Greece 2021

  • On this year’s August Full Moon, the Acropolis Museum in Athens will offer visitors the opportunity to enjoy the Museum's exhibits on both Saturday 21 August and Sunday 22 August. The details for each day are listed below.

    Saturday 21 August 2021:the Museum exhibition areas will remain open from 8am to 8pm with free entry to all visitors, this is i conjunction with the  Museum’s contribution to the "Greece 2021" initiative. The Museum second floor restaurant will be open until 12 midnight and visitors will be able to enjoy the moon from the terrace.

    Sunday 22 August 2021:  the Museum exhibition areas will remain open from 8am to 10pm. The second floor restaurant will be open during the same hours. Visitors will have the opportunity to join in the gallery talk ‘Afternoons in the Acropolis Museum’, with an introduction into the fascinating stories hidden in the treasures of the Museum’s galleries.

    English: 6 p.m. (2 simultaneous talks)
    Greek: 8 p.m. (2 simultaneous talks)
    Duration: 60 minutes

    Health protection measures: It is necessary to wear a mask (not provided by the Museum) and to use the whisper guide system headsets (provided by the Museum).

    Cost: The general admission fee to the Museum is required (10 euro).

    Morning Saturday and Sunday gallery talks will be held as usual. More information can be found by visiting the museum's website or using this link: https://theacropolismuseum.gr/en/gallery-talks 

     

    Acropolis Full moon small

  • As Greece counts 200 years since the beginning of its war of independence in 1821, we can all celebrate the spirit of defiance against tyranny and a dedication to freedom, democracy and human rights. The Iliad-literate prime minister, Boris Johnson, has called Greece’s unique brand of meritocratic indignation the “hallmark of Greek genius”. But what made the Greek Revolution truly exceptional was that from the outset, it was never a matter for the Greeks alone.

    The pan-European solidarity expressed at the time of the revolution marked the birth of a strong current of philhellenism that endures to this day. Few embody this better than Lord Byron, whose love letters to Greece paid stunning tribute to the place “where grew the arts of war and peace”. With words that speak down the ages, it is little wonder that he continues to be honoured in Greece, including today on Lord Byron Day.

    The Prince of Walesrecently said that without Greece our laws, art and way of life would never have flourished. But without Britain, they would not have survived the test of time. I couldn’t agree more. From the Greek struggle for independence to the two world wars and recent Greek history, the relations between the United Kingdom and Greece are not simply ties between nation states but between people with a shared commitment to freedom, equality, democracy and respect for human dignity. My own personal ties to the UK date back to my student days at the London School of Economics and I have been an enthusiastic Anglophile ever since.

    I am also a firm believer in keeping alive our common cultural heritage and educating the generations to come. This year the Benaki Museum in Athens has organised the most comprehensive exhibition of Modern Greek history ever seen. Among a thousand objects sits a portrait of Lord Byron by Thomas Phillips, on loan from the National Portrait Gallery in London. The loan of cultural objects is an important gesture from one country to another but this is also an opportunity to educate the public about the enduring bond between our two countries and to give Lord Byron his rightful place in the Greek story.

    Cultural heritage teaches us where we come from, where we have been and helps us understand who we are today. Modern Greece has Lord Byron to thank for this. I also have no doubt this is why Lord Byron informed his mother from Prevesa that he would be returning to Athens, later prolonging his Hellenic journey indefinitely. Here was an English peer with an undeniable thirst to consume Greece in its entirety, from the ancient walls of the Parthenon to the modern Greek we speak today. If he believed that understanding Greece’s cultural heritage held the keys to modern society’s own existence, he would not have been the only one.

    As the European Commission’s vice-president for promoting the European way of life, I can relate to Lord Byron’s commitment to the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage (unfortunately not to his poetic genius). It is why I will also be visiting the Benaki Museum’s exhibition at every chance I get, to see the portrait of Lord Byron and the many other pieces on loan from private collections and important museums across Europe.

    The bicentenary of Lord Byron’s death at Missolonghi will fall on April 19 2024. What better a time for the United Kingdom and Greece to honour the friendship between the two nations and their people than by marking it with further cultural exchanges befitting of his memory. In these difficult times, cultural heritage should uplift humanity, not divide it.

    Margaritis Schinas is vice-president of the European Commission, this article was first published in The Times

  •  

    Boris Johnson has long hailed Pericles as his political hero. How does the British Prime Minister compare to the ancient Athenian statesman?

    For Professor Paul Cartledge, it’s straightforward: “Johnson and Pericles? No comparison. Johnson v Pericles? No contest,” he says.

