Western Ways: Foreign Schools in Rome and Athens 3110601583, 9783110601589

The book discusses for the first time the foreign schools of archaeology in Rome and Athens in historical perspective, a

405 43 4MB

English Pages 324 [352] Year 2018

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

Western Ways: Foreign Schools in Rome and Athens
 3110601583, 9783110601589

Table of contents :
FM
Contents
Abbreviations
Acknowledgements
General Timeline
Dramatis Personae
Preface
Introduction
Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions
Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914
Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935
Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939
Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945
Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953
Conclusions
Epilogue
Appendices
Primary Sources and Interviews
Bibliography
Name Index
Subject Index

Citation preview

Frederick Whitling Western Ways

Frederick Whitling

Western Ways

Foreign Schools in Rome and Athens

ISBN 978-3-11-060158-9 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-060253-1 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-060236-4 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018952441 Bibliografic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliografic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Typesetting: Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd. Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck Cover image: Jules Ange Joseph Bouchon, Allégorie de la Méditerranée, 1937 (detail). Nice, Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen www.degruyter.com

For Edith, Olof and Hanna

Contents Abbreviations 

 IX

Acknowledgements  General Timeline  Dramatis Personae  Preface 

 XI  XIII  XVII

 XXV

 1 Introduction  Schools, Academies, Institutes  Contextualising the “Classical”  1

 2  5

 9 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions  Pilgrims, Antiquarians, Archaeologists   13 The Institute for Archaeological Correspondence   17 The Archaeological Society at Athens   25 “Big Digs”: National Prestige, International Framework 

2

 41 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914  French Expeditions: Egypt, Syria, Morea and Macedonia  Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War   49 Enter the Anglo-Saxons: America and Britain   63 The Kavvadias Affair and the Italian School   69

3

 77 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935  War, Interwar: Legislation and Restrictions   77 Northern Nostalgia for Southern Sunshine   90 “New Opportunities”: Colonial Archaeology   94

4

 107 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939  The Big Buildup: National Tension   107 The Archaeological Society: Celebrating a Centenary 

 29

 42

 123

VIII 

 Contents

5

Sparks From the Anvil, 1939–1945  “Breaking Wide Open”: War   135 Evacuation and Liberation   151

6

Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953  Post-War: AIAC and the Unione of institutes  Reopenings, Restorations   172 Old Networks, New Order   190  207

Conclusions  Epilogue  Appendices 

 217  223

Primary Sources and Interviews  Bibliography  Name Index  Subject Index 

 291  317  321

 283

 135

 167  167

Abbreviations AAR ACS ADA ADZ AIAC AN ASCSA ASMAE BA BFA BSA BSR CRAI CUM DAI DAIA DAIR DHI EFA EFR IAA ICA ICIC ICSU IIIC IRC IRCE ISR KNIR MFAA N.D. NIA PAA PIAC RA SAIA SIA SIR SPHS UNESCO UNIONE VV.AA. ZD

American Academy in Rome (1894) Archivio Centrale dello Stato (Rome) Archivio di Documentazione Archeologica (Rome) Archiv der Zentrale (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Berlin) Associazione Internazionale di Archeologia Classica, Rome (1945) Archives Nationales (Paris) American School of Classical Studies at Athens (1881) Archivio Storico del Ministero degli Affari Esteri (Rome) Bundesarchiv (Berlin) Bernadotteska Arkivet (Stockholm) British School at Athens (1886) British School at Rome (1901) Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen (Nice, 1933) Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Abteilung Athen (1872/1874) Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Abteilung Rom (1871/1874) Deutsches Historisches Institut in Rom (1888) École française d’Athènes (1846) École française de Rome (1873/1875) International Association of Academies (1899–1914) Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica (1829) International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation (1922–1946) International Council of Scientific Unions (the International Council for Science, 1931–) International Institute of International Cooperation, Paris (1924–1946) International Research Council (1919–1931) Istituto Nazionale per le Relazioni Culturali con l’Estero (Rome) Istituto di Studi Romani (1925) Koninklijk Nederlands Instituut Rome (1904) Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives (Allied “Subcommission”) No date Netherlands Institute in Athens (1984) Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia (1829) Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Christiana (1925) Riksarkivet (the National Archives, Stockholm) Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene (1909) Svenska institutet i Athen (1946/1948) Svenska institutet i Rom (1925) Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies (1879) United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (1945) Unione degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (1946) Various authors Zentraldirektion (Deutsches Archäologisches Institut), Berlin (1829/1832)

https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-201

Acknowledgements This book is a much revised adaptation and extension of my doctoral dissertation on foreign schools in Rome, before, during and after the Second World War (European University Institute, 2010). The book addresses how classical archaeology and the scholarly study of antiquity, arbitrated through foreign schools in Rome and in Athens, have influenced perceptions of cultural tradition, historical links and common roots in the modern (post-1800) “Western” world; tradition in the sense of Gustav Mahler’s take on Thomas More: “tradition is the handing down of the flame and not the worshipping of ashes.”1 Looking to antiquity for perceived origins and inspiration has also entailed searching for ways to control the significance and substance of the ancient past in modern society. The pursuit of ancient origins in classical studies might be seen as universal, inclusive and international, although the same search can also be simultaneously excluding and competitive. The foreign schools in Rome and Athens can be seen as expressions of both sides of this coin. Western Ways is an attempt to articulate aspects of several scholarly disciplines (classical studies, classical archaeology, classics, history, intellectual history, art history), addressing the impact and influence of foreign schools in Rome and Athens in historical perspective. My own academic background lies in classical archaeology and ancient history, with postgraduate training in history. The book is essentially interdisciplinary, and might appeal to classicists, archaeologists, historians and others with an interest in the study of the ancient world. Hopefully scholars in these (and other) fields can stand to gain something from the book.2 The archival research that underpins this book has been carried out over the last decade, generously funded by, for example, the Royal Swedish Academy of Letters, History and Antiquities, Fondazione Famiglia Rausing, and Föreningen Svenska Atheninstitutets Vänner. The revision work has also benefited from a research fellowship at the Fondation Hardt, Geneva, and from a scholarship at the École française d’Athènes. In my doctoral dissertation, I named a number of individuals who have influenced and assisted my work. This list (possibly exhausting) was by no means exhaustive, and will not be repeated here. I should however like to take the opportunity to once again thank my PhD thesis defence jury: my former supervisor Antonella Romano, Stephen L. Dyson, Anthony Molho and Salvatore Settis.

1 Alternatively, “tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire.” For the Mahler aphorism, see for example http://www.helmut-zenz.de/hztradit.html (accessed 4 March 2016). 2 Whitling (2010). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-202

XII 

 Acknowledgements

My work has been intimately connected with the Swedish institutes in Rome and Athens, my points of entry into the microcosm of foreign schools in both cities. I thank the present and former directors of the Swedish Institute in Rome, Kristian Göransson and Barbro Santillo Frizell, and of the Swedish Institute at Athens, Jenny Wallensten and Arto Penttinen, for the many opportunities to work with archival material at the two institutions. I also thank past and present directors of the German (DAIR, DAIA), French (EFA, EFR), British (BSA, BSR), American (ASCSA, AAR), Italian (SAIA) institutions discussed in this book, as well as archivists, librarians and other members of staff, too numerous to mention individually. Thank you all. The book could be dedicated to the individuals who, serving longer or shorter terms, have contributed to pushing and pulling the institutions treated here for almost two hundred years. It is hard not to sympathise with a preface statement made by the classical philologist Rudolf Pfeiffer: “the undertaking as a whole must justify itself without introductory recommendations and preparatory arguments; apologies for its deficiencies would have no end.”3 Many kind people have been of great assistance and support over the last few years. I therefore thank colleagues, friends and loved ones — you know who you are, you know I am grateful. Last but by no means least I thank my family for the support without which I would not have been able to do what I have done in the way that I have. A special and warm word of heartfelt thanks to Mum and Dad for valuable discussions, for language corrections, and for all the love.

3 Pfeiffer (1968) vii.

General Timeline 1800 Pope Pius VII, 1800–1823 1810 Fall of Napoleon, 1814 French Bourbon Restoration, 1814–1830 Congress of Vienna, 1814–1815 1820 Greek War of Independence, 1821–1832 Pope Leo XII, 1823–1829 Expedition de Morée, 1828–1833 Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica (ICA), 1829 Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia (PAA), 1829 Pope Pius VIII, 1829–1830 1830 French July Monarchy, 1830–1848 Pope Gregory XVI, 1831–1848 Kingdom of Greece, 1832–1924 (and 1935–1973, see below) Greek Archaeological Service, 1833 Archaeological Society at Athens, 1837 1840 Pope Pius IX, 1846–1878 École française d’Athènes (EFA), 1846 French Second Republic, 1848–1852 1850 French Second Empire, 1852–1870 1860 Kingdom of Italy, 1861–1946 1870 Capture of Rome, end of Papal States, 1870 Franco-Prussian war, 1870–1871 French Third Republic, 1870–1940 German Empire, 1871–1918 Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom (DAIR), 1871/1874 Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen (DAIA), 1872/1874 École française de Rome (EFR), 1873/1875 Spanish academy, Rome, 1873 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-203

XIV 

 General Timeline

Pope Leo XIII, 1878–1903 Archaeological Institute of America, 1879 1880 Opening of Vatican archives, 1881 (Leo XIII) Austrian Historical Institute in Rome, 1881 American School of Classical Studies in Athens (ASCSA), 1881 British School at Athens (BSA), 1886 Deutsches Historisches Institut in Rom (DHI), 1888 Römisches Institut des Görres-Gesellschaft, 1888 1890 American Academy in Rome (AAR), 1894 Hungarian Historical Institute, Rome, 1895–1913 (reestablished 1923) Kunsthistorisches Institut, Florence, 1897 Austrian Archaeological Institute at Athens (ÖAI), 1898 International Association of Academies, 1899–1914 1900 British School at Rome (BSR), 1901 Belgian Historical Institute in Rome, 1902 Pope Pius X, 1903–1914 Royal Netherlands Institute in Rome (KNIR), 1904 First International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Athens, 1905 Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene (SAIA), 1909 1910 Spanish School of History and Archaeology, Rome, 1910 Villa Massimo (German Academy in Rome), 1910 International Exhibition, Rome, 1911 Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rome, 1913 Pope Benedict XV, 1914–1922 First World War, 1914–1918 Weimar Republic, 1918–1933 International Research Council (IRC), 1919–1931 1920 League of Nations, 1920–1946 Romanian Academy in Rome, 1920 Czechoslovak Historical Institute in Rome, 1921–1941 (see Czech institute below) International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation (ICIC), 1922–1946 Pope Pius XI, 1922–1939 Italian Fascism (1922–1943) Second Hellenic Republic (1924–1935) International Institute of International Cooperation, Paris (IIIC), 1924–1946 Swedish Institute in Rome (SIR), 1925 Istituto di Studi Romani (ISR), 1925

General Timeline 

Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Christiana (PIAC), 1925 Polish Academy of Sciences in Rome, 1927 Hungarian Academy, Rome, 1927 Associazione Internazionale degli Studi Mediterranei, 1929–1936 Vatican City State created (Lateran Accords), 1929 1930 Nazi Germany, 1933–1945 Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen, Nice, 1933 Collegium Annalium Institutorum de Urbe Roma, 1935–c.1943 Austrian Cultural Institute, Rome, 1935 Kingdom of Greece, 1935–1973 (see above) Metaxas Regime, Greece (“4th of August Regime”), 1936–1941 Belgian Academy in Rome, 1939 Second World War, 1939–1945 Pope Pius XII, 1939–1958 1940 Vichy France (French State), 1940–1944 Hellenic State (Occupied Greece), 1941–1944 United Nations, 1945 Associazione Internazionale di Archeologia Classica (AIAC), 1945 UNESCO, 1945 Unione degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (Unione), Rome, 1946 Swedish Institute at Athens (SIA), 1946/1948 Swiss Institute in Rome, 1947 French Fourth Republic, 1946–1958 Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany), 1949–1990 German Democratic Republic (East Germany), 1949–1990 1950 Institutum Romanum Finlandiae, 1954 Danish Academy in Rome, 1956 French Fifth Republic (current), 1958– Pope John XXIII, 1958–1963 Norwegian Institute in Rome, 1959 1960 Pope Paul VI, 1963–1978 Greek military junta, 1967–1974 “Years of Lead” (“Anni di piombo”), Italy, c. 1968–1982 1970 Swiss School of Archaeology in Greece, 1975 Canadian Institute in Greece, 1976 Pope John Paul I, 1978 Pope John Paul II, 1978–2005

 XV

XVI 

 General Timeline

1980 Australian Archaeological Institute at Athens, 1980 Netherlands Institute in Athens (NIA), 1984 Finnish Institute at Athens, 1984 Belgian School at Athens, 1985 Norwegian Institute at Athens, 1989 1990 Federal Republic of Germany (current), 1990– Danish Institute at Athens, 1992 Czech Historical Institute in Rome, 1993 (cf. Czechoslovak institute above) Irish Institute of Hellenic Studies at Athens, 1995 Georgian Institute at Athens, 1998 2000 Pope Benedict XVI, 2005–2013 2010 Pope Francis (current), 2013– Slovakian Historical Institute in Rome, 2014

Dramatis Personae Akurgal, Ekrem, 1911–2002, archaeologist (Turkey) Albareda, Joaquin, 1892–1966, prefect of the Biblioteca Vaticana 1936–1962 Aldrich, Chester Holmes, 1871–1940, architect, director of the American Academy in Rome 1935–1940 Amelung, Walther, 1865–1927, classical archaeologist, first director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom 1921–1927 Ashby, Thomas, 1874–1931, archaeologist, director of the British School at Rome 1906–1925 (its first enrolled scholar (1902), honorary librarian 1902, assistant director 1903–1906) Ashmole, Bernard, 1894–1988, classical archaeologist and art historian, director of the British School at Rome 1925–1928, Keeper of Greek and Roman Antiquities at the British Museum, 1939–1956, chairman of the British School at Rome 1947–1948 Bartoli, Alfonso, 1874–1957, classical archaeologist, senatore a vita Belios, Konstantinos, 1772–1838, merchant, co-founder of the Archaeological Society at Athens Benakis, Antonis, 1873–1954, art collector and founder of the Benaki museum in Athens (1930), vice-president of the Archaeological Society at Athens Berenson, Bernard, 1865–1959, art historian, Renaissance specialist, associated with the Villa I Tatti, Settignano Bergman, Johan, 1864–1951, philologist and politican Bianchi Bandinelli, Ranuccio, 1900–1975, archaeologist, art historian and politician, director of the Italian fine arts and antiquities ministry (Antichità e Belle Arti) 1945–1948 Billig, Erland, 1915–1992, philologist, Latin teacher Billig, Ragnhild, 1914–1997, philologist and classical archaeologist, Latin teacher Blacas, Count (Pierre Louis Jean Casimir de Blacas), 1771–1839, antiquarian and diplomat, French ambassador to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies 1814–1816 and to the Holy See 1816–1821 Bloch, Raymond, 1914–1997, archaeologist Boëthius, Axel, 1889–1969, classical archaeologist, director of the Swedish Institute in Rome 1925–1935, 1952–1953 and 1955–1957, its secretary 1936–1955 Bonner, Paul Hyde, 1893–1968, American diplomat and novelist, served in Rome and Paris with the Department of State, Division of Foreign Services, 1946–1952 Bottai, Giuseppe, 1895–1959, governor of Rome 1935–1936, Italian Minister of Education 1936–1943 Broneer, Oscar, 1894–1992, Swedish-American archaeologist, acting director of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1947–1948 Brown, Frank Edward, 1908–1998, director-general of antiquities of the Republic of Syria in 1945, director of the American Academy in Rome 1965–1969, director of excavations at the American Academy in Rome 1947–1976 Bruhns, Leo, 1884–1957, art historian, director of the Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rome 1934–1953 Brøndsted, Peter Oluf, 1780–1842, archaeologist von Bunsen, Christian Karl Josias, 1791–1869, diplomat and scholar Burnouf, Émile-Louis, 1821–1907, philologist, Orientalist and racialist, director of the École française d’Athènes 1867–1875 Böckh, August, 1785–1867, philologist and archaeologist https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-204

XVIII 

 Dramatis Personae

Caetani Lovatelli, Ersilia, 1840–1925, archaeologist, first female member of the Accademia dei Lincei (1879) Calza, Guido, 1888–1946, classical archaeologist Capps, Edward, 1866–1950, classicist, philologist, chairman of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1918–1939, US minister to Greece and Montenegro 1920–1921, acting director of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1935–1936 Caputo, Giacomo, 1901–1990, archaeologist, director of Italian excavations in Libyan Cyrenaica in 1935, Soprintendente of antiquities in Etruria 1951–1966 Carcopino, Jerôme, 1881–1970, historian, director of the École française de Rome 1937–1940 Carter, Edward Julian, 1902–1982, librarian-editor with the Royal Institute of British Architects 1930–1946, first head of the Libraries Division, UNESCO 1946–1957 (previously in UNESCO preparatory commission) Carter, Jesse Benedict, 1872–1917, classical scholar, director of the American Academy in Rome 1913–1917 Caylus, Count (Anne-Claude-Philippe de Tubières, de Grimoard, de Pestels, de Lévis, comte de Caylus), 1692–1765 Chamonard, Joseph, 1866–1936, archaeologist, secretary and librarian of the École française d’Athènes 1908–1912 Clay, Edith, 1910–2000, London secretary of the British School at Athens 1937–1962 Cockerell, Charles Robert, 1788–1863, architect Colbert, Jean-Baptiste, 1619–1683, French politician, Minister (contrôleur général) of Finance 1665–1683 Cook, John Manuel, 1910–1994, classical archaeologist, with the MFAA Subcommission during the Second World War, director of the British School at Athens 1946–1954 Costantini, David, 1875–1936, count, chairman of the Associazione Internazionale degli Studi Mediterranei 1929–1936 Croce, Benedetto, 1866–1952, philosopher and politician Crous, Jan, 1901–1944/1945, librarian at the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom Curtius, Ludwig, 1874–1954, archaeologist, first director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom 1928–1938 Daux, Georges, 1899–1988, philologist and classical archaeologist, director of the École française d’Athènes 1950–1969 Davis, Arthur Vining (“Art”), 1867–1962, industrialist and philanthropist Deichmann, Friedrich Wilhelm, 1909–1993, archaeologist (Christian archaeology) and architecture historian, associated with the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom during the Second World War Della Seta, Alessandro, 1879–1944, archaeologist, director of the Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene 1919–1939 Demangel, Robert, 1891–1952, archaeologist, director of the École française d’Athènes 1936–1950 DeWald, Ernest Theodore, 1891–1968, art historian, member of the Allied Control Commission Dinsmoor, William Bell, 1886–1973 archaeologist and architectural historian, president of the Archaeological Institute of America 1936–1946, acting director of the American Academy in Rome 1940–1945 Duchesne, Louis, 1843–1922, priest, philologist, historian of the Roman-Catholic church, director of the École française de Rome 1895–1922

Dramatis Personae 

 XIX

Dunbabin, Thomas James, 1911–1955, Australian classical archaeologist, assistant director of the British School at Athens 1936 Special Operations Executive (SOE) field commander on Crete during the Second World War, head of the Allied MFAA section in Greece 1945 Dörpfeld, Wilhelm, 1853–1940, architect and classical archaeologist Evans, Arthur, 1851–1941, archaeologist Fea, Carlo, 1753–1836, archaeologist and papal antiquarian Filipetto, Gino, 1912–1989, custodian and librarian at the Swedish Institute in Rome Foster, John, 1787–1846, architect Friedrich Wilhelm (IV), 1795–1861, king of Prussia 1840–1861 Fuchs, Siegfried, 1903–1978, archaeologist, second director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom 1938–1945 Galassi Paluzzi, Carlo, 1893–1972, director of the Istituto di Studi Romani 1925–1944 (its chairman 1933–1944) Gaselee, Stephen, 1882–1943, diplomat, writer and librarian Gebauer, Kurt, 1909–1942, archaeologist, assistant at the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen from 1939 Gennadius, Joannes (John), 1844–1932, diplomat and bibliophile Gerhard, Eduard, 1795–1867, classical archaeologist, co-founder of the Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica 1829 von Gerkan, Armin, 1884–1969, classical archaeologist, first director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom 1938–1945 (second director 1924–1938) Gjerstad, Einar, 1897–1988, classical archaeologist, leader of the Swedish Cyprus Expedition 1927–1931, director of the Swedish Institute in Rome 1935–1940 Giglioli, Giulio, 1886–1957, archaeologist and politician Gilliéron, Émile, 1885–1939, artist Grenier, Albert, 1878–1961, historian, theologist and archaeologist, directeur d’études at the École pratique des hautes études 1937, member of the Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres 1942, founder of the review Gallia, Archéologie de la France antique 1943, director of the École française de Rome 1945–1952 Gsell, Stéphane, 1864–1932, archaeologist and historian, member of the École française de Rome 1886–1890, excavations in the Vulci necropolis in 1889 Gustaf (vi) Adolf, 1882–1973, king of Sweden 1950–1973, chairman of, for example, the Swedish Institute in Rome (1925–1950) and the Swedish Institute at Athens (1946–1950) Halbherr, Federico, 1857–1930, archaeologist and epigraphist von Hallerstein, Carl Haller, 1774–1817, architect, archaeologist and art historian Hammond, Mason, 1903–2002, professor of Latin (Harvard), trustee of the American Academy, Rome 1941–1976 Hampe, Roland, 1908–1981, classical archaeologist Haverfield, Francis John, 1860–1919, ancient historian and archaeologist (Oxford) Hefel, Ernst, 1888–1974, politician, post-war president of the Austrian cultural institute in Rome 1949–1954 Helbig, Wolfgang, 1839–1915, archaeologist, antiquarian, collector, owner of the Villa Lante on the Gianicolo hill, Rome

XX 

 Dramatis Personae

Hewlett, James Monroe, 1868–1941, architect, artist, director of the American Academy in Rome 1932–1935 Holmberg, Erik John, 1907–1997, classical archaeologist, director of the Swedish Institute at Athens 1947–1948 Homann-Wedeking, Ernst, 1908–2002, classical archaeologist and art historian Homolle, Théophile, 1848–1925, archaeologist and classical philologist, director of the École française d’Athènes 1890–1903 and 1912–1913 Immerwahr, Henry Rudolph [Heinrich Rudolf], 1916–2013, German-American philologist and  epigraphist, director of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1977–1982 Jantzen, Ulf, 1909–2000, classical archaeologist, first director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen 1967–1974 Jebb, Richard Claverhouse, 1841–1905, classical scholar (philologist) and politician, president of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1890–1905 Johnson, Allan Chester, 1881–1955, classicist, ancient historian and papyrologist Johnson, Harold F., 1896–1981, lawyer and trustee of the American Academy in Rome Kapodistrias, Ioannis, 1776–1831, first Governor of independent Greece Karo, Georg, 1872–1963, first director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen 1910– 1919 and 1930–1936 Kavvadias, Panayiotis, 1849/1850–1928, General Inspector of Antiquities 1895–1909 and 1912– 1920, professor of classical archaeology at the University of Athens 1904–1922, secretary of the Archaeological Society at Athens 1895–1909 and 1911–1920, founding member of the Academy of Athens 1926 Keramopoullos, Antonios Demetriou, 1870–1961, archaeologist Kestner, August, 1777–1853, art collector, Hanoverian ambassador to the Holy See Kjellberg, Lennart, 1857–1936, classical archaeologist Koës, Georg, 1782–1811, philologist Koumanoudis, Stephanos, 1818–1899, epigraphist, philologist and archaeologist, secretary of the Archaeological Society at Athens 1859–1894 Krischen, Friedrich, 1881–1949, architectural historian and archaeologist Kunze, Emil, 1901–1994, classical archaeologist, first director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen 1951–1966 Laspreyes, Paul, 1840–1881, architect and architectural historian Laurenzi, Luciano, 1902–1966, archaeologist, director of the Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene 1939–1941 Levi, Doro (Teodoro), 1898–1991, archaeologist and art historian, director of the Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene 1947–1976 Libertini, Guido, 1888–1953, archaeologist, director of the Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene 1939–1941 Linckh (Linkh), Jacob, 1786/1787–1841, painter Linnér, Sture, 1917–2010, classicist, philologist and diplomat Lord, Louis Eleazer, 1875–1957, classicist (philologist), chairman of the managing committee of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1939–1950

Dramatis Personae 

 XXI

Lutyens, Edwin, 1869–1944, architect Luynes, Count (Honoré Théodoric d’Albert de Luynes, eighth Duc de Luynes), 1802–1867 Maiuri, Amedeo, 1886–1963, classical archaeology, Soprintendente alle Antichità della Campania and the Museo Nazionale di Napoli 1924–1961, member of the Accademia dei Lincei 1936 Mâle, Émile, 1862–1954, art historian, director of the École française de Rome 1923–1937 Marinatos, Spyridon, 1901–1974, archaeologist, director of the Greek Antiquities Service 1937, professor of archaeology at the University of Athens 1939, director of antiquities and historic monuments of Greece 1956, director-general of antiquities during the Greek military junta, 1967–1974 Mayoux, Jean-Jacques, 1901–1981, literary critic, director of the International Institute of International Cooperation (IIIC), Paris, 1945–1946, staff member for cultural affairs at UNESCO, professor of English literature at the Sorbonne 1951–1973 McKim, Charles Follen, 1847–1909, architect Mercati, Giovanni, 1866–1957, cardinal, prefect of the Biblioteca Vaticana 1919–1936 Mignon, Maurice, 1882–1962, literature scholar, specialist in Italian culture, attaché at the French embassy, Rome (after 1918), professor at the Université de Provence 1923, director of the Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen (C.U.M.), Nice from 1933, “directeur d’études” at the C.U.M. after the Second World War (the poet, essayist and philosopher Paul Valéry, 1871–1945, member of the Académie française, was “administrateur” of the C.U.M. 1933– 1940 and 1945; Mignon was interim “administrateur” in 1940–1941) Middeldorf, Ulrich, 1901–1983, art historian, director of the Kunsthistorisches Institut, Florence, 1953–1968 Mingazzini, Paolino, 1895–1977, classical archaeologist Montini, Giovanni Battista, 1897–1978, Pope Paul VI (1963) Morey, Charles Rufus, 1869–1944, art historian, professor in charge of the American Academy in Rome School of Classical Studies 1925–1926, cultural attaché at the American embassy, Rome, acting director of the American Academy in Rome 1945–1947 Morgan, John Pierpoint, 1837–1913, financier and banker Myres, John Linton, 1869–1954, archaeologist and historian, chairman of the British School at Athens 1934–1947 Nilsson, Martin P. (P:son, Persson), 1874–1967, philologist and historian of religion Nogara, Antonio, 1918–2014, baron, son of Bartolomeo Nogara Nogara, Bartolomeo, 1868–1954, archaeologist and philologist, director of the Vatican Museums 1920–1954 Norton, Charles Eliot, 1827–1908, art historian, first president of the Archaeological Institute of America (1879–1890) Oikonomos, Georgios, 1883–1951, archaeologist, secretary of the Archaeological Society at Athens 1924–1951 Otto (I), 1815–1867, first king of Greece (1832–1862) Pace, Biagio, 1889–1955, archaeologist and politician, president of the Italian High Council of Antiquities and Fine Arts in 1933, presided over the founding meeting of the neo-fascist Italian Social Movement in 1946

XXII 

 Dramatis Personae

Panofka, Theodor, 1800–1858, philologist and specialist in ancient Greek pottery Paribeni, Roberto, 1876–1956, archaeologist and ancient historian, sovrintendente alle antichità di Roma e del Lazio, direttore generale delle Antichità e Belle Arti 1928-1933, accademico d’Italia from 1929, chairman of the R. Istituto di archeologia e storia dell’arte 1934–1944 Paul (I), 1901–1964, king of Greece (1947–1961) Pelham, Henry Francis, 1846–1907, ancient historian (Oxford) Persson, Axel Waldemar, 1888–1951, classical archaeologist Philadelpheus, Alexandros, 1866–1955, archaeologist, historian, painter, writer and philosopher, director of the Acropolis (Acropolis Museum), Epidauros and the National Archaeological Museum in Athens, Ephor of antiquities Picard, Charles, 1883–1965, classical archaeologist and art historian, director of the École française d’Athènes 1920–1925 Pittakis, Kyriakos, 1798–1863, first General Keeper of Antiquities in the modern Greek state de’ Pizzicolli, Ciriaco, 1391–1453/1455, traveller and humanist Pope, John Russell, 1874–1937, architect, president of the American Academy in Rome 1933– 1937, first recipient of the academy ”Rome Prize” in 1894 Poulsen, Frederik, 1876–1950, classical archaeologist, director of the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, 1926–1943 Rangavis, Alexandros Rizos, 1809–1892, Greek poet and statesman Radet, Georges, 1859–1941, historian Ralegh Radford, Courtenay Arthur, 1900-1998, archaeologist and art historian, director of the British School at Rome 1936–1945 Renaudin, Louis, 1892–1969, classical archaeologist and banker Revett, Nicholas, 1720–1804, architect Roberts, Laurance Page, 1907–2002, art historian, director of the Brooklyn Museum 1938– 1946, director of the American Academy in Rome 1946–1960 Ross, Ludwig, 1806–1859, first professor of archaeology at the University of Athens (1837– 1843), Ephor of antiquities in Greece 1834 Rossi, Attilio, 1875–1966, art historian and writer, director of the Villa d’Este, Tivoli 1925–1935, associated with the International Institute of International Cooperation, Paris Roussel, Pierre, 1881–1945, epigraphist and ancient historian, director of the École française d’Athènes 1925–1935 Salat, Rudolf (Rudi), 1906–1994, diplomat Santifaller, Leo, 1890–1974, historian, director of the Austrian cultural institute in Rome 1956–1964 Sarsfield Salazar, Demetrio, 1886–1968, count Schede, Martin, 1883–1947, classical archaeologist, president of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Berlin 1937–1945 Schliemann, Heinrich, 1822–1890, businessman and archaeologist Segre, Mario, 1904–1944, epigraphist Sforza, Carlo, 1872–1952, count, Italian minister of foreign affairs 1920–1921 and 1947–1951 Shaw, Evelyn, 1881–1974, first Honorary General Secretary of the British School at Rome Sjöqvist , Erik, 1903–1975, classical archaeologist, member of the Swedish Cyprus Expedition 1927–1931, second librarian at the Royal Library, Stockholm, 1933–1939, director of the

Dramatis Personae 

 XXIII

Swedish Institute in Rome 1940–1948, secretary to crown prince and king Gustaf (VI) Adolf 1949–1951, professor at Princeton University 1951–1969 Smith, James Kellum, 1893–1961, architect (with McKim, Mead & White), president of the American Academy in Rome 1937–1958 Sotiriou, Georgios, 1881–1965, archaeologist (Christian and Byzantine archaeology) Spinazzola, Vittorio, 1863–1943, archaeologist von Stackelberg, Otto Magnus, 1786–1837, writer, painter, archaeologist and art historian Stevens, Gorham Phillips, 1876–1963, architect and archaeologist, director of the American Academy in Rome 1912–1913 and 1917–1932, director of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1939–1941 (acting director 1941–1947) von Stradonitz, Reinhard Kekulé, 1839–1911, Strong, Eugenie Sellers, 1860–1943, classical archaeologist and art historian, first female student admitted to the British School at Athens (1890), assistant director of the British School at Rome 1905–1925 Strutt, Arthur John, 1819–1888, artist, writer and archaeologist Stuart, James, 1713–1788, archaeologist, architect and artist Svoronos, Ioannis, 1863–1922, numismatist and archaeologist, keeper of the numismatic museum in Athens 1890–1922 Säflund, Gösta, 1903–2004, classical archaeologist Taylor, Myron Charles, 1874–1959, industrialist, diplomat, US ambassador to the Holy See 1940–1950, chairman of the AAR finance committee (until 1945) Thompson, Homer Armstrong, 1906–2000, classical archaeologist, director of excavations on the Athenian Agora 1946–1967 Valéry, Paul, 1871–1945, poet, essayist and philosopher, member of the Académie française 1925, administrateur of the Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen, Nice, 1933–1945 Valmin, Natan (Svensson), 1898–1967, classical archaeologist, leader of the Swedish Messenia Expedition 1927–1934 Van Buren, Albert, 1878–1968, classical archaeologist, librarian of the American Academy in Rome 1908–1926, professor of archaeology at the academy 1911–1946 Veuillot, Louis, 1813–1883, author and journalist, champion of ultramontanism (Papal supremacy) Waldheim, Charles, 1856–1927, archaeologist Walker, John (III), 1906–1995, chief curator of the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C. 1939–1956, its director 1956–1969, trustee of the American Academy in Rome (1940) Ward-Perkins, John Bryan, 1912–1981, classical archaeologist, British School at Rome “Rome Scholar” 1934–1935, member of the Allied Control Commission (MFAA officer), director of the British School at Rome 1945–1974 (full time 1946–1974) Weickert, Carl, 1885–1975, president of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Berlin 1947–1954 von Weiszäcker, Ernst, 1882–1951, baron, diplomat and politician, state secretary with the German foreign office 1938–1943, German ambassador to the Holy See 1943–1945 Westholm, Alfred, 1904–1996, classical archaeologist, member of the Swedish Cyprus Expedition 1927–1931

XXIV 

 Dramatis Personae

Wide, Samuel (Sam), 1861–1918, classical archaeologist and historian of religion Wilhelm (I), 1797–1888, King of Prussia 1861–1871, German Emperor 1871–1888 Winckelmann, Johann Joachim, 1717–1768, art historian and archaeologist, Hellenist with major impact on the development of classical archaeology as well as art history Wrede, Walter, 1893–1990, first director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen 1937– 1944 (second director 1927–1936) Young, Gerard Mackworth-, 1884–1965, archaeologist and colonial administrator in India, director of the British School at Athens 1936–1946 (his name was legally changed to Gerard Mackworth-Young by deed poll in 1947) Young, Natalie, 1894–1981, née Hely Hutchinson, married to Gerard Mackworth Young in 1916 (her married name was changed from Young to Mackworth-Young in 1947) Ziller, Ernst, 1837–1923, architect of Saxon origin, later Greek national, professor at the school of Arts, Athens, 1872, responsible for several royal, municipal and private buildings, churches and memorials in Athens and other Greek cities Åkerström, Åke, 1902–1991, classical archaeologist, temporary director of the Swedish Institute in Rome 1948, director of the Swedish Institute at Athens 1948–1956 and 1970–1972

Preface Archaeology is in itself an international science that hitherto has known no national borders.1

The title of this book refers to “Western” classical studies in sociopolitical context, specifically to national investments and approaches in the exploration of antiquity in the Mediterranean, most prominently in Italy and Greece. The “foreign schools” of archaeology in Rome and Athens discussed here, together represent a scholarly tradition now approaching two hundred years of activity in institutionalised form.2 These foreign schools are nineteenth and twentieth century European (and North American) research institutions established for the study of the ancient world: schools, academies and institutes dealing with classical archaeology, philology (Latin and Greek), art history, and in some cases the practising arts. The title reflects both national identifications with antiquity and attitudes to international collaboration. The book offers a history of foreign schools in Rome and Athens in the context of the development of classical archaeology in the nineteenth century and its sociopolitical ramifications until the mid-twentieth century, as well as of national adaptations of classical studies. The book focuses on the years spanning the Second World War, particularly on the immediate post-war period. The foreign schools in the two cities are to a certain extent treated as interrelated “sister institutions” in terms of their institutional history, their focus on exploring the “classical” in its various guises, as well as their research topics and publishing. The

1 Carl Weickert, president of the German Archaeological Institute, 1949. Copy of a letter from Weickert to dr Strauss, secretary of state, Frankfurt am Main, 24 August 1949 (in appendix i): “Die Archäologie ist an sich eine internationale Wissenschaft, die bisher Landesgrenzen, wenigstens bei der theoretischen Bearbeitung des Materials, nicht kannte.” Cf. copy of report by Leo Bruhns, “Gliederung und Aufgaben des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts”, 16 October 1956 (in appendix i). DAI archives, Archiv der Zentrale (ADZ), Altregistratur file 10-04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 2 The book title is inspired by the street address of the Swedish archaeologist Erik Sjöqvist (1903–1975) – a key figure in the safeguarding and post-war restoration of the four main German scholarly libraries in Italy – during his time as professor in Princeton during the 1950s and 1960s (40, the Western Way). The book is a revised adaptation of my PhD thesis: Whitling (2010). Cf., for example, the observation by explorer and travel writer Freya Stark (1893–1993, in her book East is West), on the generic “young effendi […] in the modern Arab world”, educated and “trained to a profession in the Western way; he belongs indeed to the West, and it is the West that, for good and bad, will mould him, and with him the future history of his world.” Stark (1945) xvi. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-205

XXVI 

 Preface

Greek capital has long been considered a meeting-point for organisation and discussion of archaeological results from a Hellenic horizon; Rome has often been perceived as Rome, a layered symbol of both the Roman Empire and of its central city. This book deals with the organisation of archaeology and the study of the past, but also confronts the normative notion of the “classical”, embedded in ideologies, that continues to fuel research in antiquity and ancient cultural heritage. On the basis of previously unpublished archival material, analysis of the “classical” is intertwined with more tangible aspects of international relations and institutional politics. My own background and training in classical archaeology and in history, in Sweden, Italy and Greece, may furthermore allow a certain distance and a perspective from the margins on the core national actors (France, Germany, Britain and the USA) in the nineteenth and twentieth century scholarly pursuit of classical roots. Three general categories of readers are envisaged here: the classicist interested in wider sociopolitical contexts of archaeology in historical perspective, the historian interested in contextualising conceptions of the “classical” in modern Italy and Greece, and the general reader interested in the organisation of archaeology and scholarship in the Mediterranean, why the past has been thought about in certain ways, and what this may mean for the future. In the introduction, I discuss the main question – what and why the “West” has come to invest in research on classical antiquity in Italy and in Greece – and give a background to the foreign school-phenomenon. Chapter one provides a background history of classical archaeology as a scholarly field and of institutions in Italy and Greece attached to it, from the early eighteenth century to postwar “big digs”. Chapter two initiates a chronological analysis of foreign schools in Rome and Athens, from antiquarian roots via the French School in Athens (1846) to the foreign schools of the “Great Powers” before and after the turn of the last century. Chapter three continues the analysis of foreign school developments during the First World War and the interwar period, emphasising the increasingly politicised premises for scholarly work in Italy and Greece. The heightened national tension of the late 1930s and the buildup to war are explored in chapter four. Chapter five deals with the years of the Second World War, whereas the last chapter, chapter six, covers the post-war shift towards international organisations in Rome, contemporary with the civil war in Athens, as well as reopenings and restorations of foreign schools in the immediate post-war period. The conclusions place the “classical” and the foreign schools in Rome and in Athens in context, and confront national and international interests in relation to prestige in science and politics. The final epilogue provides an overview assessment of foreign schools in historical context over the past two centuries. The bibliography section also includes a descriptive list of primary sources and published material,

Preface 

 XXVII

intended as a resource for further research. The book closes with a number of appendices comprising a selection of transcriptions of particularly relevant original archival material. Similar institutions also exist elsewhere in the Mediterranean, notably in Turkey. The foreign schools in Rome and Athens however established the phenomenon per se in the nineteenth century, as this book shows, and the points that emerge from the comparison of institutions in the two cities are clarified in the conclusion, as are the bases for inferences regarding the relative influence of individuals in relation to them. In this latter case, it is suggested here that governing relations between the foreign schools have been both institutional and intrapersonal. Competition and rivalry can at the same time be benign and malign, amicable and antagonistic. It manifests itself between nations, but also between individuals operating in national frameworks, for example competing for scholarships and career-boosting study opportunities. Understanding such coexistence, it is argued here, is a way of understanding both foreign schools in the Mediterranean and classical archaeology in the history of science and scholarship.

The Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen library, 1927 (detail, photograph: Emil Kunze). DAIA photographic archive (D-DAI-ATH-Athen-Varia-0584).

Introduction Tracing a spectrum ranging from outright competition to outspoken collaboration, this book examines foreign schools in Rome and Athens, their profiles, activities, funding and administration, and what their benefactors have expected to get in return for their investments in research – salaries, property, grants and scholarship. An analysis of scholarly prestige includes aspects of its implied value on several levels: national, scholarly, cultural and individual. Which countries have or have not felt the need for Mediterranean foreign schools, and for what reasons? What sociopolitical and cultural influence have these investments exerted and what effects have they had? How have the scholarly aims of the foreign schools changed over time, and have these changes reflected political developments, national and international? How have the contexts for national or international scholarship changed – what have these labels meant in the past and what do they mean today? Through the foreign schools in Rome and Athens, this book confronts classical studies around the Mediterranean in order to discuss how we look to the past in order to make sense of the present. The book addresses what and why the “West”, including the USA, has invested in research on classical antiquity and ancient heritage in the Mediterranean over the past two centuries. This general query underpins the book and its analysis of foreign schools in historical context. Three keywords in this context deserve to be highlighted from the outset: investments, classical and heritage. The premise here is that research is always carried out in sociopolitical contexts that affect it in terms of influencing prejudice, assumptions and the work itself, also in terms of funding. This book investigates the organisation of on-site classical scholarship, focusing on the first half of the twentieth century, a critical period for the establishment and growth of structures that since their inception have influenced the organisation of the study of the past today. The ambition is to paint a picture of the widespread contribution that the foreign schools in Rome and Athens have made to the understanding of science, scholarship and the classical in the modern world. The funding of foreign schools in the Mediterranean has emanated from three principal structural sources: national (state and public funding), institutional (state and private funding) and individual (private funding), in turn partly linked with the organisation of research at the foreign schools in Rome and Athens. Insight into the organisation and funding of research gives access to direct links with structures in operation today that influence directions in future scholarship. In this way, research in the history of archaeology can open up a two-way street, contextualising past scholarship and individual scholars in historical perspective, with links to present and perhaps future circumstances. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-001

2 

 Introduction

The book opens with the assertion that much has been invested in research in Mediterranean classical studies, that much of this has been channelled in national terms through the foreign schools analysed here, and that much potential of the “classical” can be accessed when its multidimensional legacy is confronted and understood as a transnational point of reference in historical perspective. Secondary questions regarding the role of prestige, the importance of investments and the accumulation of “cultural capital”, as well as the organisation of research funding all relate to this overarching affirmation and point of departure. Since its formation as an academic discipline during the nineteenth century (see chapter one), classical archaeology, like the humanities at large, has centred around investigating the three key questions of when? where? and how? – sometimes augmented by the question why? In this book, the why? is linked with the who? and individual influence.

Schools, Academies, Institutes Foreign schools in the Mediterranean have occasionally been discussed in historical perspective, but scarcely in comparative and transnational terms.1 This book attempts to amend this situation and to fill this gap, building mainly on hitherto unpublished archival material. The study was initiated in Rome, where the foreign schools are more numerous and do not exclusively focus on classical archaeology, as is generally the case in Greece, but has since encompassed corresponding foreign schools in Athens, similar to their Roman counterparts. By intertwining the two cities and contexts, a broader picture of the history of classical archaeology in the Mediterranean can be accessed than would otherwise be the case. Correspondence and other documents in the archives of foreign schools in Athens have enabled insights into the history of classical archaeology on a wider Mediterranean scale than the material in Rome would allow. Some of the Athenian material furthermore comments on the situation in Rome during the fascist regime (chapters four and five) in way that is rarely found in Italy itself.

1 Cf. Hamilakis (2007) 48: “There are no systematic, book-length critical studies on the social history, workings, and role of foreign schools in Greece.” The same applies to the similar situation in Rome; this book attempts to fill this gap in modern scholarship. Foreign schools in other cities, notably Istanbul, are not included in this study, which focuses on the origin of the foreign school phenomenon in Rome and in Athens. Cf., for example, Fokianaki (2018): “although Greece’s appropriation throughout modernity as the mother of the Western canon is documented, not much has been said about how its ancient histories have been so consistently mutated and translated according to the desires of that order.”

Schools, Academies, Institutes 

 3

The three concepts – school, academy and institute – defy a singular comprehensive description, with varied connotations depending on language and historical context. The notion of a “school” implies subscription to certain traditions or structures, in this case a tradition of elevating the “classical” at the expense of other periods. The fact that the foreign schools are referred to as “foreign” (including by scholars based at the institutions themselves) is significant, as that also implicitly emphasises surrounding domestic national scholarly and cultural frameworks. It was ever thus: as outlined in chapter one, the Xenioi in Athens (1810), the first international archaeological association in the Mediterranean, was literally called “the Foreigners”. In order to make sense of the term “school”, one might consider both the more literal, physical meaning of an institution, a school building and a scholarly base  – often with national prestige at stake – and the wider contextual meaning of a formative tradition. Echoing ancient Greek philosophy, the concept of a “school” at the same time suggests a dogma and a doctrine, or a system of principles, tenets and traditions: not an unsuitable notion for approaching the field of classical studies. The term “foreign schools”, then, is used here in a generic sense, referring to national institutions of research and education in Rome and Athens focusing on the fields of archaeology, classics and art history. The term therefore encompasses “schools”, such as the British schools in Rome and Athens, or the American School of Classical Studies in Athens, “academies”, such as the American Academy in Rome, and “institutes”, such as the German archaeological institutes in Rome and Athens.2 On the whole, the similarities (research fields, education programmes, scholarships, publication series, and so forth) outweigh the differences between foreign schools in the two countries. The foreign schools in Rome, however, cover a wider ranger of scholarly fields than the schools in Athens, which have traditionally dealt almost exclusively with classical archaeology; their Roman counterparts have from the outset encompassed also art, architecture, history and heritage studies in varying degrees – in other words a wide spectrum of research in the humanities, encompassing also practicing artists. Specific foreign schools have often produced their own histories; this book is the first to confront the foreign schools in Rome and Athens as a comprehensive phenomenon. The main reason why such a study does not already exist is the sheer magnitude of the rich institutional archival material. This is not intended as a traditional example of linear or hagiographical institutional history. The war

2 For use of the term “academies”, see for example Rizzo (2010). For a discussion of Mediterranean foreign schools, focusing mainly on recent developments, see Braemer (2012), 35–49.

4 

 Introduction

years are not ideal for such purposes, as almost all of the institutions covered here were in practice closed for longer or shorter periods during the conflict. As a result it can in many cases be difficult to trace pre- and post-war continuities in the available archival material. This is indeed a far from exhaustive study of each of the approximately 40 foreign schools in the two cities – 25 in Rome (not counting Vatican institutions), 18 in Athens, 43 in total (2018) – such an undertaking could indeed fill several volumes. It is, rather, an attempt to outline the history of a selection of certain significant institutions, placing them in a broad sociopolitical context, focusing on the role of individuals, which warrants the dramatis personae, the list of names of individuals that figure in the narrative throughout the book. This is not a political history that examines state actions per se on a political macro level, but rather a history of institutions and individuals connected to nation states. The account may occasionally be descriptive to a certain degree; the ambition has been to combine analysis of actions and motivations with sketches of decision-making in the microcosm of foreign schools in both cities wholly based on the available archival material. Additionally, some might argue that the Swedish institutes in Rome and Athens receive a prominent placement in this book not perhaps wholly commensurate with their relative significance. In both cities, however, the Swedes do stand out somewhat: in Rome, mainly due to the Swedish institute there being unique in remaining operational throughout the entire war years, this due to political neutrality; in Athens, as the institute there was set up during the civil war in Greece after the Second World War, in the late 1940s, as the only foreign school to be established there for a period of almost six decades. Hence the Swedish institutes can provide a useful example of perspectives from the margins, in the slight shadow of the foreign schools of the “Great Powers” (France, Germany, the UK and USA). In this chronologically underpinned tale of institutions in two cities, the reader will hopefully not object too strongly to darting back and forth between Rome and Athens – the study, I believe, on the whole benefits from the comparison – or to having to turn elsewhere for more general historical overviews of political developments in nineteenth and twentieth century political developments in Italy and Greece (or for other studies of ideological investments in antiquity). Activities at the foreign schools discussed here have in varying degrees been influenced by scholarly traditions in classical archaeology, ancient history, classical philology and art history, further shaped by the study of material remains through on-site tuition. The foreign schools have in this way often functioned as a filter, directing the gaze of students and scholars coming to the Mediterranean, ensuring that they are confronted with what they “should” see, and perhaps with what they should not.

Contextualising the “Classical” 

 5

Contextualising the “Classical” As the book aims to illustrate, the foreign schools in Rome and Athens emerged in a socio-political climate and context of late nineteenth and early twentieth century nation building, with national expressions of the supposedly universal “classical”. The “classical” (in the singular) might be challenged by conceptualising several simultaneous traditions and “antiquities” in the plural, culturally, geographically and chronologically (for example “the antiquity of the Enlightenment”, antiquity as it was perceived at the turn of the last century, after the Second World War, or indeed today).3 The “classical”, used as a generic reference to antiquity, has often been approached on institutional levels from the mid nineteenth to the mid twentieth century, the age of nationalism covered in this book. Foreign schools in Rome and Athens have been channels for the study of the ancient past during this period. Prior to the Second World War, the Greco-Roman prominence in classical studies had resulted the widespread notion that antiquity carried innate universal values and was charged with “eternal verities”. According to this doctrine, the foreign schools in Rome and Athens were seen by classical scholars to constitute a “global university”, or a species of international academy. The notion of accessible common roots in classical studies is discussed in this book, as is the idea of that “global university” itself. Did such confraternity exist in practice in, say, the interwar period, and if so, what has since been lost with it? If it did, it would imply a context of transnational relevance that deserves more attention than it has yet received outside local scholarly circles in the two cities. The study of classical antiquity filtered through the “classical” can, it is suggested here, be understood as a legacy of multiple legacies.4 A contextual history of the humanities, a “heritage history”, or “heritageography”, may assist in transcending barriers between scholarly disciplines, unearthing new historical links across fields of scholarship.5 The book thus aims to illustrate where cultural and sociopolitical structures come from, in order to

3 For use of the “classical”, see for example Settis (2006); Mount (2010); and Grafton, Most and Settis (2010). For archaeology, antiquity, the “classical” and “modernity”, see for example Modernism/modernity (special issue, 11, 1, 2004), e.g. Schnapp, Shanks and Tiews (2004); and Morley (2009). For the scholarly study of classics, see for example Beard (2014). Cf. for example Hardwick and Stray (2008); van Bommel (2015); and Butler (2016). For a discussion of “the antiquity of the Enlightenment”, see Barbanera (2008), 165–178. 4 For multiple legacies of classical antiquity see for example Díaz-Andreu (2007); and Grafton, Most and Settis (2010) vii–xi. 5 For the term “heritageography”, see Weststeijn and Whitling (2017) 14–16 & 148–150.

6 

 Introduction

at least guess in which directions they might be heading. The “classical” has functioned as a source and generator of prestige by association: a positive force with which it has been considered desirable to rub shoulders, at least by many if not most stakeholders (boards, trustees, directors, and so forth) involved in Mediterranean foreign schools. Critics of the value ascribed to the “classical” can certainly be found outside of academic fields as well as within, although such voices are harder to find in the material available for the period in focus here than for recent decades. How might transformations in perceptions of the “classical” be traced over time? What new contributions, perspectives and insights might emerge from examining the foreign schools in Rome and Athens in such light? The book highlights “corporate cultures” of interaction, degrees of collaboration and institutional mobility of scholars based at foreign schools in Rome and in Athens, before, during and after the Second World War. The nature of “classical” learning and scholarship is collective and cumulative; nevertheless, individual scholars largely carry out its individual contributions. While grappling with the role of individuals in the formation and life of institutions, I have previously coined the expression “academic diplomacy”, highlighting the agency of scholars (e.g. directors of foreign schools) in the sociopolitical context in which they operate, a way of analytically linking national interests and representation with scholarly work.6 The term is useful in questioning the neutrality of science and claims to scholarly objectivity, as it permits the separation of scholarly roles and interests from representative tasks: national, institutional or individual. This book offers numerous examples of how these interests have sometimes merged and sometimes diverged. The study of tradition itself, it is suggested, reinforces traditional approaches. Simply put, the book hinges on heritage. Although the “classical” is itself not national, antiquity has historically often been studied from national points of departure, politically and culturally prioritising periods connected with empire or kingdoms (preferably as precursors to contemporary nations) over republics and less politically coherent periods (e.g. Late Antiquity). But is there such a thing as national research? Does “national” in this sense equate “nationally organised”, also in financial terms? Classical studies, it is suggested, provides a suitable 6 The use of the term “academic diplomacy” was introduced by the author: Whitling (2008), 203–218. In contrast to traditional (political) diplomacy, it is characterised by the neutrality of science and claims to scholarly objectivity. Cf. also Whitling (2010) and Idem (2011). Cf. the relative micropotere of individual fascist archaeologists in Barbanera (1998) 151. Cf. also, for example, Thornton (2018) 39, on the “international scholarly-diplomatic traveller nexus” facilitated by the British schools in Athens, Rome and Jerusalem.

Contextualising the “Classical” 

 7

paradigm case for exploring such questions. The premise here is that national research indeed not only exists, but has been valued precisely as such, springing from the corporate cultures of scholarly traditions in different countries, regions and universities, channelled in part through foreign schools in Rome and Athens. In this book, I insist that the classical is in and of itself not national, and for that reason has much to offer modern society. I study the foreign schools themselves as a cross-cultural phenomenon: the book investigates in what ground the seeds of the foreign schools in Rome and Athens were sown, what these schools have achieved, how this has changed over time, what the foreign schools have meant in the past and what they mean in the present day.

The Roman Forum being excavated, early 1850s. Photograph from VV.AA., Kunstakademiets Bibliotek, Copenhagen: Fotografernes Rom. Pius IX’s tid. Fotografier 1846–78 fra danske og romerske samlinger (Copenhagen: Thorvaldsens Museum, 1978), image 32.

1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions A spectre is haunting archaeology – the spectre of history.1

This first chapter establishes a toolbox and an historical background for dealing with foreign schools in Rome and Athens in a wide-ranging cultural, historical and intellectual setting, by discussing the emergence of classical archaeology and of institutions connected to it, from the “Institute for archaeological correspondence”, established in Rome in 1829, to “big digs” in Greece and Italy before and after the Second World War, focusing on the role of individuals in relation to institutional structures. Classical archaeology as we know it today was originally to a large extent a product of the Enlightenment, and of the late eighteenth, nineteenth and early twentieth century era of exploration. The late twentieth and early twenty-first century has witnessed an age of contemplation, with an increased interest in the history of archaeology as a consequence. The quote above by historian Ian Morris on “the spectre of history” emphasised classical archaeology as “the product of a particular set of historical circumstances” which were “now passing away.”2 This can to some extent be balanced by historian of archaeology Yannis Hamilakis, who has suitably stressed what he refers to as “the nostalgia for the whole” as “a key mode of imagining the nation”.3 He asserts that archaeology can be seen as ”the official device of western modernity”, with classical heritage as “origin myth […] of the whole western world”, applied for example in Greece in the form of an internal “ideological colonization”.4

1 Morris (1994), 8. 2 Ibid., 44. Cf. Morris (2000) 40 (on Colin Renfrew, and “a ‘great tradition’ of detailed reporting” in classical archaeology). Cf. also Loukaki (2008) 151–152: “The establishment of foreign archaeological schools in Greece is a characteristic nineteenth-century phenomenon, the product of a strong admixture of strong nationalism and expansionism, of philhellenism, adventurous optimism and scientific curiosity.” 3 Hamilakis (2007) 296. Cf. Ibid. 282: “The nation […] is not the accumulation of diverse fragments, but the reunification and re-collection of forcefully separated national entities.” 4 Ibid. vii, 8 & 291 (“the adoption by the Hellenic national imagination of the western European discourse on the moral and cultural supremacy of classical culture and civilization”). Cf. Ibid. 14: “Archaeology developed as an organized discipline in Europe at the time when the emerging nation-states were in need of proving their perceived antiquity with physical proofs. [It developed] as a response to the need to produce the national archaeological record [as] a device of modernity”. See also Fokianaki (2018), on “‘internal colonialisms’ in Europe” (adopting “to institute” as a verb): “Institutions, biennials, and mega-exhibitions attack colonial pasts, but not presents. […] a clearly rigidly Western approach as to how to institute.” Cf. Eadem, on Jacques Derrida’s https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-002

10 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Fig. 1: Heinrich Schliemann, the “father of Mediterranean archaeology”, with his wife Sophia on the north segment of the frieze on their tomb in the First Cemetery of Athens (Ernst Ziller, 1893–1894), directing workers, “holding a copy of Homer in his hand”, and resting on other volumes of ancient texts. Photograph by the author, 20 August 2014. Cf. a similar photograph in Traill (1996) 299–301.

Interest in the history of scholarly disciplines has grown substantially over the last two decades.5 This increase of historical interest also applies to classical archaeology, albeit often somewhat belatedly compared to several other domains in the humanities.6 The history of archaeology is coming of age, and is in itself interdisciplinary. The intention here is not, however, to defend classical reception,

neologism “hostipitality”, affirming the authority and patronage of the host vis-à-vis “the foreign other”, and “at least seven different versions of the ‘West’”. 5 Cf. the observation of “the erosion of ontological and epistemic certainties” around 1990 in general terms (at roughly the same time as the development of, for example, post-processual archaeology). Ibid. 13. 6 For the history of classical archaeology, see for example Ceram (1951); Schiering (1969); Dymond (1974); Bacon (1976); Bracco (1979); Daniel (1981); Daniel, Chippindale et al. (1989); Schnapp (1996); de Grummond (1996); Gran-Aymerich (1998); Medwid (2000); Gran-Aymerich (2001); Dyson (2006); Díaz-Andreu (2007); Martin Millett (2007); Calcani (2007); Gran-Aymerich (2007); Murray and Evans (2008); Carandini (2008); Ceserani (2012); Silberman et al. (2012); Bahn (2014); Barbanera (2015); as well as Fenet and Lubtchansky (2015). Cf. also for example, the 28 issues (2018) since 1991 of the Bulletin of the History of Archaeology and “The History of Archaeology Bibliography” (http://archaeology.about.com/cs/educationalresour/a/historybib.htm, accessed 2 March 2016).

1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions 

 11

the history of archaeology, or history of science in general terms, but to place the development of classical archaeology in sociopolitical and cultural context. The legacies of ancient Greece and Rome have often been considered the two pillars on which the idea of the “classical” rests; critical perspectives on this paired principle underpins this book.7 Scholars have constructed the historical arena of ancient Greece and Rome since the Renaissance in search of common cultural origins.8 Italy and Greece have often been regarded as vast repositories of art and archaeology – the physical vestiges of the roots of European civilisation – repositories to be explored, conquered and controlled. The two countries – the modern nation-states in both cases being nineteenth century constructions  – have at the same time, in different ways, been regarded as representing the crowning achievements of “Western” civilisation: monuments meet research in the physical remains of ancient Rome and Athens.9 In the embryonic rise of archaeology as science from the mid-eighteenth century onwards, the search for physical traces of cultural and historical roots gradually developed into a combination of a common pursuit and a competitive arena of national cultural and scholarly prestige during intensified nation building in the latter half of the nineteenth century. This pursuit became increasingly characterised by national scholarship, national funding and connections with national scholarly structures, as well as by requirements of modernity and the need for “new sponsorship” (following Margarita Díaz-Andreu, historian of archaeology), and for a “new type of history of citizenship”.10 The search for common roots was played out in “Western ways” and on national terms. Analogous to how science is undoubtedly political, archaeology, like time, is irreversible. An enterprise in between object and context, archaeology is ultimately a destructive activity (notwithstanding modern non-invasive methods such as laser, radar, and drone photography); it can only be performed once in each specific case.11 In the context of earlier romantic pursuit of ancient cultures, the circumstance that the sources of that pursuit were not and could not 7 Cf. the paired essay format in Alcock and Osborne (2012). See also, for example, Morris (1994), 41; Holtorf (2007); and Mouritsen (2009). 8 For classical scholarship in historical perspective, cf. Platnauer (1954); Sandys (1967 [1908, 1921]); and Hall (2014). Cf. Arnaldo Momigliano’s series of ten volumes, each one a numbered Contributo alla storia degli studi classici (1955–2012); and Idem (1980). 9 Cf. a reference to this effect in Martin P. Nilsson, “Svenska Institutet i Rom,” Svenska Dagbladet, n.d. (1925). In “Svenska Institutet i Rom. Dagbok från Okt. 1925–15 april 1926.” Gothenburg University Library (GUB), Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:241–243. 10 Díaz-Andreu (2007) 58–59 & 317. For a study of funding of archaeological research in and by the European Union, see Niklasson (2016). 11 Cf. Barbanera (1998); and Trigger (1978) 52: “Archaeology: Science or History?”.

12 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

be inexhaustible has seldom been taken into account: the nature of the “treasure hunt” is that the allure of the treasure itself decreases once it is found. For classical archaeology and foreign schools in the Mediterranean, particularly in Greece, the sharing, partage, of archaeological artefacts or finds – the term is itself problematic, as it reinforces “adventurer” images of archaeological practice – was part of the scholarly treasure hunt. Since the late nineteenth century, this was channelled through, for example, foreign schools in Athens, before legal measures were taken to put an end to such solicited export of ancient artefacts, which made significant contributions to collections in European museums of antiquities. The possibility of acquiring a certain percentage of excavated objects served as an impetus for the national organisation of archaeological excavations in “classical” lands and for the establishment of the first foreign schools. Classical archaeology can be criticised for being an ethnocentric and excluding instrument that appropriates the Greek and Roman past and substantiates claims of imagined past glories and common roots. Mediterranean classical archaeology has in this way nourished notions of superiority and identity, and has been shaped by European colonialism, to which it has also contributed, as this book shows. A refined appreciation of such perspectives are in line with calls for a “necessary critical history of archaeology”,12 incorporating and understanding of foreign schools as “remnants of a colonial era, struggling to adjust to a post-colonial environment”.13 The history of scholarly disciplines emphasises institutions and individuals, as does this book. By highlighting people’s influence, individual agency and the impact of intellectual trends in society and culture admittedly risk becoming overly emphasised.14 It is therefore relevant to examine the relative influence of

12 Cf. Moro Abadía (2006); and Idem (2013), 100–101. Cf. Said (1978). See also Hamilakis (2007) 19: “nationalist, colonialist, and imperialist archaeology” (after Bruce Trigger); and Ibid. 23 (“multi-sited” historical and archaeological ethnographies). 13 Hamilakis (2007) 50. Cf. Ibid. 21: “nationalist principles are in fact local re-appropriations and reworkings of colonial ideas”; and Ibid. 51: ”an exchange by the Greek state of the symbolic capital of antiquity for diplomatic, political, and even directly financial capital, albeit in a masked and disguised form”. Hamilakis claim that “Foreign archaeological missions […] embody the mutual constitution of colonial and national archaeology” becomes perhaps slightly too sweeping for a general statement (such “missions” developed particularly during the latter half of the nineteenth century). Cf. also Hamilakis and Yalouri (1996). 14 Cf. Kaeser (2008); and Goldhahn (2012), 212: “changes within the archeological field are always believed and considered to be introduced from the outside.” Cf. also Siapkas (2016), 6: “all too many studies of history of archaeology focus on the achievements of individual scholars and are governed by a biographical narrative structure” (deconstruction of “constructivist concerns”; “the epistemological foundations of archaeology”). The approach to this issue in this study lies in concurrently highlighting individuals and institutions (structures and agency).

Pilgrims, Antiquarians, Archaeologists 

 13

individuals in relation to each other and to scholarly structures, which the rest of this chapter and indeed this book sets out to do.

Pilgrims, Antiquarians, Archaeologists Traveller and foreigners have often found a home in Rome.15 On an institutional level, foreign scholarly presence there can be traced to religious pilgrimage, to Mediaeval “hospitals”, offering foreign nationals food and lodging (the most venerable of these was the Portuguese, established as a religious foundation in 1363 and redesigned as a cultural institute in 1913) and to national collegiate organisations, four of which were established during the sixteenth century (for example the Collegium Germanicum et Hungaricum). Origins in a religious foundation can for example be found in the Spanish Academy in Rome (organised in its present form in 1873, contemporary with the German archaeological institute and French school).16 The main exceptional precursor to the foreign schools in Rome as we know them, as nineteenth and twentieth century establishments, is the Académie de France à Rome, founded in 1666 for the practicing arts, by Louis XIV and his minister of finance, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, as the first foreign institution of its kind in Rome. The Académie was established after the death (in 1665) of Baroque painter Nicolas Poussin, who had spent most of his working life in the city. The Académie de France has been located in the Villa Medici since 1803, overlooking the city, organising, among other things, recurring “soirées d’Europe”.17 The academy, an early foreign school of sorts, can be understood as an adaptation to an established tradition of domestic Italian Renaissance academies, initiated by the Accademia Platonica, established by Marsilio Ficino in Florence in 1459, a Tuscan Renaissance attempt to rekindle Plato’s ancient Athenian academy. This sparked an academy fashion in Italian cities, with the subsequent establishment

15 Expressed in an interview with Antonio Nogara (son of Bartolomeo Nogara, former director of the Vatican Museums), Rome, 13 December 2009. 16 The Royal Spanish Academy in Rome should not be confused with the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) Spanish School of History and Archaeology in Rome, established in 1910. For this and other Roman schools, such as for example the Hungarian, Belgian and Romanian academies and the Dutch and Czechoslovakian institutes, cf. García Sánchez (2010). For the Spanish academy and Portuguese institute, cf. also Rietbergen (2012) 196. 17 See for example Windholz (2008) 27–40; Steinby (1951) 12–17; and Jacques, Verger and Virlouvet (2002). Cf. Valetta (1903). See also ”Le Accademie straniere a Roma Villa Medici”, Italiani Pel Mondo, August 1928, 667–673. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:238: “Svenska Institutet i Rom – Tidningsurklipp”.

14 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Fig. 2: Bust of Johann Joachim Winckelmann (photograph: Ingrid Keller). DAIA photographic archive, D-DAI-ATH-2009-0001.

of societies with universal aspirations. The Florentine Accademia della Crusca, established in 1582–1583, specialised in the publication of a Vocabolario of the Italian language. The seventeenth century witnessed an increasing specialisation of Italian academies, later enhanced by Enlightenment ideas and ideals.18 In Papal Rome, the most important academies in this sense were the Accademia di San Luca, 1593 (dedicated to the arts, dating to 1478), the Accademia dei Lincei, 1603 (the oldest scientific academy in the world, remodelled as the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei after Rome had become the capital of Italy in 1870, covering both arts and sciences as the Italian national academy), and the Accademia Reale, established in Rome by queen Christina of Sweden in 1674.19 After the death of the

18 Cf. Yates (1983); Pade (2011); and Rizzo (2010). For Italian Renaissance academies, see also Pfeiffer (1976) 56–58. 19 See for example the entry “Roman academies” in the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia: http:// en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encyclopedia_(1913)/Roman_Academies (accessed 29 June 2010); and Steinby (1951) 18. During the fascist period, Mussolini’s ambition was to unify all

Pilgrims, Antiquarians, Archaeologists 

 15

former queen in 1689, this Royal academy developed into the Accademia dell’Arcadia, 1690, specialising in poetry.20 Foreign interest in Greek archaeology can be traced in an abbreviated general outline, one that often begins with one of the first recorded “Western” travellers and humanist antiquarians, Ciriaco de’ Pizzicolli, “father of archaeology” of sorts, and continues with later travellers following in his footsteps, for example through the eighteenth century (British) Society of Dilettanti. Eighteenth-century efforts towards a gradual professionalisation of classical archaeology can be represented by, for example, Johann Joachim Winckelmann, the French count of Caylus, James “Athenian” Stuart and Nicholas Revett. The struggle for Greek independence (1821–1832), promoting the liberation of Greece from the Ottoman “yoke” with a new scholarly interest following in its wake, was followed by another Hellenic struggle: an archaeological one, with France and Germany as prime participants.21 Classical archaeology was gradually professionalised during the nineteenth century, with consequences also for the romantic appreciation of ruins for their own sake, in the intersection and meeting point of antiquarian, archaeological and art historical perspectives. The formerly sacred was becoming secular; archaeological excavations were beginning to replace antiquarian meditations.22 Another consequence of this was the need for scholarly organisation of the results of the archaeological work. In Rome, the “Accademia Romana di Archeologia” was established during the papacy of Pius VII in 1816, after Napoleon’s departure, as an international body – 40 of its 100 statutory members were foreign – ushering in scientific archaeology in the papal city.23 In the Greek sphere, the Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum (1825–1828), by philologist and archaeologist August Böckh, exercised a considerable influence on the emerging archaeological field.24

Italian academies into the “Accademia d’Italia”, established in 1926. For that reason, the Accademia dei Lincei temporarily merged with the Accademia d’Italia from 1939 until 1944. 20 See for example Fogelberg Rota (2008). 21 See for example Sünderhauf (2004); and Morris (1994), 17–18, 20–23 & 43 (p. 20: “An idealized Greece was defined as the starting point of Europeanness”; p. 43: In historical terms, archaeology has “acted largely to defend […] the Hellenist idealisation of Greece as the unique origin of the West[, now] largely rejected”). For a recent assessment of Winckelmann, see for example Dodero and Parisi Presicce (2017) 186–295. 22 Cf. Ridley (1992); Schnapp (2002); Farnoux (2004); Lyons, Papadopoulos, Stewart and Szegedy-Maszak (2005); Palombi (2006); Marchand (2007); Schnapp (2013); Barbanera (2013b); and Idem (2013c). 23 Cf. Rietbergen (2012) 146 & 359. 24 For Böckh, cf. Grafton (2004), xxv. See also Petrakos (2007), 18: “individuals have often influenced the fortunes of archaeology”; Giakovaki (2006); Korka et al. (2005) 13; and Korka et al. (2007) 15.

16 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Later archaeological activites of foreign schools in Greece were predated by, for example, excavations by “foreign forces” at Piraeus during the Crimean War (1853–1856).25 As Margarita Díaz-Andreu has established, Greece was, in fact, “one of the first European countries to obtain independence in the name of nationalism,” but “able to do so at least in part because the Greek cause was acceptable to the European powers through the connection of ancient Greece with the origin of civilization.”26 The nineteenth-century “Great Powers” – Great Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and the USA – would only have allowed Greek independence if it was in their interest to do so in relation to the “Eastern question” of what would become of the increasingly unstable Ottoman empire. In synchronicity with fin de siècle amplified nation building, the gradual professionalisation of classical archaeology (and of science and scholarship in general terms) prompted a slow separation of science and politics. In the mid-nineteenth century the clear connection between the two spheres was more freely acknowledged. In terms of foreign presence in Rome after Napoleon, the Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica (1829, see below) represented an institutional shift from assemblies of practising artists and antiquarians to organised archaeology in institutionalised form: a significant expression of the gradual professionalisation and increasing specialisation of classical archaeology. The first foreign school founded as a national archaeological institution was the École française d’Athènes, established in 1846 (see chapter two); it remained the only archaeological foreign school of its kind in the Mediterranean for a quarter century. The establishment of the French École can also serve as an illustration of how the same “Great Powers” to some extent “viewed the foundation of Foreign Archaeological Institutions as yet another manifestation of their multifarious penetration and interference in the internal affairs of Greece.”27 In contrast to the, on the whole, (pen)insular approach regarding foreign excavation in Italy, the schools in Athens were digging more or less from the outset, as their main raison d’être. If the foreign schools in Rome were forced by Italian archaeological policy to operate on an aesthetic, meta-level of the “classical” – encouraged by the long-standing role of the city of Rome for practising artists and for art historians, as outlined above – the schools in Athens had the possibility of being more “hands-on” from the outset, dealing directly

25 Petrakos (2007), 19. 26 Díaz-Andreu (2007) 86. Cf. Stoneman (2010); and Tziovas (2014). For archaeology and nationalism, see for example Morris (1994), 25; Marchand (2001); Arnold (2006); Hardwick and Gillespie (2007); Marchand (2010); and Eadem (2000). 27 Korka et al. (2007) 15, with reference to Nikolentzos (2003) 32.

The Institute for Archaeological Correspondence 

 17

with classical archaeology in situ. Foreign schools and archaeological “missions” carried out “big digs” in Greece from the 1870s onwards (see below).28 In Rome, the foreign school framework in many ways appropriated and redefined the function of earlier antiquarian literary and cultural salons, such as that of German archaeologist Wolfgang Helbig, at the Villa Lante on the Gianicolo in the late nineteenth century.29 Another well-frequented and prestigious cultural salon was that of archaeologist Ersilia Caetani Lovatelli, the first woman to join the Accademia dei Lincei (in 1879). The foreign schools in a sense appropriated the salon combination of social functions and representation. Through lecture events and presentations, foreign school directors simultaneously promoted themselves as well as the institution they represented. Historically, scholars, fellows and students, associated with foreign schools in Rome and in Athens have to some extent constituted groups of self-fashioning unofficial elites, in Rome for example in the context of awards such as the “Prix de Rome” at the Académie de France, artist grants at the German Villa Massimo, and the “Rome Prize” at the American Academy in Rome, originally connected with Beaux-Arts traditions in art and architecture.30 The institutional context of foreign scholarly presence in Rome can be understood in the light of the allure of the “Eternal City” as a receptacle and symbol of antiquity and post-Renaissance classical tradition. A perceived common heritage has been projected onto Rome as a universal stage for centuries, with foreign scholars and artists following the age-old traditions of religious as well as antiquarian pilgrimage to the city.

The Institute for Archaeological Correspondence In Greek mythology, the Hyperboreans were a mythical people that lived “beyond the North Wind”, or far beyond Thrace – the Southeastern tip of Europe, a geographical area with coasts on three seas: the Aegean, the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea – the abode of Boreas, God of the North Wind. The location of the dwelling of the Hyperboreans, with sunshine around the clock, was, according to Pindar, not to be found, “neither by ship nor by foot.”31 28 Cf., for example, Valavanis et al. (2007) 14. 29 For Wolfgang Helbig and the Villa Lante, cf. Dyson (2006) 108–109. In 1954, the Villa Lante became the post-war seat of the Finnish institute in Rome (Institutum Romanum Finlandiae). 30 See the work of Denise R. Costanzo, for example Eadem (2015); and the presentation “Modernism, Architecture, and the Postwar Transformation of the Rome Prize: France, USA, Britain and Spain,” delivered at the workshop “Rebooting the Postwar Academy”, British School at Rome, 18 May 2015. 31 Pindar, Tenth Pythian Ode.

18 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

During his second trip to Rome in 1823, Prussian archaeologist Eduard Gerhard assembled some ultramontani, the designation sometimes given to foreign colleagues from the North, in the “Association of Roman-Hyperboreans”, the Hyperboreisch-römische Gesellschaft, established in 1823/1824. The four original members of this association were Gerhard, the art collector August Kestner, the writer and painter Otto Magnus von Stackelberg, who published on his travels to Greece, and the philologist Theodor Panofka.32 The Hyperborean “northerners” emanated from an even earlier temporary association in Athens, the first international archaeological society: “the Foreigners”, the Xeneion, or Xenioi, a group of antiquity-loving artists and architects, founded in Athens in 1810. With Rome as the compulsory destination for Grand Tour travellers, Ottoman Athens was for the more adventurous, craving to visit the “Orient”. Von Stackelberg was one of the original Xenioi, as was the Bavarian architect Carl Haller von Hallerstein, the painter Jakob Linckh, the Danish archaeologist Peter Oluf Brøndsted, his compatriot, philologist Georg Koës, as well as the English architects John Foster and Charles Robert Cockerell. The Xenioi assembled in Athens at more or less the same time that the British ambassador Lord Elgin shipped his famous “marbles” from the Athenian Acropolis to Britain. The “Foreigners” carried out work on the island of Aegina (the temple of Aphaia) and at Bassae in the Peloponnese (the temple of Apollo).33 Returning to Rome, the relatively short-lived Roman-Hyperborean association laid the foundations for and in 1828–1829 evolved into what was to become the organisational embryo for the modern foreign schools: the “Institute for archaeological correspondence” (the Instituto, sometimes Istituto, di corrispondenza archeologica, ICA). Eduard Gerhard was one of its co-founders. The Prussian government funded Gerhard’s first journey to Rome, contemporary with the establishment of the British Academy of Arts in Rome (1821).34 Gerhard eventually became envoy to Rome of the Altes Museum in Berlin, where he, in part due to the success of the ICA, became the first professor of archaeology in what was to become Germany in 1843, setting 32 Cf. Ceserani (2012) 143; and Gran-Aymerich (2001) 355–356. Von Stackelberg was born in then Russian Estonia to an ambassador of the Russian Empire. The Prussian Panofka was a fellow graduate of Gerhard’s from the University of Berlin. For Gerhard, see for example Schnapp and Tiews (2004). 33 Cf. Gran-Aymerich (2001) 729. 34 See for example Corriere della sera, 31 January 1933 (Bottazzi): “Roma centro di studi mondiali.” GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:238. The British academy closed in 1936. Cf. Brancadoro (1834); and Díaz-Andreu (2007) 107, with references to the transformation of the ICA into the DAIR, to the EFR, the “Austro-Hungarian Historical Institute”, the AAR, the BSA and the Dutch institute (KNIR). Cf also Liversidge and Edwards (1996). For Brancadoro, cf. Rietbergen (2012) 11.

The Institute for Archaeological Correspondence 

 19

Fig. 3: Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres (1780–1867), double portrait of Otto Magnus von Stackelberg and Jacob Linckh, 1817, dedicated to Charles Robert Cockerell (“à Cocquerel”). Musée Jenisch Vevey, INV 984-099.

the study of objects on a par with that of philology.35 Together with for example the language scholar, philosopher and diplomat Wilhelm von Humboldt, Gerhard was a protagonist in the increasingly important context of foreign “scholar-diplomats” in cultural diplomacy in post-Napoleonic Restoration Rome, where he became an archaeologist and where, in the words of the scholar Giovanna Ceserani, “the importance and the fragility of the city’s link to a glorious past” was felt strongly, “a connection that was alternatively threatened and preserved through the interrelated workings of diplomacy, archaeology, and tourism.”36 The ICA had sprung from a circle of foreign cultural diplomats with antiquarian interests closely associated with the Holy See. The Papal States had begun to institutionalise its interests in classical archaeology through the Accademia delle Romane Antichità, established by Pope Benedict XIV in 1740. This academy had in turn been amalgamated with the fifteenth-century Accademia Romana, established by the Renaissance humanist Pomponio Leto, and was redefined as the 35 Cf. Gerhard (1860). For Gerhard and the ICA, see Marchand (1996) 41 (archaeology as “the philology of monuments”), 48 & 51–65. Cf. Ibid. xvii-xviii: “the ways in which the triumph of historicized classical scholarship over poetry and antiquarian reverie gradually eroded the very norms and ideals that underwrote philhellenic significance.” 36 Ceserani (2012) 143. Cf. also Dyson (2006) 28–30.

20 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Accademia di Archeologia in 1810. The status of Papal academy, as the Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia, or the PAA, had been conceded by Pope Pius VIII in 1829, partly in order to distinguish it from the international ICA, established the same year.37 The Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia was in a sense an institutional response to the gradual professionalisation of the emerging discipline of classical archaeology, and its practical application in the Papal States, in Italy and elsewhere.38 The international Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica benefited from Papal blessings at first, although tension grew with Pope Gregory XVI in the late 1830s concerning the institute’s protestant religious profile. The ICA was described at the time as “a foundation that has no other aim than to advance archaeological science and in this way to contribute to the illustration of Rome itself.”39 The organisation could, in the words of Giovanna Ceserani “hardly have taken root anywhere but Rome[;] the way to Greece passed through Rome.”40 Although the circle of Hyperboreans was primarily “of German tongue”, the ICA should also to some extent be considered a British and French enterprise. It included, among others, the Duc de Luynes, and the antiquarian-diplomat Duc de 37 See “Kurze Geschichte des ehemals Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Rom” (in appendix i). Cf. Alexander von Humboldt to Klemens von Metternich, 22 March 1840: “La société archéologique par la nature de sa composition cosmopolitique, par la pureté de ses intentions exclusivement artistiques a déjà rendu d’énormes services à la noble cause du progrès des arts.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1948–31.3.1950”. See also Ridley (1996); and Blanck (2008) 65–66. 38 Cf. Erenstoft (2008). Cf. Bosworth (2011) 220–221 (on Pius XII, “the archaeology of life” and Rome as the “lighthouse of civilisation”). The Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia (PAA) should not to be confused with the Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Christiana (PIAC), established in 1925, building on the legacy of Giovanni Battista de Rossi (1822–1894, the “father of Christian archaeology”) and his discovery and excavation of the catacombs along the Via Appia. Another organisation established in Rome in the same year was La Società degli Amatori e Cultori delle Belle Arti. See Montani (2008) 27–41. Cf. also Rietbergen (2012) 12–13. 39 DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1948–31.3.1950”. Cf. ambassador count Rudolf von Lützow to Klemens von Metternich, 25 April 1840, regarding the “protectorat immédiat” of the ICA by the “Prince royal de Prusse” with Metternich as its chairman (“la présidence”): “une fondation, qui n’a d’autre but que d’avancer la science archéologique et de contribuer ainsi à l’illustration de Rome même”. Cf. also a transcription of a letter from Cardinal State Secretary Lambruschini to Nuntius Lodovico Altieri in Vienna, 16 May 1840: “il S. Padre venisse ora a riconoscere legalmente la esistenza di questa letteraria società [ICA], essenzialmente prussiana”. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 40 Ceserani (2012) 144: “Rome remained the gateway to Greece well into the nineteenth century”. Cf. Eadem, 197: “[The ICA] was primarily conceived of as an international enterprise: its later shift from a private international association to institute of the Prussian state is deeply significant.”

The Institute for Archaeological Correspondence 

 21

Blacas.41 The duke of Blacas had worked together with Carlo Fea, papal antiquarian and “Commissioner of Antiquities”, in the excavation of the Roman Forum.42 The restricted polyglot community of the ICA has tellingly been described by scholar Suzanne Marchand as a place where one could “easily have to speak four languages in a quarter of an hour.”43 Eduard Gerhard was furthermore blessed with good timing and some good fortune: Prussian crown prince Friedrich Wilhelm visited Rome in 1828 and gave his support to the Instituto, morally as well as financially: “Just when it seemed that diplomatic tensions would make it impossible to launch the Instituto, the crown prince of Prussia, Friedrich Wilhelm, visited Rome: with Gerhard as his guide, the prince declared himself a sponsor of the new institution by the end of his visit.”44 Writing from Naples, where he had spoken with the Prussian prince, Gerhard referred to the ICA in spe as a “society [for the] conservation of archaeological facts”.45 Art historian Samuel Wittwer has emphasised the influence of Christian Karl Josias von Bunsen, head of the Prussian embassy in Rome, on Friedrich Wilhelm, as well as on the savant circles that made up the ICA.46 The foreign schools in Rome can in other words in several respects be traced back to the Institute for archaeological correspondence. Its first meetings took place around New Year 1828/1829, in the Palazzo Caffarelli, on the Capitol. Symbolically, much in line with early nineteenth century Romanticism, the institute was inducted on the traditional “birthday of Rome”, 21 April (1829). 41 Cf. VV.AA., “Elenco degli associati, membri e soci dell’Instituto,” Annali dell’Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica per l’anno 1829 = Annales de l’Institut de Correspondance Archéologique pour l’an 1829, i-viii. 42 For Carlo Fea, cf. Ridley (2000); Dyson (2006) 22–29; and Díaz-Andreu (2007) 72: “Archaeology was again used as an apology for power, as a claim to have restored a legendary golden age, but now the aim was to negate the disintegration of the old system.” 43 Quoted in Marchand (1996) 55. 44 Ceserani (2012) 144. 45 Copy of transcription of letter from Eduard Gerhard to von Bunsen, 20 December 1828. Gerhard had spoken to the crown prince in Naples “von dem Ihnen bekannten Plan einer der zur Erhaltung archaeologischer fakten bestimmten und in Rom zu gründenden Gesellschaft“, referring in passing also to a “French plan” (Blacas): “Ich denke es wäre würdig, ich bin überzeugt der Kronprinz wird leicht dazu zu bewegen seyn in dieser Gesellschaft ein Denkmal seines italiänischen Aufen[t]halts zurücklassen, wenn ein solches durch ein nahes Winckelmannsfest bald verkündet werden könnte; sein Geldbeitrag braucht nicht [gross] zu seyn um die Sachen in den Gang zu bringen.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 46 Wittwer (2012) 6: “following up an idea of Bunsen’s, in 1829 [Friedrich Wilhelm] founded the German Archaeological Institute in Rome [sic].” Available at http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/sites/ default/files/V%20and%20A%20Art%20and%20Love%20(Wittwer).pdf (accessed 3 March 2016).

22 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Its co-founder Eduard Gerhard also functioned as its secretary when he was in Rome.47 The ICA was a small-scale, privately funded international organisation, evolving out of the above-mentioned Roman-Hyperboreans.48 Although the ICA enjoyed the significant support of Friedrich Wilhelm, the organisation was largely funded by donations and subscriptions. The crown prince’s “protection” of the ICA in the form of private subsidies had been a personal concern, and did not involve strict obligations from the kingdom of Prussia for the continuation of its upkeep. Before his ascent to the throne in 1840, the ICA was regarded as a “foreign private enterprise” in Prussia. Its funding was officially annexed by the Prussian government in 1859, when the first grants were given to scholars.49 Grant holders did not need to be Prussian by birth, but needed to have spent time studying there. Friedrich Wilhelm’s successor, his brother King Wilhelm of Prussia (later Emperor Wilhelm I) took over the function of “protector” in 1861. State obligations increased in financial terms in 1870, with direct Prussian state subventions from that year, compensating for occasionally delayed subscription payments.50 Prussian funding did unquestionably take over the international enterprise; the gradual transformation of its institutional identity (from international members 47 Cf. Eduard Gerhard, “Osservazioni preliminari”, Annali dell’Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica per l’anno 1829 = Annales de l’Institut de Correspondance Archéologique pour l’an 1829, 3–35. For the foundation of the ICA, see also Marchand (1996) 36–74 (“From Ideals to Institutions”); Blanck (2000); and Idem (2008). 48 “Kurze Geschichte des ehemals Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Rom” (both in appendix i): The Palazzo Caffarelli was rented to the Prussian ambassador from 1823, and was purchased by Prussia in 1853; scholars had been meeting in organised form in Rome since 1810. Cf. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4. 1936–31.3.1948”. Cf. “Geschichte des Instituts 1828–1829[.] Frühjahr u. Sommer 1828 Vorarbeiten z. einer grossen internat. Hyperbor.-Röm. Gesell. In Rom. Besprechungen Gerhards mit Panofka u. Duc d. Luynes […] 30.12. Vorbesprechung i. Rom: Bunsen, Gerhard, Kestner, Millingen, Thorwaldsen [sic]. Bunsen schlägt Namen vor (‘Instituto di corr. arch.’) u. Rom als Sitz d. Verwaltung. 2.1.: Erste Sitzung […] 21.4.: In Pal. Caffarelli Int. Feierlich eröffnet […].”DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. For the ICA Annali-publications, see the online resource https://www.propylaeum.de/klassische-archaeologie/themenportale/rezeptionderantike/ zeitschriften/annali-dellinstituto-di-corrispondenza-archeologica/ (accessed 8 March 2016). 49 Ludwig Curtius, director of the DAIR 1928–1938, related that the conversion “in ein von preussischen Staat unterhaltenes Institut” took place in 1859. Historical overview of the DAIR, 25 June 1945 (Curtius). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. 50 Cf. “Kurze Geschichte des ehemals Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Rom” (in appendix i). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1948–31.3.1950”. Cf. Ceserani (2012) 197. The support of crown prince Friedrich Wilhelm was contemporary with the Prussian funding of ‘German’ investigations in Egypt and Sudan (1842), led by Karl Richard Lepsius, 1810–1884. Cf. Schücker (2012) 161.

The Institute for Archaeological Correspondence 

 23

club to German Reichsinstitut) is harder to pinpoint, however, and has consequently been less explored. On 18 July 1870, one day before the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian war, king Wilhelm approved a request for an “official” Prussian takeover of the ICA. On 2 March 1871, Wilhelm, then German emperor, confirmed its new statute at Versailles.51 In 1871, the ICA became a Prussian state institute. It was converted into the Imperial German Archaeological Institute, the present Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom, DAIR, in 1873–1874 (see chapter two).52 The ICA was housed in a building on the Capitoline hill erected in 1835, the Casa Tarpeia (fig. 4), funded by crown prince Friedrich Wilhelm and erected in the vicinity of the Tarpeian rock.53 The originally international venture of the Instituto had in other words been transformed into a German institute, contemporary with and as a result of the proclamation of the new German nation and empire: “archaeology was considered as a subject of national interest, and excavations became a tool in the competition with France and Great Britain.”54 The École française de Rome, EFR (see chapter two), was established in 1873–1875, after the Franco-Prussian war, as a reaction to this German takeover of the ICA. The times were changing: nationalism was becoming an increasingly influential force in the political climate of Western Europe. 51 A secretary-general of the ICA/DAI was engaged full-time from 1887. See Memorandum (Aktennotiz), 17 September 1955, regarding the history of the DAI and Adolf Michaelis’ essay “Die Aufgaben und Ziele des Kaiserlich Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts”, 1889. See also Adolf von Harnack, Geschichte der königlich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Berlin (1900), (“eine kgl. Kabinettsorder v. 2.3.1871 aus Versailles ergangen sei, durch die das Arch. Inst. preuß. Staatsanstalt wird”). The Akademie der Wissenschaften was originally a member of the ”Central-Direktion” of the DAI. Cf. the “Statut des Kaiserl. Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts v. 17.5.1893.”: “Der CD liegt es ob, ihren Jahresbericht der Akad. d. Wiss. Mitzuteilen. Die Sitzungen der CD können auf Wunsch in der Akademie stattfinden.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 52 Cf. Deichmann (1986); Blanck (2008); and DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-IStatuten 1828–1886” (six boxes). Cf. also Reinhard Kekulé von Stradonitz (cf. chapter two): “Über die Aufgaben des archäologischen Instituts” (printed and dated 28 April 1875). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. The ICA became a Reichsinstitut in 1872 according to Suzanne Marchand. Marchand (1996) 92–93. 53 For the Casa Tarpeia, see for example Dyson (2006) 34–35; and Marchand (1996) 55. The Casa Tarpeia was extended and rebuilt in 1878–1879 in connection with the establishment of the so-called Bibliotheca Platneriana, a collection of approximately 6000 volumes on Italian history, including statutes and charters, donated to the DAIR in 1879 by baron Ferdinand von Platner (1824–1896). Historical overview of the DAIR, 25 June 1945 (Curtius). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. 54 Cf. Schücker (2012) 161–162: “nationalism, imperialism and acquisition of antiquities were the key factors for the high status of foreign archaeology in the German Empire during these early years.”

24 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Fig. 4: An idealised view of the Casa Tarpeia, the Instituto di correspondenza archeologica building on the Capitoline, later seat of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom. Photograph (1938) of an original drawing used as frontispiece of the Monumenti inediti pubblicato dall’Istituto di corrispondenza archeologica (Rome & Paris, 1834–1838). Cf. Dyson (2006) 35. DAI Rom, D-DAI-ROM-38.575R.

The 1870–1871 war had taken a severe toll on relations between France and Germany. The war also had direct consequences for the realisation of the Italian Risorgimento ambition of making Rome the capital of the young nation, as the French garrison stationed to protect the pope had been recalled by Napoleon III.55 It was, then, perhaps no coincidence that France was the first country to establish its own national archaeological institution in Rome after the ICA had become German. France already had the by then more than two hundred year old Académie de France in the city. The establishment of the DAIR was furthermore contemporary with that of its Athenian counterpart, the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen, DAIA, in 1872–1874 (chapter two). The late nineteenth century German and French foreign schools were in other words vehicles of national scholarly prestige, a leitmotif that has lingered in varying degrees since. The fate, significance and legacy of the once international Instituto di corrispondenza has been understood quite differently: from a German perspective, the ICA has been perceived as the foundation of the overarching Berlin-based zentrale of the German archaeological institute, the DAI, which 55 See Arthurs (2012) 13. Cf. Gran-Aymerich and von Ungern-Sternberg (2012); and De Francesco (2013).

The Archaeological Society at Athens 

 25

consequently celebrated its 150th anniversary in 1979.56 To the French, the post1871 developments meant a rupture in the international character of the ICA and a break with tradition. Writing after the Second World War in a post-war anti-German sentiment, Albert Grenier, director of the École française de Rome, implied that the impetus for the ICA had in fact been French, “subsidised by the Duc de Luynes”, before the Prussian crown prince had offered his protection.57 As will be clarified in later chapters, for post-Second World War Allied representatives in Rome, the ICA was regarded in retrospect as an inspirational model for international collaboration: the once international had become increasingly national; scholarship was felt to be on the return to its perceived origins, to its pre-nation building roots.

The Archaeological Society at Athens The Εν Αθήναις Αρχαιολογική Εταιρεία, the Archaeological Society at Athens (also known as the Greek Archaeological Society), is an independent learned society that assists the Greek state in the protection and study of antiquities. Founded in 1837 following the initiative of a group of scholars, politicians and an affluent merchant, Konstantinos Belios, the society, “destined to play a key role in the archaeological constitution of the nation”,58 was established as an enlargement of the undermanned Antiquities Service by the poet and statesman Alexandros Rizos Rangavis and by archaeologist Kyriakos Pittakis, the first General Keeper of Antiquities in the new Greek state. Its establishment has been grandly, and perhaps somewhat exaggeratedly, described as “the most important event in Greek archaeology during 56 Cf. Memorandum (Aktennotiz), 2 September 1955, regarding the history of the DAI and Adolf Michaelis’ “Das deutsche archäologische Institut”, in Im neuen Reich, 1879. The DAI (“die älteste wissenschaftliche Reichsanstalt”) originally regarded “virtually as an Italian institute”. Michaelis used the expression “observatories” (Observatorien) for the foreign branches of the DAI, and stressed the “need” for archaeological Corpora and “mehr systematisch angelegte Ergänzungshefte der einzelnen Monumentklassen”, rather than journals: “Das ist in unseren Tagen Tatsächlichkeit geworden in den Fasti Archeologici.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 57 Albert Grenier on the libraries of the “ex-German” institutions in Rome, n.d.: “subventionné par le duc de Luynes”. Cf. French memorandum regarding AIAC (Albert Grenier?). AN, 20170185/105. 58 Hamilakis (2007) 83. For the Archaeological Society, cf. Ibid. 82–84; for its history, see for example Petrakos (1987); and the photographic exhibition Archaeologists and Excavations 1837–2011 (Athens 2011,
cf. http://www.archetai.gr/site/content.php?artid=1688, accessed 20 June 2018). Cf. also Loukaki (2008) 150–151 (p. 150: “Since its establishment, [the society] has been a rich source of ideological support for the state”); Díaz-Andreu (2007) 86; Étienne and Étienne (1992) 91; and Gran-Aymerich (1998) 47.

26 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

the 19th century”. The archaeological society was founded in January 1837, with Alexandros Rizos Rangavis as its first secretary – in the words of classical archaeologist Vassileios Petrakos “by a group of 15 individuals, including freedom fighters in the Uprising of 1821, philologists, scholars, poets, bankers and judges.” Rangavis, “who dreamed of transforming the Archaeological Society into an Archaeological Academy”, later published an influential two-volume corpus of inscriptions, Antiquités Helléniques (1845 and 1855).59 The first meeting of the society took place on 28 April 1837, “on the steps of the Parthenon […], on the grounds that ‘to these stones we owe to a large extent our political revival.’”60 As in the case of the Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica in Rome, the archaeological society was initially funded entirely by subscriptions and donations, with no state funding. As a result, it collapsed in 1854 due to lack of resources, but was restored in 1858. Its first presidents and secretaries were mainly politicians and diplomats. Under the direction of the epigraphist and archaeologist Stephanos Koumanoudis, the society gradually became the driving force of Greek archaeology that it remains to date.61 The archaeological society, not to be confused with the Central Archaeological Council, was established for the purpose of assisting “the discovery, erection and reconstruction of the antiquities found in Greece,” committing itself, in the phrasing of a survey volume on the foreign schools in Greece, “to assist the state in the protection of the antiquities and to contribute in the effort of connecting the Modern Greeks to the grandeur of their classical past.”62 Such claims

59 Petrakos (2007), 21, 23 & 26–27. Cf. a portrait of Rangavis in the Benaki museum, Athens. See also Díaz-Andreu (2007) 86: “[Rangavis and Pittakis] created the first archaeological review, the Ephemeris Archaiologiki. In 1837, they also founded the Archaeological Society of Athens and excavations soon started”. Cf. Miller (1938). 60 Elena Korka et al. (2005) 13. Cf. Hamilakis (2007) 83: “political renaissance”. 61 See Dyson (2006) 74–75. For Koumanoudis, see Matthaiou (1999). 62 Korka et al. (2007) 15; with reference to Nikolentzos (203) 110. Today, the Central Archaeological Council (CAC), is the “highest advisory body on all matters pertaining to the protection of ancient monuments, archaeological sites and sites of exceptional historical or legendary importance up to 1830.” http://www.law-archaeology.gr/Index.asp?C=76 (accessed 22 March 2016). The CAC was preceded by the archaeological Central Committee, established in 1834. See Loukaki (1997); and Eadem (2008) 140–146. For the Greek Archaeological Service, created in 1910, see Petrakos (2007), 18, 23 & 30–31. Cf. Loukaki (2008) 138: “The Greek archaeological system includes, in order of importance, the Greek Archaeological Service, the Greek Archaeological Society, Foreign Archaeological Schools, Institutes or Missions, and Greek Universities.” For archaeological agencies and legislation in Greece in historical perspective, see Ibid. 138–150. For the Greek Central Archaeological Council, see Ibid. 167–194.

The Archaeological Society at Athens 

 27

of connecting “the Modern Greeks” with “their” classical past – more or less equating the modern state with the legacy of ancient Greek city-states, above all Athens – is both problematic and indeed common in today’s Greek cultural heritage rhetoric and politics, a combination and tradition dating back to the early nineteenth century War of Independence. The wheels of Greek nation forging soon began to turn. Export of antiquities had been forbidden by law as early as 1827.63 The transfer of the capital city of Greece from Nafplio to Athens in 1834 (the very first capital of the modern state in 1828–1829 was Aigina), illustrates how “classical antiquity was fast becoming the central reference point in the national imagination of the new state”: the secular and “classical” nation was beginning to take over from earlier Christian theological domination.64 The period before the assumption of power by Ioannis Kapodistrias, the first Governor of Greece, is from this (Greek) perspective regarded as archaeological “prehistory”, connecting the development of science with a legal framework and with scholarly institutions: “[Events pre-1828] are not part of the history of archaeology, however, which set out on its history with the support of the law.”65 Such early pre-institutional and pre-national events are on the contrary very much part of the history of the discipline. As an example of early institutional organisation, the Archaeological Society at Athens was set up in order to encourage excavations, as well as the maintenance and presentation of antiquities in the new Greek state.66 Publishing was an important part of its work from the outset, with two periodicals published since 1837: the Proceedings of the Archaeological Society and the Archaeological Journal.67 The preface to the first volume of the journal (1837) stated that “the only aim of our work is the copying [and description] of the ancient object.” Basing the

63 Díaz-Andreu (2007) 85–86: “In order to implement the legislation, the Greek Archaeological Service was created in 1834”; “The essentialist notion of the nation was definitely gaining pace.” 64 Hamilakis (2007) 83. Cf. also Bintliff (2012) 488: “town plans were altered, also to conform to ‘Western’ and ‘Classical’ logic”. As a consequence of its status as capital, the first archaeological museum in Greece was established on Aigina in 1829. Cf. Petrakos (2007), 19. 65 Petrakos (2007), 19. 66 This instrumental independent learned society has not been widely researched. For the Archaeological Society, which both predates and differs from state supervision of excavations and antiquities (beni culturali) in Italy, see for example Hamilakis (2007) 44–45, 82–83, 99–100, 109–110; and Sakellariadi (2008) 322. The society, administered by an eleven-member Board, elected every three years by the members in General Meeting, could provide fertile ground for a study of structures and networks in the history of Greek archaeology. 67 The Πρακτικά της Aρχαιολογικής Eταιρείας and the Aρχαιολογική Eφημερίδα, or Arhaiologiki Ephimeris. For the Ephemeris in context, cf. Hamilakis (2007) 44–45, 82–83 & 99–103.

