Abstract
This chapter offers a new perspective on the ‘New Acropolis Museum’ (currently known as the Acropolis Museum) in Athens, Greece. It does so by focusing on the conflicts that emerged during the construction of the museum when the authorities announced the decision to demolish the surrounding 1950s’ blocks of flats as well as the listed neoclassical and Art Deco buildings. The driver of this governmental decision was the enhancement of the surrounding environment of the museum and the provision of uninterrupted views towards the Acropolis Hill. The museum itself was also viewed as an object that should be admired for its innovative architecture and thus the demolition of the aforementioned buildings was deemed to enhance its aesthetics. The long-lasting and intensive debates that ensued as a result of this act demonstrate how the Acropolis Museum formed an arena for “heritage activism” where a diverse range of interest groups (including architects, archaeologists, local residents, local societies) fought against the official and authoritarian decision to demolish nineteenth- and twentieth-century architectural buildings in order to enhance the classical, glorious past of the Acropolis Hill. This heritage activism was partly driven by conceptual ambiguities and clashes in the definitions of cultural and human rights per se, as well as by the different socio-psychological forces and ideologies of the local community towards heritage.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
It has been acknowledged by many scholars in the past that the cultural rights aspect of human rights has not been treated equally to the other categories of human rights. For example, Stavenhagen (2013, p. 30) noted that ‘cultural rights have not been given much importance in theoretical texts on human rights and […] are treated rather as a residual category’.
- 2.
- 3.
The full text of the first part of Article 1 of the First Protocol is as follows: ‘every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law’.
- 4.
The full text of Paragraph 1 of Article 24 states: ‘the protection of the natural and cultural environment constitutes a duty of the State and a right of every person. The State is bound to adopt special preventive or repressive measures for the preservation of the environment in the context of the principle of sustainable development […]’.
- 5.
In particular, Paragraph 1 of Article 17 of the Greek Constitution of 1975 states: ‘Property is under the protection of the State; rights deriving there from, however, may not be exercised contrary to the public interest’.
- 6.
The current law in Greece that regulates everything related to antiquities and cultural heritage is Law 3028/2002 ‘on the protection of antiquities and cultural heritage in general’. Regarding the expropriation process to be followed in case that antiquities are found in private land, Article 19 states: ‘for the protection of monuments, archaeological or historical sites or for carrying out excavations, the Minister of Culture may order the temporary or permanent deprivation or restriction of the use of an immovable’ and ‘in case of substantial permanent restriction or permanent deprivation of the original use of an immovable as a whole, full compensation shall be paid’.
- 7.
The concept of archaeological significance can cover a wide terminological range, since it does refer to not only areas with archaeological remains but also the surrounding areas. refer to Siouti (2004).
- 8.
- 9.
The clause is included in Article 17 Paragraph 1 of the Greek Constitution.
- 10.
- 11.
Moreover, Giannakourou and Balla (2006, p. 537) stress that the ‘courts have formulated a body of case law that is generally tolerant of government actions that serve legitimate public objectives’.
References
Ashworth, G. J., Graham, B., & Tunbridge, J. E. (Eds.). (2005). Senses of place: Senses of time. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Barber, L. B. (2013). Making meaning of heritage landscapes: The politics of redevelopment in Halifax, Nova Scotia. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien, 57(1), 90–112. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0064.2012.00452.x.
Bender, B. (2001). Introduction: Landscape-meaning and action. In B. Bender & M. Winer (Eds.), Contested landscapes: Movement, exile and place (pp. 1–18). Oxford: Berg.
Constitution of Greece. (1975- as amended in 2002). Retrieved from http://www.eui.eu/Projects/InternationalArtHeritageLaw/Greece.aspx.
Council of Europe. (1950). European Convention on Human Rights. Retrieved from http://human-rights-convention.org/the-texts/the-convention-in-1950/.
Eleftherotypia: Daily Greek Newspaper.
Epikairotita: Greek Newspaper.
Flinn, A. (2011). Archival activism: Independent and community-led archives, radical public history and the heritage professions. InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 7(2), 1–20.
Fouseki, K. (2006). Conflicting discourses on the construction of the New Acropolis Museum: Past and present. European Review of History, 3(4), 533–548. doi:10.1080/13507480601049203.
Fouseki, K. (2007). Developing and integrating a conflict management model into the heritage management process: The case of the New Acropolis Museum. In S. Grabow, D. Hull, & E. Waterton (Eds.), Which past, whose future: Treatments of the past at the start of the 21st century (BAR Series 1633, pp. 127–136). Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Fouseki, K. (2008). Conflict resolution in the management of in situ museums. Unpublished thesis, University College London, London.
Giannakourou, G., & Balla, E. (2006). Planning regulation, property protection and regulatory takings in the Greek planning law. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 5(3), 535–557.
Gilliland, A., & Flinn, A. (2013). Community archives: What are we really talking about? CIRN Prato Community Informatics Conference 2013: Keynote. Retrieved from http://ccnr.infotech.monash.edu/assets/docs/prato2013_papers/gilliland_flinn_keynote.pdf.
Greek Archaeological Law No. 3028/2002, On the Protection of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage in General. Retrieved from http://www.eui.eu/Projects/InternationalArtHeritageLaw/Greece.aspx.