    The Cambridge classicist has spent more than 50 years studying the history and civilization of ancient Greece. An eminent Hellenist, a prolific writer (he has written, edited or co-edited more than 30 books) and a long-standing philhellene (he has been visiting Greece since 1970 and he is a staunch supporter of the Parthenon Marbles’ reunification), Cartledge will on Monday be named Commander of the Order of Honour (Ταξιάρχης τοῦ Τάγματος τῆς Τιμῆς). It is one of the highest honours that the Greek state awards. The decision to bestow the title on Cartledge for his “contribution to enhancing Greece’s stature abroad” was taken by Greek President Katerina Sakellaropoulou.

    Cartledge has contributed to several television and radio programmes and publications on issues related to ancient Greece.

    The renowned academic is author of popular history books such as The Spartans: An Epic History, Thermopylae: The Battle that Changed the World, The Greeks: A Portrait of Self and Others, Alexander the Great: The Hunt for a New Past and Democracy: A Life. His latest book is Thebes: The forgotten city of Ancient Greece (Picador, 2020). In 1998 he was the joint winner of the Criticos (now London Hellenic) Prize for The Cambridge Illustrated History of Ancient Greece.

    Cartledge, 74, is A.G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture emeritus at the University of Cambridge, A.G. Leventis Senior Research Fellow at Clare College, University of Cambridge, and Member of the European Advisory Board of Princeton University Press.

    He is Vice-Chair of the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles (BCRPM) and elected Vice-President of the International Association for the Reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures (IARPS). He is also President of The Hellenic Society, Chair of the London Hellenic Prize, member of the International Honorary Committee of the Thermopylae-Salamis 2500 Anniversary framework and Honorary Citizen of Sparta.

    In an interview with Greek daily newspaper Ta Nea, Professor Paul Cartledge spoke about his relationship with Greece, ancient history (including its connection and relevance to our times), democracy (ancient and modern) and the Parthenon Marbles.

    Q: Greek President Katerina Sakellaropoulou has named you Commander of the Order of Honour in recognition of your contribution in enhancing Greece's stature abroad. What does it mean to you to receive this award?

    A: It means the world to me, since it's a public and visible confirmation that somehow both my academic research (and publications) and my attempted media interventions on cultural and other issues affecting modern as well as ancient Greece have been to a satisfactory degree successful. I see myself, perhaps rather grandiosely, as a 'public intellectual', and since around 1990 I have both tried to publish work that, though academically based and scrupulously researched, is also 'accessible' to a wider public than just my specialist university colleagues and students, and to intervene on major public cultural issues, such as the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles, a cause very dear to my heart. I tried to sum up these points as part of my Inaugural Lecture as the founding A.G. Leventis Professor of Greek Culture in the University of Cambridge (delivered 2009, and published by the C.U.P., 2009): 'Forever Young: Why Cambridge has a Professorship of Greek Culture'.

    Q: When did you first become interested in Greek history and culture? Why did you choose to study the Classics?

    A: I can almost pinpoint the moment to a precise year: I was given for my 8th birthday (1955) a copy of a simplified, children's version of Homer's Odyssey. We all know the famous episode when Odysseus, after 20 years away, at last returns to his island-kingdom of Ithaca, only to find that his palace has been taken over and is being trashed by 108 'suitors' (of his faithful Spartan wife Penelope). Outside the palace back door, full of ticks and generally in a very bad way, lies amid the dirt and squalor a dog - Argos. Once he had been Odysseus' favourite hunting dog, but now he is abandoned and degraded. Odysseus comes upon him and, though he is in disguise as a poor beggar man, Argos recognises his master! But the effort is too much - Argos has a heart attack and dies. Odysseus secretly sheds a tear - I wept out loud for half an hour...

    That's the symbolic moment of origin of my classical career. Just as crucial, obviously, was the fact that I attended private schools in which the teaching of Latin was begun at the very same age - 8, and of Greek at age 11. And the learning of Latin and Greek was privileged: if you were good at these languages, as I was, then you found yourself placed in the 'top' forms or sets. And so it went, as I progressed from Colet Court in London to the senior St Paul's School, a famous Classics school founded in 1509 by humanist John Colet, a friend of Erasmus. And from there on to New College Oxford, to read 'Mods' and 'Greats', i.e. Classics (1965-69). I graduated with a 'Double First' and, since by 1969 I'd decided I wanted as a career to teach ancient history at university, I embarked on a course of doctoral (DPhil) research into early Spartan history and archaeology under the supervision of John Boardman - then plain 'Mr Boardman', now 'Sir John'.

    Q: When did you first visit Greece and what do you recall from your first visit to the country?

    A: I am rather ashamed - retrospectively - that I did not visit Greece until 1970 - as part of my doctoral programme. My first serious venture on Greek soil was on Crete, to take part in (in fact oversee the pottery shed for) Hugh Sackett & Mervyn Popham's excavation for the BSA (British School at Athens) of the so-called Unexplored Mansion site at Knossos. Mainly Roman levels were what we were hitting in summer 1970 - but that's not all we British and American students were hitting, by any means. A couple of local mpouats (boîtes) engaged our interest of an evening, and at weekends we went on ekdhromes, expeditions, either solo (as I did once - and when I asked directions, a local farmer asked me very fiercely 'Germanos eisai?' 'Oxi, Anglos!', I replied. Huge smiles all round - this was only a generation after the Nazi occupation) or in a group.