28 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

understanding of the ancient world on “classical” texts, the past was accordingly “already known”, “the story was already told.”68 The archaeological society carried out a number of extensive archaeological interventions in Athens before its temporary collapse in 1854. Its secretary Stephanos Koumanoudis, educated in Germany, initiated further excavations in Athens during the latter half of the nineteenth century, as well as in other locations in Attica, in Boeotia, in the Peloponnese and on the Cycladic islands.69 The society also established several museums in Athens, subsequently consolidated in the creation of the National Archaeological Museum in 1866. In nation building terms, Greek antiquities have, in the words of the scholar Yannis Hamilakis, in a sense “acquired the status of sacred artefacts”; “museums are their temples”.70 Preserving antiquities sometimes also meant carrying out demolitions of buildings and monuments dating from other periods, such as that of the Frankish tower at the Propylaia on the Acropolis in 1874, instigated and paid for by Heinrich Schliemann and executed by the society. Secretary Koumanoudis, transferring the moral responsibility of the demolition on “the man responsible” for its funding, at the same time expressed his gratitude: “the Greek personality of the splendid face of the Acropolis has been restored, pure and bereft of anything foreign, for which we express our thanks to the man responsible”.71 68 Quoted in Hamilakis (2007) 99–100. The Arhaiologiki Ephimeris was founded by the “Archaeological Committee” in 1836, “quietly dissolved in 1838”; the first volume (1837), was taken over by the Archaeological Society and edited by Kyriakos Pittakis and Alexandros Rizos Rangavis. Petrakos (2007), 20–21 & 26–27. To the proceedings and the journal was later added The Work of the Archaeological Society (Έργον της Aρχαιολογικής Eταιρεία) published since 1955, with brief excavation reports, the quarterly publication Mentor, and the book series The Library of the Archaeological Society at Athens, with monographs regarding archaeological topics and excavation reports. Cf. http://www.archetai.gr/site/eng_page_uc.html and http://www.archetai. gr/site/pubs-monographs.html (accessed 20 June 2018). 69 As a reflection of the dominant interest in inscriptions at the time, Koumanoudis published his Funerary Inscriptions of Attica in 1871. Cf. Petrakos (2007), 22–23. An example of a much later project of the archaeological society was that of the excavations of the prehistoric town of Akrotiri on Thera (Santorini), initiated during the post-war military junta period. For an overview of excavations on the Athenian Acropolis, see for example Mallouchou-Tufano (2007). 70 Hamilakis (2007) 46. Cf. the photoblog http://theotheracropolis.com (accessed 22 September 2014) by The Other Acropolis Collective (Yannis Hamilakis, Fotis Ifantidis and Vasko Démou). Cf. also Carabott (1998). For an image of the archaeological society premises, cf. Kokkou (2009) 131. 71 Quoted in Petrakos (2007), 25. Cf., for example, Carter (1979); McNeal (1991); MallouchouTufano (2003); and Eadem (2007). Koumanoudis’ successor as secretary of the society was Panayiotis Kavvadias. Kavvadias was in turn succeeded by the archaeologist Georgios Oikonomos, who figured heavily in the centenary celebrations of the society in 1938 (see chapter four). For Oikonomos, cf. Robert Demangel to the French minister of education, 18 April 1936. EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936–1942)”.

“Big Digs”: National Prestige, International Framework 

 29

“Big Digs”: National Prestige, International Framework The most striking feature about archaeology in the forties and fifties […] is its continuity with pre-war research.72

Clear illustrations of the political dimensions of archaeology can be found in expeditions of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, be they to Central Asia (the “Great Game”), the Eastern Mediterranean, or elsewhere. By the end of the nineteenth century, Rome had begun to dominate the “balance” of classics between foreign schools in Greece and Italy. Verbalising a common trope in classical studies, Swedish professor Martin P. Nilsson expressed this hierarchy in the imaginary of “one’s” progression from Greece to Rome as a natural development in classical archaeological formation by the mid-1920s: I have myself made the experience that one starts in Greece but is increasingly forced to move over to Rome due to the practical demands of teaching. For we have the important task of giving those who later practice teaching an idea of ancient culture, in which one principally has to connect with Rome.73

As has often been the case in “classical” terms, Rome could also be a starting point, leading the scholar from Rome to Greece, as argued by Mary Beard and John Henderson: “Rome is also where the visit to Greece begins; it is from Rome that the mind longs to travel, away to that outpost of cultural order in the midst of wild nature”.74 In combination with a traditional art historical canon, constructed in part on Winckelmann’s appraisal of Greece, the restrictive Italian archaeological legislation, together with the tendency of the Greek state to allow limited foreign archaeological projects – although the export of antiquities had been prohibited – strongly influenced a transition of the epicentre of classical archaeology from Rome to Greece. Soon before the Second World War, BSA chairman Sir John Linton Myres (discussing a possible British school in Istanbul) expressed that “the ordinary

72 Morris (1994), 35. 73 Martin P. Nilsson to Axel Boëthius, 3 January 1925: “Jag har själv gjort den erfarenheten, att man börjar i Grekland men av de praktisk[a] behoven i läraregärningen allt mer tvingas över till Rom. Ty vi ha ju den viktiga uppgiften att ge dem, som gå ut som lärare, en föreställning om antik kultur, och där måste man främst anknyta till Rom.” GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:127. Cf. Bosworth (2011) 206, regarding Nilsson, as well as Rome as symbol of “the fusing of the centuries”. 74 Beard and Henderson continue on that theme: “to discover Rome, whether on the ground, amongst the ruins, or by reading Latin literature in the library, has always meant to be led on to Greece as well and to discover the Greek world through the Roman.” Beard and Henderson (1995) 21 & 101.

30 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Fig. 5: Archaeological measurements at the foot of the Acropolis, Athens, 1906 (Kurt Müller et al., photograph: Tasos Tsimas). DAIA photographic archive, D-DAI-ATH-1973-1141.

classical student will always come to Athens”, thus indicating a “soft border” between Greece and Turkey in classical scholarship dating back at least to the early nineteenth-century Philhellenes.75 The “ordinary classical student”, it seems, would then come to Athens or to Rome depending mainly on topics and teaching; archaeology or art history. Notwithstanding the increased focus on Rome in classical studies at the beginning of the twentieth century, Greece still dominated in archaeological terms. The selection (in 1901) of Athens as the venue for the first International Congress of Classical Archaeology in 1905 was an indication of the archaeological prominence and pluralism of Greece in the beginning of the twentieth century.76 In that same period, the archaeologist Charles Waldheim advocated an international

75 John Linton Myres to Gerard Mackworth Young, 1 December 1938. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman[)] & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-LondonPre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. For Myres, cf., for example, Casson (1937) vi. A British Institute at Ankara was founded in 1947 (instead of a school in Istanbul). 76 Cf. Dyson (2006) 22. Cf. also VV.AA. (1905).

“Big Digs”: National Prestige, International Framework 

 31

committee to promote excavations at Herculaneum, near Naples (1904, and again in the 1920s; these excavations however remained under Italian control). The Mediterranean foreign schools of archaeology spring from an academic climate of late nineteenth century national rivalry and the spirit of “peaceful conquering”, in the words of philologist and politician Johan Bergman, a process characterised by an undercurrent of tension in terms of national research traditions imbued with elements of competition and prestige.77 The foreign schools in the Mediterranean can be said to have contributed to claiming heritage for Western Europe through classical archaeology. The foreign schools to some extent also spring from a legacy of cultural and scholarly superiority and exclusion, with evidence of mistrust of domestic scholarship – Italian, Greek and other – again expressed in terms of competition and national prestige.78 The creation of colonial mandates after the First World War had significant implications for archaeological opportunism in the Mediterranean and in the Middle East.79 In Greece, the archaeological climate had changed. Without the financial resources and private funding of for example the American school at the Athenian Agora (see below), large-scale archaeological undertakings, or “big digs” could not be and were not undertaken in the interwar period in the same way as before. The maintenance of established prestigious national associations with major archaeological sites would continue, however. In describing the work of the Italian School of Archaeology in Athens in the mid-1930s, its director Alessandro Della Seta in a sense provided an unofficial manifesto and justification for “big dig” archaeology in Greece during the interwar period. According to his perspective, the modern world was perpetually inferior to that of ancient Greece. For Della Seta, the Hellenic legacy shone like a beacon of inspiration, a pinnacle of civilisation, a cult truly worthy of reverence: No region of the world […] has been riddled with excavations such as Greece and the coasts of the Aegean, and no other has responded more generously to this violence: its illustrious civilisation has been brimming with innumerable lodes of gold across the fora, the graves,

77 Bergman (1906). 78 For political applications of archaeology, see for example Hamilakis and Yalouri (1999); Maischberger (2002); Bettina Arnold (2004); Hamilakis (2007); Trümpler (2008); and Niklasson (2016). 79 Cf. Dyson (2006) 172–175. For imperial, colonial and postcolonial perspectives, cf. Bernal (1987); Morris (1994), 20–21; Reid (1996); Lynn Meskell (1998); Colla (2008); Hamilakis (2007); Trümpler (2008); and Arthurs (2012) 126–127: Archaeology as an “instrument of colonial control”; “the West and its Others”; “authentic connection to the land”; excavations as “a vehicle for the imperial transformation of space”; reinforcing “preexisting narratives of European superiority through the ages.”

32 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

the trenches of these modern people with inexhaustible curiosity. And today, for the joy of our eyes and of our spirit it [reigns as a] civilisation of art among the ancient civilisations. […] The remains of the dead block the steps of the living.80

The “ethnic problem” of “the prehistoric origins of civilisation” had been high on the agenda also of Heinrich Schliemann and other archaeologists, antiquarians and philologists in the late nineteenth century.81 By the 1930s, in the words of Della Seta, that “problem”, and classical archaeology in general terms, did not need to be “organised forcedly within the same too rigid picture that is being drawn for the Western and Northern regions of Europe, but should be recovered and sifted with large excavations and systematic investigations.”82 Archaeology was used in in post-unification pre-fascist Italy in colonial contexts, such as in the Dodecanese, occupied by Italy after the islands’ declaration of independence from the Ottoman Empire in 1912 until the end of the Second World War. This general national(ist) Italian archaeological policy was later reinforced by the fascist regime.83 Foreign archaeologists in Italy were thus in practice mainly still confined to surveys as well as topographical and material studies.84 Through the foreign schools, archaeologists from different countries were however increasingly expressing keen interest in organising large-scale excavation projects also on Italian soil, in a similar way to how this had been done in Greece

80 Alessandro Della Seta, 25-page article on “La R. Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene”, 22 (“un problema etnico”): “Nessuna regione del mondo […] è stata crivellata dallo scavo quanto la Grecia e le coste dell’Egeo e nessuna ha risposto più generosamente a questa violenza: la sua illustre civiltà ha traboccato con innumerevoli vene attraverso i fori, le fosse, le trincee di questi moderni uomini inesausti di curiosità. Ed essa oggi per la gioia dei nostri occhi e del nostro spirito si assiede regina come civiltà d’arte tra le civiltà antiche. […] gli avanzi dei morti ingombrerebbero il passo dei vivi.” SAIA archives, 1935: “Direzione (Dir.)”. 81 Cf. Heinrich Schliemann to Rudolf Virchow, 9 September 1890: “alles Denken und Trachten meines Leben dahingeht, dem Vaterlande Ehre zu machen und die über die Prähistorie der hellenischen Welt hängende dunkele Nacht aufzuklären”. Quoted in Meyer (1936) 311. 82 Della Seta, “La R. Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene”, 25: “il problema delle origini preistoriche della civilt[à] in Grecia non deve essere forzatamente assestato dentro il quadro troppo rigido che è stato disegnato per le regioni occidentali e settentrionali d’Europa, ma deve essere ripreso e vagliato con larghi scavi e sistematiche indagini.” For Della Seta, see Veronelli (2001); Barbanera (2012), 51–63; and Idem (2013a). 83 For Italian national and nationalist archaeology during the fascist period (and “archaeological Fascists” vis-à-vis “Fascist archaeologists”), see Barbanera (1998) 149–152; Ridley (1986); and Settis (1993). 84 One such project, planned by Axel Boëthius, was to gather material for an archaeological map (a Charta archaeologica) of Latium, together with his colleague Thomas Ashby, director of the British School at Rome. See for example Wallace-Hadrill (2001) 61–66.

“Big Digs”: National Prestige, International Framework 

 33

and elsewhere since the mid-nineteenth century. As Stephen Dyson has pointed out, “by making archaeology an exclusively national […] enterprise, the Italians risked disciplinary parochialism and increased the potential for the misuse of archaeology for national propaganda.”85 This potential can be illustrated by the prominence and widespread dissemination of romanità during Fascism, and the role of archaeology in historical narratives promulgated by the regime, partly through the use of publishing: journals, reviews and monographs.86 A striking example of archaeology serving regime rhetoric was the review Africa italiana (1927–1941), legitimising Italian possession of Tripolitania and Cyrenaica through archaeology and scholarship.87 The cover of the dark politicoarchaeological 1938 phantasy of Mare Nostrum (fig. 6), by Egidio Moleti di Sant’Andrea, featured a map of the Mediterranean, including a large section of North Africa, a direct reference to Italian colonies and the empire; it also features the fasces, symbolically aligned with Italy, as well as large steamships and modern aeroplanes. The new Italian empire would conquer the Mediterranean, “our sea”, like the ancient Roman precursors had done before, this time assisted by the vanguard of modernity, boats and planes, combined with “perennial” Roman values. Mare Nostrum was an example of justifying Italian imperial ambitions, also in cultural and archaeological terms, by identifying fascist Italy with ancient Rome. Appeals to romanità and to the “national spirit” reached further than the fascist party. Such cultural nationalism also encroached on the sphere of activities of the foreign schools in Rome and the Italian school in Athens (see chapter three).88 Mare Nostrum 85 Dyson (2006) 98–99. It is not coincidental that the Istituto Nazionale di Archeologia e Storia dell’Arte was established in 1918. Cf. Esch (2007), 68–69. 86 Notable examples of romanità propaganda promulgation in reviews and journals can be found in, for example, Roma (created in 1922, preceding the Istituto di Studi Romani), Capitolium (created in 1925, an organ of the Governatorato di Roma) and L’Urbe (created in 1936, founded and “directed” by art historian and architect Antonio Muñoz). Cf. Barbanera (1998) 144–145. For a summary of romanità and classical archaeology in fascist Italy, see Ibid. 144–147. Cf. Barbanera (2015); and a 21-page handwritten notebook, possibly by SAIA director Guido Libertini (1888– 1953), director of the Scuola italiana 1939–1941, on the theme of the “Valori di Roma” and romanità, in the SAIA archives, 1939: “Missioni scientifiche in Levante – Contabilità”. 87 Africa italiana. Rivista di storia e d’arte a cura del Ministero delle colonie, available at http:// periodici.librari.beniculturali.it/PeriodicoScheda.aspx?id_testata=36 (accessed 8 November 2017). 88 Cf. the above-mentioned handwritten notebook in the SAIA archives, for example page 17: “Rome was always the expression of an idea of order, of the idea of government unity, the idea from which we ourselves draw strength [literally: ‘live’] today.” (“Roma fu soprattutto l’espressione di un’idea di ordine, dell’idea di unità di governo, l’idea di cui viviamo ancora noi oggi.”) SAIA archives, 1939: “Missioni scientifiche in Levante – Contabilità”. See also, for example, Guidi (1996). Mare Nostrum has previously been available at http://www.maella.it/Download/ Mare%20Nostrum%20(1928)%20%20(Pdf).pdf (accessed 3 March 2016).

34 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Fig. 6: The book cover of Mare Nostrum, 1938.

was synchronised with the archaeological peak of Italian nation building and the zenith of the fascist identification with romanità after the proclamation of empire in 1936, manifested in the large-scale exhibition celebrating the two thousandth anniversary of the birthday of Augustus organised in Rome 1937–1938, the Mostra Augustea della Romanità, organised primarily by archaeologist Giulio Giglioli.89 In the same spirit, during the “archaeology of the pickaxe” of Fascism, it was evident, in the words of the scholar Marcello Barbanera, that “excavation was essentially viewed as an instrument for ‘liberating’ the monument from the ground, for retrieving objects of art and probably also more humble objects, but not yet conceived as an instrument for understanding of the relationship between the monument and the earth that covered it.” In the case of regime excavations at 89 Cf. Painter, Jr. (2005) 75–77; Nelis (2011), 355–356; Arthurs (2012); and Barbanera (2008). If a number of foreign archaeologists showed an interest in the mostra, the reverse was also true: its organisers, Giglioli above all, communicated with the foreign schools in Rome regarding their possible “participation” in the exhibition. See for example Dyson (2004). Cf. Giulio Giglioli to American archaeologist Albert Van Buren, 27 January 1934. AAR institutional archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1931–1935. The exhibition program of the mostra augustea, and correspondence related to it, is for example preserved in the BSR archives, box 63: “Directors correspondence 1938–1946”.

“Big Digs”: National Prestige, International Framework 

 35

Ostia (1938–1942), “colonial archaeology” even “denied the existence of a stratigraphy.” The archaeologist Vittorio Spinazzola had drawn the conclusion in 1934 that “no excavation method exists,” an acerbic assumption that was challenged by his colleague Amedeo Maiuri in 1937.90 As the regime appropriated the late nineteenth century policy of the exclusion of foreign excavations in Italy, one might ask what the perceived use was of keeping foreign schools of archaeology in operation? The resources and the scholarly output of the foreign schools – the kind of archaeological work that the foreign archaeologists had long been accustomed to in Italy: primarily reporting, surveying and publishing – was valuable to the regime, also as a vehicle for prestige. Much scholarly work was being carried out with funding from various national sources. The foreign presence and interest in “Italian antiquity” reinforced the rationale for the use and dissemination of romanità.91 As an expression of academic diplomacy, the foreign schools were a valuable status tool for the fascist regime, to the extent that an area in Rome, the Valle Giulia, was set aside for their development and expansion, in analogy with the area reserved for the 1930s new university campus of “La Sapienza”.92 “Big digs” began to flourish in the late nineteenth century and would indeed become the norm in Greece after the Second World War and in the following decades. Just before the war, a law was being considered “to suppress illicit excavation, tombrobbing and smuggling” in Greece, through a scheme that would make use of the excavations of foreign schools “in different parts of Attica” in order to deter tomb robbers. From the perspective of the British School at Athens, this would also “solve the question of the next School dig.”93 In the early stages of the Second World War, the archaeologist Gerard Mackworth Young, director of the BSA, wrote to Edith Clay, BSA secretary in London, regarding his thoughts on British archaeological policy during the war and archaeological “flag-wavers”, reacting to recent German activity at Olympia:

90 Barbanera (1998) 152–153: “una metodo di scavo non esiste”. 91 Arthurs (2007) 75–119. Cf. Arthurs (2012). 92 Cf. Corriere della sera, 31 January 1933 (Luigi Bottazzi): “Roma centro di studi mondiali. Accademie e Scuole straniere”. Cf. “Roma ‘Caput Mundi’. Tutte le Nazioni hanno nell’Urbe Istituti culturali a carattere storico. […]”, Cronaca Prealpina – Varese, 24 December 1933; and “Gli istituti culturali italiani e stranieri in Roma”, Gazzetta di Venezia – Venezia, 5 January 1934. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:238. 93 Gerard Mackworth Young to Edith Clay, 16 January 1939. The “school dig for 1939–40” was Knossos, the site excavated by and, since the beginning of the century (1901), associated with archaeologist Sir Arthur Evans. Young to Clay, 1 June 1939. BSA archives, “B.S.A. 1939”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.8-uncatalogued. Cf. BSA, Report for the Session 1938–1939, 1. For Knossos, see for example Colin F. Macdonald in Valavanis et al. (2007), 158–183; Beard (2014) 17–25; and Marinatos (2015).

36 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

Fig. 7: “I centri dell’arte e della cultura nella Roma del fascismo”, map, c. 1935/1936, from Travaglini (2007) 94. Cf. Ahlklo (2010), 70. It would be politically undesirable to make a show of “keeping the archaeological flag flying”, particularly if the flag-wavers were people who might be capable of rendering useful war service in one way or another. […] The fact that the Germans are making a great splash at Olympia, for purely propaganda purposes, only strengthens this view. […] I may mention that there is no objection, in the minds of the Greek public and others, to the nationals of neutral countries undertaking archaeological work during the war: though, as a matter of fact, the Americans are doing very little.94

94 Young continued: “The Greeks are not in the least taken in by this manoeuvre, and I think the worse of us if we tried to rival it. […] I look forward, however, to the resumption of field work by the School in Attica, […] when the war is over.” Young to Edith Clay, 11 January 1940. Young

“Big Digs”: National Prestige, International Framework 

 37

The annual reports of the foreign schools in Athens provided a regular source of information regarding archaeological activities, not least the section of the BSA reports aptly named “Archaeology in Greece”: extensive summaries in English of excavations and finds in Greek soil, relying on information provided by the other foreign schools.95 The British school took some pride in providing this comprehensive archaeological service. In 1938, director Gerard Mackworth Young wrote to BSA chairman John Myres, with an illustration of how “Archaeology in Greece” relied on German scholarship and punctuality at the same time as it was an instrument of some prestige for the British school: “for once in a way the Germans are being late with their Bericht, and for the first time in many years it will not be available as the main source of material.”96 Following the example of continued German fieldwork at Olympia, Robert Demangel, director of the French School in Athens, considered that excavations at the sites “to which its name remains attached” should preferably continue, with the added benefit of its archaeological activities being “the most useful propaganda that France could uphold in Greece.”97

advocated care for the near future: “Professor [Alan J.B.] Wace has further suggested that some of the former students of the school […] might find time and opportunity to do a little archaeological surveying in Attica […]. But for political reasons I am opposed to conducting field work in Attica for the present.” BSA archives, “Letters from Director to Secretary 1940” (folder), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.9-uncatalogued. Classical archaeologist Alan John Bayard Wace (1879–1957) was director of the British School at Athens 1914–1923, and is associated with excavations at for example Sparta and Mycenae. Cf. James R. Stewart to Alfred Westholm, 10 October 1939: “Germany showed us the value of archaeology as propaganda in the last war”. Medelhavsmuseets arkiv, E I: 3: “Cypernsamlingarna Korrespondens S. 1933–1954”. For Edith Clay, cf. Hood (2000–2001). For the Agora excavations, see for example Panos Valavanis in Valavanis et al. (2007), 202–221; and Morris (1994), 34–35. 95 BSA, “Annual Reports and Archaeology in Greece 1933–1951” (bound volume, BSA), for example “Archaeology in Greece 1939–45” (initially also covering Cyprus). Cf. BSA, Report for the Session 1938–1939, 25: “The material was collected by the Director of the British School, but other duties prevented him from writing it up.” Cf. BSA, Report for the Session 1946–47, 21–34 (“Archaeology in Greece, 1945–1947”); Gerard Young to Robert Demangel, 19 August 193; Young to Paul Lemerle, 1 August 1938; and Young to Lemerle, 1 February 1938. EFA archives, 1 ADM 6 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée secrétariat général (1937–1941)”. 96 Gerard Mackworth Young to John L. Myres, 24 August 1938. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman[)] & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 97 Robert Demangel to the “Ministre de l’Éducation Nationale Direction de l’Enseignement Supérieur”, 9 January 1940: “une reprise régulière de l’activité de l’École française sur les chantiers archéologiques auxquels son nom reste attaché. […] C’est aussi la plus utile propagande que la France puisse maintenir en Grèce.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936–1942)”.

38 

 1 Classical Archaeology, Histories and Institutions

In Italy, after the fall of the regime and the end of the war, as was the case in several sectors of Italian society and in other fields of scholarship, the gentry and rising stars of classical archaeology retained positions and influence after the crumbling of the fascist framework that they had recently served. The “opening” of Italy for foreign excavations after the Second World War was on the whole an important paradigm shift in classical archaeology, with archaeological allotments offered to the foreign schools already established in Rome.98 If the window for foreign archaeological excavations opened in Italy after the war, the opposite was true for Greece, where the previously continuous and intense archaeological activity had ground to a halt with the war, the instable post-war political situation in the country and the Greek civil war. An outright post-war ban on archaeological excavations by the foreign schools in Greece lasted until 1949. This contributed to Italy beginning to catch up in archaeological terms after a substantial period of preeminence of archaeology in Greece.99 The “big digs” of the 1950s and 1960s witnessed new and old projects alike in Italy, Greece and elsewhere around the Mediterranean. Large-scale projects on Italian soil did not really take off until the 1950s, in part due to the rather gradual “opening” for foreign excavation after the fall of Fascism.100 The 1950s was a decade of intense excavation, made possible trough national funding in each specific context. French excavations at Bolsena, beginning in 1946, had initiated a post-war focus on Etruscan archaeology at the foreign schools in Rome, exemplified for example by Swedish excavations of the 1950s and 1960s. This Etruscan focus at foreign schools was furthermore encouraged more or less by default: sites of prime national interest, such as the Roman

98 Cf. Dyson (2006) 228. See also Idem (1998) 261; and MacKendrick (1983). Contrasting opinions were also in circulation, however. Cf. “Un problema di ordine scientifico ed economico. È giusto autorizzare gli stranieri a compiere scavi archeologici nel nostro Paese?”, Il Messaggero, 6 September 1955. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1953–31.3.1956”. 99 See for example the recurring reports on “Archaeology in Greece” in the British School at Athens (BSA) annual reports: BSA annual report for the Session 1946–47, “Archaeology in Greece, 1945–1947,” 21–34 (John M. Cook); BSA annual report for the Session 1947–48, “Archaeology in Greece, 1947–1948,” 17–28; BSA annual report for the Session 1948–49; and “Archaeology in Greece 1948–1949,” 20 (Cook) Cf. Doro Levi, “Pro-memoria per il Marchese Talamo – Direttore Generale per le Relazioni Culturali, Ministero degli Affari Esteri, sulla scuola archeologica di Atene,” January 1948 (four year suspension of excavation permits). SAIA archives, 1947–1948: “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. I Affari Generali Pos. II Finanziamento e Amministrazione”. 100 Examples of early (late 1940s) post-war excavations by foreign schools in Italy are the École française de Rome excavations at Bolsena in Etruria, initiated in 1946, and at Megara Hyblaea on Sicily, initiated in 1949, as well as the American Academy in Rome (excavations at Cosa, initiated in 1948).

“Big Digs”: National Prestige, International Framework 

 39

Forum or Pompeii, for example, were to remain reserved for domestic Italian archaeology.101 The “big digs” of the 1950s and 1960s were long-term commitments to largescale excavation projects, primarily in Greece and in the Eastern Mediterranean, with a focus on the architectural remains of what were considered to be important urban or religious centres. The “conservative operational structures” of this evolving “big dig paradigm”, as Stephen Dyson has put it, exerted a strong influence on the development of classical archaeology before the Second World War.102 Through the foreign schools in Rome and Athens, national “big dig” traditions and identification with specific significant archaeological sites had evolved over time – such as Germany at Olympia and France at Delphi – and in the early twentieth century, such as the USA on the Athenian Agora. These large-scale national commitments to a finite number of historically famed sites can partly be understood in a European nation building context, with national rivalry as a consequence also in cultural terms.

101 For the Bolsena excavations, cf. EFR annual report 1946–1947 (6 March 1947). 102 Dyson (2006) 111–112 & 131–132.

The Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom (Villa Caffarelli/”Granarone”, Capitol), 1872/1873– 1877 (Paul Laspreyes, architect; drawing published in Deutsche Bauzeitung (1878), 191). Wikimedia Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:LaspeyresINstitut.jpg). Cf. Dodero and Parisi Presicce (2017) 292–293.

2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914 This chapter provides an historical and contextual overview of foreign schools in Rome and Athens from post-Napoleonic establishments until the outbreak of the First World War. The five national contexts studied here, in both Rome and in Athens, are those of the “Great Powers” in classical archaeology: France (schools, écoles) Germany (archaeological institutes), Britain (schools), the USA (academy, Rome, school, Athens), Italy (school, Athens), with the addition of the (politically neutral) Swedish institutes in both cities. This addition of a country outside the “Great Powers”-framework is further justified by the unique position of the Swedish Institute in Rome being the only foreign school of its kind – in Rome or Athens – to remain operational throughout the Second World War in its entirety, therefore presenting a unique institutional continuity during the war years, connecting the late 1930s with the post-war period. Contrary to the overall archaeological profile of the foreign schools in the Greek capital, their counterpart institutions in Rome have dealt with archaeology in combination with art history and history – with topics much influenced by the nature of the city as an artistic nexus and by its function as the seat of Christianity (the role of Athens in Greek Orthodox Christianity is not comparable).1 Had a Greek school in Rome corresponding to the Italian school in Athens existed, which is not the case, it would also have been included in this here.2 The foreign schools treated here are all “Western”, an overall image of a structure still in operation today (the extension of the “West” here includes the USA and anglo-/francophone institutions such as the Australian and Canadian

1 For foreign schools in Rome, see for example VV.AA. (1970 [1959]); Bonazzi and Pistacchi (1992); Vian (1993); Idem (1996); and Billig, Nylander and Vian (1996). See also, for example, Deuchler and Setälä (1996); Donato (1999); Pasquali (2003); Fortini (2008); and Del Gesso (2010). 2 Other associations and institutions in Rome could be mentioned here, foreign as well as domestic, such as for example the Accademia dei Lincei (1603), the Deutsche Künstlerverein (1844), the Circolo Scandinavo of Scandinavian artists (1860), the Royal Spanish Academy in Rome (1873), or the Deutsche Akademie Rom Villa Massimo (1910). For the “Circolo Scandinavo”, see Pihl Atmer, Carlens and Lång (2010). For the Spanish academy, see for example Olmos Romera, Tortosa, Bellón and Sastre de Diego (2010). For the Villa Massimo, see Blüher and Windholz (2007). Archival material pertaining to Villa Massimo can be found in the Politisches Archiv des Auswärtigen Amtes, Berlin. These institutions were also more or less contemporary with the “Associazione Artistica Internazionale”, established in 1870 (Spain had also founded an “Academia de Historia Eclesiastica” in the Spanish embassy in Rome in 1747). Cf. Rietbergen (2012) 13–14 & 145. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-003

42 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

institutes in Athens).3 Eastern Europe is underrepresented overall (with exceptions such as the Romanian and Hungarian academies in Rome). The same generally applies to similar foreign schools in Istanbul. The reasons for this western institutional dominance lie partly in the nineteenth and twentieth century cultural requirement to associate with “classical” and “Western” historical and cultural narratives, and partly in a specific tradition of allocating and prioritising resources in order to manifest a physical representative presence on ancient soils, as this book illustrates. The examination here is based almost exclusively on material in the archives of the respective foreign schools in both cities. Sources in the respective languages are accordingly used throughout. The study is not organised according to strict divisions between each national context, and is not intended to be comprehensive for each specific institution. Its aim is to place the foreign schools, their activities, their research profiles – as well as influences of individual scholars – in a widespread sociopolitical perspective.

French Expeditions: Egypt, Syria, Morea and Macedonia The first archaeological foreign school of its kind in the Mediterranean – that is to say a nationally funded institution, operating in conjunction with a national scholarly framework, established with the outright purpose of conducting excavations and scholarship in “classical” lands – was the École française d’Athènes. Founded in 1846, the French École predated other foreign schools in Athens by several decades.4 The French school, operating in the context of the generally speaking generous Greek policy regarding foreign archaeology and the relatively early organisation of the Archaeological Service (1829) of the young Greek state, contributed to establishing both the scholarly and the “corporate” profile of Mediterranean foreign schools.5

3 Cf. http://www.unioneinternazionale.it/istituti-membri/istituti-membri-non-italiani/, and http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Foreign_Archaeological_Institutes_in_Greece (accessed 20 June 2018); and Schlanger, van der Linde, van den Dries and Slappendel (2012), 21–31. 4 For the history of the EFA, see Valenti (1994); Eadem (1996); Eadem (2000); Eadem (2003); and Eadem (2006). See also VV.AA. (1873); VV.AA. (1898); Radet (1901); Fougères (1927); VV.AA. (1947); VV.AA. (1948); Mayence (1947); Étienne (1996a); Idem (1996b); Idem (2000); and Lévin (2012). Cf. also Tat (1999), in EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”); as well as retrospective articles on the history and mission of the École by several of its former directors, and excerpts from evaluations of the EFA with illuminating rhetoric on the “classical” from the turn of the millennium, spanning a decade and a half (1991, 2000 and 2007, see appendix xii). 5 For foreign schools in Athens, see for example Korka et al. (2005); and Eadem et al. (2007). See also, for example, Loukaki (2008) 151–156; Ceserani (2012) 197; Tat (1999); and VV.AA. (2000).

French Expeditions: Egypt, Syria, Morea and Macedonia 

 43

As will be examined below, when the École française de Rome was established in the 1870s, it was initially considered a branch of the French School in Athens. Special attention to the EFA in relation to other foreign schools is therefore justified.6 The status of being the first foreign school remains a source of considerable institutional prestige for the EFA. Its establishment can be seen in conjunction with nineteenth-century orientalism and French philhellenism, as well as with French East Mediterranean political strategies. The École française d’Athènes – with the seventeenth-century Académie de France in Rome (1666, see chapter one) as an inspiration – was established with Royal blessing towards the end of the “July Monarchy”: the reign of Louis Philippe, King of the French 1830–1848, before the revolutions of 1848 and the creation of the Second Republic in France.7 Partly aiming at perfectioning knowledge in situ already acquired through study, the EFA was considered “une école française de perfectionnement, pour l’étude de la langue, de l’histoire et des antiquités grecques”.8 The establishment of the French school in a period of political tension and colonial expansion has been seen in terms of rivalry with Great Britain: as king “Louis-Philippe thumbing his nose at queen Victoria”.9 Lord Elgin’s infamous removal of the Parthenon sculptures were for example justified by his compatriot

6 The EFA archives are divided between administrative material and excavation sites. Valenti (2006) is mainly based on archival material from the Archives Nationales in Paris and EFA annual reports, as well as the archives (in Nantes) of the French embassy in Athens. Valenti’s reading of the history of the school used mainly financial documentation al (“budgets 1902–1981”, “comptes de gestion 1902–1981”, “comptes d’administration 1902–1981”) and twentieth-century reports by directors (as well as correspondence) in the EFA archives, in order to show the engagement of the French state in the EFA (“institution polymorphe”), and “how France has – or has not – used the French School as a mean of influence” (“L’École française d’Athènes (1846–1981)”, résumé). 7 Cf. Valenti (1996) 13–14; and Valenti (2006) 17 & 22–24. For the founding decree of the EFA (“Louis-Philippe, Roi des Francais […]”), Palais de Neuilly, 11 September 1846, see EFA archives, 2 ADM 1: “Création, mise en place et fonctionnement de l’École française d’Athènes sous les directions d’A. Daveluy (1846–1867) et d’É. Burnouf (1867–1875)”. Cf. the collection of statutes and decrees (1846–1996), with a copy of the founding decree, as well as a transcribed version in an excerpt from Radet (1901) 423–424, in EFA archives, 2 ADM 4: “Statuts, réglementation et fonctionnement général de l’EFA. Recueil de textes législatifs et réglementaires”. 8 Quoted in Petrakos (2007), 21. 9 Basch (1995) 44, quoted in Valenti (2006) 3: “Créée en Grèce dans un contexte de tensions politiques exacerbées, l’École française d’Athènes ressemble fort à ‘un pied de nez de Louis-Philippe à la reine Victoria [L’École] a comme premier but d’affirmer le prestige de la France et de détrôner les puissances rivales, à commencer par l’Angleterre’”. Cf. Loukaki (2008) 152: “the wish of the French to undermine the influence of Britain in the East.”

44 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

John Cam Hobhouse in 1813 “on the basis of the competition with France”.10 National prestige, political and cultural, was, in a sense, a zero-sum game: in this case the more to France, the less to the main rival, the English. Somewhat paradoxically, then, the French school might also be regarded as an indirect “création de l’Angleterre”, reflecting the rivalry of the Western powers for scholarly control of Greek antiquity after the elevation of Greece to national status from Ottoman province in the wake of the Greek independence movement. The independence rally was a cause supported by a European philhellenic scramble: the outcome of “two revolutions, one political, the other literary; the Greek revolution and the Romantic revolution”.11 The national Greek Archaeological Service was founded in 1833, soon after Greece had become independent. The first law for the protection of antiquities was published in 1834. Five years after the end of the Greek War of Independence, 1837, the influential Archaeological Society at Athens was established (see chapter three).12 The first constitution in modern Greece was adopted by the national assembly in 1844. This coincided with the establishment of a “Société des Beaux-arts”, in order to enable architects in their third year at the Académie de France in Rome to study monuments in Greece, sowing the seeds of what would become the École française in Athens two years later.13 Institutions beget institutions: the seventeenth-century Académie in Rome can in this way be viewed as an indirect source for the nineteenth-century École in Athens. There is scarce archival ground for the notion put forward by the historian and archaeologist Ian Morris of the École française in Athens being “a spin-off of the international but mainly German-sponsored Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica in Rome”. Rather, “the French School’s particular trajectory reveals a more complex dynamic in its relation to the Instituto’s model, highlighting the powerful if subtle interplay between nationalism and scholarship

10 Hamilakis (2007) 250. Hamilakis also makes a case for understanding the contemporary restitution issue “within the framework of competing nationalism”. Ibid. 285. The shipment to Britain of the Parthenon sculptures was partly legitimised in an attempt to counter similar possible plans by the French ambassador, Fauvel, and were eventually purchased by the British Museum in 1816 (Hobhouse was also a companion of Lord Byron, who protested against Elgin’s actions). For Fauvel, see for example Clairmont (2007). 11 EFA director Théophile Homolle, quoted in Lévin (2012) 57. 12 See Korka et al. (2005) 13; and Hamilakis (2007) 82–83. For “the past in the struggle for Greek independence”, as well as archaeological legislation and institutions in the new Greek state, see Díaz-Andreu (2007) 82–86. 13 Cf. Valenti (2000) 432.

French Expeditions: Egypt, Syria, Morea and Macedonia 

 45

during the later nineteenth century.”14 From a French perspective, the beginnings of the school in Athens can in a sociopolitical sense be traced back to Napoleon’s Egyptian campaign (in Egypt and Syria, 1798–1801), to the years of the French Restoration (1814–1848), and, more importantly in terms of Greece, to the French “expédition de Morée” (1828–1833), excavating at Olympia (1829) and elsewhere – an intervention by the French army in the Peloponnese (Morea) during the Greek War of Independence. This Morean expedition followed in the wake of the Greco-Russian so-called Orlov revolt against Ottoman rule in 1770, unsuccessful from a Greek perspective, a precursor to the Greek War of Independence fifty years later.15 The scholarly expedition followed in the wake of the French military equivalent; its work was “managed and sanctioned by the Institut de France”.16 Its mission was to “record the state of the precious ruins”, to “revive” or “restore” them, to “trace from them an accurate and lasting image”. Also, like the military expedition, to “restore life with freedom to the generous descendants of the Hellenes.”17 Although there are no direct organisational links between the “expédition de Morée” and the École, the combination of antiquarianism and a contemporary, near-anthropological sense of cultural and historical autopsy were elements common to the expedition and to the early mission of the French school, before the gradual professionalisation of archaeology in the latter half of the nineteenth century.18

14 Ceserani (2012) 197, also quoting Ian Morris. Cf. Morris (1994), 25 (also on early French excavations in the 1850s and 1860s, work which “represented no change from art-collecting”). 15 The Morean expedition – a military expeditionary force of 14000 men – was followed by another influential French Mediterranean expedition to Algeria in 1830. Cf. Valenti (1996) 11–13; and Valenti (2006) 4 & 11. See also Radet (1901) 9; and Bastéa (2000). The scholarly results of the Morean expedition was published in an extensive three-volume folio publication: Blouet and Ravoisié (1831, 1833 & 1838). Cf. online version: http://digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/blouet1831ga (accessed 20 June 2018). Cf. also references to the expédition (as well as reproduced frontispiece image) in Dyson (2006) 80–82. 16 Blouet and Ravoisié (1833, Vol. II), dedication “to the king” (“au Roi”): “dirigés et sanctionnés par l’Institut de France”. 17 Blouet and Ravoisié (1833, Vol. II), preface (“Avertissement”): “Ce fut pour constater l’état de ces ruines précieuses, ce fut pour les ranimer en quelque sorte, pour en retracer une image fidèle et durable, que le gouvernement français nous envoya dans le Péloponèse, à la suite de l’expédition militaire destinée, elle aussi, à rendre la vie avec la liberté aux généreux descendants des Hellènes.” 18 For travellers, explorers, archaeologists, architects, merchants, diplomats, et al. in historical perspective, cf. Charmasson (2010); and Lamy (2013, http://chrhc.revues.org/3216, accessed 24 May 2018).

46 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

Fig. 8: The (Venetian) occupation of Morea, 1685 – two years before the siege against the Athenian Acropolis in which the Parthenon was shelled. Medal, Venice, from the dogate of Marcantonio Guistinian (1684–1688), Numismatic Museum of Athens (housed in the Athens residence of Heinrich Schliemann, the “Iliou Melathron”). The Venetian Regno di Morea lasted 1688–1715. “Napoli” is Nafplio; on the other side of the Corinthian isthmus lies “Achaia” and Athens (far right). Photograph by the author, 7 September 2014.

Fig. 9: Abel Blouet and Amable Ravoisié, eds., Expedition scientifique de Morée, 1831, frontispiece (detail). Heidelberg University Library – CC-BY-SA 3.0.

French Expeditions: Egypt, Syria, Morea and Macedonia 

 47

Napoleon’s expedition to Egypt and the later expédition de Morée remained valid points of reference for the École in Athens a century after Napoleon, as in the report for its activites during 1917–1918 (the French school closed in 1916, it reopened after the war, in 1919).19 In “compensation” for “prohibiting” the school from working on “its sites in Greece, on the islands and in Asia Minor,” the war, it was felt, could open a new “field of action”, if the school “wanted to and could profit from the presence of French soldiers at Thessaloniki for scientific purposes.” The French presence there sparked hopes of “repeating the admirable results in Macedonia of the expeditions to Egypt or Morea thanks to the understanding between officers and scholars.”20 This wishful thinking of EFA director Théophile Homolle, towards the end of his term as head of the school, reveals a significant facet of contemporary classical archaeologists: their mental map and geographical points of reference were, in a sense, as ancient as they were modern. Ancient geographical and topographical units were a filter and fixed reference in the continually changing modern maps of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East. For Homolle and his contemporaries, “Egypt”, “Morea” and “Macedonia” referred as much, if not perhaps more, to the “classical” lands of antiquity as to the post-Napoleonic colonial world order. When the École française was established, Greece was, to some, considered part of the “Orient” rather than of Europe: Greek language, history and antiquities are things of which the modern Greeks generally know little if at all, and the most educated among them keep asking for instruction from the learned nations of Europe. […] If France does not gain from these steps, is it not obvious that the Orient will gain a great deal? It is not also the case that new creations are a means for us to spread our language, our customs, our influence?21

19 For the EFA during the First World War, see Étienne (1996a) 14; and Stavrinou (1996). 20 A similar idea had simultaneously presented itself to some officers and soldiers in the armeé de l’Orient (Théophile Homolle, director of the EFA, annual report 1917–1918, 5: “Collaboration avec l’armée d’Orient. – La guerre, qui interdisait à l’École ses chantiers de la Grèce, des îles et de l’Asie Mineure, pouvait, en compensation, lui ouvrir un nouveau champ d’action, si elle voulait et savait profiter pour des fins scientifiques de la présence des soldats français à Salonique. […] souhaiter de renouveler en Macédoine, grâce à l’entente des officiers et des savants, les admirables résultats des expéditions d’Égypte ou de Morée.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. 21 Revue de l’Instruction publique. Recueil mensuel, 5e année, 15 October 1846, n. 89 (Paris: Hachette, 1846), 985–986, quoted in Valenti (2000) 2: “La langue grecque, l’histoire et les antiquités grecques […] sont choses que les Grecs modernes savent généralement très mal, qu’ils ne savent même absolument pas, et dont les plus instruits d’entre eux vont tous les jours demander des leçons aux nations savantes de l’Europe […] Si la France ne gagne rien à ces mesures, n’est-il pas évident que l’Orient y gagnera beaucoup? Ne l’est-il pas aussi que les créations nouvelles sont un moyen pour nous d’étendre notre langue, nos mœurs, notre influence?” Cf. Ageron

48 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

For its first decade (1846–1856), the French School in Athens was first housed in the “Maison Ghennadios” (a building on Akadimias street, no longer in place) before it moved into the Danish architect Theophil Hansens’ 1842 neoclassical precursor to the present Hôtel Grande Bretagne on Syntagma square, next to the parliament: the “Maison lemnienne”, which it occupied for almost twenty years (1856–1873). The present plot of land and the imposing school building was organised under the direction of Orientalist and racialist Émile-Louis Burnouf (director 1867–1875). Work commenced in 1872, and the building was inaugurated in 1873 (see below).22 Scholarly control and scientific exploration initiated a gradual expansion of an idealisation of Greece to including investigation of its ancient treasures. The Mediterranean as a whole was in a similar way “invented as an object of study” during the first half of the nineteenth century, in the words of the scholar Catherine Valenti.23 The historian Georges Radet, writing at the turn of the last century, was under the impression that archaeology had played little or no part in the establishment of the EFA in 1846, by which he meant the “archaeology” of its day: the discipline was still very much under construction when the school was established.24 Its director Théophile Homolle lamented in 1897 that the school, “prepared by diplomats and men of letters, without cooperation from scholars, has a purely political and literary character, it only allows archaeology in the background – in Greece! – and excludes philology.”25 The expedition campaigns of and after Napoleon included “archaeologists” in their small armies of scholars that documented the Mediterranean lands, in order to satisfy scholarly curiosity and expand the horizon of knowledge, but also in order to exercise control and influence.26 The establishment of the

(1992); and Loukaki (2008) 152: “Rivalries were played out at the scientific level too: Western countries felt they could not be absent where other European nations were present, namely in ‘the bosom of European civilization’, which, they thought, would help develop their own.” 22 See Schmid (1996) 127–129. 23 Valenti (2006) 12 & 14: “L’image, désormais, se substitue à l’idée. C’en est fini de l’Antiquité rêvée et idéale”; “Le tournant scientifique de la première moitié du XIXe siècle a inventé la Méditerranée en tant qu’objet d’étude.” 24 Radet (1901) 10. Cf. also Lévêque (1898). 25 From the first year of Revue de l’art ancien et moderne 1897, 10, quoted in Petrakos (2007), 21: “préparé par des diplomates et des lettrés, sans le concours d’érudits, [a] un caractère purement politique et littéraire, n’admet qu’au second plan l’archéologie – en Grèce ! – et exclut la philologie.” 26 See Valenti (1994) 15; and Valenti (2006) 4. For expeditions, documentation and control, see for example the passages on Napoleon in Egypt and on “Hellenism, Orientalism, Imperialism” in Morris (1994), 20. Cf. also Said (1978).

Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War 

 49

French school in Athens was in this sense a logical consequence of such practices of inventory and of inventing the Mediterranean as an object of study. The main object, the “classical”, was – and arguably remains – caught in between idealisation and investigation. Classical archaeology relied heavily on ancient texts, and therefore on philology and classical tradition in its nineteenth century guise. Another consequence of inventing the Mediterranean as object of study was the gradual rise to near-hegemonic importance of the two nodes of Rome and Athens for the study of the ancient past. In institutional terms, from the perspective of the Mediterranean foreign schools, this importance could however only be fully realised when the two cities had become the capitals of their respective countries: Athens in 1834, Rome in 1871: in both cases the status of associating with antiquity took pride of place in the choice of a suitable capital city for the new nation states.

Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War The Franco-Prussian war in 1870–1871 meant the collapse of the French Second Empire (1852–1870), succeeded by the Third Republic.27 This was a time of upheaval on several political and cultural fronts in Western Europe, not least in France, after its defeat in 1871. It was also an era of intensified European nation building and archaeological mobilisation by the Western “Great Powers”. The Franco-Prussian conflict brought serious structural change for classical archaeology in its wake. As we have seen, the formerly international venture of the Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica in Rome had become engulfed in the machinery of the new German unified Reich and transformed into the Berlin-based DAI, first as a Prussian state institute in 1871, subsequently as a German imperial archaeological institute in 1873, before it was finally transformed into a Reichsinstitut, the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (DAI), in 1874.28

27 New regulations for the EFA were established in 1869, just before the fall of the (Second) Empire: “Règlement de l’École francaise d’Athènes”, 10 February 1869 (Paris)/1 January 1870 (Athens). EFA archives, 4 ADM 2: “Réglementation générale, statuts et gestion des carrières des membres”. 28 Cf. “Im Jahre 1874 wurde das Institut auf Antrag Bayerns vom reich übernommen. Von da an = Reichsinstitut. […] April 1859 Ministerialreskript betreffs Erhöhung des bisherigen Zuschusses […]. Institut jedoch noch nicht Staatsinstitut. […] 18.Juli 1870 Übertragung des Institutsetat aus dem Extraordinarium in das Ordinarium des preußischen Staatshaushalts.

50 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

United Germany at the same time established its archaeological institute in Athens; both “departments”, Rome and Athens, filed under the overarching organisation of the DAI in Berlin, an institution described even after the Second World War by its president, Carl Weickert, to represent “the inner coherence of archaeological research”: the German institutes in Rome and Athens were described as “sister institutes”, whereas the French schools were in ongoing internal “competition” each other.29 Despite much scholarly collaboration during the last century, classical archaeology has to some (albeit mostly benign) extent remained an instrument of prestige in French-German relations. The DAI headquarters had moved to Berlin (from the ICA in Rome, see chapter one) with Eduard Gerhard as early as 1832, illustrating the sometimes-fundamental importance of individuals for the direction and maintenance of institutions The DAI remains a federal agency – a “scientific corporation” of the federal institution – affiliated with the German Foreign Office (fig. 10). From the outset, like the foreign schools in the Mediterranean at large, it dealt with “the fundamental principles of formation in the humanities, namely Greek and Roman culture.”30 The centralised organisation and structure of the DAI (divided into a number of foreign sections or departments) reflected its influential relative position in the world of classical archaeology: in excavation work, dissemination of information and publications.

[…] 9.6.1873 genehmigt Reichstag Anträge der Reichsregierung betreffs Übergang des Instituts vom preußischen Kultusministerium an das Auswärtige Amt des Deutschen Reiches. […] 18.Mai 1874. Kaiserliche Genehmigung der Umwandlung des Instituts in eine Anstalt des Deutschen Reiches.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 29 Carl Weickert, “Memorandum über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut”, 14 October 1950 (in appendix i). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”: “Rom pflegte die alte Tradition, Athen beteiligte sich mit der Archäologie des Spatens an der Gewinnung des echten Bildes der griechischen Kunst”, “inneren Zusammenhang der archäologischen Forschung”, “Schwesteranstalten”, Konkurrenzkampf”. 30 “Denkschrift über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut von M. Schede”, 13 August 1945 (in appendix i): “Das deutsche Archäologische Institut faßt somit sein Arbeitsgebiet in dem weiten Sinne auf, in dem der Franzose den Begriff ‘archéologie’ versteht, und ist daher nicht lediglich zuständig für die Grundlagen der humanistischen Bildung, nämlich für die griechische und römische Kultur”. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. For individual members of the DAI, see “Mitglieder”-files in the DAI archives. For the overall organisation of the DAI, see Dostert (2004). For contemporary perspectives on Bildung, or formation, see for example Jaeger (1945).

Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War 

 51

Fig. 10: Organisation chart (Organigramm) of the DAI, 1928, in conjunction with its new statutes in preparation for the centenary jubilee in 1929. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–01: “Sitzungen der ZD 1928, 1936–1944”. The Sitzungen of the Zentraldirektion of the DAI resumed again after the war in 1948. Cf. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 11–01: “Sitzungen ZD 1946–1949”.

The DAI added further branches during the twentieth century, in Cairo, Istanbul, Madrid, Baghdad, Tehran, Sanaa (Yemen), Damascus, Lisbon, Ankara and in Ingolstadt, as well as two archaeological “commissions”, in Frankfurt and Munich (the Baghdad, Damascus and Sanaa-branches of the DAI became part of the “Orient Department” in 1996, directed from Berlin).31 As discussed above, the first “branch”, or department, of the DAI, the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Abteilung Rom (DAIR), was established in 1871–1874. The institute, a heavyweight contributor in archaeological

31 For the DAI, see for example Das Deutsche Archäologische Institut. Geschichte und Dokumente (10 volumes, 1979–); Weickert (1949); Simon (1973); Lullies and Schiering (1988); Bittel, Deichmann, Grünhagen, Kaiser, Kraus and Kyrieleis (1979); Dostert (2004); and Vigener (2012a). Cf. also, for example the Deutsche Evangelische Institut für Altertumswissenschaft des Heiligen Landes (DEI, 1900), a research unit of the DAI (see http://www.deiahl.de/startseite. html, accessed 22 September 2018).

52 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

research in Italy, was originally located in the neoclassical Casa Tarpeia on the Capitoline hill, the seat of the Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica (see chapter one).32 Physically and symbolically, the institute overlooked and, in a scholarly sense, supervised the burgeoning archaeological activity in the old capital of the young Italian nation. The corresponding department in Greece, the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Abteilung Athen (DAIA), was established simultaneously, in 1872–1874.33 Both institutes, in Rome and Athens, employ a hierarchical system of a “first” and a “second” director. The foundation of a German institute in Athens was in a sense a long time coming. The Greek state had to a large extent been influenced by Bavarian organisation during the first half of the nineteenth century, under the first Greek king, Otto. Altertumswissenschaft and German scholarship further exercised a strong influence on the domestic development of Greek archaeology during the nineteenth century. The first professor of archaeology at the University of Athens was for example the German Ludwig Ross, appointed Ephor of all Antiquities in Greece in 1834. Ross, who hailed from Holstein, with Scottish ancestry, was for example responsible for the first restoration of the temple of Athena Nike on the Athenian Acropolis in 1835–1836.34

32 For the early history of the DAIR, see Michaelis (1879); Rodenwaldt (1929); and Rodenwaldt’s section on “Deutschtum und Ausland,” in von Oppeln-Bronikowski (1931). See also, for example, Corriere della sera, 31 January 1933 (Bottazzi): “Roma centro di studi mondiali”, and “Notiz für 10 – 04 Material für die Geschichte des Instituts findet sich in: P. Beda Bastgen, Forschungen und Quellen zur Kirchenpolitik Gregors XVI [and the file] Institut Archéologique de Rome, Wien Staatsarchiv, H.H. St.Staatsarch.1843, Varia de Rome. s.a. dasselbe Faszikel, 1844.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. Cf. Reinhard Kekulé von Stradonitz, “Über die Aufgaben des archäologischen Instituts” (28 April 1875). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 33 For the history of the DAIA, see Jantzen (1986); as well as the work of the DAI research cluster on the history of the DAI (Geschichte des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts im 20. Jahrhundert/Forschungscluster 5). See also Brands and Maischberger (2012). Cf. also Trümpler (2008); and Weickert, “Memorandum über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut”, 14 October 1950 (in appendix i). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 34 See for example Voutsaki (2003); Minner (2006); and Mallouchou-Tufano (2007), 40–42. Cf. Petrakos (2007), 20 & 23: “The foundation of the German Archaeological Institute in 1874 thus seemed long overdue”.

Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War 

 53

Fig. 11: Ludwig Ross, bust (“Herme von Ludwig Ross”). DAIA photographic archive, D-DAI-ATH-Athen-Varia-0302.

On the other hand, there could be no German archaeological institute in Greece before there was a unified Germany. As soon as there was, however, things moved swiftly indeed. In a discussion in the German Reichstag in May 1872, Athens was advocated as “a natural centre for the Classical east”, as a suitable base for “taming” ancient material.35 The Franco-Prussian war raised the stakes of national prestige, not least from a French perspective vis-à-vis Germany. In terms of the scientific organisation and institutionalisation of classical archaeology in the Mediterranean, the 1870–1871 conflict provides a clear before-and-after benchmark. The present premises of the French School in Athens provide an evocative illustration of Franco-German rivalry. The establishment of the German institute in Athens was decided in 1872. Before its inauguration in 1874, however, the French school had erected its new school building (initiated in 1872), leaving the grand building on Syntagma square for its present installation in Kolonaki (see above and fig. 12).36 35 Jantzen (1986), quoted in Petrakos (2007), 23. 36 For the “effect of political context on the attitudes of archaeologists” after the Franco-Prussian war, see Fittschen (1996). For the EFA and DAIA buildings, see for example Kokkou (2009) 133.

54 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

Fig. 12: The École française d’Athènes, main building, 1873. EfA photographic archive, cliché 29455.

Fig. 13: The Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen, reproduction from Leipziger Illustrierten Zeitung, n. 2961, 29 March 1900. DAIA photographic archive, D-DAI-ATH-1985–0351.

Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War 

 55

In synchronicity with the augmented institutionalisation of foreign schools in the early 1870s, large-scale archaeological undertakings by foreign schools in Greece began at the same time, establishing a tradition of connecting the school “big digs” with specific archaeological sites: sanctuaries and cities. After a first French excavation at Santorini in 1870 (by director Émile-Louis Burnouf, on a relatively minor scale), after an earthquake there, the French school set the tone for large-scale commitments with excavations of the Cycladic sanctuary island of Delos, beginning in 1873, in the near aftermath of the Franco-Prussian war; two years later, just after the creation of the German archaeological institute in Athens, drawn-out negotiations led to the long-term commitment to the Panhellenic jewel of Olympia.37 The newly established German institute in other words did not lose time in challenging the previous French foreign archaeological monopoly in Greece and in “taming” antiquity.38 The German takeover of the Roman international Instituto had, not surprisingly, fuelled the establishment of a French school in Rome in 1873. No clear division between science, prestige and politics, in other words. The École française de Rome (EFR) was initially considered a “Roman section of the school in Athens”; the Sous-Directeur of the French school in Athens became director of the new school in Rome.39 In this new pan-Mediterranean setup (which eventually

37 For an overview of excavations on Delos, cf. Dominique Mulliez in Valavanis et al. (2007), 78–99. For Olympia, see for example Helmut Kyreleis in Ibid. 100–117; Valavanis (2007) 14; and Petrakos (2007), 24. 38 Cf. Lévin (2012) 56. For the early German excavations at Olympia, see for example Klinkhammer (2002); and Bochotis (2015). 39 See presidential decree, 26 November 1874 (“Article 9 La section romaine de l’École d’Athènes prend le titre d’École archéologique de Rome. Le Sous-Directeur de l’École d’Athènes ajoute à ce titre celui de Directeur de l’École archéologique de Rome”; also printed in the Journal Officiel de la République Française, 28 November 1874. The 1874 EFA decree was predated by other decrees dated 11 September 1846, 7 August 1850, 9 February 1859 and 25 March 1873. Cf. also the Directeur de l’Enseignement Supérieur of the Ministry of “l’Instruction Publique, des Cultes Et des Beaux-Arts”) to the director of the EFA, 30 November 1875, concerning the “Règlement de l’École française de Rome”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 1: “Création, mise en place et fonctionnement de l’École française d’Athènes sous les directions d’A. Daveluy (1846–1867) et d’É. Burnouf (1867–1875)”. Cf. Valenti (2006) 59–68; and Lévin (2012) 58. For French “branches” in the Mediterranean, see Archives Nationales, Paris (AN), F/17/14585, “École française et Institut d’Études françaises d’Athènes. École française de Rome. Instituts de Caire, de Barcelone, de Florence, de Londres, de Madrid. 1917–1948”. Box AN F/17/13359, “Relations culturels avec l’étranger”, contains documents from the period 1940–1958. The files of the Commission des Écoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome in the Institut de France, Paris, contain correspondence and annual reports, mainly by Robert Demangel, director of the EFA 1936–1950. “Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Archives. Commission des Écoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome”, boxes 14G6, 14G7 and 14G8.

56 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

included for example the French Institute of Oriental Archaeology in Cairo, established in 1880), in a sense mirroring the two branches of German institute, the members (membres) of the École in Athens – six in total, of at least thirty years of age – were expected to spend one year in Rome before proceeding to Greece.40 The impracticality of the setup must however have become clear rather soon. By 1875, the arrangement had changed, and two separate institutions had materialised in each city, although they remained closely related in terms of organisation. The French school in Rome came into its own as “a permanent mission in Italy” in 1875, although, in its founding decree, the first of its aims was to provide the “practical preparation required by the members of the French School in Athens for their studies in Greece and in the Orient”. The Roman school was indeed at first seen to consist of “first year members” (out of a total of three years) of the school in Athens, as well as the members of the school in Rome itself.41 The establishment of an outright independent institution in Rome was also a matter of national and scholarly prestige, echoing the reconfiguration of the ICA as an imperial German archaeological institute in 1874. The French school in Rome was thus established in 1875 in order to carry out French archaeological 40 Cf. “Décret du 25.03.1873 Séjour d’un an en Italie des Membres de l’École française d’Athènes[.] Article Premier – Les membres des l’École française d’Athènes, avant de se rendre en Grèce, séjourneront un an en Italie”; and “DECRET DU 26 NOVEMBRE 1874 – Règlement relatif à l’École Française d’Athènes”: “Art. 2. – Les candidats au titre de membre de l’École Française d’Athènes doivent être âgés moins de trente ans. Ils doivent être docteurs ès Lettres, ou agrégés des lettres, de Grammaire, de Philosophie et d’Histoire. […] Art. 3 – […] Le nombre des membres est fixé à six. La durée de leur mission est de trois ans, y compris l’année de séjour à Rome, prévue par le décret du 25 Mars 1873. […] Art. 9 – La section romaine de l’École d’Athènes prend le titre d’‘École archéologique de Rome’, le sous-directeur de l’École d’Athènes ajoute à ce titre celui de ‘directeur de l’École archéologique de Rome’”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 4: “Statuts, réglementation et fonctionnement général de l’EFA. Recueil de textes législatifs et réglementaires”. Cf. also Émile Mâle, quoted in VV.AA. (1932) 264: “L’École de Rome fut d’abord une École préparatoire, où les membres de l’École d’Athènes, passant par l’Italie avant de se rendre en Grèce, étaient initiés, pendant un an, par des cours suivis, à l’archéologie antique et à l’épigraphie.” 41 Founding decree of the École française de Rome, 20 November 1875: “L’École de Rome a pour objet: La préparation pratique des membres de l’École d’Athènes aux travaux qu’ils doivent faire en Grèce et en Orient […] Elle est une mission permanente en Italie. […] L’École se compose: 1° Des membres de première année de l’École d’Athènes; 2° Des membres propres à l’École de Rome.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 1: “Création, mise en place et fonctionnement de l’École française d’Athènes sous les directions d’A. Daveluy (1846–1867) et d’É. Burnouf (1867–1875)”. EFR annual reports focus on the results of studies carried out by its membres explaining these studies in detail as showcases for the École. The reports follow a similar pattern, and are structured in the form of “mémoires” by different scholars. Reports of annual activities at the French schools in Rome and in Athens were “read” at and published by the Académie des Inscriptions et BellesLettres in Paris.

Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War 

 57

and philological work in Italy, a field outside of the sphere of activities of the seventeenth-century Académie de France (Villa Medici) of the creative arts.42 According to an 1873 decree, Villa Medici artists who were “authorised to spend some time in Greece” were incidentally also welcomed at the French School in Athens).43 The École in Rome was installed in Palazzo Farnese in 1876, a building shared with the French embassy in Rome (an unusual combination of foreign school and official diplomatic channel).44 As an exception to the general Italian archaeological policy of the period, early excavations took place in 1889 in the Vulci necropolis by the archaeologist Stéphane Gsell, on land owned by the Torlonia family, who also backed the undertaking in financial terms.45 The scholarly profile of the École in Rome covered classical archaeology, classical philology and the history of the popes. The school initiated the editing of thirteenth century papal regesta (copies of papal letters and documents) before Pope Leo XIII opened the vaults of the Holy See’s archivio segreto and made it accessible to scholars in 1881, itself an important impetus to creating national institutes for historical scholarship in Rome – foreign schools with an historical rather than an archaeological profile, such as for example the Deutsches Historisches Institut Rom (DHI, 1888) – dedicated to national Medieaval and later records in Rome.46 The important initiative of opening the archives of the Catholic Church, still resonating in the world of humanist scholarship, generated a continuous stream of scholarly pilgrims investigating national histories and trajectories

42 For the history of the EFR, see Gras and Poncet (2013, available online: http://books.openedition.org/efr/2616, accessed 20 June 2018); and VV.AA. (1975, exhibition catalogue). For early outlines of the history of the EFR, see for example Collignon (1915) 24–25; VV.AA. (1931); and VV.AA. (1932). Cf. Gras (2006). 43 Cf. “DECRET DU 26 NOVEMBRE 1874 […]”: “Art. 7 – Les élèves de l’Académie de France à Rome autorisés à faire un séjour à Athènes, les boursiers de voyage, les prix d’exposition, seront reçus à l’École française d’Athènes et placés temporairement sous l’autorité du Directeur.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 4: “Statuts, réglementation et fonctionnement général de l’EFA. Recueil de textes législatifs et réglementaires”. 44 The Palazzo Farnese is owned by the Republic of Italy (having been French property during the period 1911–1936); following a 1936 convention it was offered to the French Government for a period of 99 years. 45 Cf. Haumesser (2013, available online: http://books.openedition.org/efr/2648, accessed 20 June 2018); and Delpino (1995). 46 Cf. for example the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Historical_Institutes (accessed 20 June 2018). The opening of the archivio segreto can be seen in conjunction with Pope Leo XIII’s somewhat later encyclical Rerum Novarum, 1891. Cf. Duffy (2006) 313. The EFR has also for example employed historical investigators at the Grande Archivio of Naples, studying the documents of the Angevin dynasty.

58 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

in the Vatican collections.47 The same year that Pope Leo opened the archivio segreto witnessed the creation of the French review Mélanges de l’architecture et de l’histoire for the publication of results of scholarship carried out at the EFR.48 The “programme de concours” for entering the École in Athens in 1875 provides interesting glimpses into classical formation and classical archaeology in the late nineteenth century – the age of Schliemann – illustrating how the earlier archaeological discipline was firmly grounded in an aesthetical art historical canon: Winckelmann’s idealised legacy shines through like rays from the sun. The assignments for joining the school were based to some degree on ancient collections in France, which the students would be supposed to have studied as part of their curricula: notably not one of the 29 assignments that required answers, presumably at some length – on Greek and Latin epigraphy, ancient sources, history and topography, palaeography and archaeology – concerned actual archaeological practice. The “archaeology” assignments are quoted here: Le programme d’admission à l’École française d’Athènes et fixé ainsi qu’il suit: […] Archéologie. 19o – Marquer brièvement, mais avec précision, les caractères distinctifs des trois ordres d’architecture chez les Grecs. Donner une idée de l’extension de ces différents ordres dans l’ancien monde hellénique; citer les principaux édifices qui peuvent leur servir de type. 20o – Décrire les parties d’un temple grec, donner la définition des termes suivants: temple in antis, prostyle, amphiprostyle, périptère, hypètre, appareil polygonal, isodome, pseudisodome, péribole, hiéron, naos, cella pronaos, opisthodome, fronton, corniche, entablement, larmier, frise, architrave, métope, triglyphe; tailloir ou abaque, echinus, volute, cannelure, ove, palmette, denticule. 21o – Décrire l’acropole d’Athènes au temps de Pausanias, ses principaux édifices, ses œuvres d’art les plus célèbres, surtout d’après ce qui reste de ces monuments. 22o – Enumérer, en suivant l’ordre chronologique des empereurs romains, les principaux édifices antiques qui subsistent à Rome, avec une courte description de chacun d’eux. Indiquer succinctement les modifications apportées alors dans le caractère des trois ordres grecs. 23o – Résumer l’histoire de la sculpture grecque avant Périclès. Montrer que l’on connaît les principaux monuments de cette période, statues ou moulages, bronzes antiques conservés au Louvre, au Cabinet des médailles, à l’École des Beaux-Arts.

47 See, for example, “Per il coordinamento delle ricerche negli Archivi vaticani”, Il Popolo di Roma, March 4, 1930. In “Svenska Institutet 8 feb. – 1930-”. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:241–243. The use of the term “Vatican” before the creation of the Vatican City State in the Lateran Treaty in 1929 and the ratification of the Lateran Pacts is avoided here. 48 Cf. VV.AA. (1977). The Mélanges can be seen as the EFR counterpart to other similar foreign school publications such as the German Archäologischer Anzeiger and Römische Mitteilungen, the British school Papers, the American academy Memoirs and the later Swedish institute Actapublications (see below).

Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War 

 59

24o – La sculpture grecque au siècle de Périclès, son histoire jusqu’au temps de la mort d’Alexandre. Principaux monuments de cette période, statues ou moulages, bronzes antiques conservés au Louvre, au Cabinet des médailles, à l’École des Beaux-Arts. 25o – Étudier les principales sculptures du Louvre qui portent des inscriptions grecques; les comparer entre elle sous le double rapport de l’art et de l’épigraphie. 26o – Les vases peints; distinguer les différent[e]s époques de la céramique grecque dans leurs rapports avec l’histoire de la peinture antique; prendre pour exemple les vases de la collection Campana, au Louvre. 27o – Étudier les types et les attributs distinctifs des principaux dieux de la Grèce, tels que l’art antique les a représentés. 28o – L’art étrusque, son intérêt historique, d’après les monuments du Louvre. 29o – De l’utilité que l’on peut retirer de la lecture de Strabon, de Pline l’ancien et de Pausanias pour les études archéologiques.49

Although the emphasis on “classical” canon is striking in this French programme, one of the reasons for the omission of archaeological practice from the list of assignments was clearly that the students as a rule had little or no experience of it at that time – that was indeed one of the main reasons for making the classical pilgrimage to Greece and for enrolling in the school. This formative aspect was, and is, in this sense one of the main raisons d’être of the foreign schools in the Mediterranean. The director of the EFA was required to send monthly reports to Paris on the progress of the work of the membres; the members themselves of the schools in both Athens and Rome were in turn to submit a report, a mémoire, for their second and third year of studies.50 A “commission” covering both schools furthermore assessed their activities.51 The French concours can be contrasted with a German piece from the same year: in his “Overview of the 49 “Programme du concours d’admission à l’École française d’Athènes. […]”, 11 November 1875: 29 assignments in total, two tests – one written, one oral (“Le concours pour l’admission à l’École française d’Athènes porte sur la langue grecque ancienne et moderne, sur les éléments de l’épigraphie, de la paléographie et de l’archéologie, sur l’histoire et la géographie de la Grèce et de l’Italie anciennes.” EFA archives, 4 ADM 5: “Membres français. Concours de recrutement 1874–1969, nomination et prolongation de séjour des membres”. 50 Cf. “Le chef du 2e bureau” (Enseignement Supérieur) to the director of the EFA, 21 April 1881”; and “DÉCRET. Le Président de la République Française, Sur le Rapport du Ministère de l’Instruction publique et des Beaux-Arts, […] Décrète: article 1er Les mémoires que les membres des Écoles d’Athènes et de Rome doivent soumettre à l’académie des inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, doivent être adressés au ministère de l’Instruction publique avant le 31 Mars. Les membres de première année des deux Écoles ne sont pas tenus d’envoyer de mémoire. […] 24 Janvier 1883”. EFA archives, 4 ADM 12: “Membres français. Mémoires des membres”. 51 Cf. report, n.d. (1899/1900?), “Institut de France, Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Commission des Écoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome”. EFA archives, 4 ADM 5: “Membres français. Concours de recrutement 1874–1969, nomination et prolongation de séjour des membres”.

60 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

archaeological material”, archaeologist Reinhard Kekulé von Stradonitz, member of the Zentraldirektion of the DAI in Berlin, listed types of monuments and material categories (bronzes, terracottas, “Pietra dura und Glas”, and so forth) in an inventory of German mid-to-late-nineteenth century Altertumswissenschaft scholarship in Rome concerning all “types of monuments”, albeit with a similar clearly aesthetical and art historical focus as in the French assignments above.52 The concours from 1875 provides an insight in “archaeology” as “the study of the past”, when the term came to be synonymous with excavating, inspired by contemporary German scientific advances, for example at Olympia.53 With the Franco-Prussian war and the creation of German and French schools in both Rome and Athens, the map of classical archaeology had been rewritten in the space of less than five years: through the foreign schools, Athens and Rome had become connected on an institutional level, forging a classical tangle that has remained unravelled since. Foreign archaeology in the Mediterranean in the latter half of the nineteenth century was, at least in institutional form, an enterprise promoted by the “Great Powers”: France, Germany, Great Britain and the USA. Why did these particular countries consider it worth investing in institutional presence in “classical” lands? The answer is, at least partly, twofold: it can be found in a dynamic of internal rivalry in terms of national and scholarly prestige, as a consequence of nation building, and in national investments in the grander whole of science and scholarship. It also amounts to funding and priorities; the four powers could afford investing in foreign schools. This priority on the other hand also ought to be linked with the accumulation of museum collections in the home countries. Before the end of partage, the right to acquire a certain amount of excavated finds for export, a practice that came to and end with the Second World War (it had started to dwindle down in the interwar period), institutionalised archaeological activity in the Mediterranean along national lines was easily justified. As a consequence of this activity, of excavations, and of studies of material, iconography and epigraphy, the schools needed suitable outlets for publication, scholarly reviews of their own. The periodical journal of the French school in Athens, the Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique, was set up in 1877, a year

52 Reinhard Kekulé von Stradonitz, “Über die Aufgaben des archäologischen Instituts”, printed and dated 28 April 1875, “Übersicht über das archäologische Material”: “Das Resultat der bisherigen Geschichte der Archäologie ist die klar erkannte Notwendigkeit einer vollständigen und ausreichenden Aufnahme des gesamten wissenschaftlichen Materials”. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 53 Cf. Valenti, “École française d’Athènes (1846–1981)”, 183: “Après 1876, le terme d’‘archéologie’ ne désigne plus seulement, de façon un peu vague, tout ce qui se rapporte à l’étude du passé”. For Ernst Curtius and the first German excavations at Olympia, see for example Marchand (1996) 77–91.

Building Nations: The Franco-Prussian War 

 61

Fig. 14: Exterior of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen building, 1927 (photograph: Emil Kunze). DAIA photographic archive, D-DAI-ATH-Athen-Varia-0582.

after an Institut de Correspondance Hellénique had been organised in Athens as a meeting-place for savants and amateurs of archaeology and classics.54 Reports of the German institutes have been continually published in the two significant journals Archäologischer Anzeiger, established in 1889, and Römische Mitteilungen and Athenische Mitteilungen respectively.55 In 1888, the German archaeological institute 54 Cf. a report on “la séance de réouverture” of the Institut de Correspondance Hellénique in Journal des débats du matin (?), 19 April 1891: “Grèce. Hier samedi, a eu lieu à l’École française d’Athènes, sous la présidence de M. Homolle et en présence des membres de la légation de France, la séance de réouverture. Toutes les sommités archéologiques grecques et les représentants des écoles étrangères assistaient à cette réunion. […] à resserrer les liens qui unissent la France et la Grèce.” EFA archives, 8 ADM 4: “Bulletin de l’École française d’Athènes (1868–1871), puis Bulletin de correspondance hellénique (BCH, 1877–). Création de la revue”. The Bulletin was created at the same time as the review Parnassos, published 1877–1895 (with a second series since 1959) by the Parnassos Literary Society (Φιλολογικός σύλλογος Παρνασσός), established in 1865. 55 The Archäologischer Anzeiger was preceded by the Archäologische Zeitung, 1843–1885. The yearly reports have also been published in the Jahrbuch des Instituts. The DAIR annual reports are conserved in the institute archives in Rome, along with unpublished quarterly reports (Vierteljahresberichte).

62 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

Fig. 15: Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen, library, 1927 (photograph: Emil Kunze). DAIA photographic archive, D-DAI-ATH-Athen-Varia-0583.

Fig. 16: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Archives, Main Building, 1887.

Enter the Anglo-Saxons: America and Britain 

 63

in Athens moved in to its present premises on Phidias street, the neoclassical building designed by the architect Ernst Ziller.56

Enter the Anglo-Saxons: America and Britain In 1881, France and Germany were joined in Athens by the USA. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens (ASCSA) predated the American Academy in Rome (1894, see below) by more than a decade.57 The establishment of the American School in Athens – a privately funded (trustees), non-profit institution – had been the “chief motive” behind the foundation of the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) in 1879: the schools was intended as a place “where young scholars might carry on the study of Greek thought and life to the best advantage, and where those who were proposing to become teachers of Greek might gain such acquaintance with the land and such knowledge of its ancient monuments as should give a quality to their teaching unattainable without this experience.”58 This description by Charles Eliot Norton, professor of art and “the most cultivated man in the United States” of his time, the driving force and first president of the AIA, addresses the “field school”-aspect of foreign schools and the perceived necessity of accumulating experience and of learning in situ in “classical lands”.59 With reference to the French school and the German institute, Norton felt that the American school would, and perhaps should, in the name and “sake of American scholarship before long, enter into honourable rivalry with those already established.”60 In 1897, the AIA also created an instrument of American classical scholarship in the American Journal of Archaeology (continuing the American Journal of Archaeology and of the History of the Fine Arts, established in 1885).61 Six decades after the establishment of the American school, Louis

56 See for example Hellner (2016). 57 For the history of the ASCSA, see the special issue of the ASCSA journal Hesperia (Philhellenism, Philanthropy, or Political Convenience? American Archaeology in Greece, 2013): Davis and VogeikoffBrogan (2013). See also Lord (1947); Shoe Merritt (1984); and Davis and Natalia Vogeikoff-Brogan (2008). Lord’s 1947 text is available online: see for example “Appendix VI: Directory of Trustees, Managing Committee, Faculty and Students, 1882–1942” (http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/archives/historyof-the-american-school-1882-1942-appendix-vi, accessed 20 June 2018). Cf. also Heuck Allen (2011). 58 Quoted in Petrakos (2007), 25. For Charles Eliot Norton and the establishment of the ASCSA, cf. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 301/1. 59 For Norton, see for example Dowling (2007); and Morris (2000) 57–60. 60 Quoted in Petrakos (2007), 25. Cf. Morris (1994), 31–34 (p. 32: the ASCSA “contested European dominance and helped to organise a group of professional archaeologists under the aegis of classics”). 61 Cf. Dyson (1998) 46–49; and Heuck Allen (2002).

64 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

E. Lord, chairman of the ASCSA managing committee, explained the nature and general framework of the school as follows: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens is an American corporation chartered under the laws of Massachusetts. Our endowment, invested entirely in this country is over a million and a half dollars, and our plant at Athens is the most valuable of all the foreign school properties there. […] We have at Corinth a dormitory and we built for the Greek government the fine museum which is at Corinth. We have also for the last eight years previous to the War, been excavating at very large expense, the Market Place [Agora] of ancient Athens.62

In the case of the last “Great Power” to join the Athens club, the British School at Athens (BSA) had in contrast been preceded by the establishment of a scholarly journal: The Journal of Hellenic Studies (in 1880). The British school was established in 1886, sharing a sizeable plot of land with the American school, as it still does today.63 Classical scholar and politician Sir Richard Claverhouse Jebb, member of the British Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies (SPHS, established in 1879), took a leading role in the establishment of the British School at Athens. Jebb, later president of the SPHS (1890–1905), had been “impressed on a visit to Athens in 1878 with the extent to which England lagged behind France and Germany in the study of ancient life and art and its bearing on classical scholarship.”64 In Margarita Díaz-Andreu’s view, the creation of foreign schools led to further competition between empires. The new foundations by Germany and France in Greece were not viewed impassively by the British. In 1878 The Times published a letter by [Jebb] in which he wondered why Britain was behind France and Germany in opening archaeology institutes in Athens and Rome. National prestige was at stake.65

62 Louis E. Lord to Arthur V. Davis (New York City), 17 February 1943. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 5. 63 For the history of the BSA, see for example VV.AA. (1932/1933); Dehérain (1936); Waterhouse (1986); Clogg (1993); Idem (2000), 19–35; Idem (2009); Whitley (2003); Gill (2008); Idem (2011); Beard and Stray (2005); Morgan (2012); and Thornton (2018) 27–28 & 30. Cf. also British Archaeological Discoveries in Greece and Crete 1886–1936 (Exhibition Catalogue, Royal Academy of Arts, London, 1936 (Burlington House). Preface by John L. Myres, “Chairman of the Exhibition Committee”, vi-vii; “The British School of Archaeology at Athens”, 1–4. Cf. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Exhibition 1936”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.4-uncatalogued. 64 Waterhouse (1986) 6, quoted in Petrakos (2007), 27. For Jebb, see also Stray (1998) e.g. 138–141; and Idem (2013). 65 Díaz-Andreu (2007) 107 (referring to the Journal of Hellenic Studies, JHS, 1880, as well as to foreign schools as “foundations”). Cf. Rietbergen (2012) 156: “[Richard Jebb], expressing a mixture of jealousy and admiration drew the British public’s attention to the spectacular excavations France and Germany were realizing in Hellas; after all the Germans had been excavating Troy,

Enter the Anglo-Saxons: America and Britain 

 65

Fig. 17: The British School at Athens (presently the director’s residence), 1888–1890. British School at Athens, Byzantine Research Fund Archive, BRF WI.E-40.

Jebb subsequently contacted the Greek foreign minister, which was followed by a meeting presided by the Prince of Wales, attended by Prime Minister Gladstone, which eventually led to the approval from the Greek government of the donation of a plot of land for the British school.66 As in the case of its counterpart school in Rome (1901, see below and chapter three), the British School at Athens maintains enduring ties with the two Oxbridge universities, and was from the outset partly funded by “the 1851 Commissioners” (the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851, established in 1850 for the administration of the international exhibition the following year at London’s Crystal Palace).67 Olympia and recently Pergamon, which made Berlin into a first-rate centre both of scholarship and of tourism.” For nineteenth-century nation building and the “classical”, see for example Whitling (2009); and Fögen and Warren (2016). 66 Cf. Petrakos (2007), 27. 67 BSA archival material covers both its offices in London and the school itself in Athens. The BSA managing committee minute books are kept in London; copies of the minutes were sent to

66 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

The British school initially conducted excavations on Cyprus (through the Cyprus Exploration Fund, 1887), and subsequently at for example Megalopolis, Sparta and on Melos. The students of the school furthermore participated in the archaeological work of the so-called Cretan Exploration Fund and the Asia Minor Exploration Fund. The late nineteenth century was indeed an era of scholarly self-assurance and “big digs” for the foreign schools in Athens, certainly in the case of the French school and German institute. The French excavations on Delos, beginning in 1873, were joined in 1892 by the large-scale undertaking at Delphi. The French school was searching for a site even more prestigious than the island of Delos, in order to match the German undertaking at Olympia. Excavation permits were connected with issues of Realpolitik early on: excavation rights at Delphi were first offered to Germany, declining “out of respect for France” – the site almost became an American project in 1891, when negotiations were taking place between Greece, France and the USA.68 France emerged successful in the competition with the USA and the Archaeological Society at Athens for excavations at Delphi, the outcome of which was connected with a treaty concerning the Greek export of Corinthian sultanas (raisins) to France, and a favourable French attitude to Greece in international politics.69 Delos and Delphi have since remained archaeological crown jewels for the French school. Instead, the Americans established its scholarly presence in Rome. The American Academy in Rome dates from 1894. The “American School of Architecture in Rome” was created that year as an institution for the formation of young architects, much as a result of the input of the architect Charles Follen McKim, whose efforts were contemporary with those of the AIA to establish an American School of Classical Studies in Rome similar to the one already in existence in Athens. The result, the American Academy in Rome (AAR), was chartered in 1905, and its two strands – architecture and classical studies – were fused in 1913.70 The American Academy is run as a trust with no formal connections with US state bodies; it has thus not had to carry the weight of being an official national state representative of its scholarly disciplines in the host country in the same way as for example the French school or the German institute, although funding from private sources and

Athens. A substantial amount of material covers the period from its 50th jubilee in 1936 to the outbreak of war in 1939; the war years are, as is often the case, more scantily documented. 68 Adolf Michaelis, quoted in Fittschen (1996) 491: “[l’Allemagne] refusa cependant par égard pour la France”. See also Coulson and Leventi (1996); and Dyson (1998) 72–74. For an overview of excavations at Delphi, cf. Dominique Mulliez, in Valavanis et al. (2007), 134–157. 69 Hamilakis (2007) 110–111. 70 For the history of the AAR, see for example Valentine and Valentine (1973); Yegül (1991); Linker and Max (1995); and Adele Chatfield-Taylor, in Scott, Rosenthal and Emiliani (1996), 2.

Enter the Anglo-Saxons: America and Britain 

 67

its trustee-based organisation comes with a need to answer for activities and results in a different degree than in the case of primarily state-funded institutions.71 At the turn of the century, the French school in Athens, the most venerable of the four foreign schools in the city at that time (those of France, Germany the USA and Great Britain), added to its influence and prestige by adding a “foreign section” in 1900. Members of the school were in other words now accepted also from countries other than France; the director of the school was further expected to assist these foreign membres with finding excavation sites and arranging the necessary permits. Foreigners would be able to stay at the school free of charge, provided that their respective governments covered their service expenses.72 The expansion of the French school continued in 1905 with the creation of the position of secretarygeneral, which soon became a stepping-stone to that of director of the school.73 The new century also witnessed the creation of the British School at Rome (BSR), “Britain’s leading humanities research institute abroad”, opened by the British ambassador, Lord Currie, on 11 April 1901.74 The school was thus linked with its Athenian counterpart at an early stage; the “rules” of the BSR were indeed “modelled on those in force at the British School at Athens,” established fifteen years earlier, “with such modifications as the different circumstances of the two Schools appeared to require.”75 Academic years were referred to as “sessions” in 71 The archival records of the AAR are conserved in Washington, D.C. (Smithsonian), in the AAR New York office, and at the academy itself in Rome (on microfilm reels and original material in the Barbara Goldsmith Rare Book Room). See list of primary sources below. 72 “Le Directeur de l’Enseignement Supérieur, Conseiller d’État” to Théophile Homolle, director of the EFA, 20 January 1900. Cf. presidential decree, 20 January 1900: “Il est institué à l’École française d’Athènes une section étrangère dans laquelle seront admis les savants des pays qui en feront la demande au gouvernement français et signeront avec lui une convention à cet effet”; as well as an amendment decree, 14 July 1900: “Les membres de la Section étrangère seront logés gratuitement dans un immeuble […]. Les gouvernements étrangers ou le Comité de patronage devront s’engager à payer pour chacun d’eux, à titre de frais de service […].” (14 July 1900). EFA archives, 4 ADM 13: “Membres étrangers”. See also Viviers (1996); and Valenti (2006) 78–82. 73 For example Charles Picard (secretary-general 1913–1919, director 1919–1925); Robert Demangel (secretary-general 1924–1927, director 1936–1950), Pierre Amandry (secretary-general 1942–1949, director 1969–1981). Cf. Valenti (1994): “Annexe 4 Directeurs et secrétaries généraux de l’École française d’Athènes (1846–1992)”. 74 Quote from http://www.bsr.ac.uk/research (accessed 30 June 2016). 75 BSR annual report 1901–1902. Cf. Rietbergen (2012) 156: “[In 1878, Richard Jebb] also pointed out the need to revitalize the study of Greek and Latin both in British grammar schools and universities by introducing archaeology and ancient history in the curriculum. All this, in his opinion, necessitated the foundation of a British School not only in Athens but also in Rome. Yet it took nearly two decades till the cultural establishment, always more fascinated by Greece than by Rome, was convinced of the latter necessity, too.” For the history of the BSR, see Wiseman (1990); and Wallace-Hadrill (2001). For the BSR and the Society for the Promotion of Roman

68 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

the context of both schools. Like for example the American academy, the British School at Rome offered a combination of scholarships in archaeology and history as well as the visual arts and music. This was reflected in the organisation of the school, in a Faculty of Fine Arts and a Faculty of Archaeology, History and Letters. A generous donation of publications, organised by the École française in Rome and its director Louis Duchesne (at the same time promoting French research) compensated for some of the immediate demand for books for a swift accumulation of library holdings, emphasised in the first BSR annual report: The School has obtained the official recognition of all the authorities and bodies with whom it is necessarily brought into contact. The Italian Ministry of Public Instruction extends to our students all the facilities which it is accustomed to grant to members of such institutions, and the official introduction to the authorities of the Vatican Library has been effected through the kind offices of His Eminence Cardinal Vaughan. With the other foreign schools in Rome, our relations are of the most friendly nature. Without their hospitality our students, in the present incomplete state of the Library, would often be seriously inconvenienced and hampered in their work. Special mention should be made in this connexion of the kindness of [the] Director of the French School, who secured for the School, from the French Minister of Public Instruction, a most valuable gift in the publications of the French Schools both at Athens and at Rome.76

The annual report, intended primarily for the executive committee of the school, pointed to the need for the new institution to pay its respects to the foreign schools already established in Rome, as well as to domestic scholarly institutions, for example by expressing due gratitude for access to libraries. The British school was administered by its executive committee, which from the outset expressed its appreciation to the ambassador and embassy staff in facilitating its establishment.77 Like the British School at Athens, the school in Rome was partly funded by the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851, as well as by individual donations

Studies, established in 1910, see Smith (2012); and Stray (2010). The establishment of the BSR (and the BSA) was preceded by the Palestine Exploration Fund, 1865, and the Egypt Exploration Fund (later Egypt Exploration Society), 1882; and was followed by that of the British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem, 1919 – presently the Kenyon Institute – as well as the British School of Archaeology in Iraq, 1932 – presently the British Institute for the Study of Iraq (Gertrude Bell Memorial). Cf. Davis (2004); and Thornton (2018) 27, 30, 175 & 181. 76 BSR annual report 1901–1902. 77 BSR annual report 1901–1902: “the assistance rendered [by] Lord Currie and the Staff of the British Embassy, one of whom (Sir [James] Rennell Rodd) has consented to join the Committee”. For Rennell Rodd, 1858–1941, cf. Bosworth (1970). Cf. also Rietbergen (2012), 85 (“from the daughter[, Great Britain] to the mother[, Italy]”) & 160.

The Kavvadias Affair and the Italian School 

 69

from Oxbridge colleges.78 The BSR was closely affiliated with the University of Oxford through scholars and students, but also in terms of funding, with double the amount of grants, subscriptions and donations (pre- and post-war) than from the University of Cambridge. These Oxford ties were clear from the beginning. In 1898, an early proposal for a British research centre with “some simple form of organisation for the assistance of British Students in Rome” had been made by a group of classical scholars led by Henry Francis Pelham, professor of ancient history at Oxford.79 The focus on Roman Britain by Oxford ancient historian and archaeologist Francis John Haverfield continued to further strengthen BSR links with Oxford.80 Through his explorations of the Roman campagna, the archaeologist Thomas Ashby (director 1906–1925) initiated what was to become a British school legacy of archaeological field surveys and topographical studies.81 Ashby (and for example Oxford philosopher, historian and archaeologist Robin George Collingwood) was a student of Haverfield’s; Ashby (and Collingwood) later also made an individual financial donation to the school.82

The Kavvadias Affair and the Italian School In 1905, Athens hosted the first International Congress of Classical Archaeology (fig. 18). It was in every sense the natural location for such an enterprise: Since the birth of the modern nation state in the early nineteenth century, Greece had indeed become the prime hub for classical archaeology.83 Greek archaeologists were however initially excluded, before Panayiotis Kavvadias (see chapter one), secretary of the Archaeological Society at Athens, was “forced” to admit his countrymen scholars.84

78 For the BSR in relation to the 1851 commission and Rome scholarships, see Hobhouse (2004) 288–306; the 1934 BSR annual report, as well as the 1935 report of the 1851 commission (BSR), which contain brief accounts of the history of the school. 79 Cf. http://www.bsr.ac.uk/BSR/sub_about/BSR_About_01History.htm (accessed 28 June 2010). 80 For Haverfield and classical archaeology at Oxford and Cambridge, see for example BSR annual report 1938–1939; Dyson (2006) xiv, 125 & 129; Freeman (2007); and Thornton (2018) 28. For classics in the UK and the US, cf. Morris (1994), 19–20. 81 Thomas Ashby was in fact the very first “Rome Scholar” at the BSR, during its first year of operation. Cf. BSR annual report 1901–1902. 82 Cf. BSR annual report 1939–1940. 83 See for example VV.AA. (1905). 84 Petrakos (2007), 29: “Like the first modern Olympic Games,” the 1905 conference was held in Athens: “a flanking move by Kavvadias to downgrade the status of the Society, even though he was its Secretary.” For Kavvadias, cf. Clotz (1928); and Petrakos (2007), 25.

70 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

Fig. 18: Reproduction of group photograph from the first International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Athens, 12 April 1905: “Ouspensky, Conze, Collignon, Homolle, Wilamowitz, Carapanos, Marucchi, Kavvadias, Lambros, Robert, Keil, Strzygowski, Waldstein, Dörpfeld, Reisch, Gardner, Wheeler, Furtwängler, Smith, Stern, Jardé, Duhn, Hampel”. DAIA photographic archive, D-DAI-ATH-1987/64.

In November 1909, a newspaper debate broke out in Greece against Kavvadias, and by extension against the foreign schools in Athens, referred to in the archival material of the French school as the Kavvadias “affair”. On 9 November 1909, the journal Chronos had published an article against Kavvadias, secretary of the archaeological society, accusing the foreign schools of “having profited from [Kavvadias’] accommodating attitude to claim funds of the archaeological society,” using Greek resources, offering the best archaeological sites to the foreign schools, “humiliating Greek science for the profit of foreign science […] full of disdain for the rest of Greece”. The article was possibly prompted by the numismatist and archaeologist Ioannis Svoronos. The directors of the foreign schools prepared an official joint response protesting against these accusations.85

85 Joseph Chamonard (EFA secretary) to Maurice Holleaux, 24 November 1909: “accusé les Écoles étrangères d’avoir profité de ses complaisances pour se faire remettre des fonds de la Société archéologique”, “humiliant la science grecque au profit de la science étrangère […] pleines de dédain pour le reste de la Grèce”. Cf. Chamonard to Holleaux, 29 November 1909: “[Cavvadias] donne aux archéologues étrangers les fouilles les plus importantes, pour l’humiliation de la science grecque et la plus grande gloire de la science étrangère.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. Cf. also

The Kavvadias Affair and the Italian School 

 71

Svoronos, on the other hand, declared that he had been wrongly accused and that he whole-heartedly supported the foreign schools in Greece.86 The joint protest by the foreign school directors was published three days later in the review Hestia. Its preamble assured its readers that the foreign schools were only interfering in the affair because the Chronos-article contained “a series of offensive allegations.” Despite a notice in Chronos on 11 November, declaring that the foreign schools had misunderstood the accusations, these had not been withdrawn. Hence the official protest by the foreign schools, summarised in four points87: (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

The foreign schools were accused of having used “money from the Greek Archaeological Society in the interest of our own governments and our own science.” The directors of the foreign schools “formally declared that all the work of our schools has been paid for from our own funds.” The schools had been “reproached for that the complacent complicity” of Kavvadias had “smothered all Greek archaeological activity in Greece, allocating the best excavation sites to us, for the humiliation of hellenic science and to the greater glory of foreign science.” The schools refuted this, excavation permits were far from “arbitrary measures”, protesting “loudly against all suspicion of favouritism.” To make the point clear, the directors listed “the important work accomplished during twenty-five years” by Greek scholars, under the general direction of Kavvadias, among which were the excavations of the Acropolis of Athens, at Eleusis, Sounion, Thebes, Mycenae, Epidauros, Paros and Naxos, as well as “the conservation and restoration of ancient monuments [,] conducted with an admirable method”, and series of publications: “enough proof of the Greek scientific activity that we are accused of smothering.” The accusations against the schools implied that “our governments and scholarly societies have paid for Kavvadias’ indulgencies with decorations and honours”: “how dare one suggest that one can in this way buy the title of member of the academies of Berlin and Paris, or that of doctor ‘honoris causa’ from Cambridge and Leipzig?” The foreign schools were lastly accused of “scorning Greece”: “it is enough to recall that the first international congress of archaeology was held in Athens [in 1905]; that Athens is the seat of the permanent committee of all congresses to come. If the

http://www.efa.gr/index.php/fr/ecole-francaise-athenes/histoire/1870-1950/l-ouverture-internationale (accessed 22 March 2016). 86 Joseph Chamonard to Holleaux, 8 December 1909; Chamonard to Holleaux, 9 December 1909; and Svoronos (“Syndesmos ton ellenon archaiologon”) to Holleaux, 24 November 1909. Cf. also letter from numismatist and philologist Théodore Reinach (1860–1928) to Svoronos, 14 April 1910. EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. 87 Two printed copies of the protest with corrections by Chamonard are preserved in the EFA archival material. EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”.

72 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

unanimous opinion of the world of scholarship has rendered Athens its former prestige as metropolis for ancient studies – not least thanks to the dominant role of Kavvadias in this circumstance – what finer tribute could we offer to Greece?88

The list of archaeological sites provided by the directors of the foreign schools (a longer list in the original) partly illustrated the work that had been and was being done by Greek archaeologists. At the same time it served the purpose of justifying, and simultaneously downplaying, the numerous sites excavated by the foreign schools, instead emphasising the number of sites that had been left for Greek archaeologists. The protest also by implication asserted Western status and supremacy through institutions, academies and universities in northern Europe. It resulted in a modified statement on the part of the Greek campaigners.89 The Chronos-article also fits in a wider context in the organisation of archaeology in Greece: the same year, 1909, marked Kavvadias’ “downfall” as a more or less autocratic leader of the Greek Archaeological Service. As a result, the service was restructured the following year, when the General Ephorate of Antiquities was dissolved and an Office of the Archaeological Service was created under the new administration.90 The earlier fin de siècle certitude in classical archaeological circles in Greece, in the wake of the 1905 international congress, had started to fade somewhat before the First World War. The interwar period witnessed more restrictive attitudes from Greek archaeological authorities, due in part to increased scholarly competition in the field as well as to increasingly strained finances.91 All that was built up over a long period came crashing down with the war. For classical archaeology and the foreign schools, the challenge after the Second World War was to attempt an restoration of the benign aspects of international work within national frameworks. As the last addition to the first wave of foreign schools in Athens, fittingly founded by the last “Great Power” following the late nineteenthcentury nation building template, the Italian School of Archaeology in Athens (Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene, SAIA, see also chapter three and passim) 88 Letter of protest, signed by the directors of the foreign schools in Athens, November 1909 (see appendix ii). EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. 89 “Nous avons tous appris en Grèce à respecter et estimer les Écoles archéologiques étrangères.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. 90 Petrakos (2007), 29. 91 Valenti (2006) 73–111 & 127–142: “Le temps de certitudes”, 74–77: “La fin des certitudes (1904–1925)”, 97–111: “D’une guerre à l’autre: le budget de l’archéologie (1928–1947)”, 128–132.