Hamilakis, Y., & Yalouri, E. (1996). Antiquities as symbolic capital in modern Greece. Antiquity, 70, 117–129. doi:10.1017/S0003598X00082934.
Hamilakis, Y., & Yalouri, E. (1999). Sacralising the past: The cults of archaeology in modern Greece. Archaeological Dialogues, 6(2), 115–159. doi:10.1017/S138020380000146X.
Hellenic Ministry of Culture. (1989). Proceedings of the 3rd International Meeting for the Restoration of the Acropolis Monument: Athens, 31 March–2 April 1989. Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture, Committee for the Preservation of the Acropolis Monuments.
Hellenic Ministry of Culture. (1990). The New Acropolis Museum: An international competition. Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture.
Kontiades, X. (2004). H συνταγματιkή διαρρύθμιση της σχέσης μεταξύ πρoστασίας τoυ πoλιτιστιkoύ περιβάλλoντoς kαι διkαιώματoς της ιδιokτησίας. Σkέψεις με αφoρμή τo νόμo 3028/2002 [The constitutional regulation of the relationship between the protection of the cultural environment and property rights. Thoughts on law 3028/2002]. In E. Trova (Ed.), H πoλιτιστιkή kληρoνoμιά kαι τo δίkαιo [Cultural heritage and the law]. Athens Conference Proceedings, 3–4 June 2003 (pp. 95–110). Athens: Sakkoulas.
Logan, W. S. (2007). Closing Pandora’s box: Human rights conundrums in cultural heritage protection. In H. Silverman & D. F. Ruggles (Eds.), Cultural heritage and human rights (pp. 33–52). New York: Springer.
Logan, W. S. (2008). Cultural diversity, heritage and human rights. In B. Graham & P. Howard (Eds.), The Ashgate research companion to heritage and identity (pp. 439–455). Farnham: Ashgate.
Lovell, N. (1998). Belonging in need of emplacement? In N. Lovell (Ed.), Locality and belonging (pp. 1–24). London: Routledge.
Lowenthal, D. (1985). The past is a foreign country. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mozaffari, A. (2015). The heritage ‘NGO’: A case study on the role of grass roots heritage societies in Iran and their perception of cultural heritage. International Journal of Heritage Studies. doi:10.1080/13527258.2015.1028961.
O’Keefe, P. J. (2000). Archeology and human rights. Public Archeology, 1(3), 181–194.
Organization of American States. (1969). American Convention on Human Rights. Retrieved from http://www.oas.org/dil/treaties_B-32_American_Convention_on_Human_Rights.htm.
Papachristos, N. (2004). H περίπτωση τoυ Nέoυ Moυσείoυ Akρόπoλης [The case of the New Acropolis Museum]. In E. Trova (Ed.), H πoλιτιστιkή kληρoνoμιά kαι τo δίkαιo [Cultural heritage and law] (pp. 437–449). Athens: Sakkoulas.
Psychogiopoulou, E. (2013). The European Union and cultural rights. In A. Vrdoljak (Ed.), The cultural dimension of human rights (pp. 159–185). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schama, S. (1995). Landscape and memory. London: Harper Collins Publishers.
Silverman, H., & Ruggles, D. F. (Eds.). (2007). Cultural heritage and human rights. New York: Springer.
Siouti, G. (2004). H πρoστασία τoυ φυσιkoύ kαι πoλιτιστιkoύ περιβάλλoντoς από τη νoμoλoγία: σύγkρoυση αγαθών ή αειφόρoς πρoστασία τoυ χώρoυ; [The legal protection of the natural and cultural environment: clash of rights or sustainable protection of space?]. In E. Trova (Ed.), H πoλιτιστιkή kληρoνoμιά kαι τo δίkαιo [Cultural heritage and the law]. Athens Conference Proceedings, 3–4 June 2003 (pp. 81–94). Athens: Sakkoulas.
Stavenhagen, R. (2013). Cultural rights: A social science perspective (1998). In R. Stavenhagen (Ed.), Peasants, culture and indigenous peoples: Critical issues (pp. 29–52). Berlin: Springer.
Ta Nea: Daily Greek Newspaper.
The Guardian: Daily British Newspaper.
Tilley, C. (1994). A phenomenology of landscape: Places, paths and monuments. Oxford: Berg.
To Vima: Daily Greek Newspaper.
Tsatsou, D. (1987). Συνταγματιkό Δίkαιo [Constitutional Law] (Vol. 3). Athens: Sakkoulas.
Türeli, I. (2014). Heritagisation of the “Ottoman/Turkish House” in the 1970s: Istanbul based actors, associations and their networks. European Journal of Turkish Studies, 19(1), 1–27.
United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a27.
United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CESCR.aspx.
Xrisogonos, K. (2002). Aτoμιkά kαι koινωνιkά διkαιώματα [Individual and social rights]. Athens: Sakkoulas.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fouseki, K., Shehade, M. (2017). Heritage Activism and Cultural Rights: The Case of the New Acropolis Museum. In: Silverman, H., Waterton, E., Watson, S. (eds) Heritage in Action. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42870-3_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42870-3_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-42868-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-42870-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)