    Participation in that excavation gave me a series of lasting and deep friendships, some now interrupted by distance or death but others still alive and well. It was also my introduction to Greek politics - under the 'dictatorship' of 'the Colonels'. Members of the BSA were required - by the Greek state - to swear that they wouldn't get involved in any political activity. I duly signed, but did not abide by my oath, not on Crete (where I listened and learned to how the fiercely independent Cretans saw Athens, regardless of which regime held power there) so much as back in Athens.

    I signed the oath at the British School under the watchful eye of the then Director, Mr PM Fraser (All Souls Oxford). That would have been in about June 1970, when I arrived in Greece for the very first time. On Crete (BSA dig at Knossos) in summer 1970 I talked a lot of politics - the Cretans I spoke with (workers on the dig) were openly contemptuous of the Colonels. (Except for the Dig Foreman, Andonis - who was a Colonels' supporter. He had gained the position because his brother, a communist, had been sacked from it...) We weren't supposed even to 'talk' politics. Back in Athens in 1971 I had friends who were part of the underground resistance. e.g. I attended with them a 'secret' talk given by Cambridge economics prof Joan Robinson and went around with them distributing resistance literature to private addresses in the city. (No mobile phones, no internet...). On one occasion I agreed to act as a courier - between the resistance and (Lady) Amalia Fleming, widow of Sir Alexander (discoverer of penicillin), who lived in London. I was given - I can't now remember by whom - a fairly large packet (no idea what it contained!) to take through customs at Athens airport and then on to London, where I mailed it to Lady Fleming through the normal post. I was very very nervous going through Athens airport security and customs - but my carry-on bag wasn't searched.

    Q: In Greece we have debates from time to time about the usefulness of studying Ancient Greek. Do you think that there is value in learning this ancient language?

    A: I could hardly say 'no', could I? Let me start from the fact - I believe it is one - that the Greek poetic tradition is the longest continuous poetic tradition in the world, barring only - possibly - the Chinese. From Homer to the present day. One easy way of assimilating this is through The Penguin Book of Greek Verse, expertly edited and translated in 1971 by Constantine Trypanis. There are other such compendiums, but that one has the original Greek versions as well as a serviceable English (prose) translation. Then there is the fact - of this I have no doubt - that ancient Greek is the richest member of the Indo-European language family, capable of expressing the minutest nuances of emotion and description, blessed with several voices and moods and declensions and conjugations... Then - and directly consequent upon that latter fact - it's a fact that, if you don't know Greek, you can't speak a whole slew of English: so many are the loan words or invented words taken from Greek into English - e.g. photography ('light-writing/drawing') or xenophobia ('fear of strangers/foreigners/outsiders'). But of course, the chief value of learning ancient Greek is to read ancient Greek texts in the original - Homer, the world's greatest epic poet, Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, some of the world's greatest tragic dramatists, Hippocrates, father of Western medicine, Herodotus and Thucydides, founding fathers of my own discipline of History, Plato and Aristotle, twin founders of Western philosophy - need I continue??

    Q: Britain has a rich tradition over many centuries in teaching and studying the Classics – from which you have benefited and to which you have contributed immensely. Why would someone study ancient history now? How is it relevant to us?

    A: In my last answer I mentioned my intellectual roots in ancient Greece: the Histories of Herodotus of Halicarnassus (c. 484-425 BCE), the History of the Atheno-Peloponnesian war by Thucydides of Athens (c. 460-400). Most people who become professional classicists do not become as I did ancient historians; for them, the literature or the philosophy are what attract and engage them. But - like one of my own English history heroes, Edward Gibbon - I have known from the age of 8 or so that I wanted to be a historian, and, since I'm a Classicist, that means I'm an 'ancient' historian. But I insist: I am a historian who happens to specialise in ancient (Graeco-Roman, Mediterranean) history, not some peculiar species of historian. Like Herodotus what engages me above all are causality and causation - why did things happen, and happen the way they did, and in no other way? I mean really significant things such as the birth, development, spread and demise of (ancient, direct) democracy, the conquest of Greece by Republican Rome, the fall of the Roman Empire in the West and East. Like Thucydides, I'm particularly preoccupied with trying to understand and explain politics - the political process, the methods of politicians, the involvement of the masses in decision-making.

    Q: Which ancient Greek figure stands out for you, and why?