The Kavvadias Affair and the Italian School 

 73

was established in 1909, creating a direct foreign school link between Athens and Rome (fig. 19).92 A corresponding Greek archaeological school in Italy (as well as one in Istanbul) has been discussed since the 1950s (more frequently since 1989), but has not been realised. The SAIA budget and the school itself was threatened as its centenary (2009) approached; this threat was however averted.93 Italian archaeological activity in Greece commenced in the 1880s with the young nation’s archaeological “mission” to Crete, contemporary with a similar mission n in the Levant. The Italian mission to Crete was chiefly associated with the archaeologist and epigraphist Federico Halbherr. Through this archaeological link, the Italian school in Athens has maintained a close link to Crete, as well as to, for example, the site of Poliochni on Lemnos, “the oldest city in Europe”. The Cretan connection with Italian archaeology was maintained also during Ottoman administration as well as in the period of the independent Cretan State (1898–1913).94 Like other Italian institutions, the school in Athens was established with the prefix “Royal” (lasting until the abolition of the monarchy in Italy in 1946).

92 For the history of the Italian school, see for example Pace (1913); Pernier (1920); Di Vita (1983); Idem (1996); Idem (2000); La Rosa (1995); Di Vita (2001); Greco and Benvenuti (2005); Berutti (2010); and Greco (2012). Cf. also La Rosa (1986); Petrakos (2007), 29; and Barbanera (2015). The SAIA should not be confused with for example the SAIC, the Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Cartagine (an academic society for “Documentazione, Formazione e Ricerca”, established in Sassari (Sardinia) in 2016. Cf. https://www.scuolacartagine.it (accessed 21 September 2018). 93 One example of a Greek foreign school is the Istituto Ellenico di Studi Bizantini e Postbizantini di Venezia, founded in 1951, following a 1948 “cultural accord” between Italy and Greece. The institute has been active since 1958. Cf. http://www.istitutoellenico.org/istituto/index.html (accessed 20 June 2018). 94 For Poliochni on Lemnos, see for example Alberto G. Benvenuti, in Valavanis et al. (2007), 196–201. Cf. VV.AA. (1984); Barich and Stoppiello (1997); and www.missioniarcheologiche.it (accessed 16 March 2016).

74 

 2 Great Powers, Deep Roots, 1846–1914

Fig. 19: Former premises of the Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene, c. 1923. SAIA, photographic archives, B/543.

The Kavvadias Affair and the Italian School 

48 –19

6 194

1925–1926

86

184

6

4

87

73 18

–1 72

18

01

19

1871–1874

18

 75

5 87

–1 1894

190

9

1881

Fig. 20: The establishment of German, French, British, American, Italian and Swedish foreign schools in Rome and in Athens. Image: Jonathan Westin. Modified version of map image in Whitling (2010) 71. Cf. the more comprehensive table of “Establishment dates of foreign institutes and schools around the Mediterranean Sea”, in Braemer (2012) 38: “1st wave[,] 2nd wave[,] 3rd wave[,] last creations”.

Gorham Phillips Stevens and American Academy students measuring “twenty centuries of progress” and the entasis (convex curve) of columns inside the Pantheon, Rome, March 1917. American Academy in Rome records, 1855–2012, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution.

3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935 Internationalisation is the motto of the twentieth century, the device on the banner of progress. Science, the Super-Nation of the world, must lead the way in this as in all other things.1

“Science, the Super-Nation of the world”: the above quote, by Irish physical chemist and scientist Frederick George Donnan (1910), reflects a widespread early twentieth-century optimism in scholarly internationalisation – a naivety that did not compute with the seething Western European nationalist rivalry that would bring the continent to full-scale war merely four years later. Donnan’s general sentiment might be said to have rung true also for classical studies and classical archaeology in that period. The field of classical studies was, in a sense, a nationally organised international organism administered around academic institutions in the home countries and national foreign schools in the Mediterranean. At the same time, scholarly results and insights were regularly communicated across national borders, on a European – Western – scale, partly via individual networks. The first International Congress of Classical Archaeology in 1905 (in Athens, see chapter two) was a clear indication of concurrent international aspirations. In this light, the foreign schools in Rome and Athens could be understood as a crossroads between internationalised scientific pursuits and national scholarly traditions.

War, Interwar: Legislation and Restrictions Like many of the foreign schools in Rome, often in apartments in centrally located palazzi, the British school was first housed in smaller premises. The grand initial host of the BSR until the first years of the First World War was the Palazzo Odescalchi near Piazza Venezia, a portion of which was occupied by the school and its directors.2 Architect Sir Edwin Lutyens designed the BSR building in the Valle Giulia, beyond the Villa Borghese park, based on his British pavilion on the same location in the international exhibition in Rome in 1911.

1 Frederick George Donnan, quoted in Clara (2016), 3. 2 See Ashby (1916). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-004

78 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

Fig. 21: The British School at Rome, 1920. BSR Photographic Archive, BS Collection, bs-0128.

The building was re-erected in the Valle Giulia after the world fair, completed by April 1916 (fig. 21).3 By the outbreak of war in 1914, the American Academy in Rome was securely installed in a newly erected building, designed by the renowned architectural firm McKim, Mead & White, on the Gianicolo hill in Rome, on land acquired by the wealthy banker John Pierpoint Morgan in order to rival the seventeenth-century Académie de France on the Pincio hill on the other side of the city (fig. 22).4 The French Académie and its competitive Prix de Rome awards for gifted architects also served as inspiration for the American Academy, who established its own tradition of the “Rome Prize” awarded annually to a number of scholars from different disciplines. For its centenary (2014), the academy building was celebrated in a centenary exhibition at the American academy, aptly named in a “classical” context: Building an idea.

3 See also Petter (1992); and Hopkins and Gavin Stamp (2002). Cf. Evelyn Shaw to Courtenay Arthur Ralegh Radford, 6 January 1939. BSR archives, box 63. For the Valle Giulia exhibition 1911, cf. Massari (2011); and Rietbergen (2012) passim. 4 Fant (1996) 33.

War, Interwar: Legislation and Restrictions 

 79

Fig. 22: The American Academy in Rome (the McKim, Mead & White building, under construction, c. 1914). American Academy in Rome, Photographic Archive.

The funding for this building of the idea is and has, like in the case of the American school in Athens, been private. The AAR remains a private institution in terms of organisation and funding, with a board of trustees and finances based on stock market investments.5 A substantial part of the scholarly output of the AAR –  articles, monographic studies, excavation reports and conference papers – has been published in the Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, published since 1915. The American Academy remained operational during the First World War. Shortly before the outbreak of war in 1914, its director, classical scholar Jesse Benedict Carter, wrote regarding the “new academy”, referring to the newly fused schools of architecture and classical studies, that

5 The board of trustees to some extent reflect individual as well as corporate and government interests. In the 1930s, the academy’s funding sources also included the Carnegie Corporation. Cf. AAR director Laurance Roberts to the Fulbright committee, 26 April 1950. AAR archives. American Academy in Rome records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758; as well as minutes of meeting of the Committee on the School of Classical Studies of the American Academy in Rome (Columbia and the Metropolitan Museum of Art), 13–14 January 1944. Box 1, Dept. of Art and Archaeology Records; Princeton University archives, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton University Library.

80 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

There is nothing exactly like it, so far as I know, in the world. It bears a strong outward resemblance to the organisation of a university, but this resemblance is formal rather than spiritual. […] We are attempting to bring into close contact two distinct types of mind. We call these types, roughly, the artist and the scholar. It might perhaps be better to think of them as the artist and the historian. […] it is this fact, the existence of two distinct kinds of guides, which is the essence of the so-called “two schools” of which the Academy consists.6

Two decades later, one of Carter’s successor as academy director, architect and artist James Monroe Hewlett, made a characteristic appeal in which his view of history was reflected, in an “address to the people of America” (cf. chapter cover illustration): “The Academy asks the united interest and support of America in the maintenance of this foundation on the top of the Janiculum from which we look down upon twenty centuries of progress”.7 Soon after having emerged victorious from the First World War, Italy confiscated the libraries in Rome and Florence that belonged to defeated Germany (those of the German archaeological and historical institutes in Rome and of the art historical institute in Florence). As a consequence of deteriorating ItaloGerman relations, a post-war German institute on the Capitol Hill (the Casa Tarpeia) would have been considered “an intolerable insult to the hypersensitivity of [Italian] nationalists” – the German archaeological institute, the DAIR, had to move out of its old headquarters, into a building on the Via Sardegna, near the Via Veneto.8 The DAIR remained closed for several years during and after the war. The confiscated libraries were however eventually restored to the German institutions, largely due to interventions in 1920 by the philosopher Benedetto Croce, then minister of education, and count Carlo Sforza, minister of foreign affairs, on the condition that its library was not to be removed from Italy.9 The 6 “Memorandum on the relations of the various directors of the Academy among themselves.” Jesse Benedict Carter, 12 May 1914. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5750. 7 James Monroe Hewlett, “Address [to] the people of America” (courtesy of the Department of State of the Italian Government), 1934. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 8 Open letter from the scholar Paolino Mingazzini to the president of the DAI, published in Il Mondo, 7 October 1952: after the First World War, when “la ignoranza non aveva ancora trionfato del tutto (la marcia su Roma non era ancora avvenuta)”, “l’autorità di Benedetto Croce fu sufficiente per far restituire non il locale (la presenza di un istituto tedesco sul Campidoglio suonava intollerabile offesa alla ipersensibilità dei nostri nazionalisti) ma almeno i libri all’Istituto Germanico, che si installò in un luogo quanto mai neutro, in via Sardegna 79.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 20–30: “Bibliothek Rom 1936–1954”. 9 Cf. “Memorandum addressed to the United Nations Organization by the International Union of Institutes of Archaeology, History, and History of Art in Rome” (1946), 5 and appendices 1–3. École française de Rome, box “Union 1950–1955”, files “Union 1950” and “Union 1955”.

War, Interwar: Legislation and Restrictions 

 81

same condition applied to the libraries of other German research institutions in Italy.10 This crucial condition will be returned to below and in later chapters. Croce entertained the idea of one single German institute (for archaeology, art history and history) in Rome, under one roof, with potentially beneficial synergy effects.11 The German archaeological institute had closed in 1915 and reopened in 1921. The Casa Tarpeia on the Capitol (the headquarters of the Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica, see chapter one) was not returned to Germany after the war, however, and the institute was forced to move elsewhere. It was temporarily transferred to the Villa Amelung, the bequest of Walther Amelung, first director of the institute 1921–1927, after which premises were rented in the Evangelical “Gemeindehaus” on Via Sardegna off the Via Veneto.12 In Athens, foreign school excavations continued before and after the First World War, with for example the German excavations at the ancient cemetery on Samos, and at Kerameikos in Athens, beginning in 1913.13 The Italian school took an active archaeological interest in the territories that came with Italian colonial expansion, for example on “the Italian islands in the Aegean”, the Dodecanese islands, part of the Kingdom of Italy 1912–1943/1947.14 The Italian school was closed during the First 10 “Note sur les Bibliothèques ci-devant allemandes d’Italie et leur administration par l’Union internationale des Instituts romains d’archéologie d’histoire et d’historie de l’Art” (Albert Grenier), December 1950. AN, 20170185/105: “Les quatre bibliothèques [allemands], confisquées par l’Italie en 1915 avaient rendues à l’Allemagne en 1921 par Benedetto Croce, ministre de l’Instruction publique et le Comte Sforza ministre des Affaires Étrangères par un accord culturel aux termes duquel l’Allemagne s’engagerait a ne jamais, sous quelque prétexte que soit, transporter ces bibliothèques, hors d’Italie. L’accord ayant été considérait que les bibliothèques [redevraient] sa propriété.” Cf. historical overview of the DAIR, 25 June 1945 (Ludwig Curtius). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5: “Ein Paragraph des Rückgabevertrags bestimmt, dass die Institutsbibliothek nicht aus Rom entfernt werden darf.” For the post-First World War sequestration of “the three great German libraries”, cf. also Rietbergen (2012) 167. 11 Esch (2007) 70. 12 Cf. Historical overview of the DAIR, 25 June 1945 (Curtius). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5 13 For the DAIA and Georg Karo, its director 1910–1919, cf. classical archaeologist Konstantinos Kourouniotis (1872–1945, “Chef de la section archéologique”), to unidentified recipient, 12 July 1917: “En sortant d’Athènes monsieur le Prof. [Georg] Karo avait confié à la section archéologique du ministère de l’instruction publique et à moi personnellement la protection et la surveillance de l’institut archéologique d’Athènes.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–40: “Athen Allgemeines 1.4.1936–31.3.1945 1.8.1948–31.12.1950”. A centenary seminar on the excavations at Kerameikos was held in Athens in 2014. 14 Alessandro Della Seta to Raffaele Boscarelli, Italian minister in Athens, 19 December 1936: “La scuola greca nelle Isole Italiane dell’Egeo”. SAIA archives, 1938: “Allievi”. Cf. for example de Frenzi (Luigi Federzoni, 1913); Livadiotti and Rocco (1996); and Di Vita (1996). For Boscarelli, cf. Santoro (2005); and Medici (2009) 15.

82 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

World War. It reopened in 1920 under the direction of archaeologist and art historian Alessandro Della Seta, director of the school for twenty years (1919–1939).15 However, with changing rules regarding exports and permits in the interwar period, the impetus for foreign national investments in classical archaeology was eventually no longer equally easy to justify. In a 1922 parliament debate in France, voices were raised in protest of the possible reduction of funding the formation of young scholars through the archaeological “mission” of the French school: “It is cold in Athens when the harsh North wind blows.”16 In the same period as the exchange of populations took place between Greece and Turkish Asia Minor (1922), the hitherto generous Greek policy in relation to foreign excavation and the rules of the game were indeed beginning to change: foreign schools in Greece would from now on be limited to three excavation sites each (rather than five as before). The French School in Athens for example consequently ceased excavating outside Greek territory. In February 1924, the Greek Archaeological Council formulated this new and more restrictive policy regarding foreign excavation, justifying the stricter “regime” by delays in publication and tangible excavation results if too many projects would be running simultaneously. The new policy was summarised in three “principles”: (1) archaeological sites that had not been worked on for 15 years were to be considered “free”, (2) the maximum number of ongoing excavations in Greece for each foreign school was to be limited to three annually, and (3) new excavation sites could only be granted to the foreign schools if the number of sites associated with each institution did not already exceed two locations.17 Due to these restrictions, the French school, the authority (doyenne) of foreign schools in the Mediterranean – or of “similar institutions” – in the words of its director, Charles Picard, was slipping from its prominent position as the foreign school par excellence, catering for, and therefore influencing, the work of archaeologists

15 Cf. “La R. Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene” (with detailed archeological descriptions, Della Seta), 1: “Primo direttore della Scuola, dal 1909 al 1916, fu il prof. L[uigi] Pernier. La Scuola rimase chiusa durante la guerra europea, e fu riaperto solo nel 1920 sotto la direzione del prof. Alessandro Della Seta.” SAIA archives, 1935: “Direzione (Dir.)”. 16 Journal Officiel of the “Débats Parlementaires”, no 127, “Chambre des Députés”, “1re séance du Jeudi 7 Décembre 1922”, 3960 (Gaston Deschamps): “Il me paraît impossible de réduire le crédit prévu pour le chauffage des jeunes savants de notre mission permanente d’archéologie classique. Il fait froid à Athènes quand souffle l’âpre vent du Nord. Si j’insiste, c’est parce que l’école traverse une crise grave.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 27: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Administration française et tutelles”. 17 Copy of decision by the Archaeological Council, 11 February 1924 (translated by Charles Picard, in appendix iii). EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. Cf. Valenti (2006) 107–108. Since 1988, the restriction of three permits per year includes also archaeological surveys. Morris (1994), 38–39.

War, Interwar: Legislation and Restrictions 

 83

in Greece from a number of countries.18 For the French school, already working on five sites (Delphi Delos, Thasos, Philippi in Macedonia and Mallia on Crete), this essentially meant that they not only had to settle for those already at their disposal, they would be forced to cut back on their operations in order to work on three of the five sites each year, following a rotation schedule.19 This likely influenced the concession by the French school in 1921 of excavation rights at Asine in the Argolid to the Swedish “Asine committee”, fronted by Swedish crown prince Gustaf Adolf. The site of Asine, the first large-scale Swedish archaeological undertaking in Greece (1922–1930), was first considered “French”: Louis Renaudin had made a preliminary report in 1920, published in the Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique in 1921.20 The Swedes were given permission to excavate through a combination of the new restrictive policy regarding foreign excavations (limiting the number of sites available to the French school), of the Swedish classical archaeologist Axel W. Persson’s contacts with Charles Picard, of increasing financial strains at the École in Athens, as well as the influence of Ioannis Svoronos, keeper of the numismatic museum in Athens, whom crown prince Gustaf Adolf had meet in Athens in 1920 in order to discuss possible Swedish excavations in Greece. Gustaf Adolf also took part in the first excavation campaign at Asine in 1922 (fig. 23).21 The Swedish Asine excavations laid the foundation for a strong Swedish association with archaeology in the Argolid as well as for a Swedish institute

18 Charles Picard to the “Ministre de l’Instruction Publique et des Cultes, DIRECTION DU SERVICE ARCHEOLOGIQUE” (in appendix iii), regarding an excerpt from the proceedings of the Greek Archaeological Council, 1 March 1924: “les bases d’un régime nouveau, restrictif, de l’activité scientifique. […] l’École Française d’Athènes, doyenne des Institutions similaires […]. J’ajoute que l’École Française d’Athènes a reçu mission de plusieurs Gouvernements Étrangers pour former ici à ses méthodes un certain nombre d’archéologues d’autre Pays.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. 19 Note (Charles Picard?), n.d. (1924): “Au cas où les mesures seraient définitives, il y a un moyen de les tourner: L’École a droit à 3 fouilles par an: donc, organiser un roulement de fouilles ([…] le délai d’abandon des chantiers est de 15 ans) par exemple: 1924, Delphes, Thasos, Mallia[;] 1925, Délos, Philippes, Mallia[;] 1926, Delphes, Thasos, Mallia[;] 1927[,] Délos, Philippes, Mallia etc etc”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. The EFA started working at Mallia in 1921–1922 (Louis Renaudin, 1892–1969), thus continuing work initiated there in 1917 by philologist Giorgos Nicolaou Hatzidakis (1843–1941). 20 Renaudin (1921). 21 For the early Asine excavations, see for example EFA archives, PEL 1 – 1920–1922 (“Fouilles suédoises du site d’Asiné (1921–1922), par A. W. Persson, avec la collaboration de J. Replat.”). Cf. EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. See also SIA archives, box “‘Livet kring en utgrävning’[. U]tställning om Asine, Dendra/Midea och Berbati i samband med institutets 50-årsjubileum 1998[.] Foton ur Asinearkivet samt Bernadottearkivet. ASINE DENDRA”; as well as Styrenius (1998); Wells (1998); and Scheffer (2000) 198–199 (map on p. 200).

84 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

Fig. 23: Group photograph from Asine, 1922, with the Swedish excavators (including, inter alia, Axel W. Persson, Otto Frödin and Einar Gjerstad) together with crown prince Gustaf Adolf, Charles Picard, director of the École française, and Nikolaos Kyparissis, director of the Greek Archaeological Service and board member of the Archaeological Society at Athens. The photograph may have been taken by the absent Swedish archaeologist Alfred Westholm. Additional notes by Charles Picard. EFA.

in Athens (in 1946/1948, see below).22 After his mandate as director had ended in 1925, Charles Picard wrote a report underlining, “for the last time”, the lack 22 For Swedish interwar excavations in the Argolid (1922–1939), see SIA archives, F 1: I: “Korrespondens rörande äldre grävningar i Argolis” (previously box “(Nauplion) Arkiv inköpt 1994” – documentation emanating from the archaeological ephoria in Nafplio, dispersed during the Second World War). The SIA archives are furthermore rich in material relating to for example the Berbati-excavations, resumed in the 1950s, and the Messenia expedition (reports and field documentation and diaries), with several boxes of (mainly) photographs from Greece in the 1920s and 1930s (archival material relating to Natan Valmin, SIA archives, F 2 B:1–F 2 B:5), for example containing pictures from and texts concerning the EFA.

War, Interwar: Legislation and Restrictions 

 85

of funds made available to the EFA, and, as a consequence, “the gravity of the position of general inferiority” and prestige of the school, above all “vis-à-vis all its foreign rivals in Greece”: “The progress of anglo-american influence in Athens, the large-scale resumption of German excavations in Asia Minor, are regrettable symptoms to us”. National prestige was a way of justifying continued and increased funding. France should not be “permanently excluded from the project of the works which will be undertaken by the American school on the site of the ancient Agora for lack of financial resources,” not least as “the Germans straight away promised [an] equipment contribution for this enormous enterprise.” The “all to obvious shortage” of available funds had also “unfortunately influenced the relations” of the school with Turkey and with Greece.23 Pierre Roussel, in charge of the École française d’Athènes for a decade, succeeded Picard as director in 1925. Roussel was in turn succeeded by Robert Demangel (director 1936–1950). The problem of shortage of funds for projects and publications highlighted by Picard remained during Roussel’s directorship. Difficulties in following “the line traced out by 90 years of work and collaboration with ancient and modern Greece” were similarly emphasised in Demangel’s first annual report.24 Gorham Phillips Stevens, then director of the American Academy in Rome, wrote in 1926 that the German archaeological institute in Rome had resumed its famous open meetings for the first time since the outbreak of the Great War. Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria and Egypt are erecting Academies in Rome near the British 23 Charles Picard, report, August 1924–October 1925, to the French minister of public instruction and to “Monsieur le Secrétaire perpetual de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres”, 30 September 1925: “encore une fois – la dernière”, “la gravité de la position d’infériorité générale […] vis à vis de toutes ses rivales étrangères, en Grèce même”, “Le progrès des influences anglo-américaines, a Athènes, la reprise, sur vaste échelle, des fouilles allemandes en Asie-Mineure, sont des symptômes fâcheux pour nous”, “ne pas se laisser définitivement exclure, faute d’une constitution pécuniaire, du projet des travaux qui vont être entreprise par l’École Américaine, sur l’emplacement de l’ancienne Agora”, “Les Allemands ont promis d’emblée, pour cette entreprise énorme, une contribution matérielle”, “Les rapports de notre institution avec la Turquie et la Grèce restent influencés, malheureusement, par notre trop évidente pénurie.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. 24 Robert Demangel, 25-page typewritten annual report, 1936: “la ligne tracée par 90 années de travail[]et de collaboration avec la Grèce antique et moderne.” The financial strain was worsened by devaluation of the French Franc, balanced by an “exceptional subvention” from the French ministry of national education. Cf. Demangel, annual report 1937–1938. EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. Problems related to funding continued at the EFA after it gained financial autonomy in 1928. Cf. Valenti (2000) 311–312 & 320–323.

86 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

School, in the Valle Giulia, where the City of Rome charges them one lire rent per year and grants them tax exemption. There are now ten nations maintaining institutions in Rome for advanced study for their most talented young men. The future of Rome as an international center for the interchange of thought between these men has never been brighter. The prolific beauty of Classical Italy is the very best environment for such an international community.25

Stevens’ quote is illuminating in several ways: despite the notion of as international “interchange of thought”, the national benchmark is clear, as is the elevated status of Rome and Italy as common ground for the “international community”. His quote further confirms the perceived self-fashioned “elite” status of the scholars selected for the foreign schools – it also highlights what was often taken for granted in the 1920s: the scholars were almost exclusively male. The foreign schools generally speaking attracted the “best” students and artists of each year through competitive national selection processes. In the words of John Walker, “associate in charge” of the American academy in 1938 (admittedly applying a transatlantic perspective, but arguably also generally valid for the rite of passage-aspect of the scholarly pilgrimage to Rome), the years spent by the American academy fellows in Europe, and in Rome, “represented for them something comparable to the ‘Journeyman Period’ of the Mediaeval craftsman, a time of travel and study between Apprenticeship and Mastery.”26 In 1926, the Gennadius library was established as part of the American school in Athens, in a neoclassical building adjacent to it (fig. 24). The library’s benefactor, the diplomat and bibliophile Joannes (John) Gennadius, donated the core of his rare book, manuscript and art collection to the American school in 1922. Gennadius’ collection was largely assembled during his career as a Greek diplomat in London, “with the intent to showcase the continuity of the genius of Hellenism from antiqutiy to the present”.27 The library became, and remains, part

25 Gorham P. Stevens, director’s report, 20 September 1926. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5750. The planned Czechoslovakian and Bulgarian academies in the Valle Giulia did not materialise – the Romanian academy had however been established there in 1922. The Swedish institute inititated its activities in Rome the same year as Stevens made his report (1926). 26 John Walker to John Russell Pope, 5 June 1936. AAR archives, reel 5758. AAR records, 1855– 2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution. 27 Politi and Pappa (2009) preface & 2–3. Cf. http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/gennadius/ and http://www3.ascsa.edu.gr/gennadeion/ (accessed 20 June 2018).

War, Interwar: Legislation and Restrictions 

 87

Fig. 24: The Gennadius Library, Athens, 1930. American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Archives, Dorothy Burr Thompson Photographic Collection.

of the American school, although Gennadius wished to see his library being used “by all the foreign schools”.28 The almost exclusively white male world of the foreign schools in Rome served the purpose of “subjecting young men studying the humanities” to “the influence of Rome,” in order to “view the past, compare it with the present and formulate his own conclusions as to future values.”29 In Rome, young, malleable scholars could, at close quarters, “hear the voice of history more clearly” than arguably anywhere else.30 This can be contrasted with twentieth century and present-day developments of contem28 Cf. Gerard Mackworth Young to John L. Myres, 25 February 1939. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman[)] & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 29 AAR director James Monroe Hewlett, “Address [to] the people of America” (courtesy of the Department of State of the Italian Government), 1934. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 30 Corriere della sera, 31 January 1933 (Bottazzi): “Roma centro di studi mondiali”: “i giovani che hanno lasciato o stanno per lasciare l’Università perché si ritemprino alle pure fonti dell’arie o sentano più viva e più vicina la voce della storia.”

88 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

porary art and changing perceptions of canon and tradition, as remarked for example by cultural historian Peter Rietbergen: “the First World War heralded the death of the academic tradition that had given Rome its pre-eminent position in European, Western art for so many centuries. Inevitably international interest in Rome waned.”31 Art critic and writer Robert Hughes expressed the similar sentiment thus: The great city gradually ceased to be a place from which one could expect major painting or sculpture to emerge. And in fact no one was watching, because it was simply assumed that the resources of Rome could never be exhausted, and so could be taken for granted. This was not a sudden implosion, but a slow leakage. What Rome had to offer the artist was no longer what the artist necessarily wanted.32

The issue at hand is essentially the changing cultural roles of the “classical” since the First World War (modern art has of course also been and is produced in Rome). The possibility of admitting female fellows to the American academy was not discussed until 1947, symptomatic of the policy of foreign schools overall. In a “tentative post-war program suggested by the committees on schools of fine arts and classical studies” of the American academy, it was determined that “women should be invited to compete for fellowships in the Fine Arts,” and also that “the age limit might be raised so as to attract more mature talent”.33 One of the few foreign schools with (albeit rare) exceptions to the male order was the Swedish Institute in Rome (below), with two female participants (out of a total of five) in its first archaeological course in 1926.34 The homogeneity of scholars at foreign schools was not restricted to gender, but also, for example, to religious creed, also symptomatic of the era, as hinted in a letter written by Chester Holmes Aldrich in 1934, the year before he became director of the American 31 Rietbergen (2012) 40. Cf. Fokianaki (2018), arguing for the “collapse [of] the Western mandate for the universal” (as well as against “the overintellectualization of cultural discourses, tied into Eurocentric academia”): “Greece is unique in that it has been appropriated throughout modernity as the mother of the Western canon. […] Of course, the Roman Empire is another signifier[,] Ancient Greece being its predecessor. […] Paradoxically, [Greece] remains the unwanted child of an unwanted union: West and East.” 32 Hughes (2011) 524–525. 33 In the same program it was also agreed “that it would be desirable to permit married persons to accept fellowships [and that] visiting artists should include Europeans as well as Americans.” “Interim Report – Special Committee on Villa Aurelia – American Academy in Rome.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5799. 34 Cf. Axel Boëthius, “Svenska Institutet i Rom vårterminen 1926,” n.d. (1952?). GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:239. For gender perspectives on classical archaeology, cf. for example Gill (2002); Cohen and Joukowsky (2004); and Thornton (2018): “scripting spadework” (passim).

War, Interwar: Legislation and Restrictions 

 89

academy: “I was a little horrified (strictly confidential) at discovering that [two new AAR fellows] are both Jews, but they are both thoroughly ‘white’ ones, completely Americanized and thoroughly imbued with the desire to get from Rome the special training Rome can give.”35 The “special training Rome can give” was elaborated upon by Aldrich’s predecessor as director of the American academy, architect James Monroe Hewlett: the foreign schools in Rome strived to channel the “eternal verities, that great stream of creative influence, that springing from Greece and the Orient centuries before the Christian Era and drawn to Rome of the Empire as into a great reservoir has fertilized all the subsequent art of Europe and later of America.”36 The foreign schools considered themselves part of that “great reservoir”, shouldering responsibility for the production of knowledge. In the 12th edition of John Murray’s popular Handbook of Rome and its Environs (1875, written by English artist, writer and archaeologist Arthur John Strutt), foreign archaeologists, especially Germans, were for example referred to as the best authority on the subject, whereas Italian scholars come across more as the antiquarians of a century earlier: they had excellent knowledge of monuments and are up-to-date with daily discoveries.37 This trope died hard.38 The “cosmopolitan colonies” of the foreign schools in Rome, with their well-organised facilities and rich resources, libraries and material assets, could at times be the cause of envy to domestic archaeologists and Italian scholars.39 These sentiments were most visibly displayed vis-à-vis the “archaeological Germans”, but also concerned for example the rich library holdings of the French school and the American academy.

35 Chester Holmes Aldrich to AAR president John Russell Pope, 1 May 1934. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 36 James Monroe Hewlett, “Address [to] the people of America,” 1934. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 37 Strutt (1875). 40 years later, in 1915, the Murray handbooks were transformed into the twentieth century Blue Guide-series. 38 Before Mussolini’s interest in the political uses of the ancient past the similar theme was taken up by the Italian futurists, among others. Cf. Arthurs (2012) 18: “As Marinetti had argued before the war, the Italian past still belonged more to foreigners – and especially to the ‘archaeological’ Germans – than it did to the peninsula’s inhabitants.” 39 “The Artist as Envoy. National Links in Rome. Fears for the British School. From Our Rome Correspondent”, The Times, 27 April 1933: “Cosmopolitan Colonies”. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:238, “Svenska Institutet i Rom – Tidningsurklipp”.

90 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

Fig. 25: 70th birthday celebration salute, in contemporary fashion, for the book printer C. Meissner (Buchdruckerei “Hestia”) at Cape Sounion, Spring 1934 (standing, from left to right: “Münz (Architekt), [Georg] Karo, Lene Wenk, [Walter-Herwig] Schuchhardt, Helga Schuchhardt, [Kimon] Grundmann, Frau Grundmann, [Emil] Kunze, [Richard] Eilmann.” Copy of postcard from the estate of Kurt Müller, photograph: Tasos Tsimas). DAIA photographic archive, D-DAI-ATH-1973–1150.

Northern Nostalgia for Southern Sunshine The first non-“Great Power” to join the foreign school venture in Greece was Sweden. The Swedish Institute in Athens was not established until after the Second World War (see chapter six); the equivalent institute in Rome was however established more or less at the same time as the American Gennadius library in Athens. The Swedish Institute in Rome (Svenska institutet i Rom, SIR) was established in Stockholm in 1925. Its activities in Rome commenced the following year. In Greece, Swedish archaeologists had initiated archaeological activity in 1894 with an excavation on the island of Poros (Kalaureia) in the Saronic Gulf, led by professors Sam Wide and Lennart Kjellberg, followed by Kjellberg’s subsequent excavations at Aphidna, north of Athens.40 A second phase of more intense archaeological activity, this time in the Peloponnese Argolid, took place in the interwar period: at Asine in the 1920s, at Dendra (1926–1927 and 1937), at 40 For the Kalaureia excavations, see for example Berg (2012); Eadem (2016); and Penttinen (2014a).

Northern Nostalgia for Southern Sunshine 

 91

Berbati (1930s and 1950s), and at Midea (1939), excavations associated above all with the classical archaeologist Axel W. Persson.41 When a Swedish institute in the Mediterranean was being prepared in the early 1920s, after the Asine excavations had begun, the “classical” choice was made: Rome or Athens? Despite the Swedish archaeological activity in Greece, Rome drew the longest straw. In January 1925, crown prince Gustaf Adolf – chairman of the board of the institute and its primus motor, together with Martin P. Nilsson, professor of Greek, classical archaeology and ancient history at Lund University – agreed that the planned institute should be located in Rome rather than in Athens, following “very strong, even decisive reasons” in favour of the Italian capital, one of them being the collections and archives of the Holy See, another the accessibility of Italy in relation to the more distant Greece.42 The Swedish scholarly pilgrimage to Rome was described by Axel Boëthius, the first director of the SIR, as emanating from “our nostalgia for the sun and the spring”; as “yet another continuing current towards Italy which unites with the stream of people that hasten towards Rome.” Boëthius’ romantic attitude was not of the moderate kind: “the richest periods of our [Swedish] culture can be characterised as those with direct and tight relations with Italy.” The Swedish contributions to the study of the Roman past were perceived as part of the global “secular tribute” to Rome, in characteristic 1930s rhetoric summoned as “a voice from the North, with its own accent, with its own traditions, but inspired by Roman universalism, by the grandiose and severe harmony of Roman history, and by the inexhaustible richness of the heart of Rome.”43 The Swedish Institute in Rome is a private foundation, with state subsidies applied for annually from the Swedish ministry of education. It represents a third generation of foreign schools in Rome in the early twentieth century, after the British, American and other ventures of the late nineteenth century, in turn preceded by German and French institutions. The Swedish institute was the first Scandinavian

41 Swedish excavations also took place in Arcadia (at the site of Asea, 1936–1938) and in Messenia (The Swedish Messenia Expedition, 1927, 1929, 1933–1934). Cf. Valmin (1938). The Asine excavations, published in 1938 – Frödin, Persson and Westholm (1938) – were co-directed by Axel W. Persson and Nordic archaeologist Otto Frödin (1881–1953). Letters concerning Persson’s death in 1951 were sent by the SIA to the foreign schools in Athens. Cf. for example SIA director Åke Åkerström to Doro Levi (?), n.d. (1951). SAIA archives, 1950–1951: “Archivio 1950–51”, “Archivi 1950–51 Pos. IX Informazioni X Missioni in Levante XI Ist. a Cultura e Rapporti Culturali”. 42 Cf. crown prince Gustaf Adolf to Martin P. Nilsson, 4 January 1925 (draft letter). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:F:I. 43 Axel Boëthius, “I recenti studi di Storia e Topografia Romana in Svezia,” in Gli Studi Romani nel Mondo. I Serie (Bologna: Licinio Cappelli Editore, 1934), 165–184. Cf. Jyllands-Posten, 8 July 1931: “De fællesnordiske Traditioner i Rom. Det skandinaviske Institut”. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80: 238.

92 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

archaeological school in the Mediterranean. It would be followed by other schools from the Nordic countries established in Rome after the Second World War.44 Swedish and American classical studies share at least one common premise: both countries lack the presence of “classical” ancient material remains, and have thus in a sense had to import antiquity – both figuratively and literally, through excavation and purchase of objects. With changed archaeological legislation in Greece, the “Great Powers” could no longer dominate the scene. Sweden thus entered the scene as the first smaller country of sorts. The Swedish institute was originally discussed as a Scandinavian institute, with funding from joint Swedish and Danish sources. Early negotiations were conducted in 1921–1924 by professors Martin P. Nilsson and Frederik Poulsen. The discussed joint Scandinavian effort had however been abandoned by 1925, as it proved difficult to agree on the interests and aims of the planned institution.45 The original idea had been to establish a common Scandinavian institute in Athens rather than in Rome, upholding the “Scandinavian reputation”.46 The inclusion of Norway and Finland in the original planned Swedish-Danish “interscandinavian order” was temporarily discussed but dropped, mainly due to lack of funding resources and students. By March 1925, the common Scandinavian project had ground to a definite halt, and the envisioned institute was discussed as Swedish only – it was to be supported by Denmark with Danish participation, but “an interscandinavian order must be postponed for the future”.47 Swedish-Danish funds covered an initial

44 Since the 1950s, Swedish classical archaeology in Italy has focused on prehistory and studies of Etruscan culture, with three main excavation projects carried out under its auspices in the 1950s and 1960s: the “big digs” of San Giovenale (1956–1965), Luni sul Mignone (1960–1963), and Acquarossa (1966–1978 and 1990), associated with and actively supported by king Gustaf VI Adolf, who regularly took part in the excavations. Swedish students of classical archaeology were offered archaeological experience in the context of these excavations. This close link between teaching and practice resulted in research topics connected with material from these excavations. The vast material dimension of the spoils of archaeology, in combination with no comparable resources in later periods to that of royal involvement, has led to a reluctance to initiate archaeological projects on a similar scale since. Cf. Nylander (2002) 378–379. For the history of the Swedish Institute in Rome, cf. Östenberg (1976); Nylander (2002); Whitling (2010); Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015); and two special institute anniversary issues of the review Romhorisont (41, 2001; and 64, 2016). 45 RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:F:I. Cf. Boëthius (1934) 180. 46 Cf. “Nordiskt forskningsinstitut i Aten”, Svenska Dagbladet, 8 November 1920 (Axel W. Persson). Sigtunastiftelsens klipparkiv, “Arkeologi Grekland Italien”; and Frederik Poulsen to crown prince Gustaf Adolf, 28 November 1924. RA, Svenska Institutets i Rom arkiv, III:F:I; and Jyllands-Posten, 8 July 1931: “De fællesnordiske Traditioner i Rom. Det skandinaviske Institut”. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:238. 47 Martin P. Nilsson to Gustaf Adolf, 10 March 1925. See also Poulsen to Gustaf Adolf, 10 March 1925. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:F:I.

Northern Nostalgia for Southern Sunshine 

 93

period of three years for the director, archaeologist Axel Boëthius, together with one Swedish and two Danish grant holders. The institute became exclusively Swedish, albeit with a continued tradition of occasional students from the Scandinavian countries.48 The reciprocity of Athens and Rome in the institutional logistics of classical scholarship is reflected in the preamble of the original by-laws of the Swedish Institute in Rome, with mention of “duties” to both Rome and Greece.49 The annual SIR archaeological course, initiated in 1926, stands out as a defining characteristic of the pedagogical profile of the Swedish institute. A new director of a relatively small-scale foreign school such as the Swedish institute needed to gain local scholarly renown as soon as possible. One way of achieving this was through frequent publication, often in the form of remarks on ancient Roman topography in Italian as well as foreign archaeological journals and reviews (some of the most prestigious being the German Athenische and Römische Mitteilungen).50 The Swedes created a publication series (Acta) with monographs in the field of classical archaeology, in the tradition of the German Archäologischer Anzeiger, the French Mélanges, the British Papers and the American Memoirs.51 The Swedish Institute in Rome was a small-scale operation, a near one-manband in a rented apartment in Via del Boschetto in central Rome. It was in part modelled on foreign schools of similar proportion in their early years, such as the Austrian Institute in Athens (1898): free lodging and pay to a professor in situ, in charge of an initially modest operation that, it was hoped, would expand rapidly and dynamically.52 In 1928, the institute moved into an apartment in the Palazzo 48 See “Ändringsförslag till P.M. ang. Svenska Institutet i Rom” (1925); and confidential memorandum (draft, 1925). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:F:I: Cf. “Skal Norge delta i Det svenske institut i Rom? Instituttet aapner 1. januar med 10 studerende. Et centrum for svenskernes forskning i den evige stad”. Tidens Tegn, 31 October 1925. In “Svenska Institutet i Rom. Dagbok från Okt. 1925–15 april 1926”. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:241–243. 49 By-laws and regulations of the SIR, 1925. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:F:I. 50 Cf. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 210–211. Cf. also “Institutet i Rom i ekonomisk nöd”, Dagens Nyheter, 5 February 1936 (Sten Hedman). Sigtunastiftelsens klipparkiv, “Arkeologi Grekland Italien”. 51 The Acta Instituti Romani Regni Sueciae was created by Martin P. Nilsson. 20 Acta-volumes were published between 1932 and 1952, with the help of a separate publication fund. Cf. SIR board meeting minutes 20 March 1935, as well as 12 April 1940, § 9. The institute also published articles in the review Opuscula Romana. 52 Cf. “Sorgløse Studieaar i Rom – Dr. phil. Frederik Poulsen forteller om Oprettelsen af det dansk-svenske Institut i Rom for Videnskabsmænd og Kunstnere”. Nationaltidende, 7  November 1925. In “Svenska Institutet i Rom. Dagbok från Okt. 1925–15 april 1926”. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80: 241–243. For the first quartercentury of the Swedish Institute in Rome, see Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015). Erland Billig pioneered scholarly attention to SIR archival material from the war years. Cf. Billig (1990).

94 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

Brancaccio on Via Merulana. A 1930 newspaper article however emphasised the desired aim of “acquiring a house of its own in conformity with most of the institutes of the other fourteen nations.” A decade later, that house (in the Valle Giulia) was being erected; it was completed in 1940 (see below). The same 1930 article addressed foreign (20) and domestic (11) schools in Rome for a Swedish audience: These establishments, alongside the corresponding Italian institutions, are 31 in total, of which Italy has seven, the Papal state four, Germany five, France and Great Britain two each, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, Spain, Romania, Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland and North America [sic] one each.53

In 1929, the German Archaeological Institute (DAI) celebrated its centenary – that is to say the centenary of the ICA – by introducing the so-called “WinckelmannMedaille”. The first recipient of the aptly named medal in 1929 was a perhaps unlikely duo: the city of Rome and the Swedish crown prince Gustaf Adolf.54 The crown prince of Sweden, chairman of the recently established Swedish Institute in Rome, fit the bill perfectly. He provided a Royal and archaeological link with the similar Prussian patronage of crown prince Friedrich Wilhelm a century earlier. The medal also illustrated the close ties between the Swedish study of antiquity with German Altertumswissenchaft.

“New Opportunities”: Colonial Archaeology In 1929, coinciding with the centenary of the international Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica, the physicist Heinrich Konen, speaking to an assembly of the Notgemeinschaft der Deutschen Wissenschaft, expressed the opinion that ”oriental studies, archaeology, research expeditions and philosophy are indispensable to support our decisive future foreign policy”, putting these fields on a par with the natural sciences, and confirming earlier notions of archaeology as “Eroberungswissenschaft” (“conquest science”).55 The foreign schools in Rome generally speaking thrived in fascist Italy, at least in terms of appraisal of the traditional objects of study, with Fascism and classicism working together in symphonic dialogue. A number of Italian and 53 “Svenskt och skandinaviskt i Rom. Forums topografi först fastställd av en svensk.”, Svenska Dagbladet, 22 February 1930. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:238. 54 For the DAI and the “Winckelmann-Medaille”, see DAI archives, ADZ, “Biographica-Mappe Gustav Adolf (von Schweden)”. Cf. invitation from the newly reopened DAIR for its “125th anniversary” on 21 April 1954. ACS, PCM, box 4450, 1951–1954, file 5–1, n. 77210. 55 Quoted in Clara (2016), 5. Cf. also Maier (1992).

“New Opportunities”: Colonial Archaeology 

 95

European classicists adhered to the “disinterested idealism” read into the fascist movement, and the regime gave its active support to the promotion of classicism through its cult of romanità.56 In some scholarly foreign circles, Rome was indeed considered “the most important city for archaeological studies, not least thanks to the Mussolinian hospitality towards foreign students.”57 The ideological implications of the cult of Rome were clearly stated by Mussolini in the early stages of the fascist regime: “Rome is our point of departure and reference, it is our symbol and, if you like, our myth. We dream of a Roman Italy, that is to say wise and strong, disciplined and imperial.”58 A decade later, in 1933, a newspaper article went as far as to state that the recent dynamically expanding life and fortune of the foreign schools coincided with that of “the new Italy.”59 The following year, American academy director Hewlett affirmed that “the Italian Government is most active in the encouragement of sympathetic relations between the students of the Italian Universities and schools and those of the foreign academies”: “under the present regime [Italy] invites the peoples of the world to partake with her of this priceless heritage.”60 The urbanistic consequences of the hard focus on the “priceless heritage” of ancient Rome included the notion of isolating the ancient monuments of “our history”, separating them from the urban tissue of later periods so that they might “tower [giganteggiare] in necessary solitude”. Antiquity became the material of myth. The price, seemingly willingly paid, was the eradication of age-old historical contexts.61 Using the metaphor of a tree to epitomise cultural heritage, Mussolini called upon the new governor of Rome to “liberate the trunk of the great oak from all that still constrains it.”62 56 Barbanera (1998) 144 & 147. For fascist “policy” regarding foreign schools, see also, for example, Rietbergen (2012) 210 (“all nations still wanted to be seen in Rome”) & 213–215. 57 Jyllands-Posten, 8 July 1931: “De fællesnordiske Traditioner i Rom. Det skandinaviske Institut”: “Svigter Kunstnerne end Rom til Fordel for Paris, er Rom stadig Arkæologernes vigtigste Studieby, ikke mindst takket være den mussoliniske Gæstfrihed mod fremmede studerende.” Gothenburg University Library, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80: 238. 58 Mussolini in Il Popolo d’Italia, 21 April (the Natale di Roma) 1922, quoted in Barbanera (1998) 145. 59 Corriere della sera, 31 January 1933 (Bottazzi): “Roma centro di studi mondiali”: “Tranne le più antiche, fondate su solide basi e dotate di larghi mezzi, le Accademie e le Scuole straniere in Roma hanno cominciato a vivere una vita fiorentissima solo da pochi anni, tanto che si può affermare che la loro fortuna coincide con quella dell’Italia nuova.” The foreign schools, Bottazzi continued, “riconsacrano il fascino e la potenza del nome di Roma e mostrano di intendere pienamente quanta luce spirituale la Città Eterna ha dato e ancora può dare agli uomini di buona volontà.” 60 Hewlett, “Address [to] the people of America,” 1934. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 61 Mussolini, 31 December 1925, quoted in Barbanera (1998) 145. 62 Quoted in Arthurs (2012) 50.

96 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

The fascist focus on romanità in other words did not cause the foreign schools in Rome very much harm, and presented few obstacles to their activities and scholarly orientation – on the contrary. The contributions of the foreign schools to investigating the classical and the ancient past in fact rhymed very well overall with this particular regime policy. The presence in Rome of the foreign schools was an issue of prestige also for the regime. The foreign institutions fit the bill of the regime preoccupations with the “universality of Rome”.63 From a romanitàperspective, the “sympathetic relations” between fascist Italy and the foreign schools were mediated through, most notably, the main regime vehicle for the promulgation of the concept: the Istituto di Studi Romani (ISR, 1925). Through this institute of Roman studies and its main publication channel, the review Roma, one can observe Italian perceptions of foreign scholarship of the time: “The theme of subservience to foreign – and especially German – scholarship was frequently echoed in Roma and other publications of the ISR. While acknowledging “the only true merit of [the Germanic] race, which is diligent research,” the ISR called for a new Italian approach to writing the history of Rome, one which would reject the “all too frequent systematic apriorism and analytical pedantry” that marked non-Italian scholarship, in favour of interpretations that evoked the ability of romanità to inspire action in the present. Cuttingedge research was urgently needed to salvage national pride: in proposing a new “complete, exhaustive, definitive, and worthy” encyclopaedia of Roman monuments, ISR director Carlo Galassi Paluzzi cautioned that delay “would inevitably allow publications […] by non-Italian scholars, drawn by the fascination of glorious ruins and driven by an admirable love of science.”64 Science was in other word closely tied to political interests. The attention given to the promulgation of romanità and of ancient Rome in general by the fascist regime was, at least in terms of subject matter, also in the interest of the foreign schools in Rome. Spreading the word was to be assisted by establishing “foreign sections” of the ISR internationally. One of the few to be organised (others were planned) was in Sweden (in Gothenburg, through Axel Boëthius). Galassi Paluzzi for example wrote to the Swedish section affirming that “today,

63 Cf. for example programme for the reception offered by the Presidenza dei Comitati per la Universalità di Roma in the context of the Natale di Roma, Palazzo Corsini, 21 April 1934, as well as invitation card (addressed to the director of the Swedish institute). Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 46–47. 64 Galassi Paluzzi however conceded that “one has to admit that today the most exhaustive publications of famous Roman monuments have been produced by foreign architects and archaeologists.” Arthurs (2007) 89–90; cf. Arthurs (2012); and Visser (2014).

“New Opportunities”: Colonial Archaeology 

 97

one cannot be friends of Italy without being friends of Fascism, because Italy and Fascism are truly, inseparably, one and the same.”65 Be that as it may, the centenary of the Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica in 1929 was marked by the establishment of the Associazione Internazionale degli Studi Mediterranei in Rome (lasting approximately 1929–1936), an international scholarly venture that had sprung from “camerate”-sessions organised for students at the foreign schools.66 The Associazione, the “International Mediterranean Research Association”, was presided over and largely organised by count David Costantini in the Villa Celimontana in Rome.67 This association was succeeded by the Collegium Annalium Institutorum de Urbe Roma (1935), which however was not to survive the war. Although these two international organisations are perhaps best understood in a local Roman context, they can also be seen as part of an interwar trend of overarching international institutions, such as for example the Union Académique Internationale (International Union of Academies, Brussels) of national and international academies, initiated by the French Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, established in 1919.68 Two years later, this Union communicated a British Academy proposition regarding governmental recommendations “for the administration of antiquities in 65 Carlo Galassi Paluzzi to Ebba Atterbom (secretary of the Göteborg section of the ISR), March 26, 1936: “Oggi non si può essere amici dell’Italia senza essere amici del Fascismo, perché veramente Italia e Fascismo sono una sola inscindibile cosa.” The Istituto di Studi Romani archives, Rome, Affari Generali, Sezioni esteri, Sottoserie 8. Affari generali, 1934 dic. 19–1939 ott. 16, box 137, folder 18: “Generalità” (for the Swedish section (in Gothenburg), see for example boxes 135–137). Foreign sections of the ISR had also been set up through personal contacts in France (Paris) and in Hungary (Pécs). For Galassi Paluzzi’s directorship of the ISR and its establishment, see Istituto di Studi Romani archives, Affari Generali, boxes 1 and 2. 66 Cf. “Roma comunis patria. La Camerata degli Istituti culturali italiani e stranieri nell’Urbe”, Il Telegrafo Livorno, 13 December 1933; as well as “Roma communis [sic] patria. Istituti culturali nell’Urbe”, Corriere Padano Ferrara, 15 December 1933; and “Roma comunis patria. Gli istituti culturali italiani e stranieri in Roma”, Giornale di Sicilia – Palermo, 15 December 1933. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:238. Cf. also Rietbergen (2012) 203. 67 See for example crown prince Gustaf (VI) Adolf to Axel Boëthius, 9 December 1929. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:38. For Costantini and the Associazione, see for example correspondence between Costantini and Axel Boëthius in Gothenburg University Library, and correspondence with Albert Van Buren, in the AAR institutional archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1931–1935. 68 The International Association of Academies (IAA, 1899–1914) should not be confused with either the International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation (ICIC, 1922–1946), the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU, the International Council for Science, 1931–), the International Institute of International Cooperation, Paris (IIIC, 1924–1946), or the International Research Council (IRC, 1919–1931), all predating the establishment of UNESCO (1945). Cf. Schröder-Gudehus (1982); Eadem (1990); and Greenaway (2006).

98 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

mandated and similar territories”, intended to be presented to the union the following year. The proposition, highlighting how “the administration has to deal with (1) the natives of the country, (2) foreign excavators, explorers, and other travellers”, was heavily colonial and deeply immersed in imperial and orientalist agendas of domination in the Near East: “Equal facilities for excavation should be granted to qualified explorers of all countries which themselves grant such facilities in territories under their control of influence.”69 Charles Picard, director of the French School in Athens, made a lengthy comment on the implications of the British proposal for archaeology in Greece and the Mediterranean at large. Picard wrote an historical exposé, referring to the foreign schools (and to the “expédition de Morée”), and to Athens as “the international home of archaeology”, a “global university and an international academy” for “archaeologists of all the civilised nations”.70 Picard’s comment illustrates how closely the foreign schools associated themselves and their mission with the prominence of the Greco-Roman “canon” and classical tradition, picking up on the British colonial proposition, with an emphasis on power and specified control – on several levels: political, scientific, material and intellectual – in an attempt to sustain control of archaeological activity and to steer authority away from the political sphere (the colonial governments of mandate territories) to scholarship and culture: the foreign schools in Athens and Rome, with a clear prominence to individual directors of foreign schools in Athens (in other words to himself) should, he felt, form a consultative “commission” for excavations, most likely provoked by the contemporary increasingly restrictive Greek policies for foreign excavations (see chapter two). By the 1930s, “big digs” had become well-established with a long pedigree in Greece. One of the biggest digs of all was the American excavations of the Athenian Agora, which began in 1931, partly secured through American financial loans to Greece (although the Agora was however originally not necessarily

69 “Draft proposal for the administration of antiquities in mandated and similar territories”, 29 December 1921. EFA archives, 7 ADM 1: “Missions, activités de terrain et études. Régime des fouilles et des antiquités”. 70 Charles Picard, “Archives. Contreproposition grecque. Transmise Paris, 12 mai 1922. – ChP.”, April 1922 (in appendix iii): “à Athènes a été formée une sorte d’Université mondiale et une Académie International […] Les archéologues de touts les nations civilisées […] la ville d’Athènes comme la patrie internationale de l’Archéologie”. Cf. the “Chef de Bureau, Direction de l’Enseignement supérieur” of the French ministry of public instruction to Picard, 16 October 1920; as well as “PROJET de LOI sur les ANTIQUITÉS. […]”; and “PROJET de DÉCRET CONCERNANT les FOUILLES et RECHERCHES ARCH[É]OLOGIQUES […]”. EFA archives, 7 ADM 1: “Missions, activités de terrain et études. Régime des fouilles et des antiquités”.

“New Opportunities”: Colonial Archaeology 

 99

intended to become a long-term commitment; the initial idea was to finish within a decade).71 In the words of the scholar Susan Heuck Allen, as the civic center of the ancient city, [the Agora] had great symbolic value to the Greeks. Being the cradle of democracy, the site also conferred cultural capital on the nation that excavated it. The United States, as the preeminent twentieth-century democracy with a history of romantic philhellenism, was heavily invested in the excavations, financially and ideologically.72

Classical archaeology was still primarily carried out in Greece in the interwar period; Italy remained generally inaccessible for foreign excavation (cf. fig. 26). The foreign schools in Rome occupied themselves with, for example, topographical studies of ancient monuments and the Roman campagna, combining ancient history and philology with an often art historical profile. Quite exceptionally in pre-war Italy, as archaeological work in Italy itself by foreign scholars was then more or less non-existent, were the excavations at Ardea, south of Rome, organised by the Associazione Internazionale degli Studi Mediterranei and count Costantini, carried out by Axel Boëthius and the Swedish institute, 1930–1932.73 Support from Italian authorities was however a prerequisite. In the case of Ardea, support was secured through the influential archaeologist Roberto

71 Cf. archeologist Theodore Leslie Shear (1880–1945), field director of the Agora excavations 1931–1945, to Albert Van Buren, 18 June 1937: “The work has proceeded as satisfactorily as usual and we are now just closing up for the season. Seven years of excavation completed and only two more to come with a final year of clearance.” AAR institutional archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1931–1935. For an overview of the Agora excavations, see for example Camp II (2003); 46–48; Mauzy (2006) 11; Morris (1994), 34–35; and Valavanis (2007), 202–219. 72 Heuck Allen (2011) 15. Cf. Morris (2000) 62: “Seventy years after the Agora project began, Hellenist archaeology has lost its innocence.” 73 See for example Boëthius’ draft of SIR annual report 15 June 1933–15 June 1934. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:239; Axel Boëthius to Gustaf Adolf, 5 April 1933. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:24; David Costantini to Axel Boëthius, 25 February 1930; Guido Calza (?) to Costantini, 9 (?) June 1930. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:323; Costantini to Boëthius, 3 November 1930; Boëthius to Costantini, 24 May 1931 (“an Ardeatine report”); Costantini to Boëthius, 21 June 1931. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:81. Cf. also Annales Institutorum, III, 1930–1931, Rome 1931, 71–73; and various Swedish (January–February 1930 and 1931) and Italian newspaper articles (6–7 November 1931). GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:238 and H 80:241–243. The Ardea excavations were not comprehensively published. Cf. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 211–214, 235–236 & 239–241; and Nylander (2002) 345 & 358. See also archival material (on Ardea) in the Archivio di Documentazione Archeologica (ADA), Rome.

100 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

Fig. 26: Ongoing excavations at the Forum of Caesar, Rome, 1932. The Swedish Institute in Rome archives.

Paribeni, who was also vice-president of the association.74 Paribeni was well connected with the regime. The association was a product of its time, and was “clearly colonial”.75 In a circular letter from August 1930, the organisational ambitions regarding foreign excavations in Italy “and its colonies” were clearly stated: New opportunities for research in Italy and its colonies: The Italian Government has adopted a new and liberal policy toward foreigners who wish to engage in Archaeological research in Italy or its colonies. The Government has created a special institution, called “The International Mediterranean Research Association”; the purpose of the Association is to deal with the many applications to which the new policy will give rise. I. Excavations. Responsible foreign organizations or individuals may excavate in Italian soil under very reasonable conditions. Such work of excavation is to be carried out in accordance with Italian laws and under the inspection of Italian Government officials. The money subscribed by foreigners is to be controlled by the contributors themselves. […] II. Archaeological material for foreign museums and universities. Applications for dublicates [sic] of objects found during the process of excavation will be given just consideration. III. Apprenticeship of foreign students to Italian excavators. Students will be granted permission to act as unpaid 74 Paribeni had been superintendent of antiquities in Rome and Lazio until 1928, and was direttore generale delle Antichità e Belle Arti 1928–1933, as well as accademico d’Italia from 1929, and eventually president of the R. Istituto di archeologia e storia dell’arte 1934–1944. 75 García Sánchez (2010) 106: The Associazione as an “organización de claro signo colonialista”.

“New Opportunities”: Colonial Archaeology 

 101

assistants to Italian officials in charge of Government excavations; they will be assigned, at the request of their own organizations, a subject for special study or publication.76

The same circular related the organisational structure of the international association: “President. Count D.A. Costantini. Vice-presidents: H.E. Roberto Paribeni, General Director of Antiquities and Fine Arts for Italy; Gorham P. Stevens, Director of the American Academy in Rome. Treasurer: Ludwig Curtius, Director of the German Archaeological Institut [sic] in Rome. Secretary: Guido Calza, Director of Excavations at Ostia.” To Gustaf (VI) Adolf, chairman of the board of the Swedish institute and heir to the Swedish throne, the association was to some degree synonymous with the Ardea excavations. Expressing a common cautious Swedish attitude, he expressed the possible caveat that “other Mediterranean countries, for example Greece and Turkey” might regard the Italian initiative of the association with some suspicion. Crown prince Gustaf Adolf therefore advocated a degree of care regarding Swedish participation, a trope that would recur for example vis-à-vis the Swedish Institute in Rome during the Second World War.77 In 1932, Swedish institute director Axel Boëthius wrote to count Costantini, reporting on the excavations at Ardea, emphasising the latter’s importance and influence: After some delay and a few troubles I have now been able to start excavating on the Civita vecchia [sic] – as you approved when you handed over the last lire 5000, and as has later been approved of at your great meeting in Rome last autumn and in the committee […]. Finally, Dear Conte, I be[g] you to accept my sincere thanks for the great privilege, which I well know I in a very great part owe thanks to you for, the privilege to dig and all the invaluable possibilities to work and for the instruction of the students, which that includes. I am very indebted to you indeed and I feel it deeply.78

76 The International Mediterranean Research Association, “Circular N.o 1 August 7th., 1930”. The circular further specified that “Baiae near Naples, the best known summer resort of the Emperors and wealthy Romans in general, has been suggested as one of the possible sites.” In “Svenska Institutet 8 feb. – 1930–”. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:241–243. 77 Gustaf Adolf to Axel Boëthius, 9 December 1929: “Den enda farhågan som man och man emellan uttalades beträffande den nya organisationen, var, att andra medelhavsländer, t.ex. Grekland och Turkiet med en [viss] misstänksamhet skulle betrakta det italienska initiativet, och att förty Sverige borde vara försiktigt med sin anslutning.” GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80: 38. 78 Boëthius to Costantini, 3 February 1932. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:27. Cf. Costantini to Boëthius, 15 November 1931; and Costantini to Boëthius, 12 February 1932. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:81.

102 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

Through ardent publication, the Swedish institute and its scholars became associated with the notion of a “scuola svedese” (“Swedish school”), a topographicalarchaeological body of work of Swedish classical scholars active in Italy, exemplified by, for example, the work of classical scholar Gösta Säflund on the Republican city wall in Rome, 1932 (and by Einar Gjerstad’s excavations on the Forum Romanum, 1939 and 1949).79 In 1933, the Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen (see book cover and chapter six) was established as an institute of higher education in Nice (at that time with no university) and as a focal point for Mediterranean studies, led by writer and philosopher Paul Valéry (administrateur, with literature scholar Maurice Mignon as director).80 The following year, the International Institute of International Cooperation (IIIC, 1924–1946, inaugurated in 1926), based in Paris, contacted Alessandro Della Seta, director of the Italian School in Athens, regarding the newly established “International office for the institutes of archaeology and history of art” of the IIIC. Della Seta was in the process of organising a number of articles on the foreign schools in Athens, written by the respective school directors, for a bulletin of a recently established “International office” for foreign schools in the Mediterranean (this “International office for the institutes of archaeology and history of art” would merit further investigation).81 When organising articles on the foreign schools, Della Seta communicated with the directors of the French, American, British, Austrian and German schools and institutes, as well as with the secretary of the Archaeological Society at Athens and with the Greek ministry of instruction.82 Della Seta wrote to Attilio Rossi of the IIIC in March 1935 regarding the touchiness or “susceptibility of scholars, and 79 Cf. Säflund (1932). The SIR Acta-series was generally well received by the scholarly community, and contributed to the notion of the “scuola svedese”. Cf. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 218 & 233–234; and Santillo Frizell (2003). 80 For the C.U.M., see Gasquet (2011); Olivier-Ghauri et al. (2015); Eadem et al. (2016a); Eadem et al. (2016b); and Jemai (2017) 89–107 (chapter 3: “Le Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen et la diffusion de la culture savante”). 81 For the planned bulletin, see Attilio Rossi (IIIC) to Alessandro Della Seta, 19 March 1934: “un centro internazionale di collegamento fra gli Istituti di archeologia e storia dell’arte – Office international des Instituts d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’art”, “un Bollettino trimestrale”. Rossi may have established contact with Della Seta for similar purposes before 1934. Cf. Della Seta to Rossi, 2 May 1934: “un Bollettino quale organo dell’Ufficio Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia e di Storia dell’Arte”. Rossi wrote to Della Seta on 17 June 1935 regarding the proofs of an article by Della Seta on the SAIA. SAIA archives, 1935: “Direzione (Dir.)”. For the IIIC, cf. also, for example, “L’Egypte et la cooperation intellectuelle”, Bourse, March 1937 (n.d.); and “La Conférence des Fouilles a siégé pendant quatre heures”, Bourse, 10 March 1937. Medelhavsmuseets arkiv, Stockholm: “Tidningsurklipp Cypernsamlingarna”. 82 Cf. Della Seta to Rossi, 8 June 1935. SAIA archives, 1935: “Direzione (Dir.)”.

“New Opportunities”: Colonial Archaeology 

 103

of archaeologists in particular, especially in the international field,” advising against his draft of the article regarding the SAIA being sent to the directors of other foreign schools in Athens “as a paradigm to be followed”. Instead Della Seta suggested the exact wording of a letter that might be disseminated. He further suggested that Rossi dedicate another issue of the bulletin to the foreign schools and missions in Turkey, as well as one to “those of Syria and Palestine,” one to “those of Mesopotamia” and one “to those in Egypt,” in order to obtain “a general picture of all the archaeology of the countries around the Mediterranean,” as “such undertakings would merit international collaboration.”83 Della Seta thus notably did not include the foreign schools in Rome, although it is possible that they were to be covered in a special issue of the planned bulletin.84 Just after the outbreak of war, the corresponding foreign schools in Athens were, inversely, added to the title of the annual publication Annales Institutorum in Rome (established in 1928–1929).85 This ultimately short-lived setup of “annales des instituts d’histoire, d’art et d’archéologie de rome et comptes-rendus des écoles d’athènes”, referring to “Italian and foreign institutes and academies”, implied a division between research institutes in Rome and archaeological schools in Athens, reflecting the broader field of research in the former city and the archaeological profile in the latter.86

83 Della Seta to Rossi, 24 March 1935: “le suscettibilità degli studiosi e in particolare degli archeologi, soprattutto nel campo internazionale”, “un numero del Bollettino, interamente dedicato alle Scuole Archeologiche di Atene”, “ai lavori delle Scuole e delle missioni di Costantinopoli e della Turchia”, “a quelli della Siria e Palestina”, “a quelli della Mesopotamia”, “a quelli dell’Egitto”, “un quadro generale di tutta l’archeologia dei paesi intorno al Mediterraneo”, “quali imprese meriterebbero una collaborazione internazionale.” SAIA archives, 1935: “Direzione (Dir.)”. Cf. Rossi (1934–1936). 84 SAIA correspondence with the IIIC continued at least until 1937. Cf. International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, International Museums Office (League of Nations), 9 January 1937 (E. Foundokidis), regarding a conference in Cairo. SAIA archives, 1937: “Direzione (Dir.)”. 85 For volume VI of the Annales (1934, covering the years 1933–1934), the phrase “adiciuntur antiquiorem graeciam illustrantia instituta” was added to its by then well-established long title in Latin: “annales institutorum quae provehendis humanioribus discplinis artibusque colendis a variis in urbe erecta sunt nationibus”. The suffix on foreign schools in Greece was adhered to until the final volume, XIV, published in 1943 (covering the years 1941–1942). Vols. VIII–X (2 vols., VIII & IX–X) gave the title in both Latin and French: “annales des instituts d’histoire, d’art et d’archéologie de rome et comptes-rendus des écoles d’athènes”. 86 Mario Recchi to Robert Demangel (EFA), 25 October 1940: “Nous avons l’espoir de faire paraître, dans le plus bref d[é]lai possible, le volume XI des annales institutorum, r[é]sumant l’activité scientifique d[é]veloppée par les Instituts et les Academies italiennes et étrangères dans l’année acad[é]mique 1938–1939.” Perhaps tellingly, the French school did not reply to Recchi’s letter (“non répondu”). EFA archives, 1 ADM 6 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée secrétariat général (1937–1941)”.

104 

 3 Northern Wind, Southern Sun, 1914–1935

Notwithstanding its similarities with the post-war Unione of institutes (see below), both the Associazione and the Collegium reflected the sociopolitical climate of the 1930s and the coexistence of the national and international, as well as an antiquarian approach to the activities of the foreign schools themselves, with publication titles in Latin, as well as looking back to the genesis of the organisations in the centenary of the Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica. The rear-view mirrors in classical studies in the mid-1930s was, in other words, not confined to the objects of study, but also reflected conservative approaches to the scholarly field itself and its institutional organisation. With reference to the foreign schools themselves and their internal histories, the secure past was perhaps the only place to look in order to prepare for an uncertain future.87

87 Paraphrase of James Burke, from Idem (1978) 287: “Why should we look to the past in order to prepare for the future? Because there is nowhere else to look.”

The cover of the booklet Roma dal solco di Romolo all’impero fascista (1940, detail).

4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939 This fourth chapter surveys the increasingly politicised context in which classical archaeology operated in the late 1930s in Rome and in Athens. Although classical studies has been discussed elsewhere specifically in relation to romanità and Italian Fascism, that has seldom been the case from the perspective of the foreign schools and their archival holdings. The sociopolitical setting for the foreign schools in Athens has been particularly understudied. The main case in point in this regard, in this chapter, is the centenary of the Archaeological Society at Athens in 1938, which coincided with the peak of the fascist use of archaeology as a political tool in Italy.

The Big Buildup: National Tension Although most foreign schools in Rome and in Athens originated more or less as “one-man-bands”, with the director of the school as the “one man”, there is, to be sure, an inherent risk in overemphasising the importance and function of the individual (the director) in the early history of foreign schools. Individual influence was and is balanced with inherent traditions, “voices” and in-house corporate cultures of the institution in question: a mosaic that encompasses for example decision-making processes, funding structures and national scholarly legacies. For example, at the end of the year in 1935, Chester Holmes Aldrich, recently appointed director of the American Academy in Rome, wrote to John Russell Pope, president of the academy in New York City, regarding the recruitment of a professor in charge of classical studies at the American academy, that I cannot help feeling that with the salary and house offered, it should somehow be possible to secure eventually someone of unusually distinguished achievement, – if not a [Ludwig] Curtius or [Axel] Bo[ë]thius! Whether this choice should involve more emphasis on archaeology in view of the Academy’s location in Italy, is perhaps a question, in view of the preference now given for obvious reasons to Greece by many archaeologists. […] We are above all eager to improve the standing of the Academy in the Roman world of scholarship.1

The “obvious reasons” that Aldrich referred to were difficulties and obstacles the foreign schools faced in procuring excavation permits in fascist Italy. The following year, Aldrich somewhat ambiguously wrote that “a question has arisen concerning

1 Chester Holmes Aldrich to John Russell Pope, 27 December 1935. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-005

108 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

possible permission which may be given to Americans to carry on certain excavations in Italy, and which is being taken up now by the U.S. Ambassador with the highest authorities in the Government here. If any such work is to be considered, the Academy might be called upon for advice and assistance.”2 Aldrich furthermore envisaged his director colleagues Ludwig Curtius as being more or less synonymous with the German archaeological institute, Axel Boëthius with the Swedish institute and French scholar Émile Mâle with the French school.3 Although the foreign schools in Rome and Athens focused its activities on the host country, this was not exclusively the case. The Italian school in Athens was, at least indirectly, engaged in excavations in Italian territories, such as the Dodecanese and Libya. In the latter case, the archaeologist Giacomo Caputo, associated with the Italian school and its excavations on the island of Lemnos, became director of Italian excavations in Libyan Cyrenaica in 1935.4 The following year, 1936, witnessed Mussolini’s proclamation of Italian Empire, concurrent with the Olympic games in Berlin, which provided a platform for intensified work in excavations at Olympia itself, influenced and encouraged by regime politics and ideology. Idealised ideological antiquity from this period is for example represented in Leni Riefenstahl’s two-part documentary on the 1936 Olympics (Olympia – Fest der Völker, and Olympia – Fest der Schönheit, 1938), with the first part beginning with the ruins of the Parthenon and the Erechtheion on the Athenian Acropolis, and with marble-white (here black-and-white) sculptures that come to life in the guise of modern athletes.5 The German archaeological institute entertained plans for new institute buildings in both Athens and Rome. In Rome, the idea was to erect a new German institute building in the Valle Giulia: “With a tight time limit the city of Rome assigned a building site in Valle Giulia to the German Reich for the new institute

2 Chester Holmes Aldrich to John Russell Pope, 23 November 1936. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 3 Aldrich to Dr. J. C. Egbert (Columbia University), 20 August 1936. Cf. Aldrich to James Kellum Smith, 21 August 1938, regarding the possibility of the AAR “getting” Prof. Rostovtzeff (from Yale), in order to “increase our prestige and number of applicants.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 4 Cf. Alessandro Della Seta to Italo Balbo (Governor-General of Libya from 1933), 16 January 1935, in the context of correspondence with Giacomo Caputo and Balbo regarding Libya (Bengasi): “Con viva soddisfazione ho appreso che un altro allievo di questa Scuola Archeologica è stato chiamato a prestare servizio in Libia […] agli ordini di un Capo che è mirabile esempio di energia e di passione.” Cf. also letters of reference regarding Caputo. SAIA archives, 1935: “Allievi”; certificates also in SAIA archives, 1936: “Direzione (Dir.)”; and correspondence between SAIA director Guido Libertini and Caputo (1939) in SAIA archives, 1939: “Allievi Amministrazione Annuario”. 5 Cf. Heuck Allen (2011) 18.

The Big Buildup: National Tension 

 109

building”, in the words of DAIR director Ludwig Curtius.6 Plans for such a move may have been entertained as early as 1927; by 1930 Axel Boëthius and the Swedish institute had seemed more or less convinced that the DAIR would move to the Valle Giulia in the near future. Pre-war wartime voices were also raised for taking over the British school premises there, to demolish the building and erect a new German one on the British plot of land. The possibility of installing the DAIR in the suburban new world fair area of “EUR” was possibly also discussed as another alternative.7 Nothing was to come of such political plans, however. An active commitment from the Swedish state was a necessary prerequisite for the bilateral agreement between Sweden and Italy regarding a vacant plot of land on Via Omero in the Valle Giulia. The building and the property were, as promised by the government, to be administered by the Swedish state.8 Earlier state “lottery funds” were no longer sufficient: in 1937, the board communicated a proposition for regular annual state subsidies of the institute to the king. State subsidies were indeed granted, albeit applied for annually. At the same time, Axel Boëthius (then no longer director of the SIR) wrote that the foreign schools in Rome “should evolve organically out of the educational traditions of the specific country, completely independently grown out of its own memories in Rome. The ideal would be that each one of our [Scandinavian] countries had its own distinctive, independent institute.”9

6 “Die Pläne sind vor etwa einem Jahr dem Führer unterbreitet worden.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–40: “Athen Allgemeines 1.4.1936–31.3.1945 1.8.1948–31.12.1950”; and historical overview of the DAIR, 25 June 1945 (Curtius): “Die Stadt Rom überweist mit bemessener Baufrist dem deutschen Reich zum Neubau des Instituts einen Baugrund in Valle Giulia” (1940?). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. Cf. “P.M. ang. Villa Svezia tillställd M.P. Nilsson. Red. E.F. Bergström, Säflund, 27 april 1930.” In “Svenska Institutet 8 feb. – 1930–.” GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:241–243. 7 Various architects were allegedly approached regarding the controversial project of taking over the BSR premises, including Albert Speer (who, if approached, then declined). Was the safekeeping of the DAIR library catalogue in the Swedish institute after the evacuation of the library in 1944 (see chapter three) in any way related to such Valle Giulia plans? 8 The building was and is administered by Kungliga byggnadsstyrelsen, now Statens fastighetsverk. The funding for the new building itself was secured through Knut och Alice Wallenbergs stiftelse. Cf. Magnusson and Ahlklo (2010). 9 Boëthius to Politiken (Copenhagen), n.d. (March 1937). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III.B.1. The Swedish institute – in particular its library and the interior (and exterior) furnishing of the Valle Giulia premises – has also received significant financial support from the friends association (Föreningen Svenska Rominstitutets Vänner), established in 1937 – archival material (in Stockholm) covering the early history of the association has recently come to light (investigated by the author in 2018).

110 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

The École française de Rome was described as a rather romantic and conservative “Chateaubriand-Academy for archaeologists in Palazzo Farnese, the stronghold of France in Rome” in the early 1930s.10 This French urban arcadia would not last indefinitely, however. Political clouds were gathering, slowly but surely, in fascist Italy, in Greece as elsewhere in Europe. In 1937, historian Jérôme Carcopino, recently appointed director of the EFR, affirmed that “in spite of the build-up of clouds caused by politics it is certain that the intellectual relations between France and Italy remain intact,” and that the École was on most cordial terms with the “Roman elite”.11 Carcopino was anxious to maintain good relations with what he considered to be the scholarly and political haut monde in Rome.12 In his 1937–1938 report, Carcopino reported that “since all the schools comparable to ours are speaking out it seems to me that the French school should not keep silent; and the expressions of Italian sympathy which the school has attracted during a diplomatic year of such tension have touched and moved us. I believe that these are imponderables of some consequence.”13 This tone was consistent, however, with remarks on “Gallophobie”; Carcopino felt that “the year of the Rome-Berlin axis is also that of a noticeable regrowth of scholarship at [our] institutes. Without denying the beneficial influence of a friendly policy declared between France and Italy, one is obliged to believe that diplomacy would not succeed in substantially modifying the condition of their existence.”14

10 Jyllands-Posten, 8 July 1931: “De fællesnordiske Traditioner i Rom. Det skandinaviske Institut.” GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80: 238. 11 EFR annual report 1936–1937 (15 October 1937): “en dépit des nuages que la politique amoncelle, il est certain que les relations intellectuelles entre la France et l’Italie demeurent intactes. […] Je travaillerai d’autant mieux à le maintenir que les nouveaux membres de l’École […] sauront nouer pour leur compte plus d’amitiés scientifiques et personnelles avec ‘l’élite romaine’ qui a gardé jusqu’ici sa sympathie et son estime à l’École française de Rome.” 12 Like the main archives of the EFR, annual reports for the period 1937–1960 are preserved at the École in Rome. Archival material outside the EFR itself pertaining to the school can be found at the Institut de France (the archives of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres), and at the Archives Nationales in Paris. EFR material in the national archives is located in the archival collections of the ministry of public instruction. Cf. VV.AA. (1987); and VV.AA. (1997). The Comptes Rendus of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (CRAI) are available online: http://www.persee.fr/collection/crai (accessed 21 June 2018). Cf. AN, 20170185/88. 13 EFR annual report 1937–1938 (10 October 1938): “Alors que toutes les Écoles émules de la nôtre parlent, il était bon, m’a-t-il semblé, que l’École française ne restât pas silencieuse; et les sympathies italiennes que l’École a su grouper autour d’elle dans une année diplomatique si âprement tendue nous ont profondément touchés et réjouis. Je crois que ce sont là des impondérables de quelque conséquence.” 14 Report, Carcopino to the ministers of foreign affairs and national education, 28 May 1938. EFR archives, box “Instituts culturels français en Italie”: “l’année de l’‘axe’ Rome-Berlin est aussi

The Big Buildup: National Tension 

 111

A program of Italian-Greek cultural exchange was discussed in the context of the centenary of the University of Athens in 1937.15 The following year, Italian school director Della Seta played a prominent role as representative of the directors of the foreign schools in Athens in the inaugural ceremony of the centenary celebrations of the Archaeological Society at Athens (see below). In a 1938 “French-Greek cultural accord”, signed by the Greek dictator Metaxas, the aim of the École française d’Athènes (as well as of the Institut français, for language, literature, French culture and civilisation)16 was stated in abbreviated form: The École in Athens was described as “an establishment of higher education, dedicated to excavations and to research relating to Greece and Hellenism”, by all means a relatively neutral statement on the surface, even though it reflected and aligned with Metaxas’ ideology of “indigenous Hellenism”.17 In a 1938 report on the equivalent Instituts français in Florence, Rome and Naples (today also in Milan and Palermo),18 EFR director Carcopino expressed the value of studying on location: “in the same way that our higher instruction in Ancient and Mediaeval history provides our French School of Rome with its future masters, it is desirable that the French Italianists perfect and complete their education in Italy itself, as it is hard to imagine a young man aspiring to

celle d’une recrudescence sensible de la scolarité dans nos trois Instituts. Sans nier l’influence bienfaisante d’une politique d’amitié déclarée entre la France et l’Italie, on est obligé de croire que la diplomatie ne saurait modifier substantiellement leurs conditions d’existence.” 15 Alessandro Della Seta to Raffaele Boscarelli, Italian minister in Athens, 3 June 1937: “borse di studio”, “schema di programma per scambi culturali tra l’Italia e la Grecia”. 16 For the creation of the Institut français in Athens by the EFA in 1902–1907, see Milliex (1996); and Demangel, “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1947”, “APPENDICE: COMMEMORATION DU CENTENAIRE DE L’ÉCOLE” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950” (see appendix viii). 17 “Accord culturel franco-grec”, 1938, published 14 February 1939: “L’École Française d’Athènes est un établissement d’enseignement supérieur, consacré aux fouilles et aux recherches se rapportant à la Grèce et l’hellénisme.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. For the Hellenism of Metaxas, cf. Carabott (2003); Hamilakis (2007) 173–176, 181 & 199–201 (for neo-Hellenism, “Western” and “Indigenous” Hellenism, cf. Ibid. viii (“the broader phenomenon of Hellenism as one of the most pervasive western intellectual and social phenomena”) & 57–123); and Damaskos and Plantzos (2008). For Hellenism and the creation of “a continentalist past” in Greece, see Morris (2000) 37–38 & 41–76. 18 For the French cultural institutes, the Instituts français, in historical perspective, cf. Archives Nationales, Paris (AN), F/17/14585: “École française et Institut d’Études françaises d’Athènes. École française de Rome. Instituts de Caire, de Barcelone, de Florence, de Londres, de Madrid. 1917–1948.” For French and British similar cultural institutes (1945), see Rietbergen, Rome and the World, 241.

112 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

teach well the language, literature and realia of Italy without having lived in the country of which the civilisation constitutes the object of his studies.”19 Writing about the position of the French institutes “in an Italy eternally proud and tetchy”, “a country which flatters itself that it attracts research from every foreign countries, and where the best penetration would always be that which progresses unnoticed”; “in stormy weather or fair, under this regime or that, Italy, to reuse a famous phrase, ‘Italy will take care of itself’.”20 Admittedly not referring to the French school itself, in the words of Carcopino “a little French light” had been shed on fascist Italy through the French institutes: With the passing of time, while the Italian and German governments unite through conventions of cultural exchange, [with a] press which is not free, either wrapping us in impenetrable silence or covering us with criticism, but while there is not one of our compatriots who does not feel that, even in a dictatorship, the government is not always obeyed, that even in a totalitarian state there is room for several streams of ideas, that even an opinion condemned to silence is able to take shape and react, we may not abandon to their fate those who have turned to us and on whom, thanks to our institutes, a little French light has been shed, as little as this may be.21

Political tensions between France and Italy increased further after Mussolini joined forces with Hitler in the “Pact of Steel” (22 May 1939), and the “imponderables” Carcopino had referred to (expressions of Italian sympathy) were perhaps now of less “consequence” with the outbreak of war approaching.22 Such political 19 Report, Carcopino to the French ministers of foreign affairs and national education, 28 May 1938. EFR archives, box “Instituts culturels français en Italie”: “il est souhaitable que les italianisants de France perfectionnent et achèvent leur formation en Italie même, car l’on ne conçoit pas qu’un jeune homme puisse prétendre à bien enseigner la langue, la littérature et les choses d’Italie sans avoir vécu dans le pays dont la civilisation constitue l’objet de ses études.” 20 Report, Carcopino, 28 May 1938. EFR archives, box “Instituts culturels français en Italie”: “dans une Italie éternellement fière et ombrageuse”, “dans un pays qui se flatte d’attirer la recherche de tous les pays étrangers, et où la meilleure pénétration sera toujours celle qui cheminera invisible”, “La vérité est que sur ce chapitre, par temps d’orage ou par ciel clair, sous la régime actuel ou sous un autre, l’Italie, pour transposer une phrase célèbre, ‘l’Italia farà da se’.” 21 Report, Carcopino, 28 May 1938. EFR archives, box “Instituts culturels français en Italie”: “Par le temps qui courent, où les gouvernements italien et allemand se lient par des conventions d’échanges culturels, où une presse qui n’est pas libre, ou bien nous enveloppe d’un opaque silence, ou bien nous accable de critiques, mais où il n’est pas un de nos compatriotes qui ne sente que, même en dictature, le gouvernement n’est pas toujours obéi, que même dans un état totalitaire il y a place pour plusieurs courants d’idées, que même une opinion condamnée au silence y est capable de se former et de réagir, il nous est interdit d’abandonner à elles-mêmes les consciences qui se sont tournées vers nous et sur lesquelles, si peu que ce fût, a rayonné déjà, grâce à nos Instituts, un peu de lumière française.” 22 For Italian-French relations, see for example Bolech Cecchi (1986).

The Big Buildup: National Tension 

 113

tensions did not seem to make much impression on BSR director Courtenay Arthur Ralegh Radford, who reported in the autumn of 1938 that everything “is to all appearance normal, much more so than in London.”23 His pre-war correspondence with BSR honorary general secretary Sir Evelyn Shaw was largely of a formal nature, concerned with logistical issues such as the boundaries of the land of the school and its tennis court. Little concern was expressed regarding political developments.24 As for safeguarding the interests of the school, good relations were entertained with the gentry in power in Rome. On the topic of the façade of the BSR building, Ralegh Radford for example referred to his contacts with the mayor (governor) of Rome, who “had always been a good friend to England”.25 The national perspective was emphasised also in the pre-war reorganisation of the British school library: It is intended to develop this section of the Library dealing with the norther [sic] and western provinces of the Roman Empire and more particularly with British Archaeology in order to make more easily available to scholars in Rome the result of archaeological work carried out in the British Isles.26

In the context of a cycle of conferences initiated in 1937–1938 at the École française de Rome, Jérôme Carcopino was hoping for the participation of the renowned Italian archaeologist Alfonso Bartoli. Carcopino described Bartoli as “cautious”: Bartoli had “sought authorisation to lend us his support in a note he had delivered to the leader of [Mussolini’s] cabinet and that the note had been returned crossed through with the words ‘not at present’ in the hand of Il Duce.” Archaeologist and philologist Bartolomeo Nogara, director of the Vatican Museums, thus representing the Vatican, came to Carcopino’s rescue: I would have appeared to be initiating the very breakdown in relations which others were attempting to impose on me. Thanks to the amiability of [Nogara,] who, less in order to be

23 Courtenay Arthur Ralegh Radford to Evelyn Shaw, 1 October 1938. Cf. Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 10 April 1939: “Conditions here are absolutely unmoved [and] the reports of the English press seem like news from another world.” BSR archives, box 63. Sir Evelyn Shaw was furthermore secretary to “the 1851 commissioners” (1910–1947). 24 Cf. Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 9 June 1939. The issue regarding the BSR plot of land was one of planned construction of “villini signorili”, changed by the governor of Rome, Don Piero Colonna, to include “villini comuni”, three to four storey buildings, which were feared to seriously affect the light in the BSR artists’ studios. Similar practical topics were commonplace. Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 24 March 1939. BSR archives, box 63. 25 Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 10 September 1945. BSR archives, box 63. 26 Report on the “the extension and reorganization of the buildings of the British School at Rome carried out during the session 1937–8”, December 1938. BSR archives, box 63.

114 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

kind to me personally than to show his disapproval of certain procedures and his sympathy with France, agreed immediately, thus breaking the isolation which threatened me and which I have continued to avoid, by keeping in touch with learned Italians who, while they were not termed opponents, yet remained entirely free vis à vis the authorities.27

This can serve as an illustration of the fragile climate and the academic diplomacy of the late interwar period and the build-up to war. Carcopino was pleased to note that although the Italian savants officiels no longer “dared speak” at the École, they at least “had the courtesy to come and listen to us.” Carcopino was furthermore concerned that he might have been accused of “maliciously” adapting the programme and of deserting “the realm of science for that of propaganda.” Such accusations, felt Carcopino, were a “chance illusion”: the French school should not contribute to [French] propaganda unless unwittingly by the shining example it offers of labours at once diligent, disinterested and fruitful. The École […] has not ceased to carry out its task in the ordinary way and it seems to me that in its modest way it has won the war of nerves which was declared on us, by working as much and as well as if it had escaped our notice.28

Science, it was felt, could drown the din of politics: by maintaining and setting standards of scholarship, the EFR would scrape through and block the impending noises of war. Scrape through it did, although it was forced to close in 1940.29

27 EFR annual report 1938–1939 (10 October 1939): “j’aurais eu l’air de prendre l’initiative de la rupture qu’on cherchait à m’imposer. Grâce à l’amitié du professeur Nogara, Directeur Général des Musées du Vatican, qui, moins pour m’être agréable personnellement que pour manifester sa réprobation de certains procédés et ses sympathies pour la France consentit à remplacer au pied levé M. Bartoli, brisant ainsi l’isolement dont j’étais menacé, et auquel j’ai continué d’échapper, en m’adressant à des savants italiens qui, sans avoir l’étiquette d’opposants, demeuraient entièrement libres à l’égard du pouvoir.” Nogara, sometimes compared to his nineteenth-century predecessor cardinal Bartolomeo Pacca, was “the first real director in the modern sense of these [Vatican] collections”. Magi (1954–1955) 9. For his 70th birthday, Nogara was saluted for his “juridical wisdom” (“sapienza giuridica”) in the tradition of Cardinal Pacca. Cf. Paribeni (1937). 28 EFR annual report 1938–1939: “on aurait pu croire que j’avais malicieusement combiné le programme et que je m’étais évadé du terrain scientifique sur celui de la propagande. Ce n’est là qu’une illusion du hasard. L’École française ne doit contribuer à notre propagande que sans le vouloir, par le seul rayonnement de l’exemple qu’elle donne d’un labeur à la fois ardent, désintéressé et fécond. Elle […] n’a pas cessé de remplir sa tâche comme à l’ordinaire et il me semble que pour sa modeste part, elle a vaincu dans la guerre des nerfs qui nous était déclarée, en travaillant autant et aussi bien que si elle ne s’en fût pas même aperçue.” 29 Cf. Chester Holmes Aldrich (director of the AAR) to Bernard Berenson, 6 March 1940. The Bernard and Mary Berenson Papers, 24.52. Biblioteca Berenson. The Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies, Villa I Tatti, courtesy of the President and Fellows of Harvard

The Big Buildup: National Tension 

 115

At the British school, an appeal was made to increase the number of scholarships in the Faculty of Archaeology, History and Letters and to “raise their emoluments to a value equivalent to that of the Rome Scholarships in the Fine Arts […] as a result of considerably increased support from the Universities of the Empire.”30 Direct references to empire, in a sign-of-the-times colonial-imperial framework and rhetoric, were not rare occurrences at the British School at Rome before the war.31 Prime minister Neville Chamberlain made “an informal visit” to the school in early January 1939 together with foreign secretary Viscount Halifax. A new east wing was inaugurated on 24 January 1939, in the presence of the king of Italy, Vittorio Emanuele III, and of the British ambassador.32 In the light of the recent Italian imperial conquests in East Africa and the elevation of the king to “emperor of Ethiopia”, honorary general secretary Shaw felt that the inauguration of the new east wing required astuteness and political sensitivity on the part of director Ralegh Radford.33 Before the war broke out, American academy director Chester Holmes Aldrich reported rumours to academy president James Kellum Smith “that the Italian Government ‘take over’ the Villa Medici”, the seventeenth-century Académie de France, although “nothing further seems to have been heard of this or of some similar propositions.”34 Political tension was undoubtedly increasing, also in scholarly circles, in Rome as in Athens. During the last interwar spring, BSA director Gerard Mackworth Young illustrated how the king of Greece, George II (also president of the Archaeological Society at Athens) would annually attend lectures at the foreign schools of the old “Great Powers”:

College. Cf. also Aldrich to James Kellum Smith, 30 March 1939. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855– 2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 30 Report on the “the extension and reorganization of the buildings of the British School at Rome carried out during the session 1937–8”, December 1938. BSR archives, box 63. 31 A clearly “colonial”, at times near-patronizing gaze vis-à-vis the Italian staff of the school, for example, is more easily found than for the other foreign schools in Rome covered here. 32 Cf. Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 23 December 1938; and Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 13 January 1939. BSR archives, box 63. Cf. 1938–1939 BSR annual report. 33 Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 24 February 1939: “The title of King of Italy and Emperor of Ethiopia”, “it would startle people over here to see in a descriptive and informal document King George referred to as the King of England and Emperor of India.” Shaw to Ralegh Radford, 27 February 1939. BSR archives, box 63. 34 Aldrich to Smith, 3 January 1939: “I will not indulge in any comments on the uncertain political atmosphere, but only say that so far, we are continuing to receive on every side the cordial cooperation we have always had from the Government authorities.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758.

116 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

The King makes a practice of attending one lecture at each of the Foreign Schools every year […]. The preceding tea at my house was rather an event, as he doesn’t do that at the other schools. But I fancy he knows me personally better than the other directors […]. [The lectures] were quite a success […] they interested a good many people, though His Majesty’s only comment was “I think the later things are more interesting”.35

The increasingly political profile of the German institute in Athens did little good to its scholarly reputation and networks in the late 1930s and early 1940s.36 Director Walter Wrede, a convinced Nazi, for example corresponded with Martin Schede, president of the DAI in Berlin, on a wide range of politically tainted issues, including racial policies.37 The implementation of such policies before the Second World War made a number of American archaeologists such as William Dinsmoor and Gorham Phillips Stevens resign as corresponding members of the DAI in protest.38 In 1939, a fellowship was accordingly established in the

35 Young to Myres, 1 April 1939: “However, we didn’t bore him as much as the annual meeting of the Archaeological Society two days before!” BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4–uncatalogued. 36 For the DAIA in political context, see for example document to the German legation in Athens (n.d.) “betr. Überprüfung der als Mitglieder vorgeschlagenen Personen auf ihre Stellung gegenüber Deutschland”. DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”. See also for example Kurt Gebauer, “Manuskript […] für Handwörterbuch des Auslandsdeutschtums. Stichwort Archäologe”. DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 38: “Korrespondenz 1939–1944 For DAIA excavations before and during the Second World War, see for examples DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner K7 (“alte Nr. 43, 44”): “Korrespondenz Deutsche Grabungen 1920–1944”; and DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner K9 (“alte Nr. 36, 42”): “A: Korrespondenz 1930 B: Korrespondenz 1931 C: Korrespondenz Samos 1932–1943, 1954–1961”. Cf. also Egyptologist Friedrich Wilhelm von Bissing (1873–1956) to Joseph Göbbels, 3 November 1936 (advocating Armin von Gerkan, not Walter Wrede, as director of the DAIA). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–40: “Athen Allgemeines 1.4.1936–31.3.1945 1.8.1948– 31.12.1950”. For von Gerkan, see Fröhlich (2012). 37 For racial policies at the DAIA before and during the war, cf. Wrede (?) to Schede, 5 January 1939, “betr. nichtdeutsche Ehefrauen von Archäologen in Hinsicht auf Rasse und Einstellung gegenüber Deutschland”; and Karl Lehmann-Hartleben, 11 January 1939 (writing in exile from New York University) regarding contemporary racial policies at the DAI. DAIA archives, D-DAIATH-Archiv, Ordner 38: “Korrespondenz 1939–1944”. 38 Correspondence regarding Dinsmoor, Stevens et al. DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 38: “Korrespondenz 1939–1944”. Dyson, Ancient Marbles to American Shores, 215–216. See also Dinsmoor (in the capacity of president of the Archaeological Institute of America) to Albert Van Buren, 15 May 1940: “my resignation from a membership of more than twenty-six years in the German Archaeological Institute.” AAR archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1936–1940. As AIA president, Dinsmoor attended the sixth International Archaeological Congress in Berlin “along with 599 other scholars (no Jews)”. Cf. Heuck Allen

The Big Buildup: National Tension 

 117

American school for “a qualified Jewish exile from Germany” – Henry (Heinrich) Immerwahr, later director of the school) – the fellowship was however only to last until the following year.39 After the implementation of the humanitarian and cultural caesura of the Italian racial laws in 1938, director Della Seta was dismissed from his position at the Italian school after two decades of service due to the fact that he was Jewish (ebreo).40 Following the 1938 Anschluss, the DAIA took over the Austrian Institute in Athens in 1939.41 The Austrian Archaeological Institute (Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut, OeAI) was established in 1898 as the Royal Imperial Austrian Archaeological Institute in Vienna (modelled in part on the DAI in Berlin), following excavations carried out at Ephesos, in Asia Minor, from 1895. The institute’s earlier building in Rome was opened in 1908. It was incorporated with the University of Vienna in 1935. In 1939, the new institute building in the

(2011) 18–19 & 22: “German archaeologists in Athens were ordered to sever relations with American colleagues.” 39 “Report of the Committee on Fellowships” (Sidney N. Deane, chairman), 1939. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 5. Cf. Gorham Phillips Stevens to Louis E. Lord, 20 May 1940: “I cannot urge you too strongly not to send any more German students to the School until Europe settles down again”; and Lord to Stevens, 8 June 1940: “We shall not send any more German students over.” ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. 40 The year before, Giuseppe Bottai (Italian minister of education) had appointed Della Seta as representative of “Italian archaeological science” at a congress and museum inauguration in Teheran. Della Seta to Bottai, 18 January 1937. SAIA archives, 1937: “Direzione (Dir.)”. For such political context, cf. also Della Seta to regime architect Marcello Piacentini, November 1938. SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. For Della Seta’s financial compensation and travel reimbursements to Rome after his dismissal, cf. Bottai, 23 November 1939. SAIA archives, 1939: “Allievi Amministrazione Annuario”. For the “caesura” of the 1938 racial laws in Italian classical scholarship (e.g. Della Seta, Doro Levi, Arnaldo Momigliano, Mario Segre et al.), and for Della Seta’s dismissal, cf. Barbanera (1998) 150. The dismissals of Georg Karo and Ludwig Curtius from their positions as directors of the German institutes in Athens and Rome can be seen as one of many examples of the consequences of outspoken political influence on scholarly structures. In this context, Barbanera also refers to a post-war structural shift in the 1960s, when the “professors of the Weimar republic and the Nazi period retired”. Ibid. 149. For “political pressure on the academic world” in Nazi Germany, and the preoccupations of substantial parts of that world with “Aryan roots”, see Ibid. 148–149. 41 Cf. correspondence dated 13 and 18 January 1939 regarding the “Übernahme des österreichischen Instituts in Wien und Athen”. DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 38: “Korrespondenz 1939–1944”. See also Otto Walter (1882–1965, director of the Austrian Archaeological Institute at Athens) to the direction of the Italian school, 31 March 1939, regarding the German takeover of the Austrian institute. SAIA archives, 1939: “Biblioteche Direzione Fotografie”.

