india demands return of treasures The uk stole

How about Maxim gun, spear, leather shield?

I think they should be returned because they are part of Greece's cultural heritage. Here's why I am persuaded:

1. Lord Elgin action’s illegality: Thomas Bruce, then British ambassador in Istanbul, did not have the legal right to remove (in 1801) the ancient masterpieces from the Parthenon. Officially, Elgin obtained a ‘firman’ from the Ottoman authorities but when the British Parliament asked to examine it, he couldn’t submit it. What he submitted was an italian translation of the official document. I reproduce from an interesting article of the American Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures, Inc: “Specialists in Ottoman Law point out that the document does not carry the signature and seal of the Sultan or his customary invocation to God, and without them, Elgin and by extension the British Museum have no legal evidence of ownership of the Parthenon Sculptures” (Newsletter, Nov.2008).

Therefore, the argument of the British Museum’s administrations that the Sculptures consist “legal property of the museum” is doubted. How proper is to base the ‘legality’ of Parthenon Marbles’ ownership on a translated version of a letter probably produced by a low-ranked Ottoman official?

2. The precedent cases of artifacts restitution: Two years ago, the Los Angeles-based J.Paul Getty Museum returned to Greece a 4th century BC Macedonian gold wreath as well as a 6th century BC marble statue of a woman; eight years ago, in 2001, the same museum had handed back to Italy almost 500 ancient objects. Going back three years ago, in September 2006, the Heidelberg University of Germany handed over to Greece a small piece of Parthenon’s north frieze.

In 2008 the Vatican decided to give back a Parthenon fragment, while on the same year a British court ordered the return of a Byzantine icon which had been stolen 30 years ago from a Greek monastery. Furthermore, during last September, in a gesture of meritorious goodwill Italy gave back to Greece a fragment of the Sculptures which had been acquired by a museum in Palermo, Sicily; its worthy of remark that the Italian President Giorgio Napolitano personally presented the restored fragment to his Greek counterpart Karolos Papoulias.

3. Complete view of Parthenon: Almost 99% of what survives of Parthenon’s masterpieces is exposed in London and Athens According to Professor A.M Snodgrass of Cambridge University, “among these pieces, the British Museum possesses fifty-five of the fifty-six frieze slabs, all twenty of, the pediment figures and fifteen of the sixteen metopes, nearly 98% in total” (Appendix B, British Committee’s submission to the Select Committee of the House of Commons). But the removed Marbles consist core part of the whole architectural environment of the Acropolis and their position is in sight of the building to which they actually belong and not in the hall of a museum in the other side of Europe. As Professor Snodgrass writes “if the aim is to investigate the meaning attached to the original design as a whole, it would be a huge gain to have virtually all the surviving material in one location” – that location is the New Acropolis Museum, in the shadow of the Parthenon.

The visitor in the renowned British Museum sees some random parts of the Parthenon, along with other ancient masterpieces of other civilizations and historical periods. But if the Sculptures will be exhibited in the modern Acropolis Museum, the visitor will have the great opportunity to appreciate them in their original environment, in sight of the Parthenon and very close to other known ancient Athenian sites (e.g. ancient market, Olympic Zeus Temple etc).

4. A UNESCO World Heritage Site dismembered: The Acropolis’ Parthenon consists a unique case of a crudely dismembered ancient building. What Lord Elgin did in the start of the 19th Century was an action of disgrace, against a monument which stances a landmark of Western Civilization. Because the actual meaning of Parthenon’s appreciation is in its unique universal value as a great symbol of Democracy – therefore, a gesture of respect which would cancel Elgin’s irreverent act would be the restoration of the removed artifacts and the reunification of the twenty-four centuries old monument.

5. Public Opinion’s stance: If the restitution of the Marbles was fully dependent on what people think, then the British Museum should have handed them back to Greece. According to a poll conducted during 2008 by the British Ipsos-Mori firm (2,109 persons in 198 UK locations), 69% of those who were familiar with the issue were in favour of Sculptures’ restitution to Greece, while only 13% expressed opposition. In comparison with a poll conducted in 2002, there is a 7% increase in the number of the British people who support the Marbles’ restoration.

Previous polls, conducted in the United Kingdom during the 90s, had similar results, proving that the majority of Britons (who are familiar with the issue) are in favour of Sculptures’ restitution.

6. International Pressure: The campaign for the restoration of the ancient masterpieces back to Greece has gained international recognition. From Australia to the United States, significant celebrities from the political and cultural scene, as well as distinguished scholars, have favoured the Parthenon Sculptures’ Restitution. International organizations such as the European Parliament and UNESCO have formally supported that aim, while politicians from various countries have expressed their keen interest towards the reunification of the Parthenon.

For example, in the UK, the late Robin Cook, MP and Secretary of State (1997-2001), was in favour of Sculpture’s restoration. The former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, had said that the Marbles “should return home once there is a proper place for them there”, while the Labour Euro-MP Alfred Lomas has repeatedly urged the British government to take positive initiatives on the issue. Moreover, in 2000, U.S. Senator Peter Fitzgerald of Illinois introduced a resolution (S.Con.Res 127) in which he expressed the “sense of the Congress that the Parthenon Marbles should be returned to Greece”.

7. A European Cultural Heritage Issue: Except from a bilateral issue between Greece and the United Kingdom, the case of Parthenon’s reunification is a matter of E.U.’s common Cultural Heritage. On January 1999, the European Parliament adopted a declaration in which it assured its support “for the return of the Elgin marbles to Greece, reflecting the view held by the majority of the British public on this matter and international instruments designating the Parthenon a world cultural heritage site”.