    A: May I choose two, please? One female, one male. My female choice is a Spartan, not just any Spartan female, I admit, but a princess of the blood (more precisely, of the Eurypontid blood). Sparta uniquely in the 5th and 4th centuries - still - had two royal houses, the senior males of which ruled as joint kings (basileis). Women in Sparta were unusually empowered, by contrast to the relatively lowly status of Greek women in others of the 1000 or so Greek cities. But even Sparta couldn't contemplate a ruling Queen. Nor - I am assuming - did wives choose the names of their daughters, so I am assuming that it was her father, King Archidamus II (r. c. 465-427), who chose the name of his daughter - my female choice - Kyniska. The name means 'little dog' or 'puppy', and it's the female equivalent of Kyniskos, a name attested elsewhere in the 5th-century Peloponnese. I infer that the name gives a nod to the fact that Spartans bred particularly excellent hunting dogs, especially females, which they used in pursuit of the greatest of all 'big game', the wild boar of the lower Taygetus mountain slopes. We don't know exactly when Kyniska was born - her full brother Agesilaus II saw the light of day in about 445, so I suppose that 440 or so would be a reasonable birthdate. In which case she was about 45 when she made the biggest possible splash in the world of sports normally restricted exclusively to Greek males: the equestrian competition at the Olympic Games. In 396 she won the top-notch 4-horse chariot race - and four years later repeated that amazing feat. And she was no shrinking violet. A statue base happens to have survived from Olympia on which Kyniska had engraved a boastful epigram, telling anyone who'd listen that she was 'the first woman in all Hellas (the Greek world) to have won this crown' - the victor's olive wreath. Of course, she hadn't actually driven the winning chariots, but she had reared and trained the horses in her own stables in Sparta, where there was a considerable number of successful (male) owners and trainers already. So just to ram the point home, she opened her epigram by stating her own aristocratic breeding pedigree and bloodline: 'kings are my father and brothers', that is, the aforementioned Archidamus II and Agesilaus II and her half-brother Agis II. By 396 both Archidamus and Agis were dead: how well did Kyniska's boast go down with her full brother, reigning co-king Agesilaus? Not well at all, I think. Agesilaus's encomiastic biographer, the Athenian Xenophon, took time out to insist that, although Kyniska had indeed won an Olympic victory, it was Agesilaus's idea in the first place that she compete at all, and anyway rearing race-horses was far less important than rearing war-horses!

    My male choice is a different kettle of fish altogether: not a Spartan - nor an Athenian, nor a Syracusan, nor even a Macedonian but... a Theban. We don't know exactly when he was born, some time in the last quarter of the 5th century, nor do we know much about his family background or upbringing because - unlike that of his contemporary and sidekick Pelopidas - Epaminondas's biography by fellow-Boeotian Plutarch is lost. We assume he was high status and well educated, so his career and alleged espousal of Pythagoreanism would suggest. What we do know that, unlike Pelopidas again, who went into exile, Epameinondas remained in Thebes while it was under Spartan military occupation between 382 and 379 and did what he could to keep up Theban morale and resistance from the inside - until the daring stroke of Pelopidas and a small band of brothers effected Thebes's liberation in winter 379/8. Thereafter Epaminondas was in the frontline both physically and morally. On three fronts mainly: 1. the field of battle - he was a strategist and tactician of genius, winning for Thebes and its allies two major battles, Leuktra (371) and Mantineia (362); 2. federalism: Thebes was itself the chief city of a - moderately - democratic federal state, the Boeotians; in the 360s Epameinondas extended that principle to the Peloponnese with the foundation of Megalopolis as capital of the federal state of the Arcadians; and, not least, 3: liberation: in 369 Epameinondas was key to liberating the Helots of Messenia, Greeks who for centuries had been the unfree compulsory labour-force of the Spartans. Nor was he unconventional only in religion; so too in his private life. He never married, and he died (on the battlefield of Mantineia) and was buried side by side with his current male lover.

    Q: In your recently released book Thebes: The Forgotten City of Ancient Greece you write that democracy in ancient Greece "was not just a matter of institutions but also a matter of deep culture". What do you mean by that and, given recent political developments in several parts of the world, is democracy still deeply ingrained in our culture?

    A: I'm almost inclined to say that the difference between any ancient form of democracy and any modern version is like the difference between chalk and cheese, or apples and pears... All ancient versions of demokratia were direct - in antiquity 'we the people' (demos) did not merely choose others to rule for/instead of them but ruled directly themselves. That in itself gave ancient Greek democratic citizens - free, legitimate adult males only, of course - a participatory stake in governance that is not available to the vast majority of citizens in representative democratic systems like our own today. That participatory stake was not felt or exercised only occasionally but almost on an everyday basis: in the 4th century BCE the Athenian Assembly met every 9 days, yes, really, the decision-making organ of the Athenian democratic state made major decisions of religious and other political policy every 9 days. The 6000 citizens who put themselves forward to be enrolled, by lot, on the annual panel of jurors might sit on average every other day - for which they were paid a small fee out of state funds. Every year the Athenians staged two religious play-festivals, for which audience members who were too poor to afford the entrance fee to the Theatre of Dionysus were given a small subsidy. Decisions as to who were the winning playwrights and impresarios - the ancient Athenian Oscars - were made by democratic majority vote. All that implies that democracy was for them not just a matter of institutions but also a matter of deep culture. That implication was made manifest in the second half of the 4th century when a new goddess was added to the official Athenian democratic pantheon, the personification of none other than Demokratia, herself.