118 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

Valle Giulia was taken over by Germany.42 In March 1939, American academy director Chester Holmes Aldrich reported that he had “represented the Academy last week at the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the German Historical Institute here and its installation in the building in the Valle Giulia which had just been completed for the Austrian Academy at the moment of the Anschluss last year.”43 When the Second World War broke out in September 1939, the German Historical Institute (DHI) in Rome had just merged with the Austrian Historical Institute, as a consequence of the 1938 Anschluss.44 The “DHI library” in 1945 thus in effect consisted of both the German historical and the Austrian libraries.45

42 The OeAI was “restored” in 1945; the Athens branch was reopened in 1964. See Kandler and Wlach (1998). Cf. “100 Jahre Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut. 1898–1998” (online, http://homepage.univie.ac.at/elisabeth.trinkl/forum/forum0399/10oai.htm, accessed 21 June 2018); and Petrakos (2007), 28. 43 Aldrich continued: “Near this building are the two new buildings being put up just now for the Belgian and Swedish Academies [sic]. The architect of the latter, Mr. Tengbom was with us last year and is coming again this spring. Mr. Ostberg [sic], the Architect of the Stockholm Town Hall has also promised to come and visit us at the Villa Aurelia next month.” Aldrich to James Kellum Smith, 30 March 1939. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 44 See Leo Santifaller to the president of the Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, 28 June 1943: “das Österreichische Historische Institut in Rom ist seit 1938 mit dem preussischen Historischen Institut unter dem Titel ‘Deutsches Historisches Institut’ vereinigt. Das Österreichische Institut ist seinerzeit […] als eine Art Schwesterinstitut des Wiener Instituts für Geschichtsforschung begründet worden.” Cf. “Akten betreffend das Istituto austriaco di studii storici in ROM”. The Austrian Historical Institute Rome archives, box II, 113, 1 “Akten 1939–1946”. For the Austrian Historical Institute, see VV.AA. (2008a). Cf. also “Memorandum addressed to the United Nations Organization by the International Union of Institutes of Archaeology, History, and History of Art in Rome” (1946, appendix 9): “The amalgamated German Institute figures in the Nazi-Fascist Concordat of 1938, whereby the German Government declared its solemn intention that these libraries should never leave Rome.” AN, 20170185/105. 45 Cf. selected documents in appendix vii, for example Ernest DeWald to Albert Van Buren, 9 November 1945: “Among the cases of the German Institute books are presumably some from the Austrian Academy at Rome. The Austrians have been fussing about them. […] I thought that maybe cases from the Austrian Academy might have been taken to ship books from the German one.” RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:4; Leo Santifaller to the Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, 14 December 1946; Richard Meister (1881–1964) to the Bundesministerium für Unterricht, 19 November 1946 (two letters); Clemens (?) Wildner (1892–1965, Bundeskanzleramt, Auswärtige Angelegenheiten) to the Präsidium der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (ÖAW), 23 November 1946: “in Rom Schritte unternommen werden, um den Teil der beschlagnahmten Bibliothek, der die Österreichische Bibliothek bildet, für Österreich sicherzustellen”; and Josef Keil to the Bundeskanzleramt/Auswärtige Angelegenheiten, Vienna, 24 December 1946 (“zur Frage der Sicherstellung der Bibliotheksbestände des Österreichischen Historischen Instituts in Rom”). See also Leo Santifaller to the ÖAW, 30 October 1946; “Akademie der Wissenschaften,

The Big Buildup: National Tension 

 119

In a both valuable and ambivalent document from late 1945 (in a sense Martin Schede’s final “public” statement: one month later he was imprisoned by the Russians; he died two years later), in an attempt to exculpate the DAI, and himself, from Nazi involvement, Schede affirmed that the DAI had dealt with classical archaeology and nothing else: it was a research institute that did not engage in politics, but operated within “the universality of classical culture”, with relations across borders “on the widest international terms”, creating “the high regard” that the DAI “had enjoyed, everywhere abroad – in peacetime or at war”.46 Three years earlier, Schede had conversely, in no uncertain terms, stated that the DAI was “to look after the scholarly research interests of the Reich in the field of ancient studies, a task that puts it in the frontmost place in the cultural policy work of the Reich.”47 In the same letter, Schede had described the “cultural politics” of the DAI and its organisation in branches, “Inland” (including Vienna) and “Ausland” (fig. 27), in a letter to Reichsminister Bernhard Rust. Schede was also the key organiser of the sixth International Congress of Classical Archaeology, in Berlin 1939, in conjunction with which he aimed to establish an “International Office for Archaeology”. This “international office” was presented as a fait accompli: Schede presided over the congress itself and announced that the DAI would take care of the establishment, management and funding of the international venture. Its office (Büro) was described as “intergovernmental”, and was to care for the “continuity” of the international archaeological congresses. The next congress was intended to be held in Rome in 1942, synchronised with the planned world fair (“EUR”), supposed to be held the same year, in which the issue of the funding of the international office would be discussed again. The “intergovernmental” office made a mockery of collaboration, as its president by default was to be the current president of the DAI. Its committee outspokenly prioritised the “Great Powers” – not including Italy – and Greece, for archaeological reasons. All countries who had taken part in the 1939 Abschrift”, 16 November 1946; Richard Meister to Otto Skrbensky (1887–1952), 19 November 1946; and Wildner to the “Direktion des österreichischen Staatsarchives”, Vienna, 4 December 1946. The Austrian Historical Institute in Rome archives, box II, 113, 1 “Akten 1939–1946” (see appendix vii). 46 “Denkschrift über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut von M. Schede”, 13 August 1945 (in appendix i). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”: “der Allgemeingültigkeit der klassischen Kultur”, “auf breitester zwischenstaatlicher Basis”, “das hohe Ansehen, das es überall im Ausland – in Friedens- und Kriegszeiten – genießt”. 47 Martin Schede to Bernhard Rust (Reichsminister für Wissenschaft, Erziehung und Volksbildung), 16 June 1942: “Das Institut hat als einzige Reichsbehörde die wissenschaftlichen Forschungsbelange des Reichs auf dem Gebiet der Altertumsforschung wahrzunehmen, eine Aufgabe, die es an die vorderste Stelle in der kulturpolitischen Arbeit des Reichs im Ausland stellt.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”.

120 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

Fig. 27: DAI president Martin Schede to Reichsminister Bernhard Rust, 16 June 1942 (detail). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”.

congress would have one representative member on the committee of the international office, except for the following countries which would have two: the USA, Germany, Great Britain, France and Greece.48 48 “Ordnung des internationalen Büros für Archäologie”: “Der Präsident bestimmt […] die Geschäftsführung in persönlicher und sachlicher Hinsicht.” The little-known Büro was described by Schede as “Eine Art Zweigstelle” of the DAI. “Denkschrift über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut von M. Schede”, 13 August 1945 (in appendix i). Cf. Schede, 1 March 1934; and Schede to Reichsminister Bernhard Rust, 8 November 1938. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”.

The Big Buildup: National Tension 

 121

Cultural propaganda was a common theme in the in increasing pressure of the build-up to war. In 1939, BSA director Young reported that through its chairman, Lord Lloyd, the British Council had considered taking over the British schools in Rome and Athens: I am told (but I have not been able to verify this) that the British School at Rome has asked to come under the British Council, and that the Council are planning a British School of Byzantine Archaeology at Constantinople. […] The British Council probably see a certain amount of propaganda value in the British School […] But I think that the School should be guaranteed against any modification of its constitution, functions and independence. Propaganda is not in our lines, and we should lose our character with the Greeks if we were harnessed too closely to an avowedly propagandist institution. [We] correspond directly with the Greek Government, whose language we speak.49

BSA chairman John Myres and the committee were however “clear that the School must be kept clear of all sort of propaganda and outside guidance”, presumably being well aware of the centenary celebrations of the Archaeological Society at Athens the previous year (see below). The actual clauses in the agreement, rehearsing the function [and] status of the School seemed to us satisfactory. […] the School exists to make Greece (ancient and modern) intelligible to English people; not to explain or commend England to the Greeks.”50 During the war, a clear distinction was made between “the financial support of British institute[s] and enterprises abroad (British Council), and the propaganda of British ‘culture’,” with the British school defined as “a seat of learning and of Greek studies including study of Greek life in all its aspects.”51

49 Young to the managing committee of the BSA (also as a typewritten attachment to a letter from Young to Edith Clay, 4 April 1939), “Confidential”, 17 March 1939. BSA archives, “B.S.A. 1939”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.8-uncatalogued. See also Young to Myres, 8 November 1938 (on “the new British Institute” and “British propaganda”); Young to Myres, 20 March 1939; and Myres to Young, 19 September 1939. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 50 Myres to Young, 28 March 1939. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 51 John L. Myres to Edith Clay, 18 (?) March 1943. BSA archives, “Chairman’s Letters to Secretary 1940–43” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.9-uncatalogued.

122 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

Fig. 28: The Athenian Acropolis from the Philopappos Hill (Mouseion), 1939. The Swedish Institute in Rome archives.

The Archaeological Society: Celebrating a Centenary One of the biggest political and symbolical splashes made in the name of classical archaeology was arguably caused by the centenary celebration of the Archaeological Society at Athens in 1938. This large-scale affair, coinciding with the contemporary directed political use of antiquity in the fascist Mostra augustea in Rome in the build-up to war (see chapter one), was charged with much symbol and significance, for the archaeological society itself as for the foreign schools in Athens.52 The Swedish archaeologist Natan Valmin for example commented on the centenary with blazing hyperbole, mirroring the official rhetoric of Metaxas’ regime, quoting Pericles’ famed funeral oration: 52 For the 1938 centenary, cf. Hamilakis (2007) 199–200.

The Archaeological Society: Celebrating a Centenary 

 123

The reborn Greek nation has by no means been sitting sighing with its arms folded on the graves of its forefathers while foreigners have placed its history on contract. As a victory trophy, the old yellowed marble columns again rise towards the bluest of all skies, like Olympic evidence that the nation of the Hellenes is not extinct and dead, the beautiful testimony of a small but living and active nation to [its] affinity with the time and the people to whom the great Pericles gave this wisdom: “We shall be admired by the present and posterity because we erect mighty monuments to our power.” These words in the famous funeral oration are applicable and proper for the centenary of the Greek archaeological society.53

For financial reasons (lack of funding), the centenary was postponed until October 1938, but also in order “not to clash with” the centenary of the University of Athens in 1937.54 The inauguration ceremony of the five-day centenary celebrations of the society in 1938 was held in the Parthenon itself, attended by the king of Greece, George II (also president of the society) as well as members of the Royal family, the dictator Metaxas, and the directors of the foreign schools in Athens. Georgios Oikonomos, the secretary of the society, gave the main speech on its behalf, with references to the “Hellenism that circulates in the blood of the people”. This resonated well with Metaxas’ “charter myth of the nation”: the above-mentioned ideology of “indigenous Hellenism”. In his address, Metaxas, on the other hand, emphasised alleged popular “links between ‘common people’ and antiquities,” whereas the archaeological society represented “the interests of the local and European elites”. Metaxas repeated “the popular saying about the statues of [the] Erechtheion, the caryatids, who still mourned the ‘loss of their sister’, removed by Elgin [in] the early nineteenth century.”55 Linking the people with the ancient past was wholly deliberate on Metaxas’ part, as the dictator routinely “promoted archaeology as a ‘patriotic duty’ and a bridge between that glorious era and the troubled present.”56 Oikonomos, who was also professor at the University of Athens as well as director of the Archaeological Service, spoke of modern Greece as the “moral, spiritual and psychical continuation” of “the historical core of integral Greece”, unlike Metaxas he stressed the wide dissemination of membership and patronage of the archaeological society.57

53 Valmin (1937) 208 (author’s translation of Valmin’s Swedish adaptation). For another contemporary report of the centenary, see Miller (1938). 54 Miller (1938). 55 Hamilakis (2007) 199–201. 56 Cf. Heuck Allen (2011) 8: Metaxas’ “staged youth rallies using ancient temples as backdrops”; and “antiquities, fundamental to the country’s image, as ‘ambassadors of the nation’” at the 1939 World Fair in New York. 57 Hamilakis (2007) 199–200. Quoted in Kokkinidou and Nikolaidou (2004) 166, with reference to Petrakos (1987) 168. See also Petrakos (1995) 35; and “Archaeology under Metaxas” (online, http://metaxas-project.com/archaeology-greece-metaxas-4-august/, accessed 22 March 2016).

124 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

The king spoke first, followed by Metaxas and Italian director Alessandro Della Seta, the “representative of the foreigners”. Oikonomos was last. The ceremony in the Parthenon was followed by a meal in the evening “under the chairmanship of the minister of national education”. After the solemn inauguration in the Parthenon, the five-day celebrations of the centenary (23–27 October) continued with a full programme, including a guided tour of gold medals in the Academy of Athens, an address and award ceremony, performances of Greek folk dances, a performance of Elektra in the Odeion of Herodes Atticus in the afternoon and a reception in the Benaki museum on the 24th; an excursion to Epidauros, with the “disclosure” of a monument to Panayiotis Kavvadias (see chapters one and two) there on the 25th; a tour of Dafni and Eleusis followed by an evening performance in the Royal theatre on the 26th; the celebrations ending on the 27th with a visit to the museum and excavations at Plato’s academy, and a farewell dinner hosted by the Archaeological Society.58 Taking Oikonomos’ opening speech and narrative about the history of the society more or less at face value, a British report in The Journal of Hellenic Studies related “characteristic facts” about the archaeological society, “the Greeks” and institutions in modern Greece: It is characteristic of the Greeks that barely three years after Athens became the capital, they thought of such intellectual things as University education and archaeology, including, first of all, the preservation of their ancient monuments, to which attention had been paid even during the War of Independence by the National Assemblies of Troizen and Argos, and for which a museum was founded at Aegina by Capo d’Istria [sic], and in the Theseion by the Royal Government in 1835, while in 1837 Ludwig Ross was appointed the first professor of Archaeology at the University.59

Documents in the archives of the foreign schools in Athens reveal the other side of the story, the perspective of another “European elite”: that of the foreign school directors. A formal invitation to participate in the five-day centenary celebration was sent to the foreign schools. The invitations, from the vice-president of the society, Antonis Benakis, and secretary Georgios Oikonomos followed a three-page preamble, written in old-fashioned, high-strung Attic version of “pure” KatharevousaGreek, reflecting the generally conservative nature of the society (cf. fig. 29).60 58 Centenary celebration program, 23–27 October 1938. DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”. 59 “The programme began with a meeting in the Parthenon, where the King and the Prime Minister spoke, and M. Oikonomos, general secretary of the Society, gave an interesting summary of its history.” Miller, “The Centenary of the Archaeological Society of Athens”. 60 Invitation dated 12 October 1938 to DAIA first director Walter Wrede. See also Oikonomos to Wrede, 29 July (?) 1938, concerning the ceremonies; and Oikonomos to Wrede, 29 October

The Archaeological Society: Celebrating a Centenary 

 125

Fig. 29: From the invitation to the centenary celebrations of the Archaeological Society at Athens addressed to the DAIA, October 1938. DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”.

Two months before the centenary ceremonies, Gerard Mackworth Young, director of the British school, reported that “the archaeological centenary has at last materialized […]. All my colleagues will be attending.”61 Representation and speeches at the celebrations were equally about national prestige and international camaraderie. Reporting to the Italian minister of education, Giuseppe Bottai, director Alessandro Della Seta accentuated that “a preeminent position had been reserved for Italy”, as he, director of the Italian school since 1919, had, as “the dean among the directors of the foreign schools of Athens spoken in their name”. In “homage to our host country”, Della Seta had delivered some of his talk in Greek. A similarly “prominent position” was given to the archaeologist and fascist politician Biagio Pace, speaking on behalf of Italy in the ceremony in the Academy during the second day of the celebrations.62 1938, asking the director to send the speech that he would give during the celebrations in advance. Cf. Wrede to the president of the DAI, 29 October 1938, with an attached “Bericht über die Hundertjahrfeier der Athener Archäologischen Gesellschaft”, and Wrede to the DAI, Berlin, 30 October 1938, regarding Greek diplomas for the following German scholars: “Hiller von Gärtringen, Rodenwaldt, Rubensohn, Schede [W]ilcken.” DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”. 61 Gerard Mackworth Young to John L. Myres, 24 August 1938: “it would have been much more convenient for all concerned if they had the centenary in April, as they meant to do”. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 62 Alessandro Della Seta to Giuseppe Bottai, 2 November 1938: “all’Italia è stata riservata una posizione preminente”, “ho parlato, quale decano tra i direttori, a nome delle Scuole Archeologiche straniere di Atene”, “in omaggio al paese che ci ospita, ho in parte pronunciato in greco”, “posizione preminente”. SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)” (both speeches are included in appendix iv). Biagio Pace, a Sicilian and early enthusiast of the Fascist movement,

126 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

In the inaugural ceremony in the Parthenon, Della Seta, as “representative of the foreigners”, wanted to celebrate “the glorious civilisation of Greece in the work of the archaeological society”, dedicated to the “fatherland” and “to civilisation”. Expressing the same gratitude for Greek collegial hospitality and friendship as his German colleague Walter Wrede did the following day, modern Greece was, at least to Della Seta, “the heir to the never belied [Greek] love of strangers [filoxenia]”.63 In his speech, the Italian director however also wished to represent “the most intoned voice,” the “voice of Rome, the voice of Latin and Italian civilisation”, textbook fascist regime romanità, which placed Mussolini’s “third Rome” on a par with the first Rome of antiquity. Echoing Mussolini’s battle cry for the liberation of ancient monuments in Italy, the function of the Archaeological Society at Athens was in Della Seta’s words connected with “returning to the fatherland [Greece] the conscience of its grandeur” by “unearthing, liberating and restoring the ancient monuments,” as these constituted “the diplomas of your nobility.” The members of the society – with mention of for example Benakis and Oikonomos as examples of working “for faith, for patriotism, for science” – were described in terms of “armed sentinels of the Greek national spirit,” working “under your life-giving sun.” Della Seta emphasised the collegial work carried out on Crete, “the landfall of the mythical Europa” by Great Britain, France, Italy and Greece, “for a long time, without shadows of political allusion, in an accord which could be said to be Mediterranean.”64 Della Seta also referred to the archaeological achievements of the other foreign schools in Greece, offering examples of national characteristics such as “the active and efficacious America”, the “solid and athletic Germany”, and the “passionate and spiritual France”. The achievements of the society itself were summed up through its work in three “symbolical centres” of Greek civilisation,

had a background in art and archaeology in Sicily, had taken part in SAIA excavations on Crete (Gortyn) and on Rhodes, and had published the work L’Impero e la collaborazione internazionale in Africa the same year as the centenary. Cf. Pace (1913); Palermo (2012); and Giammellaro (2012). 63 Della Seta, speech (Parthenon), 23 October 1938 (in appendix iv): “celebrare nell’opera della Società Archeologica la gloriosa civiltà della Grecia”, “uno sacro alla patria, l’altro sacro alla civiltà”, “ereditiera della non mai smentita ‘filoxenia’ greca”. 64 Della Seta, speech (Parthenon), 23 October 1938 (in appendix iv): “la voce più intonata”, “la voce di Roma, la voce della civiltà latina e italiana”, “ridare alla patria non solo l’aspetto ma anche la coscienza della sua grandezza”, “disseppellire, liberare, ripristinare i monumenti antichi”, “erano i diplomi della vostra nobiltà”, “esemplari per fede, per patriottismo, per scienza”, “sentinelle sempre in armi dello spirito nazionale greco”, “sotto il vostro sole vivificatore”, “terra di approdo della mitica Europa”, “da gran tempo […] in un accordo che potrebbe dirsi mediterraneo.” SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. Cf., for example, Hawes and Hawes (1909).

The Archaeological Society: Celebrating a Centenary 

 127

“of art, science and religion”: the Athenian Acropolis, Epidauros and Eleusis. In Della Seta’s expression of the sign-of-the-times cult of monuments, the ancient remains were in themselves “the indicator of the perennial life of the spirit, a testimony and an inspiration.” Returning to “the voice of Rome”, Della Seta ended his speech with a reference to the recent inauguration by Mussolini – “il nostro grande Duce”, the self-styled new Augustus and inheritor of the role of guarantor of Pax Romana – of “the reconstructed Ara Pacis Augustae” in Rome. The centenary celebrations were phrased as “one of those celebrations that draw closer and unite the peoples in the common work of intelligence which is the supreme good of humanity.” Conflating “Roman” with “Italian”, Della Seta accordingly compared the Acropolis in Athens to the Capitol in Rome, as “one of humanity’s sublime summits of perfection on the great sea of history”.65 It is possible that Della Seta’s delivery of this exceedingly high-strung regime rhetoric was not entirely heartfelt; if it was he must have been heartily disappointed when the new racial laws of the same regime were to cost him his position as director the following year (see chapter two). Similar rhetoric permeated the Italian contribution in the continued celebrations the following day in the Athens Academy by Biagio Pace, sent by Bottai to deliver the “salute, the congratulations, the greeting from Italian culture” to “this incomparable land of ancient beauty.” Although the “congratulations” from fascist “Italian culture vibrated on a note of its own”, it shared its entanglement in classical legacies with Greece, integral to “our reality as peoples”: In Greece as in Italy, archaeology is not something that can be or not be: a reason for solitary study or a training ground for intellectual drills. […] It is at the same time our history and our politics: the attestation of the past that works irrepressibly on the future. For us Italians as for you Greeks, the same kind of purpose in life gushes from the serene majesty of our favourite studies.66

65 Della Seta, speech (Parthenon), 23 October 1938 (in appendix iv): “l’attiva e fattiva America”, “la quadrata e atletica Germania”, “la Francia fervida e spirituale”, “tre simboli della vostra civiltà […] dell’arte, della scienza, della religione greca”, “i monumenti sono […] l’indice della vita perenne dello spirito, sono una testimonianza e sono un’ispirazione”, “il nostro grande Duce, Benito Mussolini, inaugurava […] la ricostruita Ara Pacis Augustae”, “una di quelle feste che affratellano i popoli nel comune lavoro dell’intelligenza, che è il supremo bene dell’umanità”, “sul grande mare della storia è una delle vette sublimi di perfezione dell’umanità”. SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. 66 Biagio Pace, speech (Academy, Athens), 24 October 1938: “il saluto, il compiacimento, l’augurio della Cultura Italiana [a] questa incomparabile terra della bellezza antica”, “il compiacimento della Cultura Italiana vibra di una nota tutta sua”, “In Ellade come in Italia l’archeologica non è qualche cosa che possa essere e possa non essere: una ragione di stud[i]o solitario o una palestra di esercitazioni intellettualistiche. È lo stesso dato fondamentale della nostra realtà di

128 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

Confirming the role and importance of archaeology in romanità and fascist nation building, Pace proceeded to speak of the “intimate beauty and eternal truth” in the “act of the scholar and of the patriot” as a “symbol of national reality”. As in Della Seta’s inaugural speech, the cult of the monument was very much a part of such “national reality”. The “venerated relics” of the past carried in themselves the spirit of the national: throughout “darker centuries” they had “maintained the common national existence.” In Greece, as in Italy, “the most fervid supporters of the Risorgimento and of power” had looked to archaeology “for an unrestrainable coherence of thought.” For these reasons, Pace assured the congregation, “the Duce of the new Italy” viewed Greece and the Greeks “with the inexhaustible possibilities of his great spirit.”67 The “inexhaustible possibilities” did not preclude attempts at military invasion of the “incomparable land of ancient beauty”, and the “venerated relics” of the past did not prevent national rivalry from spinning out of control only a year later. After the Italian invasion of Albania and the Italian attack on northwestern Greece in 1939, “rumours flew that Metaxas had begged Italy to treat Athens as an open city in order to protect its civilians and historic monuments, and threatened that if the Italians bombed Athens, the British would bomb Rome.”68 The perhaps unfortunately named Pace’s (peace) contribution to the centenary celebrations of the archaeological society in 1938 – an almost flawless flagship of faithful, fateful romanità – sums up the contemporary political inspirations and interests in archaeology, and the “classical” (in and on national terms), as well as 1930s right-wing interpretations of the study of the ancient past, in Mussolini’s Italy as in the Greece of Metaxas. Covering this late 1930s apex of scholarly nation-building with a fragile layer of international varnish, the Italian representation in the centenary celebrations consciously set out to “affirm the absolute primacy that Italy has reached in terms of results of excavations and conservation of monuments under the fascist regime,” using those results as “contributions to the development of

popolo. È insieme la nostra storia e la nostra politica: l’attestazione del passato che opera insopprimibile sull’avvenire. Per noi italiani come per voi greci, una medesima ragione di vita sgorga dalla serena maestà dei nostri studi prediletti.” SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. 67 Biagio Pace, 24 October 1938: “quale intima bellezza e quale verità imperitura fossero nel gesto del letterato e del patriota”, “simbolo medesimo [della] realtà nazionale”, “venerande reliquie”, “secoli più oscuri” “mantenuto […] la comune esistenza di nazione”, “i più fervidi assertori del risorgimento e della potenza”, “una coerenza insopprimibile di pensiero”, “vi guarda con le inesauribili possibilità della sua grande anima il Duce dell’Italia nuova”. SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. 68 Heuck Allen (2011) 29. For the archaeological society at the outbreak of war, cf. Ibid. 47.

The Archaeological Society: Celebrating a Centenary 

 129

civilisation” and as “affirmation of historical power.”69 At the same time representing ancient Rome and modern Fascism, the Italian delegation justified its statement of romanità in the context of the Greek celebrations partly by referring to the well-preserved remains of Greek art and monumental architecture in the ancient Greek colonies in southern Italy. In other words much of the best of ancient Greece was, territorially and culturally, Italian: “as Italy has more numerous and better preserved monuments of Greek art than Greece itself, the Italian mission could take a truly directive part in the contributions as in the discussions” during the celebrations. If Italy did not seize this opportunity – or cultural “obligation”, directed by “national tradition”, as Alessandro Della Seta put it in the tensely national climate of the day – some other nation would do so instead: Our absence or scarce presence would leave the field free for a predominance of other nations, which, in reality, have more of a scholarly interest in these issues than a duty [conditioned] by national tradition.70

The French School in Athens was represented by three delegates in the centenary celebrations of the archaeological society, which were considered significant enough to merit the presence of two of director Robert Demangel’s predecessors on his post, Charles Picard and Pierre Roussel.71 The French representatives, speaking after Biagio Pace, were however outnumbered by the German contingent, with

69 Alessandro Della Seta to Raffaele Boscarelli, Italian minister at Athens, 25 July 1938: “apparrà forse opportuno che l’Italia affermi, attraverso la sua rappresentanza, il primato assoluto che essa ha raggiunto, in Regime Fascista, tanto per i resultati degli scavi quanto per la tutela dei monumenti, considerati gli uni e gli altri non solo come testimonianza d’arte ma anche e più come contributo allo sviluppo della civiltà e come affermazione di potenza storica.” SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. 70 Della Seta to Raffaele Boscarelli, Italian minister at Athens, 25 July 1938: “avendo l’Italia monumenti di arte greca più numerosi e meglio conservati della Grecia stessa, potrebbe la missione italiana prendere una parte veramente direttiva tanto nelle relazioni quanto nelle discussioni. Una nostra assenza o scarsa presenza lascerebbe il campo libero ad un predominio di altre nazioni che, in realtà, per questi problemi hanno più un interesse di studio che un dovere di tradizione nazionale.” SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. 71 Robert Demangel to “Monsieur le Président de la Société Archéologique Athènes”, 9 October 1938: “[L’École] sera représentée aux cérémonies par trois délégués [Demangel, Lemerle and ‘M. H. Ducoux, architecte’]”, “avec ses vœux les plus cordiaux pour l’avenir, l’expression de ses sentiments d’admiration et d’affectueuse estime pour le travail accompli par [la Société] depuis un siècle.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936–1942)”. Cf. EFA annual report 1937–1938 (Demangel): “en Octobre […] nous ont valu l’heureuse fortune de recevoir à la fois M. Ch. Picard et M. P. Roussel, anciens directeurs de l’École.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”.

130 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

no less than seven speakers participating in the festivities. “The other countries” (Great Britain, USA and Austria) followed the Italian, French and German speakers.72 In his address, Walter Wrede, director of the German institute, emphasised the foreign schools’ cordial relations with the society, which had received the schools “as sisters” in reciprocal friend- and companionship. Wrede congratulated the society to its first hundred years of activity, and to “having brought new value to old Hellenicity [Hellenentum]”. The German institute in Athens also took the opportunity to coordinate the opening of the museum at the archaeological site of Kerameikos in Athens with the centenary celebrations of the archaeological society: “when someone has a birthday, one wants to make him happy.”73 The DAI in Berlin had decided to confer its Winckelmann-medal on the Athenian society for its centenary, a prize that had a near decade earlier (1929) been awarded for the first time: a joint award to the crown prince of Sweden and to the city of Rome. The renowned classical archaeologist Wilhelm Dörpfeld was given the ceremonial task of handing it over in Athens.74 The society centenary provided a good opportunity for honouring archaeology in Greece: the archaeological society, having become “a concern for the whole nation” (illustrated by the King of Greece taking the role as its president), had itself upheld the “atmosphere” that the city of Rome had provided the German archaeological institute with in Italy.75 The French school had, on its part, proposed to nominate members of the archaeological society for decorations (the Légion d’Honneur). Secretary-General

72 “Bericht über die Hundertjahrfeier der Athener Archäologischen Gesellschaft.” (Walter Wrede), 29 October 1938 (in appendix iv). Cf. “Reihenfolge der deutschen Sprecher” (approved by the German minister of education): Wilhelm Dörpfeld for the Zentraldirektion, Walter Wrede for the DAIA, 7 speakers in total; and Martin Schede to Walter Wrede, 14 October 1938: “Als Anlage übersende ich Ihnen […] die deutschen Teilnehmer an der Hundertjahrfeier der Griechischen Archäologischen Gesellschaft in Athen betreffend.” DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”. 73 Walter Wrede, speech held at the Academy, Athens, 24 October 1938 (in appendix iv): “diese Archäologische Gesellschaft im Griechischen Gastlande hat uns fremde Institute wie Schwestern aufgenommen”, “Wenn jemand Geburtstag hat, dann will man ihm eine Freude machen”; and “Bericht über die Hundertjahrfeier der Athener Archäologischen Gesellschaft. […] eine neue Wertung des alten Hellenentums heraufgebracht hat” (Wrede), 29 October 1938 (in appendix iv). 74 Schede to Wrede, 11 October 1938: “wird Ihnen die für die Hundertjahrfeier der Griechischen Archäologischen Gesellschaft bestimmte Winckelmanns-Medaille in Kassette überbracht.” The medal was also addressed in Wrede’s speech at the centenary celebrations (see appendix iv). DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”. 75 Wrede, speech held at the Academy, Athens, 24 October 1938 (in appendix iv): “die Trägerin jene Atmosphäre”, “nicht eine gelehrte Spezialgesellschaft sondern eine Angelegenh[e]it der ganzen Nation, wie denn auch der König des Landes jeweils den Vorsitz übernimmt.” DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”.

The Archaeological Society: Celebrating a Centenary 

 131

Oikonomos, “très ami de la France et de l’École”, was nominated as Commandeur. Archaeologists Alexandros Philadelpheus, director of the National Museum in Athens (“très francophile”), Spyridon Marinatos and Antonios Demetriou Keramopoullos were nominated for the rank of Officier. Georgios Sotiriou, working in Christian archaeology, and Swiss artist Émile Gilliéron (“collaborateur précieux de l’École Française”), were nominated for the rank of Chevalier. It was also “necessary to anticipate a Cross” for the society’s vice-president Antonis Benakis.76 The archaeological society itself had ordered no less than 800 plaques and 500 badges from the Monnaie de Paris to be distributed among the participants of the centenary celebrations – indicating the dimension of the festivities. The Monnaie were however pressed to deliver the order in time for the festivities. Instead of the diplomatic and friendly token it was intended to be, the situation risked becoming both “humiliating and disagreeable” for the French school. A promise was eventually made for the on-time delivery of 300 of the 800 plaques by mid-October.77 Post festum, British school director Gerard Mackworth Young reported on the celebrations, remarking that neither Latin nor Greek was used by the speakers representing the foreign schools, thus indirectly commenting on and reflecting an horizon of expectation in the study of classics: The festivities are over. They went off very well indeed. The rain interfered with the proposed expeditions […]. Of the functions in Athens the most important was the meeting at the Academy with the King. 35 (!) delegates spoke, including all the Germans, who led off with old Dörpfeld. My British colleagues preferred to let me speak for them all. I had 76 Robert Demangel to the minister of national education (?), 29 July 1938 (in appendix iv). In the margin of the letter, the nomination of Marinatos and Keramopoullos was upgraded from “Chevalier” to “Officier”. EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936–1942)”. 77 Paul Lemerle to the commercial attaché at the French legation in Athens, 15 September 1938: “il n’en sera pas moins fort humiliant et désagréable pour nous d’entendre officiellement proclamer dans un important Congrès international, la carence singulière d’une de nos grandes administrations.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 4 (prov. number): “Courrier départ secrétariat général (1938–1941)”; and “Le Directeur de l’administration des monnaies et m[é]dailles” to the commercial attaché at the French legation in Athens, 28 September 1938: “le souci de sauvegarder à l’étranger la réputation de la Monnaie de Paris.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 6 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée secrétariat général (1937–1941)”. For material concerning the “commemorative bronze plaque from the Centenary of the Society (1837–1937)”, see ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 703/2, folder 1 (cf. http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/archives/administrative-records-2014 (accessed 21 June 2018). For a reproduction of the bronze “jubilee plaque” (awarded to the crown prince of Sweden and to Axel W. Persson; a diploma was given to Martin P. Nilsson), see “Grekland ger Sverige Atentomt för institut”, Svenska Dagbladet, 3 November 1938. Sigtunastiftelsens klipparkiv, “Arkeologi Grekland Italien”.

132 

 4 Academic Diplomacy at Risk, 1935–1939

to keep it within 3 to 5 minutes, and did not risk quoting from our address or from the Cambridge address which was in Latin. None of the delegates spoke or quoted any ancient language.78

After the centenary celebrations, and as a result of them, Young and other foreign school directors received decorations from the Greek state. Describing the decoration reception, Young referred to his experiences in colonial India and similar but much more “appalling functions in Delhi”.79 A year after the archaeological society celebrations, after the outbreak of the Second World War in September, the frontlines of national scholarship were again forcefully encroaching on the increasingly delicate rhetorical no-man’s-land of internationalism.80 The national confrontation of war, it would seem, would override most international interests. What effects would this have for the internationalisation of science, for the common exploration of classical archaeology, and for the Mediterranean foreign schools?

78 Gerard Mackworth Young to John L. Myres, 28 October 1938. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. Cf. BSA, Report for the Session 1938–1939, 1. See also Miller (1938): “Delegates from many countries were present, including four British representatives: Mr. Gerard M. Young, director of the British Archaeological School[;] Dr. William Miller, who represented the British Academy; Mr. R. D. Barnett, who represented the British Museum and the Hellenic Society; and Dr. Routh, who represented the University of London.” 79 Young to Myres, 25 February 1939: “I have just been made a Commander of the order of King George Ist – presumably in common with other foreign directors etc, as an aftermath of the centenary. […] I suppose I had been gazetted”. Cf. Myres to Young, 13 March 1939: “Hearty congratulations on your Greek Order. It […] is a pleasant reminder of ‘Attic Days’. I hope H.M. allows you to wear it.” BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. Cf. also BSA, Report for the Session 1938–1939, 1. Cf. also, for example, letter of thanks regarding the centenary, 4 April 1939. SAIA archives, 1939: “Biblioteche Direzione Fotografie”. 80 Cf. Georgios Oikonomos to Paul Lemerle, 10 September 1939: “Je vous remercie de l’envoi de votre Chronique des fouilles pour 1938, mais je ne puis m’empêcher de vous dire qu’en la lisant j’ai été frappé du silence systématique sur le patronnage [sic] des fouilles exécutées aux frais de la Société archéologique, dont le centenaire fut, pourtant, célébré cette même année avec le brillant concours de la science française que vous connaissez et que nous reconnaissons avec gratitude”. Cf. Oikonomos to Lemerle, 12 September 1939: “Dans la prochaine Chronique n’oubliez pas pourtant la pauvre Société. Elle mérite d’être mentionnée.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 6 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée secrétariat général (1937–1941)”.

German Wehrmacht officers (with Generalfeldmarschall Walther von Brauchitsch in the centre, with Walter Wrede (Erster Direktor of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen), third from right), on the Acropolis, Athens, after the conquest of Greece in 1941 (photo: Süddeutsche Zeitung).

5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945 The Second World War was a game changer of immense proportion in the political and cultural landscape of Europe, also in archaeological terms. The war would signify the beginning of the end of earlier nationalist points of departure, with a newfound willingness to cooperate internationally following in its wake. For the foreign schools in Rome and Athens, the war signified a hiatus: they were nearly all closed or functioning at a minimum for the duration of the conflict; the Swedish Institute in Rome provided the sole example of unbroken continuity in that regard, secured by the political neutrality of the home country. A wide range of consequences of the devastating conflict for classical archaeology and for the foreign schools are explored in this chapter, which also touches upon a rebranding of classical studies, moving in international and increasingly politically neutral directions after its strong ideological associations before and during the war. At the samt time, classical scholarship has often transcended national interests. One example of this can be found in Clelia Laviosa’s obituary of archaeologist Doro Levi, post-war director of the Italian School of Archaeology in Athens, quoted by Jack L. Davis, former director of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, on the milieu of the foreign schools in Greece: “There was in Athens […] an ongoing dialogue with Greek, German, English, Swedish, and other archaeologists, who were then guests at the established foreign schools, in that special atmosphere outside of national boundaries that is one of the most attractive aspects of archaeology.”1 This somewhat romantically tinted narrative arguably still forms part of the understanding of many classical archaeologists in Greece today, and confirms national boundaries of scholarship in reference to them being transgressed. This chapter discusses the escalation of nationalist pressure during the Second World War in relation to that “special atmosphere” in terms of what was then referred to as the internationale of classical archaeology, or individual and institutional collaboration overriding national interests.

“Breaking Wide Open”: War As clouds of conflict were thickening over Europe, the foreign schools in Rome and in Athens were considering which policy to adopt in the event of war. James Rennell Rodd, chairman of the executive committee of the British School at Rome, stressed that “the male students of the School, as well as the members 1 Clelia Laviosa, quoted in Davis (2010) 142. Cf. for example Davis (2003). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-006

136 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

of the Directorate, became liable for military service on the outbreak of war, and without distinction of sex all were anxious to devote themselves at once to work of national importance,” and that there was therefore “no alternative to suspending the services of the School until the younger generation could resume their normal studies.”2 Just after the war had broken out, James Kellum Smith, president of the American academy, expressed his position from a New York perspective: “I think no one here expects that Italy’s neutrality will be maintained very long, and of course, in spite of the strong isolationist sentiment in the country, most people fear or expect that America will become actively involved, the only problem being, how soon!”3 Smith informed director and fellow architect Chester Holmes Aldrich that “it becomes necessary to direct your thoughts to the gradual drying up of the situation there [in Rome] and preparing to reduce the staff to a minimum point required to exercise responsibility for the properties, in the event that the Academy remains neutral property, and making what plans can be made in the event that conditions should take such a turn as to make it alien property.”4 The outward attitude was one of defiance: “the Academy’s position in Rome seems to me never to have been better. Relations with the other academies have been developed and smoothed by the Director”,5 but the AAR and Smith remained hesitant: “I feel a little as if [the Academy] is in low gear, none of us quite daring to open the throttle wide.”6 In May 1940, Smith reported to Aldrich that it is not outside of the realm of possibility, or even probability, that our properties instead of being “alien”, could within all too short a time, become “Enemy”. […] Whether in the face of these possibilities our position would be improved by offering our plant for hospital

2 James Rennell Rodd to the chairman of the Faculty of Archaeology, History and Letters, 14 November 1939, quoted in BSR annual report 1938–1939: “after the restoration of normal conditions, the School may look forward, with the continued favour of our Italian friends, to a renewed and lasting period of prosperity and usefulness”. 3 James Kellum Smith to Chester Holmes Aldrich, 12 September 1939: “The parallels of the last war […] have little bearing.” Cf. Smith to Aldrich, 22 September 1939. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 4 Smith to Aldrich, 22 September 1939. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 5 Report by James Kellum Smith, 12 November 1939: “Official Rome, representing both the Church and the State, seems to have been very satisfactorily cultivated.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5750. 6 Smith to Aldrich, 16 April 1940. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758.

“Breaking Wide Open”: War 

 137

purposes, Red Cross, or some humane activity, is of course a consideration which you will want to explore.7

The Red Cross-solution was opted for in Athens (see below). Smith furthermore expressed that “no one expects conditions to be favorable to the normal operation of the Academy next year, and everyone I think feels that we ought to get the Fellows out of the danger zone before the thing breaks wide open.”8 “The thing” did indeed “break wide open”. Before the USA entered the war, however, the US embassy in Rome enrolled director Chester Holmes Aldrich as “special attaché” (1940), in order to supervise the Académie de France in Villa Medici.9 After Aldrich’s death in 1940, possible wartime Vatican protection of the American academy and its library was discussed but not realised. Enquiries were made by the academy president James Kellum Smith the following year regarding “the possibility of making some arrangement with the Vatican under which the Prefect of the Vatican Library might act as custodian for our Library, and perhaps our properties in general, in the event that the international situation further deteriorates, and Americans are forced to leave Italy.”10 In the summer of 1940, Gorham Phillips Stevens, director of the American school in Athens (and former director of the academy in Rome),11 suggested a

7 Smith to Aldrich, 24 May 1940. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 8 Smith to Aldrich, 24 May 1940. Cf. also AAR Fellow Charles Naginski to president J.K. Smith, 17 September 1939. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758; and Allan Chester Johnson to Albert Van Buren, 22 March 1940. AAR archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1936–1940. 9 Aldrich to Smith, 17 June 1940: “(I had volunteered to help during my spare time with the extra work which the Embassy has to do in caring for the French and British property in Italy; my share at present consists in looking after the Villa Medici, the home of the French Academy).” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 10 Smith to Amey Aldrich, 14 March 1941. Amey Aldrich, Chester Aldrich’s sister, had remained at the academy after her brother’s death in March 1941. According to her an agreement with the Vatican was at that time “not feasible”. Cf. Smith to William C. Phillips, US Ambassador to Italy, 10 December 1941; Phillips to Smith, 16 December 1941; and Smith to Amey Aldrich, 14 March 1941: “The suggestion keeps arising of making our properties the headquarters of some organization involved in the relief of suffering, until such time as we can again send students there.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. Cf. also DAIR director Armin Von Gerkan to Albert Van Buren, 9 January 1941. AAR archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1941–1945. 11 Stevens, born in New York, died in Athens, was director of the AAR 1912–1913, acting director 1913–1917, and director 1917–1932. He was director of the ASCSA 1939–1941, and acting director in Athens 1941–1947. Cf. http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/archives/stevens-finding-aid/ (accessed 21 June 2018).

138 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

consolidation of the academy in Rome with the American school in Athens, in an amendment to the academy charter: The easiest way to make the School [in Athens] a national institution is for the School to consolidate with the American Academy in Rome. There should be no difficulty in obtaining an amendment to the charter of the [Academy]. This was done when the Academy and the American School of Classical Studies at Rome consolidated. The great difficulty came when the [Academy] obtained its charter from Congress. There was great opposition. There ought to be some way of consolidating with the American Academy in Rome whereby each Institution retains its independence, just as was done when the Academy consolidated with the American School of Classical Studies in Rome.12

This eyebrow-raising proposition was, perhaps needless to say, not acted upon. Aldrich and Smith shared concerns regarding the “new Axis announcements,” indicating “increasing strain in the relations between our country and Italy, which may be reflected in tension and difficulties for the Academy.”13 Great Britain and France declared war on Italy on 10 June 1940, the day that Italy joined the war on the side of Germany and the Axis. As a consequence, the British and French schools in Rome closed, as did the American academy after the attack on Pearl Harbor a year and a half later. At the outbreak of war, German forces occupied the Netherlands, Belgium and Poland; their respective schools in Rome were struggling and were in effect also closed for the duration of the hostilities.14 When Evelyn Shaw, honorary general secretary of the BSR, asked director Ralegh Radford’s advice as to what should be done “to safeguard the property of the School” in case of war, Ralegh Radford suggested leaving the archive in the care of the director of the Dutch institute in the Valle Giulia: “We should not be at liberty to place them with the Embassy, as the School is not a Government institution and enjoys no diplomatic immunity.”15 The archive however remained on the school premises, as did the library. In collaboration with AAR director Chester Holmes Aldrich, the British and American embassies temporarily acted

12 Gorham P. Stevens to ASCSA chairman Louis E. Lord, 15 June 1940, preceded by a letter from Stevens to Lord, 24 May 1940 (“the book-keeping was simpler”). ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. 13 Smith to Aldrich, 2 October 1940. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 14 For the consequences of Italy’s entry in the war for the foreign schools in Rome, see for example Rietbergen (2012) 229–231. 15 Memorandum, Evelyn Shaw, 11 July 1939. BSR archives, box 63. The neighbouring Swedish institute building was still being constructed at that time; it is otherwise not unlikely that the Swedes might also have been approached by the BSR.

“Breaking Wide Open”: War 

 139

as guardians of the BSR during the initial stages of the war.16 The maintenance of the American academy was largely dependent on Aldrich, and his illness and subsequent death in December 1940 combined with “the progressive disintegration of the international situation made many of us here feel that the time had come to close the Academy.”17 The activities of the American Academy in Rome were suspended when the USA entered the war in 1941. The academy was placed under the protection of the Swiss legation in Rome and remained closed for the duration, with three members of staff “vested with responsibility for administration and maintenance of the property.”18 BSR affairs were run mainly from London during the war by honorary general secretary Shaw, who met regularly with director Ralegh Radford at the Athenaeum Club in London. Ralegh Radford kept up the appearance of active directorship from London, “as my signature is known to the various authorities in Rome and my appointment presumably valid in their eyes until further notice.”19 The École française in Athens remained open when the war broke out (and nominally remained so throughout the conflict). Director Demangel wished to maintain the activities of the school to the greatest extent possible, including its publications, which “must be able to continue coming out”: As during the First World War, and “thanks to its near centennial prestige,” the “activities in the years of peace” of the school, Demangel hoped, ought to “permit it to usefully remain an important post in Greece in wartime” when the hostilities broke out in 1939.20 This “near centennial prestige” was repeated in Demangel’s 1940 16 BSR annual report 1939–1940. 17 AAR board meeting minutes (New York City), 8 April 1941. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855– 2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 18 Cf. US Department of State documents regarding financial assistance to American nationals “in territories where the interests of the United States are represented by Switzerland”, 10 March 1942. See for example Joseph C. Green (Department of State) to J.K. Smith, 22 May 1942; and J.K. Smith to J.C. Green, 4 June 1942. Cf. Frederik van den Arend (Department of State) to J.K. Smith, 28 January 1942; “cablegram”, Smith to the AAR, 27 March 1941; and Smith to Amey Aldrich, 28 March 1941. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. The annual reports for the war years are located in two bound volumes at the AAR: (1) for 1934–1940, and (2) for 1943–1964. The Swiss Institute in Rome was not established until after the war, in 1948–1949. See Perret (2014). 19 Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 19 December 1942 (from the Political Intelligence Department of the Foreign Office, London). BSR archives, box 63. The BSR for example invested in war bonds “in the national interest”. Cf. BSR annual report 1939–1940. BSR correspondence is rife with audits and budgetary comments in so-called “grey sheets”. Cf. BSR archives, boxes 63 and 64. 20 Demangel, annual report 1938–1939: “L’École reste ouverte […]. Ses publications doivent pouvoir continuer à paraître. […] grâce à son prestige bientôt séculaire, son activité des années de paix lui permet de se maintenir utilement en Grèce à un poste important du temps de guerre.”

140 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

report (written in March 1941), accentuating that the school had so far been able to remain open.21 After Alessandro Della Seta’s dismissal in 1939, the Italian school was directed during the war by the archaeologists Guido Libertini and Luciano Laurenzi (who was captured and arrested by the German army in September 1943, after which the school was closed).22 Italo-Greek cultural relations were, not surprisingly, seriously compromised when Italy invaded Greece in October 1940. After Mussolini’s decision to invade Albania in April 1939, with the Italian army thus a direct threat to the Northwestern Greek border, archaeologist Spyridon Marinatos, dictator Metaxas’ director general of Greek antiquities, for example excavated at Thermopylae – in the words of Susan Heuck Allen “where the Spartans once defended Greece, as propaganda fodder glorifying Greek patriotic sacrifice.”23 Director Gerard Mackworth Young wrote to BSA secretary Edith Clay in early 1940, outlining the situation after the outbreak of war: When I reached Greece early in October [1939], I was guided by the knowledge of what was done in the last war […] and the announcement of the policy of the British School at Rome[.] In particular the embarrassment that would result from the continued presence in Greece

EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. Cf. Robert Demangel to the “Ministre de l’Éducation Nationale Direction de l’Enseignement Supérieur, 3ème Bureau”, 16 September 1939: “Suivant vos instructions, l’École sera maintenue ouverte tant que je resterai à Athènes.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936– 1942)”. Cf. also Étienne, “L’École française d’Athènes, 1846–1996,” 15–16. 21 Demangel, annual report 1940: “une activité conforme à ses traditions et à la place que nous tenons en Grèce depuis un siècle..” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. Cf. Demangel to the “Ministre de l’Éducation Nationale Direction de l’Enseignement Supérieur”, 9 January 1940: “Une partie des locaux […] a été occupée par les services de l’Armée et de la Marine.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936–1942)”; and Demangel to the French minister in Athens, 11 March 1941. EFA archives, 1 ADM 22 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1940–1965)” (see appendix v). 22 Giuseppe Bottai to Della Seta, 25 January 1939; Della Seta to Guido Libertini, 9 February 1939: “lasciando un lavoro a cui ho dedicato tanta parte della mia vita, vedo con soddisfazione passarlo nelle vostre accorte e valide mani, lo vedo affidato ad un allievo degnissimo di questa stessa Scuola.” SAIA archives, 1939: “Biblioteche Direzione Fotografie”. For Libertini, see Dubbini (2010). For Laurenzi, cf. “Volume I/II Serie Annuario Scuola d’Atene”, “Spedizioni a titolo d’omaggio ordinato dal Prof. Laurenzi I/3/43”. SAIA archives, 1947–1948: “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. VII Annuario Pos. VIII Scavi e Missioni”; and DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner K9 (“alte Nr. 36, 42”): “A: Korrespondenz 1930 B: Korrespondenz 1931 C: Korrespondenz Samos 1932–1943, 1954–1961”. 23 Heuck Allen (2011) 18.

“Breaking Wide Open”: War 

 141

of persons of military age not engaged upon, or awaiting, war work, was strongly impressed upon me from the start.24

In his 1939–1940 annual report, American school director Gorham Phillips Stevens remarked that when he “took charge of the School on June 9th, the prospects of a normal School year were not altogether bright.” After the “disturbing […] rumors of war”, the “clouds of war burst. Fortunately Greece was not initially involved in actual warfare. For a time, however, excitement in the country ran high. Needless to say the program for the School had to be altered to fit conditions.”25 In early 1940, classicist Edward Capps, who had just retired as chairman of the ASCSA, commented on the opportunistic “nerve” of German archaeologists moving in on the Isthmus of Corinth: American territory in the geography of classical archaeology.26 The German institute had carried out a survey there, financed by the SS Ahnenerbe, in the early stages of the war.27 Capps’ successor as chairman, Louis Lord, was not amused: I am sure we have given no permission for such a survey or relinquished our rights on Corinthia in any way. In fact I am planning to have the history of Corinthia written as part of our publications. This topographical survey would help, rather than hinder it, but I think we should do that ourselves. […] I got the impression that their survey of the

24 Cf. Young to Clay, 27 February 1940; and Young to Clay, 11 January 1940: “I would propose to keep accommodation open for bed and breakfast only, as in the last war.” BSA archives, “Letters from Director to Secretary 1940, Letters from Chairman to Secretary 1940–43, Letters from Treasurer to Secretary 1940–44, Carbon Copies of Secretary’s Letters 1940”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.9-uncatalogued. Cf. also Clay (?) to “The Under-Secretary of State Foreign Affairs”, 7 January 1940: “[The Director of the School, who is now working in Athens at H.B.M. Legation.” BSA archives, “Carbon Copies of Secretary’s Letters 1940” (folder), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box#3.9-uncatalogued. See also Myres to Young, 26 September 1939; Young to Myres, 1 November 1939; and Myres to Young, 3 April 1940: “The ‘1851’ Commissioners, hearing that the School is ‘closed’, propose to suspend their £200 grant. We have replied that the School is not closed”. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 25 ASCSA annual report 1939–1940. Cf. report by acting director Arthur W. Parsons for 1 July 1939–1 April 1940. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 5. 26 Edward Capps to Louis Lord, 7 January 1940: “The noive [sic] of the Germans! The Greek Gov. – i.e. Marinatos – should certainly have consulted the [ASCSA] before giving them a permit for the Isthmus”. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. For Capps, cf. Mauzy (2006) 23; and Rupp (2013). 27 ASCSA acting director Arthur W. Parsons to Louis Lord, 1 December 1939: “I only learned from the last number of the [Archäologischer] Anzeiger that the German Institute had begun a topographical survey of the Corinthia.” ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6.

142 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

Argolid was done not for the sake of a survey, but because they hoped to locate some lucrative site for excavation.28

Director Stevens discussed “the Germans working on prehistoric sites in Corinthia”, underlining the perceived American archaeological authority in the Corinthia area: “The Germans probably have regular permission from the Greek government, but they should also have had permission from our School out of courtesy.”29 Disregarding possible permission from the government authorities, the “Corinthia business” was, as it turned out, purportedly based on a misunderstanding. The archaeologist Oscar Broneer, working at Corinth, had given Kurt Gebauer (assistant at the German archaeological institute in Athens), permission to carry out a survey at Corinth.30 For the Swedish Institute in Rome, the financial stability and relative security that came with state subsidies (1938) and new premises (1940) was in many ways crucial to its immediate future. The archaeologist Erik Sjöqvist succeeded Einar Gjerstad as its director in 1940.31 The war began only a year after a bilateral agreement with Italy was reached, and the completion of the new building in the Valle Giulia in 1940 was synchronised with the initiation of the Italian war effort. Although the Swedish institute was established relatively late in relation to the foreign schools in Rome, discussed here, its standing during the war years partly compensated for lost time. Due to Swedish political neutrality the SIR was the only foreign school, in Rome or in Athens, to remain in operation through the entire war. Archival material from the Swedish institute therefore offers unique opportunities to trace the activities of the foreign scholarly community in Rome during the war years.32 “Operational” is a relative concept; the Romanian

28 Louis Lord to Arthur W. Parsons, 18 December 1939: “I too am worried about the Germans making a topographical survey about Corinthia”. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. 29 Stevens to Lord, 20 February 1940; and Stevens to Lord, 14 February 1940: “I will do my best to stop the undertaking.” ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. 30 Parsons to Lord, 7 March 1940: “the Corinthia business is settled.” ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. For Broneer, see also ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 804/1, folder 7; and ASCSA, the Oscar Broneer papers (http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/archives/oscar-broneerpapers, accessed 21 June 2018). 31 For Erik Sjöqvist’s directorship and the war years, see for example Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 171–200. Cf. also, for example, Sjöqvist to the Direzione Generale per gli Italiani all’Estero, 29 November 1940 (regarding visas for Swedish students and “the promotion of cultural relations”; the war was referred to as “la straordinaria situazione attuale”). Erland Billig’s papers (Lena Billig, Stockholm). 32 For the Swedish institute during the war years, see Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 171–208. The SIR archives were first organised in 1947–1948, in part by director Erik Sjöqvist. Cf. SIR executive committee minutes, 17 December 1947, §8. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, I:5. See

“Breaking Wide Open”: War 

 143

Fig. 30: The Swedish Institute in Rome, 1941 (with the Dutch institute on the left). The Swedish Institute in Rome archives.

academy in Rome was open for most of the war, due to Romania becoming an axis power in 1940. The Dutch institute was also nominally open, for example, with the director in residence.33 The Swedish institute was however the only foreign school to remain operational throughout. In regard to Athens, Edward Capps wrote to Louis Lord, his successor as chairman of the American school: “It’s too bad that this war should happen to us, but we’re lucky to have [Gorham Phillips] Stevens in charge, old warhorse that he is. And a couple of years’ stoppage may save the Agora’s skin.”34 After the outbreak of war, Stevens expressed his qualms to Lord: “Our real difficulties begin if

also Sjöqvist to the SIR board, 1 March 1948. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. The SIR archival material consists mainly of correspondence from and to the various directors of the SIR, as well as with members of the board. SIR archival material is located in Riksarkivet (RA), at the institute itself in Rome, in various collections of correspondence in the university libraries in Gothenburg, Lund and Uppsala, as well as in various private archives. 33 Cf. Cools and de Valk (2004); Turcuş (2011); and Bărbulescu, Turcuş and Damian (2013). 34 Edward Capps to Louis Lord, 19 September 1939. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6.

144 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

Greece goes to war: (1) our properties might be confiscated by the Greek government or by an invader of Greece and (2) Athens would probably be bombed.”35 The threat of destruction was taken seriously by the chairman: “The most serious difficulty that presented itself in adjusting to the present situation was the necessity of constructing a bomb-proof shelter capable of holding all the faculty, students and staff of the School […] under the porch of the Gennadeion.”36 During the German invasion of Greece in April 1941, the bomb shelter constructed under the Gennadius library was much used; the American school became “the rallying point for the American colony” in Athens.37 The British School at Athens was taken care of by the neighbouring American school during the early stages of the war, as it had been also during the First World War.38 In June 1940, American director Stevens reported that “If America goes into the war, the Legation of some neutral country will take over the work of the American Legation. The Legation of Brazil has been mentioned in this connection. It looks as though all excavations next year will have to be abandoned.”39 Stevens decided to close the school after the Italian attack on Greece on 28 October 1940.40 The chairman, Louis Lord, later wrote to the members of the managing committee of the American school regarding the year 1939–1940, that The School was unusually fortunate in having Mr. Gorham P. Stevens as its Director during this troubled year. He was the Director of the Academy in Rome during the [First World War] and his experience there proved invaluable to him and to us. He was able to adjust the machinery of the School to the war conditions with the slightest possible dislocation. During the year he has prepared a complete inventory of the buildings and furniture and

35 Stevens to Lord, 5 September 1939. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. Cf. Heuck Allen (2011) 17 (“On the rim of a volcano”): “In 1939 the archaeologists had read the signs of approaching war, but ventured to Greece anyway, to shovel that last spade of earth before it was too late”; and Eadem, 20 & 53, regarding the painting of “twenty-foot high apotropaic ‘USAs’ on the roofs of the School’s buildings and debated turning one into an American Red Cross Hospital.” The “USAs” were scrubbed off again after the German invasion of Salonika in April 1941. 36 Statement by Louis Lord, 2 December 1939. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. For the Gennadius library during the war, cf. “Report of the Librarian of the Gennadeion” (Shirley H. Weber), April 1, 1939: “We are troubled, of course, by the rumblings of war from the North, and can only conjecture what would happen to the Library if the country were occupied by a foreign power.” ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 5. 37 Heuck Allen (2011) 55. 38 Young to Myres, 7 June 1941 (Karachi): “an inventory in triplicate of all property”. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. Cf. Heuck Allen (2011) 26. 39 Stevens to Lord, 15 June 1940: “[We] are planning to stay on until ordered by the American Legation to leave.” ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/4, folder 6. 40 Heuck Allen (2011) 14.

“Breaking Wide Open”: War 

 145

has made valuable suggestions which will undoubtedly save us a great deal of money when we come to build the Agora Museum.41

Having left Athens, Natalie Young, married to BSA director Gerard Mackworth Young, made the radical remark that “one can hardly bear to think of Greece, it is so overwhelming a tragedy. But one day we shall go back & throw the Nazis out”.42 In April 1941, BSA chairman Myres wrote that he had “no news from Athens, nor have I heard at all from the Director for over a year. […] Perhaps the School will be under the protection of the American Legation; and the American School should look after the buildings.”43 Myres did hear from the director, who had gone to Pakistan. Just before the US entered the war in June 1941, Young wrote to Myres explaining that he had “left Athens in rather a hurry, and [had] to leave practically all my personal belongings including most of my clothes. But the arrangements for handing over to the American Legation were complete.” The British legation to the Holy See was involved in an illustrative issue that arose in 1942, regarding whether or not the British subject count Demetrio Sarsfield Salazar and his wife might be able to stay for some time in the evacuated premises of the British School at Rome. Count Sarsfield Salazar had escaped from “an Italian concentration camp” and “organized an underground route for American and British prisoners-of-war, smuggling them to neutral Switzerland.”44 BSR honorary general secretary Evelyn Shaw was hesitant to grant count Sarsfield Salazar’s residency request, and suggested that director Ralegh Radford ask the opinion of Foreign Office diplomat, knight librarian and classical scholar Sir Stephen Gaselee, as “hitherto the School has been entirely unmolested, doubtless owing to the fact that it is known to be closed and in the hands of Italian caretakers. The presence of a British subject in the School might rouse suspicion, especially among the ignorant, with possibly serious consequences to the safety of the School.”45 41 “Report of the Chairman of the Managing Committee” (Lord). ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 1. 42 Natalie Young to John L. Myres, 3 May 1941. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 43 Myres to Clay, 29 April 1941. BSA archives, “Chairman’s Letters to Secretary 1940–43” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.9-uncatalogued. 44 The Montreal Gazette, 11 September 1968. 45 Shaw to Ralegh Radford, 22 December 1942. See also Hirst (? – unidentified) to Shaw, 26 December 1942: “I should vote against the Count being installed in Valle Giulia. […] These Irish attachés really belong to the Vatican. Let them show some signs of that catholic charity which is expected of others. So far, they have done little to discourage Fascist hooliganism in Italy that is the risk involved here. […] I can only suggest that [Ralegh Radford] be relieved of the difficulties of acting officially on behalf of the Committee for I cannot feel that he is able

146 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

The request was indeed turned down. BSR director Ralegh Radford communicated the decision to the British legation to the Holy See in January 1943. The BSR did not want to risk jeopardising “the quasi-diplomatic privileges” that it enjoyed at the time – the school was not to be endangered unduly; neither its property nor its reputation was to be put at unnecessary risk: After careful consideration we feel that the proposal that Count and Countess Sarsfield Salazar should reside at the School is not one to which the Committee could agree. In view of the fact that the Swiss legation, who are now custodians of the [BSR] buildings, do not display any enthusiasm for the project we fear that […] the Italian authorities might well accuse us of desiring to use the school buildings for our own purpose in time of war, and might cease to extend to the buildings the quasi-diplomatic privileges which they now enjoy. This would, we fear, lead to sequestration involving difficulties both during and after the war.46

The German archaeological institute in Rome continued to operate when most foreign schools in the city had been forced to close.47 In 1942, Siegfried Fuchs, second director of the institute and its leading NSDAP man, carried out excavations of a late antique villa at Galeata, near Forlì and Bologna, together with his colleague Friedrich Krischen. Fuchs certainly made no secret of his political allegiance.48 During the war, Fuchs’ and Krischen’s interests lay chiefly in exploring and projecting narratives of Germanic origins via the Lombards and the Ostrogoths onto the transition from the late antique to the early Mediaeval period in Italy: in their rare wartime archaeological enterprise, they interpreted the Galeata villa as a palace or hunting lodge erected by Theoderic the Great (493–526), in the early sixth century AD, thus confirming the “Germanic” presence in Italy almost

to see things in their proper perspective.” See also Hirst (?) to Shaw, 30 January 1943: “[Ralegh Radford] has been shown to be hopelessly wrong in his estimation of the power of Musso’s gang and yet he is asked to do [jobs] for the [Government] in which his opinions must be fairly useless.” BSR archives, box 63. 46 Ralegh Radford to D.G. Osborne, British legation to the Holy See, Vatican City, 6 January 1943. BSR archives, box 63. For British-Vatican relations, see for example Chadwick (1986). 47 Institutional DAIR correspondence during the Third Reich followed the Führerprincip of being forwarded to the Zentrale of the DAI in Berlin. Material covering the period 1944–1953 is therefore scarce in the DAIR archives overall. The archival material was made accessible to the author in 2008 at Via Sardegna, Rome, by dr Thomas Fröhlich. Cf. DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-I-Vierteljahresb. Varia. Vierteljahresberichte Rom 1927–1944”. Quarterly reports are missing for the following periods: 1930 (1/1–31/3), 1941 (1/7–30/9 and 1/10–31/12), all of 1942, 1943 (1/1–31/3, 1/4–30/6 and 1/7–30/9), 1944 (1/7–30/9). Cf. also documentation in appendix i. For aerial photographs from the Second World War (lists of photos and correspondence, 1945–1953), conserved at the Swedish Institute in Rome, thereafter in the EFR archives, see AN, 20170185/132. 48 For Fuchs, see Vigener (2010); and Eadem (2012b).

“Breaking Wide Open”: War 

 147

immediately after the fall of the Western Roman empire.49 This was in line with the instructions of focusing on frühgermanischen Hinterlassenschaft given to the different branches of the DAI in 1940 by its president Martin Schede.50 When the German archeological institute in Rome opened its annual lecture series in December 1942, the Swedish institute was one of few neighbouring scholarly institutions still in operation. At the Herrenessen-reception following the lecture, German-Italian cultural and personal relations were actively encouraged by the gathered congregation of German, Italian and Swedish scholars, going so far as to suggest that the German institute should re-establish itself on the symbolic location of the Capitoline hill, the centre of Rome and the caput mundi, after having been evicted from the Casa Tarpeia after the First World War.51 This notion never left that reception and met with the same fate as the affected notion of taking over the British school in the Valle Giulia. Following axis partner Italy’s failed attempt to conquer Greece in 1940, Germany invaded Yugoslavia and Greece in 1941, postponing the planned attack on Russia. The invasion of Greece, as Marcello Barbanera has observed, demonstrated that “philhellenic tradition and aesthetical education could be sacrificed for a professional opportunism”, with archaeologists attempting to profit as much as possible from the new situation.52 Greece was occupied and divided between 49 For the Galeata excavations, see for example Fanning (1981); Johnson (1988); Schulz (2004) 14–15; Fröhlich (2008); Whitling (2016a); and http://www.zavagli.it/missionibolognagale.htm (accessed 29 June 2010). For Nazi archaeology, see Arnold (1990); Eadem (1992); Junker (1998); Arnold (2002); Eadem (2004); Eadem (2006); and Whitling (2016a). Cf. Chapoutot (2016); and an unpublished manuscript by Franz-Xavier Zimmermann “Germanen in Italien”. The Austrian Historical Institute in Rome archives, box I, 58–63. 50 Martin Schede, 14 October 1940 (“Bericht über Besuch des Ministers Rust in Italien”): “Die Erforschung der frühgermanischen Hinterlassenschaft aus de Völkerwanderungszeit sei überhaupt die wichtigste Aufgabe der Altertumsforschung für Deutschland”. DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 38: “Korrespondenz 1939–1944”. Cf. “Denkschrift über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut von M. Schede”, 13 August 1945 (in appendix i: “den Denkmälern der Ostgoten und Langobarden”). Fuchs’ “ostgotischen und langobardischen Altertümer” were listed under “den Gebieten der Völkerwanderung”. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 51 Erik Sjöqvist to Axel Boëthius, 10 December 1942. Riksarkivet (RA), Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2. 52 Barbanera has also pointedly observed that “Fortunately for the classicists, in the postwar period one remembered their patient positivist work more than their racial enthusiasm.” Barbanera (1998) 149. When the Germans “marched through empty streets” in Athens on 27 April 1941, and the swastika was raised on the Acropolis – “the symbol of human culture,” as Hitler wrote to Mussolini – replacing the Greek flag that had wrapped the Greek Evzone guard refusing to replace it with the Nazi banner, allegedly leaping to his death. Quoted in Heuck Allen (2011) 58–59.

148 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

Germany, Italy and Bulgaria. Vichy France did not leave many noticeable marks on the French School in Athens, where the show went on until it was forced to slow down, after the German invasion in 1941. The “principal reforms of constitutional and political order” of the Vichy regime had been communicated to the EFA in August 1940.53 Director Robert Demangel however hoped that, “apart from the general heavy incertitude regarding things and men,” the school would be able to “resume its laborious road, at least following the rhythm imposed by the current situation in France.” His hopes for the immediate present were however compromised by the French Franc no longer being accepted in Greece and by the Greek war with Italy: “One should thus not be surprised that this report [omits] important archaeological discoveries and that it is presented in a different form.” The report showed, as Demangel put it, that “despite the grave difficulties,” the school had thus far “continued to live and work following its centennial tradition.”54 After the German invasion of Greece in April 1941, the French school operated a rotating schedule of round-the-clock surveillance. In May, with Athens under

53 Note from the French consulate in Athens “relative aux principales réformes d’ordre constitutionnel et politique auxquelles le Gouvernement français vient de procéder”, August 1940 (two copies). Cf. attached letter from the French consul in Greece to the director of the EFA, 20 August 1940. EFA archives, 1 ADM 6 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée secrétariat général (1937–1941)”. Vichy traces in the EFA archives include “PRIERES POUR LA FRANCE ET POUR LES SOLDATS TOMBES AU CHAMP D’HONNEUR 14 Juillet 1940”; statement (telegram) by Vichy foreign minister Paul Baudouin (October 1940); and the French minister in Athens (Maugras) to the French colony, 30 October 1940. EFA archives, 2 ADM 3: “Fonctionnement de l’École pendant les conflits mondiaux. Seconde guerre mondiale”. Cf. the French Consul at Saloniki (État Français) to Robert Demangel, 14 February 1942. EFA archives, 1 ADM 20 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée direction (1939–1960)”; Demangel to the “Ministre Secrétaire d’État à l’Éducation Nationale Direction de l’Enseignement Supérieur, 7 October 1942; Demangel to the “Chef du Gouvernement, Ministre Secrétaire d’État aux Affaires Etrangères […]”, 9 October 1942. EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936–1942)”; and letters from 9 October 1942 and 28 January 1943 concerning EFA budgets 1940–1943. EFA archives, 1 ADM 22 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1940–1965)”. 54 Demangel, annual report 1940: “l’incertitude générale pesant sur les choses et sur les hommes”, “reprendre sa vie laborieuse, du moins au rythme imposé par la situation actuelle de la France”, “On ne devra donc pas s’étonner que ce compte-rendu de l’activité de l’établissement en 1940 n’ait pas, comme les rapports sur les travaux de l’École des années précédentes, d’importantes découvertes archéologiques à signaler et qu’il soit présenté sous une forme différente”, “malgré les difficultés graves[, l’École] a continué en 1940 à vivre et à travailler dans le sens de sa tradition séculaire.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”.

“Breaking Wide Open”: War 

 149

German control, the French school was placed under German “protection”.55 This did not prevent members of the school from excavating that summer, at Gortys in Arcadia and at Delphi. The excavations continued in 1942.56 Responsibility for “French interests” in Greece, including for the French school, was vested in the Swiss legation in Athens during the years of occupation. Contacts with the Vichy regime became increasingly frail as the war proceeded.57 During the war, in 1943, ASCSA chairman Louis Lord disclosed his personal outspoken view of the current landscape of foreign schools in Greece: There are in Athens the following schools devoted to the training of archaeologists or to excavating archaeological sites: The Swedish School – not very important[.] The Italian and German Schools[.] The French, British and American Schools[.] At the close of the War, the Swedish School will resume its ordinary activities. The French and British Schools will also try to do this, but both of them will probably be very seriously hampered for lack of funds. 55 Notice, Demangel, 15 April 1941: “un service de jour sera établi […] de quatorze heures à quatorze heures”; and “(COPIE) Sonderkommando Auswaertiges Amt. Das Gebaeude des Franzoesischen archaeologischen Instituts steht unter dem Sch[ü]tze des Auswaertigen Amts. Athen am 12 Mai 1941”. EFA archives, 1 ADM 6 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée secrétariat général (1937–1941)”. Cf. Demangel to the French minister in Greece, 17 June 1941. EFA archives, 1 ADM 4 (prov. number): “Courrier départ secrétariat général (1938–1941)”. Cf. also Demangel to the chargé d’affaires, 2 November 1942 (regarding “la réquisition par les troupes italiennes de la maison de l’École Française à Delphes”); and Robert Demangel to the French Chargé d’Affaires in Greece, 30 November 1942. EFA archives, 1 ADM 6 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée secrétariat général (1937–1941)”. Cf. also, for example, Petrakos (1994); and Flouda (2017). 56 Demangel to “K. Christopoulos, Gymnasiarque de Mégalopolis, Epimélète Extraordinaire des Antiquités”, 3 July 1941. EFA archives, 1 ADM 4 (prov. number): “Courrier départ secrétariat général (1938–1941)”. Cf. Demangel to the “Ministre de l’Éducation et des Cultes, Direction du Service des Antiquités”, 2 September 1942; and Demangel to the “Ministre Secrétaire d’État à l’Éducation Nationale et à la Jeunesse Direction de l’Enseignement Supérieur”, 28 August 1942: “les fouilles archéologiques […] à Delphes en Juillet et à Gortys (Arcadie) en Juillet–Août 1942, ont donné des résultats très satisfaisants.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 6 (prov. number): “Courrier arrivée secrétariat général (1937–1941)”. Cf. Valenti, “École française d’Athènes (1846–1981)”, 340–342 (“Guerre mondiale et archéologie”). For the EFA during the Second World War, see also Roland-Martin (1996). 57 Demangel to the “Ministre Secrétaire d’État à l’Éducation Nationale Direction de l’Enseignement supérieur – 3e Bureau”, 30 May 1944. Cf. Demangel to the “Chef du Gouvernement, Ministre Secrétaire d’État aux Affaires Étrangères […]”, 30 May 1944; as well as Demangel to the “Chef de la Section des Intérêts étrangers en Grèce, s.c. de M. le Chargé d’Affaires de Suisse à Athènes”, 25 October 1943; and Demangel to the “Ministre Secrétaire d’État à l’Éducation Nationale […]”, 20 June 1943. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Cf. also John L. Myres to Edith Clay, 29 (?) April 1945: “the French School, which remained in Greece throughout”. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued.

150 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

The German and Italian Schools will probably not be able to do any work for a good many years. Both of these Schools are devoted not so much to training students (as our School is) as they are to conducting excavations. It will be probably a good many years before any German will be able to excavate on Greek soil. The feeling against the Italians is, I gather, not so strong. The Italian School is not very important. They own no real property, I believe, and have only a limited library. The German School, on the other hand, has a building of considerable importance located on one of the downtown streets near the business district.58

The Swedish “school” referred to here did not exist in institutionalised form until 1948, although it in a way existed in practice (Swedish excavations had been carried out in Greece for decades without a formal school setup, see below). Chairman Lord went on to express an interest in taking over the premises of the German Archaeological Institute in Athens. Both the American school and the German institute were involved in intelligence work for their respective governments during the war.59 In 1943, Lord declared that the German institute has the best arch[a]eological library in Athens and has an unrivalled collection of photographs of Greek sites and works of Greek art. It seems probable that the property of this School will be forfeited as part of the reparations. At least the Germans will not be able to make use of it for a good many years. My suggestion is that measures be taken to turn over to the American School of Classical Studies at Athens the library and the photographs and other scientific property of this institution. They could be inventoried and held in trust by our School, or if they are confiscated, they would nowhere be so useful as in our possession.60

Lord felt that the American school was “in a position financially to care for the [German] collections”: “With the addition of the German library and the

58 Louis E. Lord to Arthur V. Davis (New York City), 17 February 1943. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 5. 59 According to Susan Heuck Allen, Rodney Young (1907–1974), member of the ASCSA, was offered three buildings for the ASCSA during the war, among which were the DAIA and the residence of the director of the Italian School. Heuck Allen (2011) 226. Little can be said with any certainty regarding possible similar intelligence work at the foreign schools in Rome during the war; as for the Athenian schools, the BSA was put to similar use to some extent. See Clogg (2000), 19–35; and Idem (2012). 60 Louis E. Lord to Arthur V. Davis (New York City), 17 February 1943. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 5. Cf. a similar vindictive moment in Rome vis-à-vis the Bibliotheca Hertziana, which “would solve the problem of the expansion of the [American] Academy’s library in the direction of the history of art”. Charles Rufus Morey to Allan Chester Johnson, 6 March 1944. Cf. Johnson to the Joint Committee on Classical and Mediaeval Studies of the American Academy in Rome, 24 October 1944. American School of Classical Studies in Rome (1943–1944); Box 1, Dept. of Art and Archaeology Records; Princeton University archives, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton University Library.

Evacuation and Liberation 

 151

photographs belonging to the German School, the American School would become the center for all arch[a]eological work in Greece. We should then have the equipment which would enable any archaeologist to find in our resources all of the material he would need for any archaeological [undertaking] anywhere in Greece.”61 Lord made this, to us eyebrow-raising, statement in reply to a request by industrialist and philanthropist Arthur Vining Davis, the wealthy chairman of the board of the Aluminium Company of America, regarding what the properties of the two schools (American and German) are, what buildings they have, and particularly of course what the German school has which the American school would like to get. I think it would be well to show that if the American school could get possession of the library and collections of the German school then there would be centered in the American school practically all the material of that character which is now or ever likely to be in Athens or in Greece.62

These discussions remained as such. This was not the case for the Germans in Italy, however, where transfers of library holdings were indeed put into practice, from Rome and Florence to German-controlled Austria, in early 1944.

Evacuation and Liberation During the German occupation of Rome in 1943–1944, plans were made to evacuate the German archaeological institute in Rome and its library from Italy, violating the earlier Italo-German concordat (1938).63 These plans were put into practice in January and February 1944, despite being challenged by baron Ernst von Weiszäcker, German ambassador to the Holy See.64 The Vatican embassy also took care of what remained of the DAIR in Rome. The library holdings were however sent to salt mines in Austria for the duration of the war.65 An illuminating source

61 Lord to Davis, 17 February 1943. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 5. 62 Davis to Lord, n.d. (1943?). ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 5. 63 For the DAIR during and after the Second World War, cf. Junker (1997); Manderscheid (2003); Fröhlich (2007); Matheus (2013); and Whitling (2016a). 64 It is unclear at present what material might exist in the Vatican archives regarding von Weiszäcker. Cf. for example Hill (1967); and Chadwick (1977). Cf. Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann to Erland and Ragnhild Billig, 15 September 1946: ”Indessen ist Weizsäcker und Stab repatriiert, ersterer im Wagen durch Frankreich in Schwaben in seinem Anwesen glücklich angelangt.” RA, Svenska Institutet, Lektoratsarkivet i Florens (och Rom) 1946–1949, Lektor Erland Billigs brev och handlingar, volym 4, mapp 1: ”Erland Billigs Lektorsarkiv Ink. Skrivelser 1946”. 65 DAIR, file “Vierteljahresberichte Rom 1927–1944”, “Vierteljahresbericht des archäologischen Instituts des Deutschen Reiches Zweigstelle Rom 1. Januar–31. März 1944.” Real obstacles were not

152 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

regarding the events can be found in the (draft) memorandum “Pro Memoria recording the events preceding the transportation of the German scientific libraries from Rome to Germany – Confidential”, written by Swedish institute director Erik Sjöqvist sometime between June 1944 and May 1945, possibly in October 1944.66 Historian Arnold Esch refers to a “confidential report” by Sjöqvist, mentioned by art historian and cultural attaché Charles Rufus Morey in a memorandum to the US ambassador in Rome, 3 May 1945 (from the US Office of War Information), as well as a separate memorandum by Sjöqvist, possibly dated 25 October 1944 (mentioned in a list of “relevant writings” from 20 September 1945). It is possible that the pro-memoria above and this hitherto elusive 1944 memorandum are the same. Esch quotes a memorandum by Morey from 1945: “One reason why Director Sjöqvist’s report is confidential is the possibility that the Germans might destroy the libraries if it became known that the people here are taking an interest in them!”67 “Every forward-looking activity was construed as sabotage”, wrote archaeologist Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann, looking back in November 1945 on the evacuation of the DAIR almost two years earlier. The Vatican had declared itself willing to take on the German institutes, and “as Vatican statements were binding, the German angle was to be prepared to leave the institutes in case of an Allied invasion of Rome. Now began the fight against a whole gang opposed to this project however, supported by the in party circles wholly suspicious ambassador von Weiszäcker.”68 This image corresponds with Erik Sjöqvist’s on the whole positive opinion of the German ambassador. reported on until 1945. Cf. DAIR, file “Vierteljahresberichte Rom 1927–1944”, “Vierteljahresbericht über die Tätigkeit der Zweigstelle Rom im IV. Viertel des Jahres 1944/45”; and DAIR, file “Vierteljahresberichte Rom 1927–1944”, “Jahresbericht der Zweigstelle Rom 1944/45”: “Zu Beginn des Jahres war das Eigentum der Zweigstelle gerade aus Rom in Deutschland eingetroffen und in rund 1400 Kisten vorläufig im Salzmagazin am Bahnhof von Bad Aussee eingelagert worden.” Cf. also Whitling (2016a). 66 “Pro Memoria recording the events preceding the transportation of the German scientific libraries from Rome to Germany – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (25 October 1944?). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5 (referred to here as “Pro Memoria – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (25 October 1944?). 67 Quoted in Esch (2007), 75. 68 “Excerpts of the letter of Dr. F.W. Deichmann […] written November 11th 1945”: “jede vorausschauende Tätigkeit wurde als Sabotage aufgefasst”, “Da die Aussagen des Vatikans bindende geworden waren, war man von deutscher Seite bereit, uns auch im Falle einer allierten Besetzung Roms bei den Instituten zu belassen. Nun begann aber der Kampf einer ganzen Meute gegen dieses Projekt, das wesentlich durch den in Parteikreisen höchst verdächtigen Botschafter von Weiszäcker gestützt worden war.” RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. Cf. Bittel, Deichmann, Grünhagen, Kaiser, Kraus and Kyrieleis (1979) 9.

Evacuation and Liberation 

 153

The DAIR was, almost literally, in two minds regarding what was to be done about the imminent withdrawal and evacuation from Rome (the Räumung Roms). The NSDAP party contingent of the DAIR, led by second director Siegfried Fuchs, argued that the library needed to be evacuated immediately, thus saving it from the “ungrateful Italians”.69 The official policy of the institute, shared by director Armin von Gerkan and by the institute librarian, Jan Crous, was that the institute and its library should remain in operation as long as possible (in other words as long as German forces controlled Rome). This policy was supported by the Vatican, although the position of the Vatican in connection with the four German libraries from Italy in early 1944 remains murky at best, due the inaccessibility of relevant archival material. It seems that the Vatican had tried to prevent to the removal of the German libraries when they left Rome in 1944. The Vatican furthermore seems to have contributed to working for a restitution of the libraries to Italy after the war. Few, if any, German sources offer any details.70 The matter was supposedly settled by a direct overriding order by Hitler (Führerbefehl) on 9 December 1943: all German research institutes in Italy were to be closed and their contents to be transported to German territory. The painful task of organising this was given to Leo Bruhns, director of the Bibliotheca Hertziana (art history, Rome).71 The three German libraries in Rome were sent 69 Fuchs and his group were supported by Werner Hoppenstedt (1883–1971), vice director of the Bibliotheca Hertziana. The NSDAP contingent “were decidedly hostile to Messrs Deichmann and Crous and hardly tolerated their director, von Gerkan.” “Pro Memoria – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (25 October 1944?). Cf. Siegfried Fuchs to Reichsminister Dr. H.W. Frey at the German Ministry of Education, 28 November 1943. BA, R/4901/14064. Cf. “Die Akte R 4901/15 177 [DAI, Bestand im Bundesarchiv Berlin-Lichterfelde]” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. See also Fröhlich (2007); Idem (2008); and DAIR, “Jahresbericht der Zweigstelle Rom 1944/45”. DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-IBerichte Rom. Jahresberichte 1887/88–1944/45”. For the perceived importance of Frey, cf. General G.R. Upjohn to Secretary of State Carlo Ragghianti, 19 July 1945: “What, if any, changes of status [of the four German libraries] were negotiated by Ministerial-Counsellor Frey in, or about, 1940?” RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. 70 This according to Erland Billig; cf. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 250–252 & 254–256. For German-Vatican relations during the period in question, cf. Kent (1964); Stehlin (1984); Rémond, (1987); and Stehlin (2009). 71 Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann to Erland Billig, 4 July 1990: “In der Quirinalbotschaft bestätigt Dr. Haas (an Stelle des erkrankten Konsuls Möllhausen) das Vorliegen des Führerbefehls und versprach eine schriftliche Anweisung zu senden.” Erland Billig’s papers (Lena Billig, Stockholm). Cf. DAIR, “Jahresbericht” 1943: “die Sicherstellung der deutschen Institute durch den Führer anbefohlen wurde”. DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-I-Berichte Rom. Jahresberichte 1887/88–1944/45”. Cf. also “Vierteljahresbericht des archäologischen Instituts des Deutschen Reiches Zweigstelle Rom 1. Oktober–31. Dezember 1943”: “Am 9. Dezember übermittelte Prof. Bruhns als Beauftragter des Botschafters Dr. Rahn den Befehl des Führers zum Abtransport des

154 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

North by rail in February 1944. The exact date of their departure has been debated. In a damaged, animated account written just after the evacuation of the German libraries from Italy (fig. 31), Leo Bruhns related that the transport occurred in instalments between 5 January and 5 February 1944.72 Erik Sjöqvist gave a no less vivid account of the events surrounding the departure of the DAIR library in early 1944:73 The packing [of the library] was going on when on the 22nd of January the Anzio landing took place. Everybody concerned believed now that the evacuation was rendered impossible, and that the final result would be that the remaining library should be deposited in the Vatican partly packed as it was in its cases. […] again the same phenomenon was repeated as that noticed after the Salerno landing. When it got clear [sic] that the liberation of Rome was not immediately impending, the momentary panic of the Germans vanished, and was replaced by a doubled energy [sic]. At the beginning of February the two first railway trucks loaded with book cases and hooked on a soldiers’ leave train were sent northwards towards Brenner. At Terni the train was bombarded when on the bridge; the bridge was hit and some of the carriages plunged into the river. A part of the train including the two trucks with the book-cases were saved and parked close to the burning railway station. Miraculously enough they remained intact and could be sent on after some days delay. […] Some week[s] later two further carriages were sent in the same way, in spite of Prof. Bruhn[s’] attempt to arrange a lorry convoy which would have been able to travel on side roads at night and this run less risks. However, the second couple of carriages came through without any incident, and on February 21st the rest of the library forming a special train was sent off along the [coastline].74

Institutes […] Vom 13.12. ab wurden die Vorbereitungen für den Abtransport getroffen.” DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-I-Vierteljahresb. Varia. Vierteljahresberichte Rom 1927–1944”. See also Fröhlich (2007) 153–156. For the Bibliotheca Hertziana, see for example Thoenes (1991); and Rischbieter (2004). 72 Leo Bruhns, “Bericht über den Abtransport der deutschen wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken aus Rom nach Deutschland im Dezember 1943–März 1944” (Merano), 11 February 1944. The report contains a number of details, for example of attacks, attested also by Sjöqvist. The last (?) transport took place on 5 February. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4. 1936–31.3.1948”. Cf. also “Denkschrift über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut von M. Schede”, 13 August 1945 (in appendix i). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 73 Erland Billig maintained that the libraries had left Rome by 20 February 1944. Billig (1990) 222. The transport took place between late December 1943/early January and 21 February 1944. See “Pro Memoria – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (25 October 1944?). RA. Cf. Billig, Nylander and Vian (1996) 6–8; and Whitling (2008) 203–204. 74 “Pro Memoria – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (25 October 1944?). RA. Cf. DAIR, “Jahresbericht” 1943. DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-I-Berichte Rom. Jahresberichte 1887/88–1944/45”; and “Vierteljahresbericht des archäologischen Instituts des Deutschen Reiches Zweigstelle Rom 1. Januar–31. März 1944”: “Der letzte Transport verliess das Institut am 21.2., und obwohl fast alle Transporte Angriffen ausgesetzt waren, ist das Material

Evacuation and Liberation 

 155

Fig. 31: Leo Bruhns, “Bericht über den Abtransport der deutschen wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken aus Rom nach Deutschland im Dezember 1943–März 1944”, 11 February 1944 (detail, with possible gun shot damage). DAI archives, file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4. 1936–31.3.1948”.

Plans had been made in order to secure the assets of the DAIR in the event of this “Räumung Roms”. The institute had contacted “neutral and Vatican locations” for this purpose. The neutral location was the Swedish institute.75 DAIR wohlbehalten in Bad Aussee eingetroffen”. DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-IVierteljahresb. Varia. Vierteljahresberichte Rom 1927–1944”. Cf. Jan W. Crous to Ludwig Curtius (Krefeld), 15 May 1944, “Bericht über Bemühungen in Aussee”. DAI archives, ADZ, “Nachlaß Ludwig Curtius”. 75 DAIR, “Jahresbericht” 1943: “Eigentum der Zweigstelle für den fall einer Räumung Roms mit Hilfe von neutralen und vatikanischen Stellen möglichst zu sichern, da unter den obwaltenden

156 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

director von Gerkan had organised the deposit of the invaluable library catalogue in the Swedish “protected neutral oasis”.76 Although the possibility of depositing the libraries in the care of the Vatican was discussed, but not realised, the neutral status of the Swedish institute was put to practical use: Sjöqvist offered its premises as a safe haven for the precious German library catalogues.77 This had been organised as a precaution before Rome came under German control in September 1943. The deposit was undercover; it was not hinted at in the DAIR annual or quarterly reports. It is noteworthy that the library catalogues were not missed in the autumn of 1943 as well as when the library was being packed for transportation. Sjöqvist believed that leaving out the library catalogues from the packing and the transport “was not part of the official plan but was a deliberate oversight on the part of the librarian, Crous. For obvious reasons its existence must therefore be treated as a highly confidential matter to avoid any possibility of reprisals.”78 Jan Crous was drafted in the German army in December 1944 and was killed shortly thereafter.79 Sjöqvist clearly wanted to avoid any risk of possible reprisals, as he was probably taking more of a personal risk than compromising or endangering the Swedish institute itself. He was partly doing von Gerkan a personal favour, although he also wanted to do all he could to keep the German archaeological library, the greatest and most extensive of its kind, in Rome. Keeping the library catalogue in Rome would at least increase the odds for its return, as well as severely complicating any permanent organisation of the library in Germany. The German art historical Bibliotheca Hertziana also made a similar deposit at the Swedish institute.80 Following a request from von Gerkan, the Swedish institute Umständen an einen Abtransport mit eigenen Mitteln nicht gedacht werden konnte.” DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-I-Berichte Rom. Jahresberichte 1887/88–1944/45”. 76 Dyson (2006) 211–212. Cf. also Rietbergen (2012) 227: “the institute of neutral, unblemished Sweden”. 77 Cf. Billig, Nylander and Vian (1996) 5–6; and Armin von Gerkan to Erik Sjöqvist, 17 August 1943. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. 78 “Pro Memoria – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (25 October 1944?, appendix vi). RA. 79 Cf. DAIR, “Zweigstelle Rom Tätigkeitsbericht im III. Viertel des Haushaltjahres 1944 1. Oktober – 31. Dezember 1944”. DAIR archives, DAI, Abtlg. Rom, Archiv: “A-I-Vierteljahresb. Varia. Vierteljahresberichte Rom 1927–1944”. 80 Receipt for material from the Bibliotheca Hertziana deposited at the SIR, 28 September 1943: “Material, das dem Schwedischen Institut in Rom, Via Omero 14 von dem Kaiser-Wilhelm-Institut für Kunstgeschichte in Rom Via Gregoriana 28 zu treuen Händen übergeben worden ist.” RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. Cf. “Pro Memoria – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (25  October 1944?, appendix vi). RA: “Sept. 28th [1943] the librarian of the Bibliotheca Her[t] ziana, Dr. L. [Schudt], asked me to house the most valuable catalogues of his library too, at the Swedish Institute. They were brought over the same day.”

Evacuation and Liberation 

 157

was promoted as a “clearing-station” for German exchanges with British and French libraries.81 The Swedes in fact took on the role as “clearing station” also in Athens, before a Swedish institute had been established there.82 Sjöqvist himself used the term “moral courage” (“civilkurage”) in commenting on DAIR director Armin von Gerkan’s protection of “non-Aryans” during the war – exactly what he meant by that in this context is admittedly difficult to assert – as well as von Gerkan’s attempt to “sabotage the transfer of the library”.83 It was arguably the same kind of “moral courage” with which Sjöqvist described von Gerkan that Sjöqvist himself displayed during the final two years of the war. An expression of such “moral courage” on Sjöqvist’s part was his protection of the DAIR library as a neutral representative when the (American) Allied army allegedly briefly entertained plans to evacuate the DAIR and to transport it to the United States. DAIR associate Ernst Homann-Wedeking had asked Sjöqvist if he could step in and protect the institution.84 The need for Jewish asylums increased rapidly during the Gestapo and SS-Winter of 1943–1944, an as yet contested period in terms of Vatican protection of Jewish citizens due to as yet inaccessible archival material from Pius XII’s

81 SIR annual report 1939–1940, 8. In 1940, Einar Gjerstad had been approached by the DAIR regarding the SIR acting as an intermediary “clearing-station” for the possible continued publication of the DAI Römische Mitteilungen. The French Institute in Cairo, as well as the BSR, had declined the offer. Cf. Gjerstad to Jérôme Carcopino, 14 May 1940. SIR, Billig box 1. 82 Edith Clay to “The Keeper of the Swedish Cyprus Collection […]” (Alfred Westholm), 12 March 1940. Cf. Clay to Einar Gjerstad, 16 March 1940. Could director Young “arrange for a similar exchange through a neutral Institute correspondingly in Athens”? Clay to Young, 12 March 1940. BSA archives, “Carbon Copies of Secretary’s Letters 1940” (folder), BSA Corporate Records-Londonsteel case #2-Box#3.9-uncatalogued; as well as Thomas Dunbabin to Edith Clay (?), 10 January 1939; Dunbabin to Clay, 21 January 1939; Dunbabin to Clay, 22 February 1939; and Dunbabin to Clay, 28 February 1939. BSA archives, “B.S.A. 1939”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.8-uncatalogued. Cf. also John L. Myres to Young, 3 April 1940. BSA archives, “Correspondence J.L.M. (Chairman) & G.M.Y. (Director) 1938–41” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 83 Erik Sjöqvist to Axel Boëthius, 28 February 1946. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2. See also “Pro Memoria – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (25 October 1944?, appendix vi). RA. 84 There is no other evidence for such (American) evacuation plans, and it is unclear when this would have taken place; presumably in conjunction with the liberation of Rome in June 1944 – although the library had then already been evacuated to German territory. The incident is related by professor William Childs (Princeton University), who heard it from Sjöqvist in the autumn of 1968: “Sjöqvist may have embroidered it and I probably recall it erroneously.” Interview with William Childs, Nicosia, Cyprus, 3 July 2010. It is feasible that further details regarding plans and activities concerning the AAR and the ASCSA before, during and after the Second World War may be preserved in the National Archives at College Park, Maryland.

158 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

papacy (1939–1958).85 The Swedish Institute in Rome was spacious and relatively well protected. Its director, Erik Sjöqvist, recognised the risk involved in hiding individuals and was reluctant to jeopardise the institute. He however made at least one exception on humanitarian grounds: the Jewish-Italian epigraphy scholar Mario Segre, who was associated with the Italian School of Archaeology in Athens and had been given the task of editing the numerous Greek inscriptions of the Rhodian archipelago by the governor of the islands in 1937.86 Segre, attempting to assemble the necessary qualifications for teaching in an American university,87 arrived in Rome from Greece with his wife and their threeyear-old son in October 1943. After the first Nazi raid of Jewish deportations from Rome in October 1943, Segre escaped together with his wife and son. Sjöqvist offered the Segre family to stay at the Swedish institute.88 On Maundy Thursday 1944, Segre went with his family through the city to pick up some belongings in his old apartment in the Prati region of the city. Segre was recognised and was taken to the nearest police station from which he was handed over to the SS.89 It seems that Pope Pius XII granted Sjöqvist an audience, but did not personally intervene in the matter.90 Ernst von Weizsäcker, who had been of assistance to Sjöqvist on previous occasions, was powerless, as the Segre family was already in the hands of the SS. It is likely that von Weizsäcker however did intervene in order to spare the Swedish institute any further unpleasantness as a consequence of the sad Segre affair. About a month later, the Segre family was deported to the Auschwitz-Birkenau 85 For an assessment of the German occupation of Rome, see for example Ellwood (1985); or, from a different perspective, Barzini (1972) 95–96. 86 Segre’s work was hindered by the introduction of the Italian race laws; the situation was worsened further by the advent of the “repubblichetta di Salò” (1943). Cf. two letters from Mario Segre to SAIA director Alessandro Della Seta (Segre to Della Seta, 3 October and 26 October 1935), as well as one telegram (a reply from Della Seta, 12 October 1935). SAIA archives, 1935: “Allievi”. 87 Barbanera (1998) 151. 88 For Segre, see for example Pugliese Carratelli (2005); and Berlinzani (2005). Cf. Giovanni Pugliese Carratelli to Alessandro Della Seta, 3 June 1937. SAIA archives, 1937: “Direzione (Dir.)”. Cf. also Di Vita (1996). 89 See for example Pugliese Carratelli (2005) 1. Cf. interview with Erik Sjöqvist in Svenska Dagbladet, 6 September 1945. The details regarding the discovery and capture of the Segre family differ slightly in different accounts. 90 Erik Sjöqvist also maintained relations with the Vatican and with the archivio segreto during the war, above all through Monsignore Angelo Mercati (1870–1955). Cf. Erik Sjöqvist to Ludvig Magnus Bååth, 29 September 1941. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2; Bååth to Sjöqvist, 6 February 1943; and Sjöqvist to Bååth, 7 May 1943. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2. Cf. also correspondence between Bååth and Boëthius regarding the “Diplomatarium Suecanum, 1945, in RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III.B.1; and Bååth (1956).

