the British Museum and the Louvre to see the advantages of a co-operative approach and the benefits of displaying other Ancient Greek Treasures in their Museums

7. In the event that the British refuse then it focuses the World on the intransigent and colonial attitude of the British towards the return of the Parthenon Sculptures particularly in light of the loan of the sculpture of the Greek river god Ilissos to the State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg in 2014. This may help galvanise further support for the campaign for the permanent reunification fo the Parthenon Sculptures;

8. We finally have a Greek government making a more serious proposal for the return of the Sculptures albeit for a short period of time. Successive Greek governments have done very little to seriously demand the return of the Parthenon Sculptures save for proposing mediation (as recommended by UNESCO) which has been completely rejected by the British. A Government that is proactive towards the Return of the Parthenon Sculptures should be supported and encouraged on this issue.

I am an active campaigner and activist for the permanent reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures but can see the benefit of the recent proposal by Prime Minister Mitsotakis. Of course, the devil will be in the detail of any agreement that may be reached for their return.

Jim Mellas

Jim Mellas is a Barrister at the Victorian Bar and also a commentator, activist and campaigner with a large following on social media. He is currently actively campaigning for the Return of the Parthenon Marbles to Athens. On 22 June 2018 Jim did a live protest inside the British Museum which went viral around the world. The video and photographs of the protest have been viewed by millions throughout the world. He is also one of the founding member of the Acropolis Research Group*

The Acropolis Research Group (TARG) was formed by concerned researchers and activists in the UK, Greece and Australia who share a common interest in the repatriation of looted cultural property, with a particular focus on the Parthenon Sculptures

Our group seeks to draw attention to contentious cultural heritage issues and to contribute to the current public discourse on the role of museums, cultural diplomacy, strategic litigation and the overarching theme of return or restitution of cultural artefacts and other treasures that were appropriated under dubious circumstances, usually during the age of empire and western colonial dominance.

TARG seeks to influence decision makers, non-State actors, museums and galleries as well as the community at large through research, education, advocacy and lobbying. The founding research fellows at TARG are:

Matthew Taylor (

Maria Pullinger Koutsikou

Geoffrey White

Elly Symons

Jim Mellas

George Vardas

David Hill

Andrew George

223 views0 comments


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page