    Q: The title of a BBC Radio 4 series you recently participated in was Could an ancient Athenian Fix Britain? What is the answer to that question? And, do you think an ancient Athenian could fix modern Greece as well?

    A: There is no answer to that question! I mean, no answer to 'how could or should Britain be fixed?', if by that is meant - how do we overcome the utterly disgraceful and shameful class divide between rich and poor (which in Covid-ridden Britain equates pretty much to healthy and unhealthy Britain)? or between the well and the less well educated? or between the rich and poor regions of not just England but also Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland? or between those regions - in favour of the strengthening or shoring-up of our now very shaky Union? I could go on. The ancient Athenian polis and the modern British state are simply not commensurable. However, at another level, there are ways in which, it could be suggested, ancient Athenian practices - I mean democratic political practices - could and should be re-evaluated with a view to seeing whether and how they might improve our own. Take the present - unelected - House of Lords: scandalously un-democratic as such (and that's without mentioning the 80-plus 'hereditaries'!!). And what about having far more in the way of genuinely democratic input into legislation - via constitutional assemblies of bodies selected by lot to be genuinely representative of all relevant sections of society, who would then put forward measured recommendations to Parliament? What about genuinely democratic referendums or plebiscites - in which all parties to a debate have to put forward a manifesto for which, if they win, they will be held responsible and accountable, if necessary through the courts?

    Q: Boris Johnson, the British Prime Minister, has made no secret of his classical education and love for Greece. He has also said that Pericles is his hero. Do you see any similarities between the two statesmen? What is your opinion of Mr Johnson?

    A: I am an academic, not a politician, but I am also a committed citizen, and not a supporter of the Party that chose Mr Johnson as its leader and thereby - at a stroke - originally as our Prime Minister. Very undemocratic, that. The office of the UK Prime Minister has infinitely more discretionary powers than Pericles ever held. Pericles was regularly elected to the top executive Athenian office, but he was as such a member of a board of ten, and any moment almost of any day he might be impeached - as he in fact was in 429 (deposed and fined). For ancient Athenian democrats, all officials however selected had to be made constantly to realise they were accountable - to the People. Johnson and Pericles? No comparison. Johnson v Pericles? No contest.

    Q: In his recent interview with Ta Nea, Johnson said that “the (Parthenon) Sculptures were legally acquired by Lord Elginand have been legally owned by the British Museum’s Trustees since their acquisition.” I know that you have been campaigning for decades for the Marbles’ reunification. What did you think when you read his comments? Why do you think that the Parthenon Marbles should return to Greece?

    A: How would a French person feel if the Bayeux tapestry were cut in half, and half were to remain in Bayeux, while the other half was transported to Berlin? How would an Italian feel if the Mona Lisa were cut in half and one half was transported and permanently housed in Milan while the other half remained in Paris? How would one feel about either of those - as a cultured European, or as a citizen of the world? What the British Museum currently holds of the Parthenon Marbles were removed when Athens was part of the Ottoman Empire, a power whose local functionaries on the spot could not give a fig for what Britain's Ambassador to the Sublime Porte, Lord Elgin, did to or with the Parthenon Marbles. There is no evidence yet discovered to prove that what Elgin in fact did (sheer vandalism, according to Lord Byron and many of us since) was literally authorised by the Ottoman Sultan. But, even if there were, so what? What - moral - authority could possibly legitimise the removal of artefacts from a building under alien control to the jurisdiction of a foreign power which then claims them as spoils by a supposedly legal enactment? There is in Athens on the Acropolis the very substantial remnant of a once aesthetically magnificent temple, the shadow of which extends from antiquity to modernity. There is in Athens a simply amazing modern Museum with a dedicated gallery intervisible with the Acropolis in which what the Greeks hold of the Parthenon sculptures are properly - I mean scientifically, art-historically correctly - displayed. Reunification? Q.E.D.

    Q: Greece is celebrating this year the bicentennial of its War of Independence, as well as the 2,500th anniversary of the Battle of Thermopylae and naval battle of Salamis. How do you evaluate the historic importance of the War of Independence and do you agree that Thermopylae and Salamis were of seminal importance for the course of Western Civilisation as we know it?