Evacuation and Liberation 

 159

concentration camp, where they all perished in the horrors there in the beginning of May 1944, “a tragic and absurd death”.91 To the Swedish classical philologist and diplomat Sture Linnér, both Erik Sjöqvist and Axel Boëthius exemplified a degree of moral courage (civilkurage) – in Sjöqvist’s case in terms of the risk, courage and integrity involved in hiding Jewish refugees at the Swedish institute.92 The German institutes in Rome remained in operation until early 1944. The Swedish institute, due to political neutrality, remained open throughout.93 The American school premises in Athens were closed from 1941 until 1945, as in the case of the École française in the care of the Swiss legation, but also of the Swiss and Swedish Red Cross; in “saving the Greeks from starvation” during the war, the Red Cross participated in “the largest rescue effort ever carried out by the organisation” (the street where the American and British schools in Athens are located was accordingly renamed “Sweden street”, Odos Souidias, after the war).94 In April–July 1943, the British school had been placed in the care of its American neighbours through the American legation.95 The premises were

91 Berlinzani (2005) 4. The manuscripts of Segre’s work on the inscriptions on the island of Cos were later discovered at the Swedish institute by Doro Levi, and eventually published (1993). Cf. Barbanera (1998) 150–152; and typewritten list of “Libri del compianto Prof. M. Segre depositati all’Istituto Svedese” (64 titles, along with 11 boxes of plates (photographs) and two “packages”), with a stamp and signature from the Istituto Italiano per la Storia Antica. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 49 & 332. 92 Interview with Sture Linnér, Stockholm, April 2009. In the words of Carl Nylander (director of the Swedish institute 1979–1997), “Erik and Gurli Sjöqvist elevated the activities [of the SIR] from mere humanistic scientificity to true and profound humanism and offered refuge to several persecuted individual with threats to their lives […] and contributed to compassion and international understanding in an evil time. This was and remained the ‘finest hour’ of the Swedish Institute.” Author’s translation, from Nylander (1984) 14. Gurli (Gulli) Sjöqvist (1896–1984), née Wallbom, was an employee of the Swedish legation in Rome, and married Erik Sjöqvist in 1941. 93 Cf., for example, Axel Boëthius to Alfred Westholm, 11 May 1944. Medelhavsmuseets arkiv, Stockholm, E I: 1: “Cypernsamlingarna Korrespondens B 1934–1954” (excerpt, author’s translation): “Given the circumstances, it is magnificent of Sjöqvist to keep it all going and to let our institute become the central for all ongoing research in Rome.” 94 Wells and Penttinen (2005) 17. For the Swedish Red Cross, see Mauzy (2008); Walldén (2016); and Idem (2017). The ASCSA reopened in 1945 (with staff); “officially” in 1946. For the ASCSA during the war years, see for example Gorham Phillips Stevens’ and Arthur W. Parson’s monthly reports for 1940–1941. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 1; as well as minutes of the managing committee, 1941–1942 (box 310/5, folder 3), and 1942–1943 (box 310/5, folder 5). See also minutes of “informal” and “special” meetings during the war ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 2. Cf. also ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 804/2, folder 1. 95 ASCSA caretaker Adossides (“the School’s business liaison”) to Arthur W. Parsons, 28 July 1943. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/5, folder 1. Cf. Myres to Clay, 15 January 1943. BSA archives, “Chairman’s Letters to Secretary 1940–43” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case

160 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

occupied by the Swedish Red Cross in 1944.96 The Swiss legation was similarly involved in the care of the property of the Italian school (which remained closed between 1943 and 1949).97 Throughout the war, BSA chairman John Myres communicated frequently with Edith Clay, the school secretary. Writing on the theme of a (British) “Joint Archaeological Committee” (1943), Myres felt that “the whole situation will be cleared when German archaeologists are put under control: they have been the most importunate, and the most dishonest, and are responsible for much of the trouble with the smaller countries. The French also have a good deal to explain.”98 In 1944, Myres addressed the situation of the British schools in Athens and in Rome: Without either building or students, I do not feel that there is much need to attempt to “reopen” the School: certainly not till next autumn. I see no reason why the two Schools [in Athens and Rome] should not make joint representations to the Government as to their financial needs. It is very good news that Athens is released, and apparently without serious damage: and that the Roman School is unharmed.99

BSA director Gerard Mackworth Young spent a few days in Athens on his way back from India the following spring. He asserted that the British embassy had “resumed occupation of the School premises (which had escaped war-damage)” after the liberation of Athens and mainland Greece in October 1944.100 The German army retreated as the Red army advanced. Athens had temporarily become an

#2-Box #3.9-uncatalogued; Myres to Clay, 9 January 1945 “paying off our debt to the American School”; and Myres to Clay, 27 March 1945. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. Cf. also BSA treasurer (V.W.  Yorke) to Clay 25 May 1943; and 16 February 1944. BSA archives, Letters from Director to Secretary 1940, Letters from Chairman to Secretary 1940–43, Letters from Treasurer to Secretary 1940–44, Carbon Copies of Secretary’s Letters 1940”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.9-uncatalogued. For Adossides, cf. Heuck Allen (2011) 16–17. 96 Cf. Myres to Clay, 25 October 1944. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate RecordsLondon-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. 97 Material from the war years is scarse in the SAIA archival material. Cf. for example SAIA archives, 1939–1941: “Conti Scuola 1939–1940–41, Direttore Allievi Parlanti”. 98 Myres to Clay, 6 February 1943. BSA archives, “Chairman’s Letters to Secretary 1940–43” (envelope), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.9-uncatalogued. 99 Myres to Clay, 15 (?) October 1944. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate RecordsLondon-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. 100 BSA, Report for the Session 1944–45, 1. Cf. Myres to Clay, 25 October 1944. BSA archives, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued.

Evacuation and Liberation 

 161

“open city” and a “city state” in a near-ancient sense in terms of administration, while communist groups had declared the “Sowjetrepublik Morea” in the Peloponnese, as reported by the archaeologist Roland Hampe, who also reported that money that had previously lasted a month now only lasted a day, and that an Italian guard had been quartered in the German institute premises (which had also functioned as a spying central during the Nazi occupation). Together with his colleague Ulf Jantzen, Hampe administered the DAIA and handed it over to the Greek authorities. The two archaeologists left Athens on 13 October, following in the footsteps of the German army, “armed to the teeth with machine guns, hand grenades and pistols”. During demonstrations the next day, “wild women” spat on their car as they ventured north to former Yugoslavia.101 Rome, a perhaps more renowned “open city” (città aperta) during the German occupation (1943–1944) than Athens, was liberated by the Allied army in June 1944. Allied forces soon challenged the German occupation of Rome: in early 1944 they were only months away from reaching the city. The Allied army attempted to break the deadlock at Montecassino, halfway between Rome and Naples, by landing troops behind German lines at Anzio in January 1944. The distance from the frontline to Rome was less than 30 kilometres. After months of slow and painstaking advance northwards, the Allied army entered Rome on 4 June 1944.102 Early in the morning of 5 June 1944, the day after the liberation of Rome, a detachment from an American artillery regiment placed their guns on a lawn in the northern part of the Villa Borghese park, approximately 100 metres to the east of the institutes on Via Omero. The Americans fired, aiming for the retreating German troops moving northwards along Via Flaminia; the enemy did not retaliate. Swedish institute director Erik Sjöqvist intervened: he had observed some German soldiers hiding on as yet unoccupied land directly to the west of the Swedish institute (on the future site of the Danish Academy in Rome). According to eyewitness Erland Billig, Sjöqvist approached the German troops and talked

101 Roland Hampe to Martin Schede, 30 December 1944: “der Erklärung Athen Unbefestigter Stadt”, “Mit Jantzen, der zu meinem Nachkommando gehörte, habe ich am […] Tage vorm Abrücken der deutschen Truppen von Athen, das Institut den Griechen übergeben. […] ebenfalls mit Mpi, Handgranaten und Pistolen bis an die Zähne bewaffnet”, “wildgewordenen Weibern”. Cf. Schede to Hampe, 15 January 1945 (on Hampe’s “ausführlicher und so inhaltsreicher Bericht über die Räumung von Athen”). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–40: “Athen Allgemeines 1.4.1936–31.3.1945 1.8.1948–31.12.1950”. Cf. also Hampe (1955); Mazower (1993); and Heuck Allen (2011) 18. 102 For the capture of Rome and the Allied liberation of Italy, see for example Hughes (2011) 520–524.

162 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

them into giving themselves up. Sjöqvist then led the six soldiers down Via Omero to the American battery where he handed them over to an officer.103 The American headquarters were set up without fracas on 5 June 1944 in Via Veneto, on the site of the present American embassy. The Allied civil administration of the city was organised through the Allied Control Commission, ACC. This is not the place for a comprehensive account of the administrative situation in Rome and the Allied government of the city. The structures and confinements within which the individuals discussed here operated might provide an attractive avenue for further research. Suffice to say that the Italian bank system ceased to be operational after the German retreat; US dollars and Swiss francs functioned as valid currencies and the Italian lira collapsed, with exploitation on the black market as a result. The postal system (the post was administered via Casablanca) was not up and running until Christmas 1944. The situation worsened due to combined inflation and deflation as the Allied military personnel in Rome were pushing the consumer prices up, at the same time as the large influx of US dollars exhausted the limited market with a devaluation of the dollar rate as a result.104 The foreign schools in Rome were placed under a division of the ACC, the “Subcommission for Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives”, or MFAA Subcommission. Referred to here as the Subcommission, this was in effect largely controlled by two scholars: Ernest Theodore DeWald, professor of art history at Princeton University, and archaeologist John Bryan Ward-Perkins, post-war director of the British School at Rome. DeWald had served as lieutenant in the First World War and as assistant military attaché in Bern 1916–1919. In the following world war, with the rank of Major, DeWald was head of the Subcommission in 103 Sjöqvist himself believed that he might personally have been involved in the capture of possibly “the last German patrol in Rome” (one can only speculate why this was emphasised in an annual report to the board of the SIR). The intervention had occurred “close to the Belgian academy” on Via Omero. SIR annual report 1943–1944, 2. Erland Billig also mentioned that a group of residents at the Swedish institute went outside an hour or two after Sjöqvist’s return to observe some “real fighting”. The Swedes brought back some shell cases as souvenirs, which were used as umbrella stands at the institute for a while, as “the only traces of ‘the shooting war’ at the institute”. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 194. 104 The inflation in practical terms had to be met in terms of an increase in the scholarships offered by the Swedish institute. Cf. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 198; and SIR board meeting minutes, 20 March 1946, appendix 5. Cf., for example, Majanlahti and Osti Guerrazzi (2010); and Ralegh Radford to Evelyn Shaw, 4 March 1945 (on conditions for the Italian staff (“servants”) of the BSR): “My own view is that they are not ungenerously treated by comparison with Italian employees but life is hard in Rome this winter, harder than last winter when the city was occupied by the Germans and their feeling of disillusionment is the greater in that they had felt that as employees of an English institution they should benefit over the average Italian.” BSR archives, box 63.

Evacuation and Liberation 

 163

Italy, and was working with the restitution of collections deposited in salt mines (Alt Aussee) in Austria in the Winter of 1945.105 He returned to Princeton after the war. Ward-Perkins did his military service during the Second World War, having been employed at the Museum of London 1937–1939. After serving in North Africa during the war, he was promoted to lieutenant colonel and transferred to the Subcommission. Ward-Perkins became director of the British school in October 1945.106 In concert with Charles Rufus Morey, professor at Princeton University and colleague of DeWald, cultural attaché of the US embassy in Rome and acting director of the American academy, DeWald and Ward-Perkins constituted an influential group to which Erik Sjöqvist was later added. Together they set the tone and contributed to sowing the seeds for institutionalised post-war collaboration in Rome. These would be reaped about a year later, with the establishment of AIAC and the Unione (see below).107 The American academy facilities were put at the disposal of the United States Information Services in Italy and the “Monuments Men” of the Subcommission for army “leave courses” in archaeology, topography and art history at the academy.108 Similar courses were held at the British School at Rome. The American academy was used for such leave courses for discharged military personnel in 1945 under the G.I. Bill of Rights for veterans, consisting mainly of a “series of lectures on usual subjects” given by archaeologist Albert Van Buren.109 The first appearance of Allied (British and American) military officers at the operational

105 Cf. Ernest DeWald to Albert Van Buren, 9 November 1945 (“HQ US Forces in Austria”). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:4 (in appendix vii). Cf. also Serlupi Crescenzi and Calvano (1980); and Smyth (1988). 106 For the ACC and the Subcommission, see for example Harris (1957); Ziemke (1975) 53–57 & 397–399; and Coles and Weinberg (2004 [1964]), 84–190 & 413–424. Cf. also Dagnini Brey (2009); Edsel and Witter (2009); Edsel (2013); as well as Robert M. Edsel’s (somewhat polemical) http:// www.monumentsmenfoundation.org (accessed 21 June 2018). 107 Archaeologist Carl Blegen (1887–1971), who excavated in Greece (Pylos) and in Turkey (Troy), was, like Morey in Rome, also cultural attaché in Athens. 108 Minutes of the meeting of the Joint Committee for the American School of Classical Studies, Columbia University, 13 April 1944. Box 1, Dept. of Art and Archaeology Records; Princeton University archives, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton University Library. 109 Myron Charles Taylor to Henry James, draft telegram, n.d. (1945?). AAR institutional archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file “VB et al: undated corresp.” Cf. James Kellum Smith to Albert Van Buren, 29 November 1945. AAR institutional archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1941–1945. Cf. also J.K. Smith to B.K. Johnstone, 30 November 1945; Myron Charles Taylor to acting chairman Henry James (“radiogram”), 9 June 1945; and Smith to Robert P. Patterson, Secretary of War, Washington, D.C., 9 January 1946. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758.

164 

 5 Sparks from the Anvil, 1939–1945

Swedish institute after the liberation of Rome was in July 1944.110 As director Sjöqvist put it at the time, thanks to its neutrality, the Swedish institute has become the most natural platform [where] scholars from different nations have been able to meet, and where informal but valuable contacts have been able to be established to the benefit of common scholarly interests. This tendency has developed in an especially striking way after the liberation of Rome, when it has been a great satisfaction to mediate the reestablishment of the contacts between British, American and French archaeologists on the one hand and our Italian colleagues on the other.111

After the liberation of Rome in June 1944, Erik Sjöqvist organised a dinner party at the Swedish institute for the members of the Allied Subcommission, as well as a concert with a newly founded Italian chamber orchestra on 24 July, and, somewhat controversially, the 70th birthday celebrations of Ludwig Curtius, pre-war director of the DAIR, on 13 December 1944. Curtius had remained in Rome during the war; he was briefly interned upon the Allied assumption of power but was soon released, partly thanks to interventions by Sjöqvist. The birthday reception for Curtius was politically charged: Italian archaeologists as well as scholars representing the schools of the Allied countries were invited.112 One of the two original “schools” within the AAR, the “American School of Classical Studies in Rome”, pursued the interests and activities of the American academy in New York City towards the end of the war, discussing possible excavations in Italy under the aegis of the American academy. In January 1944, the committee of the AAR school of classical studies “voted to recommend to the Board of Trustees that steps be […] for carrying on excavations in Italy.”113 In

110 Cf. SIR guestbook I, 1926–1945; and Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 196–197, 316 & 357–358. 111 SIR annual report 1943–1944, 2–3 (translated). 112 The reception was vividly portrayed by Erland Billig (Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 197– 198) and by Sjöqvist, related by Axel Boëthius (Boëthius (1946), 72–74, based on a letter from Sjöqvist, 2 January 1945). See also Vian (1993) 506; and Billig, Nylander and Vian (1996). For Ludwig Curtius and Rome, cf. “IX. Rom 1928–1938”, in Curtius (1958) 296–349. 113 Minutes of meeting of the Committee on the School of Classical Studies of the American Academy in Rome (Columbia and the Metropolitan Museum of Art), 13–14 January 1944: The committee was devoted to “the study and investigation of the archaeology, literature and history of the classical and later periods”: “to secure funds adequate to guarantee continued excavations for five or ten years”, “a fund of $25,000 a year for a period of five or ten years.” Box 1, Dept. of Art and Archaeology Records; Princeton University archives, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton University Library. The minutes also referred to a previous joint meeting (9 October 1943) and to meetings of groups of the Advisory Council (15 December and 29 December 1943).

Evacuation and Liberation 

 165

Fig. 32: “A Day in Rome with Gunner Smith”, part of a series intended to “depict ‘Gunner Smith’ touring Rome with the aid of a guidebook […] compiled by Major DeWald of the Fine Arts Sub-Commission”, with a foreword by General Alexander Tanner. From the Pincio hill, overlooking Piazza del Popolo towards the Vatican, 29 June 1944. From Gentiloni Silveri, Di Stefano and Palermo (2011) 64–65.

December 1944, in “its first full meeting since the liberation of Rome,” the AAR board of trustees expressed its “sense of deep gratitude and appreciation to His Excellency the Minister of Switzerland and the members of the Swiss Legation in Italy, for the unremitting care and energetic supervision of the properties and interests of the Academy during the past long years of separation from American control.”114

114 William Dinsmoor to “His Excellency The Minister of Switzerland In Italy”, 12 December 1944. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758.

The Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom library, reading room, 1957, in the premises of the DAIR on Via Sardegna 1920–1958 (after having moved from the Villa Caffarelli on the Capitoline), interrupted 1944–1953 by the war and its reverberations. D-DAI-Rom-57.1455.

6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953 National prestige had been a dominant element at the foreign schools in Rome and Athens for a century of fervent nation building, manifested on institutional as well as individual levels. A new rhetoric of post-war collaboration sprung from the disastrous experience of the war, from satiated disillusionment with nationalism, as well as from nostalgia and a desire for a renaissance of “lost” values and earlier scholarly atmospheres. Moving towards a new general spirit of international collaboration meant breaking with the recent past, but at the same time relying on the past itself as the common object of study. Fresh possibilities for establishing collaborative organisations focusing on common interests and cultural ties began to present themselves, although several pre-war competitive elements were to linger on. This chapter illustrates how post-war international collaboration was organised and manifested through a relatively limited network of individual scholars in the context of foreign schools in Rome and Athens.

Post-War: AIAC and the Unione of Institutes Two post-war organisations epitomise a conscious move towards institutionalised international collaboration in the circle of foreign schools in Rome after the war: AIAC – the Associazione Internazionale di Archeologia Classica, or International Association for Classical Archaeology (1945) – and the Unione degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (or Unione) of foreign and domestic institutes in Rome (1946). AIAC was outlined in a “provisional committee” in late 1944. This committee met repeatedly in spring 1945 under the presidency of Swedish institute director Erik Sjöqvist. The organisation was formally constituted on 5 May 1945, at the Swedish institute, before the war ended (the German surrender was signed just days later).1 Sjöqvist was the only director 1 The minutes from these (four) meetings (from 18 December 1944 onwards) have been preserved. A circular letter, dated 10 March 1945, as well as later lists of AIAC members, can be found in AN, 20170185/101, as well as in AN, 20170185/105. Cf. circular letter (AIAC), 15 December 1947, AN, 20170185/101 (see appendix ix). Cf. also AIAC archives, box “Statuto”, comprising for example the files “Statuto dell’A.I.A.C.”, “Statuto approvato”, “Documenti costitutivi” and a draft diagram of the organisational structure of AIAC: “Consiglio permanente – Presidente – Comitato esecutivo – Direttore – Segretario […].” See also AIAC archives, boxes “Biblioteche Tedesche 1 & 2”; as well as SIR Annual Report 1944–1945, 2–3. The circular letter can also be found in DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines Bittel 1.10.1951–31.3.1953”. AIAC was based in the premises of the DAIR (Via Sardegna, 79) until its restitution to German control in 1953 (see below). Cf., for example, Rosetti (2010). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-007

168 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

of an operational foreign school at that time, and could thus offer an organisational safe haven for the establishment of the new international organisation. In 1945, he compared Sweden with the Holy See in terms of political and cultural neutrality: “The collaboration with the other neutral state that disposes an archaeological institute and an academy in Rome, that is the Vatican, has been especially fruitful.”2 AIAC drew its international inspiration from earlier organisations: the nineteenth-century Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica, the pre-war Associazione Internazionale degli Studi Mediterranei and the Collegium (see chapters one and three). AIAC was however exclusively directed at classical archaeology: the unifying intra-institutional role that the Collegium had aspired to was instead assumed by the Unione, established in February 1946 (a century after the foundation of the École française d’Athènes).3 Despite deliberate explorations of new international ground, national outlooks persisted. EFR director Albert Grenier for example resentfully correlated the increased Prussian funding of the ICA in the nineteenth century with the post-Anschluss Nazi annexation (1938) by the German Historical Institute in Rome of the Austrian Historical Institute.4 Notwithstanding such disputes, the main pragmatic reason for the establishment of the Unione – besides the desire to increase integration between the foreign schools in Rome and with their Italian counterparts – was to negotiate and lobby for the return to Italy of the four titanic so-called “German libraries” of archaeology and art history that had been removed in early 1944 – those of the German Archaeological Institute in Rome, the German Historical Institute in Rome, the Bibliotheca Hertziana (Rome), as well as of the Kunsthistorisches Institut (Florence), considered invaluable to continued scholarly activity at foreign schools in Rome and sorely missed. The prehistory of the Unione can be traced to a lobbying process in the media following the end of censorship in June 1944, when the four German libraries, recently removed from Italy, were being 2 SIR annual report 1944–1945, 1. The archaeological institute in question was the Pontificia Istituto di Archeologia Christiana, PIAC; the academy the Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia Romana, PAA. Sjöqvist was elected corresponding member of the papal academy in 1945. 3 For the Unione, see for example Nylander and Vian (1996); Battelli (1996) 199–210; Esch (2007), 67; and Whitling (2008). 4 Albert Grenier, n.d. AN, 20170185/105. The Austrian Historical Institute in Rome (1881) library collection had merged with the DHI library after the Anschluss. The DHI books remained in the Vatican deposit until 1952/1953 – they were located in the Vatican library itself, in the stacks and the wing above the gate. Cf. reopening speech (1950), and John Bryan Ward-Perkins to Ernst Hefel (1888–1974, politician, post-war president of the Austrian cultural institute in Rome 1949–1954), 10 April 1950. The Austrian Historical Institute in Rome archives, Akten II, 113, 3 “Eröffnung des Kulturinstituts 11. April 1950”. Cf. also, for example, Atzler and Gottsmann (2017).

Post-War: AIAC and the Unione of Institutes 

 169

referred to as, quote, “German”.5 The libraries lacked a home, funding, and clearly defined owners. The negotiation of the return of the libraries to Italy was the work of the Unione preparatory committee, again presided by Erik Sjöqvist. The juridical ownership and future administration of the four libraries turned out to be a complicated political problem, one that, it was perceived, could not be able to be determined before the advent of a peace treaty with Germany.6 The return of the German libraries was being discussed by the late spring of 1945. For the second time in one year, Sjöqvist became the chairman of a committee whose task was to sketch statutes for a large-scale international institution in Rome: A provisional committee has been organized in Rome under chairmanship of head of Swedish Academy [sic] to establish an international research institute for archaeology and kindred humanistic subjects. [The] Committee contains very good names representing Spain, Italy, USA, France, Rumania, Vatican, Great Britain, Sweden. […] Project considered admirable […] not only for the intrinsic worth but as yardstick for future cooperative undertakings in postwar scholarship.7

Sjöqvist chiefly carried out the preparatory work together with John Bryan Ward-Perkins (BSR) and Charles Rufus Morey (AAR) (cf. fig. 33). The Unione combined archaeology, history and art history, adapting to the fields of study at the foreign schools in Rome, and to those covered by the four German libraries. In comparison with AIAC, the Unione was therefore at the same time both narrower in scope (focusing on Rome) and wider (including several scholarly disciplines). AIAC aimed to internationalise and organise classical archaeology in the Mediterranean through exchange of excavation-related and other information. The main pragmatic reason for the establishment of the Unione was to organise the return of the German libraries to Italy, a task beyond the horizons of AIAC, limited to associating itself with the DAIR library.

5 See Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 255 & 367. 6 Cf. Erik Sjöqvist to the board of the SIR, n.d. (after 16 February 1946. before 23 April 1946). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5; and Carl Weickert, “Antrag” regarding the DAI (1946?). Cf. also Weickert, “Bericht über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut”, 24 July 1946. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 7 Telegram to US state department, 12 May 1945: “Provisional Committee hopes for American initiative through Department of State’s Division of Cultural Cooperation.” Records Concerning the Central Collecting Points (“Ardelia Hall Collection”): Wiesbaden Central Collecting Point, 1945–1952, http://www.fold3.com/image/114/232002428/ & http://www.fold3.com/image/114/ 232002435/ (accessed 21 June 2018). For Ardelia Hall, cf. Reed (2014).

170 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

Fig. 33: Guestbook, Swedish Institute in Rome, 1945–1946, with the signatures of, inter alia, Massimo Pallottino, Filippo Magi, Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli, Erland and Ragnhild Billig, Charles Rufus Morey, Gino Filipetto (1945), Enrico Josi, Bartolomeo Nogara and Doro Levi (1946).

The libraries did indeed return; the DAIR and Bibliotheca Hertziana libraries reached Rome on 1 February 1946. The Unione was formally established on 6 February. Its overall ambition was to create a permanent group of libraries for scholars of the humanities in Rome.8 The Unione, in Erik Sjöqvist’s view, evolved out of AIAC, believing that the Unione might for example be able to counteract protests from Greek archaeologists regarding the most Rome-specific AIAC elements.9 AIAC pursued its original tasks when it too became a member of the 8 The Unione was granted official legitimacy by the Allied Control Commission on 18 February 1946. Cf. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 258–260 & 264–265. Cf. also an album presented to Erik Sjöqvist (1948): “Al Dott. Erik Sjöqvist con riconoscenza ROMA – 28 giugno 1948 […]”, with added note by Sjöqvist (1963): “This is an album containing photos of Roman monuments which were the objects of my particular interest and study during my Roman period 1941–1948. It was given to me at my departure in June 1948 by those young German scholars whom I had been able to help in the years 1944–1948 and who in turn helped me in my assignment to reconstitute the libraries of the German archaeological Institute, the German Historical Institute, and the Hertziana. The Rumanian [sic] scholar Dinu Adamesteanu belonged also to this fine group of helped and helpers.” Swedish Institute in Rome, Gino Filipetto’s papers, box 2. 9 Cf. Erik Sjöqvist to Axel Boëthius, 17 December 1945. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2.

Post-War: AIAC and the Unione of Institutes 

 171

Unione, that is to say the custody of the DAIR library (until 1953, see below) and regular publication of archaeological bibliographies in the so-called Fasti archeologici. At the same time, Carl Weickert, president pro tempore of the DAI, was negotiating with the Allied authorities regarding travel from Berlin to Frankfurt am Main to discuss the DAI, “situated in the American Sector of Berlin and at present under the control of the Berlin Municipal Administration.”10 When the return of the German libraries was organised in late 1945, the Vatican was seemingly not directly involved, although the sources for this period are fragmentary. The library of the German historical institute, DHI, had however been deposited in the Vatican in 1947. It remained in its care until 1952, and was returned to German control in 1953.11 In 1948, Erik Sjöqvist had written to Monsignore Giovanni Battista Montini, future Pope Paul VI, then serving in the Vatican Secretary of State, expressing gratitude from AIAC for a financial donation of 300.000 lire from the Vatican as a contribution to the management of the library of the German archaeological institute. According to Sjöqvist, this signified support for and encouragement of AIAC:s “efforts meant to serve international humanist studies.”12 He also wrote directly to Pope Pius XII, on behalf of AIAC, expressing how the Vatican donation represented “much more than material support, although of considerable importance, offered to the association at a critical moment of its life.” The Papal donation reaffirmed, as Sjöqvist put it, the “supranationality of the Vatican state,” as well as the “active interest of the Pope in humanist studies in Rome.” Above all, it represented “a high moral encouragement and a precious sign of the confidence which the association enjoys from your holiness.”13

10 Transcription of letter (Werner?) to the US Headquarters, Berlin, 22 March 1946. Cf. unidentified sender (“F.”) to Erik Sjöqvist, 8 April 1946. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4. 1936–31.3.1948”. Cf. also Weickert to the U.S. Headquarters Education Section, Berlin-District, 11 April 1946; Weickert to Friedrich Matz (1890–1974, archaeologist and art historian), 7 December 1945; and Bernhard Schweitzer to Weickert, 10 January 1948 (“Demokratisierung des Institutes”; “eine allgemeine Archäologenversammlung”). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 11 Cf. memorandum (Grenier), 14 December 1950. AN, 20170185/105. The post-1953 fate of the DHI library has been discussed in, for example, two chapters in Matheus (2007a): Esch (2007); and Matheus (2007b). Cf. VV.AA. (1945). 12 Erik Sjöqvist to Mons. [G].B. Montini, 6 February 1948: “i nostri sforzi intesi a servire gli studi umanistici internazionali”. Cf. correspondence between Montini and Albert Grenier (as president of AIAC), 7 July 1949, regarding the first volume of the Fasti Archeologici-publication. AIAC archives, box “Statuto”, file “Statuto dell’A.I.A.C.”. 13 Erik Sjöqvist to Pius XII, 6 February 1948: “un alto incoraggiamento morale ed un segno prezioso della fiducia di cui gode la Associazione presso la Santità Sua”; “un’altra prova della

172 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

The main challenge shared by both AIAC and the Unione was to secure funding, as the new organisations could not rely on contributions from domestic institutions or the nationally funded foreign schools. The Unione was established almost at the same time as UNESCO, and placed its initial hopes for an international solution to the library conundrum in the new UN cultural organisation, hoping to benefit from possible financial aid, an aspiration that did not come even close to materialising on the scale that was originally anticipated. 14 The issue of the return of the four German libraries to Rome after the war, an illustrative case of the coexistence of the national and international, combines individual and national perceptions of cultural heritage and of Rome as a centre for scholarship and “universal culture”. Both AIAC and the Unione can be seen as expressions of the strong post-war sign-of-the-times international, almost postnational, attitude. The Swedish scholars Erland and Ragnhild Billig, themselves first-hand witnesses of this post-war international shift at the foreign schools in Rome (particularly vis-à-vis AIAC), phrased the main objective of the period as “to overcome the idea of nationalism and the national state as its vehicle.”15

Reopenings, Restorations As a post-war dead-end consequence of the collapse of pre-war national rivalry, the foreign schools in Rome and Athens discussed the need for closer collaboration. After the war, the Italian classical archaeologist Paolino Mingazzini expressed the desire that “perhaps good sense will triumph and we may have the normality and peace that all desire after thirty-five years. As a scholar I feel that very strongly.”16 Mingazzini shared that sentiment with a majority of the post-war scholarly community in Europe, and with war-weary society at large. In the political vacuum in Rome of the immediate post-war period, the Vatican came to represent a locus of power and continuity. The Church had survived both the fascist regime and the war. The “Roman pope”, Pius XII, remained a beacon of continuity after the referendum on and abolition of the Italian monarchy in 1946,

sovranazionalità dello Stato della Città del Vaticano e dall’interesse attivo della Santità Sua per gli studi umanistici di Roma”. AIAC archives, box “Statuto”, file “Statuto dell’A.I.A.C.”. 14 “Memorandum addressed to the United Nations Organization by the International Union of Institutes of Archaeology, History, and History of Art in Rome” (1946). AN, 20170185/105. 15 Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 367 (endnote 512, translation). 16 Paolino Mingazzini to Erik Sjöqvist, 3 June 1946. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:4: “Tuttavia può darsi che Buon Senso trionfi e si abbia veramente la normalità e quella pace che tutti desiderano da trentacinque anni. Io, come studioso, lo desidero assai.”

Reopenings, Restorations 

 173

and the subsequent establishment of the Italian republic.17 The industrialist, diplomat and US Ambassador to the Holy See, Myron Charles Taylor, AAR trustee and chairman of its finance committee, was a key figure in American academy affairs in Rome as the war ended.18 Taylor also tailored American relations with the Vatican, a useful connection during the hostilities (although considered near superfluous after the war).19 Architectural historian William Bell Dinsmoor had been the nominal acting director of the AAR during the war years; this position was taken over for two years (1945–1947) by Charles Rufus Morey, cultural attaché of the US embassy in Rome (see chapter five).20 Morey was from the outset considered a temporary solution from the New York horizon. As the trustees’ “man in Rome”, and with a double authority as scholar and cultural attaché at the US embassy, Morey was well integrated in post-war scholarly circles. Archaeologist Albert Van Buren had also contributed to the supervision of the academy property and the safeguarding of its interest during the war.21 17 Duggan (2007) 542–544. For Pius XII, see for example Bottum and Dalin (2004). 18 AAR report 1943–1951, 5; and Myron Charles Taylor to James Kellum Smith, 31 July 1945. Cf. Taylor to Smith, 1 October 1945; and Smith to Taylor, 3 October 1945. In 1934, Taylor had commissioned an unofficial report (1934) on the BSR, EFR and AAR by his friend, artist Frank Owen Salisbury (1874–1962). Taylor had learned that the BSR was “dying of dry rot”. Taylor (Villa Schifanoia, Florence) to John Russell Pope, 29 June 1934: “The British School is in the worst plight. […] All I can say that the wrong students are being sent, and that it is a great mistake to send female students.” See also Taylor to Pope, n.d. (1934). AAR archives, AAR records, 1855– 2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 19 Cf. James Kellum Smith to Lindsay Bradford (1892–1959, investment banker, treasurer of the American Academy in Rome, AAR treasurer 1945–1946, trustee of the academy, 1947), 3 October 1945: “the importance of opening up normal channels and closing the Vatican channel is recognized by the Treasurer and the Chairman of the Finance Committee”. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 20 Cf. board meeting (of AAR trustees), 24 April 1945. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5750. Cf. also 24 April 1945 board meeting. Cf. also William Bell Dinsmoor to James Kellum Smith, 23 October 1944; and Smith to Dinsmoor, 15 October 1944. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. For Morey, see the Charles Rufus Morey Papers, 1900–1954 (bulk 1924–1945), Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton University Library; and Sjöqvist (1956, reprinted in Billig, Nylander and Vian (1996), 141–148); AAR archives, Register of the American Academy in Rome, vol. I (1919–1973); and Morey to Albert Van Buren, 15 June 1931. AAR archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1931–1935. 21 Cf. AAR institutional archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1941–1945; and Charles Rufus Morey to Albert Van Buren, 12 April 1946. AAR institutional archives, Albert Van Buren, “General correspondence, 1904–1967”, file 1946–1955. It is possible that Van Buren was in some way associated with the OSS during the war years and/or in the immediate post-war period.

174 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

Fig. 34: The Villa Aurelia (the American Academy in Rome), c. 1900. American Academy in Rome, Photographic Archive.

Morey made the rather controversial suggestion that the academy might sell the Villa Aurelia (fig. 34), the director’s residence, in many ways the crown jewel of the academy, part of its property, a stone’s throw from the main building. The villa had fallen into disrepair during the war, but was in the end retained by the academy, following an investigation by a “Special Committee on Villa Aurelia”, which considered it, after all, “the finest site in Rome, for the views in all directions are unsurpassed by any other situation in the capital City.”22

22 Charles Rufus Morey to James Kellum Smith, 20 November 1945. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reels 5758 and 5798. Cf. suggestion for the employment of architect Alberto Davico. Cf. “Interim Report – Special Committee on Villa Aurelia – American Academy in Rome”: “the Aurelia parcel comprises 39 per cent of the entire realty holdings”. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5799. Cf. Harold F. Johnson to J.K. Smith, 16 June 1947. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758; and Laurance Roberts to C.R. Morey, 18 March 1947: “Bruno Zevi’s plans for altering the Villa […] the Aurelia will at last be useful.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5798.

Reopenings, Restorations 

 175

When the French School in Rome reopened after the war, Jerôme Carcopino had been replaced by the Gaullist Albert Grenier as its director. In the EFR annual report for 1943–1944 regular scholarly publication was considered necessary in terms of scholarly prestige, reflecting on both the director and the institution itself. Carcopino had stressed that the members of the EFR once more had to give merit to its name, to “finally breathe that sweet perfume, so penetrating and so special […] which [author and journalist Louis] Veuillot called the perfume of Rome.”23 Carcopino’s nostalgia was likely also a personal one. Carcopino had been minister of National Education and Youth in the Vichy government 1941–1942, a government which had also entertained cultural ambitions on a Mediterranean level, for example involving itself in the Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen in Nice (see chapter three).24 When the Académie de France (Villa Medici) closed at the outbreak of war, its Prix de Rome-grant holders were temporarily relocated to France during the war, in the villa Il Paradiso in Nice, accordingly styled “the intellectual capital of the South”.25 Carcopino had been in favour of this move, and appears to have considered the same for the École française.26 Albert Grenier in other words represented a fresh start for the École in Rome when it reopened in 1945; the first post-war annual report stressed that it was important that its activities should recommence as soon as possible: Material difficulties are no obstacle to those who dream of enriching their spirit, and there is no lack of subjects of study for our young missionaries. Rome, thank God, is more or less intact. The libraries, the archives and the museums have reopened or are preparing to reopen and there are still treasures to be extracted from the Italian soil. […]

23 Jerôme Carcopino, 28 April 1944. Cf. Veuillot (1862); and L’Estrange (1930). 24 Cf. AN, Boxes F/17/13596–13618: “Grandes écoles spéciales”, F/17/13359: “Relations culturels avec l’étranger” (1940–1958) and box F/17/14585: “École française et Institut d’Études françaises d’Athènes. École française de Rome. Instituts de Caire, de Barcelone, de Florence, de Londres, de Madrid. 1917–1948.” Carcopino was minister in the Vichy government 25 February 1941–18 April 1942. Cf. Carcopino (1968). For Carcopino and connections with the Action française, see for example Bosworth (2011) 206. 25 “L’Académie de France a été installée solennellement hier matin, à Nice, dans sa lumineuse villa ‘Il Paradiso’. Dans l’après-midi s’est déroulée, avec éclat, la cérémonie d’inauguration dans l’amphithéâtre du C.U.M.”, L’Éclaireur du soir (Nice), 9 November 1941. Cf. for example “L’École de Rome cherche toujours un domicile à Nice”, Paris-Soir, 25 October 1940. CUM archives, Nice, file “C.U.M. Revue de presse 1940 à 1943”. Cf. also Dubois (2014). 26 Carcopino had furthermore given no less than three public talks at the C.U.M. in 1937. OlivierGhauri et al. (2015) 42: “Annexe. Conférences au CUM des membres de l’Institut de France 1936–2013”.

176 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

It matters that France is present in Rome, if she wishes to expand or only defend her scientific positions.27

This passage characterises a pre-war climate of national scholarship and the conservative framework of classical studies of the period. Although libraries, archives and museums were necessary research tools, then as now, archaeology remained a combination of scholarly endeavour and competitive treasure hunt, immersed in national pathos. Similarly, the good name of the country continued to be emphasised in the post-war annual reports of the EFR.28 The École had established connections with French North Africa in the late nineteenth century, with excavations carried out in Algeria under the auspices of the school before the Second World War. This North African connection was maintained during the war.29 Archaeological activity in Italy commenced after the war: the EFR initiated excavation campaigns at Bolsena in Etruria (1946), and at Megara Hyblaea on Sicily (1949).30 Competition does not rhyme well with cooperation, at least not on paper. Yet the two often seem to coexist. The challenges of the new archaeological situation in Italy after the war encompassed potential national competition for archaeological sites. Post-war cracks in the institutional budgets of the schools also manifested themselves, together with strains on financial resources. The foreign 27 EFR, CRAI, Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Comptes rendus des séances de l’année 1945, 475: “Les difficultés matérielles sont peu de chose pour qui songe surtout à s’enrichir l’esprit, et les sujets d’étude ne manqueront pas à nos jeunes missionnaires. Rome, Dieu merci, est intacte ou peu s’en faut. Les bibliothèques, les archives, les musées ont rouvert ou se préparent à rouvrir leurs portes et il y a encore des trésors à extraire du sol italien […]. Il importe d’autre part que la France soit présente à Rome, si elle veut y élargir ou seulement y défendre ses positions scientifiques.” The report (pp. 467–476, including the passage “fussions-nous réduits, ce qu’à Dieu ne plaise, à ne contrôler in situ que des hypothèses françaises”, p. 475) continues thus (Ibid.): “M. le ministre de l’Éducation nationale, en plaçant notre confrère M. Albert Grenier, à la tête de l’École, a marqué la volonté du gouvernement de donner, sans plus tarder, une impulsion vigoureuse à une œuvre nécessaire au bon renom de notre pays.” No issue of the EFR review (Mélanges) had been published since 1940, which was perceived as an acute problem by Carcopino: “if this insolvency were to be prolonged, it would risk damaging the radiance of our École” (“une carence qui risquerait, en se prolongeant, de nuire au rayonnement de notre École.”). Ibid. For the reopening of the École (press clippings, reports and correspondence with other foreign schools in Rome), see also AN, 20170185/26. 28 See for example EFR annual report 1947–1948 (1 March 1948). 29 Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 1945, EFR report for the year 1943–1944 (by Charles Samaran, 28 September 1945): “l’Afrique du Nord s’est occupée cette année-là moins de fouilles archéologiques que de la libération de la France.” 30 Cf. AN, 20170185/88 (“Rapports des directeurs à l’Institut”). The 1949–1950, 1950–1951 and 1951–1952 reports include sections on “Les Fouilles de l’École française”.

Reopenings, Restorations 

 177

schools grew, as did their range of activities. Collaboration was the word of the day; “international” was indeed in the air; the “perfume” of the moment. In 1946, AAR president James Kellum Smith was approached regarding a proposal for establishing a global system of “international universities”: as “a living symbol of peace and dedicated to the integration of people from all nations in the common pursuit of learning.” The academy opted not to participate, partly as the project did not fully address how to overcome the limitations of reliance on national funding, an issue that lay at the heart of the matter then as it does today.31 Funding was undeniably a key issue. The BSR might for example have reopened earlier (in 1945), but it was considered too expensive and impractical to send British students to Rome so soon after the war, taking “questions about rations (the black market has impossible prices), transport, travel in Italy and supplies” into account.32 The same must reasonably have applied for the French school, but the prestige of being the first to rekindle its activities after the war was considered to be worth the extra expenditure. BSR director Ralegh Radford reported that “the French Government is, for reasons of prestige, sending out a full complement of students […] the [American] Academy will be ‘open’. The same holds good for the Dutch and Belgians. I have talked informally to a number of Italians and there is a very real desire that the British School should function again next session.”33 The British school, felt Ralegh Radford, should in other words avoid lagging behind: “In view of the fact that a new Director has been appointed in the American Academy and in view of the proposal […] of lectures on classical subjects by French professors I feel it desirable that the British School should not remain entirely closed during the present session [1945–1946].”34 The American academy similarly considered it “unwise to postpone the opening of the Academy later than next Fall. The French and Swedish Academies [sic] are already open with almost a full complement of students. The British School expects to open soon with several students. The Embassy has inquired somewhat pointedly as to the date of the opening and in view of the Italian attitude of looking to the United States for leadership at the present moment it would be unfortunate for the Academy to lag so far behind the others in resuming operations.”35 Although the Swedish institute had remained operational 31 Arthur W. Potts to James Kellum Smith, 12 August 1946. Cf. Smith to Potts, 4 September 1946. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 32 Courtenay Arthur Ralegh Radford to Evelyn Shaw, 18 August 1945. BSR archives, box 63. 33 Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 18 August 1945. BSR archives, box 63. 34 Ralegh Radford to Noel Charles, British embassy, Rome, 1945 (?). BSR archives, box 63. 35 “Memoranda for Mr. [Lindsay] Bradford” (AAR treasurer), 20 February 1946. Cf. telegram (Morey), 19 March 1946: “Four Academies open and operating French and Swedish Eight and Twelve students respectively […] strongly advise full operation [of the AAR] next fall;” and AAR

178 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

during the war, the German occupation of Rome had effectively stifled most of its activities. In December 1945, director Erik Sjöqvist felt that it was “important to get started again after this long two-year break. The French in Palazzo Farnese [EFR] are the only ones who have so far managed to get going. […] The Americans and English are aiming at autumn 1946. I am as usual eager that we take the lead.”36 The race, in other words, was on. National rivalry was, at least on paper, an obstacle to a true “return” to perceived lost international ideals. In practice, prestige and collaboration often seemed to coexist simultaneously. Part of the challenge just after the war for the foreign schools lay in finding ways of collaborating in practical terms, also with Italian institutions. Writing in 1945, Swedish director Sjöqvist thought that Italian scholars were “finally beginning to regain their self-respect, which has been badly tarnished these last few years. They have gained a different posture which seems to me to forebode a new era.”37 The situation was delicate, however, and the foreign schools were not always greeted with enthusiasm. Three years later, in 1948, Axel Boëthius instructed temporary Swedish institute director Åke Åkerström that “the Italian aversion to foreign research, suppressed by Mussolini and the circumstances surrounding the peace, is now reawakening; the magnificent tributes to Sjöqvist had an undertone of ‘we have had it up to here with the foreign institutes, but we appreciate you [the SIR] very much’. We have a here a capital of good will that requires your friendly touch. No brusque speeches!”38 The desired post-war shift from national to international was, in other words, far from any smooth overnight success. The French École in Rome for example raised qualms regarding how “in the face of the renaissance of Italian nationalism, foreign [scholars] will no longer be able to undertake archaeological research of any interest in Italy”.39 At the same time, the EFR reported that it had

secretary Riccardo Davico to Morey, 14 March 1946: “I have heard that the French, Romanian and Swedish institutions [sic], have resumed their full activities, and that soon also the British School will do the same; but I have no direct information.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5798. 36 Erik Sjöqvist to Axel Boëthius, 17 December 1945 (translation). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2. 37 Sjöqvist to Boëthius, 6 May 1945 (translation). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2. 38 Axel Boëthius to Åke Åkerström, 3 September 1948 (translation). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III.B.1. 39 EFR annual report 1946–1947 (6 March 1947): “devant la renaissance du nationalisme italien, les étrangers ne pourront bientôt plus entreprendre des recherches archéologiques de quelqu’intérêt en Italie”. The 1946–1947 annual report also stated that Adrien Bruhl (1902–1973, ancient historian and classical archaeologist), the “recently appointed secretary-general” of the EFR (Bruhl was secretary-general 1946–1953), had been in charge of surveillance of the École in the interim period after the end of the war until Albert Grenier’s arrival in Rome in November 1946.

Reopenings, Restorations 

 179

recently started excavating at Bolsena, north of Rome, “reviving an ancient and too soon interrupted tradition on Italian soil.”40 The new director of the École, Albert Grenier, spoke of “an Italy which has again become more liberal regarding the exploitation of its archaeological soil than it has been for half a century”, and “to carry out excavations there once more”.41 The French school excavations at Bolsena, led by archaeologist Raymond Bloch, had been delayed by the owner of the plot of land designated for excavation. Grenier reacted strongly, and interpreted this in terms of “hostility towards French excavations”, also in the light of recent writings published in the journal La Tribuna della Domenica in the summer of 1946, writings that manifested a jealousy towards work accomplished in Italy by foreign scholars.42 Grenier thought this issue serious enough to warrant getting in touch with archaeologist and art historian Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli, director of the Direzione Generale delle Belle Arti.43 Bianchi Bandinelli assured Grenier that there was no need to take this minor press campaign into serious account. Grenier likely considered the issue a matter of principle, not to hinder future foreign – in this case French – archaeological campaigns in Italy. He stressed his personal relations with Bianchi Bandinelli as fundamental to the assurance of future excavation permits; this as an illustration of his own authority, as well as establishing the assurance publically, in case Bianchi Bandinelli might leave his current position (he had in fact encouraged Grenier to renew the archaeological permit for another three years for that very reason).44 Much ado about nothing; the excavations continued and the issue ended there. Like the École in Rome, the French School in Athens resumed its activites as soon as possible after the war: “despite the alarming financial difficulties and the incertitude concerning the immediate future, the French school, the only one of all the archaeological schools in Athens in service, endeavours to

40 EFR, Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Comptes rendus des séances de l’année 1946, 272: “renouvelant une tradition plus ancienne et trop tôt interrompue, sur le sol italien.” 41 EFR, Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Comptes rendus des séances de l’année 1946, 275–276: “une Italie redevenue plus libérale dans l’exploitation de son sol archéologique que depuis un demi-siècle, d’y pratiquer de nouveau des fouilles.” Grenier envisaged an excavation campaign also at Vulci. Ibid. 42 EFR annual report 1946–1947, 1: “une hostilité déclarée aux fouilles françaises”. The review may have been entitled La Tribuna Illustrata della Domenica. The 1947–1948 annual report instead highlighted the maintenance of good scholarly relations as well as the prestige of the École, for example stressing the importance of library exchanges (EFR annual report, 1947–1948, 9). 43 For Bianchi Bandinelli, cf. Barbanera (2000); and Barbanera (2003). 44 EFR annual report 1946–1947, 2.

180 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

Fig. 35: The main building of the École française d’Athènes at the time of its centenary, 1946, with Mount Lycabettos in the background. EFA/Émile Sérafis.

maintain its this year one hundred year old traditions intact.”45 These traditions were celebrated in grand style during the centenary celebrations of the school in 1947: the École française showed “that it had regained all its pre-war vitality” befitting its “historic mission” (cf. fig. 35 – for the centenary celebrations, see

45 Robert Demangel, annual report 1945: “malgré les difficultés financières angoissantes et l’incertitude de l’avenir le plus immédiat, l’École française, seule en activité de toutes les Écoles archéologiques d’Athènes, s’efforce-t-elle de maintenir intactes ses traditions cette année séculaires.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”.

Reopenings, Restorations 

 181

appendix viii).46 The Swedish Institute in Rome tribute to the French School in Athens for its centenary can serve here as an illustration of the “corporate culture” and self-perception of the in many ways interrelated foreign schools in Rome and Athens, and of the spirit in which the foreign schools felt that they operated: “In the name of the classical scholarship that unites those who see the most precious possession of our humanity in our common ancient cultural heritage, irrespective of national boundaries, the young Swedish Institute in Rome sends its admiring tribute to its French sister institution in Athens for its 100th birthday.”47 Pre-war financial strains on the EFA budget continued, however: the school was ready to resume its activities, but was temporarily “paralysed” due to the French Franc not being valid in Greece in the immediate post-war period.48 The French excavations on Delos, at Delphi, and at Mallia on Crete, were all resumed after the war (with Delos and Delphi as the main archaeological in-house comparative archaeological frame of reference): “for the first year of its second century, the school has resumed its entire pre-war activity in the scientific domain. The 1946 results from Delos are not unworthy of the success at Delphi in 1939.”49 In the context of the centenary celebrations of the school, the French government assisted the Greek Antiquities Service in its post-war restoration by “reinstalling” 46 Demangel, “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1947”, “APPENDICE: COMMEMORATION DU CENTENAIRE DE L’ÉCOLE” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950” (in appendix viii): “l’École a montré qu’elle avait, dans le sens et la conscience de sa mission historique, retrouvé désormais toute sa vitalité d’avantguerre.” Cf. also EFA archives, 7 ADM 25–28: “Commémorations. Centenaire de l’EFA (1947)”. 47 Erik Sjöqvist to the EFA, n.d. (1947, translation). RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:3. Cf. Valmin (1946). 48 “RAPPORT sur la détresse financière de l’École […]” (March 1946): “paralysée”. Cf. letter (Demangel, 4 March 1946); and (Demangel?) to Charles Roux (French embassy), 5 January 1946. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”; and Pierre Amandry to the embassy, 30 June 1945, with a table regarding inflation, comparing for example the price of a “Billet de tramway” in 1939, November 1944 and June 1945 (2, 7 and 14 drachmas respectively). EFA archives, 1 ADM 5 (prov. number): “Courrier départ secrétariat général (1941–1949)”. Cf. also EFA archives, file “Lettres envoyées du 1 Janvier 1940 au 31 Décembre 1953”. EFA archives, 1 ADM 24 (prov. number): “Courrier départ secrétariat général (1930–1953)”. 49 Demangel, “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1946”: “pour la première année de son second siècle, l’École a repris dans le domaine scientifique son activité complète d’avant-guerre. Les résultats déliens de 1946 ne sont pas indignes des succès delphiques de 1939.” See also “RAPPORT […] sur les travaux exécutés en 1946 […].” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950” (Demangel). Cf. Demangel to the French minister of national education, 5 April 1945. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”.

182 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

Fig. 36: Centenary medal, École française d’Athènes, 1946: Apollo with representations of “the two aspects – discovery and meditation – of archaeological research” and EFA excavation sites; three columns of the tholos at Delphi, “raised in 1938” with a list of EFA directors. EFA/Émile Sérafis. Cf. Demangel (1948) vi–vii (images of the centenary medal on pp. iii & v): “un volume exceptionnel” for the EFA centenary, in which Demangel addressed “tous ceux des anciens membres français et étrangers de l’école qui sont demeurés fidèles à l’hellénisme”. For the issue of the Bulletin de correspondance hellénique (VV.AA. (1948)) and for the centenary medal, cf. EFA archives, 7 ADM 25: “Commémorations. Centenaire de l’EFA. Organisation générale”.

the museum at Delphi, thereby offering: “a new token of feelings which will never be denied.”50 After the war had ended, the already devastated Greece was thrown into a three-year civil war from 1946 to 1949 between leftist guerrillas and the conservative government, backed by Britain and the USA.51 The British school considered “the ways in which [it] can help the Greek colleagues to set their house in order,” and to raise “a fund for repair of Greek monuments,” partly as “the antiquity service is the key to the Greek Tourist-industry”, its “source of revenue.”52 During the first stages of the Greek civil war, “fresh excavation” by the

50 Demangel to “M. le Ministre de l’Éducation Nationale et des Cultes Direction du Service des Antiquités”, 15 March 1947: “la réinstallation de musée de Delphes. […] un nouveau témoignage de sentiments qui ne sont jamais démentis.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. 51 See for example Gerolymatos (2004). 52 John L. Myres to Edith Clay, 29 (?) April 1945. Cf. Myres to Clay, 1 May 1945, regarding “the suggestion that the School, Hellenic and other Societies should raise a fund for repair of Greek

Reopenings, Restorations 

 183

foreign schools in Greece was no longer allowed. One exception from the ban was made, however, for the American excavations on the Agora in Athens in 1946, led by Homer A. Thompson.53 Archaeological attention was therefore temporarily directed elsewhere, in the case of the BSA to Turkey. To dig or not to dig, was the question, or rather where to dig, if not in Greece itself: “The Greek Ministry of Education has prohibited fresh excavation by the foreign schools until further notice. […] an agreement was approved by the Committee to undertake an Anglo-Turkish excavation on Turkish soil.”54 The French school director, Robert Demangel, had blamed the ban on excavations directly on the world war and indirectly on “powerful foreigners”: Germany and Italy. The “principal arguments in favour of restrictions” were “the shortage of surveillance staff and the incertitude about the political and international future” – “to that, one must no doubt add a certain dose of xenophobia, excusable in a country in which national pride as of late has had much suffering due to various powerful foreigners.”55

monuments, & other urgent needs of the Antiquities Department;” and Myres to Clay, 5 May 1945. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944– 45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. 53 Cf. Morris (1994), 34–36: “Greece at war, 1941–9”. The Agora was furthermore an extra excavation site, not included in the maximum three awarded annually to each foreign school. A precondition for ASCSA excavations in Greece is however that the school continues work at the Agora. Cf. Loukaki (2008) 153. 54 BSA, Report for the Session 1947–48, 5 & 17 (“Archaeology in Greece, 1947–1948”): “The ban which the Ministry of Education imposed on excavation on Greece has not been withdrawn, though there are sign of a more liberal interpretation of it.” See also Robert Demangel, “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1947”: “L’interdiction de toute fouille en Grèce depuis la libération, édictée par le Conseil archéologique grec le 17 décembre 1945 pour les années 1945, 1946 et 1947, a été en 1947 plus sévèrement appliquée que les deux années précédentes”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. 55 Demangel, “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1947”: “Les principaux arguments invoqués en faveur des restrictions sont le manque de personnel de surveillance et l’incertitude de l’avenir politique et international. Il y faut sans doute ajouter une certaine dose de xénophobie, excusable dans un pays dont la fierté nationale a eu dernièrement tant à souffrir de la part d’étrangers divers et puissants.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. Cf. Demangel to “M. le Ministre de l’Ordre Public”, 22 March 1948; and Demangel to “M. GEORGIADES, Directeur général du Ministère de l’Ordre public”, 14 April 1948 (no “contact avec les rebelles”). EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”.

184 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

During the final stages of the war, the British embassy in Rome occupied parts of the BSR facilities.56 The British school library reopened on 1 October 1945, “for the benefit of scholars and Army officers who are in Rome on duty or on leave,” with a “series of concerts and tea parties in the School to bring the Italian academic world into closer touch with British officials stationed in Rome”. Army “leave courses”, similar to those arranged at the American academy, were also organised at the BSR.57 The director, Ralegh Radford, was keen on making up for lost time: If the school were opened I should suggest giving one or two small parties in order to bring the Italian academic world into rather closer touch with British officials stationed in this city. […] After the concert I should propose to offer tea in the courtyard and this would give Italians an opportunity of meeting our own people.58

Concerts and tea in the courtyard was in other ways the perceived politically balanced way of interacting with both scholars and soldiers. Archaeologist Thomas Dunbabin, SOE field commander on Crete during the war, as well as head of the Allied Monuments and Fine Arts section (MFAA, see chapter five) in Greece in 1945, was a candidate for the directorship of the British School at Athens after the war.59 Another was John Manuel Cook, also working for the MFAA, who in 1945 seemed “to be the only possible one among the younger men”.60 That it was a man was considered important: “at the present stage it would be most unwise to appoint a woman to the post and it would not go down with the Greeks, unless, of course it were someone really outstanding”.61 The position was offered to Cook, who represented “the School and the University of Cambridge at the Centenary Celebrations of the French school.62 The British school reopened in 1947, in the 56 Cf. Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 17 December 1944; and Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 25 October 1944: “The suggestion is at present on the basis that I should remain Director and be responsible.” BSR archives, box 63. 57 Shaw to Ralegh Radford, 4 May 1945. BSR archives, box 63. 58 Ralegh Radford to Shaw, April (?), 1945. Cf. Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 18 August 1945. BSR archives, box 63. 59 Clay to Myres, 14 May 1945. Cf. also Myres to Clay, 11 May 1945 and 17 May 1945. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. 60 Myres to Clay, 25 September 1945. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate RecordsLondon-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. 61 Clay to Myres, 26 September 1945. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate RecordsLondon-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. 62 Cf. BSA, Report for the Session 1945–46, 1; and BSA, Report for the Session 1946–47, 1: “In December 1946, the status of Hon. Attaché of H.M. Embassy in Athens was conferred upon him

Reopenings, Restorations 

 185

midst of the Greek civil war: “The British School has thus fully re-established its position as a research institution among the foreign schools in Athens. […] Movement in some parts of the mainland is restricted by guerrilla activity: nevertheless, most of the more important sites have been visited by Students.”63 After the war, Myres, chairman during “some of the most exacting years in the School’s history” retired from his post. He was succeeded by archaeologist and art historian Bernard Ashmole (director of the BSR in the 1920s).64 Due to the post-war expansion of activities at the British School at Athens, the property of the school at Knossos was offered to and taken over by the Greek Archaeological Service. The school however maintained “its priority of interest” at the place so strongly associated with Sir Arthur Evans’ crowning achievement.65 The post-war directorship of the British School at Rome was offered to archaeologist John Bryan Ward-Perkins.66 Times had changed (the director for example now had to pay income tax, which had not been the case before the war).67 Ward-Perkins was concerned that the school should reawaken from its wartime slumber and not lag behind other foreign schools. He informed honorary general secretary Shaw in January 1946 that the moment was “very opportune” for applying for “sponsoring” of passage for students to Rome.68 The multitude of issues facing Ward-Perkins, the BSR and other foreign schools in Rome included adaptation to post-war Italian legislation and property insurance.69 The 1945–1946 BSR annual report informed its “subscribers” that “the School buildings came through the war unscathed […] despite the gathering clouds of the impending European disaster, the School extended its activities and the library grew apace.”70 Ward-Perkins was “trying to cut clean of [the director].” For Cook’s early directorship, cf. BSA archives, “Correspondence with Director 1946–47, 1947–48, 1948–49; Correspondence J.L.M. & GMY 1938–41”, BSA Corporate RecordsLondon-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. For Cook, cf. also Snodgrass (1987) 36. 63 BSA, Report for the Session 1947–48, 1. 64 BSA, Report for the Session 1946–47, 1. 65 BSA, Report for the Session 1950–51, 1. See also John L. Myres, “The Palace at Knossos. British Estate Offered to the Greek Government,” in The Times, 14 July 1951. 66 Cf. BSR annual report 1934–1935. The BSR executive committee appointed Ward-Perkins director on 23 May 1945 67 For the financial situation of the BSR director, see Ralegh Radford to Shaw, 25 June 1945. BSR archives, box 63. 68 John Bryan Ward-Perkins to Evelyn Shaw, 18 January 1946 (the Foreign Office had “just agreed to give favourable consideration to opening the English (Papal) College” in Rome). BSR archives, box 64. 69 Shaw to Ward-Perkins, 24 September 1945. BSR archives, box 64. 70 Cf. BSR annual report 1945–1946. When Ward-Perkins and his wife arrived in Rome in November 1945, they stayed with Sjöqvist and his wife at the Swedish institute until 1946 (“until the Foreign Office personnel vacated their quarters in the School”), in the “tradition of

186 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

MFA [sic] responsibilities […] as soon as possible”.71 The classical scholar Eugenie Sellers Strong, a long-time BSR associate, had died in Rome during the war. In her will, the BSR was named “the sole heir of her estate in England and Italy”.72 Ward-Perkins steered the British school further towards active collaboration than had been the case before the war. Building on and developing the legacy of his interwar predecessor Thomas Ashby, Ward-Perkins focused on field surveys (in Etruria), although excavations were discussed again after the war based on WardPerkins’ archaeological interests in Libya.73 Ward-Perkins carried out “brief trial excavations in the church of S. Salvatore at Spoleto, one of the most disputed monuments of late antiquity”, a three-day excavation in December 1946, together with Erik Sjöqvist. The results were published in the publication series of the school, the Papers of the British School at Rome.74 Excavation permits were generally speaking still difficult to come by, and were distributed “with little enthusiasm”. Despite the change in policy regarding foreign excavations and the opening of Italy after the Second World War, Italian authorities remained reluctant to suddenly concede an abundance of archaeological permits; the thorny legal framework contributed to such restrictions. The Swedish archaeologist Natan Valmin was for example recommended by Sjöqvist to prepare himself for a long procedure involving the Italian Ministry of Education, the Direttore Generale delle Antichità, the local Soprintendente and the archaeological council regarding a proposal for an excavation in Cagliari.75 New archaeological strategies were discussed at the British School at Athens, partly due to the ban on foreign excavation in Greece during the civil war, such Anglo-Swedish friendship”. Wiseman (1990) 19. Cf. Ward-Perkins to Sjöqvist, 17 November 1945. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. 71 Ward-Perkins to Sir Leonard Woolley (the War Office, London), 8 October 1945. The archaeologist Woolley (1880–1960) was also with the MFAA during the Second World War (lieutenant-colonel). Ward-Perkins concurrently suggested the employment of Fanny Bonajuto as his secretary at the BSR. Ward-Perkins to Shaw, 17 September 1945. BSR archives, box 64. 72 Cf. Shaw to Ward-Perkins, 24 September 1945. BSR archives, box 64. See also Dyson (2004). Cf. Rietbergen (2012) 215, with reference to Strong as an example of an “academic politician”. For Strong’s last years in Rome, cf. Sjöqvist’s correspondence in RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2, III:A:3; III:A:4, and III:A:5. 73 Possible BSR excavations on the Crown Colony of Malta had been considered before the war. See BSR annual report 1937–1938: Director Ralegh Radford had “spent a week in Malta at the suggestion of the Colonial Office to explore the possibility of the School undertaking archaeological research in the island.” 74 BSR annual report 1946–1947. Cf. Ward-Perkins (1949). 75 Natan Valmin to Erik Sjöqvist, 7 January 1948; and Sjöqvist to Valmin, 14 January 1948. RA, Svenska Institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. For the legal framework of classical archaeology in Italy, see for example Arias (1995).

Reopenings, Restorations 

 187

as a “scheme for the academic study of the Near East” (involving Crete), the establishment of a British Institute at Ankara, as well as a collaboration with the British School at Rome involving discussions of a joint excavation at Cyrene in Libya.76 Instead, the discussions eventually resulted in excavations by the British School at Rome in Libya, at Leptis Magna, Sabratha and in Cyrenaica. In March 1947, Charles Rufus Morey, acting director of the American academy, discussed the possibility of a joint British-American excavation at Cyrene with the incoming AAR director, art historian Laurance Roberts:77 Ward-Perkins is going to propose, with apparently considerable expectation of success, that the British School undertake, what he calls an exploratory operation, amounting at least at first, to cleaning up the edges and completing by scientific recording what the Italians left undone. […] Perkins seems confident that the British mandate there will be good for several years and suggests that the British effort might be spread to include the Americans in a joint expedition.78 76 Myres to Clay, 10 June 1945; and Myres to Clay, 11 September 1945. Cf. also Myres to Clay, 17 May 1945. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. For the BSA and post-war “British work in Cyprus”, see Clay to Myres, 14 December 1946; and Myres to Clay, 16 December 1946. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence”, “1946 Chairman – Secretary Misc. Correspondence” (bundle), BSA Corporate Records-Londonsteel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. See also Clay to Myres (?), 29 March 1947. For the Ankara institute and the discussed joint BSR–BSA excavations at Cyrene, see minutes of meeting of the Managing Committee (at the British Museum) 24 February 1947. BSA, “Letters between Chairman (J.L.M.) & Secretary Session 1946–47” (bundle), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2Box #3.10-uncatalogued. See also BSA archives, “Letters between Director and Secretary Session 1946–47” (folder), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued. 77 Morey was however retained as acting director until 1947 (together with Lamont  Moore, 1909– 1998, art historian, assistant director of the American Academy in Rome 1947–1948, monuments officer for the MFAA 1945), when Roberts took the helm. Cf. Roberts to Morey, 20 November 1946; and Clarence Mendell (AAR trustee, Yale) to Roberts, 29 November 1946. For Moore’s appointment, see Roberts to Moore, 9 May 1947. Among other suggestions for the post-war directorship were John Nicholas Brown (1900–1979, philanthropist, art connoisseur and real estate broker, special cultural advisor (MFAA) to General Eisenhower 1945) and John Walker (chief curator of the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., AAR trustee and Bernard Berenson’s candidate of choice). Cf. John Walker to James Kellum Smith, 28 February 1946. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758; Walter Lippmann to Bernard Berenson, 11 July 1945; and Ernest DeWald to Berenson, 7 January 1947. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5798. Cf. also the Robert and Isabel Roberts Papers. Biblioteca Berenson. The Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies, Villa I Tatti, courtesy of the President and Fellows of Harvard College. 78 Morey to Roberts, 6 March 1947: “In view of the politics involved, it is obvious that this should not be talked about too much, but I thought you might wish to discuss the possibility while you

188 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

This potential joint Anglo-American venture did not take place; the BSR was to uphold its archaeological interests in Libya for some time. The AAR officially reopened after the war in October 1946. A few months earlier, the AAR announced that “several other foreign Academies in Rome have been reopened during the past few months. Among these are the French Academy, the Swedish School, the Dutch School and the Romanian Academy”, illustrating the bustling postwar activity reconstruction and reawakening of the foreign schools in the city (despite only getting the name right of one of the four institutions, the Romanian academy – French school, Swedish institute, Dutch institute – and not acknowledging that the Swedish institute had in fact never closed).79 The time seemed ripe to increase the scale of American operations. AAR associate Harold F. Johnson wrote to academy president James Kellum Smith in June 1947 that I am convinced that the Academy should serve more people. […] Today it is out of scale and out of keeping with the times. I entirely agree that art is necessarily aristocratic, but that has nothing to do with small numbers. Size is no good of itself, but without a sufficient size, I fear a loss of vitality. The crying need is to make this great thing more serviceable […]. You must admit that from some aspects, the Academy has grown into a respectable curio.80

AAR trustee Mason Hammond described what was awaiting Laurance Roberts as director of the academy: “You will occupy a house which has the finest location in Rome, you will have a position which will enable you not only to do rewarding work with the students but to represent this country in a way which is impossible even for an Ambassador.”81 The academy kept close watch on the development of the Fulbright bill, which introduced a program of grants for international educational exchange in 1947–1948: “The Academy’s unique position in Europe as the only American institute of its kind makes it actually the focal point of American

were in the United States.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5798. 79 AAR press release, 16 June 1946: “The American Academy, closed during the war for the first time in its distinguished history, will be reopened on October 1, 1946”. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 80 Harold F. Johnson to James Kellum Smith, 16 June 1947. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855– 2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 81 Mason Hammond to Laurance Roberts, 31 May 1946. Cf. J.K. Smith to Roberts, 15 May 1946: “The salary, while low from American standards, is I believe tax free, and goes considerably further in Italy […] the return in real living value compared very favorably with that of the Presidents of some of the best institutions in this country. […] P.S. This is going to be fun!” Cf. Roberts to Smith, 13 December 1946. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5798.

Reopenings, Restorations 

 189

studies in the humanities and the creative arts.”82 No mention was made of the American school in Athens, admittedly a primarily archaeological institution. In May 1947, American academy president James Kellum Smith wrote to the US House of Representatives regarding a resolution on a post-war program conducted by the recently established Office of Information and Educational Exchange (1946).83 In the framework of other post-war foundations, such as the Marshall Plan and the Fulbright Resolution, the academy was to benefit from an “ItaloAmerican Agreement on Surplus Property Disposal”.84 President Smith wrote to two academy trustees in Washington, D.C., urging them to constitute themselves as the “Congressional lobby of the American Academy in Rome”, “with a view of advising us how best to obtain for the Academy any proper benefits which might accrue from this source”: “substantial funds will be available for cultural purposes in Europe, regardless of […] the Fulbright Resolution[.] This fact is particularly confidential.”85 Smith was understandably excited about these new prospects: “Of course if we really get this source open, there are certain rather extraordinary opportunities there which could be exploited with some more cash. At last we have been promised some opportunities to excavate. […] An extra $15.000 or $20.000 would appear to finance such a dig very comfortably.”86 The funds required for 82 Laurance Roberts to Herschel Brickell (Institute of International Education, New York), 16 January 1948. Cf. Roberts to Kenneth Holland (Department of State, Washington, D.C.), 28 February 1947; Roberts to Morey, 14 March 1947; Roberts to Morey, 18 December 1947; and Morey to Roberts, 9 August 1946. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5798. 83 James Kellum Smith to Charles Eaton, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C., 23 May 1947. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 84 “Memoranda for Mr. [Lindsay] Bradford”, 20 February 1946 (“60 million dollars worth of surplus Army and Navy property”). AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. For US-Italian relations in this period, see for example Miller (1986). 85 James Kellum Smith to Whitney Hart Shepardson (1890–1966, businessman and foreign policy expert, head of the OSS Secret Intelligence Branch during the Second World War, trustee of the American Academy in Rome, 1946), 21 March 1946: “It seems to me likely that the Academy’s lire budget could be paid by the Office of International Information and Cultural Affairs. If this were the case, we could double our enro[l]ment, and really make the Academy of great service to this country.” Cf. Smith to John Walker, 21 March 1946; and Walker to Smith, 11 April 1946. The interest for 1946 was “roughly $2.000.000”. As a reference the pre-war AAR annual budget was “some $65.000, and about 580.000 lire”. Smith to Walker, 17 April 1946. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 86 James Kellum Smith to John Walker, 17 April 1946: “There is a lot we could do with the money, if we can get it.” AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758.

190 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

excavation purposes were estimated to augment the annual academy budget by at least one fourth of the pre-war resources. The American academy hence prepared a public appraisal of the new Office of Information and Educational Exchange, phrased in terms of the promotion of peace and humanism.87 Archaeology was introduced on the agenda of the academy in Rome when it was back in full operation in 1947.88 Archaeologist Frank Edward Brown selected the city of Cosa (ancient Ansedonia), north of Rome. Excavations began there in May 1948.89 Roman and Etruscan archaeology was not as strongly grounded in the American academic system as Greek archaeology, and field experience was limited.90 The development of field archaeology was not one of the original aims of the AAR. Unlike the American school in Athens, archaeology could not and did not dominate the academy in Rome. Also unlike the situation in Athens, where the American school channels excavation permits in Greece, the American academy did not exercise control over other simultaneous American archaeological projects operating in Italy, such as the later Princeton University excavations in Sicily.91

Old Networks, New Order After the Italian school (1909), the next foreign school in line to be founded in Greece was the Swedish Institute at Athens (Svenska institutet i Athen, SIA), established in 1946, inaugurated in 1948.92 Discussions concerning a possible Swedish archaeological institute in Athens took place in Sweden in the same period as excavations were 87 “Resolution adopted by the Board of Trustees of the American Academy in Rome”, 23 May 1947. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. 88 Cf. Valentine and Valentine (1973 109–118; and Dyson (1998) 262. 89 The AAR received its excavation permit for the Cosa excavations on 30 December 1947. Cf. Lamont Moore to Roberts, 30 December 1947. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855–2012, bulk 1894– 1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5798. The excavations ended in 1977, with the establishment of a small museum on the site. For Cosa, cf. Valentine and Valentine (1973) 132–141; Brown (1980), 1–46; Fant (1996) 34–35; and Dyson (1998) 262–263. 90 Cf. Dyson (1998) 261. 91 Cf. Dyson (1998) 265. For the Sicily excavations (Morgantina), cf. correspondence to and from its directors Erik Sjöqvist and Richard Stillwell (as well as two albums of photographs excavations) in the archives of the Department of Art and Archaeology, Princeton University Archives. 92 See early SIA annual rapports, SIA archives, box “Institutets årsredogörelser”, beginning with a report from 1947 (Erik J. Holmberg, “the representative of Swedish archaeological research in Greece”). Cf. BSA, Report for the Session 1947–48, 17. See also BFA, Gustaf VI Adolfs arkiv I, box 166, “Grekland och Athen-institutet 1945–71”.

Old Networks, New Order 

 191

initiated in the Argolid in the early 1920s, discussions that instead were to culminate in the establishment of the Swedish Institute in Rome (see chapter three).93 The Swedes, albeit having “been asked to open an archaeological school during the 1930s”,94 thus managed to initiate a series of excavations in Greece without an institution in Athens until after the war. The case of Asine (see chapter three) was an exception that became a precedent for further interwar Swedish archaeological activity in Greece and for excavation permits granted directly to individuals. From 1937, the director of the Swedish Institute in Rome had been expected to organise and lead a one-month excursion to Greece as part of the annual archaeological course.95 The Swedish Institute at Athens was founded in Stockholm in April 1946.96 The establishment proper of the institute in 1948 awaited consent from the Greek government, a confirmation of a promise made personally to Swedish archaeologist Einar Gjerstad. The confirmation was delayed due to the civil war: “the political situation in Greece does not seem to have improved and the economic situation in Sweden has worsened.”97 The institution had not yet succeeded in securing its quarters when it was inaugurated in 1948 in a ceremony in the Gennadius library of the American school. Before the inauguration, the Swedish

93 See for example crown prince Gustaf Adolf to the “archaeological section” of the ministry of education, Athens, 4/18 October 1922 (written in German by Axel W. Persson, signed by Gustaf Adolf). SIA archives, boxes F 1 I: “Korrespondens rörande äldre grävningar i Argolis” (previously box “(Nauplion) Arkiv inköpt 1994”). 94 Wells and Penttinen (2005) 9. Early arguments in favour of establishing a Swedish institute in Athens were for example presented in the articles “Svenskmuseet i Vasiliko”, Svenska Dagbladet, 29 October 1935 (Natan Valmin); “Svenskt institut i Aten, entusiasm för förslaget”, Svenska Dagbladet, 30 October 1935; and “Grekland ger Sverige Atentomt för institut”, Svenska Dagbladet, 3 November 1938. Sigtunastiftelsens klipparkiv, “Arkeologi Grekland Italien”. 95 One such excursion to Greece took place after the war, in 1947, before the Swedish Institute at Athens was inaugurated. Cf. Billig, Billig and Whitling (2015) 164–170. Cf. Martin P. Nilsson, “Svenska Institutet i Rom,” Svenska Dagbladet, n.d. (1925). In “Svenska Institutet i Rom. Dagbok från Okt. 1925–15 april 1926”. GUB, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, H 80:241–243. See also correspondence in BFA, Gustaf VI Adolfs arkiv I, box 166; and in Brevsamling Gjerstad, Einar, Lund University Library. 96 For the history of the Swedish Institute at Athens, see for example Åkerström (1973); Styrenius (1974); Wells (2002); Wells and Penttinen (2005); Schallin (2013); Penttinen (2014b); and Whitling (2016b). See also Styrenius (2016); and SIA archives, folders “Institutets historia” and “Diverse fotografier Ej Berbati”. Cf. also SIA archives, press cuttings, folder “1925–1983”. 97 Einar Gjerstad to Axel Boëthius, 27 November 1947 (translation). Brevsamling Gjerstad, Einar, Lund University Library, Sweden. See also Erik J. Holmberg’s correspondence with Erik Sjöqvist, RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:3. Cf. Erik Sjöqvist to Axel Boëthius, 27 December 1947. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2; and (for example) SIR board meeting minutes, 19 March 1948, § 13.

192 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

Institute in Rome acted as middleman for exchanges of Italian publications vis-à– vis for example the British and Italian schools in Athens.98 As in the case of the institute in Rome, crown prince Gustaf Adolf was elected chairman of the board of the institute in Athens.99 The board of the Swedish Institute at Athens was initially struggling to arouse interest in the position as its director (directeur d’études, in French). Einar Gjerstad even considered temporarily taking the job himself.100 The position as director of the Swedish institute was accepted by the archaeologist Erik John Holmberg, for one year only (1947–1948, indeed Holmberg’s criteria for accepting the post). During his time in Athens, Holmberg was himself referred to as “the Swedish Institute” – an illustration of the role and influence of individual directors of foreign schools, at least in the formative years in the life of an institution. Unlike the earlier foreign schools in Athens, the Swedish Institute at Athens was not initially allowed to undertake excavations in its own name (until 1975, after the fall of the regime of the colonels, when the Swedish institute was granted the same status as other foreign archaeological schools, cf. fig. 37).101 The Swedish-American Oscar Broneer served as acting director of the American school in 1947–1948, during the Greek civil war. Broneer was an American citizen, and was associated with the Greek War Relief Association (he for example assisted in organising war relief by way of “a Swedish boat to Greece”).102 In Greece, the civil war hindered a real return to the international stage until the following decade. At the same time, designs for an “international archaeological library” were briefly considered at the American school. The plan consisted of 98 Cf. BSA, Report for the Session 1946–47, 4; BSA, Report for the Session 1947–48, 6; and Erik Sjöqvist to Doro Levi (?), 26 June 1947: “Gli inglesi riservono per Lei tutte le annate della guerra e dell’attuale – ahimé – dopoguerra, della B.S.A.”. SAIA archives, 1947–1948: “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. VII Annuario Pos. VIII Scavi e Missioni”. 99 See for example Boëthius to Sjöqvist, 26 April 1946. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:2. 100 Gjerstad to Boëthius, 21 April 1947. Brevsamling Gjerstad, Einar, Lund University Library, Sweden. 101 Cf. Erik J. Holmberg to Erik Sjöqvist, 23 February 1948. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:3. The current premises of the SIA, adjacent to the new Acropolis museum, were purchased in 1976. Cf. Penttinen (2014b), 103. The establishment of the SIA was followed by the acceptance on the part of the Swedish state of the Villa San Michele on Capri in 1949–1950, the creation of medical doctor and writer Axel Munthe (1857–1949), run by the board of the SIR since Munthe’s death. Cf. for example Oliv (1972). 102 The Oscar Broneer papers (ASCSA archives) contain personal correspondence with Swedish archaeologists such as Natan Valmin, Einar Gjerstad, Erik J. Holmberg, Axel Boëthius, Erik Sjöqvist, Paul Åström and Åke Åkerström (cf. http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/archives/ oscar-broneer-papers, accessed 21 June 2018). Cf. also “Oscar Broneer och hans utgrävningar i Grekland”, Göteborgs Handels- och Sjöfarts-Tidning, 12 January 1935 (Axel W. Persson). Sigtunastiftelsens klipparkiv, “Arkeologi Grekland Italien”.

Old Networks, New Order 

 193

Fig. 37: The Swedish Institute at Athens, 10 June 1976 (on the day of the inauguration of the then recently purchased and restored institute building). Photograph: Pontus Hellström.

uniting the libraries of the German, Italian, Austrian, French and British schools with that of the Archaeological Society at Athens, in a library building that would be connected with the Gennadius library of the American school. The suggestion was a way of dealing with and of controlling the Italian, Austrian and above all German library collections in Athens. A report to the managing committee of the American school in 1947, probably made by its chairman Louis Lord, stressed the difficulties of “the strong nationalistic feeling which is now prevalent in Athens”: “I never have found the Greeks so difficult to deal with.”103 103 Louis E. Lord (?), “A Report to the Managing Committee on my Visit to the School during August, 1947”. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/8, folder 1. See box 310/8, folder 3 for further discussions regarding a possible “International Archaeological Library” in Athens (1947?).

194 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

Lord was granted an audience with the king, Paul I, regarding the “international” library plan “and had “talked it over with him”. Paul, who had become king of Greece the same year, had told Lord “that he was giving the German library to a newly organized institute.” Lord did not think that was in any way realistic: Of course he will be unable to do this. I did not, however, deem it wise to tell him so. The libraries of the German and Italian and Austrian schools are in the hands of the Greek Government. If the Greek Government takes over the German library as they are planning, it will have to be part of their reparations from Germany and it is a question whether the Greek Government will wish to accept it under that condition. The same thing is true of the Austrian and Italian libraries which the Greek Government now says will probably be returned to the original owners. In the case of Italy, this might be possible. […] King Paul hopes to open [the German] library to the newly formed institute but apparently the government at present has no fund to finance the project.104

Louis Lord went to London and Oxford to discuss a possible international library with BSA chairman, Bernhard Ashmole, and his predecessor, John Myres: “They both recognized the economical advantage of the proposal and thought that we might make some sort of an arrangement by which the British [and] American libraries would buy different periodicals and save a considerable amount. […] either we press this project of an international library or erect a new building at the rear of our own grounds or remodel the present building.”105 Earlier the same year, 1947, the British School at Athens was also discussing “the future of the German library in Athens,” and what it referred to as “the Rome plan of a joint management by the Foreign Institutes”, supported at least by John Myres.106 This might imply that the recently established AIAC and Unione of institutes in Rome were considering including the German library in Athens in a future international institution in Greece. Or perhaps the (Allied) schools in Athens – in this case the British and American schools – were inspired by the

104 Lord (?), “A Report to the Managing Committee on my Visit to the School during August, 1947”: “Incidentally the German library is in wretched condition. About a third of the books have been removed and are said to be stored in the basement under seal. The whole place is covered with dust and is in utter disorder.” ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/8, folder 1. 105 Lord (?), “A Report to the Managing Committee on my Visit to the School during August, 1947”. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, box 310/8, folder 1. 106 Myres to Edith Clay, 19 February 1947, regarding “proposals for the reorganisation of the German Institute. I would support the Rome plan of a joint management by the Foreign Institutes[.] The essential thing is to keep these Institutes in working order & maintenance.” Cf. minutes of meeting of the managing Committee (at the British Museum) 24 February 1947. Handwritten notes (Myres). BSA archives, “Letters between Chairman (J.L.M.) & Secretary Session 1946–47” (bundle), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued.

Old Networks, New Order 

 195

contemporary discussions in Rome regarding the return and future management of the German libraries in Italy? The issue is an example of the fine line between international idealism and national opportunism in the reorganisation of science and scholarship after the war. Two years earlier, before the war had ended, chairman Myres referred to another “American proposal” by Louis Lord regarding “the interim use of the German Institute & its Library,” quite likely on a similar theme, which Myres however did “not much like”: “its only advantage is that it provides for the interim use of the German Institute & its Library & that is part of the larger question of the disposal of the whole German organisation [abroad].” Myres seemed to prefer the old order of “national outlooks” – in effect also relying on national funding – and a maintained “freedom of methods”: All these existing Institutes have their own funds, equipment and methods of work, which are different, and are primarily responsible for their own nationals & friends. What for instance, will be the French reaction to this? […] There is some advantage in different national outlooks and freedom of methods. At most we should say that the whole question of German Institutes abroad is a large & complex one, and that if any conference is called to discuss it, we should wish to be represented.107

Unlike similar international intentions in Rome (AIAC and the Unione), nothing came of these Anglo-American Athenian post-war proposals. In Italy, negotiations were initiated in 1947 concerning a treaty for an international solution to the challenge of the future administration of the German scholarly institutions and libraries in Rome and Florence. The proposed solution was to be based on the liquidation of German assets in Italy seized during the war, which could thereby also contribute to secure the funding of the Unione. In order for this to occur, an agreement between the USA, Great Britain, France and Italy would be necessary. The interests from a fund consisting of one billion lire were to be allotted for the maintenance of the four German libraries in Italy, to be considered Italian property, controlled by the Unione for 99 years.

107 Myres to Clay, 23 (?) February 1945. Cf. Clay to Myres, 26 September 1945. BSA archives, “B.S.A. Correspondence between: President Chairman & Secretary 1944–45 1946 1947 1947–48 1948–49 1949–50”, BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued. Cf. also Clay to Myres, 14 December 1946, regarding “German libraries in Athens”. BSA archives, “Letters between Chairman (J.L.M.) & Secretary Session 1946–47” (bundle), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued; as well as correspondence in BSA archives, “Letters between Director and Secretary Session 1946–47” (folder), BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued.

196 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

An appeal was discussed by German scholars against the planned “four powers treaty” in late 1948.108 UNESCO representative Edward J. Carter was present at a Unione meeting in December 1948, and subsequently reported on the planned treaty (referring to it as “1949 obligations”).109 After two years of drawn-out negotiations, the treaty was to be signed in 1949. The US State Department however backed out of the agreement in the last minute (3 August). Interventions by art historian Bernard Berenson in 1948 may contributed to the American change of direction, although they were perhaps not quite as influential as has been previously suggested. In a letter to US diplomat Paul Hyde Bonner in February 1948, Berenson had manifestly advocated the restitution of the libraries to Germany, favouring return to German control over the international administration drafted in the four powers treaty: “My ideal would be to restore these institutions to German scholarship, subject to supervision by a committee selected from the archaeologists and art historians from the United Nations.”110 Berenson’s influence may however have been somewhat exaggerated, given Bonner’s prompt reply to Berenson: The whole matter seems to be moving along with the utmost agreement amongst all concerned. The Italian Foreign Office informed me yesterday that they were entirely in accord

108 Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann, report, 24 November 1948 (“Abschrift 238/48 – Rom, den 24.11.1948”: “ein Anruf (nicht ein ‘Protest’) an die ganze gelehrte Welt”). The Kunsthistorisches Institut archives, Florence, Institutsgeschichte, Berichte, 1948. Cf. Deichmann to Erland and Ragnhild Billig, 19 February 1948: “Grosse Pläne bewegen die Union für neue Stellen an unserem Institut”. RA, Svenska Institutet, Lektoratsarkivet i Florens (och Rom) 1946–1949, Lektor Erland Billigs brev och handlingar, volym 4, mapp 4: ”Inkommande skrivelser 1947/48”. 109 Edward J. Carter, “Memorandum of meeting with the council of the International Union of Institutes of Archaeology, History and History of Art, Rome on 10.12.48”, 4 January 1949: “I reported on the 3 General Conference decision to make a grant of $5,000 with, if required, a loan of a further sum not exceeding $8,000, should funds not be forthcoming from the investment of ex-German assets in Italy in sufficient time to meet 1949 obligations. […] The Union is completely independent politically, both from the Italian Government and the governments of participating institutions, and is determined to preserve its independence.” The Kunsthistorisches Institut archives, Florence. For Carter and UNESCO, and “the practical process of cooperating internationally”, see Carter (1948) 235. Cf. also Thomas (1962); and “Mr. Edward J. CARTER” (10 October 1948), UNESCO/Biographies/14, PI D-538, UNESCO Archives, Paris. 110 Berenson to “Paul Bonner Esq. American Embassy, Rome”, 17 February 1948 (in appendix i). Cf. Bonner to Berenson, 19 February 1948. Bonner also wrote to Berenson on 1 April and 5 May 1948 regarding the application of the Marshall Plan in Italy. The Bernard and Mary Berenson Papers, 31.10. Biblioteca Berenson. The Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies, Villa I Tatti, courtesy of the President and Fellows of Harvard College. For Bonner, see also the Paul Hyde Bonner Papers, 1931–1975, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton University Library. Cf. also Whitling, ”Relative Influence”, 658.

Old Networks, New Order 

 197

with our formula, which is, as I believe I told you, to give the libraries to Italy on the condition that they be leased for 99 years to the Union of Institutes. In addition, our plan is to give the Union an endowment of one billion lire to be invested in Italian Government bonds. The whole plan is now being forwarded to Washington, London and Paris for consideration by the three Governments. Once the Union have possession, they should take heed of your advice to use those German scholars who have done so much to develop the libraries and whose presence would be of such infinite use to scholars.111

This shows that the US embassy in Rome in fact supported the “internationalisation” of the libraries and the Unione approach in early 1948. It is therefore possible that the impetus for the American objection to the treaty emanated from elsewhere, possibly from within the state department itself, although intense lobbying efforts by Italian and German scholars may have had a certain influence on the proceedings.112 A British memorandum outlined the following three main reasons, ex post facto, for why the Americans had backed out of the treaty: (1) “The state department considered itself obliged to withdraw its concurrence in the draft protocol of 1949 because its provisions ran contrary to the principle, which has always inspired the Department’s policy, that owners of cultural property should not be deprived of title to it.” (2) “Were the three Powers now to deprive the German owners of title to the libraries or to restrict its exercise, their action would be condemned by public opinion as ‘gauche and uncultured’.” (3) The Unione had allegedly “formally stated that they are unable and unwilling to continue to administer the libraries” (although no such formal refusal by the Unione had been made).113 Whichever the exact reasons, the fact remains: the “four powers 111 Bonner to Berenson, 20 February 1948. Cf. Bonner to Berenson, 20 November 1958. The Bernard and Mary Berenson Papers, 31.09. Biblioteca Berenson. The Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies, Villa I Tatti, courtesy of the President and Fellows of Harvard College. 112 See for example art historian William George Constable to Ludwig Heinrich Heydenreich (1903–1978, art historian, director of the Kunsthistorisches Institut, Florence 1943–1945, director of the Zentralinstitut für Kunstgeschichte, Munich 1947–1970), 8 November 1949; and Walter Paatz to Theodor Klauser, 15 June 1949. The Kunsthistorisches Institut archives, Florence, Allgemeine Korrespondenz, 1949 (?). Cf. Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann to Erland Billig, 29 June 1949: “Die Union beharrt mit allen Mitteln weiter auf Internationalisierung und hat vor wenigen Tagen einen heftigen Druck auf die Liquidations-Kommission, auch durch die Schliessung aus Geldmangel, ausgeübt. […] Es ist mir schon lang sauer genug geworden, auch von der Union Geld anzunehmen, und nach dieser Form des Hinausschmisses dürfte man nun auch nicht mehr allzu riconisciente [sic] gesinnt gezwungen zu sein.” RA, Svenska Institutet, Lektoratsarkivet i Florens (och Rom) 1946–1949, Lektor Erland Billigs brev och handlingar, volym 3, mapp 2: ”Lektor Billig utg. korr 1949”. 113 Anthony H. Lincoln (British diplomat, Foreign Office) to the British embassy in Rome, 2 December 1950. Records Concerning the Central Collecting Points (“Ardelia Hall Collection”): Wiesbaden Central Collecting Point, 1945–1952, http://www.fold3.com/image/231928462/

198 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

treaty” was not signed. After the breakdown of the treaty, the Unione nevertheless continued to define the four libraries as “international”.114 The Unione was waiting for a response to a new appeal in 1950, although Albert Grenier, director of the École française de Rome, felt, “without much hope, as the issue of the exGerman libraries has after a year unfortunately become a question of politics.”115 The issue had however been exactly that, “a question of politics”, since the libraries had been removed from Italy in early 1944, and well before that. Archaeologist Doro Levi (see chapter five) had taken over the direction of the Italian school in Athens in 1947. The school had rented its pre-war premises near the Acropolis. After the world war and the end of the civil war, this earlier arrangement was replaced with a new school building in the vicinity, as part of a two-part “programme” for the school, with short-term aims – the establishment of a “Byzantine Institute” in Venice (in 1951, following a 1948 accord) and the restitution by the Greek state of the Italian school and the Italian Missione on Crete – as well as longterm objectives: the “creation of a hellenic school or academy in Rome” (which did not materialise), the construction of a new building for the Italian school in Athens, and an Italian–Greek exchange programme for teachers and students.116 The Italian school officially reopened in 1949, having earlier been placed under sequestration by the Greek government. The director referred to the “nerve-wracking slowness” of the restitution of the school, and to his

http://www.fold3.com/image/231928468/, http://www.fold3.com/image/231928476/ & http:// www.fold3.com/image/231928483/ (accessed 21 June 2018). 114 Cf. Unione statutes, registered 29 October 1949, signed 8 November 1949, §12–14. AN, 20170185/105. 115 “Note sur les Bibliothèques ci-devant allemandes d’Italie”: “[L’Union] l’attend sans beaucoup d’espoir car, depuis un an la question des bibliothèques ci-devant allemandes est malheureusement devenue une question politique.” AN, 20170185/105. Cf. Whitling (2011) 658. The creation of the Federal Republic of Germany in May 1949 might also have contributed to the Americans backing out of the “four powers treaty” the same year. Cf. Rietbergen (2012) 240. 116 Cf. “Ripresa delle relazioni culturali italo-elleniche” (1947/1948), draft (in Italian and French): “Programma da attuarsi immediatamente”, “Programma più ampio da svolgersi gradualmente”, “creazione di una Scuola o Accademia Ellenica in Roma”. SAIA archives, 1947–1948: “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. I Affari Generali Pos. II Finanziamento e Amministrazione”. See also Doro Levi to “G. Guidotti Dir. Gen. A.P. Ministero Affari Esteri […]”.SAIA archives, 1950–1951: “Archivio 1950–51”, “Pos. I Affari Generali Pos. II Amministrazione”; and Levi to “A. Alessandrini Ambasciatore d’Italia Atene”, 3 May 1951. SAIA, archives, 1950–1951: “Archivio 1950–51”, “[Pos.] V Sede, ammobigliamento e forniture casa VI Biblioteca e Gabinetto fotografico”. For the Italian foreign ministry, cf. the Archivio Storico del Ministero degli Affari Esteri (ASMAE), Archivio Storico Diplomatico, Rome.

Old Networks, New Order 

 199

“impatience to act and to reconstruct everything from these ruins”.117 When the Italian school was finally back on its feet, Levi sketched out a “programme” for “this institute which has brought so much distinction to Italy in the past in the international competition of archaeological research and cultural activities.”118 The issue at hand was in part one of prestige: archaeological international competition required a “gradual but certain recapture of lost positions,” in a post-war order in which Greece “no longer defined the boundaries of the classical world.” “The roots of hellenic civilisation” were “inexplicably tied to those of other civilisations in the Near East”, implying internal priorities and hierarchies in classical archaeology.119 In reference to Italian excavations on Lemnos, Levi tellingly considered it necessary to “save the savable” and to “pick all the possible fruits of the most significant research activity conducted by the school during its last ten years of activity before the world war.”120

117 Doro Levi to Giacomo Caputo, 10 May 1948: “esasperante lentezza.” SAIA archives, 1947– 1948: “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. VII Annuario Pos. VIII Scavi e Missioni”; and Levi to Count Pellati (Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione, Rome), 1 June 1948: “la mia impazie[n]za di agire e di ricostruire tutto da queste rovine”; Levi to Marquis Talamo (Affari Esteri, Rome), 14 May 1948; copy of “Verbale di Consegna” (on sequestration); and “Pro-memoria per il Marchese Talamo”, January 1948. SAIA archives, 1947–1948: “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. I Affari Generali Pos. II Finanziamento e Amministrazione” (cf. also “Pos. V” and “Pos. VI”). See also Carl Weickert (DAI) to Rudolf Salat (Bundeskanzleramt), 4 November 1950 (“Jener Vertrag mit Italien ist in Griechenland durchaus unpopulär”). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–40: “Athen Allgemeines 1.4.1936–31.3.1945 1.8.1948–31.12.1950”. 118 Levi to the Italian minister of public instruction, 7 May 1949: “programma [per] questo Istituto [sic] il quale, nella gara internazionale delle ricerche archeologiche e delle attività culturali, per il passato ha fatto tanto onore all’Italia.” Cf. Levi to Talamo, 18 May 1949; and Levi to the Italian Minister in Athens, 25 July 1948 (with a memorandum by Levi, 25 July 1948). SAIA archives, 1948–1950: “Archivio 1948–49 e 1949–50”, “Pos. I – 1948–49”. Cf. also Levi to the Italian minister of public instruction, 2 November 1949. SAIA archives, 1948–1950: “Archivio 1948–49 e 1949–50”, “Pos. I 1949–50”; and SAIA archives, 1948–1950: “Archivio 1948–49 e 1949–50”, “Pos. II 1948–49 1949–50”, “III Direzione e Personale IV Allievi, aggregate e ospiti”; “Missione di Creta”; and “VIII Scavi ed esplorazioni Missione in Grecia” – “Creta, Lemnos, Rodi”. 119 Manuscript (Doro Levi, 1949, “Si riapre la Scuola di Atene”): “[la] graduale ma sicura riconquista delle posizioni perdute”, “Il territorio della Grecia non delimita più i confini del mondo classico. Le radici della civiltà ellenica sono inesplicabilmente allacciate con quelle di altre civiltà del prossimo Oriente” (published in Il Giornale della Sera, 5 January 1950). Cf. other newspaper articles on the same theme (1950). SAIA archives, 1948–1950: “Archivio 1948–49 e 1949–50”, “Pos. I 1949–50”. 120 Levi (?) to the Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione, 17 June 1949: “salvare il salvabile e cogliere tutti i frutti possibile della più significativa attività di ricerca condotta della Scuola durante i suoi ultimi dieci anni di vita prima della Guerra Mondiale.” SAIA archives, 1950–1951: “Archivio 1950–51”, “Pos. III Direzione e Personale Pos. IV Allievi, aggregate e ospiti”, “Scavi Lemnos”.

200 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

In early 1948, the suspension of archaeological activity by the foreign schools in Greece, initiated in 1946, was, it then seemed, to last for four years in total.121 The above-mentioned British excavations in question “on Turkish soil” were carried out together with the archaeologist Ekrem Akurgal. The ban on excavations was however “removed” the same spring: “The year 1949 has seen a great improvement in conditions in Greece. The Peloponnese and Central Greece have been completely cleared, and archaeological sites in the north can now be visited; excavation has been resumed by the Archaeological Society and the foreign schools.”122 The ban on foreign excavations in Greece consequently ceased before the end of the civil war. French excavations were back on track, although pre-war restrictions regarding the number of excavation sites remained, with increased rigour.123 Resuming excavations, the “traditional activity” of the French school, was considered a way of “continuing to deserve the amicable homage which the scholarly world has been kind enough to bring it at the occasion of its centenary.”124 The end of the civil war led to the resumption of archaeological undertakings by the foreign schools in Athens, having ground to a halt for almost a decade. The road back to Athens for German scholars was both a slow and rocky one. Towards the end of the Greek civil war, Italian school director Doro Levi had informed Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli that “the German institute is closed, barred and bolted,” and that no German or Austrian scholar had “so far been granted permission to return.”125 The renewed archaeological activities, “since the collapse

121 Levi, “Pro-memoria per il Marchese Talamo”, January 1948. SAIA archives, 1947–1948: “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. I Affari Generali Pos. II Finanziamento e Amministrazione”. 122 Excavations at Bayrakli Tepe, near Izmir, in June–July 1948. BSA, Report for the Session 1948–49, 20 & 1. Cf. Edith Clay to John L. Myres, 10 March 1949 (on excavations at Mycenae). BSA archives, “President & Secretary 1948–49” (bundle), BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2- Box #3.10-uncatalogued. 123 Robert Demangel, “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1948”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. Cf. Demangel to the minister of national education, 19 April 1948. EFA archives, EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. See also “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1949”; and “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1949”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 21–22: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”, and “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1951–1998”. 124 Demangel to “M. le Ministre de l’Éducation Nationale et des Cultes Direction du Service des Antiquités”, 12 March 1948: “pour continuer à mériter l’amical hommage que le monde savant a bien voulu lui apporter à l’occasion de son Centenaire”, “son activité traditionnelle”. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. See also, for example, Cheze (2013); and Arnoux-Farnoux (2015). 125 Doro Levi to Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli, 16 April 1948: “L’istituto Germanico è chiuso e sbarrato, nè ad alcun tedesco o austriaco è stato dato finora permesso di tornare.” Cf.