According to Professor Francesco Buranelli, the head of the Pontifical Commission for the Cultural Heritage (Vatican), Lord Elgin’s act “left a deep wound in European cultural sensitivity”. That needed sensitivity on Europe’s Cultural Heritage is mentioned in Article 151 of the E.U. Treaty, which stipulates that the Community must support and supplement action by the Member States in order to conserve and safeguard cultural heritage of European significance. The Athens Parthenon is definitely Europe’s landmark monument, epitomizing its historical, political and cultural roots. 

www.elginism.com/new-acropolis-museum/eight-reasons-why-the-elgin-marbles-should-be-returned-to-greece/20090225/1754/

The economy took time to take off and there is little doubt the Jacobite activities did not help nor did some of the taxes imposed but once the benefits of Union were realised then growth was rapid The growth from 1700 was from the context that the Darien episode had effectively bankrupted the nation and it was starting from a very low point. In 1973 there was no immediate benefit of the EEC, like all such agreements benefits took time to accrue and that was in a time where economic activity was at a much faster pace.
You cannot remove the effect of the enlightenment with the influence of Scots throughout the Empire. Scots names pop up all over the place where the first actions of the Empire and frequently the best occurred. Their representation as the movers and shapers of Empire is how you measure. From Hudson Bay who employed Orkney men as a matter of policy to Livingstone Scottish names abound.
Ireland is a far more complex issue than Scotland as there were the new Irish from ex Norman/Angevin/Viking/Welsh/English stock and the Ulster Scots rooted in Presbyterianism.
Scotland was not in armed rebellion, there was a dispute as regards the Royal Succession which divided Scotland as much as it threatened England and in the final analysis was poorly supported by the 45 and most Scots were glad to see the back of the Young Chevalier. The independence movements when I was a youth were pretty poorly supported and referred to often as the Tartan Tories. I went to see the result declared in Stirling when McIntyre lost to a Labour postman and in keeping with the rabble the winning candidate was shouted down. It has been downhill since then.

EDIT Indeed the subject of this thread involves a Scotsman

Wikipedia offers the back story. Remember that Greece was under the control of the Ottomans at the time.


Built in the ancient era, the Parthenon was extensively damaged by earthquakes. Also, during the Sixth Ottoman–Venetian War (1684–1699) against the Ottoman Empire, the defending Turks fortified the Acropolis and used the Parthenon as a castle and gunpowder store. On 26 September 1687, a Venetian artillery round, fired from the Hill of Philopappus, ignited the gunpowder, and the resulting explosion blew up the Parthenon, and the building was partly destroyed.[14] The explosion blew out the building's central portion and caused the cella's walls to crumble into rubble.[15] Three of the four walls collapsed, or nearly so, and about three-fifths of the sculptures from the frieze fell.[16] About three hundred people were killed in the explosion, which showered marble fragments over a significant area.[17] For the next century and a half, portions of the remaining structure were scavenged for building material and looted of any remaining objects of value.[18]



In November 1798, the Earl of Elgin was appointed as "Ambassador Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Britannic Majesty to the Sublime Porte of Selim III, Sultan of Turkey" (Greece was then part of the Ottoman Empire). Before his departure to take up the post he had approached officials of the British government to inquire if they would be interested in employing artists to take casts and drawings of the sculptured portions of the Parthenon. According to Elgin, "the answer of the Government ... was entirely negative."[5]



Elgin decided to carry out the work himself, and employed artists to take casts and drawings under the supervision of the Neapolitan court painter, Giovanni Lusieri.[5] According to a Turkish local, marble sculptures that fell were being burned to obtain lime for building.[5] Although his original intention was only to document the sculptures, in 1801 Elgin began to remove material from the Parthenon and its surrounding structures[19] under the supervision of Lusieri. Pieces were also removed from the Erechtheion, the Propylaia, and the Temple of Athena Nike, all inside the Acropolis.[11]



The marbles were taken from Greece to Malta, then a British protectorate, where they remained for a number of years until they were transported to Britain.[20] The excavation and removal was completed in 1812 at a personal cost to Elgin of £74,240[5][21] (equivalent to £4,700,000 in 2019 pounds). Elgin intended to use the marbles for a private museum to enhance the art of the nation,[22] but a costly divorce suit forced him to sell them to settle his debts.[23] Elgin sold the Parthenon Marbles to the British government for £35,000,[5] less than half of what it cost him to procure them, declining higher offers from other potential buyers, including Napoleon.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elgin_Marbles

Greece was part of the Ottoman empire at the time. If fallen sculptures were being used to obtain lime for building, it's conceivable this was being done by the Turks, not the Greeks. On a trip to Greece a few years ago, we visited the Acropolis where a tour director delivered an impassioned speech imploring the British tourists to tell their government to return these artefacts home where they belong. I think the Greeks have a compelling case.

Elgin made no profit from his sale of the marbles, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt as to his motives, but that was then, and this is now. Greece is no longer part of the Ottoman empire and the Greeks opened an ultra-modern new Acropolis museum costing 130 million Euros a few years back with almost 14,000 sq metres of exhibition space, dismantling the years-long argument that there isn’t a proper place to host the ancient sculptures in Athens.

I think if some formula could be devised which coupled the return of the Koh-i-noor with the return of an appropriate number of Indian colonists then there would be little cause for complaint. Ditto Benin bronzes and Nigerians, and so forth.