    A: I am a historian of ancient Greece and Rome, not of early 19th-century Greece and Europe - and by extension the world. But I have of course read widely in the accessible literature and am aware that there has been a ton of new research issuing forth especially since the 150th anniversary, in 1971, and now at the bicentennial. As I understand it, that research tends to emphasise the singularity, the crucially influential singularity, of what Greeks both inside and outside the boundaries of the Ottoman empire achieved during the crucial first three decades of the 19th century (not coincidentally precisely the period of Lord Elgin's vandalism). In short, the Rising of 1821 saw the birth of modernity, political modernity, both in Greece and elsewhere.

    As for the 2500th anniversary - or rather the anniversaries in 2021 of the two battles of 480 BCE and the anniversary in 2022 of the finally decisive battle of Plataea in 479 BCE - the issue hinges on a massive 'what if?' What if the invading Persians under Xerxes had won, rather than the 32 or 33 resisting Greek cities? (And what if at precisely the same moment, in 480 BCE, the Carthaginians of north Africa had defeated Greek Syracuse and taken over Greek Sicily?) There are many imponderables here, and as a historian I have to insist first that we must not talk of 'Greece' or 'Greeks' as if they were a unitary political force in the way that 'the Persians' were. Most Greeks of the Aegean area did NOT choose to resist the Persian invasion, and many of them fought for rather than against the Persians. Consider only Thebes: rather than join Sparta and Athens, the leading resisters, Thebes sided with almost all Greeks from Boeotia to the Hellespont and took the Persian side. And it would be hard to find two Greek cities more UNalike than Sparta and Athens in 480-479 BCE. No doubt all the resisters agreed equally that they were fighting for freedom FROM a potential Persian takeover; but within Sparta and Athens 'freedom' could have very different meanings for different sectors of the population - for male citizens as opposed to female; for all citizens as opposed to legally unfree Helots or chattel slaves. So, for me, the question of what difference did the loyalist Greeks' victory over the Persians make on a grand, world-historical/civilisational scale boils down to - would the Athenians' precious and still infant democracy have been allowed to survive, had the Persians won? To which my answer is: unquestionably not. And - therefore - but for the loyalist Greeks' victory, there would have been no "Persians" tragedy by Aeschylus (472 BCE), and indeed no flowering of the tragic and later comic drama that constitutes the very foundation of all Western drama. No democracy would have meant no free speech, no free exchange of scientific and philosophical and other ideas, ideas which sometimes challenged even the very basis of conventional norms not least in religion. But even so, it is not of course the ancient Greeks or Athenians themselves who directly ensured that their original creations should influence subsequent civilisations including our own today - for that, we have to thank the Romans, the Byzantine Greeks, the European Renaissance, the European and American Enlightenments... 'Legacy' or cultural inheritance is a dynamic, two-way, dialectical and constantly renegotiable process - currently being rather fiercely debated so far as 'Classics' is concerned, along the two axes of racism and sexism above all. Let a thousand flowers bloom...

    This interview was written by  Ioannis Andritsopoulos, UK Correspondent for Greek daily newspaper Ta Nea and published on 17 April 2021

     

    Professor Paul Cartledge received his Commander of the Order of Honour from H.E Ambassador Ioannis Raptakis in London on 22 April 2021, at the Ambassador's Residence . This  was organised on the occasion of Philhellenism and International Solidarity Day and Greece's 1821 Bicentennial. John Kittmer,  Kevin Featherstone, Stephen Fry and Robin Lane Fox  were awarded the Commander of the Order of Phoenix and Professor Paul Cartledge with the Commander of the Order of Honour . H. E Ambassador of Greece, Ioannis Raptakis, presented the medals on behalf of the President of the Hellenic Republic, Katerina Sakellaropoulou, recognising each distinguished philhellene for their contribution in enhancing knowledge about Greece in the UK and reinforcing the ties between the two countries.

    H.E. Ambassador Raptakis with Professor Cartledge, awarded  the medal of Commander of the Order of Honour  and  second photo John Kitmer with Ambassador Raptakis and Professor Cartledge.

    Stephen Fry with Ambassador Raptakis, second photo Ambassador Raptais with Kevin Featherstone and  last image is Lane Fox.

     

     

  • Thursday, 28 January 2021

    The Hellenic Observatory (@HO_LSE) is internationally recognised as one of the premier research centres on contemporary Greece and Cyprus. It engages in a range of activities, including developing and supporting academic and policy-related research; organisation of conferences, seminars and workshops; academic exchange through visiting fellowships and internships; as well as teaching at the graduate level through LSE's European Institute.

    This event is part of the 21 in 21 activities, celebrating the 2021 bicentenary of the outbreak of the Greek War of Independence in 21 Greek-British encounters. The 21 in 21 events are sponsored by the A.G. Leventis Foundation

    Power and Impunity: what Donald Trump and Boris didn't learn from the ancient Greeks.