Old Networks, New Order 

 201

of the rebel movement”, can be exemplified by a British report that highlighted both stable conditions and the zeal of the BSA to once more cater for students and visiting scholars: “Communications have been restored in all parts of Greece, and travel within the country is quicker and more comfortable than in pre-war days. The Antiquities Department and the Archaeological Society are now in a position to play a more active part again, and the museums are being restored.”126 Notwithstanding post-war international intentions, national scholarly rivalry remained a common trope, also among friends. With reference to the British School at Rome, in 1949, Axel Boëthius referred to Great Britain as a “less luxurious nation” than Sweden.127 National prestige and pride in other words remained a tetchy topic in the immediate post-war period, also among former allies, also on the level of dreary detail: in 1949, EFA director Robert Demangel made a request for a concession of motorcars for the École, once again described as the “doyenne” of foreign archaeological institutions in Greece. The request combined practical use with national prestige; it was made as the American school had for some time had a number of cars at its disposal.128 A French car (a Hotchkiss) that was to be delivered for the centenary of the École did not arrive in time, however, somewhat ironically obliging Demangel to use an American car (a Dodge) for the French centenary celebrations.129 Demangel was succeeded by the philologist and archaeologist Georges Daux, who wrote two reports for the year 1952. The first report affirmed that “the archaeological exploration of Greece is far from having been achieved”, emphasising the need for much increased financial resources, if the school was to anew experience the “glory days” of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. Daux also addressed the issue of maintaining the foreign section of the French school. The establishment of a new school in Athens in 1948 (the Swedish institute) meant that international recruitment to the EFA ran the risk of “running dry” due to “the attraction exercised

Bianchi Bandinelli to Levi, 10 April 1948. SAIA archives, 1947–1948: “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. IX Informazioni” (envelope). 126 BSA, Report for the Session 1949–50, 1: “The School has become more than ever before a centre for British students visiting Greece, and a number of Swedish and Danish scholars have also resided in the [BSA] Hostel.” 127 Axel Boëthius to Arvid Andrén (classical archaeologist and art historian), 24 January 1949. SIR archives, “Korrespondens 1939–”. 128 Demangel (?) to the French ambassador in Athens, 12 February 1949: “la doyenne des Institutions archéologiques fonctionnant en Grèce”. EFA archives, 1 ADM 22 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1940–1965)”. Cf. Demangel to the French Ambassador in Athens, 24 March 1948. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. 129 Demangel to the Hotchkiss company, 21 September 1947. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”.

202 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

by the other foreign schools”.130 Daux’ second report treated “the material and moral situation” of the school and the “decay” of the EFA buildings.131 Notwithstanding such post-war material challenges, Daux insisted that the École would continue to carry out “its research in the most varied fields of Hellenism.”132 A Kommission for the German archaeological institute in Berlin had been set up six months after the end of the Second World War (10 January 1946), when the archaeological institute was under consideration for adhesion to the Berliner Akademie der Wissenschaften.133 The German archaeological institute in Athens eventually reopened in 1950–1951, a few years before the resumption of activities of its counterpart in Rome (in 1953).134 The DAIA library had temporarily been placed in the National Archaeological Museum in order to protect it from the risk of looting.135 Carl Weickert, president of the DAI in Berlin, who expressly ascertained in retrospect that indeed “much damage was caused” at  the German institutes 130 Georges Daux, “Rapport sur les conditions du fonctionnement scientifique de l’École Française d’Athènes”, 1952: “L’exploration archéologique de la Grèce est loin d’être achevée […] La création d’une École suédoise en 1950 [sic], l’attrait exercé par les autres Écoles étrangères risqueraient d’en tarir le recrutement […] les heures glorieuses”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 22: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1951–1998”. Cf. Georges Daux to Crédit Lyonnais, Paris, 29 December 1950 “(spécimens de ma signature)”. EFA archives, 1 ADM 22 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1940–1965)”. 131 Daux, “Rapport sur les conditions du fonctionnement scientifique de l’École Française d’Athènes”, 1952: “la situation matérielle et morale”, “le délabrement de l’École”. Cf. Daux to P.  Donzelot, “Directeur Général de l’Enseignement Supérieur”, 4 October 1952. EFA archives, 2 ADM 22: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1951–1998”. 132 Daux, “Rapport sur les travaux de l’École en 1954”: “ses recherches dans les domaines les plus variés de l’hellénisme.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 22: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1951–1998”. No report for the year 1953 is preserved in the EFA archives (although the 1954 report refers to such a report). 133 Carl Weickert, 21 January 1946. Cf. Weickert to Captain Hathaway, MFAA, 26 January 1946; and Weickert to Dr Karsen (“U.S. Military Government”, 14 March 1947 (“Der Plan der Bildung einer Forschungsanstalt im amerikanischen Sektor Berlins”). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 134 For the reopening of the DAIA, cf. BSA, Report for the Session 1950–51, 27. For DAIA correspondence with Greek authorities, see DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner K 10: “A: Korrespondenz mit griechischen Behörden bis 1944 B: Allgemeine Angelegenheiten: Korrespondenz mit griechischen Behörden 1931–1962 C: Korrespondenz mit griechischen Behörden, Erziehungsministerium bzw. Ministerpräsidium 1951–1967”. Cf. DAIA archives, D-DAIATH-Archiv, Ordner 39: “Tätigkeitsberichte 1923–1944”; DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10– 42: “Athen Aufgaben 1936–1943”; and DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 20–40: “Bibliothek Athen 1934–1944 1950–1965” (library purchases, lists of books and related correspondence). 135 Weickert to Friedrich Matz, 7 December 1945; and Carl Weickert to “Captain Grier, Monuments Fine Arts Archives”, Berlin, 16 November 1945 (in appendix i). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”.

Old Networks, New Order 

 203

Fig. 38: Carl Weickert, “Memorandum über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut”, signed by a number of German scholars, 1950.

in Athens and Rome during the Nazi period, asked that the DAIA be returned to German control in the imminent liquidation of German assets, arguing that archaeologists and scholars in general were separated from the world of politics.136 In 1948, Weickert inversely claimed post-factum that the German archaeological 136 Weickert to dr Strauss, secretary of state, 24 August 1949 (in appendix i): “Die Nazizeit hat auch in dieser Hinsicht sowohl in Athen, wie in Rom viel Porzellan zerschlagen”. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”; and Weickert to Minister Papas,

204 

 6 Competition and Collaboration, 1945–1953

institute in Rome had never entertained “Nazi ideas” in its scholarly endeavours: a damnatio memoriae that clearly disregarded the activities of convinced Nazi archaeologists such as Siegfried Fuchs, Edgar Kübber and Friedrich Krischen.137 The war had certainly taken its toll on German scholarly reputation, according to Weickert more so in Greece than in Italy (cf. fig. 38).138 The hope was that the Greek government would however look favourably upon reopening the DAIA: “scholarly camaraderie among the various institutes has for long worked stronger [in Greece], whereas very specific roles have been played in Rome, also socially, particularly in the older institutes.”139 In this first post-war phase, classical archaeologist Emil Kunze directed the German institute in Athens, as well as the prestigious excavations at Olympia, which were resumed in 1952. Reopening the institute in Athens could facilitate rekindling the institute in Rome, which eventually reopened in 1953, after eight post-war years of debates and diplomatic efforts regarding the future of the German scholarly institutions and libraries in Italy.140 The pre-war national institutional framework in Rome and Athens had thereby ultimately been restored, although this time in an overarching international setting; a situation that with minor modifications has remained in place until the present day. “Leiter” of the Greek military commission, 2 November 1950 (in appendix i). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–40: “Athen Allgemeines 1.4.1936–31.3.1945 1.8.1948–31.12.1950”. 137 Weickert to Ludwig Heydenreich, 6 December 1948. “In seiner wissenschaftlichen Haltung hat das Institut sich niemals Naziideen geöffnet.” The Kunsthistorisches Institut archives, Florence. Cf. Weickert to the Magistrat of the city of Berlin and to the Prussian Akademie der Wissenschaften, 12 December 1945 (“dem neutralen Gebiet der Wissenschaft”). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 138 Carl Weickert to Friedrich Matz, 7 December 1945: “Jedenfalls fürchte ich, daß der Verlust des Ansehens in Griechenland noch größer ist als in Italien. Über Stambul und Kairo weiß ich nichts.” German standing and prestige was for example considered to be higher in Turkey than in other countries. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 139 Transcription of report “regarding the present situation of the DAI” (Weickert?), to the Magistrat von Gross-Berlin, 24 January 1950: “Die wissenschaftlichen Kameradschaft zwischen den verschiedenen Instituten wirkt dort [in Griechenland] seit je stärker, während in Rom besonders unter den älteren Instituten ein jedes eine ganz bestimmte auch gesellschaftliche Rolle spielt.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. 140 See restitution treaty, and Unione session, 20 April 1953: “Trasferimento delle Biblioteche ai Tedeschi”. Cf. John Bryan Ward-Perkins, “Promemoria for conclusion of transfer of libraries”, 15 May 1953 (the DAIR was to be directed by Guido Kaschnitz von Weinberg (1890–1958, first director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom 1953–1956); the transfer of its library took place on 26 May 1953); and receipt for Unione payments from the German embassy, 13 June 1953. AN, 20170185/105. Cf. also “Mietvertrag Rom” and various newspaper articles (1953). DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines Bittel 1.10.1951–31.3.1953”; as well as, for example, VV.AA. (1965); Seidel (1999); Maier (2008); Matheus (2013); and Idem (2015). See also AIAC archives, box “Biblioteca Archeologica Germanica 1”.

The École française d’Athènes, 1905 (detail). EFA.

Conclusions The foreign schools in Rome and Athens can in historical retrospect be seen as mediators of the “classical” and ambassadors of antiquity. This book has illustrated a movement from horizontal early nineteenth century international cooperation, via the vertical expansion of national structures during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, in the wake of the Franco-Prussian war, to a conscious return to horizontal twentieth century collaboration after the Second World War. It has in this way shed light on the establishment of foreign schools in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries as figureheads of classical archaeology and of national scholarship. The foreign schools in the two cities have survived Mussolini’s Italian fascist regime, Metaxas’ dictatorship in Greece, the Second World War and the Greek civil war. This book has shown how they in different periods have interwoven prestige with scholarship, and how this dynamic was placed under pressure during the Second World War and in the post-war years, when the Allied powers aimed to move them in more transparent and collaborative directions. This attempt was however only partially successful: the Allies had for example hoped to create new international institutions out of the German institutes in Rome and Athens, for the express purpose of collaborating across national scholarly frameworks. Internationalisation was perceived as a means to safeguard the future of classical studies. The foreign schools in Rome and Athens are national investments, in financial as well as in cultural terms. Their importance as research nodes in the humanities has been and remains considerable, with significant national prestige as a result for the countries and funding bodies that have chosen to associate themselves with these institutions. As this book has shown, the foreign schools have originally sprung from colonial contexts of national rivalry, but have at the same time also championed international ideals of science and scholarship. The cultural, scholarly and economic returns for the investments made have been considerable, in national, institutional and individual terms. Who are the main stakeholders? Who have been chiefly responsible for the upkeep of the foreign schools treated here? A comprehensive list of funding bodies would be long indeed. On the whole, financial contributions on national (state) levels have provided for the general upkeep of the institutions (salaries and premises), with individual research projects funded by specific foundations, ranging from national to private. The foreign schools operate within a range of highly varied financial conditions: the American Academy in Rome generates 100% of its budget, the British School at Rome approximately 50%, most other foreign schools roughly 20%. The origins of the institutions discussed here have https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-008

208 

 Conclusions

often been modest, with initial funding mainly from private donations; public state funding entered the equation as the institutions expanded. A system of trustees and private donations has remained in play, primarily in the American case; to this can be added specific situations such as the liquidation of German assets after the war. The issue of possible international funding of the two postwar organisations AIAC and the Unione of institutes in Rome was never satisfactorily addressed, a structural problem also inherent in earlier (nineteenth century) international assemblies, as shown in this book. The foreign schools in Rome and Athens have on the whole functioned as catalysts in the organisation of “classical” research: as vehicles and guarantors for archaeological excavation permits, for the organisation and publication of results, and for granting scholarships to students and researchers from the various national academic frameworks in question. As focal points for the organisation of research, the foreign schools have created structures that enable financial investments in research in the humanities and formal and informal networks for generations of scholars.

Classical Challenges The foreign schools in Rome and Athens can similarly be regarded as Western investments in the “classical”. An important aspect of classical scholarship in general terms is the combination of education and formation, with Greece and Italy traditionally as the two legs of the constructed body of Western historical identity. The underlying rationale for these investments lies in the classical itself. The “classical” and “classicicity” as a system of values has often been considered a positive source of cultural capital and prestige considered to be worth associating oneself with. This study has highlighted adjustments made after the Second World War in order to maintain, justify and expand established research frameworks in the study of the classical world. Changes needed to be made in order for nothing to change. The rhetoric of international collaboration, rather than actual hands-on collaboration per se manifested in concrete projects, moved the foreign schools in Rome and in Athens to continue their pre-war activities in the post-war world. By using “international” as a legitimising factor (referring mainly to Western Europe and North America), foreign schools could maintain influence over the scholarly presentation of the cultural and ideological roots of Western civilisation through ancient history and classical archaeology.1 National funding remained 1 Cf., for example, memorandum by Carl Weickert (DAI), 1948: “Die Archäologie ist von Natur eine Wissenschaft, [an] der alle Nationen in stärkerem Maße vielleicht als [besonderen]

Classical Challenges 

 209

the framework par excellence for the organisation of the study of the past, and national prestige continued to be at stake; a structure that continues to influence the organisation of the foreign schools as a whole and of studying the ancient past today. In the mid- to late-nineteenth century, the “classical” was widely considered a grandiose communal cultural inspiration and a transnational source and stimulus. By establishing national foreign schools in Italy and Greece, the “West” could ensure direct access to and control of archaeological sources on which narratives of the classical past were composed: an accumulated scholarly understanding and inventory of ancient roots, societies, cultures and religions through research, excavation and publication. The past century and a half has witnessed organisation of classical studies largely on national levels. The “classical”, although to some extent a post-Enlightenment national construction, is not national in itself. What, then, creates national identifications in scholarship? Two factors seem to be important in this regard: in-house academic traditions and systems, influencing topics and fields of research; and sources of funding, public and private. National scholarship has perhaps ultimately been national due to language, and has created and continues to create its own “corporate cultures”. Classical scholars have on the other hand often transcended national scholarly boundaries, creating “elite” layers of cosmopolitan scholarship. This book has discussed national commonalities and contrasts, combining historiographies and crossing academic disciplines, aiming to contribute to understanding both national biases and transnational challenges. The book has also highlighted the prestige often attached to the “classical”: the study of antiquity has been linked with reputation and cultural standing, for individuals, for institutions and for nations. The source of such prestige can be found in the elevation of classical heritage and ancient history to universal levels as a common cultural denominator. The field of classical studies is not presented here as a banner to be followed, but the potential of the “classical” as a point of transnational reference is deliberately stressed – a potential that might be successfully realised at foreign schools in the Mediterranean and perhaps serve as an inspiration for other sectors in society. Through case studies of the activities and ambience of foreign schools in the Mediterranean, this book has illustrated how international collaboration coexists with national structures and funding in scholarly fields. It has placed the history

Wissenschaften in gemeinsamer Arbeit mitwirken.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10-30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4. 1936–31.3.1948”.

210 

 Conclusions

Fig. 39: Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen, main entrance hall (note the period “tropical” helmet), 1927 (photograph: Emil Kunze). DAIA photographic archive (D-DAI-ATH-Athen-Varia-0586).

of late nineteenth and early twentieth century classical archaeology in a broad socio-political context, through networks of individuals as well as institutions. The sentiment expressed by Marie Curie in her (interwar) remark that “after all, science is essentially international, and it is only through lack of a historical sense that national qualities have been attributed to it” was accurate.2 Scientific work cannot reasonably be separated from society. The war years admittedly stand out in this regard, although political and colonial examples can be found in the preas well as post-war periods both on and in between the lines in the rich archival assets of the foreign schools in Rome and Athens (cf. fig. 39). Political influence on science and scholarship – institutions as well as individual scholars – has 2 Curie (1926).

Finding Funding 

 211

been clearer under totalitarian rule, for example in fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and Metaxas’ Hellenist Greece, but is also present to a less obvious degree in more politically lenient social structures. The “classical” offers a dynamic transnational potential when it is itself included as an object of scholarly study, and foreign schools in the Mediterranean can provide a useful framework within which to do so. I have in this book aimed to paint a picture of the microcosm of foreign schools in Rome and Athens within the historical macrocosm of classical studies. The schools in Rome and Athens could be viewed as heralds of heritage, as national figureheads of scholarship, claiming portions of a perceived common past through scholarship. Archaeological sites have become national by association and by investment – of time, money, and resources – as well as through the affiliation of generations of scholars. This kind of cultural capital has accumulated over time, and reflects the element of national competition and prestige among foreign schools in Rome and Athens, as well as the relative influence of the late nineteenth century “Great Powers” in terms of cultural, political and territorial expansion. Through national investments, the foreign schools in Rome and Athens have contributed to associating antiquity and the “classical” with accumulated national scholarly prestige.

Finding Funding The foreign schools in Rome and Athens have from the outset faced the need to persuade funding authorities, trustees, politicians and other influencers to continue to invest in classical studies. A Sword of Damocles habitually hangs over the humanities, it seems, indicating two main recurring issues: funding and communication – the need to develop convincing channels for informing scholarly, cultural and political authorities – and the general public – of the need for researching the classical today; to provide the means for making the “classical” matter in the twenty-first century.3 This requires ongoing discussion regarding the nature of the “classical” itself: what it has been, what it is today, and in which 3 One example of this is the relatively recent (2014) threat of discontinued state funding of the Swedish institutes in Rome, Athens and Istanbul; a threat that was averted but may be indicative of the need to sharpen the relevance and unlock the potential of the classical in modern society. See for example letter from the directors of the Swedish institutes in Rome, Athens and Istanbul, as well as of the Villa San Michele on Capri, to Helene Hellmark Knutsson, Swedish minister for higher education and research, 2 December 2014: http://www.isvroma. it/public/PDF/Brev_fr_Medelhavsinstituten.pdf (accessed 21 June 2018), and letter from The Royal Swedish Academy of Letters, History and Antiquities to the Swedish ministry of education and research, 28 October 2014 (http://www.vitterhetsakad.se/ckeditor_assets/attachments/

212 

 Conclusions

direction it is heading. This would benefit from confronting, debating and incorporating heritage history and legacies connected with the study of the ancient past into the study of antiquity itself. Clear similarities and interrelations in institutional and funding structures have emerged from this comparison of foreign schools in Rome and Athens, notwithstanding the Roman schools’ wider scope in terms of scholarly disciplines compared to the overall predominantly archaeological schools in Athens. As research institutions, the foreign schools in both cities have doubled as a kind of unofficial cultural embassies. Their sociopolitical effects can be traced in the development of cultural ties and exchanges between the host countries (Italy and Greece) and the countries investing in these institutions abroad. The most striking example of this is perhaps the drawn-out debate between the Allied powers, Italy and Germany regarding the fate of the German research institutions in Italy after the war. Similar discussions also took place in Greece, albeit on a different scale. Science is political; to deny this is in a sense also political. Political and social developments have left their mark on the aims and the scholarly output of the foreign schools in Rome and Athens, ranging from an art historical and architectural approach to classical archaeology in the late nineteenth century to increasingly contextualised perspectives on religious and urban centres in the early twentieth century. Previously overlooked domestic archaeological contexts were given more attention in the interwar period, and several excavations became more outspokenly politicised during the Second World War (for example the German excavations at Galeata, see chapter five). Post-war emphasis was generally placed on commonalities and shared research objectives rather than on differences and national interests. Much attention has been given in this book to international archaeological collaboration in the aftermath of war, although national funding of and association with “big digs” have prevailed in the post-war period. This suggests that cultural heritage can be understood as simultaneously local, national and international. This investigation has in other words shown how national and international frameworks can exist side by side, and how both scholarship and collaboration have often depended on national sources of funding, although scholarship itself has not been limited to national scholarly boundaries. The maintenance of institutional traditions is also an expression of power and control, to a large extent dependent on the active influence of individuals. The activities and profiles of the foreign schools have clearly (and expectedly) been influenced by relationships between board members and trustees in the respective countries

348/brev_till_regeringen_och_riksdagen_20141028.pdf, accessed 21 June 2018). Cf. also, for example, Bremer (2011), on the Unione of institutes in Rome and Italian funding cutbacks.

Finding Funding 

 213

on the one hand, and on-site staff on the other: directors, assistant directors, secretaries, research assistants, librarians, and others. Contacts with local and regional domestic scholars as well as with international networks operate on yet another axis. This inquiry has traced intersections between these spheres of influence. With historical hindsight, the foreign schools in Rome and Athens can be identified as simultaneously competitive and collaborative national institutions. They illustrate how ideals and principles of international collaboration – the perceived common ground of the Internationale of scholarship – can become entangled in national agendas, identities and traditions. National structures, particularly in terms of research funding, however prevail to this day. An underlying current and sentiment in the immediate post-war period was to strive towards at least nominal political and cultural international “brotherhood” in the wake of war. On the whole, individual scholarly initiatives, research traditions and funding structures at the foreign schools in Rome and Athens continued to operate within established national paradigms and funding structures. In other words, national funding persisted also during the internationally oriented immediate post-war years. The institutional (as opposed to national or individual) level on which the foreign schools in both cities continue to operate is both regional and international at the same time. Both labels influence the role and position of classical studies in modern society, and may provide arguments in favour of the foreign schools in times to come, with the foreign schools as structural intermediaries in the national territory where research funding has hitherto mainly been organised. The premises for national and international research and its funding have furthermore changed considerably over time. National research traditions within classical scholarship differ to a degree in terms of specialisation (periods and cultures, e.g. Etruscology, Late Antiquity), although most features of the study of antiquity – from philology to archaeology – have been considered communal and international. “Corporate cultures” of national scholarly traditions in specific national contexts and universities have been channelled and expressed through foreign schools in Rome and Athens. Might historicised self-reflection facilitate future funding possibilities? Funding is, needless to say, indubitably a key factor in the organisation of scholarship. The foreign schools continue to channel the bulk of and carry the responsibility for such national cultural investments. In a sense, the foreign schools become repositories of cultural capital, scholarly exchange and goodwill. Prestige is added to the equation, as national repute is a contributing factor in the accumulated understanding of the past. Despite its vital importance to scholarly work, funding itself has seldom been explicitly addressed in narratives regarding

214 

 Conclusions

the organisation of scholarship, collaborative or otherwise. Funding is a key player in the piece, yet has chiefly been dealt with offstage. National funding has indeed persisted at the foreign schools in Rome and Athens. The two main prerequisites, and obstacles, to international collaboration – funding and prestige – often go hand in hand, and continue to set the general tone for scholarly cooperation in Rome, Athens and elsewhere. As long as both funding and prestige are mainly envisaged in national terms, research will seemingly struggle to be either international or interdisciplinary. Following the writer Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa’s somewhat acerbic remark that “if we want things to stay as they are, everything must change”,4 it is reasonable to suspect that the study of the ancient past, together with perceptions of the “classical” and the activities of the foreign schools in Rome and Athens will need to adapt to their times and surroundings in order to remain relevant. The “Western Ways” of this book can be equated with the nineteenth and twentieth century scholarly investigation and control of material sources for the narrative of Greco-Roman antiquity as the perceived bedrock of Western civilisation. The “West” also implies an occidental set of political values prevalent at foreign schools, in Rome as in Athens, ranging from to liberal–conservative to social democratic, often with a dominance of the former, but seldom “Eastern” – a notion needless to say largely synonymous with Communism in the immediate post-war period. The more the classical legacies of Greece and Italy become contextualised themselves, the greater the potential for the foreign schools to contribute as colleges in a “global university”. In recent years, self-reflective scholarly perspectives have increased significantly; a turning point in terms of increased interest in entangled, transnational and interdisciplinary scholarly work on the role of the humanities in modern society. Without exaggerating the position and importance of the foreign schools in Rome and Athens, it is safe to say that their potential as keys for understanding both national and scholarly structures in historical perspective has begun to unfold. This book hopes to contribute to an increased interest in the foreign schools themselves and to illuminate potential avenues for future research on their histories. The benefits of consciously addressing the intellectual legacies and traditions of these institutions could prove to be useful in the continued challenge of untangling the knot of the “classical” and “universal values” attached to scholarship in and of the Roman “eternal city” and the Athenian “cradle of democracy”: the challenge of making sense of and perhaps finding new Western ways.

4 The original well-known, widespread quote was “Se vogliamo che tutto rimanga com’è, bisogna che tutto cambi.” Tomasi di Lampedusa (1958).

The Parthenon, Acropolis, Athens, 1939. The Swedish Institute in Rome archives.

British soldiers resting in the Acropolis Museum, December 1944 (Dmitri Kessel), from a “triptych” of photographs of the same subject, published in Kessel (1994) 176. Cf. Clogg (2000) 166: “British troops bivouacked […] during the December 1944 fighting and pictured resting their weaponry on the archaic statuary”.

Epilogue In 1950, James Kellum Smith, president of the American Academy in Rome, expressed that his “faith in the Academy” was “based upon an absolute conviction of the importance to Western culture of the classical tradition, and further upon the belief of the absolute freedom of the artist in Rome.” The post-war world was, according to Smith, “confronted with a world-wide rebellion against many phases of classical culture. The young artists are indoctrinated so heavily against it, and so little informed about it, that our institution is confronted […] with the practical problem of how to attract the most vital of the youngsters, and expose them to that freedom and its influence and opportunities, hoping that the vaccination will take.”1 The belief in the positive effects of exposing impressionable young intellects to Mediterranean historical palimpsests was indeed shared by the foreign schools at large, in both cities; it formed an important part of their self-perception and raison d’être. Whether or not the classical vaccination could continue to “take” today at all is an open question, hinging on the challenge of making the “classical” continually relevant. Today, national funding structures continue to influence the boundaries of research activities at foreign schools in Rome and Athens, and the microcosm of foreign schools remains influenced by late nineteenth-century contexts and practices. The national frameworks and colonial sociopolitical structures that characterised the interwar period persisted after the Second World War, as did a climate of friendly competition among foreign schools, despite post-war international rhetoric. If internationalism had been mainly rhetorical before the war – the varnish of idealism and diplomacy – the disastrous experiences of the war itself elevated internationalism to the foundation and starting-point also for the exploration of antiquity. One example of a persistent pre-war structure, an expression of hierarchy and implicit cultural supremacy, was at times to regard domestic (Italian and Greek) archaeologists as inferior in carrying out the onerous task of preserving as well as researching the perceived international heritage of ancient remains, a perspective sometimes visible with individual scholars, directors and in decisionmaking hierarchies, in boards of trustees and executive committees. Through dayto-day interactions, late nineteenth and early twentieth century perceptions of the ancient world as the foundation of the civilised “West” continued to be projected on and cultivated at foreign schools in Rome and Athens. Scholarly 1 James Kellum Smith to Paul Manship, 7 September 1950. AAR archives, AAR records, 1855– 2012, bulk 1894–1946, Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, reel 5758. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-009

218 

 Epilogue

structures were in other words notably national in the interwar period, and can be observed through the lenses that the foreign schools provide. National promotion through scholarship on aspects of the ancient Roman past was a theme shared by, for example, the French school (Roman Gaul) and the German archaeological institute in Rome (the “longobardian-Germanic” archaeological enterprises of the Nazi period).2 The foreign schools of the major “Great Powers” were already established in Athens and Rome by the turn of the last century. These countries – France, Germany, USA and Great Britain – were capable of carrying the costs involved in such undertakings. In Greece, the first wave of archaeological foreign schools (1846–1909) was directly linked with foreign policy of the “Great Powers”.3 The situation was in many ways different in the internationally oriented post-war period, although foreign schools continued to be established through intergovernmental agreements, “with the approval of the Central Archaeological Council of Greece”.4 This book has shown that politics also was what bound the two waves together. National prestige was a factor in the establishment of the foreign schools, and the same prestige to some extent contributed to the “Great Powers” balancing each other out, without much interest in other nations entering the race for exploring the perceived common ancient past. Other factors also came into play: as archaeological and scholarly hubs in Greece, the French and German schools also accommodated foreign scholars. Following the First World War, the Greek archaeological authorities furthermore became increasingly restrictive regarding excavation permits, limiting of foreign archaeological activity on Greek soil. Due to prior strict Italian regulations, outright archaeological activity at the foreign schools in Rome did not begin until after the Second World War. The temporary post-war archaeological “closure” of Greece, during the civil war, 1946–1949, thus coincided with the corresponding post-war “opening” of Italy. These new opportunities for international archaeological research initiated a new phase of and a broader direction for classical archaeology in the Mediterranean. The generous Greek archaeological policy – albeit increasingly strict regarding the export of antiquities – was, on the whole, resumed after the

2 Cf. Rietbergen (2012) 201. 3 Korka et al. (2007) 15. Cf. Díaz-Andreu (2007) 107. According to Argyro Loukaki, Greece consented to foreign schools for three reasons: limited national funding for large-scale research undertakings, Greek political dependence on foreign powers, and “a national shortage of educated people”. Loukaki (2008) 153. 4 Korka et al. (2007) 15, with reference to Nikolentzos (2003) 17, 29–30, 32–33 & bibliography.

Epilogue 

 219

civil war.5 The result was a certain “equilibrium” in classical archaeology between Greece and Italy that coincided with the “big digs” of the 1950s and 1960s, in the old excavation sites in Greece, as well as in Etruria, on Sicily and elsewhere. The second phase of foreign schools in Greece did not take off until after the military junta period (the Swiss School of Archaeology was established in 1975; the Swedish Institute at Athens had been the sole earlier post-war exception, see chapter six).6 The long hiatus – almost seven decades – in the establishment of foreign schools in Greece is indeed conspicuous. It would however have been difficult to establish a foreign school in Greece in the interwar period, due to Greek legislation and restrictions in archaeological permits as well as to national and international political developments. The increase of foreign schools in postjunta and post-1968 Athens took place “despite the gradual diminution of the foreign countries’ interest in Classical studies”,7 and despite voices being raised against foreign schools as “institutions of hospitals [for] contagious diseases in exotic countries”.8 Classical scholarship was used as an inspiration in the wake of war; equated with international ideals, the two converged at the abstract notion of the “classical”. One expression of this ideal can be found in the Swiss Fondation Hardt for classical studies (established in 1950), promoting international collaboration and “durable links with colleagues from other nations” through classical studies.9 Classical antiquity was perceived in the post-war period as a provider of a much-needed symbolic historical common ground, as a soothing balm for shattered visions and pre-war aspirations, as defence against the threat of career hiatuses due to associations with specific national (mainly German) scholarly systems, and as a possible vehicle for addressing multiple, parallel narratives concerning the past, ancient and modern. The foreign schools in Rome and Athens generally operate in an atmosphere of heightened cooperation. Interest in their histories has increased since the turn 5 Cf., for example, a project for a “Proposed Garden around the Acropolis of Athens” and the “Suggested planting of trees in the area round the Acropolis” (Greek Agora Committee, appendix xi). BFA, Gustaf VI Adolfs arkiv I, box 166, “Grekland och Athen-institutet 1945–71”. 6 Cf. Petrakos (2007), 30; and Penttinen (2014b), 103. For the Swiss School of Archaeology in Greece (not “in Athens”), see Martin Pruvot, Reber and Theurillat (2010) 41–45. The funding of the Netherlands Institute in Athens (NIA), founded in 1984, was threatened in the 1990s, and is now funded by and representative of six Dutch universities. For (unsuccessful) attempts to establish a Russian school in Athens, see Basargina (2008). 7 The “new generation” of foreign schools were, like their predecessors established “as nonprofit cultural institutions.” Korka et al. (2005) 15. 8 Zois (1990) 48, quoted in Hamilakis (2007) 48. 9 See VV.AA. (1954) vii; and Gex et al. (2016).

220 

 Epilogue

of the millennium. In 2006, the 160th anniversary celebrations of foreign schools in Greece (of the École française), was officially intended to mark “the beginning of a new phase of intercultural co-operation […] based on the study of Greek civilisation [emphasising] cultural diversity as a means of strengthening European and international cultural cohesion.”10 This grand intention has clearly not been realised, however, as witnessed during the post-2009 financial crisis and in the migration situation of later years.11 Although few foreign schools in either city have been established since 2000 – with two exceptions, the Slovakian Historical Institute in Rome, in 2014, and the Romanian Archaeological Institute in Athens, in 2017 – Rome remains the node par excellence for approaching ancient pasts in Italy, as Athens remains “the major centre of Greek archaeology”.12 There is hitherto no organisation in Athens equivalent to the Roman Unione of institutes, however. In Greece, collaboration among foreign schools has depended largely on unofficial networks and personal relations.13 The foreign schools in Rome and Athens provide a educational environments, with a future potential for a collegiate or loose federate structure among them, based on tuition and research programs. Such a structure would not compete with national funding, boards of trustees, in-house traditions and organisations already in place, nor would it compromise the national autonomy of the institutions involved, but could on the contrary complement and augment their profile and activities. It would be conceivable to think of the foreign schools – particularly in Rome, mainly due to the plurality of topics there compared with the schools in Athens – in terms of a “European University” of sorts, with the foreign schools and domestic institutions forming programs of study in collaboration: the foreign schools might then also take on an additional role as a form of “classical colleges”, at the same time both national and international, possibly with distinctive thematic profiles tailored to the scholarly traditions of the individual institutions. Such a collegiate structure could stand a good chance of receiving significant European funding for research and tuition, as an additional supplement to the overall nationally funded institutional budgets of the foreign schools themselves. Similarly, the foreign schools in Athens could benefit more from their prominent position as centres of classical archaeology in the Aegean and in the Eastern 10 Korka et al. (2007) 23. 11 For a post-financial crisis assessment of the “classical” today, see for example Hanink (2017). 12 Petrakos (2007), 30. For the Slovakian Historical Institute in Rome, cf. www.shur.sk (accessed 21 June 2018). 13 Greek law enforces annual public meetings at the foreign schools in Athens. Their directors are furthermore required to be nationals of the respective countries.

Epilogue 

 221

Mediterranean. Different research and tuition themes involving junior and senior scholars might be addressed in collaborative funding proposals. Proposals for external funding could supplement already existing structures. Such collegiate collaboration would not necessarily, and probably should not, be seen as solely European. In Rome, funding proposals might conceivably be organised through or on behalf of the Unione of institutes (or other international bodies), which could then administer funds on behalf of the individual institutions.14 Such collegiate possibilities could indicate new beginnings and one of many possible collaborative pathways for future work. The foreign schools in Rome and Athens share the advantage of their position and character of interdisciplinary meeting places and potential melting pots for innovative individual and collaborative interdisciplinary research work. Heritage history might help to open up scholarly disciplines for increased collaboration, as self-reflective work can assist in defining scholarly disciplines in historical context, sharpening the tools of research and widening the scope of scholarly inquiry. As indicated above, change is likely to continue to be necessary for continued dynamic research on the “classical”, as was the case at the foreign schools in Rome after the Second World War. Scholarly collaboration – political, cultural and educational – is better served by curiosity than by defensiveness. Narratives regarding foreign schools and classical archaeology in Greece tend to emphasise European philhellenism and international, collaborative aspects. Such overall positive evaluations have been balanced somewhat over the last decade by illustrations of national rivalry as an important factor.15 The two aspects, national and international, however tend to go hand in hand: their coexistence, sometimes seemingly paradoxical, arguably contributes to propelling the foreign schools in Italy and Greece; a dynamic with national appropriations and assimilations of the common, cumulative enterprise of science.

14 Library poles, or nodes, already exist among the schools in Rome, for example, in the Valle Giulia and on the Gianicolo hill, and collaboration among a number of schools is already in place. Cf. a research document by Christopher Smith, former director of the British School at Rome (“Research in the Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma: Le Accademie Straniere”, 2014) on the varied research interests of the foreign schools in Rome. 15 E.g. Valenti (2006); and Díaz-Andreu (2007).

Fig. 40: “Generalsekretare und Präsidenten des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts” 1828–1960, 22 April 1960. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”

Appendix i: Correspondence regarding the library of the German Archaeological Institute in Rome (DAI archives, Berlin) “Kurze Geschichte des ehemals Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts in Rom” (Carl Weickert, n.d. 8 pages): “Iperborei romani”, 1824; the ICA/DAIR was founded in 1828 (preliminary meeting 30 December 1828, first meeting, in the Palazzo Caffarelli, 2 January 1829; scholars meeting in Rome since 1810). The “protection” of Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm was of strictly private and personal concern, not with obligations from the Kingdom of Prussia. Quoting a letter from Alexander von Humboldt to Fürst Klemens von Metternich, 22 March 1840: “La société archéologique par la nature de sa composition cosmopolitique, par la pureté de ses intentions exclusivement artistiques a déjà rendu d’énormes services à la noble cause du progrès des arts.” Papal blessings during its first decade. The Prussian state purchased the Palazzo Caffarelli. The ICA had a protestant religious profile in the 1830s, which offended the church, with a certain tension in the late 1830s (Pope Gregory XVI). The ICA was described as “une fondation, qui n’a d’autre but que d’avancer la science archéologique et de contribuer ainsi à l’illustration de Rome même.” Prussia, France and Russia occasionally contributed state funding for institute publications. Private subsidies from crown prince Friedrich Wilhelm. King Wilhelm of Prussia took over the function of “protector” in 1861. State “subventions“ from Prussia from 1870, in 1874 part of the German Reich. Since then, a tradition of “Gastfreundschaft” and openness. The transportation of the library in 1944 was a “violation” of these ideals and the agreement with Italy, that “das Institut für ewige Zeiten in Rom bleiben solle.“ The “change of emphasis” in the 1938 Nazi-Fascist accord had found “no agreement“ with German archaeologists – the invitation of protection from the Vatican through Cardinal Mercati and Pope Pius XII had been universally or “generally greeted”. Information regarding such discussions had settled the matter of the Führerbefehl. “In seiner wissenschaftlichen Haltung hat das Institut sich niemals Naziideen geöffnet. […] Einen Anlass die ehrwürdige wissenschaftliche Anstalt wie das Archäologische Institut in Rom, die während ihrer mehr als hundertjährigen Geschichte ihres Bestehens nur der Wissenschaft und dem Ansehen Roms gedient hat, als eine Einrichtung anzusehen, die sich feindseligen oder kulturschädlichen Einflüssen hingegeben hätte, hat das Institut mit den beklagenswerten Vorkommnissen jener letzten zehn Jahre nicht gegeben. Das römische Institut hat allgemeinen öffentlichen Interessen im weitesten Sinne gedient und von sich aus die ihm drohende tödliche Gefahr vermieden, dass es ganz in die nationalsozialistische Auslandsorganisation einbezogen wurde.” Cf. fig. 40. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1948– 31.3.1950”. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-010

224 

 Appendices

“Geschichte des Instituts 1828–1829 [n.d.] Frühjahr u. Sommer 1828 Vorarbeiten z. einer grossen internat. Hyperbor.-Röm. Gesell. In Rom. Besprechungen Gerhards mit Panofka u. Duc d. Luynes, der seit Juni 1828 in Italien. Mitte Nov. Friedr. Wilh. auf Markt v. Pozzuoli Protektorat ‘abgequetscht’. Neben Gerhard drängt bes. Bunsen auf Annahme. Protektorat einige Wochen später förmlich übernommen i. Rom. Gleich nach Pozzuoli setzt sich Gerhard mit Blacas i. Verbindung (Geandter i. Neapel). 30.12. Vorbesprechung i. Rom: Bunsen, Gerhard, Kestner, Millingen, Thorwaldsen [sic]. Bunsen schlägt Namen vor (‘Instituto di corr. arch.’) u. Rom als Sitz d. Verwaltung. 2.1.: Erste Sitzung, von der Protokoll erhalten. Grundzüge d. ‘Regolamento dell’Inst.’ u.Versendung d.Gründungsaufrufs beschlossen. 26.3.: Blacas Präs. d. Inst. 21.4.: In Pal. Caffarelli Int. Feierlich eröffnet […]. ‘Regolamento’ unterschrieben von Bunsen (Generalsekretär), Gerhard (Sekretär), Kestner (Sekretär-archivista), Panofka (Sekretär), Fea, Thorwaldsen, Millingen. Nibby u. Welcker nicht anwesend. Auch unterschrieben haben Knapp (Architekt Inst.-Gebäud. 1835), Platner u. Laglandière. Endgültige Fassung des Regol. 21.4.1830 genehmigt (damals mitunterzeichnet L. v. Ranke, L. v. Klenze, Emil Wolff).” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. Leo Bruhns, “Bericht über den Abtransport der deutschen wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken aus Rom nach Deutschland im Dezember 1943–März 1944.” (9 pages, Merano), 11 February 1944: The packing was done in December 1943 (finished more or less by Christmas) for “den vom Führer befohlenen Abtransport der deutschen Kulturinstitute aus Rom”, the transport of the German institute libraries, including that of the DHI “in der Valle Giulia”. “Der Vatikan, der uns ja schon seit langem seinen freundschaftlichen Beistand für den Fall, dass wir dessen bedürfen würden zugesagt hatte, war vielleicht am meisten bestürzt, als er den Führerbefehl vernahm.” Letter to Bruhns from Cardinal Mercati, who “wurde mir noch einmal das [a]llergrösste Interesse des Vatikans am Verbleiben der deutschen Institute in Rom versichert und uns jeder Schutz, den der Papst gewähren könnte in Aussicht gestellt. Auch das persönliche Wohlwollen, das der Hlge. Vater für die deutschen wissenschaftlichen institute in Rom […] hege […].” The possibility of depositing the libraries in the Vatican was considered. The Roman Curia had declared that “ohne die deutschen Bibliotheken […] die historischen und kunstgeschichtliche Studien in Rom ihr bisheriges hohes Niveau unmöglich wahren könnten. Auch von andrer Seite, mit besondrer [sic] Wärme z.B. vom Direktor des Schwedischen Instituts Prof. Sjöquist [sic], der sich als [unser] echter Freund unsrer Instituts mehrfach erwiesen hat, wurde der Primat der deutschen Wissenschaft so rückhaltlos anerkannt, dass dieses Mass von Achtung wohl mit schmerzlicher Genugtuung von uns zur Kenntnis genommen

Appendix i: German Archaeological Institute in Rome (DAI archives, Berlin) 

 225

werden konnte: mit schmerzlicher – denn die Kriegsereignisse zwangen uns ja tatsächlich dazu eine der stärksten und schönsten Positionen, die sich die deutsche Wissenschaft im Auslands erobert hat, zu räumen; hoffentlich nur für Kurze Zeit!” The first “Waggons” left Rome in the night of the 5th/6th of January 1944. The Hertziana boxes were installed in the “Berg von Hallein” with the help of 20 Italian prisoners of war. Temporary storage in small churches. The first DHI wagons reached Salzburg on the 9th of January. When Bruhns returned to Rome on the 23rd of January, the packing of the DAIR was “im vollen Gange”. Bomb attacks: “2 Waggons mit historischen und archäologischen Büchern, die bis Orte gekommen waren, sollten nach Bombardierung ihres Zuges dort stehen geblieben sein; 2 andre Waggons mit Kisten des Archäologischen Instituts waren zwischen Orvieto und Chius[i] in einen Fliegerangriff geraten und wir wussten nicht was aus ihnen geworden war.” After the 26th of January, Field Marshall Kesselring decided to use lorries (“Lastkraftwagen”) for further transports, not the railway. 5 Waggons on the 5th of February – the last transport (?). Bruhns left Italy in a military lorry to find out that Reichsleiter Martin Bormann had decided against the deposit of the Roman libraries in the Aussee-mine (to be used for “other purposes”). The Salzberg was however so “rich in dry caves” that the libraries should fit, etc. Bruhns therefore wrote to Bormann, asking that the books would not have to travel any further, etc. Bruhns then met with Schede, president of the DAI, in Berlin. Bormann denied the request – the further transport, to “Salinen in Mittel- oder Süddeutschland” (the DHI to “Schloss Schwertberg” near Linz) was seemingly hindered. Bruhns’ report ended with commenting on “Die undankbare, mit einem Misserfolge schliessende Aktion, die mir auftragen worden war […] konnte für abgeschlossen gelten.” Funds for the transport had been made available by the Kaiser-WilhelmGesellschaft (through Hoppenstedt and Bruhns himself?). Bruhns returned to Merano on the 7th of March. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur  file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4. 1936–31.3.1948.” Jan W. Crous to Ludwig Curtius (Krefeld), 15 May 1944, “Bericht über Bemühungen in Aussee um dort die Bibliothek des römischen Instituts im Bergwerk unterzubringen während des Krieges. Einverständnis der höchsten Stellen fehlt dazu. Erwägen und besichtigen anderer Orte, die dafür geeignet wären. Noch keine Entscheidung vom Prasidenten [sic]. Bericht über seine Reisen und die dabei getroffenen Freunde. – Frage nach Rom, beunruhigt. Persönliches. – Eindrücke von bombengeschädigter Vaterstadt Krefeld. [W]eil ohne jede Nachricht aus Rom. Beschreibung der Zerstörungen in Krefeld von der Zensur unleserlich gemacht!”: “Als ich in Aussee ankam, glaubte ich nicht anders, als daß ich nach etwa zwei oder drei Wochen, wie [?] das Einlagen der Kisten im Bergwerke kosten würde,

226 

 Appendices

daran geben könnte, die Fortsetzung der römischen Bibliothek in Deutschland aufzubauen und die unterbrochene Arbeit wieder aufzunehmen: reduziert zwar […]. Statt dessen mußte ich erfahren, daß Bruhns nicht gründliche Arbeit geleistet hatte und die verfrühte Auffordnung, nach Aussee zukommen, ohne das Einverständnis der höchsten Stellen ergangen war. Nur eben diese mangelt. Von Ausseer Bergstelle sollen, nach der Bestimmung, die Reichsleiter Bormann erlassen [hat], nur bestimmte für das künftige Museum in Linz gesammelte Kunstwerke geborgen werden, und unsere Bibliothek soll ausgeschaltet werden, obwohl Platz genug ist. Nun gab es Verhandlungen hin und her, die indessen noch zu keinem […] Ergebnis gefügt haben. Ich gebe die Hoffnung noch nicht auf, während ich gleichzeitig andere Bergungsorte suche, daß wir am Ende doch noch in Aussee bleiben dürfen, was in unechterer Beziehung wünschenswert wäre. Die Sache ist schwierig, weil wir, wie sie sich denken können, von unserem Ministerium leider gar keine Unterstützung erfahren; und auch der Präsident nimmt sich unserer Angelegenheiten nicht mit den Eifer an, der nötig wäre.” DAI archives, ADZ, “Nachlaß Ludwig Curtius”. “Denkschrift über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut von M. Schede”, Berlin, 13 August 1945 (7 pages, with a 5-page appendix – a list of “the most important excavations, research and publications” of the DAI to date; along with the excavations are the names of the (present) excavators). This concludes with two excerpts: “Auszug aus dem Bericht von Dr. Fuhrmann über Verhandlungen mit dem Vatikan”, and “Auszug aus dem Bericht von Prof. Bruhns über den Abtransport der deutschen wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken aus Rom.” Fuhrmann’s report included the Führerbefehl (late 1943) and correspondence between Cardinal Mercati and Leo Bruhns. The Holy See “faced the evacuation of the institutes with the greatest regret”, offering “the prospect of all protection that could be guaranteed”. Three members of the institute were received by the pope, who hoped that the absence of the institutes would not last long. From Schede’s Denkschrift: The DAI was founded in Rome in 1829 “in der Fortsetzung der Ideen Winckelmanns”. It had four sections: Germany, France, Great Britain and Italy – plans for further sections: Greece, Russia, Scandinavia and the Netherlands. 1942, “die byzantinische Abteilung in Athen” and a branch in Madrid. Also, the 1939 6th international archaeological congress as “Eine Art Zweigstelle”. The Zentraldirektion in Berlin was housed in the former residence of the von Bunsen family (Maienstraße 1), “jetzt stark zerstörten”. Almost 1000 members in 33 countries; membership was considered an honour. “Mit der Schaffung der Zweigstelle Bagdad wird der gewaltige Komplex der Grabungen der deutschen Orientgesellschaft in Mesopotamien […] in dem Institutsbereich und damit in staatliche Obhut [care] gebracht […].

Appendix i: German Archaeological Institute in Rome (DAI archives, Berlin) 

 227

Das deutsche Archäologische Institut faßt somit sein Arbeitsgebiet in dem weiten Sinne auf, in dem der Franzose den Begriff ‘archéologie’ versteht, und ist daher nicht lediglich zuständig für die Grundlagen der humanistischen Bildung, nämlich für die griechische und römische Kultur”. Schede was also “Erster Vorsitzender der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft”. The SS had taken over research on the Vikings, “hatte sich in seine Ostgoten- und Langobardenforschung in Form einer erzwungenen Arbeitsgemeinschaft hineingedrängt und hatte sogar [even] versucht, die Olympiagrabung zu annektieren” (“das Amt Rosenberg”: “Vorgesichtsforschung in Deutschland”, research on Crete, wanting to “break down” the DAIR and the DAIA). The DAI “only” dealt with classical archaeology; it was “purely a research institute”, not political – it engaged in “der Allgemeingültigkeit der klassischen Kultur” and relations across borders “auf breitester zwischenstaatlicher Basis”. This had contributed to “das hohe Ansehen, das es überall im Ausland – in Friedensund Kriegszeiten – genießt”. DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. Copy of a letter from Carl Weickert to “Captain Grier, Monuments Fine Arts Archives”, Berlin, 16 November 1945, together with a memorandum about the DAI written by Martin Schede (13 August 1945), a report by Heinrich Fuhrmann (DAIR) about the negotiations with the Vatican regarding the DAIR library, and the report above by Leo Bruhns concerning the transport of the libraries (December 1943– March 1944). The Römisch-Germanische Kommission was temporarily directed by Dr. W. Wagner, in the director Ernst Sprockhoff’s absence. Schede had been in Russian imprisonment since 27 September 1945. The “files” (Akten) of the DAI had been transported to Schede’s home in the Russian zone, then confiscated by the Russians, although “ein Teil des wissenschaftlichen Materials, soweit es nicht wie die Bibliothek des Instituts vor der Eroberung Berlins im Pergamonmuseum geborgen wurde. Weiteres Material ist nach auswärts verlagert, und zwar nach Stendal im Stadtarchiv bei der Winckelmann-Gesellschaft und im Schacht Bornburg, beide innerhalb der russischen Zone. […] Ein Teil der laufenden Geschäftsakten und Inventare war nach Schloß Niederhof bei Greifswald verbracht worden, wo sich eine Zeit lang der Direktor der Zweigstelle Rom, Prof. v. Gerkan, aufhielt. Ob sich die Akten noch dort befinden, ist unbekann[t]. Das Archiv der Abteilung Rom wurde dem Schwedischen Archäologischen Institut in Rom zu treuen Händen übergeben, ebenso der Standortkatalog der Bibliothek.” The “Villino Amelung” is mentioned, as well as “ein Baugrundstück an der Via Valle Giulia. Dieses Grundstück erhielt das Institut zu seinem hundertjährigen Bestehen als Geschenk der Stadt Rom“ in 1929. “Das Institut in Athen […] ist zu treuen Händen

228 

 Appendices

dem griechischen Byzantinisten Prof. Dr. Bees, übergeben worden. Die Bibliothek soll in das Nationalmuseum Athen überführt worden sein.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. “Kopie des “Memorandums […] unterschreiben von C. R. Morey als Praesidenten Albert Grenier als Vizepraesidenten Pietro Toesca als Vizepraesidenten Erik Sjöquist [sic] als Secretary General”: “V. The Hertziana Library. […] VIII. The International Union, in view of the above, propose to UNO and Unesco the following: 1) That the Hertziana Library and the Library of the ex German archaeological Institute be rehabilitated and opened to the scholars of all nations under the control of an international body designated by UNO and UNESCO, the Archaeological library preferably under the control of the International Association for Classical Archaeology. The Hertziana to be reestablished in its former quarters of the Pal. Zuccari, the Archaeological library in quarters furnished by the Italian Government. 2) That a subvention of D. 50 000 for 5 years be allocated from the funds at the disposition of UNESCO for the maintenance of the 2 librarys [sic] until the resources of international scholarship can be mobilized to the end of their permanent endowment. That UNO or UNESCO take the proper steps for the return of the German Institute of the History of Art to Florence, and of the library of the ex-German Historical Institute to Rome. I. […] The purposes of the Union, as set forth in its Act of Incorporation are 1) To coordinate the activities of the institutions forming the Unione and to constitute a center of consul[t]ation on questions of interest to all its members. 2) To protect the scientific material, and to promote the formation of a Union Catalogue of the libraries of the academies and institutes for archaeology, history and the history of art in Rome. 3) To assume, by itself or in collaboration with others, such other responsibilities as are related to or analogous with those abovementioned. The responsibility assumed under No. 2 of these purposes insofar as it includes the protection of scientific material and libraries belonging to[its] field of research[,] has become of immediate urgency, by reason of the action of the Italian Government and of the Allied Commission for Italy, in consigning to the temporary custody of the Union, pending eventual di[s]position by the United Nations Organization, the library of the German Archaeological Institute of Rome, and the

Appendix i: German Archaeological Institute in Rome (DAI archives, Berlin) 

 229

Hertziana library. Thes[e] were removed from Rome by the German Army in 1943 [sic], and were returned to Rome from Austria in February of this year [1946], by action of the Austrian U.S. Arm[y] Command, Division of Repatriation, Deliveries and Restitutions. The books are in boxes at present stored in the Gallery [of] Modern Art at [sic] Rome.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur  file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1953–31.3.1956”. Bernard Berenson to Paul Hyde Bonner (“Paul Bonner Esq. American Embassy, Rome”), 17 February 1948: “Dear Paul, forgive delay in writing what I have to say about the three German Institutions, the Archaeological one and the Hertziana in Rome, as well as the German Institute in Florence. All three were created by German scholarship and conducted in a way that did it honour. Every student was welcome, and until the Nazi madness, regardless of nationality, race or creed. Not only welcomed, but given every encouragement, every assistance to forward his task. The idea was the promotion of learning and understanding in the branch specialized in by each institut [sic]. Thus the Archaeological one in Greek and Roman Antiquity, the Hertziana in Roman Renaissance and Baroque, the Florentine Institut[e] in Florentine and Tuscan Art from early Middle Ages to 19th century. I understand that the libraries of these institutions are henceforth to be conducted by Americans, British and French. This meets with my approval. I venture nevertheless to utter a warning against putting in inferior or indolent scholars of our nations into the posts of directors, librarians, etc. in any of these institutions. These must not afford board, lodging and society advantages to any of our fellow citizens who want to enjoy a year or two in sunny Italy. My ideal would be to restore these institutions to German scholarship, subject to supervision by a committee selected from the archaeologists and art-historians of the United Nations. I believe I have three good reasons for ventilating this ideal. In the first place it would remove the competition, petty politics and favoritism among ourselves, poor sinful creatures that we are. [Then] it would continue the contribution German have made – at least as great as made by any one of us – to archaeological and art-historical studies. Let me add that these remained almost unaffected by the Nazi regime, and that it would not be difficult to find German scholars of the best attainments to fill posts even of a subordinate rank. These libraries moreover being collected by Germans and in the first place for Germans, have inevitably as German a character as mine for similar reasons has an English-language one. Just as an American could find his way about and advice and direct others better than any Continental person, in my library, so the German institutions could be more inexpensively and more efficiently run by Germans then [sic] by Italians, French or ourselves. Finally these libraries should be made accessible with the least delay. As I know from my own experience students, and not only Italians, are in sore need of them.”

230 

 Appendices

The Bernard and Mary Berenson Papers, 31.10. Biblioteca Berenson. The Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies, Villa I Tatti, courtesy of the President and Fellows of Harvard College. Memorandum (Carl Weickert/DAI, Zentraldirektion, December (?) 1948): “Das römische Institut besaß die anerkannt bedeutendste archäologische Bibliothek und ein Archiv, dessen wertvollster Bestand eine ebenfalls einzigartige Photographiensammlung ist.” The DAIR as a “scientific instrument” previously available to all nations, etc. A sort of “limbo” (“Schwebezustand”) would be advisable for the time being. “Bisher sind Christen[tum] und Antike die Grundlagen der geistigen Kultur Deutschlands gewesen und sind es auch trotz der Nazizeit geblieben. […] Begeisterung und Hunger nach kulturellen Gütern sind jedoch umsonst, wenn ihnen nicht stattgegeben werden kann. […] Die Archäologie ist von Natur eine Wissenschaft, and der alle Nationen in stärkerem Maße vielleicht als [besonderen] Wissenschaften in gemeinsamer Arbeit mitwirken. Nach schweren politischen Störungen war es die archäologische Forschung, in der sich, und zwar ganz besonders in den Gastländern des Südens, die Fachgenossen der verschiedenen Nationen begegneten, sodaß sich zwischen ihnen die Anknüpfung und die Möglichkeit zu gemeinsamer Arbeit an den gleichen Aufgaben wie von selbst ergab. Ein solches Wiederzusammenfinden auf dem nur scheinbar abseits liegenden Gebiet der Archäologie würde daher zur kulturellen Widerbelebung Deutschlands beitragen. Eine Abtrennung Deutschlands und seine geistige Verarmung hingegen müßten sich ebenso verhängnisvoll auswirken wie eine Ausschaltung aus dem wirtschaftlichen Zusammenhang der Völker.” Germany would also be prepared to make sacrifices: “für die Erhaltung und Weiterführung dieser für die Kultur Europas bedeutsamen Einrichtung Opfer zu bringen.” The national “sections of the old ICA” (French, Italian, German and British) could work as a “stimulus” after decades of national institutes: “Vielleicht ist jetzt die Zeit gekommen, unter Berücksichtigung der neuen europäischen Verhältnisse die Ideen der Gründer des Istituto di corrispondenza archeologica auf breiter Grundlage zu verwirklichen.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur  file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1948–31.3.1950”. Report by Friedrich Baethgen, president of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica, on his stay in Rome and the present situation of the German institutes in Italy, 4 March 1949 (“Streng vertraulich!”): Baethgen had spent two weeks in Rome discussing the situation regarding the German institutes in Italy. Sequestered in October 1945 by the Italian Ministero del Tesoro, thereafter in the care of the Unione. The four powers treaty was based on an agreement for 99 years, then Italian, depending on state bonds and a building for the DAIR and DHI libraries for free. The building question was an obstacle for the Italians. Morey,

Appendix i: German Archaeological Institute in Rome (DAI archives, Berlin) 

 231

Ward-Perkins and Frank Brown (erroneously named as “secretary”); “die Rücksichtnahme auf italienische Wünsche wird immer sehr viel bestimmender sein als ein etwaiges Eingehen auf die Interessen der deutschen Wissenschaft.” The only remaining option seemed to be to try to influence the Italians: “Die Rücksichtnahme auf den amerikanischen Gönner, auf den Italien heute aus vielfachen Gründen angewiesen ist, wird sich hier immer als das ausschlaggebende Motiv erweisen.” Bruhns had managed to get a letter of recommendation from Montini (Paul VI) to the American ambassador to the Holy See, later forwarded to Morey. Italian control would mean the end of the existence of the German institutes, as the books would be divided between a large number of libraries. The proposed director ought to be neutral, possibly a Swede. The positive outcome of Baethgen’s trip was that “Es war Prof. Morey, unbedingt die massgebende Persönlichkeit im Kreise der Union, der mir selber in aller Form den Vorschlag machte, es solle von deutscher Seite möglichst bald ein neues Institut in Rom begründet werden, das möglichst alle in Frage kommenden Wissenschaften in sich vereinigen solle.” The director of this new institute would then be part of the Unione, with a say in the proceedings regarding the old institutes. Before the peace treaty? A new institution with a “Handbibliothek” only. For some reason compared to the AAR, “insofern diese nicht eigentlich ein Institut nach unseren Begriffen ist, sondern vor allem einen Vereinigungspunkt für jüngere und ältere Gelehrte und Künstler, die in Rom arbeiten wollen, darstellt.” WardPerkins: “wenn ein Direktor eines neuen deutschen Institutes in Rom sei, so sei die Union bereit, anzuerkennen, dass wir ein besonderes Interesse an der weiteren Entwicklung der früheren deutschen Bibliotheken besässen”. A way of preserving the “German character“ of the libraries. Gonella – Italian minister of education (public instruction). “Es scheint mir nach alldem, dass der deutschen Wissenschaft hier eine Chance geboten ist, die zum mindesten eine sorgfältige Prüfung verdient.” The necessity of reestablishing German sholarly presence in Rome, “da Rom heute wieder und meinem Eindruck nach sogar in noch höheren Masse als früher ein Zentrum internationaler wissenschaftlicher Arbeit darstellt, das an Lebendigkeit wohl von keinem anderen Punkt in Europa übertroffen wird.” “Man kann gegen diese ganzen Überlegungen vielleicht einwenden, die Errichtung eines derartigen neuen Instituts, das mehr eine Art von Station als ein wirkliches Institut darstellen würde, laufe in Wahrheit darauf hinaus, dass wir in unserer wissenschaftlichen Position auf römischem Boden zum mindesten um ein halbes Jahrhundert zurückgeworfen seien. Aber dazu wäre dann doch zu sagen, dass diese an sich unbestreitbare Tatsache nur als eine Wiederspiegelung unserer allgemeinen politischen Situation angesehen werden könnte.” People he had spoken to advocating “dass man die dargebotene Hand ergreife”: “Ein sehre kluger vatikanischer Beobachter zog die Parallele

232 

 Appendices

zum Ruhrstatut, in dem Sinne, dass mit blosser Negation nichts zu erreichen sei, sondern dass es darauf ankomme, alle Chancen auszunutzen und schrittweise des verlorene Terrain wieder zurückgewinnen. Und immer wieder wurde ich darauf hingewiesen, dass von deutscher Seite Geduld und noch Geduld notwendig sei, dass aber anderseits die Zukunft noch viele Möglichkeiten in ihrem Schosse berge.” Conclusion: “in allen massgebenden italienischen und internationalen Kreisen meiner Überzeugung nach der Wunsch und die ehrliche Absicht besteht, der deutschen Wissenschaft die Rückkehr nach Rom zu ermöglichen. Man erkennt vorbehaltlos an, dass die Mitarbeit der deutschen Gelehrten nicht zu entbehren ist, und man ist bereit, die Folgerungen aus dieser Erkenntnis zu ziehen. […] ein Ausdruck der entscheidenden Tatsache, dass das Ansehen der deutschen Wissenschaft, soweit sie sich von den nationalsozialistischen Verirrungen frei gehalten hat, in den kulturell interessierten Kreisen des Auslandes unerschüttert ist.” Morey, quoted in English, to an American friend of Baethgen’s: “Dr. Baethgen’s visit was most useful. It can become a historic event when [if] it leads to the establishment of some German institute in Rome. For that would mean the first reappearance of German sc[h]olarship on the international scene and the renewal of cultural contacts.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1948–31.3.1950”. Copy of a letter from Carl Weickert to secretary of state dr Strauss, Frankfurt am Main, 24 August 1949, regarding the DAI – from private society to state institution, gradually more and more cultural politics: “vor dem ersten Weltkrieg war in den verschiedenen Anstalten des Auslandes nur von Wissenschaft und niemals von Politik die Rede.” “Politics” – associated with the Nazi period. “Ich habe selbst die Wiederanfänge des Athener Institutes im Ausland mit erlebt, und kann bezeugen, dass es trotzdem damals erstaunlich leicht war, die wissenschaftlichen Fäden zu den anderen Nationen wieder zu knüpfen. […] Die Nazizeit hat auch in dieser Hinsicht sowohl in Athen, wie in Rom viel Porzellan zerschlagen, während das vorsichtig unpolitisch geleitet Institut in Istanbul sich frei halten konnte. […] Ich zweifle nicht, vorausgesetzt die Möglichkeit der ungestörten Wiederaufrichtung der Wissenschaft in Deutschland, dass die für das Institut und die deutsche Archäologie unentbehrliche Arbeit im Ausland sich wieder einspielen wird und auch die Auslandsinstitute selbst einmal zurückgeben werden.” This would however only be possible “bei vorsichtiger Zurückhaltung und grösster Geduld.” Again, the issue of funding: “Die Frage der Auslandsinstitute stände besser, wenn unsere wissenschaftlichen Institute nicht Staatsinstitute gewesen wäre, sondern den Charakter privater Anstalten mit staatlicher Subvention gehäbt hätten, wie das im Allgemeinen

Appendix i: German Archaeological Institute in Rome (DAI archives, Berlin) 

 233

bei den ähnlichen Instituten der anderen Nationen der Fall ist und es auch beim römischen Institut bis 1859, formell sogar bis 1870 war.” The present state of the German state might make that a good time to influence things in that direction. Regarding the Zentraldirektion of the DAI: “Die Archäologie ist an sich eine internationale Wissenschaft, die bisher Landesgrenzen, wenigstens bei der theoretischen Bearbeitung des Materials, nicht kannte. Aber auch für die Ausgrabungstätigtkeit waren Griechenland, der Vordere Orient, die Türkei, Ägypten und Palästina Gastländer, die ihre Grenzen der praktischen Arbeit anderer Nationen gern geöffnet haben. Erst recht gilt diese kulturelle Zusammengehörigkeit für Deutschland selbst. Der Humanismus ist nicht erst seit Winckelmann, Herder und Goethe ein wesentlicher Teil des Fundamentes, auf dem die deutsche Kultur ruht, die das einzige ist, was wir in dem zerstörten und an einer Art Selbstschändung schliesslich zugrunde gegangenen Vaterlande noch als unser wirklich Eigenes und Gemeinsames besitzen. Die Vorstellung einer westlich oder östlich also nach der uns auferlegten politischen Teil und orientierten Kultur ist unmöglich und es ist zu bedauern, dass auch gewisse deutsche Strömungen in solcher Richtung treiben. […] Das Archäologische Institut hat sich auch seit seiner Konsolidierung immer als ein deutsches Glied der europäischen Wissenschafts-Gemeinschaft betrachtet. Der Zusammenhang zischen den deutschen Ländern ist nie diskutiert worden.” Caring for, not “betraying and deserting” the next generation. The role of Berlin in the future – the Zentraldirektion needed to remain there: “Eine Verlegung von hier würde sowohl für Deutschland selbst, wie erst recht für das Ausland die Preisgabe eines grossen Teiles von Deutschland bedeuten.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. Carl Weickert, “Memorandum über das Deutsche Archäologische Institut”, 14 October 1950 (6 pages), signed by a number of German scholars, sent to Rudolf (“Rudi”) Salat: The DAI had its origins in ICA, romanticism and early nineteenth-century scholarship (Wissenschaft), with Rome as the centre of “jeder archäologischen Forschung”: “Griechenland und Kleinasien waren noch wenig erforscht und, abgesehen von der Architektur dieser Länder, um deren Studium sich besonders englische Gelehrte und Architekten bemühten, war die übrige Hinterlassenschaft des Altertums dort noch kaum in das Gesichtsfeld der Wissenschaft getreten, will die Ausgrabungstätigkeit nur wenig zutage gefördert hatte.” The accessibility of Rome – the ICA originally had “den Charakter eines Vereins mit kosmopolitischen Tendenzen.” The French section only lasted until 1848. Gerhard moved to Berlin, therefore the Zentraldirektion/Secretary-general was located there. “Reichsanstalt” – 1874. Excavations in Greece in the nineteenth century – “Es war daher bezeichnend, daß in Griechenland Frankreich

234 

 Appendices

bereits im Jahre 1846 mit der Gründung eines archäologischen Instituts in Athen allen anderen Nationen vorausging”. The DAIA, “only in 1874”. “So standen eine zeitlang die beiden Zweiganstalten Rom und Athen als in einem gewissen Sinne rivalisierende Schwestern nebeneinander, jedoch beide vollkommen organisch aus dem wissenschaftlichen Bedürfnis ihrer Gründungszeit erwachsen. Rom pflegte die alte Tradition, Athen beteiligte sich mit der Archäologie des Spatens an der Gewinnung des echten Bildes der griechischen Kunst.” 1929 – “Abteilung Istanbul”. Early Christian archaeology was increasingly important in understanding the “bridge” between late antiquity and the early Middle Ages. “Das Institut als Gesamtbilde umfaßte daher in wunderbar entwickelter Form, besonders als Kairo und Bagdad noch mitgerechnet werden konnten, alle Zweige der Altertumsforschung von frühester Zeit bis in das Mittelalter hinein”. The DAI represented the “inneren Zusammenhang der archäologischen Forschung,” and was admired accordingly. The German institutes were “Schwesteranstalten”; the French schools were however “in einen Konkurrenzkampf”. Losing this would be “a setback for German archaeological research [and] a loss for archaeology as science generally and for the prestige [Ansehen] of German scholarship abroad, undisputed until the outbreak of the last war [and] the scholarly falseness of National Socialism.” Conclusion: “Das Deutsche Archäologische Institut ist eine organisch erwachsene und unlösbare Einheit.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”. Carl Weickert to minister Papas, chair (Leiter) of the Greek military commission, Berlin, 2 November 1950: “Das [DAIA], steht seit der Kapitulation Deutschlands im Jahre 1945 unter Sequester, seine Bibliothek ist verschlossen und jeder Benutzung unzugänglich. Das 1874 gegründete Deutsche Archäologische Institut ist nächst der seit 1846 bestehenden Ecole Française [sic] die älteste archäologische Anstalt der in Griechenland als Gäste arbeitenden Nationen. Bis zu der unglücklichen politischen Entwicklung seit 1933 hat das Deutsche Archäologische Institut in Athen während seiner langen Geschichte immer in enger freundschaftlicher Beziehung zur griechischen Wissenschaft gestanden und das kollegiale Verhältnis zu den anderen fremden Schulen in der Überzeugung von der Gemeinsamkeit kultureller und wissenschaftlicher Arbeit gepflegt. […] Ein wesentlicher Teil der früher so engen kulturellen Beziehungen zwischen Griechenland und Deutschland beruht auf der Tätigkeit dieses Instituts. Durch das seit 1933 in Deutschland herrschende totalitäre Regime sind diese Beziehungen sehr gegen den Willen der meisten deutschen Archäologen gestört und endlich durch die beklagenswerten Ereignisse des letzten Krieges unterbrochen worden. Die deutsche Archäologie, die einen Wesentlichen Teil ihres Interesses auf Griechenland richtet, an dessen Erforschung sie nicht selten in unmittelbarer Zusammenarbeit mit griechischen

Appendix i: German Archaeological Institute in Rome (DAI archives, Berlin) 

 235

Gelehrten bei Ausgrabungen in Athen, Olympia, Tiryns, Orchomenos in Boiotien, auf Aigina, Thera und Samos […] empfindet die Störung der ihr anvertrauten und am Herzen liegenden Arbeiten schmerzlich. […] Viele deutsche Gelehrte, deren freundschaftliche Gefühle für das griechische Volk und sein Land unter den furchtbaren Ereignissen der jüngsten Vergangenheit, die nicht beschönigt werden dürfen, ni aufhörten, haben den brennenden Wunsch, in Griechenland wieder eine Arbeitsstätte zu haben. Auch die deutsche Bundesregierung wünscht eine baldige Wiederherstellung der kulturellen Beziehungen.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–40: “Athen Allgemeines 1.4.1936–31.3.1945 1.8.1948–31.12.1950”. “Promemoria sulle Biblioteche ex-Germaniche”, n.d. (1950–1951): “I presentatori di questo promemoria si fanno interpreti delle preoccupazioni della maggior parte degli studiosi italiani di archeologia e storia dell’arte e cioè di tutti coloro che non hanno ritenuto opportuno firmare l’appello De Sanctis per la restituzione pura e semplice delle biblioteche alla Germania. Tale appello infatti, pur recando le firme di alcuni nomi illustrati della scienza italiana, non è stato condiviso né per la sua sostanza né per la sua forma, dai più qualificati rappresentanti universitari ed extra universitari delle discipline archeologiche e storico-artistiche, come è facilmente controllabile dall’esame delle firme apposte all’appello medesimo e come è, del resto, ben noto agli organi competenti del Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione e a tutti i circoli scientifici italiani. Si ritiene che nella questione delle biblioteche ex-germaniche vi siano almeno tre punti di vista in contrasto, o almeno differenti l’uno dall’altro: e cioè il punto di vista germanico, ovviamente orientato alla richiesta di un ripristino integrale dello status anteriore all’ultima guerra; il punto di vista degli Alleati, che erano originariamente concordi per una internazionalizzazione delle biblioteche e a tal scopo crearono la Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Storia, Archeologia e Storia dell’Arte in Rome, e che oggi appaiono piuttosto indirizzati verso una futura restituzione delle biblioteche alla Germania (particolarmente desiderata dagli Stati Uniti e avversata dalla Francia), ma con un periodo di gestione intermedia della suddetta Unione; il punto di vista italiano, che deve essere, in ogni caso quello della tutela degli interessi e dei diritti storici dell’Italia nei riguardi delle biblioteche in questione sia rispetto alle esigenze germaniche che a quelle alleate. Sarebbe assurdo che gli organi responsabili italiani, Ministero degli Affari Esteri e Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione, si facessero interpreti e sostenitori piuttosto dei punti di vista dei Tedeschi e degli Alleati che di quelli italiani. Nessuno vorrebbe, unilateralmente e faziosamente, misconoscere la importanza dei diritti germanici acquisiti in tanti anni di lavoro nelle biblioteche, né la necessità di una più vasta utilizzazione internazionale di questi centri di studio,

236 

 Appendices

per certi aspetti unici al mondo. Ma il primo nostro dovere è quello di esigere che siano rispettati i diritti storici, morali e scientifici dell’Italia, rappresentati da tanti anni di permanenza e di attività di queste istituzioni nel nostro Paese, dove primamente sorsero (la Biblioteca dell’Istituto Archeologico Germanico di Roma fu anzi in origine e fino al 1871 la biblioteca di un istituto internazionale nel quale la lingua e l’attività italiana avevano una posizione preminente), e positivamente garantiti dall’accordo Croce, reso successivamente inoperante ed anzi tradito dai noti eventi dell’ultima guerra e della occupazione germanica. È necessario inoltre tener presente anche la opportunità di una conveniente salvaguardia da eccessive invadenze della scienza e dell’attività scientifica straniera nel nostro Paese, di cui, per quanto riguarda la Germania si ebbero purtroppo nel passato manifestazioni allarmanti nel senso di una esorbitante propaganda culturale e perfino politica, partita proprio dalle biblioteche in questione e sorretta da mezzi finanziari in cui l’Italia non poté mai disporre. Tutte queste ragioni portano a suggerire una grande cautela, da parte delle nostre Amministrazioni responsabili, in eventuali prese di posizione a favore di una restituzione sic et simpliciter alla Germania o di una totale internazionalizzazione, specie se questo si voglia fare in vista esclusivamente di interessi politici, laddove il problema ha anche e prevalentemente un suo profilo culturale. In ogni caso si dovrebbe rispettare, in un eventuale accordo con la Germania, la posizione base dell’accordo Croce, nella sua pienezza, e cioè anche in quelle clausole che contempl[a]vano la presenza di italiani nella direzione delle biblioteche (condizione che allora fu offerta dai Tedeschi stessi e poi non applicata). Ma si riterrebbe assai più opportuna una soluzione generale di conciliazione dei vari punti di vista sopra enunciati, la quale contemplasse una partecipazione tedesca ed italiana alla gestione delle biblioteche, non escludendo la possibilità di interessare ad essa anche una commissione di formazione internazionale. Si richiede comunque dalle Amministrazioni responsabili uno studio assai mediato del problema, prima di prendere qualsiasi impegno con governi stranieri, e si ritiene opportuno che di questa volontà di esame, per la tutela degli interessi italiani, siano informati gli organi attualmente preposti alla gestione provvisoria delle biblioteche.” AN, 20170185/105 (previously EFR archives, box “Union 1946–1949”, file “Historique. L’UNION et les Bibliothèques ex-Allemandes, textes et Documents 1952– 1953”). Copy of report by Leo Bruhns, “Gliederung und Aufgaben des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts”, 16 October 1956 (6 pages): Friedrich Wilhelm IV – the “patronage” of the ICA. The secretary-general became president in 1929 – a “Primus inter pares”. “In Rom als der eigentlichen Geburtsstätte des Institutes liegt das Hauptgebiet auf der Bibliothek, die mit über 70 000 Bänden die größte

Appendix i: German Archaeological Institute in Rome (DAI archives, Berlin) 

 237

archäologische auf der Welt ist. Von da aus ebenso wie von der ebenfalls größten archäologischen Photographiensammlung her ist die alte Bezeichnung als Institut der wissenschaftlichen Korrespondenz heute wie eh und je gerechtfertigt, denn ständig müssen die in diesem Institut Arbeitenden auf sich immer mehrende Anfragen aus allen Ländern Auskünfte geben und wissenschaftlichen Rat erteilen.” Courses for teachers, guided visits, and so forth. “Durch die großen Ausgrabungen, die in Griechenland immer veranstaltet worden sind, unterscheidet sich der Charakter des Athenischen Instituts wesentlich von dem in Rom. Zurzeit [at the moment] laufen die großen Ausgrabungen in Olympia und die kaum minder ausgedehnten auf Samos.“ Excavations at Kerameikos, in Thessaly, and other sites. Possibilities to keep working (albeit modestly) in Istanbul. The Römisch-Germanische Kommission and its library was more or less intact in Frankfurt am Main. “Die Archäologie ist, durch die Verbindung rein geisteswissenschaftlicher Arbeit mit praktischer Tätigkeit, die von allen Kulturvölkern gleichermaßen geübt wird, eine unvergleichlich stärker völkerverbindende Wissenschaft, als es die reinen Naturwissenschaften oder auch die reinen Geisteswissenschaften sein können und müssen. […] auch die Verbindung zu den Vertretern anderer ebenfalls in der Archäologie tätigen Kulturnationen und damit eine Möglichkeit zu kulturellen Austausch ohne jede Politik, die durch keine anderen Berufe geboten werden kann. Es ist dies eine Möglichkeit und ein Weg zum gegenseitigen Kennenlernen, der als ein Positivum der Archäologie zusätzlich zu den eigentlichen wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen nicht hoch genug bewertet werden kann. Die menschheitsgeschichtliche Erkenntnis, die die Archäologie vermittelt, dürfte jedoch allein schon genügend Ausweis für ihre Notwendigkeit sein und damit für die Notwendigkeit kraftvoller Arbeit unseres Instituts.” DAI archives, ADZ, Altregistratur file 10–04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”.

Appendix ii: Letter of protest, signed by foreign school directors in Athens, November 1909 “(1) On nous accuse d’avoir employé, dans nos recherches, de ‘l’argent de la Société Archéologique Grecque, dans l’intérêt de nos propres gouvernements et de notre propre science’. Nous déclarons formellement que tous les travaux de nos Écoles ont été payés sur nos propres fonds; la Grèce n’y a contribué que pour assurer la surveillance des fouilles et la conservation des trouvailles, et, dans quelques cas, pour l’expropriation des terrains, touts mésures prises dans l’intérêt de la Grèce seule. (2) On nous reproche que la complaisante complicité de M. Kavvadias a ‘étouffé en Grèce toute activité archéologique grecque, en nous faisant attribuer les meilleurs emplacements des fouilles, pour l’humiliation de la science hellénique et la plus grande gloire de la science étrangère’. Nous sommes profond[é]ment reconnaissants, non seulement à Mr l’Éphore Générale, mais à tous les Éphores et Directeurs de musées, des facilités de travail toujours libéralement accordés; mais nous rappelons que nous tenons les autorisations des fouilles les plus importantes, du Gouvernement et de la Chambre hellénique[.] Il ne saurait, dès lors, être question des mesures arbitraires, et nous protestons hautement contre tout soupçon de favoritisme, de la part de qui ce soit. Et nous avons si peu étouffé l’activité archéologique grecque, si injustement flétrie par le ‘Chronos’, qu’il suffit d’énumérer les travaux importants accomplis depuis vingt-cinq ans, précis[é]ment sous l’éphorie générale de M. Kavvadias, par des savants grecs. Les fouilles de l’Acropole d’Athènes, d’Eleusis, de Thorikos et de Sunion, d’Oropos, d’Érétrie et de Chalkis, de Thèbes et de Chaironée, de Dimini, Sesklo et Pagasées, de Thermon, de Képhallonie, du Lykeion et de Lykosoura, de Gythion, Vaphio et Mycènes, d’Epidaure, de Syros, Paros, Naxos, pour ne citer que les plus connus, le sauvetage des statues d’Anticythère; la conservation et la restauration des monuments antiques (Parthénon, Erechthéion, Epidaure, Bassae etc.), menées avec une méthode admirable; la riche série de publications modèle des musées d’Athènes et des provinces; ce sont là assez de preuves de l’activité scientifique grecque qu’on non accuse d’étouffer. Nous sommes surpris qu’on nous laisse le soin de la défendre. (3) On va jusqu’à prétendre que nos gouvernements et nos sociétés savantes ont payé de décorations et d’honneurs les complaisances de [M.] Kavvadias. Comment ose-t-on supposer qu’on achète ainsi le titre de Membre des Académies de Berlin et de Paris, ou celui du Docteur ‘honoris causa’ de Cambridge et de Leip[z]ig ? Ce sont là des honneurs décernés librement aux savants les plus illustres. (4) On nous accuse enfin de mépriser la Grèce. Il suffit de rappeler que c’est à Athènes qu’a été tenu le premier Congrès Archéologique International; qu’à Athènes siège le comité permanent régissant tous les congrès à venir. Si l’avis unanime du monde savant a rendu à Athènes son

Appendix ii: Letter of protest, signed by foreign school directors in Athens, 1909 

 239

ancien prestige de métropole des études antiques – et il nous sera bien permis de témoigner du rôle prépondérant joué par M. Kavvadias, en cette circonstance – quel plus bel hommage pouvions-nous présenter à la Grèce? Les Secrétaires de l’Institut Allemand W. Dörpfeld, G. Karo Le Directeur de l’École Américaine B. H. Hill Le Secrétaire de l’Institut Autrichien A. von Premerstein Le Secrétaire de l’École Française (en l’absence du Directeur) J. Chamonard Le Directeur de l’École Anglaise R. M. Dawkins”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”.

Appendix iii: Charles Picard/École française d’Athènes, correspondence 1922–1924 Charles Picard, document regarding a British Academy proposition to the International Union of Academies (“Archives. Contreproposition grecque. Transmise Paris, 12 mai 1922. – ChP.”), April 1922: “Grâce à la loi hellénique sur l’administration des antiquités et à la manière libérale d’après laquelle les Hellènes l’ont appliquée, la science archéologique a déjà fait des progrès immenses. La Grèce, qui consacra ses forces à l’exploration de son sol pour la découverte, l’étude, et la publication des Monuments, n’a pas gardé ce privilège pour elle-même; convaincue que la science appartient à tous, elle a convié tous les peuples à partager avec elle les labeurs de la recherche et l’honneur des découvertes. C’est la France, la première qui, continuant l’œuvre glorieuse de l’Expédition Scientifique de Morée, s’empressa de participer à ces tendances en instituant à Athènes, dès 1846, l’École Française Archéologique. Puis toutes les grandes nations d’Europe et d’Amérique créèrent aussi, tout à tout, leurs Écoles Archéologiques, au nombre de six aujourd’hui [1922]. Ainsi à Athènes a été formée une sorte d’Université mondiale et une Académie International, et dans le sol de la Grèce a commencé un grand mouvement des recherches. Sous la pioche, que maniaient Hellènes et Étrangers, les vieux temples ressuscitèrent et du sol sortirent par milliers les merveilles de l’art antique, qui ont fait aujourd’hui de l’Archéologie une science grande et noble faisant honneur à l’esprit humain. Les archéologues de touts les nations civilisées, parmi lesquels se trouvaient les meilleurs maîtres de la science, applaudirent à ces travaux. Dans le Congrès International d’Archéologie classique réuni pour la première fois à Athènes, en 1905, on a désigné, dans une entente universelle, la ville d’Athènes comme la patrie internationale de l’Archéologie […]. L’autorisation de faire des fouilles dans les contrées ci-dessus ne peut être accordée qu’ I) Au Musée Impérial de Constantinople. II) Aux Écoles Archéologiques étrangères établies à Athènes, et à la Société Archéologique d’Athènes. III) à l’“Académie dei Lincei” [sic] et aux Écoles Archéologiques étrangères établies à Rome. IV) à l’Académie de tout État qui n’a pas une École Archéologique à Athènes, ou à Rome, ou à Constantinople. […] Toutes les trouvailles transportables provenant des fouilles et qui ont une valeur pour l’histoire de l’art, doivent être transportées à Smyrne, où sera crée un Musée central des antiquités grecques et gréco-romaines de l’Asie-Mineure. Les antiquités de moindre importance doivent être déposées en des Musées locaux. Les doubles peuvent être concédés par les autorités du pays, à L’École Archéologique ou Institution qui fait des fouilles. Faute, peut-être, de personne compétentes parmi les autorités du pays pour indiquer justement et séparer les

Appendix iii: Charles Picard/École française d’Athènes, correspondence 1922–1924 

 241

doubles, il serait désirable de s’adresser à une commission de deux ou trois des directeurs des Écoles Archéologiques étrangères établies à Athènes.” EFA archives, 7 ADM 1: “Missions, activités de terrain et études. Régime des fouilles et des antiquités”. Copy of decision by the Archaeological Council, 11 February 1924, translated by Charles Picard: “Le Président: Kougeas. Les membres: Kouroniotis, Kéramopoullos, Balanos, Sotiziou, Oikonomos, Orlandos, Rhomaios (secrétaire). Certifié la traduction: ChP [sign.]”. See also note (Picard?), n.d. (1924): “Au cas où les mesures seraient définitives, il y a un moyen de les tourner: L’École a droit à 3 fouilles par an: donc, organiser un roulement de fouilles […] le délai d’abandon des chantiers est de 15 ans […] par exemple: 1924, Delphes, Thasos, Mallia[;] 1925, Délos, Philippes, Mallia[;] 1926, Delphes, Thasos, Mallia[;] 1927[,] Délos, Philippes, Mallia etc etc”. EFA archives, 2 ADM 28: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Autorités et partenaires grecs”. Charles Picard to the “Ministre de l’Instruction Publique et des Cultes, DIRECTION DU SERVICE ARCHEOLOGIQUE”, regarding an excerpt from the proceedings of the Archaeological Council, 1 March 1924: “J’ai pris connaissance des considérations développées dans ce document; il vise à instaurer, pour les Écoles Etrangères, qui reçoivent à Athènes l’hospitalité, jusqu’ici pleinement libérale de la Grèce, les bases d’un régime nouveau, restrictif, de l’activité scientifique. En raison des longues traditions de collaboration sympathique qui ont existé depuis 1846 entre l’École Française d’Athènes, doyenne des Institutions similaires, et les services de l’Éphorie Hellénique […] ma demande de l’année […] n’a sollicité de la Grèce l’octroi d’aucun site archéologique nouveau, et que, sur les cinq chantiers dont il a été question dans ma requête, (Delphes,Delos,Thasos,Philippes,Mallia), deux (Delphes,Delos), exploités par l’École Française d’Athènes de longue date, ne sollicitent plus guère notre effort scientifique que par suite des lenteurs et des difficultés d’une publication faite par nous très en détail […]. Les sondages que nous avons à continuer sur de tels sites ne méritent aucunement le nom de “fouilles”, puisqu’il ne s’agit là que de men[er] à bien une liquidation scientifique […]. Ceci peut faire ressortir le danger qu’il y aurait à décréter une équivalence trop absolue entre telles et telles fouilles, les cas d’espèce étant fort différents selon les lieux. […] J’ajoute que l’École Française d’Athènes a reçu mission de plusieurs Gouvernements Étrangers pour former ici à ses méthodes un certain nombre d’archéologues d’autre Pays. (Ce sont, pour l’année: Belgique, Danemark, Hollande, Pologne, Russie, Suisse). Les archéologues devenus nos associés comptent prendre part à nos travaux, et leur présence est une des raisons qui avaient motivé

242 

 Appendices

ma demande de plusieurs chantiers, parmi lesquels, – je le répète, – aucun n’est nouveau pour nous.” See also M. de Marcilly to M. Félix Sartiaux, 17 January 1923. EFA archives, 2 ADM 27: “Relations extérieures et partenariats. Administration française et tutelles”.

Appendix iv: The Centenary of the Archaeological Society at Athens, October 1938 Robert Demangel to the minister of national education (?), 29 July 1938: “Monsieur le Ministre, La date de la célébration du Centenaire de la Société Archéologique d’Athènes venant d’être fixée au 23–27 octobre prochain, l’occasion paraît favorable pour signaler au gouvernement français l’intérêt qu’il y aurait à décerner quelques décorations françaises aux archéologues grecs. Je me permets de rappeler à ce propos que, lors du Centenaire de l’Université d’Athènes, l’année dernière, aucun archéologue n’a été d´coré (ce qui avait remarqué), justement parce qu’on avait voulu réserver cette faveur pour le Centenaire de la Société Archéologique, qui devait être célébré à l’automne 1937 et fut différé pour des raisons financières. J’ai donc l’honneur de vous adresser les propositions suivantes de nomination dans la Légion d’Honneur: Pour Commandeur: Mr G. Oikonomos, secrétaire général de la Sté archéologique. – Mr Oikonomos, depuis longtemps officier de la Légion d’Honneur, est directeur général des Beaux-Arts au Ministère de l’E.N., professeur à l’Université d’Athènes, secrétaire perpétuel de l’Académie d’Athènes, correspondant de l’Institut de France. Très ami de la France et de l’École. Pour Officier (rappel): Mr A. Philadelpheus, membre de la Société archéologique. Mr Philadelpheus, directeur du Musée National d’Athènes, a été dernièrement proposé pour officier. C’est un des doyens de l’archéologie grecque, très francophile. Pour Chevalier: Mr Sp. Marinatos, membre de la Société archéologique. – M. Marinatos est directeur des antiquités et monuments historiques de Grèce au Ministère de l’E.N., ancien éphore de Crète et organisateur du Musée de Candie. Un des meilleurs savants de la Grèce actuelle. Mr A.–D. Kéramopoullos, membre de la Sté archéologique. – M. Kéramopoullos est Président de l’Académie d’Athènes et professeur de science de l’antiquité à l’Université. Bon savant et ami de la France: c’est lui qui m’a averti de la venue du Ministre de l’E.N. de Berlin, M. Rust, l’an dernier, en me disant que la France devrait aussi envoyer un ministre. Cette indication, transmise par moi à M. Bruère, a été à l’origine de la venue de Mr Jean Zay. [In the margin, concerning Marinatos and Keramopoullos – change from Chevalier/Knight of the Légion to ‘Officier’] Mr G. Sotiriou, membre de la Société archéologique.

244 

 Appendices



M. Sotiriou est le directeur et le créateur véritable du Musée Byzantin d’Athènes, professeur d’archéologie chrétienne. Mr E. Gilliéron fils (rappel), proposé au titre de l’Exposition. […] – M. Gilliéron est un artiste suisse, chef du service des moulages au Musée National. Collaborateur précieux de l’École Française. Il faudrait sans doute ajouter Mr A. Bénakis, le grand collectionneur, ancien ministre, qui est vice-président de la Société Archéologique (le Président est le Roi). Mais M. Bénakis ne doit rentrer en Grèce que dans le courant du mois d’Août et je n’ai pu savoir quel grade il avait dans la Légion d’Honneur; probablement aucun: il faudrait donc prévoir aussi une Croix pour lui.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936–1942)”. Alessandro Della Seta, speech held in the Parthenon, 23 October 1938: “[…] dovendosi oggi sull’Acropoli celebrare nell’opera della Società Archeologica la gloriosa civiltà della Grecia, la voce più intonata, quella che, con maggiore coscienza degli antichi legami, può farne l’esaltazione, è certo la voce di Roma, la voce della civiltà latina e italiana. Perchè noi riconosciamo alla Società Archeologica due compiti, dei quali non saprei dire quale sia il maggiore, uno sacro alla patria, l’altro sacro alla civiltà. […] la Società Archeologica si costituì per ridare alla patria non solo l’aspetto ma anche la coscienza della sua grandezza. Era, infatti, necessario disseppellire, liberare, ripristinare i monumenti antichi, non solo perché questi erano belli ma, e soprattutto, perchè erano i diplomi della vostra nobiltà. […] Pacifici colleghi della Società Archeologica, permettetemi quindi di dirvi che voi siete le sentinelle sempre in armi dello spirito nazionale greco, pronte ad accorrere ogni dove un tratto del volto della grande madre dormiente, dalle case alle tombe, dai templi alle cinte murarie, torna a destarsi e a palpitare sotto il vostro sole vivificatore. […] esemplari per fede, per patriottismo, per scienza, Antonio Benakis e Giorgio Oikonomou [sic]. Questo è il dovere sacro che avevate verso la vostra patria, e lo avete splendidamente assolto. Ma la civiltà della Grecia è una di quelle civiltà immortali, le quali elaborano generosamente anche per le altre genti forme e pensieri di un [valore] universale che, con la stessa compattezza e regolarità di una stratificazione archeologica, si depositano nel grembo di altre civiltà ed anzi divengono fondamenta incrollabili del comune vivere civile. Ed anche a questo compito la Grecia ha adempiuto in pieno. Ha fatto di più: ereditiera della non mai smentita “filoxenia” greca, che è non soltanto esteriore ospitalità di modi ma è anche, e specialmente, interiore ospitalità dello spirito, che anzi è istintiva generosità dell’anima, ci avete accolti, noi, studiosi delle altre terre, come vostri collaboratori e, spesso con una larghezza che fa più apprezzato il dono, avete affidato alle nostre ricerche parti integrali del vostro patrimonio avito. E forse vi è stato un destino non solo fortunoso

Appendix iv: The Centenary of the Archaeological Society at Athens, October 1938 

 245

ma cosciente se ciascuna delle scuole straniere ha chiesto e ricevuto di questo retaggio la parte che meglio appagava la tendenze del suo spirito. Così l’attiva e fattiva America ha scelto la vita pulsante dell’Agora ateniese e di Corinto, dominatrice anche essa di due mari. Così la quadrata e atletica Germania è rimasta fedele sino ad oggi al severo santuario di Olimpia, al primigenio stadio simbolico di tutti gli agoni del corpo e dell’intelligenza. Così la Francia fervida e spirituale ha spaziato nel dominio apollineo da Delfi a Delo. E, senza ombra di allusione politica, da gran tempo in Creta, nella terra di approdo della mitica Europa, Inghilterra, Francia e Italia hanno lavorato collegialmente con voi, Greci, in un accordo che potrebbe dirsi mediterraneo. Ma la vostra generosità non è stata rinuncia: voi avete lavorato, prima degli altri ed esemplarmente per gli altri, in tre luoghi che non soltanto sono i preminenti della Grecia nella vita dello spirito, ma che sono tre simboli della vostra civiltà: sull’Acropoli, in Epidauro, in Eleusi. Ai centri simbolici dell’arte, della scienza, della religione greca[,] mancava, per completare la grande tetrade della vostra civiltà, quello della filosofia, l’Accademia di Platone: e questa vi la sta restituendo, con una passione che è pari alla sua munificenza, uno dei vostri, Panaghioti Arsitophron. Torno alla mia lingua ma volgo al fine. I monumenti sono dunque l’indice della vita perenne dello spirito, sono una testimonianza e sono un’ispirazione. Un mese fa, quando fosche nubi di guerra si addensavano sul cielo di Europa, il nostro grande Duce, Benito Mussolini, inaugurava presso la tomba di Augusto la ricostruita Ara Pacis Augustae: pochi giorni dopo egli veniva chiamato con unanime consenso a regolare quella pace romana, che è sempre pace di giustizia e di equità. Oggi qui, in un’atmosfera che questa pace ha reso serena e tranquilla, egualmente tra i monumenti, celebriamo una di quelle feste che affratellano i popoli nel comune lavoro dell’intelligenza, che è il supremo bene dell’umanità. Auguriamo quindi che la Società Archeologica di Atene possa celebrare centenari senza numero su questa Acropoli millenaria, che sul grande mare della storia è una delle vette sublimi di perfezione dell’umanità, come lo è il Campidoglio.” SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. The SAIA archives also contain a handwritten draft of the same speech. Biagio Pace, speech held at the Academy, Athens, 24 October 1938: “Per incarico del Ministro dell’Educazione Nazionale del Governo Fascista ho l’onore di recare a questa adunanza di eccezione il saluto, il compiacimento, l’augurio della Cultura Italiana [a] questa incomparabile terra della bellezza antica. […] Permettete pertanto, che, al di là di esso, io tenti di esprimervi il motivo per cui il compiacimento della Cultura Italiana vibra di una nota tutta sua, e ancor più profonda e sostanziale che non comporti la semplice considerazione che ad uomini di scienza impone un complesso così cospicuo di lavoro scientifico. In

246 

 Appendices

Ellade come in Italia l’archeologica non è qualche cosa che possa essere e possa non essere: una ragione di stud[i]o solitario o una palestra di esercitazioni intellettualistiche. È lo stesso dato fondamentale della nostra realtà di popolo. È insieme la nostra storia e la nostra politica: l’attestazione del passato che opera insopprimibile sull’avvenire. Per noi italiani come per voi greci, una medesima ragione di vita sgorga dalla serena maestà dei nostri studi prediletti. […] i vostri primi archeologi operavano col fucile dei Palikari alla mano. […] sorridevo pensando ad una vera stranezza. Gli anni più maturi mi fanno oggi comprendere quale intima bellezza e quale verità imperitura fossero nel gesto del letterato e del patriota. Al di là del successo del momento in una fazione di armi, premeva il simbolo medesimo [della] realtà nazionale: premevano quelle venerande reliquie che per voi come per noi, anche nei secoli più oscuri hanno mantenuto fra le certezze più assolute dello spirito la comune esistenza di nazione: e questa certezza hanno opposto alla transeunte realtà dei tempi, e l’hanno imposta all’attenzione politica del mondo. Son queste le ragioni per cui presso di voi come presso di noi all’archeologia hanno sempre guardato, per una coerenza insopprimibile di pensiero i più fervidi assertori del risorgimento e della potenza: queste le ragioni per cui vi guarda con le inesauribili possibilità della sua grande anima il Duce dell’Italia nuova. Queste ancora le ragioni, Maestà ed eminenti colleghi, per cui la mia voce d’Italiano s’alza nella ricorrenza odierna come particolarmente intima e congeniale al vostro medesimo sentimento.” SAIA archives, 1938: “Direzione (Dir.)”. Walter Wrede, speech held at the Academy, Athens, 24 October 1938 (5 typewritten pages): “Ew. Majestät ! [Exzellenzen !] Liebe Etaireia ! Ich bringe Dank und Glückwünsche der Athenischen Abteilung des Archäologischen Instituts des Deutschen Reiches und der Leitung der Ausgrabungen in Olympia. Und ich darf als erster gratulieren zu der hohen Auszeichnung die die hundertjährige Archäologische Gesellschaft seitens der Akademie von Athen erfahren hat, vor allem aber meiner Freude Ausdruck geben über die Verleihung der Winckelmanns-Medaille durch die Zentraldirektion meines Institutes, die durch diese Ehrung der Etaireia ihre ganz besondere Verbundenheit kundtut. Wie Sie wissen, ist die Winckelmanns-[M]edaille bisher zweimal verliehen worden: an Seine Kgl. Hoheit, den Kronprinzen von Schweden und – and die Stadt Rom. Die Athener Archäologische Gesellschaft neben der Stadt Rom, Warum? In Italien wie in Griechenland trat das Institut mit seinen Gründungen in eine ganz bestimmte Atmosphäre ein, die es in beiden Gastländern, wenn auch in sehr verschiedener Brechung, vorfand: die Atmosphäre, die von der unmittelbaren

Appendix iv: The Centenary of the Archaeological Society at Athens, October 1938 

 247

Nähe der Antike angefüllt war. Als 1829 das Institut in Rom gegründet wurde, da fand es als Trägerin dieser Atmosphäre eben die Stadt Rom, die ewige, seit dem Altertum in ununterbrochener Tradition fortlebende Stadt in ihrer lebendigen Gesamtheit. 1875 entstand unser Athener Institut in einem Athen, dem lebendige Tradition einer ewigen Stadt fehlte, das vielmehr nach Jahrhunderten unglücklicher Schicksal eben erst wieder auflebte. Und da war die Etaireia die Trägerin jene Atmosphäre, sie vermittelte dem wiedererstarkten Nationalbewusstsein des griechischen Volkes die Grundlagen, die es suchte: die Erkenntnis von der Grösse der Vorfahren. Denn sie ist nicht eine gelehrte Spezialgesellschaft sondern eine Angelegenh[e]it der ganzen Nation, wie denn auch der König des Landes jeweils den Vorsitz übernimmt. [Die Leistungen der Etair[e]ia auf den Ausgrabungsfeldern werden in diesen Tagen oft genannt werden, ihre drei grössten Ruhmesplätze besuchen wir gemeinsam. Wie sehr [die] Bergerin [sic] und Pflegerin der Denkmälerschätze war in einer Zeit, als der Staat noch wenig dazu tun konnte, geht daraus hervor, dass es bis 1891 (also bis über 50 Jahre nach ihrer Gründung) in Athen nur ein Museum der Archäologischen Gesellschaft noch kein National-Museum gab.] Und diese Archäologische Gesellschaft im Griechischen Gastlande hat uns fremde Institute wie Schwestern aufgenommen, und darum sind wir fremden Institute heute die nächsten daran, ihr zu danken. Ich habe hier nur für uns Deutsche zu sprechen. Das Wort etairos [written in Greek] hat in seiner Grundbedeutung – so stets bei Homer – genau die Bedeutung und die Färbung wie unser “Kamerad” in seinem heutigen Klang. Die Etaireia ist nicht nur eine Kameradschaft unter sich, sondern sie hat mit uns Kameradschaft geschlossen und sie gehalten. Kameradschaft beruht auf Gegenseitigkeit. Das einemal [sic] gräbt ein Schliemann mit eigenem Aufwand, aber namens der Archäologischen Gesellschaft die Schachtgräber von Mykenai aus; im Rahmen der Etaireia arbeitet Wilhelm Dörpfeld auf der Akropolis, in Epidauros, in Eleusis. Und auf der andern Seite überlässt die Etaireia so oft den fremden Schulen bereitwillig von ihr geplante oder begonnene Unternehmungen. Wir wollen das nicht vergessen und uns immer bewusst bleiben, wie die Pflege dieser Kameradschaft über die Grenzen des Volkstums hinüber nicht nur gemeinsamen wissenschaftlichen Zielen, sondern unsern beiden Völkern nützt. Wenn jemand Geburtstag hat, dann will man ihm eine Freude machen. So kommen wir zum Geburtstag der Archäologischen Gesellschaft zwar nicht mit einem unmittelbaren Geschenk an sie, so doch mit etwas, was ihr Freude machen soll. Die Ausgrabungen im Kerameikos von Athen sind auch einst von der Etaireia begonnen und später grosszügig an unser Institut vergeben worden. Auf diesem Platz gemeinsamer Arbeit ist mit den Mitteln der Oberländer–Stiftung ein Museum fertig geworden. Wir übergeben anlässlich der Hundertjahrfeier der Athener

248 

 Appendices

Archäologischen Gesellschaft das Kerameikosmuseum der Oeffentlichkeit. Und ich lade Sie alle ein zur Eröffnung und zu einer ersten Führung durch das Museum am kommenden Donnerstag um 11,30 Uhr. Liebe Etaireia! Die ersten hundert Jahre deines Weges mögen nur die erste Etappe sein! In einer Zeit, von der wir glauben, dass sie, für jedes Volk von seinem Blickpunkt aus, eine neue Wertung des alten Hellenentums heraufgebracht hat und in der Folge davon neue Wirkungen heraufbringen wird, haben wir den Mut, dir zuzurufen: [May you live to be a thousand! (Added, in Greek)]” DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”. “Bericht über die Hundertjahrfeier der Athener Archäologischen Gesellschaft. Ein Programm der Feiern ist dem Bericht beigefügt. Der Ausflug nach Epidauros fiel wegen schlechten Wetters aus. Die Zahl der främden Gäste war, wohl noch infolge der politischen Krisentage, geringer als etwa die bei Kongressen übliche. Immerhin waren die meisten europäischen Länder, der nahe Orient und die USA. (diese durch ihren Gesandten) vertreten: Deutschland, Italien, England, Frankreich, Schweden, Schweiz, Polen, Rumänien, Bulgarien, Türkei, Aegypten [sic]. Deutschland hatte die stärkste Teilnehmerzahl. Die Feier trug von Anfang bis zu Ende ein angenehm intimes und kameradschaftliches Gepräge. Die Solidarität der Archäologischen Gesellschaft mit den fremden Instituten wurde bei allen Gelegenheiten in den Vordergrund gestellt. In der ersten Festsitzung im Parthenon sprach Herr Della Seta als Doyen der fremden Institute für alle Fremden. Dagegen wünschte die Leitung der Archäologischen Gesellschaft gelegentlich der zweiten Sitzung in der Akademie von möglichst vielen etwas zu hören, (je 3–5 Minuten). Nach dem französischen begann “Allemagne”. So war Wilhelm Dörpfeld de erste und überreichte dem König als dem Vorsitzenden der Gesellschaft namens der Zentral-Direktion des Archäologischen Instituts des Deutschen Reiches die WinckelmannMedaille. Dann sprach Wrede für die Athenische Abteilung des Instituts und die Ausgrabungen in Olympia. Es folgte Herr Praschniker für die Wiener Akademie und das […] Archäologische Institut der Universität Wien, er brachte zugleich den Dank für alle verflossene Zusammenarbeit mit dem bisherigen Oesterreichischen Institut in Athen zum Ausdruck, das nun voraussichtlich in der Athenische Abteilung des Reichsinstituts aufginge. Herr Weickert brachte die Wünsche der Berliner Museen und der Berliner Archäologische Gesellschaft; Herr Kolbe die Wünsche derjenigen deutschen Universitäten, die bei der Feier vertreten waren oder um Uebermittlung [sic] ihrer Wünsche gebeten hatten. Wir hatten hierfür Herrn Kolbe ausersehen, da er der älteste der Anwesenden war und zugleich so die Epigraphik zu Worte kam. Die Herren Herbig und Kurt Müller überreichten Bücher. Es folgten die anderen Länder.

Appendix iv: The Centenary of the Archaeological Society at Athens, October 1938 

 249

Die Athener Archäologische Gesellschaft ernannte die folgenden Gelehrten deutscher Staatsangehörigkeit zu “Oeffentlichen [sic] Ratsmitgliedern[”] bzw. zu Ehrenmitgliedern und Korrespondierenden Mitgliedern: Dörpfeld, Karo, Hiller von Gärtringen, Thiersch, Wilcken; Kolbe, Kurt Müller, Praschniker, […] Rodenwaldt, Schede, Weickert, Wrede; Rubensohn, Kübler. Anlässlich der Hundertjahrfeier fand am 27. Oktober die in der Festsitzung durch den Unterzeichneten angekündigte Eröffnung des Kerameikos – Museums mit anschliessender Führung durch Herrn Kübler statt. Die Beteiligung wahr zahlreich, alle Institute waren vertreten (das Französische durch seine früheren Direktoren Picard und Roussel), das Griechische Kultusministerium durch die Herren Oikonomos und Marinatos, eine grosse Anzahl griechischer und ausländischer Geleh[r]ter und Altertumsfreunde war zugegen. Herr Marinatos dankte namens der griechischen Altertümerverwaltung und hob die bleibende Bedeutung solcher Lokalmuseen hervor. Athen, den 29. Oktober 1938”. DAIA archives, D-DAI-ATH-Archiv, Ordner 37: “Korrespondenz 1933–1938”.

Appendix v: Documents regarding the École française d’Athènes in wartime, 1940 Robert Demangel to the “Ministre de l’Éducation Nationale Direction de l’Enseignement Supérieur”, 9 January 1940: “Une partie des locaux de l’École a été occupée par les services de l’Armée et de la Marine. […] J’ai fermé les yeux par nécessité sur certaines modifications de détail à l’état actuel, en maintenant de mon mieux les façades dont je conserve la responsabilité civile vis-à-vis du pays dont nous sommes les hôtes. Le pavillon des membres étrangers de l’École a dû être entièrement cédé aux services militaires.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 7 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1936–1942)”. Robert Demangel to the French minister in Athens, 11 March 1941: “Un abri a été également construit en novembre 1940 à l’École Française, pour assurer la sécurité du personnel français et grec.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 22 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1940–1965)”. Robert Demangel, annual report 1940: “La situation faite à l’École d’Athènes par la guerre européenne pour le personnel et les locaux a été plusieurs reprises précisée dans mes rapports au Ministère de l’Éducation Nationale […]. Depuis le 28 octobre 1940, le conflit italo-grec a ajouté de nouveaux problèmes administratifs […]. La guerre générale avait mobilisé dès le début de septembre 1939 tout le personnel français, sauf le secrétaire général, M. Lemerle. […] Les membres étrangers et les boursiers ou missionnaires français et étrangers avaient rapidement rejoint leurs pays respectifs. […] Malgré ces circonstances défavorables, […] j’ai cru nécessaire d’essayer de maintenir à l’École française, dans le cadre de la situation générale, une activité conforme à ses traditions et à la place que nous tenons en Grèce depuis un siècle. Avec l’assentiment du chef du poste militaire, dont elle formait en quelque sorte la couverture, l’École a donc pu demeurer ouverte, bien qu’elle n’ait conservé en fait que son personnel grec. La bibliothèque est restée accessible aux savants deux matinées par semaine. […] Les relations de l’École avec les autorités helléniques et françaises comme avec les établissements scientifiques et les particuliers grecs et étrangers n’ont pas été interrompues. […] Des conférences ont été données à l’École en avril et mai 1940, S.M. le Roi de Grèce ayant, comme chaque année depuis 1937, honoré de sa présence la première, l’exposé du directeur sur les Travaux de l’École en 1939.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”.

Appendix vi: “Pro Memoria recording the events preceding the transportation of the German scientific libraries from Rome to Germany – Confidential”. Erik Sjöqvist, n.d. (between June 1944 and May 1945, possibly 25 October 1944) “The events of the 25th of July 1943 [the German occupation of Rome] created a pronounced state of allarm [sic] in all German circles in Rome with very traceable repercussions, also in the intellectual quarters. The nervousness was apparent and already at that time the responsible directors of the two scientific institutions with which I was in contact, Prof. Dr. Armin von Gerkan of the Deutsche[s] Archäologische[s] Institut and Prof. Dr. Leo Bruhns of the Kaiser Wilhelms Institut für Kunstwissenschaft (Bibliotheca [Hertziana]) were preoccupied for the future of their respective institutes. One of the first days in August [1943] I received a visit of Prof. Bruhns who under strongly confidential conditions – any expressed doubt on the possibility of the German authorities to master the new situation would be considered as high treason – very outspokenly let me know his worriedness as regarded the future of his institute, asking me if I were willing in the event of a separate peace between Italy and the Allieds and by a joint occupation of Rome, to exert the moral authority I might possess to hinder the violation of the library and its eventual confiscation by the Italians. On my reply that the best moral authority available of course was the Holy See, Prof. Bruhns pointed out that any approach to the Vatican had to be made through the German diplomatic representatives of the Power, and that under present conditions they were not allowed to take any step which might reveal distrust in the final victory. He would however try to approach privately the Cardinal Librarian Giovanni Mercati and the Prefect of the Vatican Library, Father Albareda. I declared myself willing to do what I could to protect the library [and] the real estate if necessary to prevent [the?] sequestration and dispersal during the [foreseen] Allied occupation of Rome, and in that matter to cooperate with the Vatican if that was considered useful. No written act of this our agreement was put up, nor were the assistants of the institution [the Hertziana] informed, owing to the very confidential character of the affair and of Prof. Bruhn[s’] pronounced fear of being considered a ‘défaitiste’. During our conversation the eventual transport of the library to Germany was never mentioned and I am quite sure that it had never entered into the mind of Prof. Bruhns. Shortly after I had a similar visit of Prof. von Gerkan who, however, made much clearer proposals in the matter than had Prof. Bruhns. Although well aware of the personal risks he might run by applying for foreign protection of

252 

 Appendices

his Institute – these risks were especially high, as he was personally on very bad terms with the German Embassy at the Quirinal in general and especially with the Ambassador Herr von Mackensen – he did not hesitate after our preliminary conversation to send me an [officially?] registered letter dated Aug. 17th asking me to take care of the interests of the Institute [the DAIR] in the event of the Germans having to leave Rome, which he foresaw would happen very soon. I remember especially his expression during a subsequent conversation of ours, that he felt it his duty to do anything in his power to safeguard the library especially against the event that the ‘high poppies’ (‘gli alti papaveri’) [implying that they conversed in Italian] of the party or the embassy, whom he characterized as extremely stupid and unknowing, might get it into their heads to take the library from Rome. He did not feel inclined to cooperate with the Vatican, if he could prevent it, this in view of his strongly anti-Italian instincts. His assistants, Dr. J.W. Crous, Librarian, Dr. F.W. Deichmann, deputy for Christian archaeology and Dr. H. Fuhrmann, deputy for the photographic archives, were officially informed of my position as curator ad interim in case of emergency, and declared their willingness to follow any directions given by me for the safeguard of the library, [following] the general lines laid down by von Gerkan. At the day of the armistice, the 8th of Sept., the German Embassy at the Quirinal, headed by Herr von Rahn, had succeeded Herr von Mackensen after July 25th, fled hastily northwards after having given strict orders to the directors of the two institutes and to Messrs Deichmann and Crous to follow in a special train at 4 o’clock in the morning together with other prominent members of the German colony. Bruhns and von Gerkan followed the orders given but Deichmann and Crous neglected them, and both came the same day to me to report what had happened. Neither of them being members of the Nazi party and both having acted against orders, they were naturally somewhat anxious about the personal positions, also much the more so as the assistant director of the Archaeological Institute, Dr. Siegfried Fuchs, an SS man and ‘Vorsitzender der N.S.D.A.P. Landesgruppe Italien’ with special not clearly defined qualifications in the ‘Sicherheits Dienst’ [sic], was present in Rome at that time. It should however, be stated that the principle preoccupation of these two brave gentlemen concerned their institute and its library; they asked me to allow them to deposit in the store rooms of the Swedish Institute the most valuable catalogue of the library (the shelf index) and the archives of the Institute from 1829 and onwards, a thing which I granted them with pleasure. The deposit was brought in Sept. 9th. On my advice they avoided any contact with the resident German consul in Rome – at this time I think it was Reisinger or Möllhausen – both I was told fanatically [sic] Nazi-men, but tried to establish contact with the German Embassy at

Appendix vi: Erik Sjöqvist, “Pro Memoria” on the German libraries, 1944/1945 

 253

the Holy See, where they found an efficient supporter in the Councellor [sic], Baron von Kessel, whom Prof. Bruhns had pointed out to me as ‘a very reasonable gentleman’, an expression which in the mouth [sic] of a German intellectual at that time would be synonymous to [a] non-Nazi. He and the Ambassador, Baron von Weiszäcker, gave them their full moral support and von Kessel took immediately steps to legalise their presence in Rome. This was achieved with great skill, and after a short time their positions were cleared also with the resident German consul, who characterised them as the only ones who had not lost their heads in a critical moment. When the tempo of the Allied offensive at Salerno slowed down, the panic in official German circles dwindled, and the directors of the institutes were allowed to come back on short visits to Rome. The library of the Archaeological Institute was kept open for selected visitors during the whole of October and November. Baron von Kessel, supported by Messrs von Gerkan and Bruhns, when at Rome, brought about a stable contact with the Vatican, which declared itself ready to take over the moral protection of the Institutes [and] to house the libraries inside the Vatican City if necessary, to realise this intention however, a formal application for such protection was wanted, and this the German Government considered […] incompatible with the Reich’s dignity. Even the Pope [Pius XII] personally was interested in the matter, and directed a letter in his own hand writing to the German Ambassador offering his bona officia. Sept. 28th the librarian of the Bibliotheca [Hertziana], Dr. L. [Schudt], asked me to house the most valuable catalogues of his library too, at the Swedish Institute. They were brought over the same day. Before the middle of November there were no visible or otherwise traceable signs that the removal of any of the libraries were considered, but at that time the first rumours came to my ears that something of that sort was planned. They coincided approximately with the return from Berlin of Prof. W. Hoppenstedt, director of the German propaganda institute, Kaiser Wilhelms Institut für Kulturwissenschaft, a man with very high Nazi acquaintances and an old friend of Hitler. It is, however, doubtful whether he can be considered responsible for having first brought about the idea or not. Dr. Deichmann, who generally was very well informed about what was going on behind the scenes, did not seem to know anything with certainty in the matter, and was together with Crous towards the end of November still fairly optimistic. He could however, state that the assistant director, Fuchs (president of the Nazi group in Italy), the portion of the Archaeological Institute, [Mannz?], (secretary of the same institution) and the intendent [sic] of the Archaeological Institute Kübber (treasurer of the same institution), all ardently Nazi and highly influential, had spoken threateningly of the necessity of saving the libraries from the ‘ungrateful Italians’.

254 

 Appendices

It was certainly a very unhappy circumstance that these three men, all holding key positions in the German Nazi group in Italy, belonged to the personelle [sic] of the Archaeological Institute, and that they were decidedly hostile against Messrs Deichmann and Crous and hardly tolerated their director, von Gerkan. Von Kessel of the Embassy to the Holy See and Drs. Deichmann and Crous, to a certain extent seconded by Dr. Fuhrmann who was a man of much less influence, courage and ability, tried [in] different ways which I do not exactly know, to counterbalance the overwhelming influence of the Nazi trio who were undoubtedly supported by Hoppenstedt. It was however an uphill struggle and the result was in the beginning of December clearly traceable. As to what happened at Fasano, the site of the German Embassy in Northern Italy, during this crucial week, there are two somewhat contradictory versions, one given me by Prof. Bruhns who was actually there, the other by Dr. Deichmann who assured me of the reliability of his sources. According to Bruhns, von Rahn had during the last week of November been summoned up to Hitler’s HQ to report on Italian affairs and included in his report the subject of the German Institutes. He told Bruhns that he had given the advice not to remove them from the viewpoint of German prestige in Italy, and it was decided to give the Boards of Trustees of the two institutions the chance of uttering their opinion[.] On one hand wanting to keep the libraries at Rome, on the other suspecting their master’s wish to bring them to Germany and not daring to utter an opinion in [contrast] with Hitler’s presumed will, they unhappily enough had based their dissuation [sic] on what they termed the impossibility of arranging a safe transport owing to the bombardment of all the lines of communication. This [–] so von Rahn related to Bruhns – brought the Führer in a rage and he gave von Rahn the order to bring the libraries back to Germany forthwith. Arrived back in Italy he called Prof. Bruhns to Fasano and gave him the order to execute the Führer’s will (Beauftratragten des Führerbefehls). According to Deichmann’s sources which confirmed the earlier portions of this story von Rahn still intended to delay the execution of Hitler’s order until it would have been too late, but on discussing the matter with Bruhns in Fasano, the latter had put himself at disposal and declared himself ready to execute the order immediately. Against [this] von Rahm could no longer oppose. On December 9th Bruhns came back to Rome and presented himself with full powers as executor of the Führer’s orders to evacuate the libraries of the German Historical Institute (ex-Austrian), the Art historical Institute (Bibliotheca [Hertziana]) and Archaeological Institute. A possible explanation of this seemingly contradictory attitude of Bruhns may lie in the precarious position of himself and of his family. He may very well have felt that his own failure in the past to take [the] nazi ticket demanded some such expression of [unquestioning?] obedience.

Appendix vi: Erik Sjöqvist, “Pro Memoria” on the German libraries, 1944/1945 

 255

A few days [after?] the packing of Bibliotheca [Hertziana] began and the catalogue deposited at the Swedish Institute was withdrawn by Miss Schreibmüller, the Secretary of the Institute. At an informal conversation in my house soon after his arrival Prof. Bruhns deplored the necessity of his mission, but tried to make me believe that the real reason for the evacuation was that the Allies had the intention of bombarding Rome and that at least the German property had to be saved. On my questioning how such an hypothesis could be reconciled with the bringing to Rome of all the material from Montecassino, he remained slightly embarrassed. The historical and the art historical libraries were sent away in railway trucks in the first half of January [1944] and arrived without incident at their destination, a salt mine near Salzburg where suitable localities also were prepared for the archaeological library. Messrs Deichmann and Crous succeeded in putting off to the very last, any packing of the Archaeological Institute in the expressed hope that it would finally be too late to carry it through[.] Therefore the Historical Institute was packed immediately after the [Hertziana], and [their] own library was kept open until xmas [sic] 1943. In the early days of January Prof. von Gerkan returned again to Rome, and on January 7th the packing finally began. Dr. Deichmann told me that nothing more could be done to prevent the unhappy decision from being carried through, especially as Dr. Fuchs had let him, Crous and even Prof. von Gerkan understand that any further delay would be interpreted as sabotage of the Führer’s orders. The packing was going on when on the 22nd of January the Anzio landing took place. Everybody concerned believed now that the evacuation was rendered impossible, and that the final result would be that the remaining library should be deposited in the Vatican partly packed as it was in its cases. I am told that Baron von Kessel again tried to make his influence felt in this direction, but again the same phenomenon was repeated as that noticed after the Salerno landing. When it got clear [sic] that the liberation of Rome was not immediately impending, the momentary panic of the Germans vanished, and was replaced by a doubled energy [sic]. At the beginning of February the two first railway trucks loaded with book cases and hooked on a soldiers’ leave train were sent northwards towards Brenner. At Terni the train was bombarded when on the bridge; the bridge was hit and some of the carriages plunged into the river. A part of the train including the two trucks with the book-cases were saved and parked close to the burning railway station. Miraculously enough they remained intact and could be sent on after some days delay. […] Some week[s] later two further carriages were sent in the same way, in spite of Prof. Bruhn[s’] attempt to arrange a lorry convoy which would have been able to travel on side roads at night and this run less risks. However, the second couple of carriages came through without any incident, and

256 

 Appendices

on February 21st the rest of the library forming a special train was sent off along the coast line. Dr. Deichmann remained in Rome until Febr. 28th; Dr. Crous followed the last train on Febr. 21st; Prof. Bruhns had left slightly earlier, and Prof. von Gerkan left Rome together with Kübber somewhat later. A considerable part of the deposit consisting of the Shelf-Catalogue, Catalogue of [the] Bibliotheca Platneriana at the Swedish Institute remained on [sic] its place and is still in my hands. It is my personal belief that the failure to withdraw this material was not part of the official plan but was a deliberate oversight on the part of the librarian, Crous. For obvious reasons its existence must therefore be treated as a highly confidential matter to avoid any possibility of reprisals. The last time I saw Prof. von Gerkan he was deeply pessimistic regarding the future of his Institute. He expressed little hope that the library would ever return to Rome as a German library and pointed out at the same time that he could not imagine a German Institute in Rome without its library. Even if the Germans should win the war, he did not believe in the return as so many German university libraries had been destroyed that the want for books at home would induce the authorities not to send it out of the country anymore. He considered, therefore, the last chapter written in the glorious history of the more than 100 years old Institute, and again assured me that he had done what had been within his powers to prevent this tragic event. As regards the place finally decided upon for the deposit in the Reich of the Archaeological Library – a salt mine not in Austria but in Bohemia – he pointed out that although it could be considered pretty safe against direct acts of war, it was politically just as unsafe as ex-Austria. Professor L. Curtius, the ex-director of the Institute [the DAIR], summed up his opinion in a conversation with me shortly after the departure: ‘They are all mad, and have no idea of the consequences of their acts’, and I am sure that his opinion is shared by all responsible German scholars concerned. Summing up the evidence here presented I trust that it has been made clear that the evacuation of the German scientific libraries in Rome was favoured by Prof. Dr. W. Hoppenstedt, Director of the Kaiser Wilhelms Institut für Kulturwissenschaft, pronounced Nazi holding a party ticket with a very low number[;] Dr. S. Fuchs, Second Director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, SS man, Vorsitzender der NSDAP Landesgruppe Italien and connected with the [Sicherheitsdienst;] Herr Mannz, portier [secretary] of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, convinced Nazi and Schriftleiter der NSDAP Landesgruppe Italien[;] Herr Kübber, intendent [sic] of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Nazi and Rechenschaftsführer der NSDAP Landesgruppe Italien. It is even probable that the idea of removing the libraries had its origin in this inner Nazi circle of Rome. Professor L. Bruhns, director of the Kaiser Wilhelms Institut für Kunstwissenschaft (Bibliotheca [Hertziana]), one of the few – if not the only – German official personality [sic]

Appendix vi: Erik Sjöqvist, “Pro Memoria” on the German libraries, 1944/1945 

 257

of high rank who had never taken the Nazi ticket, worked strenuously to bring his institution under Vatican and Swedish [neutral] protection; was in his heart against the removal of his library, which was bound to Rome by the donator’s will; but yielded to the pressure exerted by the party men and finally ended as the actual executor of higher orders. Professor A. von Gerkan, director of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, member of the Nazi party pro forma, worked actively and openly against the evacuation project – his moral courage is well documented, e.g. in his intervention to the favour of Prof. A.W. Van Buren of the American Academy and his efficient protection of the Russian-Jewish scholar Mrs. T. Warscer – but had the considerable drawback of having as employees in his Institute the three most important Nazi men in Rome[,] to whom he had to obey as a simple party member. Dr. F.W. Deichmann, deputy for Christian archaeology at the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, worked with the utmost courage and skill to prevent the removal and run gladly great personal risks for the benefit of the cause. Dr.  J.W.  Crous, librarian of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, a faithful companion to Deichmann and as he a convinced and plucky anti-Nazi, worked methodically and quietly to obstruct the realization of the plans, and showed the great and foreseeing presence of mind to let the shelf catalogue of the library be left behind in Rome, thus facilitating its eventual reconstruction. Dr. L. Schudt, librarian of the Kaiser Wilhelms Institut für Kunstwissenschaft (Bibliotheca [Hertziana]) and Dr. H. Fuhrmann, deputy for the photographical archive of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut[,] played, as far as I know, fairly negligeable [sic] roles in the matter. None of them was member of the Nazi-party and both are earnestly working scholars with an all-absorbing interest for their respective scientific topics. Fuhrmann, being married to an Italian, managed to remain in Rome until the end of May, 1944. Dr. Homann-Wedekind [sic], attached without charge to the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, visited Rome on military leave from the Balkans in February 1944. He is an intimate friend of Deichmann, a nonNazi and supported Deichmann and Crous in their work. Baron von Kessel, counsellor to the German Embassy at the Holy See, has played an honourable rôle [sic] as the official supporter of the good forces in the two institutions.” RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5. This (handwritten) draft memorandum (“Pro Memoria”) by Erik Sjöqvist was edited and corrected by John Bryan Ward-Perkins. Sjöqvist’s additional chronological notes (in Swedish), attached to the memorandum, read as follows: “9 dec. Führerbefehl omkr. Årsskiftet far [Hertziana] 6 jan. börjar packningen på Via Sardegna

258 

 Appendices

slutet av jan. (efter Anzio) de första två vagnarna början på febr. ytterligare 2 vagnar mitten på febr. resten jämte Crous slutet på febr. far Deichmann slutet på maj far Fuhrmann”. RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:5.

Appendix vii: Documents regarding the library and restitution of the Austrian Historical Institute, Rome, 1945–1947 Ernest DeWald to Albert Van Buren (AAR), 9 November 1945 (“HQ US Forces in Austria”): “We are really in the middle of our job here. The big move of things out of the Alt Aussee mine has been completed and many other smaller [deposits] are back or in our warehouse. Some still have to be attended to, such as the Library of the German Institute. The Hertziana we have collected and have safe in Salzburg warehouse. There is one thing you might find out from Eric [sic] Sjöqvist. Among the cases of the German Institute books are presumably some from the Austrian Academy at Rome [sic]. The Austrians have been fussing about them. Although I had that information in writing from people at the mine I wasn’t quite certain about the truth of the situation because Eric and no one else in Rome ever mentioned that books had been removed from the Austrian Academy [sic]. I thought that maybe cases from the Austrian Academy might have been taken to ship books from the German one. So if Eric [sic] could check up on this for me and you could let me know I should be very happy and thankful. There was an Austrian by the name of [Gottfried Lang] who wanted to take over the Austrian Academy while I was still in Rome. He had come down from Milano, and according to John W-P [Ward-Perkins] has halitosis! He might know something about it too. [Today] General Clark finally pinned the Legion of Merit on me which had actually been awarded some time ago. He always insists on doing it personally. […] You mention hoping that I would return soon. Don’t I! I get very homesick for Rome. […] You are very nice writing to me and keeping me informed about the situation in Rome. I appreciate it no end. I am sure that you and Rufus are doing the usual bang-up job. Wes shall miss seeing you and being with you at Thanksgiving and Xmas. We had such a wonderful time at Sjöquists [sic] during those holidays last year.” RA, Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv, III:A:4. Leo Santifaller (Österreichisches Staatsarchiv) to the Österreichisches Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, 30 October 1946: “Im Anschlusse an meine der hohen Akademie der Wissenschaften vorgelegte Denkschrift vom 6.Dezember 1945, betreffend das Oesterreichische Historische Institut in Rom, teile ich heute mit, dass laut Schreiben des gegenwärtigen Vorsitzenden der Monumenta Germaniae, Professor Walter Goetz in München, vom 11.Oktober 1946, die ehemalige Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom, die im Jahre 1943 nach Bayern (Pommersfelden) geborgen wurde, ‘auf amerikanischen Befehl als deutsches Eigentum im Auslande beschlagnahmt und nach Rom abtransportiert wurde’; wer sie dort in Empfang nimmt bezw. Genommen hat, ist bis jetzt

260 

 Appendices

unbekannt. Wie ich bereits in meinem obenzitierten Schreiben vom Jahre 1945 mitteilte, wurde im Jahre 1938–39 durch Dekret des Reichswissenschaftsministers die Bibliothek des Oesterreichischen Historischen Instituts in Rom beschlagnahmt und mit der Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Instituts zu einer einzigen Sammlung vereinigt, so dass daher unsere österreichische Bibliothek einen Teil der soeben von den Amerikanern beschlagnahmten Deutschen Bibliothek bildet. Im Interesse der österreichischen Wissenschaft bitte ich daher die hohe Akademie der Wissenschaften, alle notwendigen Schritte beim Bundeskanzleramt, Auswärtige Angelegenheiten, und beim Bundesministerium für Unterricht zu unternehmen, um unsere österreichische Bibliothek in Rom für Österreich sicherzustellen. Ich stelle ferne zur Erwägung, ob etwa jetzt der Zeitpunkt gekommen ist, gemeinsam mit dem Bundeskanzleramt, Auswärtige Angelegenheiten, mit dem Bundesministerium für Unterricht, mit dem Institut für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung und mit dem Österreichischen Staatsarchiv in Beratungen über die Zukunft der Bibliothek bezw. des Österreichischen Historischen Instituts in Rom einzutreten.” The Austrian Historical Institute archives, Rome, box II, 113, 1 “Akten 1939–1946”. “Akademie der Wissenschaften, Abschrift”, 16 November 1946 (Rome), signed by Gottfried Lang (“Z.113.312–Pol/1946”): “Aktenvermerk. Betr.: Rückkehr der Österr.Instituts-Bibliothek nach Rom. Anlässlich des Rücktransportes der Bibliothek des Oesterrechischen Institutes nach Rom, sind folgende Punkte festzuhalten und zu klären. Der Gesamtbestand der Bücher, deren Rücktransport unmittelbar und in Kürze zu erwarten ist, besteht aus der Österreichischen Historischen Bibliothek und der Preussischen Historischen Bibliothek, die 1938 nach dem Anschluss zusammengelegt wurden. Seit diesem Jahre wurden alle Neuanschaffungen – und deren Anzahl ist beträchtlich – erklärlicherweise nur in je 1 Exemplar vorgenommen. Es ergibt sich daher die wichtige Aufgabe bei der nun vorzunehmenden Teilung des Gesamtbestandes den entsprechenden Anteil für die Oesterreichische Bibliothek zu sichern. Ausser den einzelnen Büchern ist hierbei besonders auf die Zeitschriften nahezu unmöglich, die in diesen Jahren erschienen bände nachträglich zu erwerben. Es ist daher von grosser Bedeutung, dass vom Augenblick des Eintreffens der Bücher in Rom, diese Funktion sofort in Betracht gezogen und die Interesse Oesterreichs gewahrt werden. Von besonderer Wichtigkeit wäre es auch daher zu erreichen, dass die Bibliothek sogleich in das Institutsgebäude gebracht wird. Diesbezüglich wurde die erforderliche Fühlungnahme mit den kompetenten Faktoren bereits angeleitet. Ueber den Inhalt der Verhandlungen wird fortlaufend berichtet werden.” The Austrian Historical Institute archives, Rome, box II, 113, 1 “Akten 1939–1946”.

Appendix vii: Documents regarding the Austrian Historical Institute in Rome 

 261

Richard Meister (vicepresident of the Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften) to Otto Skrbensky (Bundesministerium für Unterricht), Vienna, 19 November 1946: “Bis zum Jahre 1938 bestand in Rom das Österreichische Historische Institut. Es wurde sodann mit dem Deutschen Historischen Institut in Rom verbunden. Das Akademiepräsidium hat durch Eingabe von gleichem Datum, d.i.vom 19.November 1946, Zl.1314/46, berichtet, daß gleichzeitig mit der Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Institutes auch die Österreichischen Historischen Institutes durch die Amerikaner beschlagnahmt wurde, und um geeignete Schritte zur Wiedergewinnung der österreichischen Bestandteile jener Bibliothek gebeten. Das Akademiepräsidium regt nunmehr auch an, es möge eine gemeinsame Beratung von Herren Beamten des Bundesministeriums und Vertretern der Akademie abgehalten werden, um über eine etwaige Neuerrichtung des Österreichischen Historischen Institutes in Rom, bzw. die Vertretung der noch zu rettenden Bestände entsprechende Beschlüsse fassen zu können. Das Österreichische Historische Institut war eine der wissenschaftlich fruchtbarsten und angesehensten Forschungsinstitutionen Österreichs im Auslande. Es ist demnach in ganz besonderem Interesse der österreichischen Wissenschaft, daß diese Tradition entweder wieder fortgesetzt oder in eine andere wissenschaftliche Unternehmung übergeleitet werde.” The Austrian Historical Institute archives, Rome, box II, 113, 1 “Akten 1939–1946”. Wildner (Bundeskanzleramt, Auswärtige Angelegenheiten) to the “Direktion des österreichischen Staatsarchives”, Vienna, 4 December 1946: “Das Bundeskanzleramt, Auswärtige Angelegenheiten, beehrt sich mitzuteilen, dass nach einem Bericht der österreichischen Vertretung in Rom der d.s. beschäftige Dr. Gottfried Lang, Sekretär des Oesterreichischen Historischen Instituts in Rom, vom Generalinspektor für die Bibliotheken im italienischen Erziehungsministerium verständigt worden ist, dass die Bibliothek des Oesterreichischen Instituts, der im Winter 1944 über Befehl der Deutschen Wehrmacht nach Deutschland abtransportiert worden war, in nächster Zeit über Veranlassung der Allierten Kommission in Rom, nach Rom zurückgebracht werden wird. Da nach dem Anschluss im Jahre 1938 das Oesterreichische Historische Institut mit dem Preussischen Institut zusammengelegt und im dortigen Gebäude untergebracht worden war, befindet sich in dieser ungefähr 500 Kisten ausmachenden Sendung auch die Bibliothek des Preussischen Instituts. Ueber letztere verfügt eine zur Verwaltung aller deutschen Institute in Rom eingesetzte Internationale Kommission. Die Politische Vertretung wird sich mit dieser Internationaler Kommission ins einvernehmen setzen, um deren Zustimmung zu erwirken, dass der gesamte Büchertransport vorläufig in den Kellerräumen des hiesigen Gebäudes untergebracht werden kann, damit die Aussonderung

262 

 Appendices

der Bücher des Oesterreichischen Instituts unter der Kontrolle des Dr. Gottfried Lang, der ein Inventar dieser Bücher besitzt, im hiesigen Gebäude stattfinden kann. [Anverwandt] übermittelt das Bundeskanzleramt, Auswärtige Angelegenheiten, einen Aktenvermerk des ehemaligen Sekretärs des österreichischen historischen Institutes Lang mit der Bitte, anher bekanntgeben zu wollen, welche Ansprüche bezüglich der vom deutschen historischen Institut in der Zeit vom Jahre 1938–1944 gemachten Neuanschaffungen zu Gunsten des österreichischen historischen Institutes geltend gemacht werden sollen. Das Oesterreichsiche Staatsarchiv wird gebeten, in dieser Angelegenheit auch das Bundesministerium für Unterricht und die österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien (letztere unter Bezug auf Zl. 1314/46 vom 19.November der Akademie) zu befragen. Für den Bundesminister für die Auswärtigen Angelegenheiten: Wildner eh.” The Austrian Historical Institute archives, Rome, box II, 113, 1 “Akten 1939–1946”. Leo Santifaller to the Hohe Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, 15 February 1947 (re: “Oesterreichisches Historisches Institut in Rom”): “Zufolge Nachrichten aus Rom ist die Bibliothek des ehemaligen Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom, mit der bekanntlich 1938 die Bibliothek des Oesterreichischen Historischen Instituts vereinigt wurde, nach Rom zurückgekehrt und soll im Frühjahr unter internationaler Verwaltung und Finanzierung durch die UNESCO eröffnet werden. Desgleichen [s]oll das ehemalige Kaiser-Wilhelm Institut für Kunstgeschichte, die Biblioteca [sic] Hertziana, in Rom demnächst ebenfalls unter der Leitung der UNESCO wieder in Betrieb gesetzt werden. […] Ich stelle daher folgende Anträge: 1. Die hohe Akademie möge angesichts der Bedeutung des Römischen Instituts für die österreichische Gesichtsforschung eine ständige kleine akademische ‘Kommission für das Oesterreichische Historische Institut in Rom’ einsetzen. Diese Kommission hätte alle einschlägigen Fragen fachgemäss zu beraten und darüber der Akademie zu berichten. […]. 2. Die hohe Akademie möge das Bundesministerium für Unterricht ersuchen, möglichst bald und dringlich eine Besprechung des betreffenden Ministerial-Referenten mit den Mitgliedern der akademischen ‘Kommission für das Oesterreichische Historische Institut in Rom’ über die zukünftige Gestaltung des Historischen Instituts in Rom anzuberaumen. […] Die ‘Wiener katholische Akademie’ arbeitet bekanntlich an dem grossen wissenschaftlichen Unternehmen der ‘Austria Sacra’; die Ausführung dieses Werkes erfordert aber jahrelange Arbeiten im Vatikanischen Archiv und daher erhalte ich aus diesen Kreisen immer wieder Anfragen über das Schicksal bezw. die Neugestaltung unseres römischen Instituts. […] Im Interesse der österreichischen Geschichtsforschung und damit in dieser für uns so sehr wichtigen

Appendix vii: Documents regarding the Austrian Historical Institute in Rome 

 263

Angelegenheit ja nichts versäumt werde, bitte ich die Akademie um Genehmigung [approval of] meiner Anfräge.” The Austrian Historical Institute archives, Rome, box II, 113, 1 “Akten 1939–1946”. Memorandum, Rome, 27 February 1947. “Amtsvermerk” (Buresch? 2 versions): “In einer Unterredung mit dem Generalsekretär der internationalen Kommission für die Ausländischen Institute in Rom, Prof. Sjöquist [sic], wurde die Frage der künftigen Verw[a]ndung der ehemaligen Angestellten des früheren preussischen Institutes, Ferruccio Serafini und Nannina Bernardinelli, welche derzeit für das hiesige Amt tätig sind, besprochen. Es wurde der Generalsekretär [Sjöqvist] dringend gebeten, die Angelegenheit der Genannten in dem Sinne zu regeln, dass sie sobald wie möglich bei der Vorbereitung der Wiede[r]herstellung des preuss. Instituts in Dienst gestellt werden und vor allem auch schnellstens in dem für dieses Institut vorgesehenen Palazzo Vidoni Wohnung finden sollen. Der Generalsekretär sagte zu, sich für eine baldige Lösung dieses Problems einzusetzen, erklärte aber, dass derzeit die Kommission noch keine Mittel zu Verfügung habe, um die Genannten zu übernehmen und zu bezahlen.” The Austrian Historical Institute archives, Rome, box II, 113, 2 “Desequestrerung”. “Aktenvermerk (Buresch)”, Rome, 27 February 1947: “[1] Ich trug heute dem Kulturattaché der Amerikanischen Botschaft Prof. Morey, der gleichzeitig in seiner Eigenschaft als Präsident des amerikanisches Kulturinstitut in Rom, Vorsitzender der internationalen Kommission zur Verwaltung der deutschen Institute ist, auftragsgemäss die Bitte um Übernahme des hiesigen Portiers Ferruccio Serafini durch die internationale Kommission vor. Prof. Morey antwortete mir, dass dieses Vorhaben vorläufig undurchführbar sei, da die internationale Kommission noch über keinerlei Mittel verfüge. Solche Mittel sollen jedoch von der UNESCO bewilligt werden und er hoffe, dass mit der Wiedereröffnung der deutschen Bibliothek im nächsten Jahr gerechnet werden könne. Da Ferruccio Serafini zum österreichischen Staat hie[r] in einem Vertragsverhältnis gestanden ist und er sich in seiner Eigenschaft als früherer Bibliothekdiener für den Portierposten bei der Po[l]itischen Vertretung in keiner Weise eignet bat ich Prof. Morey die Frage zu prüfen, ob ihm nicht vorläufig eine Wohnung im Palazzo Vidoni, wo die deutsche Bibliothek bereits lagert und sie eröffnet werden soll, zur Verfügung gestellt werden könne. Die Vertretung würde dem Serafini vorläufig seinen Gehalt gegen Leistung von Diensten weiter bezahlen. Prof. Morey sagte zu, dieses Projekt bei der heute stattfindenden Sitzung der Kommission unterstützen zu wollen. [2] In diesem Zusammenhang kam Prof. Morey auf die österr. Bibliothek zu sprechen und erklärte, dass die Frage der Restitution dieser Bibliothek von der UNESCO

264 

 Appendices

entschieden [decided] werden müsse. Er regte an, dass die Wiener Regierung sich diesbezüglich über die Alliierte Kontrollkommission an die UNESCO wenden möge. [3] Schliesslich gab Prof. Morey seinem Wunsch Ausdruck, das ein Vertreter des hiesigen Kulturinstitutes nach Wiedereröffnung desselben in die internationale Kommission zur Verwaltung der deutschen Institute aufgenommen werden möge.” The Austrian Historical Institute archives, Rome, box II, 113, 2 “Desequestrerung”.

Appendix viii: Director Robert Demangel on the centenary celebrations of the École francaise d’ Athènes in 1946–19471 “RAPPORT sur l’activité de l’École française d’Athenès en 1947”, “APPENDICE: COMMEMORATION DU CENTENAIRE DE L’ÉCOLE”: “La commémoration du Centenaire a été un événement trop important dans la vie de l’École en 1947 pour qu’il ne soit pas fait ici mention des cérémonies qui se sont déroulées en Grèce du 10 au 18 septembre et en France les 6 et 7 novembre à cette occasion. […] le ‘Centenaire’ avait été préparé de longue date par des conférences, des articles de presse et des causeries radiodiffusées, qui avaient créé, malgré l’instabilité politique et les difficultés internationales, un climat favorable en France comme en Grèce. En Grèce, l’École française, qui n’avait cessé de prendre sa part des malheurs du pays, guerre italienne et allemande, triple occupation, famine et guerre civile, pouvait compter sur la sympathie générale. En France, elle bénéficia de l’appui efficace du gouvernement […] et du Parlement, qui accorda à l’École d’Athènes une subvention exceptionnelle de cinq millions de francs. Le programme proposé par le directeur de l’École avait reçu dès l’origine l’approbation du Ministère […], et il fut exécuté point pour point, sauf l’excursion de Delphes, comprise alors dans la zone de bataille. […] Les délégués de quinze pays avaient accepté nos invitations, adressées depuis le printemps aux Universités, aux Musées et aux corps savants d’une partie du monde […]. Diverses raisons firent que 91 délégués seulement, d’une douzaine de pays différents, participèrent aux cérémonies. A chaque délégation fut attaché un membre de l’École qui eut à s’occuper de faciliter logement et formalités. […] La célébration officielle du Centenaire commença le 11 sept. par l’appel des morts de l’École dans les deux guerres et au cours de leurs travaux, suivi du dépôt d’une palme aux couleurs françaises au pied de la Stèle des morts. Puis eut lieu, dans la salle des fêtes, en présence du Roi et de la Reine de Grèce, des ministres et des délégués, et sous la présidence du représentant du Ministre de l’Ed.Nat., M. P. Jouget, doyen d’âge des ‘athéniens’ présents, la séance solennelle au cours de laquelle, après les allocutions d’usage, furent remises la médaille d’or décernée à l’École par l’Académie d’Athènes et les nombreuses adresses envoyées par les Universités et les Académies françaises et étrangères. Le roi Paul 1er et la reine ont 1 The present appendix contains perspectives on the centenary of the EFA from material in other archival sections (director’s correspondence and the 1947 EFA annual report) than those dedicated to the celebrations themselves (EFA archives, 7 ADM 25–28: “Commémorations. Centenaire de l’EFA (1947)”). A specific study of the centenary celebrations of the École could hardly avoid taking also this material into account.

266 

 Appendices

ensuite inauguré les médaillons et la stèle du Centenaire. Le même soir l’Acropole fut illuminée. Quelques scènes de cette journée mémorable ont été incluses dans le film documentaire qui paraîtra prochainement sur le travail de l’École pendant un siècle. A la place de l’excursion prévue pour Delphes, la stèle portant la plaquette en bronze de Th. Homolle, ancien directeur de l’École et du Cinquantenaire et organisateur des fouilles de Delphes, fut inaugurée dans le jardin de l’École le 12 septembre […] La médaille du Centenaire fut offerte aux délégués et aux amis de l’École. Une autre stèle, inaugurée le 16 septembre par le ministre de Belgique à Athènes, porte les noms des membres étrangers morts pour leur pays. […] L’excursion à Délos […] était destinée essentiellement à célébrer la mémoire de Maurice Holleaux qui dirigea l’École et les grandes fouilles de Délos; une stèle de marbre élevée en son honneur dans le musée fut dévoilée à cette occasion. […] Diverses cérémonies aurant lieu également à l’Institut français d’Athènes, création de l’École (1902–1907) atteignant en 1947 en quarantième année de bon et prospère fonctionnement. […] Le complément parisien de la commémoration du Centenaire de l’École fut réalisé les 6 et 7 novembre. Le Ministre de l’Éduc.Nle et le Ministre des Aff.Etrang. donnèrent des réceptions, auxquelles furent conviés, avec les personnalités marquantes de l’archéologie à Paris, dix anciens membres étrangers de l’École et un délégué de chaque Université française. Diverses conférences ont été faites pendant leur séjour. Une séance solennelle, à laquelle assistait le Président de la République et l’élite de la société parisienne, fut tenue au grand amphithéâtre de la Sorbonne sous la présidence du Ministre de l’Éducation Nationale. L’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, patronne scientifique de l’École d’Athènes, lui consacra sa séance du vendredi 7 novembre, au cours de laquelle prirent la parole son président, M. Faral [?], un ancien membre étranger, M. Fr. Poulsen et le Directeur de l’École. Enfin une Exposition (qui fut ‘télévisée’ après sa fermeture) réunit dans une grande salle de l’École des Beaux-Arts un certain nombre de moulages, de maquettes, de photographies (quelques originaux aussi, prêtés par le Louvre, qui organisa l’Exposition) des principaux monuments ou documents d’art ou d’histoire, découverts par l’École en Grèce et dans le monde hellénique au cours de ses cent années d’activité féconde. Par ces diverses manifestations, dont on a généralement reconnu la réussite, l’École a montré qu’elle avait, dans le sens et la conscience de sa mission historique, retrouvé désormais toute sa vitalité d’avant-guerre. Le Directeur de l’École française d’Athènes R. DEMANGEL”.

Appendix viii: The Centenary Celebrations of the EFA in 1946–1947 

 267

EFA archives, 2 ADM 21: “Rapports sur les travaux et les fouilles de l’EFA 1912–1950”. Robert Demangel to “Monsieur le Ministre des Affaires Étrangères Direction générale des Relations culturelles c/o Monsieur le Chargé d’affaires de France à Athènes’, 6 August 1946: “Création romantique issue de la Révolution grecque, l’École française d’Athènes a été fondée en septembre 1846 par un commun désir de collaboration culturelle de la part de la France et de la Grèce. On sait comment elle est devenue le plus actif séminaire archéologique du Proche Orient. Les circonstances n’ayant pas permis de fêter le centenaire de l’École en 1946, j’ail l’intention de reporter au mois du septembre 1947 le célébration de cet anniversaire, qui couronnera dignement la reprise complète de nos positions spirituelles en Grèce. Voici dans ses grandes lignes le programme que je désirerais pouvoir exécuter. Pour sa réalisation j’ai naturellement besoin d’une aide efficace, morale et matérielle, tant du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères que du Ministère de l’Éducation Nationale, tous deux intéressés au succès du jubilé de l’École d’Athènes. […] Pour m’aider à la réalisation de ce programme, j’ai l’honneur de demander à la Direction générale des Relations culturelles la somme de un million de francs, payables en drachmes à Athènes sur l’exercice 1947.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 22 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1940–1965)”. Description of the École for the “Annuaire Aff. Étr.”, 31 January 1947: “Doyenne de Écoles archéologiques en Grèce, fondée en 1846. Cette mission scientifique permanente, placée sous le patronage de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, se compose de six membres français choisis au concours et d’un nombre variable de membres étrangers, qui étudient les antiquités helléniques et dirigent des fouilles dans le domaine de la Grèce ancienne. L’École publie, depuis 1877, un périodique scientifique, le Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Elle dirige sept grandes collections de publications archéologiques et épigraphiques. Elle est depuis l’origine chargée de l’organisation des examens français dans le Levant hellénique.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Robert Demangel (Invitation, March 1947): “COMMEMORATION DU CENTENAIRE 1846–1946 (Athènes 29 août–5 septembre 1947) L’École française d’Athènes, fondée par l’ordonnance du 11 septembre 1846, vient de terminer sa centième année.

268 

 Appendices

Doyenne des Institutions archéologiques étrangères d’Athènes, après la dernière période qu’elle a durement vécue dans le pays ami dont elle partage depuis un siècle les heures de deuil et de détresse comme les jours de lumière et de gloire, l’École française, ayant repris dans le domaine scientifique toute son activité d’avant-guerre, se propose de célébrer son Centenaire dans le courant de l’année 1947. Elle invite donc cordialement les Universités, les Académies et Sociétés savantes et tous ceux que l’hellénisme a touchés à recenser avec elle le labeur d’un siècle dans les riches provinces de l’Orient grec, de la Macédoine à Cyrène, de la Sicile à la Phénicie. Elle rappelle que huit collections archéologiques sont publiées par ses soins et convie les lettres à visiter quelques-uns de ses actuels chantiers de fouilles, Delphes, Mallia, Délos enfin, dont le trouvailles de 1946 ne sont pas indignes des découvertes delphiques de 1939. Elle espère que de nombreux délégués et visiteurs pourront assister à cette commémoration et prie les Corps savants et les Universités de vouloir bien, s’ils l’en jugent digne, lui envoyer, sous forme d’adresse, un témoignage précieux pour elle de fraternité scientifique. Le Directeur de l’École française d’Athènes R. DEMANGEL”. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Robert Demangel to the French Ambassador in Greece, 30 July 1947: “En réponse à votre lettre […], j’ai l’honneur de vous adresser ci-joint les dossiers concernant les personnalités grecques qui pourraient recevoir une distinction honorifique à l’occasion du Centenaire de l’École française d’Athènes, soit MM. KAROUZOS, KERAMOPOULOS, MARINATOS, ORLANDOS et SOTIRIOU, proposés pour un grade dans l’ordre de la Légion d’honneur, et M.M. APARTIS et FOMINE, pour les palmes d’Officier d’Académie.” Demangel was made “Conseiller d’honneur” of the Archaeological Society of Athens (presumably during the centenary celebrations) – cf. letter of thanks from Robert Demangel to the President of the Society (Benakis?), 21 September 1947. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Several letters of thanks, following the centenary celebrations – for example: Robert Demangel to “Monsieur Bénakis Président de la Société archéologique”, 22 September 1947: “Je viens vous remercier de l’aide précieuse que vous nous avez accordée pour la célébration des fêtes du Centenaire de l’École française d’Athènes. En ouvrant largement aux délégués étranger les portes de votre Musée, vous leur avez permis d’admirer la première des collections athéniennes réinstallée après la

Appendix viii: The Centenary Celebrations of the EFA in 1946–1947 

 269

guerre et l’une des rar[es?] qui soit actuellement visible. Je vous prie de remercier en mon nom M. Hatzidakis pour sa bonne grâce et son dévouement coutumiers.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Robert Demangel to “Monsieur le Président”, 22 September 1947: “Je viens vous remercier personnellement et vous prier en mon nom MM. les Ministres des Affaires Étrangères et de l’Éducation Nationale de l’aide très précieuse accordée par vos services pour la célébration des fêtes du Centenaire de l’École française. Votre amicale collaboration nous a permis de réaliser un programme très chargé en un moment où les valeurs spirituelles risquent parfois de ne pas être placées au premier plan. Le dîner offert par le Gouvernement hellénique a été, en particulier, une réussite très appréciée de tous. Et les paroles prononcées à cette occasion sont allées au cœur de tous les amis de la Grèce.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Robert Demangel to “Monsieur l’Attaché militaire auprès de l’Ambassade de France à Athènes”, 30 September 1947, “concernant une demande d’avion militaire pour transporter d’Athènes à Paris et ramener de Paris à Athènes les archéologues grecs et les membres de l’École (une douzaine en total) dont la présence me semble désirable pour la commémoration du Centenaire de l’École française d’Athènes à Paris les 30 et 31 octobre prochain.” Cf. letter from Robert Demangel to the Minister of National Education “Direction de l’Enseignement Supérieur”, 30 September 1947 (same topic). EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Robert Demangel to “Monsieur le Ministre de l’Éducation Nationale”, 22 October 1947: “Me référant à votre lettre […] et à l’entretien que j’ai eu avec M. le Secrétaire Général Yannacopoulos, j’ai l’honneur de vous prier de transmettre à MM. A. Kéramopoulos, Directeur du service des antiquités, G. Oikonomos, Professeur à l’Université d’Athènes et Ch. Karousos, Directeur du Musée National d’Athènes, l’invitation du Gouvernement français à assister aux fêtes du Centenaire de l’École française d’Athènes, qui seront célébrées à Paris le 30 octobre 1947. M. G. Oikonomos recevra à cette occasion le titre de docteur honoris causa de l’Université de Paris. Le Gouvernement français prendra à sa charge les frais de voyage, de logement et de nourriture des délégués helléniques.” Cf. letter on the same topic from Demangel to the French Minister of National Education, 4 October 1947. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Robert Demangel to Alison Frantz, Cultural Attaché, American embassy in Athens, 12 January 1948, regarding the letter below from the director of the

270 

 Appendices

École française de Rome (Albert Grenier) to Charles Rufus Morey, 12 January 1948. EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Albert Grenier (?) to Charles Rufus Morey (“Attaché Culturel Ambassade d’Amérique à Rome”), 12 January 1948: “J’ai bien reçu, par l’aimable entremise de l’Ambassade d’Amérique à Athènes, l’adresse envoyé par l’Académie Américaine de Rome à l’École française d’Athènes à l’occasion de son Centenaire. Je vous prie de vouloir bien transmettre mes vifs remerciements à l’Académie Américaine de Rome, ainsi qu’à S.E. l’Ambassadeur des Etats-Unis à Rome, qui a bien voulu joindre ses compliments à ceux de l’Académie Américaine.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Robert Demangel to “M. le Président de la Croix Rouge française”, 11 March 1948, regarding diplomas and medals. Cf. letter from Robert Demangel to “M. le Colonel Divonne Croix-Rouge française”, 22 July 1947, as well as two letters from 30 May 1947 and letters from 1943 (same file). EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”. Robert Demangel to “Monsieur l’Ambassadeur de France à Athènes”, 19 August 1948: “Monsieur l’Ambassadeur, En réponse à votre lettre no 23 du 7 août dernier, j’ai l’honneur de vous adresser, après les avoir complétés, les trois formulaires concernant les propositions dans l’ordre de la Légion d’honneur de M.M. Pamboukis (chevalier), Lorandos (officier) et Papadopoulos (commandeur). Je vous prie, Monsieur l’Ambassadeur, d’agréer l’hommage de mes sentiments tout dévoués.” EFA archives, 1 ADM 2 (prov. number): “Courrier départ direction (1943–1951)”.

Appendix ix: AIAC circular letter, 1947 Circular letter from AIAC to its members, 15 December 1947: “Two years have passed since the group of members who founded the International Association for Classical Archaeology sent out their programme and invited scholars of Archaeology throughout the world to take part in the enterprise. The circle to which we have addressed ourselves has so far been very limited. This was primarily due to the difficulty of communication – a difficulty which largely still continues to exist –, and also to the fact that in 1945 we still did not know what had happened to many of our colleagues. […] We have however not got in touch with our colleagues again during this period: we have neither written to those who already belong to our Association nor invited others to join it. The cause of this silence can well be understood when the difficulties of this post-war period are taken into consideration and when normal intercourse between nations is impeded on all sides. As we have stated in our first appeal, the proposed programme could not be considered workable immediately. Only patiently and gradually, counting solely on our very limited resources, were the first results attained which will form the basis for all future efforts; and only if this initial step proves to be solid and vital shall we be able to look confidently to the future. Yet the very delay caused by difficulties both economic and practical has enabled us to consolidate our internal organization and to prepare a work which we can now present to our members, old and new, as realising one of the principal aspirations of our programme, namely the world-wide collaboration between classical archaeologists [the Fasti Archaeologici]. We would however like to draw the attention of our members to the financial situation of the enterprise. Funds to meet the many expenses come to us from institutions and private individuals – and we would here thank all those who have contributed either directly or by means of their valuable collaboration, notably the American Academy, l’École Française d’Archéologie et d’Histoire [sic], the British School and the Swedish Institute in Rome, whose comprehensive and generous assistance has enabled us to realize our project. However in order to be able to face the future with confidence we are still obliged to rely upon the financial help our members are able to give us. […] The Association has furthermore taken upon itself another task of no less importance and of vast international range, though of a more local character: that of organizing the library of the German Archaeological Institute in Rome. This library was confiscated by the Italian Government after the first world war and restored to German ownership at the instance of Benedetto Croce, Minister of Education in 1920, with the conditional clause that it was not to be removed from Italy. In 1938 a concordat was signed between the Nazis and the Fascist governments in which, in return for the cancellation of the previous formal restrictions, the German government again

272 

 Appendices

solemnly stated that it would not remove the library from Italy. However in 1944 it was taken by the German Army to Austria and only returned to Rome in 1946 by action of the Austrian U.S. Army Command. Nearly 1300 cases containing the books were stored in the Gallery of Modern Art in Rome. The temporary custody of the library was, with the consent of the Italian government, entrusted by the Allied Commission for Italy to the International Union of Institutes of Archaeology, History and History of Art in Rome awaiting final directions from the Allied Authorities in cooperation with the UN and particularly its cultural section UNESCO. Pending the definition of the future legal and financial status of the library by the competent Allied or other authorities, the Union of Institutes applied to UNESCO for the funds necessary temporarily to operate the library. The Italian government placed the Palazzo Vidoni at the disposal of the Union as a suitable new seat for the library. The Union delegated the reorganization of the archaeological library to one of its members, that is to say our Association. The Association has taken over this task, fully aware of the responsibility and duties implied, and it will, while awaiting the repairs and alterations necessary to adapt the Palazzo Vidoni to its new purpose, make temporary use of the rooms of the old seat of the library at 79 Via Sardegna. The re-organization was carried out during the summer months and the library has just been re-opened; temporarily only to a limited number of scholars, since the necessary funds granted by UNESCO have not yet arrived, the expenses for the installation and for the temporary administration of the library have been and still are paid by the Association, which has been generously helped by institutions and private individuals in the carrying out of this task. Difficulties of every kind have hampered our activity and still continue to do so; but we trust the news we are able to give our members will suffice to convince them that the time that has elapsed since our last circular has not been wasted. We should therefore be fully justified in requesting our members to pay their membership fees for 1946–47, were it not for technical difficulties owing to the present situation of foreign exchange which still prevents the normal payment of the fees. We intend to overcome these difficulties by creating other collecting centres: in London, Paris, New York and perhaps elsewhere. We therefore ask our members to send us their adherence only, postponing the payment of fees. We are principally concerned in any case with the diffusion of our fundamental idea, which is international collaboration in the scientific field, and therefore with obtaining adherence wherever there are kindred archaeological interests. We say this in the first place to those scholars who are already members and whom we consider permanent members of the Association. New members whom we address for the first time are to consider this letter as an invitation to take part in this work of ours which is taking shape in such a manner as to permit us to look confidently to

Appendix ix: AIAC circular letter, 1947 

 273

the increase of contacts and enlargement of activity which was envisaged in our program of 1945. This letter will be followed by a membership form and a copy of the Statute. [Signed] The provisional Council of the International Association of Classical Archaeology.” AN, 20170185/101 (previously EFR archives, box “AIAC 1945–1959”).

Appendix x: Memorandum, UNESCO and the Unione, 1949 Edward J. Carter (head of the UNESCO Libraries Division), “Memorandum of meeting with the council of the International Union of Institutes of Archaeology, History and History of Art, Rome on 10.12.48”, 4 January 1949: “I reported on the 3rd General Conference decision to make a grant of $5,000 with, if required, a loan of a further sum not exceeding $8,000, should funds not be forthcoming from the investment of ex-German assets in Italy in sufficient time to meet 1949 obligations. A vote of thanks was passed to Unesco for its assistance. […] I promised to press for the payment immediately the 1949 financial year started. […] The Committee expressed the hope that Unesco should have some formal and permanent association with the Union. It was agreed that something less than formal trusteeship would be desirable; Unesco had interest in the Union’s work extending beyond the conduct of the libraries, so that it might be mutually advantageous for the Union to offer Unesco a seat on its council, which could be filled by the most suitable representative from the Cultural Department in respect to the actual business at any meeting on certain occasions this might be a representative of the Libraries Division, on others a representative of Humanistic Studies. […] The Union is completely independent politically, both from the Italian Government and the governments of participating institutions, and is determined to preserve its independence.” The Kunsthistorisches Institut archives, Florence. Attached: a letter from Jean-Jacques Mayoux (Director of Ideological and Humanistic Projects, Philosophy and Humanistic Studies Division), UNESCO to Ulrich Middeldorf (Chicago), n.d. (1949): “You will realize that there is indeed a difficulty. If I remember rightly, your point of view is that German intellectuals, in so far as they could show that they had remained pure of heart throughout this tragic period of German history, ought to be allowed to do intellectual work on top level, if such was their capacity, in the international as well as the national field. […] the main obstacle to that is the ‘National prejudice’ encountered in the country where the work would have to be done. […] It is a very delicate question indeed, in which possibly an American intervention with Dr. Morey might do something. My personal viewpoint, which I am not called to act upon, would be that if one of the three posts of directors were given to a ‘good German’, that would be the ideal solution. Failing that one or more of the librarians’ posts might be so given. In any case, as a gesture, it would be good in my opinion that a German scholar should receive a post of some importance in one of the libraries in question.” The Kunsthistorisches Institut archives, Florence.

Appendix xi: Project for a “Proposed Garden around the Acropolis of Athens” and the “Suggested planting of trees in the area round the Acropolis”, Greek Agora Committee, 1955 Gorham P. Stevens to Spyridon Marinatos (“Ministry of Education, Athens”), 10 December 1955 (“Proposed Garden around the Acropolis of Athens”): “For many years your Government has wished that the world-famous Acropolis should have a dignified setting: this means that a garden should encircle the Acropolis […]. It also means the expenditure of a good deal of money. […] The American School, at the moment, is trying to raise money in America […] so that the excavation of the Ancient Agora of Athens may be rounded out. Would the Greek Government look with favour upon a collaboration with the various Archaeological Schools in Athens? If so, the Greek Agora Committee begs to submit to you the following proposal: 1. The undertaking to be directed by the Greek Government. 2. A small section around the Acropolis to be assigned to each School, on the understanding that the School raise money in its country, for both the expropriation and the excavation. There are some rich industrialists in every country, who have made money in the recent war. […] The economic recovery of Greece will be stimulated, for the expropriations will bring money into Greece, and the excavating will give work to the unemployed. This is a good moment to take up the idea of beautifying the Acropolis, for the recent attempt to erect a six-storey apartment house which would hide a great part of the Acropolis […], has shocked alike the Athenian people and the Philhellenes the world over. If the Greek Government approves in general of the proposal, the Greek Agora Committee will be pleased to ‘sound out’ the Directors of the various Schools in Athens, and then report to you.” BFA, Gustaf VI Adolfs arkiv I, box 166, “Grekland och Athen-institutet 1945–71”. “Ministry of National Education Directorate of Antiquities Administrative Section” to Gorham P. Stevens, n.d., [January?] 1956 (“Subject: Suggested planting of trees in the area round the Acropolis”): “The entire matter will, of course, be in the hands of the Archaeological Service of the Ministry of Education; the Archaeological Society, which has vested excavation rights, should, however, also be taken into account, as being a factor of special importance. As, however, during the expropriation, which will take place, major and difficult problems will arise, it will be necessary to pass laws and generally much work will be required. In view of this the [Archaeological] Council has decided to request the Greek Agora Committee to proceed to the carrying out of the plan of the planting of trees, unofficially at present, until the opinion of the foreign archaeological Schools in Greece on this project is obtained.” BFA, Gustaf VI Adolfs arkiv I, box 166, “Grekland och Athen-institutet 1945–71”.

Appendix xii: Excerpts from Evaluations of the École française d’Athènes, 1991, 2000 and 2007 Pamphlet – “CNE – Comité National d’Évaluation des établissements publics à caractère scientifique, culturel et professionnel – L’ÉCOLE FRANÇAISE D’ATHÈNES  – Rapport d’évaluation Août 1991”. 22 names associated with the “Comité National d’Évaluation” in 1991 (President: François Luchaire), all were male. Responsible for the evaluation of the EFA were committee members Philippe Contamine and Jean Sirinelli. p. 9–10 (“Historique et statuts”): “Sise à Athènes, sur les premières pentes du Lycabette […] Ainsi que le rappelle la stèle de fondation, en marbre, toujours visible et soigneuse entretenue […] Son histoire reflète le dialogue de notre civilisation avec ses racines antiques: sa vocation première fut de retrouver en Grèce des modèles plus purs de l’art antique, spécialement dans le domaine de l’architecture, et de donner sa couleur locale à l’étude de l’Antiquité grecque dans les domaines littéraire, philosophique et historique. Parcourir l’Attique et l’Argolide les sources écrites à la main: telle fut la démarche enthousiaste des premiers membres de l’École, ceux que la légende a qualifiés d’‘Argonautes’. Puis, à partir des années 1870, aiguillonnée par les premières grandes découvertes allemandes (notamment celles de Heinrich Schliemann, à Mycènes et ailleurs), l’École entra de plain-pied dans le domaine inépuisable de l’archéologie, dont elle n’est pas sortie depuis lors. […] tantôt l’École montra la voie, tantôt elle adopta pour elle-même et adapta à ses objectifs propres des modes d’approche et d’investigation, des techniques, mis au point ou suggérés dans d’autres lieux, en Grèce mais aussi hors de Grèce, et par d’autres milieux au sein de la communauté archéologique internationale. Il reste qu’elle est demeurée fidèle, explicitement ou implicitement, à l’idée que l’archéologie n’est pas une fin en soi mais un moyen, évidemment privilégié, de saisir dans sa totalité, dans sa majesté et aussi dans son devenir historique la civilisation des anciens Hellènes et de leurs descendants immédiats. A cela s’ajoutant la force du sentiment philhéllène qui animait la France entière et en particulier les élites. Le décret du 8 janvier 1928 donne à l’École le nom officiel d’École française d’archéologie d’Athènes, dénomination qui subsiste encore sur la plaque de cuivre à la porte d’entrée de la rue Didotou. […] La crise de l’humanisme classique et de ses valeurs, le déclin quantitatif des études grecques dans l’enseignement secondaire comme dans l’enseignement supérieur, la montée en puissance d’autres disciplines au sein des sciences de l’homme et de la société, ajoutons aussi, plus précisément, les interrogations suscitées par les transformations survenues à l’École française de Rome – cette

Appendix xii: Excerpts from Evaluations of the École française d’Athènes 

 277

prestigieuse cadette: tout cela aboutit, dans les années 1970, à un projet visant à modifier dans le sens d’une diversification maximale, d’un aggiornamento radical, et, il faut le dire, téméraire, la finalité traditionnelle de l’École française d’Athènes.” p. 41–42 (“les chantiers de fouilles”): “[l’École] a ajouté a sa mission de formation cette mission de fouille qui est devenue quasi-institutionnelle.” p. 43–44 (“Le problème de la recherche archéologique”): “Comme le souligne un rapport de l’École, le temps et passé des grandes fouilles étrangères en Grèce, “à la recherche de monuments prestigieux, marbres inscrits ou sculptés”, mais “avec la transformation des objectifs et des méthodes archéologiques, à l’étude de l’art grec s’est ajoutée celle des modes de vie, de la culture matérielle; l’objectif est maintenant d’étudier comment une société s’est implantée dans un territoire, comment elle en a utilisé les ressources, par quelles techniques elle l’a façonné pour répondre à ses besoins tant matériels que spirituels. C’est un fait que l’archéologie a évolué et elle l’a fait à la fois dans son esprit et dans ses méthodes. Dans son esprit elle est passée, comme la notion même de culture, d’une conception esthétique et spirituelle à une conception scientifique, technologique et anthropologique. […] Il est bien entendu que tous les athéniens [les membres de l’École] ne demeurent pas nécessairement des ‘fouilleurs’ mais il est bon qu’ils en aient la formation, même s’ils doivent changer d’orientation par la suite.” “Archéologie nationale” vs “archéologie classique”. p. 44 (“La mission de l’École dans le domaine historique”): “La fouille, même dans sa conception modernisée, n’épuise pas le rôle de l’archéologie. Mais on rejoint ici un problème plus vaste. L’archéologie a besoin d’une dimension historique parce qu’elle est elle-même une composante de l’histoire qui englobe tous les aspects d’une civilisation. Elle ne prend son sens, de nos jours, dans ce cadre. […].” p. 52 (Conclusions: “II – Recommandations”): “2. On doit accréditer l’idée que tout athénien n’est pas nécessairement un archéologue pur, encore moins un “fouilleur” […] 10. La bonne gestion de l’École exigerait la présence d’un intendant (sur poste contractuel avec recrutement par le directeur) pour décharger le directeur et le secrétaire général des tâches non scientifiques. […]” p. 55–59 (“Postface: Réponse du Directeur”, Olivier Picard). EFA archives, 2 ADM 8: “Inspections et évaluations de l’EFA”. “CNE – Comité National d’Évaluation des établissements publics à caractère scientifique, culturel et professionnel – LES ÉCOLES ET INSTITUTS FRANÇAIS EN MÉDITERRANÉE – RAPPORT D’ÉVALUATION”, February 2000. The report was the result of a “programme engagé à l’automne 1996” – “Le programme Méditerranée” – to evaluate all French scientific establishments around the Mediterranean – “dans

278 

 Appendices

les pays du pourtour méditerranéen”) – for the first time “en série cohérente”. Unlike the earlier report, this time two women (Chantal Cumunel and Chantal Mirroneau) were in the committee (cf. pp. 81–83 – cf. the 1991 report above). p. 1: “La liste en est la suivante: l’École française d’Athènes [1846], l’École française de Rome [1875], la Casa de Velasquez (Madrid) [1920], l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale (Le Caire) [1880], l’Institut français d’archéologie du Proche-Orient (Beyrouth, Damas, Amman) [1946], l’Institut français d’études arabes de Damas [1922], l’Institut français d’études anatoliennes (Istanbul) [1931], le Centre d’études et de recherches sur le Moyen-Orient contemporain (Beyrouth et Amman) [1977], l’Institut de recherche sur le Maghreb contemporain (Tunis) [1992] et le Centre de documentation et d’études juridiques (Le Caire) [1968].” p. 64–65 (“Les activités scientifiques”): “II – L’ARCHÉOLOGIE”: “Discipline fondatrice des institutions les plus anciennes et les plus prestigieuses, et activité commune à la majorité des établissements qui nous occupent, l’archéologie tient une place particulière dans le dispositif français en Méditerranée. Elle mérite, à ce titre, qu’on s’y arrête plus longuement. 1– UNE IMPLANTATION ANCIENNE ET SOLIDE. Depuis le siècle dernier, la France entretient en Méditerranée une importante activité archéologique. Cette importance se mesure en termes politiques (que l’on pense à la tradition française en Égypte depuis Bonaparte ou à la période mandataire au Levant dans l’entre-deux-guerres), en termes intellectuels et en termes institutionnels. In ne faut pas oublier que, parmi les institutions méditerranéennes, certaines, et non des moindres, se sont structurées et sont encore aujourd’hui structurées autour de cette discipline: c’est le cas de l’École française d’Athènes (qui, par un décret de 1928, portait le nom d’École française d’archéologie d’Athènes), de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale au Caire er de l’Institut français d’archéologie du Proche-Orient à Beyrouth, Damas et Amman. […] Le problème des sollicitations extérieures se présente à tous les établissements engagés dans une activité archéologique. […] Les collaborations qui en ont sont issues sont nombreuses et multiformes: fouilles bien sûr, mais aussi expositions, réalisations muséographiques, colloques, publications. Recherche et valorisation de la recherche sont ici étroitement liées. Ils doivent toutefois éviter un risque de dérive. Les autorités locales, qui utilisent l’archéologie comme un instrument de prestige et de promotion touristique ou politique, sont souvent tentés de les engager au-delà de leurs moyens et de leurs missions dans des programmes ou des projets d’entretien ou de valorisation des sites archéologiques dont ils ont la responsabilité. Ces établissements, comme ils le rappellent eux-mêmes, sont des lieux de recherche et de formation à la recherche et non des prestataires de service. Un nécessaire équilibre doit donc être trouvé entre les contraintes politiques du milieu et les exigences scientifiques.

Appendix xii: Excerpts from Evaluations of the École française d’Athènes 

 279

Ce problème ne se rencontre pas partout avec la même acuité: la demande est particulièrement forte en Egypte, en Grèce et en Jordanie [c’est-a-dire en 2000].” EFA archives, 2 ADM 8: “Inspections et évaluations de l’EFA”. Pamphlet: “No 3364 Assemblée Nationale Constitution du 4 Octobre 1958, Douzième législature, Enregistré à la Présidence de l’Assemblée nationale le 12 Octobre 2006. Avis présenté au nom de la Commission des Affaires Culturelles, Familiales et Sociales sur le projet de loi de finances pour 2007 (no 3341). Tome 1 Action Extérieure de l’État, Rayonnement Culturel et Scientifique, par M. Patrick Bloche, Député”. Section II: “Quel avenir pour les Écoles françaises à l’étranger?” p. 5 (“Introduction”): “La partie thématique du rapport est consacrée aux cinq écoles françaises à l’étranger (EFE) – l’École française d’Athènes (EFA), l’École française de Rome [EFR], l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale du Caire (IFAO), la Casa de Vélasquez de Madrid et l’École française d’Extrême-Orient (EFEO) – et au rôle que peuvent jouer ces établissements pour le rayonnement de la culture française et à leur positionnement vis-à-vis du réseau diplomatique.” p. 15 (Section II): “A. DES ÉTABLISSEMENTS DE RECHERCHE PRESTIGIEUX HÉRITIERS D’UNE TRADITION DE PRÉSENCE FRANÇAISE À L’ÉTRANGER 1. L’originalité des cinq écoles françaises à l’étranger La France est le premier pays à avoir développé à l’étranger, depuis plus d’un siècle, un réseau d’institutions culturelles diverses qui constituent de puissants relais des actions de coopération”. The five EFE are part of this “réseau”, which comprises “151 centres et instituts culturels, plus d’un millier d’alliances françaises, […] 27 instituts de recherche et, enfin, des organismes spécifiques dont la mission première est d’être des centres de recherche de haut niveau: les cinq Écoles françaises à l’étranger (EFE).” p. 15–20: “– L’École française d’Athènes (EFA) Fondée par ordonnance royale de Louis-Philippe en 1846, comme ‘École de perfectionnement pour l’étude de la langue, de l’histoire et des antiquités grecques’, il s’agit du plus ancien établissement scientifique français à l’étranger et du premier institut archéologique établi à Athènes. L’EFA se présente aujourd’hui comme un grand laboratoire de recherche […]. Stratégique pour l’étude du monde hellénique et du rayonnement de la culture antique, par ses programmes propres ou en collaboration avec le ministère des affaires étrangères et le Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), elle anime l’essentiel des recherches français sur la Grèce. – L’École française de Rome [EFR]

280 

 Appendices

Elle partage depuis 1875 le Palais Farnèse avec l’ambassade de France auprès du Quirinal, au cœur de Rome. Depuis 1966, elle s’est dotée d’un deuxième pôle, Piazza Navona, dans un immeuble qui abrite le secrétariat général, l’agence comptable, la direction des publications et les services archéologiques. L’École française de Rome a depuis lors pour mission de développer la recherche et la formation à la recherche sur toutes les civilisations qui se sont succédé en Italie, au Maghreb et sur la façade adriatique des Balkans, de la préhistoire à nos jours. Sa vocation centrale est constituée par l’histoire et l’archéologie. Mais, depuis sa création, l’École n’a cessé d’évoluer: elle fait largement appel à toutes les disciplines voisines, de la philologie à l’historie du droit, et s’est ouverte aux sciences sociales. […] Cet établissement a un rayonnement sur tout le basin méditerranéen, avec notamment des chantiers de fouilles au Maghreb et dans les Balkans. […] L’École française de Rome a aussi un fonds documentaire très important et sa bibliothèque est riche de deux cent mille volumes. – L’Institut Français d’archéologie orientale du Caire (IFAO) Le 28 décembre 1880, un décret inspiré par Gaston Maspero et signé par Jules Ferry instituait la Mission permanente au Caire. Homologue en Égypte des Écoles d’Athènes et de Rome, ce nouvel organisme de recherche reçut le nom d’École du Caire. En 1898, elle prit la dénomination d’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, afin de traduire une vocation proche-orientale dépassant le seul cadre de l’Egypte. […] les orientations actuelles de l’institut, qui poursuit l’étude de toutes les civilisations qui se sont succédées sur le sol égyptien depuis la préhistoire jusqu’à la période arabo-islamique. […] – L’École française d’Extrême-Orient (EFEO) L’EFEO a pour mission le développement de la recherche et de la formation à la recherche, principalement par le travail sur le terrain dans toutes les disciplines qui se rapportent aux civilisations de l’Asie, principalement de l’Asie du Sud, du Sud-Est et de l’Est. La particularité de cet établissement est d’avoir son siège à Paris mais seize implantations à travers toute l’Asie et l’Extrême-Orient. L’école regroupe actuellement [2006] quarante-deux chercheurs orientalistes (anthropologues, archéologues, architectes, historiens, historiens de l’art, linguistes, philologues et spécialistes d’épigraphie). […] L’histoire de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient est exemplaire d’une capacité à s’adapter malgré la violence des crises politiques auxquelles elle a été confrontée. La décolonisation contraint ainsi l’EFEO à quitter Hanoi en 1957 et le Cambodge en 1972. Son siège central s’installe alors à Paris en 1968, dans l’immeuble de la Maison d’Asie 22, avenue du Président Wilson. Un centre permanent est ouvert à Pondichéry en Inde, dès 1955, chargé de recherches en histoire et en indologie. À Jakarta, un autre centre permanent fonctionne depuis la fin des années 1950 et accueille aussi bien des spécialistes d’épigraphie religieuse que

Appendix xii: Excerpts from Evaluations of the École française d’Athènes 

 281

des archéologues, tandis qu’est créé à Kyoto, en 1968, l’institut de Hôbôgirin, où des spécialistes de l’histoire du bouddhisme sont installés dans un dépendance du grande temple zen du Shôkikuji. […] [Chiang Mai, Kuala Lumpur, Hongkong, Pnomh Penh, Vientiane (Laos), Hanoi]. Confirmant sa présence en Chine, l’école a créé en 1992 un centre à Taiei, au sein même de l’Academia Sinica, puis en 1997 à Pékin, à l’Institut d’histoire des sciences. En 1994, deux antennes étaient créées en outre à Tokyo, au sein du grand institut qu’est le Tôyô Bunko, et à Séoul. – La Casa de Velasquez de Madrid En 1909 a été ouverte à Madrid une École des hautes études hispaniques, création de l’université de Bordeaux destinée à accueillir de jeunes chercheurs français. En 1916, Charles-Marie Widor, secrétaire perpétuel de l’Académie des beaux-arts, exprima le vœu que des artistes francais puissent compléter leur formation en Espagne comme ils le faisaient depuis longtemps à la Villa Medicis de Rome. L’idée plut au roi Alphonse XIII qui choisit lui-même, dans ce qui allait devenir la cité universitaire de Madrid, un terrain de 20 000 m2 cédé à la France en usufruit à condition qu’y fût construite une résidence à l’intention de ses artistes et de ses chercheurs. On appelle ce palais la Casa de Vélasquez parce que, selon la légende, c’est sur cet emplacement, en face de la Sierra de Guadarrama, que le peintre aimait installer son chevalet. […] Compte tenu de son histoire et du rôle joué par le roi Alphonse XIII, la Casa Velasquez n’est pas considérée par les autorités espagnoles comme une institution étrangère. Elle fait partie intégrante du paysage culturel espagnol et jouit d’un prestige considérable en Espagne. C’est sans nul doute l’établissement qui jouit de la plus grande notoriété auprès du pays hôte, notamment en raison des multiples événements culturels qu’elle organise et qui sont ouverts à un large public. En cela elle est dans une situation très différente de l’École française d’Athènes, par exemple, qui a plutôt une image d’érudition auprès du public grec. Comme on l’a vu, les cinq Écoles françaises à l’étranger constituent des pôles d’attraction pour les chercheurs du monde entier et jouent un rôle fondamental dans leurs champs disciplinaires. La densité des implantations culturelles et scientifiques françaises à travers le monde reste un atout pour la France.” EFA archives, 2 ADM 8: “Inspections et évaluations de l’EFA”.

Primary Sources and Interviews Unpublished Material Manuscript Sources (in alphabetical geographical order) France

Archives Nationales (AN). Paris. The École française de Rome is subordinate to the Ministère de l’enseignement supérieur, de la recherche et de l’innovation; archival material pertaining to the EFR at the AN relevant to this study can be found in the categories represented by call numbers 20170185/105-112 (“UNIONE”); 20170185/101-104 (“AIAC”); and 20170185/88 (“Rapports des directeurs à l’Institut”, beginning in 1936), with rich material on post-war intra-institutional contacts and organisations in Rome (AN, Fonds de l’École française de Rome, répertoire numérique détaillé des cotes 20170185/1 à 610, Pierrefitte-sur-Seine); as well as in the archival holdings of the French ministry of public instruction (subseries F 17). This material in turn mainly contains director’s reports (1896–1929), publication of the works of the École, as well as discussions regarding the nomination of its membres, covering the first sixty years of EFR activities; the majority of this material is related to its first three decades of existence. The AN also keeps documents that illustrate Vichy Franco-German institutions and agreements (similar to fascist Italian Italo-German archaeological agreements documented in the Archivio Centrale dello Stato). AN, boxes F/17/13596–13618: “Grandes écoles speciales”; F/17/13359: “Relations culturels avec l’étranger”, 1940–1958; and box F/17/14585: “École française et Institut d’Études françaises d’Athènes. École française de Rome. Instituts de Caire, de Barcelone, de Florence, de Londres, de Madrid. 1917–1948”. Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen, Nice (C.U.M. archives, Nice), file “C.U.M. Revue de presse 1940 á 1943”. Institut de France, the archives of the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, Paris. The archives contain the papers of the “Commission des Écoles françaises d’Athènes et de Rome” (boxes 14G6, 14G7, 14G8, 14G12 and 14G13). The published “rapports” from the school to the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres in Paris (cover the period 1931–1980, excluding the years 1942, 1943 and 1944, as the school was closed between 1940 and 1945) are not to be confused with the annual reports of the École française de Rome. The UNESCO Archives, Paris, UNESCO/Biographies/14, PI D-538 (Edward J. Carter, 1948).

Germany

Archiv des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts (ADAIZ), Archiv der Zentrale (ADZ), Berlin (DAI archives). Material in the DAI archives relevant to this study comprise the Altregistratur files 10-01: “Sitzungen der ZD 1928, 1936–1944”, 10-04: “Institutsgeschichte 1828–1950”, 10-30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4. 1936–31.3.1948”, 10-30: “Rom Allgemeines 1.4.1948–31.3.1950”, 10-40: “Athen Allgemeines 1.4.1936–31.3.1945 1.8.1948–31.12.1950”, 10-42: “Athen Aufgaben 1936–1943”, 11-01: “Sitzungen ZD 1946–1949”, 20-30: “Bibliothek Rom 1936–1954”, 20-40 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-011

284 

 Primary Sources and Interviews

“Bibliothek Athen 1934–1944 1950–1965”, “Biographica-Mappe Gustav Adolf (von Schweden)”; and “Nachlaß Ludwig Curtius”. Bundesarchiv, Berlin (BA). Archival holdings pertaining to the DAIR can be found in the following main categories: the Reichsministerium für Wissenschaft, Erziehung und Volksbildung (R/4901, for example R/4901/14064 (“Bericht über die Lage der deutschen Kulturinstitute in Italien”, November 1943; and “Errichtung des Amtes eines Generalbevollmächtigen für die deutschen Kulturinstitute in Italien”, February 1943), the Reichskanzlei (R/43), the Reichsfinanzministerium (R/2); the Auswärtiges Amt (R/901); the Reichsministerium des Innern (R/1501); the Persönlichen Stab Reichsführer SS (NS/19); as well as “Das Ahnenerbe” (NS/21, B.52, “Lehr- und Forschungsstätte für Klassische Altertumswissenschaft”).

Greece

The American School of Classical Studies at Athens archives. Relevant material for this is located in the ASCSA Administrative Records (ADM REC), series 300: “Governance”, subseries 310: “Managing Committee – Correspondence of the Chairman”, boxes 310/4 (Edward Capps and Louis Lord) and 310/5 (Louis Lord); and series 800: “Relating to the Public. The Non-Disciplinary/Professional Community”, subseries 804: “The ASCSA During the Second World War and the Immediate Post-War Years”, boxes 804/1 (Gorham Phillips Stevens), and 804/2 (Idem). For exchanges with other foreign schools in Athens (post1950), cf. ASCSA archives, ADM REC, series 700 “Relating to the Disciplinary/Professional Community”, subseries 702: “Foreign Archaeological Schools in Greece”. See also (ADM REC) online inventory: http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/archives/administrative-records2014 (accessed 14 June 2018). The ASCSA Oscar Broneer Papers are located in a separate collection (http://www.ascsa.edu.gr/index.php/archives/oscar-broneer-papers, accessed 14 June 2018). The British School at Athens archives. The BSA archives cover both the school in Athens and the London office, with a substantial amount of material from 1935–1939, and less material from the war years. The BSA (Managing Committee) minute books are kept in London (copies of the minutes were sent to Athens). Relevant material for this study can be found chiefly in boxes 3.8 (“BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.8-uncatalogued”, 1939), 3.9 (“BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.9-uncatalogued”, 1940–1943), 3.10 (“BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.10-uncatalogued”, 1944–1950), and 7.4 (“BSA Corporate Records-London-Pre 1980s, Box #7.4-uncatalogued”, 1938–1949). Material regarding the “B.S.A. Exhibition 1936” can be found in box 3.4 (“BSA Corporate Records-London-steel case #2-Box #3.4-uncatalogued”). Archival references are given in the footnotes throughout. The BSA “Annual Reports and Archaeology in Greece 1933–1951” is kept in a bound volume in the BSA library. BSA annual reports and the sections on “Archaeology in Greece” were published separately before 1933–1934 (in the Journal of Hellenic Studies, and in the annual publication of the school). The Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Athen archives. The DAIA archives are organised in two main categories: archaeological sites and administrative records (1875–). The originals of early archaeological documents (diaries, correspondence, and so forth) are located in the DAI

Primary Sources and Interviews 

 285

archives, Berlin. Relevant material can be found in Ordner (file) K7 (“Korrespondenz Deutsche Grabungen” 1920-1944), K9 (various correspondence), K10 (various correspondence), 37 (correspondence 1933–1938), 38 (correspondence 1939–1944), and 39 (“Tätigkeitsberichte” 1923–1944). The École française d’Athènes archives. The EFA archives are divided between administrative material (directors’ correspondence and “rapports”) and excavation sites. The subseries 10 ADM (“Archives”) contains information regarding the organisation of the archives (cf. EFA archives, 10 ADM 35 (prov. number): “Correspondance avec les chercheurs (1970–1977)”; and EFA archives, 10 ADM 27 (prov. number): “Rapport sur le fonds Homolle conservé à la bibliothèque de l’Institut de France (1926)”). See also (ADM) online inventory: https://www.efa.gr/images/archives/ repertoire_serie_ADM_V05-2_2016-07.pdf (accessed 6 June 2018). Relevant material for this study is located in EFA archives, series ADM (Archives administratives de l’École française d’Athènes), subseries 1 ADM: “Correspondance des directeurs et des secrétaires généraux”, 2 ADM: “administration générale”, 4 ADM: “membres scientifiques”, and 7 ADM: “activités scientifiques”; as well as in EFA archives, series Voyages, fouilles et études, subseries PEL: “Péloponnèse” (on archaeological investigations and excavations at Asine, 1920–1922). Archival references are given in the footnotes throughout. Early EFA “Rapports” (1867–1912) are conserved in the Centre d’accueil et de recherche des Archives nationales (CARAN), Paris, AN F/17. The reports of EFA director Charles Picard, 1919–1925, are conserved at the EFA; those of Pierre Roussel and Robert Demangel, 1925–1931, are in Paris (AN). Reports from 1927–1942 are conserved at the EFA and in Paris, depending on the year(s) in question. From 1945 onwards (no reports were produced in 1943–1945) annual reports are conserved at the EFA in Athens. The directors’ correspondence also contains correspondence to and from the Secretary-General of the EFA. The Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene archives. The SAIA archives are organised in two main categories: administrative material and archaeological sites. Material relevant to this study (mainly correspondence) can be found in the following administrative material categories: “Direzione (Dir.)” (1935, 1937, 1938); “Allievi” (1935, 1938); “Allievi Amministrazione Annuario” (1939); “Biblioteche Direzione Fotografie” (1939); “Missioni scientifiche in Levante – Contabilità” (1939); “Conti Scuola 1939–1940–41, Direttore Allievi Parlanti” (1939–1941); “Archivi 1947–48 Pos. I Affari Generali Pos. II Finanziamento e Amministrazione […] Pos. VII Annuario Pos. VIII Scavi e Missioni […] Pos. IX Informazioni” (1947–1948); “Archivio 1948–49 e 1949–50”, “Pos. I–1948– 49” and “Pos. II 1948–49 1949–50”; “III Direzione e Personale IV Allievi, aggregate e ospiti”, “Missione di Creta”, “VIII Scavi ed esplorazioni Missione in Grecia” – “Creta, Lemnos, Rodi” (1948–1950); and “Archivio 1950–51”, “Pos. I Affari Generali Pos. II Amministrazione” […] “Pos. III Direzione e Personale Pos. IV Allievi, aggregate e ospiti”, “Scavi Lemnos” […] “[Pos.] V Sede, ammobigliamento e forniture casa VI Biblioteca e Gabinetto fotografico […] Pos. IX Informazioni X Missioni in Levante XI Ist. a Cultura e Rapporti Culturali” (1950–1951). The Swedish Institute at Athens (Svenska institutet i Athen) archives. The Swedish interwar excavations in Greece, 1922–1939, are documented in material located in F 1: I: “Korrespondens rörande äldre grävningar i Argolis”. The archives contain substantial material relating to for example the Berbati-excavations, resumed in the 1950s, and the Messenia expedition (reports and field documentation and diaries), with several boxes of photographs and other material from Greece in the 1920s and 1930s (archival material relating to Natan Valmin, in F 2 B:1–F 2 B:5).

286 

 Primary Sources and Interviews

Italy

The American Academy in Rome archives. The AAR archives are preserved in the Smithsonian Archives of American Art, but also exist on microfilm (stack 176.9) at the AAR in Rome. The collection as a whole can be found on AAR microfilm reels 5749–5800. The bulk of the AAR archival records date from 1894 to 1946 (the archive as a whole contains material from 1855 to c. 1981. The AAR archival documentation was donated to the Smithsonian Archives of American Art in Washington, D.C. in 1982, as well as in a separate donation in 1990. Prior to these donations, the Smithsonian transferred printed academy matter to microfilm in 1965 (reels ITRO 2–3 and ITRO 11–13; cf. http://www.aaa.si.edu/collections/american-academy-romerecords-6320/more, accessed 14 October 2017). The AAR institutional archive (the New York office) is referred to as “American Academy in Rome records, 1855–2018. American Academy in Rome, New York City”. The MFAA Commission Archives (Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives) of the Allied Subcommission (2 boxes) at the AAR duplicate a substantial amount of similar material in the BSR archives. Archival material in the Barbara Goldsmith Rare Book Room (AAR institutional archives) includes Register of the American Academy in Rome (2 volumes, I: 1919– 1973; II: 1973–1981, with lists of scholars and AAR fellows, as well as annual summer schools 1930–1940 and 1947–), as well as archaeologist Albert Van Buren’s “General correspondence, 1904–1967”. For AAR archival material, see also the two documents “ARCHIVI. List of archives and sections of archives”, and “Guide to the Archival Collections of the New York Office” (AAR). Archivio Centrale dello Stato, Rome. ACS, Ministero Pubblica Istruzione, Direzione Generale delle Antichità e Belle Arti, box 178, file 3204, contains a translation of an interview with Erik Sjöqvist in the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet entitled “Le relazioni culturali fra l’Italia e la Svezia”, 11 October 1945. Box 176 contains plans for an Italian archaeological institute in Egypt (based in Cairo), as well as with minister of Education Giuseppe Bottai regarding ItalianGerman archaeological and cultural exchanges 1941–1943. Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, box 3474, 1944–1947, file 7–2, n. 50058, subfile 3–30, contains discussions in 1946 regarding the location of the headquarters of the four German libraries after their return to Rome. Copies of various MFAA documents may also exist in the ACS. The Associazone Internazionale di Archeologia Classica archives, Palazzo Venezia, Rome. The AIAC archives contain various document boxes and bound volumes of the minutes of AIAC board meetings (Verbali assemblee) from 1945 onwards. The Austrian Historical Institute in Rome archives, Rome. Material relevant to this study can be found in box I, 58-63; box II, 113, 1 “Akten 1939–1946”; box II, 113, 2 “Desequestrerung”; box II, 113, 3 “Eröffnung des Kulturinstituts 11. April 1950”. Biblioteca Berenson, Villa I Tatti (Florence). The Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies, courtesy of the President and Fellows of Harvard College. The British School at Rome archives. The BSR administrative archives (in Rome) contain records of its wide range of activities: awardees applications and documents arranged by discipline and award (Visual Arts, Humanities, Architecture), funding bodies and award-related documentation; institutional charters, minutes and supporting papers of the BSR council and its two faculties  – the Faculty of Archaeology, History and Letters (FAHL) and the Faculties in the Fine Arts, now known as Faculty of Fine Arts (FFA) – as well as other committees and

Primary Sources and Interviews 

 287

sub-committees. This study focuses mainly on the correspondence of former BSR directors (Courtenay Arthur Ralegh Radford, box 63, and John Bryan Ward-Perkins, box 64), arranged in chronological order. Additional archival material relating to the BSR is located in the National Archives, London, including records created by the Foreign Office, the Treasury and the Government Communications Headquarters. John Bryan Ward-Perkins’ appointment as director of the BSR in 1945 explains the substantial MFAA Subcommission archival material at the BSR (with duplicates and additional material at the AAR). Archival material pertaining to the Allied Subcommission at the BSR can be found in MFAA document box D (7 boxes in total). The Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom archives. The DAIR archives contain statutes and early correspondence of the Hyperboreisch-Römische Gesellschaft (1823–1828) and of the Istituto di corrispondenza archeologica (1829). General DAIR correspondence is alphabetically ordered in numbered document boxes (“Allgemeine korrespondenz”). The DAIR annual reports (“Berichte Rom”) are chronologically organised, along with additional quarterly reports (“Vierteljahresberichte”). The École française de Rome archives. Annual reports from 1937–1960 are conserved at the École in Rome. The annual reports (comptes rendus) of the school for the Académie des Inscriptions & Belles-Lettres (CRAI) are preserved in bound volumes. The EFR archives also contains for example the box “Instituts culturels français en Italie”. Archival material on the Unione and AIAC located at the École when it was consulted has now been transferred to the Archives Nationales in Paris (see above). The Istituto di Studi Romani archives. Material used in this study can be found in Affari Generali, Sezioni esteri, Sottoserie 8. Affari generali, 1934 dic. 19–1939 ott. 16, box 137 (with reference also to boxes 135–137, as well as to the Affari Generali series, boxes 1 and 2). The Keats and Shelley House archives, Rome. The Keats and Shelley House archive contains files relating to meetings and correspondence of the association in charge of the removal and return of the library and artefacts of the Keats and Shelley House in Rome during and after the Second World War. The Kunsthistorisches Institut archives, Florence. The archives of the Kunsthistorisches Institut for example contain correspondence and press clippings pertaining to the issue of the post-war restitution of the German institutes in Italy (1945–1953). The Swedish Institute in Rome (Svenska institutet i Rom) archives. SIR archival material is primarily divided between the Swedish Institute in Rome archives in Rome and the Swedish National Archives (Riksarkivet) in Stockholm (see below). The archival material at the SIR contains correspondence and administrative records as well as photograph albums, guestbooks, and so forth. The archives also contain Erland Billig and Ragnhild Billig’s incomplete draft for their history of the SIR, 1925–1948, published in 2015 as Erland Billig, Ragnhild Billig and Frederick Whitling, Dies Academicus. Svenska Institutet i Rom 1925–1950, edited by Frederick Whitling (Stockholm: CKM Förlag). Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’arte in Roma. The Unione board meeting minutes (Verbali assemblee, 6 February 1946–27 June 1958) have been

288 

 Primary Sources and Interviews

made accessible courtesy of prof. Paolo Vian, Rome, as the Unione archives are as yet neither organised nor open to the public. A considerable amount of material pertaining to the Unione can be found in the archives of above all the EFR and AIAC. Cf., for example, Regin (1998). The Vatican archives (Archivio Segreto Vaticano, not used for this study). The Vatican State Secretary archives apply a 75-year rule. The most recent pontificate accessible at the time of writing in the Vatican archives is that of Pius XI (1922–1939). A request made in December 2013 by the author to study selected material relating to relations with the foreign schools in Rome from the pontificate of Pius XII was denied – archival material is thus far accessible only until 10 February 1939. For Vatican relations with the foreign schools in Rome, material may for example be found in the “Carte Mercati” in the manuscript collection of the Biblioteca Vaticana, pertaining to Giovanni Mercati, cardinal from 1936 and prefect of the Biblioteca Vaticana 1919–1936, thereafter librarian and archivist of the Holy Roman Church; as well as in the diaries of Joaquin Albareda, prefect of the Biblioteca Vaticana 1936–1962 (for example diary n. 120, covering the period 1936–1940).