    Are we living in a world marked by a new impunity of power? Political leaders discard established norms and taboos that have guided the behaviour of their predecessors and, in doing so, they win popular support from new areas of society, including the disengaged and excluded. How did we get here? Our notions of the good society, of the responsibility that comes with power, and, of course, democracy and its discourse, stem from ancient and classical Greece. Aristotle, Pericles, Plato, and Socrates etc. have shaped our political thinking, processes and systems. Our deepest sense of Western values, embedded in education curricula across our societies, emanates from classical Athens. Is it no longer of use or value? Are we now judging utility and cost differently? A panel brought together a set of experts to address these issues from different vantage points.

    Professor Kevin Featherstone deliver introductory remarks, which included the introduction by Professor Paul Cartledge, who was unable to attend. 

    I do apologise, but for unavoidable personal reasons I am unable to be with you in the flesh this evening. So I am even more grateful to  Professor Kevin Featherstone than I would anyway have been, for so kindly agreeing to be my spokesperson.

    I have set out my brief contribution as a Q & A: answering half-a-dozen possible questions (of course there could have been many, many more). The keynote to be struck throughout is difference: both differences within ancient conceptions and constructions of democracy, and between all ancient (direct) versions and all modern (representative) ones.

    There’s a case for arguing that modern democracies should be more direct, but there’s also a case (mismanaged referendums) that they should be less so. Unarguably, the lesson to be learned from ancient democracy is the absolute necessity of ensuring the responsibility, the accountability of all officials, but above all of the chief executives.

    1. What is democracy?

    There is no (one) such thing as 'democracy'. To use an ancient Greek analogy, it is hydra-headed. The original Greek word demokratia was a compound of 'demos' and 'kratos'. Kratos meant unambiguously might, power, strength, force - which could be used for good or ill. ‘Demos’, however, was ambiguous and so ambivalent. It meant People - but (as today) 'People' is an ambiguous and ambivalent term: it could mean either ALL the people (in ancient Greek terms, that meant all the empowered adult male free CITIZEN people) or a section of them. If the latter, in ancient Greece demos could be used in a sectarian/class sort of way to mean the majority of the empowered People, specifically the poor majority of them, the dictatorship of the proletariat as it were.

    Thus if one was an opponent of demokratia, such as Plato was, one saw it as the dictatorship of the poor masses of the citizenry over the elite few rich citizens (such as Plato), a form of ochlocracy or mob-rule. But if one was an ideological democrat (such as Pericles) demokratia was government of the people, for the people, AND by the people. Directly by the people: all ancient versions of democracy were direct, transparent, face-to-face. Whereas all modern versions are the opposite - indirect, parliamentary, and representative governance: we the people do not actually rule ourselves but we choose others, usually by voting in elections, to rule for us (instead of us). That is the absolutely key and fundamental difference and opposition between ancient and modern Democracy.

    2. How do we know about ancient democracy?

    First, let's repeat that democracy was not just one thing - even in ancient Greece. The democracy of (e.g.) ancient Syracuse differed from that of ancient Athens. Athens between about 500 and 325 BCE had three different forms of democracy in succession. Athens, which invented democracy, is also by far the best documented of the ancient cities that had democracy (perhaps 250 in all out of about 1000?). I shall concentrate on Athens here.

    There are three main types of source: Documentary, Literary, and Archaeological. The evidence that survives is not good enough or sufficient in quantity for us to write a continuous narrative history of democracy at Athens between 500 and 325, but it is good enough for us to see what were the major issues and turning points. What we lack, oddly, is a thorough, conceptually reasoned presentation of pro-democratic ideology and theory by a convinced ancient Greek democrat. This is partly because almost every writer on ancient democracy that we know of was more or less hostile to it.

    3. What was the new democratic order?

    Again, I shall confine myself mainly to Athens here. The word demokratia is first attested in works published in the 420s BCE, but most of us scholars believe that the earliest form of democracy was introduced at Athens by reforms attributed to an aristocrat called Cleisthenes in 508/7 BCE. From then on, the demos meeting in assembly (ekklesia) voted by majority (after the counting or assessing of raised hands) on all laws and on all major domestic and foreign policy issues. There was no property qualification either for attendance at the assembly or for membership of the Council of 500 that prepared the Assembly’s agenda. But there were property qualifications for holding the top executive offices - Treasurers, Generals- who were elected. About 460 BCE the old aristocratic privileges were mostly swept away. Juror-judges in the new People's courts were all selected by lot and paid from public moneys.

    4. What were the governing bodies?

    The grease in the machine was provided by the Council of 500: 50 citizens chosen by lot from each of the 10 electoral districts into which the Athenian citizen population was divided. By lot, because on democratic principle elections were not in themselves democratic. Such was the distribution of the 500 seats that well over 30 percent of the citizen population would have had to serve at least once in their lifetime. The Council was both proactive - it prepared the agenda for the monthly, later almost weekly Assembly meetings; and reactive - it saw to the execution of the wishes of the Assembly. It also exercised an oversight (accountability) over all elected or allotted officials. Even Pericles might be brought to account on a criminal charge and deposed and fined. The Assembly, advised by the Council members and by top officials and by other, unofficial 'speakers', made all the key policy and pragmatic decisions by majority vote. Those decisions could be reviewed and revised and indeed rejected by legal means, specifically through the People's jury courts.

    But the Athenian democracy was not just a matter of democratic political institutions of decision-making governance. Democracy was also a matter of education and culture. Religious festivals including for example the theatre festivals in honour of Dionysus were completely democratised. And democracy was local as well as national. Democracy happened within the 139 or 140 local villages as much as in the political capital of the city of Athens.

    5. What were the merits of this democracy? What were its problems?

    From the surviving - mostly elite - ancient sources we hear much more about the defects and failures of democracy as a system than we do about its merits. The two key features of democratic ideology were freedom and equality. Anti-democrats complained that democracy gave too much of the wrong kind of freedom (license) to the wrong sort of (poor) citizen people, making the cardinal error of treating unequals as if they were equals.

    Democrats countered those attacks in various ways, stressing above all that, if and when 'the Athenians' made a decision, it was ALL Athenians who were empowered to make that decision, not just a small subset of them. Democracy treated all Athenians equally AS Athenians. (Men only, male citizens only, of course.) They invoked the notion of what today we call 'the wisdom of the crowd'. Even Aristotle, who was not a democrat, saw merit in this democratic argument.

    Pragmatically, the Athenian democracy made terrible - and fatal – mistakes, especially in foreign rather than domestic policy. On the other hand, democracy in various forms flourished for most of almost two centuries. And it was under the democracy and because it was a democracy that Athens scaled cultural heights achieved by no other ancient Greek city - nor by hardly any other city or country since.

    6. Heritage – how does Athenian democracy compare to ours? What have we changed?

    Whereas all modern democracies are fundamentally representative, all ancient ones were fundamentally direct democracies. Combining representative democracy with direct democracy by using referendums is a potential recipe for disaster. Another factor bedeviling modern democracy is the mystifying rhetoric that is often applied to politics today. The expression 'the people' is not self-explanatory and is regularly abused to support variously populist agendas. Today we could, because of the availability of our new digital technology, reintroduce if we wish direct democratic decision-making on ALL issues - not just the occasional referendum. But in order to make that work, we would need a great deal more of what the ancient Greeks called paideia, education and culture, and we would need to introduce many more of the sort of checks and safeguards that the Athenians introduced when faced with their own disastrous mistakes. In this regard at least the US constitution – itself subject to bitterly confrontational interpretation – is, despite being far too Presidential, clearly superior to the UK’s mixed parliamentary system.

    Let us prove Hegel wrong – who said that what we learn from history is that we do NOT learn from history! We can learn from the experience of the ancient Greeks and apply it to improve our own democratic politics.

     The speakers: 

    Professor Michael Cox lectured to universities world-wide as well as to several government bodies,  is currently visiting professor at the Catholic University in Milan. He is the author, editor and co-editor of over 30 books, including most recently a collection of his essays The Post-Cold War World, as well as new editions of J M Keynes’s, The Economic Consequences of the Peace and E H Carr’s Nationalism and After. He is now working on a new history of LSE entitled, The “School”: LSE and the Shaping of the Modern World.

    Professor Simon Goldhill is Professor of Greek at the University of Cambridge and Foreign Secretary of the British Academy. He has written extensively about Greek society and the culture of ancient democracy. His books have been translated into ten languages and won three international prizes. He has lectured, and broadcast on television and radio, all over the world, from Canada to China.

    Johanna Hanink (@johannahan) is Associate Professor of Classics at Brown University and co-editor of the Journal of Modern Greek Studies. Her work focuses on classical Athens and the modern reception of Greek antiquity. She is author of Lycurgan Athens and the Making of Classical Tragedy and The Classical Debt: Greek Antiquity in an Era of Austerity. She is also a translator of Ancient and Modern Greek, and her new volume Andreas Karkavitsas: The Archeologist and Selected Sea Stories (translation with introduction and notes) is due out in autumn with Penguin Classics.

    The Chair 

    Paul Kelly (@PjThinker) is Professor of Political Theory at the LSE, where he has taught for over 25 years. He is author and editor of fifteen books on political philosophy and the history of political ideas. His publications include Utilitarianism and Distributive Justice (Clarendon 1990), Liberalism (Polity 2005) and edited Political Thinkers with David Boucher (Oxford 2017). He has also been co-editor of Political Studies and editor of UtilitasA Journal of Utilitarian Studies. He was recently Pro-Director Education at LSE and has recently returned to regular academic life. He is completing a book entitled Conflict, War and Revolution

    You can watch the event in full via this link https://www.facebook.com/lseps/videos/542777373347200

    Picture LSE event

     

© 2022 British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles. All Rights Reserved.