Sweden

Bernadotteska Arkivet (The Bernadotte Archives), Stockholm (BFA), Gustaf VI Adolfs arkiv I (G VI A I). Erland Billig’s papers. This collection of loose documents refers to correspondence from Erland Billig to Carl Nylander pertaining to Billig’s article Habent Sua Fata Libelli. Swedish Notes on the Problem of the German Scientific Libraries in Italy 1943–1948 (1990), as well as draft versions of chapters in Billig’s unpublished manuscript (Lena Billig, Stockholm). Gothenburg University Library Manuscripts Collection, Handskriftssamlingen, Professor Axel Boëthius’ papper, Gothenburg University Library (GUB). Kungliga Biblioteket (the Royal Library, the Swedish National Library), Stockholm (KB). Unpublished manuscript by John Rohnström, first librarian at KB, relating his experiences as grant holder at the SIR 1943–1944. KB, Stockholm, Acc. 1997/37. Lund University Library Manuscripts Collection (LUB). Brevsamling Gjerstad, Einar, Lund (LUB), correspondence to and from Einar Gjerstad (cf. also Nilsson, N.M.P:son, efterlämnade papper, correspondence to and from Martin P. Nilsson). Medelhavsmuseets arkiv (the archives of the Museum of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Antiquities), Stockholm. Riksarkivet (the National Archives), Stockholm (RA). Categories of archival material at RA in Svenska institutets i Rom arkiv relevant to this study are series “I” (board minutes), “III” (correspondence) and “VI” (the archives of Erik Sjöqvist, 4 volumes). Category “III:F:1” contains documents relating to the establishment of the SIR and correspondence with crown prince Gustaf Adolf. Further relevant material is located RA, Svenska Institutet, Lektoratsarkivet i Florens (och Rom) 1946–1949. Sigtunastiftelsens klipparkiv (the Sigtuna Foundation, newspaper clippings archive), Sigtuna.

Primary Sources and Interviews 

 289

United Kingdom

The National Archives (Public Record Office), Kew, London (NA). The NA holds BSR-related government records created by (1) the Foreign Office, (2) the Treasury, (3) the Government Communications Headquarters.

United States of America

Princeton University archives, Department of Rare Books and Special Collections, Princeton University Library, Princeton, New Jersey; as well as Princeton University Archives, Department of Art and Archaeology, Princeton, New Jersey. The two main categories of archival material at Princeton University relevant to this study can be found in (1) the Department of Rare Books and Special Collections of Princeton University Library (Boxes 1, 2, 4 and 9), as well as various faculty files (Erik Sjöqvist, Charles Rufus Morey, Ernest DeWald, Richard Stillwell and Allan Chester Johnson); and (2) the archives of the Department of Art and Archaeology, which contain photographs from the Princeton Morgantina excavations (2 albums: 1955–1961 & 1961–), as well as correspondence to and from Erik Sjöqvist.

Interviews (2008–2010) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

Interviews with Carl Nylander, ex-director of the Swedish Institute in Rome, Lund, Sweden, March 2008 and March 2009. Interview with Richard T. Arndt, cultural diplomat. Washington, D.C., U.S.A., December 2008. Interview with Ross Holloway, professor emeritus, Brown University. December 2008. Interview with Sture Linnér, Swedish diplomat and professor of Greek, Stockholm, Sweden, April 2009. Interview with ambassador Bernardino Osio, Rome, 13 December 2009. Interview with Antonio Nogara, son of Bartolomeo Nogara, Rome, 13 December 2009. Interview with William Childs, professor, Princeton University. Nicosia, Cyprus, 3 July 2010. Interview with Malcolm Bell, professor, University of Virginia. 7 October 2010.

Bibliography Printed Sources Ashby, Thomas (1916), “The Palazzo Odescalchi in Rome”, Papers of the British School at Rome 8, 55–90. Bååth, Ludvig Magnus (1956), “De skandinaviska historiska expeditionerna till Rom 1920–1939”, in: Ingvar Andersson (ed.), Archivistica et mediævistica Ernesto Nygren oblata, Stockholm: Norstedts, 53–85. Bergman, Johan (1906), “Sverige och det klassiska studiet”, in: Johan Bergman, Antiken. Essayer, Stockholm: Albert Bonniers förlag, 1–26. Blouet, Abel and Amable Ravoisié (eds.) (1831, 1833 & 1838), Expedition scientifique de Morée: ordonnée par le Gouvernement français; Architecture, Sculptures, Inscriptions et Vues du Péloponèse, des Cyclades et de l’Attique, 3 vols, Paris: Firmin Didot Frères. Boëthius, Axel (1934), “I recenti studi di storia e topografia romana in Svezia”, in: Gli studi romani nel mondo. I Serie, Bologna: Licinio Cappelli Editore, 165–184. Boëthius, Axel (1946), Band svenska minnen i Rom: En skiss. Svenska spår i främmande land, Göteborg: Riksföreningen för svenskhetens bevarande i utlandet. Brancadoro, Giuseppe (1834), Notizie riguardanti le Accademie di Belle Arti e di Archeologia esistenti a Roma … con l’accurato elenco di pittori, scultori, architetti … compilata ad uso degli stranieri e degli amatori delle belle arti, Rome: “Imprimatur F[rater] D[ominicus] Buttaoni [&] A. Piatti”. Carcopino, Jérôme (1968), Souvenirs romains, Paris: Hachette. Carter, Edward J. (1948), “Unesco’s Library Programs and Work”, The Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy 18, 4, 235–244. Clotz, Gustave (1928), “Éloge funèbre de M. Panagiotis Cavvadias, correspondant étranger de l’Académie”, Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 72, 3, 269–273. Collignon, Max (1915), L’Archéologie classique, La science française, Paris: Librairie Larousse. Curie, Marie (1926), “Memorandum by Madame Curie, Member of the Committee, on the Question of International Scholarships for the advancement of the Sciences and the Development of Laboratories”, League of Nations, International Committee on Intellectual Co-operation: Sub-committee of Experts for the Instruction of Children and Youth in the Existence and Aims of the League of Nations. (Recommendations. Preamble): Issue 5, Issues 9–13, 12. Curtius, Ludwig (1958), Deutsche Und Antike Welt. Lebenserinnerungen, Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt. de Frenzi, Giulio (Luigi Federzoni) (1913), L’Italia nell’Egeo, Rome: Gaetano Garzoni Provenzani. Dehérain, Henri (1936), “Le cinquantenaire de l’École britannique d’Athènes”, Journal des savants 5, 231–233. Demangel, Robert (1948), “Avant-propos”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique, 71, v-vii. Fougères, Gustave (1927), “L’École d’Athènes”, Revue des deux Mondes, 1 October, 543–574. Frödin, Otto, Persson, Axel W. and Westholm, Alfred (1938), Asine. Results of the Swedish excavations, 1922–1930, Stockholm: Generalstabens litografiska anstalt. Gerhard, Eduard (1829), “Osservazioni preliminari”, Annali dell’Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica per l’anno 1829 = Annales de l’Institut de Correspondance Archéologique pour l’an 1829, 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-012

292 

 Bibliography

Gerhard, Eduard (1860), Zur Jubelfeier der Universitaet Berlin, Berlin: Georg Reimer. Hampe, Roland (1955), Die Rettung Athens im Oktober 1944, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag. Hower, Thomas Carr (1946), Salt Mines and Castles: The Discovery and Restitution of Looted European Art, New York: Bobbs-Merrill. Jaeger, Werner (1945), Paideia. The Ideals of Greek Culture, translated by Gilbert Highet, 3 vols, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lévêque, Charles (1898), “La formation et les débuts de l’École française d’Athènes”, Revue des deux Mondes, 1, 85–119. Lord, Louis E. (1947), A History of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1882–1942, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Magi, Filippo (1954–1955), “Commemorazione di Bartolomeo Nogara”, Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia 28, 1–24. Mayence, Fernand (1947), “Le centenaire de l’École francaise d’Athènes”, L’Antiquité Classique 16, 2, 345–351. Meyer, Ernst (ed.) (1936), Briefe von Heinrich Schliemann. Gesammelt und mit einer Einleitung in Auswahl herausgeben, Berlin & Leipzig: Walter De Gruyter & Co. Michaelis, Adolf (1879), Geschichte des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, 1829–1879, Berlin: A. Asher & Co. Miller, Wayne (1938), “The Centenary of the Archaeological Society of Athens”, The Journal of Hellenic Studies 58, 2, 254. Moleti di Sant’Andrea, Egidio (1938), Mare Nostrum. Roma nella civiltà mediterranei, Milano: E.L.I.C.A. von Oppeln-Bronikowski, Friedrich (1931), Archäologische Entdeckungen im 20. Jahrhundert, Berlin: Verlag Heinrich Keller. Pace, Biagio (1913), “La scuola archeologica italiana in Atene”, 118–121 (available online: https://www.scuoladiatene.it/images/documents/Biagio%20Pace0001.pdf). Paribeni, Roberto (ed.) (1937), Scritti in onore di Bartolomeo Nogara raccolti in occasione del suo LXX anno, Vatican City: Tipografia del Senato. Radet, Georges (1901), L’Histoire et l’œuvre de l’École française d’Athènes, Paris: Albert Fontemoing. Renaudin, Louis (1921), “Note sur le site d’Asinè en Argolide”, Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 45, 295–308. Rodenwaldt, Gerhart (1929), Archäologisches Institut des Deutschen Reiches 1829–1929, Berlin: Walter De Gruyter & Co. Rossi, Attilio (ed.) (1934–1936), Bulletin de l’Office International des Instituts d’Archeologie et d’Histoire de l’Art 1-7, Paris: Institut International de Cooperation Intellectuelle. Schefold, Karl (1949), Orient, Hellas und Rom in der Archäologischen Forschung seit 1939, Bern: A. Francke AG. Verlag. Sjöqvist, Erik (1956), “Charles Rufus Morey, 1877–1955”, Colloqui del Sodalizio tra studiosi dell’arte, 3, 3–10 (reprinted in Billig, Nylander and Vian (1996), 141–148). Stark, Freya (1945), East is West, London: John Murray. Steinby, Torsten (1951), Finland i den eviga staden, Helsingfors: Amos Andersons Förlag. Strutt, Arthur John (1875), Handbook of Rome and its Environs, London: John Murray. Tomasi di Lampedusa, Giuseppe (1958), Il Gattopardo, Milano: Feltrinelli. Valetta, Ippolito (1903), L’Académie de France à Rome 1666–1903, Turin: Bocca Frères Éditeurs. Valmin, Natan (1937), “Hundra år grekisk arkeologi. Till det grekiska arkeologsällskapets sekeljubileum”, Svensk Tidskrift. Årsbok 1937, 195–208. Valmin, Natan (1938), The Swedish Messenia Expedition, Lund: Gleerup.

Bibliography 

 293

Valmin, Natan (1946), “En fransk kulturgärning. École française d’Athènes fyller etthundra år”, Ord och Bild. Illustrerad Månadsskrift 55, 449–457. Veuillot, Louis (1862), Le Parfum de Rome, vol. I., Paris: Gaume Frères et J. Duprey. VV.AA. (1829), “Elenco degli associati, membri e soci dell’Instituto”, Annali dell’Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica per l’anno 1829 = Annales de l’Institut de Correspondance Archéologique pour l’an 1829, i-viii. VV.AA. (1873), “L´Ecole francaise d’Athènes de 1846 à 1873”, Bibliothèque Historique de l’Éducation 16, 308, 408–418. VV.AA. (1898), Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 22, 1–108. VV.AA. (1905), Comptes rendus du Congrès international d’archéologie, 1ère session, Athènes 1905. Athens: Imprimerie ‘Hestia’, VV.AA. (1931), L’Histoire et l’œuvre de l’École française de Rome, Paris: De Boccard. VV.AA. (1932), “Le Cinquantenaire de l’École française de Rome”, Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire 49, 261–310. VV.AA. (1932/1933), “List of Directors, Honorary Students, Students and Associates”, Annual of the British School at Athens 33, 234–253. VV.AA. (1939), Dragma. Martino P. Nilsson A.D.IV ID.IUL. Anno MCMXXXIX Dedicatum. Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Institutet i Rom. Acta Instituti Romani Regni Sueciae. Series Altera. I, Lund: Institutum Romanum Regni Sueciae. VV.AA. (1945), Biblioteche ospiti della Vaticana nella seconda guerra mondiale col catalogo dei cimeli esposti nel salone Sistino, Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. VV.AA. (1948), Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 71, 1–276. VV.AA. (1954), Fondation Hardt, Entretiens, Tome I, La notion du divin depuis Homère jusqu’à Platon, Vandœuvres: Fondation Hardt. VV.AA. (1965), Feier zur Eröffnung des neuen Hauses und zum fünfundsiebzigsten Jubiläum am Sechzehnten Mai 1964, Florence: Kunsthistorisches Institut. VV.AA. (1970), Guida delle istituzioni culturali di Roma, Rome: Residenze Universitarie Internazionali. [1959]. Ward-Perkins, John Bryan (1949), “The Church of San Salvatore at Spoleto: Some Structural Notes”, Papers of the British School at Rome 4, 72–86. Ward-Perkins, John Bryan (1977), “The International Union of Institutes of Archaeology, History and History of Art in Rome and the International Association for Classical Archaeology”, in: Jean Bingen and Guy Cambier (eds.), Aspectes des études classiques. Actes du colloque associé à la 16e assemblée générale de la fédération internationale des associations d’études classiques, Brussels: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 53–59. Weickert, Carl (1949), Das Deutsche Archäologische Institut. Geschichte, Verfassung, Aufgaben, Berlin: Deutsches Archäologisches Institut.

Secondary Sources Ageron, Charles-Robert (1992), “Comment les Européens ont colonisé la Méditerrannée”, L’Histoire, 157, July–August 1992, 104–111. Ahlklo, Jan (2010), “Architettura e arredamento, italiano e svedese = Architecture and Furnishing, Italian and Swedish”, in: Börje Magnusson and Jan Ahlklo (eds.), L’Istituto svedese di studi classici a Roma = The Swedish Institute of Classical Studies in Rome, Rome: L’Istituto Svedese di Studi Classici a Roma, 68–103.

294 

 Bibliography

Alcock, Susan E. and Osborne, Robin (2012), Classical Archaeology, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Arias, Paolo Enrico (1995), “Il mito dell’archeologia italiana: Due ‘patres conscripti’ all’inizio delle leggi sulle antichità dopo il 1870”, Rendiconti della classe di scienze morali, storiche e filologiche dell’Accademia dei Lincei 9, 137–145. Arnold, Bettina (1990), “The Past as Propaganda: Totalitarian Archaeology in Nazi Germany”, Antiquity 64, 464–478. Arnold, Bettina (1992), “The Past as Propaganda: How Hitler’s Archaeologists Distorted European Prehistory to Justify Racist and Territorial Goals”, Archaeology 45, 4, 30–37. Arnold, Bettina (2002), “A Transatlantic Perspective on German Archaeology”, in: Heinrich Härke (ed.), Archaeology, Ideology and Society: The German Experience, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 401–425. Arnold, Bettina (2004), “Dealing With the Devil: The Faustian Bargain of Archaeology Under Dictatorship”, in: Michael A. Galaty and Charles Watkinson (ed.), Archaeology Under Dictatorship, New York: Springer, 191–212. Arnold, Bettina (2006), “‘Arierdämmerung’: Race and Archaeology in Nazi Germany”, World Archaeology 38, 8–31. Arnoux-Farnoux, Lucile (2015), “Relations intellectuelles et artistiques entre la France et la Grèce au XXe siècle: L’action de deux philhellènes, Octave Merlier (1897–1976) et Roger Milliex (1913–2006)”, Rives méditerranéennes 50, 53–64. Arthurs, Joshua (2007), “A Revolution in the Idea of Rome: Excavating Modernity in Fascist Italy”, PhD diss., University of Chicago. Arthurs, Joshua (2012), Excavating Modernity: The Roman Past in Fascist Italy, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Atzler, Elke and Gottsmann, Andreas (2017), Austria in Urbe 1938–2018. Österreichs irdische Adresse in der Ewigen Stadt = Una dimora terrena dell’Austria nella Città eterna, Baden: Edition Lammerhuber. Bacon, Edward (ed.) (1976), The Great Archaeologists. The modern world’s discovery of ancient civilisations as originally reported in The Illustrated London News from 1842 to the present day, Indianapolis & New York: Bobbs-Merrill. Bahn, Paul (ed.) (2014), The History of Archaeology: An Introduction, London & New York: Routledge. Barbanera, Marcello (1998), L’archeologia degli italiani. Storia, metodi e orientamenti dell’archeologia classica in Italia, Rome: Editori Riuniti. Barbanera, Marcello (2003), Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli. Biografia ed epistolario di un grande archeologo, Milano: Skira. Barbanera, Marcello (2008), “The Impossible Museum: Exhibitions of Archaeology as Reflections of Contemporary Ideologies”, in: Nathan Schlanger and Jarl Nordbladh (eds.), Archives, Ancestors, Practices. Archaeology in the Light of its History, New York & Oxford: Berghahn Books, 165–178. Barbanera, Marcello (2010), “Riflessi su uno specchio deformante: sul rapporto tra memoria e storia”, Scienze dell’antichità 16, 13–25. Barbanera, Marcello (2012), “Alessandro Della Seta (1879–1944)”, in: Gunnar Brands and Martin Maischberger (eds.), Lebensbilder. Klassische Archäologen und der Nationalsozialismus, Rahden/Westfahlen: Verlag Marie Leidorf, 51–63. Barbanera, Marcello (2013a), “Archeologia e politica durante il fascismo. Alessandro Della Seta e la direzione della Scuola Archeologica di Atene (1919–1938)”, in: Marcello Barbanera, Il museo impossibile. Storie di archeologia: istituzioni, uomini, idee. Roma: Aracne editrice, 87–120.

Bibliography 

 295

Barbanera, Marcello (2013b), Metamorfosi delle rovine. Milan: Electa. Barbanera, Marcello (2013c), “L’antichità reinventata. Le rovine di Roma come immagine del regno d’Italia”, in: Astrid Capoferro, Liv D’ Amelio and Stefania Renzetti (eds.), Dall’Italia. Omaggio a Barbro Santillo Frizell, Florence: Edizioni Polistampa, 221–239. Barbanera, Marcello (2015), Storia dell’archeologia classica in Italia. Dal 1764 ai giorni nostri, Rome & Bari: GLF Editori Laterza. Barbanera, Marcello (ed.) (2000), Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli e il suo mondo, Bari: Edipuglia. Bărbulescu, Mihai, Turcuş, Veronica and Damian, Iulian M. (2013), Accademia di Romania in Roma. 1922–2012, Rome: Accademia di Romania. Barich, Barbara E and Stoppiello, Alessandra Assunta (eds.) (1997), Missioni archeologiche italiane: la ricerca archeologica, antropologica, etnologica, Rome: “L’Erma” di Bretschneider. Barzini, Luigi (1972), From Caesar to the Mafia. Sketches of Italian Life, New York: Bantam Books. Basargina, Ekaterina (2008), “Проекты создания русских археологических институтов за рубежом” [“Projects of Russian Archaeological Institutes Abroad”], Вестник древней истории [Journal of Ancient History] 4, 205–213. Basch, Sophie (1995), Le mirage grec. La Grèce moderne devant l’opinion française (1846–1946), Paris: Hatier. Bastéa, Eleni (2000), The Creation of Modern Athens. Planning the Myth, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. Battelli, Giulio (1996), “Le premesse dell’Unione: collaborazione internazionale per il salvataggio dei beni culturali durante la seconda guerra mondiale e per la bibliografia dell’Archivio Vaticano”, in: Erland Billig, Carl Nylander and Paolo Vian (eds.), ”Nobile munus”. Origini e primi sviluppi dell’Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (1946–1953). Per la storia della collaborazione internazionale a Roma nelle ricerche umanistiche nel secondo dopoguerra, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma, 199–210. Beard, Mary (2014), Confronting the Classics. Traditions, Adventures and Innovations, London: Profile Books. Beard, Mary and Henderson, John (1995), Classics. A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Beard, Mary and Stray, Christopher (2005), “The Academy Abroad: The Nineteenth-Century Origin of the British School at Athens”, in: Martin Daunton (ed.), The Organisation of Knowledge in Victorian Britain, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press/The British Academy, 371–387. Berg, Ingrid (2012), “Kalaureia 1894 – nytt ljus över svensk arkeologihistoria i Grekland”, in: Påvel Nicklasson and Bodil Petersson (eds.), Att återupptäcka det glömda. Aktuell forskning om forntidens förflutna i Norden, Lund: Lunds universitet, 279–291. Berg, Ingrid (2016), “Kalaureia 1894. A Cultural History of the First Swedish Excavation in Greece”, PhD diss., Stockholm Studies in Archaeology 69, Stockholm University. Berlinzani, Francesca (2005), “L’opera Di Mario Segre. Da Pausania alla passione epigrafica”, Bollettino d’Arte 133–134, 3–8. Bernal, Martin (1987), Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization, 3 vols, New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press. Berutti, Stefania (2010), “Luigi Pernier: Direttore ‘Pel bene e l’avvenire’”, Annuario della Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene 87, 69–77.

296 

 Bibliography

Billig, Erland (1990), “Habent sua fata libelli. Swedish notes on the problem of the German scientific libraries in Italy 1943–1948”, Opuscula Romana 18, 221–235. Billig, Erland, Billig, Ragnhild and Whitling, Frederick (2015), Dies Academicus. Svenska Institutet i Rom 1925–1950, Skriftserie utgiven av Vänföreningarna för de svenska instituten i Rom och Athen 9, Stockholm: CKM Förlag. Billig, Erland, Nylander, Carl and Vian, Paolo (eds.) (1996), “Nobile munus”. Origini e primi sviluppi dell’Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (1946–1953). Per la storia della collaborazione internazionale a Roma nelle ricerche umanistiche nel secondo dopoguerra, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Billig, Ragnhild (1996), “Quegli anni a Roma”, in: Erland Billig, Carl Nylander and Paolo Vian (eds.), “Nobile munus”. Origini e primi sviluppi dell’Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (1946–1953). Per la storia della collaborazione internazionale a Roma nelle ricerche umanistiche nel secondo dopoguerra, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma, 211–213. Bintliff, John (2012), The Complete Archaeology of Greece. From Hunter-Gatherers to the 20th Century A.D., Malden, MA & Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Bittel, Kurt, Deichmann, Friedrich Wilhelm, Grünhagen, Willhelm, Kaiser, Werner, Kraus, Theodor and Kyrieleis, Helmut (eds.) (1979), Beiträge zur Geschichte des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 1929 bis 1979. Teil 1. Das Deutsche Archäologische Institut Geschichte und Dokumente, Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Blanck, Horst (2000), “Von Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica zum Reichsinstitut. Die deutsche Archäologie und ihre Italienerfahrungen”, in: Arnold Esch and Jens Petersen (eds.), Deutsches Ottocento. Die deutsche Wahrnehmung Italiens im Risorgimento, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 235–255. Blanck, Horst (2008), “The Instituto di corrispondenza archeologica”, in: Natalie de Haan, Martin Eickhoff and Marjan Schwegman (eds.), Archaeology and National Identity in Italy and Europe 1800–1950, Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 63–78. Blüher, Joachim and Windholz, Angela (2007), “Zurück in Arkadien! Der ‘kalte Krieg’ um die Villa Massimo und ihre Übergabe an die Bundesrepublik Deutschland im Jahr 1956”, in: Michael Matheus (ed.), Deutsche Forschungs- und Kulturinstitute in Rom in der Nachkriegszeit, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 193–210. Bochotis, Thanasis N. (2015), Ελέγχοντας τον τόπο του παρελθόντος. Η γερμανοελληνική σχέση εξουσίας στις ανασκαφές της Ολυμπίας 1869–1882, Heraklion: Crete University Press. Bolech Cecchi, Donatella (1986), Non bruciare i ponti con Roma: Le relazioni fra l’Italia, la Gran Bretagna e la Francia dall’accordo di Monaco allo scoppio della seconda guerra mondiale, Milano: Giuffrè. Bonazzi, Gianni and Pistacchi, Massimo (eds.) (1992), Atti della III conferenza nazionale degli istituti culturali. Gli istituti culturali nella dimensione europea, Rome: Ministero per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali. Ufficio Centrale per i Beni Librari e gli Istituti Culturali. Bosworth, Richard J.B. (1970), “Sir Rennell Rodd e l’Italia”, Nuova Rivista Storica 54, 420–436. Bosworth, Richard J.B. (2011), Whispering City: Modern Rome and Its Histories, New Haven & London: Yale University Press. Bottum, Joseph and Dalin, David G. (eds.) (2004), The Pius War: Responses to the Critics of Pius XII, Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Bracco, Vittorio (1979), L’archeologia classica nella cultura occidentale, Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider.

Bibliography 

 297

Braemer, Frank (2012), “Foreign schools and institutes around the Mediterranean Sea: relics of the past or renewed tools for scientific partnership?”, in: Sjoerd van der Linde et al. (eds.), European Archaeology Abroad: Global Settings, Comparative Perspectives, Leiden: Sidestone Press, 35–49. Brands, Gunnar and Maischberger, Martin (eds.) (2012), Lebensbilder. Klassische Archäologen und der Nationalsozialismus 1. Menschen—kulturen—traditionen. Studien aus den Forschungsclustern des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Rahden/Westfahlen: Verlag Marie Leidorf. Bremer, Jörg (2011), “Geist und Tourismus. Italien unter Sparzwang lässt die Forschung bluten”, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 9 March. Brown, Frank Edward (1980), Cosa: The Making of a Roman Town, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press. Burke, James (1978), Connections. Alternative History of Technology, London: Macmillan. Butler, Shane (ed.) (2016), Deep Classics. Rethinking Classical Reception, London & New York: Bloomsbury Academic. Cacciatore, Vera (2005), “The House in War-Time”, in: VV.AA., Keats and Italy. A History of the Keats-Shelley House in Rome. Rome: Il Labirinto, 68–72. Calcani, Giuliana (2007), Storia dell’archeologia. Il passato come ricerca di attualità, Rome: Libreria dello Stato. Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato. Calder III, William M. and Smith, R. Scott (2000), A Supplementary Bibliography to the History of Classical Scholarship: Chiefly in the XIX and XX Centuries, Bari: Dedalo. Camp II, John McK. (2003), The Athenian Agora. A Short Guide, Excavations of the Athenian Agora. Picture Book No. 16, Athens: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens [updated version 2010]. Carabott, Philip (2003), “Monumental Visions: The Past in Metaxas’ Weltanschauung”, in: Keith S. Brown and Yannis Hamilakis (eds.), The Usable Past. Greek Metahistories, Lanham: Lexington Books, 23–37. Carabott, Philip (ed.) (1998), Greek Society in the Making, 1863–1913: Realities, Symbols, and Visions, Aldershot: Variorum. Carandini, Andrea (2008), Archeologia classica. Vedere il tempo antico con gli occhi del 2000, Torino: Einaudi editore. Carter, Rand (1979), “Karl Friedrich Schinkel’s Project for a Royal Palace on the Acropolis”, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 38, 1, 34–46. Casson, Stanley (1937), Ancient Cyprus: Its Art and Archaeology, London: Methuen & Co. Ceram, C. W. (Kurt Wilhem Marek) (1951), Gods, Graves & Scholars. The Story of Archaeology, New York: Knopf [Götter, Gräber und Gelehrte. Roman der Archäologie, 1949]. Ceserani, Giovanna (2012), Italy’s Lost Greece. Magna Graecia and the Making of Modern Archaeology, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Chadwick, Owen W. (1977), “Weiszäcker, the Vatican and the Jews of Rome”, Journal of Ecclesiastical History 28, 138–159. Chadwick, Owen W. (1986), Britain and the Vatican During the Second World War, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapoutot, Johann (2016), Greeks, Romans, Germans. How the Nazis Usurped Europe’s Classical Past, Oakland, California: University of California Press. Charmasson, Thérèse (ed.) (2010), Voyages et voyageurs. Sources pour l’histoire des voyages, Paris: Éditions du CTHS.

298 

 Bibliography

Cheze, Mathilde (2013), “La France en Grèce: Étude de la politique culturelle française en territoire hellène du début des années 1930 à 1981”, PhD diss., Institut national des langues et civilisations orientales, Paris (available online: https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/ tel-00966630/document). Clairmont, Cristoph W. (2007), Fauvel. The first archaeologist in Athens and his Philhellenic correspondents, Zürich: Akanthus. Clara, Fernando (2016), “‘The “invisible” export of thought’: German Science and Southern Europe, 1933–45”, in: Clara, Fernando and Ninhos, Cláudia (eds.), Nazi Germany and Southern Europe, 1933–45. Science, Culture and Politics, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–24. Clogg, Richard (1993), “The British School at Athens and the Modern History of Greece”, Journal of Modern Hellenism, 10, 91–109. Clogg, Richard (2000), Anglo-Greek Attitudes. Studies in History. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Clogg, Richard (2009), “Academics at War: The British School at Athens During the First World War”, in: Michael Llewellyn Smith, Paschalis M Kitromilides and Eleni Calligas (eds.), Scholars, Travels, Archives: Greek History and Culture through the British School at Athens, London: The British School at Athens, 163–177. Clogg, Richard (2012), “Susan Heuck Allen Classical Spies – American archaeologists with the OSS in World War II Greece”, Times Literary Supplement, 10 February 3. Cohen, Getzel M. and Joukowsky, Martha Sharp (eds.) (2004), Breaking Ground. Pioneering Women Archaeologists, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press. Coles, Harry L. and Weinberg, Albert K. (2004), Civil Affairs. Soldiers Become Governors, United States Army in World War 2. Special Studies, Washington, D.C.: United States Army Center of Military History [1964]. Colla, Elliot (2008), Conflicted Antiquities: Egyptology, Egyptomania, Egyptian Modernity, Durham, N.C: Duke University Press Books. Cools, Hans and de Valk, Hans (2004), Institutum Neerlandicum MCMIV–MMMIV. Honderd jaar Nederlands Instituut te Rome, Hilversum: Verloren. Costanzo, Denise R. (2015), “‘A Truly Liberal Orientation’: Laurance Roberts, Modern Architecture, and the Postwar American Academy in Rome”, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 74, 2, 223–247. Coulson, William and Leventi, Iphigeneia (1996), “Les relations entre l’École américaine d’Études classiques et l’École française d’Athènes”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 498–499. Cuno, James (2008), Who Owns Antiquity? Museums and the Battle Over Our Ancient Heritage, Princeton & Oxford: Princeton University Press. Dagnini Brey, Ilaria (2009), The Venus Fixers: The Untold Story of the Allied Soldiers Who Saved Italy’s Art During World War II, New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Damaskos, Dimitris and Plantzos, Dimitris (eds.) (2008), A Singular Antiquity. Archaeology and Hellenic Identity in Twentieth-Century Greece, Mouseio Benaki 3rd Supplement, Athens: Benaki Museum, 2008. Daniel, Glyn (1981), A Short History of Archaeology, London: Thames and Hudson. Daniel, Glyn, Chippindale, Christopher et al. (1989), The Pastmasters: Eleven Modern Pioneers of Archaeology, London: Thames and Hudson. Davis, Jack L and Vogeikoff-Brogan, Natalia (eds.) (2008), The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Links to the Past, Looking to the Future, Athens & Princeton, New Jersey: American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

Bibliography 

 299

Davis, Jack L. (2003), “A Foreign School of Archaeology and the Politics of Archaeological Practice: Anatolia 1922”, Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 16, 145–172. Davis, Jack L. (2010), “‘That Special Atmosphere Outside of National Boundaries’: Three Jewish Directors and the American School of Classical Studies at Athens”, Annuario della Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene 87, 133–145. Davis, Jack L. and Vogeikoff-Brogan, Natalia (2013), “Introduction: Philhellenism, Philanthropy, or Political Convenience?”, Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 82, 1, 1–14. Davis, Thomas W. (2004), Shifting Sands. The Rise and Fall of Biblical Archaeology, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. De Francesco, Antonino (2013), The Antiquity of the Italian Nation. The Cultural Origins of a Political Myth in Modern Italy, 1796–1943, Oxford: Oxford University Press. De Gregori, Giorgio (1996), “‘Biblioteche che debbono tornare in Italia’”, in: Erland Billig, Carl Nylander and Paolo Vian (eds.), ”Nobile munus”. Origini e primi sviluppi dell’Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (1946–1953). Per la storia della collaborazione internazionale a Roma nelle ricerche umanistiche nel secondo dopoguerra, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma, 215–230. De Grummond, Nancy Thomson (ed.) (1996), Encyclopaedia of the History of Classical Archaeology, 2 vols, Milton Park, Abingdon & New York: Routledge. Deichmann, Friedrich Wilhelm (1986), Vom internationalen Privatverein zur preussischen Staatsanstalt. Zur Geschichte des Instituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica, Das Deutsche Archäologische Institut. Geschichte Und Dokumente, Band 9, Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Del Gesso, Emilio (2010), “La cultura internazionale a Roma”, in: Raffaella Rizzo (ed.), Accademie svelate. Tradizione e attualità delle accademie straniere nel Lazio, Rome: Itinera Comunicazione, 9–12. Delpino, Filippo (1995), “Gli scavi di Stéphane Gsell a Vulci (1889). La politica culturale dell’amministrazione per le antichità tra aperture internazionalistiche e autarchismo archeologico”, Bulletino di paletnologia italiana, 86, 429–468. Deuchler, Florens and Setälä, Päivi (eds.) (1996), Cicerone Romano. Guida ai Centri di Ricerca Storica a Roma, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Di Vita, Antonino (1983), “L’archeologia italiana in Grecia”, Il Veltro 27, 267–280. Di Vita, Antonino (1996), “La politica archeologica italiana nel Dodecaneso tra il 1912 e il 1943”, Magna Graecia 31, 1–4. Di Vita, Antonino (2000), “La politica archeologica dell’Italia in Grecia dall’Unità ad oggi”, in: Roland Étienne (ed.), Les politiques de l’archéologie du milieu du XIXe siècle à l’orée du XXIe. Colloque organisé par l’École française d’Athènes à l’occasion de la célébration du 150e anniversaire de sa fondation: Discours prononcés à l’occasion du 150e anniversaire de l’EFA, Athens: École française d’Athènes, 255–270. Di Vita, Antonino (2001), “Alessandro Della Seta e la Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene”, in: Giorgio Veronelli (ed.), Della Seta oggi. Da Lemnos a Casteggio. Atti della giornata di studi, Casteggio, 21 Marzo 1999, Milano: Edizioni enerre, 61–66. Díaz-Andreu, Margarita (2007), A World History of Nineteenth-Century Archaeology. Nationalism, Colonialism, and the Past, Oxford Studies in the History of Archaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

300 

 Bibliography

Dodero, Eloisa and Presicce, Claudio Parisi (eds.) (2017), Il Tesoro di Antichità. Winckelmann e il Museo Capitolino nella Roma del Settecento, Rome: Gangemi Editore. Donato, Maria Pia (1999), “Accademie e accademismi in una capitale particolare. Il caso di Roma, secoli XVIII–XIX”, Mélanges de l’École française de Rome. Italie et Meditérranée 111, 1, 415–430. Dostert, Astrid (ed.) (2004), Zwischen Kulturen und Kontinenten… 175 Jahre Forschung am Deutschen Archäologischen Institut. Between Cultures and Continents… 175 Years of Research at the German Archaeological Institute, Berlin: Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. Dowling, Linda (2007), Charles Eliot Norton: The Art of Reform in Nineteenth-Century America, Lebanon, NH: University of New Hampshire Press. Dubbini, Rachele (2010), “Guido Libertini direttore della Scuola di Atene alla vigilia del conflitto italo-ellenico (1939–1940)”, Annuario della Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene, 87, 91–104. Dubois, Jérémie (2014), “Le Centre universitaire méditerranéen de Nice et les stratégies d’influence de l’Italie fasciste. Entre légitimations croisées et suspicions mutuelles”, Relations internationales, 158, 2, 27–43. Duffy, Eamon (2006), Saints and Sinners. A History of the Popes, New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Duggan, Christopher (2007), The Force of Destiny. A History of Italy since 1796, London: Allen Lane/Penguin Books. Dymond, David P. (1974), Archaeology and History. A Plea for Reconciliation, London: Thames and Hudson. Dyson, Stephen L. (1998), Ancient Marbles to American Shores. Classical Archaeology in the United States, Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Dyson, Stephen L. (2004), Eugenie Sellers Strong: Portrait of an Archaeologist, London: Duckworth. Dyson, Stephen L. (2006), In Pursuit of Ancient Pasts. A History of Classical Archaeology in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, New Haven & London: Yale University Press. Edlund-Berry, Ingrid (2003), “Erik Sjöqvist: Archeologo svedese e ricercatore internazionale alla Princeton University”, Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Annuario 45, 173–185. Edsel, Robert M. (2013), Saving Italy. The Race to Rescue a Nation’s Treasures from the Nazis, New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Edsel, Robert M. and Witter, Bret (2009), The Monuments Men: Allied Heroes, Nazi Thieves, and the Greatest Treasure Hunt in History, New York: Center Street. Edwin Sandys, John (1967), A History of Classical Scholarship, 3 vols, New York& London: Hafner Publishing Company [1908, 1921]. Ellwood, David W. (1985), Italy, 1943–1945, New York: Holmes and Meier. Elzinga, Aant (1996), “Unesco and the Politics of Scientific Internationalism”, in: Elzinga, Aant and Landström, Catharina (ed.), Internationalism and Science, London & Los Angeles: Taylor Graham, 89–131. Erenstoft, Jamie Beth (2008), “Controlling the Sacred Past: Rome, Pius IX, and Christian Archaeology”, PhD diss., State University of New York at Buffalo. Esch, Arnold (2007), “Die deutschen Institutsbibliotheken nach dem Ende des Zweiten Weltkriegs und die Rolle der Unione degli Istituti: Internationalisierung, Italianisierung – oder Rückgabe an Deutschland?”, in: Michael Matheus (ed.), Deutsche Forschungs- und Kulturinstitute in Rom in der Nachkriegszeit, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 67–98.

Bibliography 

 301

Étienne, Roland (1996a), “L’École française d’Athènes, 1846–1996”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 3–22. Étienne, Roland (1996b), L’Espace grec. Cent cinquante ans de fouilles de l’École française d’Athènes, Paris: Fayard. Étienne, Roland (ed.) (2000), Les politiques de l’archéologie du milieu du XIXe siècle à l’orée du XXIe: Colloque organisé par l’Ecole française d’Athènes à l’occasion de la célébration du 150e anniversaire de sa fondation: Discours prononcés à l’occasion du 150e anniversaire de l’EFA, Athens: L’École française d’Athènes. Étienne, Roland and Étienne, Françoise (1992), The Search for Ancient Greece, London: Thames and Hudson. Fanning, Steven C. (1981), “Lombard Arianism Reconsidered”, Speculum 56, 2, 241–258. Fant, Maureen B. (1996), “L’Accademia Americana a Roma”, Forma Urbis 1, 10, 33–36. Farnoux, Alexandre (2004), “Ruines, vestiges et patrimoine”, in: Sophie Basch (ed.), La Métamorphose des ruines. L’influence des découvertes archéologiques sur les arts et les lettres (1870–1914), Athens: École française d’Athènes, 5–22. Fenet, Annick and Lubtchansky, Natacha (eds.) (2015), Pour une histoire de l’archéologie XVIIIe siècle–1945. Hommage de ses collègues et amis à Ève Gran-Aymerich, Bordeaux: Ausonius Éditions. Fittschen, Klaus (1996), “L’École française d’Athènes et l’Institut archéologique allemand”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 487–496. Flouda, Georgia (2017), “Archaeology in the War Zone: August Schörgendorfer and the Kunstschutz on Crete During World War II”, The Annual of the British School at Athens 112, 341–377. Fogelberg Rota, Stefano (2008), Poesins drottning. Christina av Sverige och de italienska akademierna, Lund: Nordic Academic Press. Fokianaki, iLiana (2018), “Redistribution via Appropriation: White(washing) Marbles”, e-Flux journal 91, May 2018 (available online: https://www.e-flux.com/journal/91/197800/ redistribution-via-appropriation-white-washing-marbles/). Fortini, Patrizia (ed.) (2008), Giacomo Boni e le istituzioni straniere. Apporti alla formazione delle discipline storico-archeologiche, Documenti dall’archivio disegni della Soprintendenza Archeologica di Roma 2. Rome: Soprintendenza Speciale per i Beni Archeologici di Roma, Fondazione G. Boni-Flora Palatina. Freeman, Philip (2007), The Best Training Ground for Archaeologists. Francis Haverfield and the Invention of Romano-British Archaeology, Oxford: Oxbow. Fröhlich, Thomas (2007), “Das Deutsche Archäologische Institut in Rom in der Kriegs- und Nachkriegszeit bis zur Wiederöffnung 1953”, in: Michael Matheus (ed.), Deutsche Forschungs- und Kulturinstitute in Rom in der Nachkriegszeit, Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom 112, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 139–179. Fröhlich, Thomas (2008), “The Study of the Lombards and the Ostrogoths at the German Archaeological Institute of Rome, 1937–1943”, in: Natalie de Haan, Martin Eickhoff and Marjan Schwegman (eds.), Archaeology and National Identity in Italy and Europe 1800–1950, Turnhout: Brepols Publishers, 183–213. Fröhlich, Thomas (2012), “Armin von Gerkan (1884–1969)”, in: Gunnar Brands and Martin Maischberger (eds.), Lebensbilder. Klassische Archäologen und der Nationalsozialismus, Rahden/Westfahlen: Verlag Marie Leidorf, 91–106. Fögen, Thorsten and Warren, Richard (eds.) (2016), Graeco-Roman Antiquity and the Idea of Nationalism in the 19th Century. Case Studies, Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter.

302 

 Bibliography

Galinsky, Karl (ed.) (2014), Memoria Romana: Memory in Rome and Rome in Memory, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press for the American Academy in Rome. García Sánchez, Jorge (2010), “Roma y las academias internacionales”, in: Ricardo Olmos Romera, Trinidad Tortosa, Juan Pedro Bellón and Isaac Sastre de Diego (eds.), Repensar la Escuela del CSIC en Roma. Cien años de memoria, Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 77–108. Gasquet, Martine (ed.) (2011), C.U.M. Le Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen, Nice: Ville de Nice. Gentiloni Silveri, Umberto, Di Stefano, Andrea and Palermo, Stefano (eds.) (2011), Roma 4 giugno 1944/Rome 4 June 1944. La Liberazione a colori/The Liberation in Colour, Rome: Palombi Editori. Gerolymatos, André (2004), Red Acropolis, Black Terror: The Greek Civil War and the Origins of the Soviet-American Rivalry, 1943–1949, New York: Basic Books. Gex, Nicolas et al. (2016), La Fondation Hardt, Geneva: Librairie Droz. Giakovaki, Nasia (2006), Ευρώπη μέσω Ελλάδας. Μια καμπή στην ευρωπαϊκή αυτοσυνείδηση, 17ος–18ος αιώνας, Athens: Hestia Publishers. Giammellaro, Pietro (2012), “Biagio Pace e la Sicilia antica”, Studi storici 53, 2, 391–420. Gill, David W.J. (2002), “‘The Passion of Hazard’. Women at the British School at Athens before the First World War”, Annual of the British School at Athens 97, 491–510. Gill, David W.J. (2008), Students at the British School at Athens (1886–1914), Swansea: Ostraka Press. Gill, David W.J. (2011), Sifting the Soil of Greece: The Early Years of the British School at Athens (1886–1919), London: Institute of Classical Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London. Goldbrunner, Hermann M. (1990), “Von der Casa Tarpea zur Via Aurelia Antica. Zur Geschichte der Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom”, in: Reinhard Elze and Arnold Esch (eds.), Das Deutsche Historische Institut in Rom 1888–1988, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 33–86. Goldhahn, Joakim (2012), “Review: Evert Baudou Oscar Montelius–om tidens återkomst och kulturens vandringar”, Current Swedish Archaeology 20, 205–215. Grafton, Anthony (2004), “Introduction”, in: Jacob Burckhardt (ed.), The Civilisation of the Renaissance in Italy. An Essay, London: The Folio Society [1860], xxi–xxviii. Grafton, Anthony (2009), Worlds Made by Words. Scholarship and Community in the Modern West, Cambridge, Massachusetts & London: Harvard University Press. Grafton, Anthony, Most, Glenn W. and Settis, Salvatore (eds.) (2010), The Classical Tradition. Harvard University Press Reference Library, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Gran-Aymerich, Ève (1998), Naissance de l’archéologie moderne, 1798–1945, Paris: CNRS Éditions. Gran-Aymerich, Ève (2001), Dictionnaire biographique d’archéologie 1798–1945, Paris: CNRS Éditions. Gran-Aymerich, Ève (2007), Les Chercheurs de passé. 1798–1945. Aux sources de l’archéologie, Paris: CNRS Éditions. Gran-Aymerich, Ève and von Ungern-Sternberg, Jürgen (2012), L’Antiquité partagée. Correspondances franco-allemandes (1823–1861), Paris: Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Gras, Michel (2006), “L’École française de Rome”, Bilans échanges projets. La lettre de l’École française de Rome, 6, 1–2.

Bibliography 

 303

Gras, Michel and Poncet, Olivier (eds.) (2013), Construire l’institution. L’École française de Rome, 1873–1895, Rome: Publications de l’École française de Rome (available online: http://books.openedition.org/efr/2616). Greco, Emanuele (2012), “L’archeologia italiana nel Mediterraneo orientale dalla fine del XIX alla vigilia della II guerra mondiale”, in: Paolo Frascani (ed.), Nello specchio del mondo: l’immagine dell’Italia nella realtà internazionale, Naples: Presso l’Università degli Studi di Napoli “L’Orientale”, 375–387. Greco, Emanuele and Benvenuti, Alberto G (eds.) (2005), Scavando nel passato. 120 anni di archeologia italiana in Grecia, Athens: Scuola archeologica italiana di Atene. Greenaway, Frank (2006), Science International. A History of the International Council of Scientific Unions, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. Guarducci, Margherita (1996), “Per la storia dell’Istituto Archeologico Germanico”, in: Erland Billig, Carl Nylander and Paolo Vian (eds.), ”Nobile munus”. Origini e primi sviluppi dell’Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (1946–1953). Per la storia della collaborazione internazionale a Roma nelle ricerche umanistiche nel secondo dopoguerra, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma, 231–244. Guidi, Alessandro (1996), “Nationalism Without a Nation: The Italian Case”, in: Margarita Díaz-Andreu and Timothy Champion (eds.), Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe, Boulder: Westview Press, 108–118. Hall, Jonathan M. (2014), Artifact and Artifice. Classical Archaeology and the Ancient Historian, Chicago: Chicago University Press. Hamilakis, Yannis (2007), The Nation and Its Ruins: Antiquity, Archaeology, and National Imagination in Greece, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Hamilakis, Yannis and Yalouri, Eleana (1996), “Antiquities as Symbolic Capital in Modern Greek Society”, Antiquity 70, 117–129. Hamilakis, Yannis and Yalouri, Eleana (1999), “Sacralising the Past. Cults of Archaeology in Modern Greece”, Archaeological Dialogues 6, 2, 115–135. Hanink, Johanna (2017), The Classical Debt. Greek Antiquity in an Era of Austerity, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Hardwick, Lorna and Gillespie, Carol (eds.) (2007), Classics in Post-Colonial Worlds, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Hardwick, Lorna and Stray, Christopher (eds.) (2008), A Companion to Classical Receptions, Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Harris, Charles R.S. (1957), Allied Military Administration of Italy 1943–1945. History of the Second World War, United Kingdom Military Series, London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Hartmann, Jørgen Birkedal (1996), “Bibliotecari all’Hertziana. Accanto a Hoogewerff nella riapertura della biblioteca”, in: Erland Billig, Carl Nylander and Paolo Vian (eds.), “Nobile munus”. Origini e primi sviluppi dell’Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (1946–1953). Per la storia della collaborazione internazionale a Roma nelle ricerche umanistiche nel secondo dopoguerra, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma, 245–256. Haumesser, Laurent (2013), “Les débuts des études étrusques à l’École française de Rome. Auguste Geffroy et Vulci”, in: Michel Gras and Olivier Poncet (eds.), Construire l’institution. L’École française de Rome, 1873–1895, Rome: Publications de l’École française de Rome (available online: http://books.openedition.org/efr/2648).

304 

 Bibliography

Hawes, Charles Henry and Hawes, Harriet Boyd (1909), Crete, the Forerunner of Greece, London & New York: Harper & Brothers. Hellner, Nils (2015/2016), “Der Kernbau der Athener Abteilung”, DAI AtheNea (2015/2016), 12–17. Heuck Allen, Susan (ed.) (2002), Excavating our Past: Perspectives on the History of the Archaeological Institute of America, Colloquia and Conference Papers 5, Boston: Archaeological Institute of America. Heuck Allen, Susan (2011), Classical Spies. American Archaeologists with the OSS in World War II Greece, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press. Hill, Leonidas E. (1967), “The Vatican Embassy of Ernst Von Weiszäcker, 1943–1945”, Journal of Modern History 34, 138–159. Hillbom, Niklas and Rystedt, Eva (2009), Antikens kultur och samhällsliv i Lund. Hundra år av pedagogik och forskning 1909–2009, Lund: Lunds universitet. Hobhouse, Hermione (2004), The Crystal Palace and the Great Exhibition: Art, Science and Productive Industry. A History of the Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851, London: Continuum. Hobsbawm, Eric (1983), “Introduction: Inventing Tradition”, in: Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (eds.), The Invention of Tradition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–14. Holtorf, Cornelius (2007), Archaeology is a Brand! The Meaning of Archaeology in Contemporary Popular Culture, Oxford/Walnut Creek, CA: Archaeopress/Left Coast Press, 2007. Hood, Sinclair (2001), “Edith Clay (1910–2000)” (Obituary), Annual Report, British School at Athens (London), 2000–2001, 50–51. Hopkins, Andrew and Stamp, Gavin (eds.) (2002), Lutyens Abroad: The Work of Sir Edwin Lutyens Outside the British Isles, London: British School at Rome. Hubert, Hans W. (1997), Das Kunsthistorische Institut in Florenz. Von der Gründung bis zum hundertjährigen Jubiläum (1897–1997), Florence: Il Ventilabro. Huemer, Christina (ed.) (2005), Spellbound by Rome. The Anglo-American Community in Rome (1890–1914) and the Founding of Keats-Shelley House, Rome: Palombi Editori. Hughes, Robert (2011), Rome, London: Phoenix. Jacques, Annie, Verger, Stéphane and Virlouvet, Catherine (eds.) (2002), Italia Antiqua. Envois de Rome des architectes français en Italie et dans le monde méditerranéen aux XIXe et XXe siècles, Paris: École nationale supérieure des beaux-arts. Jantzen, Ulf (1986), Einhundert Jahre Athener Institut 1874–1974, Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Jemai, Slim (2017), Les arts plastiques à Nice dans l’entre-deux-guerres. Fondements et institutions, Nice: Serre Éditeur. Jens, Walter (1973), “The Classical Tradition in Germany: Grandeur and Decay”, in: Edgar J. Feuchtwanger (ed.), Upheaval and Continuity: A Century of German History, London: Wolff, 67–82. Johnson, Mark J. (1988), “Toward a History of Theoderic’s Building Program”, Dumbarton Oaks Papers 42, 73–96. Junker, Klaus (1997), Das Archäologische Institut des Deutschen Reiches zwischen Forschung und Politik. Die Jahre 1929 bis 1945, Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Junker, Klaus (1998), “Research under Dictatorship: The German Archaeological Institute 1929–1945”, Antiquity 72, 282–292. Kaeser, Marc-Antoine (2008), “Biography as Microhistory. The Relevance of Private Archives for Writing the History of Archaeology”, in: Nathan Schlanger and Jarl Nordbladh (eds.), Archives, Ancestors, Practices: Archaeology in the Light of its History, New York & Oxford: Berghahn Books, 9–20.

Bibliography 

 305

Kandler, Manfred and Wlach, Gudrun (eds.) (1998), 100 Jahre Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut, Sonderschriften 31, Wien: Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut. Kent, George O. (1964), “Pope Pius XII: Some Aspects of German-Vatican Relations, 1933–1943”, American Historical Review 70, 59–78. Kessel, Dmitri (1994), Elláda tou ’44, Athens: Ammos. Klinkhammer, Lutz (1992), “Die Abteilung ‘Kunstschutz’ der deutschen Militärvervaltung in Italien 1943–1945”, Quellen und Forschungen aus Italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken. Deutsches Historisches Institut Rom 72, 483–549. Klinkhammer, Lutz (2002), “Grossgrabung und grosse Politik”, in: Helmut Kyrieleis (ed.), Olympia 1875–2000. 125 Jahre Deutsche Ausgrabungen. Internationales Symposion. Berlin 9.–11. November 2000, Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 31–47. Kokkinidou, Dimitra and Nikolaidou, Marianna (2004), “On the Stage and Behind the Scenes: Greek Archaeology in Times of Dictatorship,” in: Michael A. Galaty and Charles Watkinson (eds.), Archaeology under Dictatorship, New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, 155–190. Kokkou, Angeliki (2009), Η μέριμνα για τις αρχαιότητες στην Ελλάδα και τα πρώτα μουσεία, Athens: Kapon Editions. Korka, Elena et al. (eds.) (2005), Foreign Archaeological Schools in Greece: 160 years, Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture. Korka, Elena et al. (eds.) (2007), Foreign Archaeological Schools in Greece: From the 19th to the 21st Century, Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture. L’Estrange, J. K. [Pseudonym?] (1930), “Louis Veuillot and Papal Rome”, New Blackfriars 11, 120, 165–170. La Rosa, Vincenzo (ed.) (1986), L’archeologia italiana nel Mediterraneo fino alla seconda guerra mondiale, Catania: Centro studi per l’archeologia greca del C.N.R. La Rosa, Vincenzo (ed.) (1995), All’ombra dell’Acropoli: generazioni di archeologi fra Grecia e Italia, Athens: Scuola archeologica italiana di Atene. Lamy, Jérôme (2013), “Thérèse Charmasson (dir.), Voyages et voyageurs. Sources pour l’histoire des voyages”, Cahiers d’histoire. Revue d’histoire critique [online], 121 (first appeared online 2014: http://journals.openedition.org/chrhc/3216). Lévin, Sonia (2012), “French archaeology abroad: a short history of its institutional and political framework”, in: Sjoerd van der Linde et al. (eds.), European Archaeology Abroad: Global Settings, Comparative Perspectives, Leiden: Sidestone Press, 51–66. Linker, Wayne A and Max, Jerry (eds.) (1995), American Academy in Rome. Celebrating a Century, New York: American Academy in Rome. Livadiotti, Monica and Rocco, Giorgio (eds.) (1996), La presenza italiana nel Dodecaneso tra il 1912 ed il 1948: la ricerca archeologica, la conservazione, la scelte progettuali, Catania: Edizioni del Prisma. Liversidge, Michael and Edwards, Catherine (1996), Imagining Rome: British Artists and Rome in the Nineteenth Century, London: Merrell Holberton. Loukaki, Argyro (1997), “Aesthetics, Bureaucracy, and the Politics of Patrimony: The Case of the Greek Central Archaeological Council”, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 15, 6, 679–705. Loukaki, Argyro (2008), Living Ruins, Value Conflicts, Aldershot & Burlington, VT: Ashgate. Lullies, Reinhard and Schiering, Wolfgang (eds.) (1988), Archäologenbildnisse. Porträts und Kurzbiographien von Klassischen Archäologen deutscher Sprache, Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern.

306 

 Bibliography

Lyons, Claire L, Papadopoulos, John K, Stewart, Lindsey S and Szegedy-Maszak, Andrew (2005), Antiquity & Photography. Early Views of Ancient Mediterranean Sites, Los Angeles: Getty Publications. MacKendrick, Paul (1983), The Mute Stones Speak: The Story of Archaeology in Italy, New York & London: W. W. Norton & Company. Magnusson, Börje and Ahlklo, Jan (eds.) (2010), L’Istituto svedese di studi classici a Roma = The Swedish Institute of Classical Studies in Rome, Rome: L’Istituto Svedese di Studi Classici a Roma. Maier, Charles S (2008), “Return to Rome: Half a Century of American Historiography in light of the 1955 Congress for International Historical Studies”, in: Hans Cools et al. (eds.), La storiografia tra passato e futuro. Il X Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche (Roma 1955) cinquant’anni dopo, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma, 189–211. Maier, Franz Georg (1992), Von Winckelmann zu Schliemann–Archäologie als Eroberungswissenschaft des 19. Jahrhunderts, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Maischberger, Martin (2002), “German Archaeology during the Third Reich, 1933–45: A case study based on archival evidence”, Antiquity 76, 209–218. Majanlahti, Anthony and Osti Guerrazzi, Amedeo (2010), Roma occupata 1943–1944. Itinerari, storie, immagini, Milano: il Saggiatore. Mallouchou-Tufano, Fani (2003), “From the 19th to the 21st Century: Metamorphoses of the Archaeological Landscape in Athens”, in: Manolis Korres, Charalambos Bouras, Timothy Cullen et al., Athens. From the Classical Period to the Present Day (5th century B.C.–A.D. 2000), Athens & New Castle, Delaware: Kotinos & Oak Knoll Press, 308–343. Mallouchou-Tufano, Fani (2007), “The vicissitudes of the Athenian Acropolis in the 19th century. From castle to monument”, in: Panos Valavanis et al., Great Moments in Greek Archaeology, Athens: Kapon Editions, 36–57. Manderscheid, Hubertus (2000), “Klaus Junker – Das Deutsche Archäologische Institut des Deutschen Reichs zwischen Forschung und Politik”, Journal für Kunstgeschichte, 3, 223–231. Marchand, Suzanne (1996), Down from Olympus. Archaeology and Philhellenism in Germany, 1750–1970, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Marchand, Suzanne (2000), “The End of Egyptomania: German Scholarship and the Banalization of Egypt, 1830–1914”, in: Wilfried Seipel (ed.), Ägyptomanie: Europäische Ägyptenimagination von der Antike bis heute, Milan & Vienna: Skira Editore & Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, 125–133. Marchand, Suzanne (2001), “German Orientalism and the Decline of the West”, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 145, 4, 465–473. Marchand, Suzanne (2007), “From Antiquarian to Archaeologist? Adolf Furtwängler and the Problem of ‘Modern’ Classical Archaeology”, in: Peter N Miller (ed.), Momigliano and Antiquarianism: Foundations of the Modern Cultural Sciences, Toronto, Buffalo & London: University of Toronto Press, 248–285. Marchand, Suzanne (2010), German Orientalism in the Age of Empire. Religion, Race, and Scholarship, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. Marinatos, Nanno (2015), Sir Arthur Evans and Minoan Crete. Creating the Vision of Knossos
, London: I.B. Tauris. Massari, Stefania (ed.) (2011), La Festa delle Feste. Roma e l’Esposizione Internazionale del 1911, Roma: Palombi Editori.

Bibliography 

 307

Matheus, Michael (ed.) (2007a), Deutsche Forschungs- Und Kulturinstitute in Rom in Der Nachkriegszeit, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Matheus, Michael (2007b), “Gestione autonoma. Zur Wiedereröffnung und Konsolidierung des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom (1953 bis 1961)”, in: Michael Matheus (ed.), Deutsche Forschungs- Und Kulturinstitute in Rom in Der Nachkriegszeit, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 99–125. Matheus, Michael (2013), “Deutsche Akteure im internationalen Kontext. Zu den Auseinandersetzungen um die deutschen Forschungsinstitute in Italien (1949–1953)”, in: Sibylle Ebert-Schifferer and Elisabeth Kieven (eds.), 100 Jahre Bibliotheca Hertziana. Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte. Die Geschichte des Instituts 1913–2013, München: Hirmer Verlag Gmbh, 124–143. Matheus, Michael (2015), Germania in Italia. L’incontro di storici nel contesto internazionale, Rome: Unione internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Matthaiou, Sofia (1999), Stephanos A. Koumanoudis 1818–1899, Athens: The Archaeological Society at Athens. Mauzy, Craig A (2006), Agora Excavations, 1931–2006. A Pictorial History, Athens: American School of Classical Studies. Mauzy, Marie (2008), “Inter Arma Caritas: The Swedish Red Cross in Greece in the 1940s”, in: Richard Clogg (ed.), Bearing Gifts to Greeks: Humanitarian Aid to Greece in the 1940s, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 97–112. Mazower, Mark (1993), Inside Hitler’s Greece: The Experience of Occupation, 1941–1944, New Haven: Yale University Press. McNeal, Richard A. (1991), “Archaeology and the Destruction of the Later Athenian Acropolis”, Antiquity 65, 246, 49–63. Medici, Lorenzo (2009), Dalla propaganda alla cooperazione: la diplomazia culturale italiana nel secondo dopoguerra (1944–1950), Padua: CEDAM. Medwid, Linda M. (2000), The Makers of Classical Archaeology: A Reference Work, Amherst, NY: Humanity Books. Merryman, John Henry (2000), Thinking About the Elgin Marbles. Critical Essays on Cultural Property, Art and Law, The Hague & Boston: Kluwer Law International. Meskell, Lynn (ed.) (1998), Archaeology Under Fire. Nationalism, Politics and Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, London & New York: Routledge. Miller, James Edward (1986), The United States and Italy, 1940–1950. The Politics and Diplomacy of Stabilization. Chapel Hill, NC & London: The University of North Carolina Press. Millett, Martin (2007), “What is Classical Archaeology?”, in: Susan E. Alcock and Robin Osborne (eds.), Classical Archaeology, Oxford: Blackwell, 30–50. Milliex, Roger (1996), “L’Institut français d’Athènes, fils spirituel de l’École française”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 69–82. Minner, Ina E. (2006), Ewig ein Fremder im fremden Lande. Ludwig Ross (1806–1859) und Griechenland. Biographie, Mannheim: Bibliopolis. Momigliano, Arnaldo (1955–2012), Contributo alla storia degli studi classici, Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura. Momigliano, Arnaldo (1980), “The Place of Ancient Historiography in Modern Historiography”, in: Willem den Boer (ed.), Entretiens, Tome XXVI, Les études classiques aux XIX e et XX e siècles: Leur place dans l’histoire des idées, Vandœuvres: Fondation Hardt, 127–157.

308 

 Bibliography

Montani, Giovanna (2008), “La Società degli Amatori e Cultori delle Belle Arti in Roma. 1829–1883”, PhD diss., Università degli studi di Roma Tre. Morgan, Catherine (2012), “The Foundation and Early Development of the British School at Athens, 1886–1900”, paper delivered at the conference “British-Greek Relations: aspects of their recent history.” Foundation of the Hellenic Parliament, 2–3 November 2012 (available online: https://www.academia.edu/14682963/ The_Foundation_and_Early_Development_of_the_British_School_at_Athens_1886-1900_ paper_delivered_at_the_conference_British-Greek_Relations_aspects_of_their_recent_ history_Foundation_of_the_Hellenic_Parliament_2–3_November_2012_). Morley, Neville (2009), Antiquity and Modernity, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Moro Abadía, Oscar (2006), “The History of Archaeology as a ‘Colonial Discourse’” Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 16, 2, 4–17. Moro Abadía, Oscar (2013), “The History of Archaeology as a Field: From Marginality to Recognition”, in: Stephen Chrisomalis and André Costopoulos (eds.), Human Expeditions. Inspired by Bruce Trigger, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 90–101. Morris, Ian (1994), “Archaeologies of Greece”, in: Ian Morris (ed.), Classical Greece: Ancient Histories and Modern Archaeologies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 8–47. Morris, Ian (2000), Archaeology as Cultural History. Words and Things in Iron Age Greece, Malden, MA & Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Mount, Ferdinand (2010), Full Circle. How the Classical World Came Back to Us, London: Simon & Schuster. Mouritsen, Henrik (2009), “Modern Nations and Ancient Models: Italy and Greece Compared”, in: Roderick Beaton and David Ricks (eds.), The Making of Modern Greece: Nationalism, Romanticism, & the Uses of the Past (1797–1896), Farnham: Ashgate, 43–49. Müller, Jan-Werner (ed.) (2002), Memory and Power in Post-war Europe: Studies in the Presence of the Past, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. Murray, Tim and Evans, Christopher (eds.) (2008), Histories of Archaeology. A Reader in the History of Archaeology, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Nelis, Jan (2011), “Le mythe de la romanité et la religion politique du fascisme Italien: nouvelles approches méthodologiques”, in: Jan Nelis (ed.), Receptions of Antiquity, Gent: Academia Press, 349–360. Niklasson, Elisabeth (2016), “Funding Matters: Archaeology and the Political Economy of the Past in the EU”, PhD diss., Stockholm Studies in Archaeology 66, Stockholm University. Nikolentzos, Kostantinos (2003), Aspects of archaeological policy management. The relations between the Greek Ministry of Culture, the Foreign Archaeological Schools and the Archaeological Society at Athens, Athens: National School of Public Administration. Nylander, Carl (1984), “Agne Hamrin – smålänning, världsmedborgare, romare”, Romhorisont 7, 13–14. Nylander, Carl (2002), “Humanister vid Medelhavet. Svenska Institutet i Rom 1926–2001”, in: Börje Magnusson (ed.), Humanist vid Medelhavet. Reflektioner och studier samlade med anledning av Svenska Institutet i Roms 75-årsjubileum, Skriftserie utgiven av Vänföreningarna för de svenska instituten i Rom och Athen 7, Stockholm: Rubicon, 345–384. Nylander, Carl and Vian, Paolo (1996), “Nobile munus”, in: Erland Billig, Carl Nylander and Paolo Vian (eds.), ”Nobile munus”. Origini e primi sviluppi dell’Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma (1946–1953). Per la storia della collaborazione internazionale a Roma nelle ricerche umanistiche nel secondo dopoguerra, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma, ix–xxiii.

Bibliography 

 309

Oliv, Josef (1972), Vägen till San Michele, Stockholm: Bonniers. Olivier-Ghauri, Frédérique (2013), À la recherche de J.J.H. Bouchon auteur de ‘L’Allégorie de la Méditerranée’ dans l’Amphiteâtre du C.U.M.”, Recherches Régionales 204 (Archives départementales du CG06, 2013), 53-64 (available online: https://www.departement06.fr/ documents/Import/decouvrir-les-am/recherchesregionales204_04.pdf). Olivier-Ghauri, Frédérique (2016), “Les secrets de l’Allégorie de la Méditerranée de J. JH. Bouchon”, in: Frédérique Olivier-Ghauri, et al. (eds.), Le C.U.M. Un écrin art déco pour la pensée méditerranéenne, Nice: Ville de Nice, 47–74. Olivier-Ghauri, Frédérique et al. (eds.) (2015), Passion Méditerranée. Actes du colloque littéraire, Nice: Ville de Nice. Olivier-Ghauri, Frédérique et al. (2016a), Le C.U.M. de la Mer … à la Mer, Nice: Ville de Nice. Olivier-Ghauri, Frédérique et al. (2016b), Le C.U.M. Un écrin art déco pour la pensée méditerranéenne, Nice: Ville de Nice. Olmos Romera, Ricardo, Tortosa, Trinidad, Bellón, Juan Pedro and Sastre de Diego, Isaac (eds.) (2010), Repensar la Escuela del CSIC en Roma. Cien años de memoria, Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Pade, Marianne (ed.) (2011), On Renaissance Academies. Proceedings of the International Conference “From the Roman Academy to the Danish Academy in Rome/Dall’accademia romana all’accademia di Danimarca a Roma”, The Danish Academy in Rome, 11–13 October 2006, Analecta Romana Instituti Danici. Supplementum. Rome: Edizioni Quasar. Painter, Borden W, Jr. (2005), Mussolini’s Rome: Rebuilding the Eternal City, New York & Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Palermo, Dario (2012), “Biagio Pace e l’archeologia in Sicilia nella prima metà del ’900”, Annali della Facoltà di Scienze della Formazione, Università di Catania 11, 3–12. Palombi, Domenico (2006), Rodolfo Lanciani. L’archeologia a Roma tra Ottocento e Novecento. Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider. Pasquali, Michela (ed.) (2003), The Gardens of Diplomacy: Foreign Embassies and Academies in Rome, Milan: Electa. Pavone, Claudio (2004), “Introduction. Hidden pages of contemporary Italian history”, Journal of Modern Italian Studies 9, 271–279. Penttinen, Arto (2014b), “Arkeologi i juntans Grekland”, in: Frederick Whitling (ed.), Svensk antikforskning vid Medelhavet. Gustaf VI Adolf och fältarkeologi i historiskt perspektiv, Stockholm: Kungl. Vitterhetsakademien, 101–105. Penttinen, Arto (2014a), Staden, guden och havet. En berättelse om Poseidons helgedom i Kalaureia efter de andra svenska utgrävningarna, 1997–2012. Slutrapport från ett forskningsprogram, Göteborg & Stockholm: Makadam förlag. Pernier, Luigi (1920), “La scuola archeologica italiana di Atene (1910–1920)”, Emporium, 52, 307–308, 46–47. Perret, Noëlle-Laetitia (2014), L’Institut suisse de Rome. Entre culture, politique et diplomatie, Neuchâtel: Éditions Alphil-Presses universitaires suisses. Petrakos, Vassileios (1987), Hē en Athēnais Archaiologikē Hetaireia: hē historia tōn 150 chronōn tēs, 1837–1987, Athens: En Athēnais Archaiologikē Hetaireia. Petrakos, Vassileios (1994), “Τά ἀρχαῖα τῆς Ἑλλάδος κατά τόν πόλεμο 1940–1944”, Ὁ Μέντωρ 30, 69–184. Petrakos, Vassileios (1995), Hē peripeteia tēs Hellēnikēs archaiologias ston vio tou Chrēstou Karouzou, Athens: Archaiologikē Hetaireias.

310 

 Bibliography

Petrakos, Vassileios (2007), “The Stages of Greek Archaeology”, in: Panos Valavanis et al., Great Moments in Greek Archaeology, Athens: Kapon Editions, 18–33. Petrucciani, Alberto (2007), “Le biblioteche italiane durante la guerra: I servizi al pubblico”, in: Andrea Capaccioni, Andrea Paoli and Ruggero Ranieri (eds.), Le biblioteche e gli archivi durante la seconda guerra mondiale: Il caso italiano, Bologna: Edizioni Pendragon, 99–141. Petter, Hugh (1992), Lutyens in Italy. The building of the British School at Rome, British School at Rome Archive, 3, London: The British School at Rome. Pfeiffer, Rudolf (1968), History of Classical Scholarship from the beginnings to the end of the Hellenistic Age, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pfeiffer, Rudolf (1976), History of Classical Scholarship from 1300 to 1850, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pihl Atmer, Ann-Katrin, Carlens, Brita and Lång, Fredrik, Till Rom – Nordiska konstnärer i Rom under 150 år, Stockholm: Carlsson Bokförlag. Platnauer, Maurice (ed.) (1954), Fifty Years of Classical Scholarship, Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Politi, Maria L., Pappa, Eleni (2011), Exploring Greek Manuscripts in the Gennadius Library, translated by John C. Davis and Elizabeth Key Fowden, Princeton, New Jersey: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Pollard, John F. (1985), The Vatican and Italian Fascism, 1929–32. A Study in Conflict, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pollard, John F. (2005), Money and the Rise of the Modern Papacy. Financing the Vatican, 1850–1950, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. Pruvot Martin, Chantal, Reber, Karl and Theurillat, Thierry (eds.) (2010), Cité sous terre: des archéologues suisses explorent la cité grecque d’Erétrie, Gollion: Infolio éditions. Pugliese Carratelli, Giovanni (2005), “Ricordo di Mario Segre (Torino 1904–Auschwitz 1944)”, Bollettino d’Arte 133–134, 1–2. Reed, Victoria (2014), “Ardelia Hall: From Museum of Fine Arts to Monuments Woman”, International Journal of Cultural Property 21, 1, 79–93. Regin, Cornelia (1998), Tesori di carta. Guida agli archivi e alle collezioni degli istituti membri dell’Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Reid, Donald M. (1996), “Cromer and the Classics: Imperialism, Nationalism and the Greco-Roman Past in Modern Egypt”, Middle Eastern Studies 32, 1–29. Rémond, René (1987), “Le Saint Siège et la guerre pendant la Seconde Guerre Mondiale”, in: VV.AA., Les Internationales et le problème de la guerre au XXè siècle. Actes du colloque de Rome (22–24 novembre 1984). Publications de l’École française de Rome 95, Rome: L’École française de Rome, 139–149. Ridley, Ronald T. (1986), “Augusti manes volitant per auras: The Archaeology of Rome under the Fascists”, Xenia 11, 19–46. Ridley, Ronald T. (1992), The Eagle and the Spade. The Archaeology of Rome During the Napoleonic Era 1809–1814, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ridley, Ronald T. (1996), “The Founding of the German Archaeological Institute: Unpublished Documents”, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Römische Abteilung 103, 275–294. Ridley, Ronald T. (2000), The Pope’s Archaeologist. The Life and Times of Carlo Fea, Rome: Edizioni Quasar.

Bibliography 

 311

Rietbergen, Peter (2012), Rome and the World – The World in Rome. The Politics of International Culture, 1911–2011, Dordrecht: Republic of Letters Publishing. Rischbieter, Julia Laura (2004), Henriette Hertz: Mäzenin und Gründerin der Bibliotheca Hertziana in Rom, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Rizzo, Raffaella (ed.) (2010), Accademie svelate. Tradizione e attualità delle Accademie straniere nel Lazio, Rome: Itinera Comunicazione. Roland-Martin, Marguerite (1996), “Souvenirs d’une femme de membre (1939–1945)”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 101–126. Rosetti, Anna Maria (2010), “Federico Pfister primo Segretario Generale dell’AIAC. Una straordinaria personalità dimenticata”, AIACNews 3, 6–12. Rupp, David W. (2013), “Mutually Antagonistic Philhellenes: Edward Capps and Bert Hodge Hill at the American School of Classical Studies and Athens College”, Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 82, 1, 67–99. Säflund, Gösta (1932), Le mura di Roma repubblicana. Saggio di archeologia Romana, Acta Instituti Romani regni Sueciae. Series prima in 4°, vol. I, Lund: Gleerup. Said, Edward W. (1978), Orientalism, New York: Pantheon Books. Sakellariadi, Anastasia (2008), “Public Challenges and the Private Ways of State Archaeology: the Case of Greece”, Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 10, 4, 320–329. Santillo Frizell, Barbro (2003), “1903–2003: Due centenari all’Istituto Svedese: Erik Sjöqvist e Gösta Säflund”, Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Annuario 45, 165–171 Santoro, Stefano (2005), L’Italia e l’Europa orientale. Diplomazia culturale e propaganda 1918–1943, Milano: FrancoAngeli, 283–295. Schallin, Ann-Louise (2013), “Introduction”, in: Ann-Louise Schallin (ed.), Perspectives on Ancient Greece. Papers in Celebration of the 60th Anniversary of the Swedish Institute at Athens, Stockholm: Svenska institutet i Athen, 9–18. Scheffer, Charlotte (2000), “Studying Classical Archaeology and Ancient History in Sweden”, Current Swedish Archaeology 8, 195–208. Schiering, Wolfgang (1969), “Zur Geschichte der Archäologie”, in: Ulrich Hausmann (ed.), Allgemeine Grundlagen der Archäologie. Begriff und Methode, Geschichte, Problem der Form, Schriftzeugnisse, Handbuch der Archäologie, München: C. H. Beck, 11–161. Schlanger, Nathan (2012), Sjoerd van der Linde, Sjoerd van der Linde et al. (eds.), European Archaeology Abroad: Global Settings, Comparative Perspectives, Leiden: Sidestone Press, 21–31. Schmid, Martin (1996), “Les bâtiments de l’École française d’Athènes et leur évolution”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 127–151. Schnapp, Alain (1996), The Discovery of the Past: The Origins of Archaeology, London: British Museum Press. Schnapp, Alain (2002), “Between Antiquarians and Archaeologists—Continuities and Ruptures,” Antiquity 76, 134–140. Schnapp, Alain (2013), “Ruines, permanence de l’impermanence: un essai de conclusion”, in: Karolina Kaderka (ed.), Les Ruines. Entre destruction et construction de l’Antiquité à nos jours, Rome: Campisano Editore, 199–206. Schnapp, Alain and Tiews, Matthew (2004), “Eduard Gerhard: Founder of Classical Archaeology?”, Modernism/modernity 11, 1, 169–171. Schnapp, Jeffrey, Shanks, Michael and Tiews, Matthew (2004), “Archaeology, Modernism, Modernity”, Modernism/modernity 11, 1 (Special Issue: “Archaeologies of the Modern”), 1–16.

312 

 Bibliography

Schröder-Gudehus, Brigitte (1982), “Division of Labour and the Common Good: The International Association of Academies, 1899–1914”, in: Carl Gustaf Bernhard, Elisabeth Crawford and Per Sörbom (eds.), Science, Technology and Society in the Time of Alfred Nobel, Oxford & New York: Pergamon Press. Schröder-Gudehus, Brigitte (1990), “Nationalism and Internationalism”, in: Robert Cecil Olby et al. (eds.), Companion to the History of Modern Science, London & New York: Routledge. Schücker, Nina (2012), “Warum in die Ferne schweifen? An overview of German archaeology abroad”, in: Sjoerd van der Linde et al. (eds.), European archaeology abroad: Global settings, comparative perspectives, Leiden: Sidestone Press, 157–190. Schulz, Juergen (2004), The New Palaces of Medieval Venice, Pennsylvania, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Scott, Russell T., Rosenthal, Paul and Emiliani, Vittorio (1996), The Academy & the Forum. One Hundred Years in the Eternal City, New York: American Academy in Rome. Seidel, Max (ed.) (1999), Storia dell’arte e politica culturale intorno al 1900. La fondazione dell’Istituto Germanico di Storia dell’Arte di Firenze, Venice: Marsilio Editore. Serlupi Crescenzi, Maria and Calvano, Teresa (eds.) (1980), 1940–1945. Arte in fuga, arte salvata, arte perduta: le città italiane tra Guerra e Liberazione, Città del Vaticano: Edizioni Musei Vaticani. Settis, Salvatore (ed.) (1993), L’archeologia italiana dall’Unità al novecento, Ricerche di Storia dell’Arte 50, Rome: La Nuova Italia Scientifica. Settis, Salvatore (2006), The Future of the “Classical”. Cambridge & Malden, MA: Polity Press [2004]. Shoe Merritt, Lucy (1984), History of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens 1939–1980, Princeton, New Jersey: American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Siapkas, Johannes (2016), “Skulls from the Past: Archaeological Negotiations of Scientific Racism” Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 26, 1: 7, 1–9. Silberman, Neil Asher, Alexander A. Bauer, Cornelius Holtorf, Margarita Díaz-Andreu García, Emma Waterton (eds.) (2012), The Oxford Companion to Archaeology, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Simon, Hertha (1973), Gelehrtenbriefe im Archiv des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts zu Berlin: ein Verzeichnis, Berlin: Wasmuth. Smith, Christopher J. (2012), “A Hundred Years of Roman History: Historiography and Intellectual Culture”, Papers of the British School at Rome 80, 295–323. Smyth, Craig Hugh (1988), Repatriation of Art from the Collection Point in Munich after World War II. Background and Beginnings with Reference Especially to the Netherlands, Maarssen: G. Schwartz. Snodgrass, Anthony M. (1987), An Archaeology of Greece. The Present State and Future Scope of a Discipline, Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press. Stavrinou, Miranda (1996), “Gustave Fougères, l’École française d’Athènes et la propagande en Grèce durant les années 1917–1918”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 83–99. Stehlin, Stewart A. (1984), Weimar and the Vatican, 1919–1933. German-Vatican Relations in the Interwar Years, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Stehlin, Stewart A. (2009), “Der Heilige Stuhl Und Die Weimarer Republik”, in: Wolfram Pyta, Carsten Kretschmann, Giuseppe Ignesti and Tiziana Di Maio (eds.), Die Herausforderung Der Diktaturen. Katholizismus in Deutschland und Italien 1918–1943/45, Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 65–76.

Bibliography 

 313

Stoneman, Richard (2010), Land of Lost Gods: The Search for Classical Greece, London & New York: I.B. Tauris. Stray, Christopher (1998), Classics Transformed. Schools, Universities and Society in England, 1830–1960, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Stray, Christopher (2010), “‘Patriots and Professors’: A Century of Roman Studies”, The Journal of Roman Studies 100, 1–31. Stray, Christopher (2013), Sophocles’ Jebb: A Life in Letters, Cambridge Classical Journal Supplement 38, Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society. Styrenius, Carl-Gustaf (1974), “Swedish Institute in Athens 1948–1973”, Medelhavsmuseet, Bulletin 9, 75–80. Styrenius, Carl-Gustaf (1998), Asine. En svensk utgrävningsplats i Grekland/A Swedish Excavation Site in Greece, Stockholm: Medelhavsmuseet. Styrenius, Carl-Gustaf (2016), Arbete med lokalfrågor i Antikens tjänst, Uppsala: Åströms förlag. Sünderhauf, Esther (2004), Griechensehnsucht und Kulturkritik. Die deutsche Rezeption von Winckelmanns Antikenideal 1840–1945, Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Tat, Celeste (1999), “Foreign Institutes in Athens. A Comparative analysis to scientific and cultural institutes in Athens”, (MA) thesis, University of Amsterdam. Thoenes, Christof (1991), “Geschichte des Instituts”, in: Ulrike Emrich (ed.), Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Berichte und Mitteilungen, Rome: Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut, 9–35. Thomas, Jean (1962), U.N.E.S.C.O., Paris: Gallimard. Thornton, Amara (2018), Archaeologists in Print. Publishing for the People, London: UCL Press. Traill, David A (1996), Schliemann of Troy. Treasure and Deceit, London: Penguin Books. Travaglini, Carlo M (ed.) (2007), Trastevere: Società e trasformazioni urbane dall’ottocento ad oggi: Catalogo della mostra, Museo di Roma in Trastevere, 15 dicembre 2007–24 marzo 2008, American Academy in Rome, 14 febbraio–15 marzo 2008, Rome: CROMA. Trigger, Bruce (1978), Time and Traditions. Essays in Archaeological Interpretation, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Trümpler, Charlotte (ed.) (2008), Das Große Spiel. Archäologie und Politik zur Zeit des Kolonialismus, Köln: DuMont Verlag. Turcuş, Veronica (2011), “Prolegomeni alla costruzione dell’Accademia di Romania a Roma”, Ephemeris Dacoromana 13, 247–286. Tziovas, Dimitris (ed.) (2014), Re-imagining the Past. Antiquity and Modern Greek Culture, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Valavanis, Panos (2007), “Introduction”, in: Panos Valavanis et al., Great Moments in Greek Archaeology, Athens: Kapon Editions, 13–15. Valenti, Catherine (1994), “Les membres de L’École française d’Athènes: Étude d’une élite universitaire (1846–1970)”, Université de Provence Aix – Marseille. Valenti, Catherine (1996), “Les membres de L’École française d’Athènes: Étude d’une élite universitaire (1846–1970)”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 157–172. Valenti, Catherine (2000), “L’École française d’Athènes (1846–1981): Histoire d’une grande institution universitaire”, Université de Provence Aix – Marseille. Valenti, Catherine (2003), “L’École française d’Athènes au cœur des relations francohelléniques, 1846–1946”, Revue d’histoire moderne et contemporaine 50, 4, 92–107. Valenti, Catherine (2006), L’École française d’Athènes, Paris: Éditions Belin. Valentine, Lucia N and Valentine, Alan Chester (1973), The American Academy in Rome, 1894–1969, Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.

314 

 Bibliography

van Bommel, Bas (2015), Classical Humanism and the Challenge of Modernity. Debates on Classical Education in 19th-Century Germany, Philologus. Zeitschrift für antike Literatur und ihre Rezeption. Supplemente 1, Berlin, Munich & Boston: De Gruyter. Veronelli, Giorgio (ed.) (2001), Della Seta oggi. Da Lemnos a Casteggio, Atti della giornata di studi, Casteggio, 21 Marzo 1999, Milano: Edizioni enerre. Vian, Paolo (ed.) (1993), Speculum mundi. Roma centro internazionale di ricerche umanistiche, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Vian, Paolo (ed.) (1996), “Hospes eras, civem te feci”. Italiani e non Italiani a Roma nell’ambito delle ricerche umanistiche, Rome: Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia, Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Vian, Paolo (2008), “Biblioteche e archivi durante la seconda guerra mondiale. Il caso Italiano”, Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Annuario 50, 219–230. Vigener, Marie (2010), “Der ‘gegebene Ortsgruppenleiter’? Ein Archäologe in der Auslandsorganisation der NSDAP in Rom”, Das Altertum 55, 127–142. Vigener, Marie (2012a), “Ein wichtiger kulturpolitischer Faktor”. Das Deutsche Archäologische Institut zwischen Wissenschaft, Politik und Öffentlichkeit, 1918–1954, Rahden/Westfahlen: Verlag Marie Lehdorf. Vigener, Marie (2012b), “Siegfried Fuchs (1903–1978)”, in: Gunnar Brands and Martin Maischberger (eds.), Lebensbilder. Klassische Archäologen und der Nationalsozialismus, Rahden/Westfahlen: Verlag Marie Leidorf, 223–236. Visser, Edzard (2014), “Istituto (Nazionale) di Studi Romani (CT)”, in: Hubert Cancik and Helmuth Schneider (eds.), Brill’s New Pauly (antiquity volumes), Brill Online. (available online: http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/brill-s-new-pauly/istitutonazionale-di-studi-romani-ct-e1406850, first appeared online 2006). Viviers, Didier (1996), “Un enjeu de politique scientifique: la Section étrangère de l’École française d’Athènes”, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique 120, 1, 173–190. vom Bruch, Rüdiger (2002), “Internationale Forschung, Staatsinteresse und Parteipolitik. Die Olympia-Ausgrabung als frühe Phase deutscher auswärtiger Kulturpolitik”, in: Helmut Kyrieleis (ed.), Olympia 1875–2000. 125 Jahre Deutsche Ausgrabungen. Internationales Symposion. Berlin 9.–11. November 2000, Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 9–17. Voutsaki, Sofia (2003), “Archaeology and the Construction of the Past in NineteenthCentury Greece”, in: Hero Hokwerda (ed.), Constructions of Greek Past. Identity and Historical Consciousness from Antiquity to the Present, Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 231–255. VV.AA. (1975), L’École française de Rome, 1875–1975: Exposition organisée à l’occasion de son centenaire. Paris, Hôtel de Rohan, Archives de France, Rome, Piazza Navona, Paris: Archives de France. VV.AA. (1977), Tables des Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire. Tables des tomes 1-82 (1881–1970), Rome: École française de Rome. VV.AA. (1978), Kunstakademiets Bibliotek: Fotografernes Rom. Pius IX’s tid. Fotografier 1846–78 fra danske og romerske samlinger, Copenhagen: Thorvaldsens Museum. VV.AA. (1984), Creta antica: cento anni di archeologia italiana (1884–1984), Rome: De Luca. VV.AA. (1987), Annuaire des membres (1873–1986), Rome: École française de Rome. VV.AA. (1997), Liste des membres et anciens membres, Rome: École française de Rome.

Bibliography 

 315

VV.AA. (2000), The Foreign Schools of Athens: The Australian Archaeological Institute at Athens in Context, Sydney: The Australian Archaeological Institute at Athens. VV.AA. (2008a), Un terreno adatto in Valle Giulia. L’accademia austriaca a Roma. 70 anni in Viale Bruno Buozzi 113, Rome: Forum Austriaco di Cultura. VV.AA. (2008b), “Palazzo Vidoni dal ’500 ad oggi”, Rome: Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Dipartimento della funzione pubblica. Wallace-Hadrill, Andrew (ed.) (2001), The British School at Rome. One Hundred Years, London: The British School at Rome at The British Academy, London SW1Y 5 AH. Walldén, Axel Sotiris (2016), From Lapland to the Acropolis. The European Itinerary of a Swede in the 20th Century, Malmö: Publit [Greek edition, Idem (2017): Από τη Λαπωνία στην Ακρόπολη. Η ευρωπαϊκή διαδρομή ενός Σουηδού στον 20ό αιώνα, Athens: Polis]. Walldén, Axel Sotiris (ed.) (2017), Η Ανθρωπιστική Βοήθεια στην Κατοχική Ελλάδα. Η Σουηδική Αποστολή του Ερυθρού Σταυρού 1942–1945, Athens: Themelio. Waterhouse, Helen (1986), The British School at Athens. The First Hundred Years, Supplementary volume (British School at Athens) 19, London: British School at Athens. Watkinson, Charles (2006), “Pseudoarchaeology and Nationalism”, in: Garrett G Fagan (ed.), Archaeological Fantasies: How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public, London: Routledge, 154–179. Wells, Berit (1998), Life around an excavation: Hē zōē gyrō apo mia anaskaphē: Aithousa technēs Naupliou 24.10–14.11.1998 [exhibition and catalogue: Berit Wells], Athens: The Swedish Institute at Athens. Wells, Berit (2002), “The Prehistory of the Swedish Institute at Athens”, in: Berit Wells (ed.), New Research on Old Material from Asine and Berbati in Celebration of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Swedish Institute at Athens, Stockholm: Svenska institutet i Athen, 9–22. Wells, Berit and Penttinen, Arto (2005), On Site: Swedish Archaeologists in Greece, Athens: Motibo Books. Weststeijn, Arthur and Whitling, Frederick (2017), Termini. Cornerstone of Modern Rome, Rome: Edizioni Quasar. Whitley, James (2003), “Classical archaeology and British identity: The role of the British School at Athens”, Pharos: Journal of the Netherlands Institute in Athens 11, 95–111. Whitling, Frederick (2008), “The Unione in 1946: Reflections on Academic Diplomacy and International Collaboration”, Unione Internazionale degli Istituti di Archeologia Storia e Storia dell’Arte in Roma. Annuario 50, 203–218. Whitling, Frederick (2009), “Memory, history and the classical tradition”, European Review of History: Revue européenne d’histoire 16, 235–253. Whitling, Frederick (2010), “The Western Way. Academic Diplomacy: Foreign Academies and the Swedish Institute in Rome, 1935–1953”, PhD diss., European University Institute. Whitling, Frederick (2011), “Relative Influence: Scholars, Institutions and Academic Diplomacy in Post-War Rome. The Case of the German Libraries (1943–53)”, The International History Review 33, 645–668. Whitling, Frederick (2016a), “The Library of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Rom and Perceptions of German Scholarship”, in: Fernando Clara and Cláudia Ninhos (eds.), Nazi Germany and Southern Europe, 1933–45. Science, Culture and Politics, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 141–152.

316 

 Bibliography

Whitling, Frederick (2016b), “Einar Gjerstad, Erik Sjöqvist och Svenska Institutet i Athen”, in: Bodil Nordström-Karydakis and Ann-Louise Schallin (eds.), Svunna ögonblick. Svenskars möten med Grekland, Skellefteå: Artos & Norma Bokförlag, 205–222. Windholz, Angela (2008), Et in Academia Ego. Ausländische Akademien in Rom zwischen künstlerischer Standortbestimmung und nationaler Repräsentation, Regensburg: Verlag Schnell & Steiner GmbH. Wiseman, Timothy Peter (1990), A Short History of the British School at Rome, London: The British School at Rome at The British Academy, 10 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5 AH. Wittwer, Samuel (2012), “Vision and duty: Friedrich Wilhelm IV of Prussia and the arts in the early Victorian era”, Susanna Avery-Quasch (ed.), London: Royal Collection Trust. Yates, Frances Amelia (1983), “The Italian Academies”, in: Frances Amelia Yates, Renaissance and Reform: The Italian Contribution. Collected Essays, Volume II, London, Boston, Melbourne and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Yegül, Fikret K. (1991), Gentlemen of Instinct and Breeding. Architecture at the American Academy in Rome, 1894–1940, Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. Ziemke, Earl Frederick (1975), The U.S. Army in the Occupation of Germany, 1944–1946, Army Historical Studies, Washington, D.C.: Center of Military History, US Army. Zois, Antonis (1990), H Αρχαιολογία φτηυ Ελλαδα. Πραγματικότητɛs κου Προοπτιɛs [Archaeology in Greece. Realities and Prospects], Athens: Polytypo. Åkerström, Åke (1973), Svenska Institutet i Athen: Ett jubileum och en återblick, Gothenburg: Riksföreningen för svenskhetens bevarande i utlandet. Östenberg, Carl Eric (ed.) (1976), Svenska Institutet i Rom 1926–1976, Rome: Svenska Institutet i Rom.

Name Index Akurgal, Ekrem 200 Albareda, Joaquin 251, 288 Aldrich, Chester Holmes 88, 89, 107, 108, 115, 118, 136, 137, 138, 139 Alfonso XIII, king of Spain 281 Amelung, Walther 81 Ashby, Thomas 69, 186 Ashmole, Bernard 185, 194 Baethgen, Friedrich 230, 232 Bartoli, Alfonso 113 Belios, Konstantinos 25 Benakis, Antonis 124, 126, 131, 244, 268 Benedict XIV, pope 19 Berenson, Bernard 196, 229, 230, 286 Bergman, Johan 31 Bianchi Bandinelli, Ranuccio 172, 179, 200 Billig, Erland 161, 171, 172, 288 Billig, Ragnhild 171, 172 Blacas, count (Pierre Louis Jean Casimir de Blacas) 20–21, 224 Bloch, Raymond 179 Böckh, August 15 Boëthius, Axel 91, 93, 96, 99, 101, 107, 108, 109, 159, 178, 200, 289 Bonaparte, Napoleon 19, 47, 48, 278 Bonner, Paul Hyde 196, 229 Bormann, Martin 225 Bottai, Giuseppe 125, 127 Brøndsted, Peter Oluf 18 Broneer, Oscar 142, 192, 284 Brown, Frank Edward 190, 231 Bruce, Thomas, 7th Earl of Elgin 18, 43, 123 Bruhns, Leo 153, 154, 155, 224, 225, 226, 227, 231, 236, 251, 252, 253, 254, 256 Bunsen, Christian Karl Josias 224 von Bunsen, Chrisian Karl Josias 21, 224, 226 Burnouf, Émile-Louis 48, 55 Caetani Lovatelli, Ersilia 17 Calza, Guido 101 Capps, Edward 141, 143, 284 Caputo, Giacomo 108 Carcopino, Jérôme 110, 112, 113, 114, 175 https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110602531-013

Carter, Edward Julian 195, 274, 283 Carter, Jesse Benedict 79, 80 Caylus, count (Anne-Claude-Philippe de Tubières, de Grimoard, de Pestels, de Lévis, comte de Caylus) 15 Chamberlain, Neville 115 Chamonard, Joseph 238 Clay, Edith 35, 140, 160 Cockerell, Charles Robert 18, 19 Colbert, Jean-Baptiste 13 Collingwood, Robin George 69 Cook, John Manuel 184 Costantini, David 97, 99, 101 Croce, Benedetto 80, 81, 236, 271 Crous, Jan W. 153, 156, 224, 252–258 Curie, Marie 210 Currie, Philip Henry Wodehouse 67 Curtius, Ludwig 101, 107, 108, 109, 164, 225, 226, 256, 284 Daux, Georges 201 Davis, Arthur Vining 151 Dawkins, Richard MacGillivray 238 De’ Pizzicolli, Ciriaco 15 De Sanctis, Gaetano 235 Deichmann, Friedrich Wilhelm 152, 252–258 Della Seta, Alessandro 31, 32, 82, 102, 103, 111, 117, 124, 126, 127, 128, 129, 140, 244, 248 Demangel, Robert 37, 85, 129, 139, 148, 182, 183, 201, 250, 265–270, 285 DeWald, Ernest Theodore 21, 162, 163, 165, 188, 259, 289 Dinsmoor, William Bell 116, 173 Donnan, Frederick George 77 Dörpfeld, Wilhelm 70, 131, 130, 238, 247, 248 Duchesne, Louis 68 Dunbabin, Thomas James 184 Evans, Arthur 185 Fea, Carlo 21, 224 Ficino, Marsilio 13 Filipetto, Gino 172

318 

 Name Index

Foster, John 18 Frantz, Alison 269 Frederica, queen of Greece 231 Friedrich Wilhelm, king of Prussia 22, 23, 94, 223, 224, 236 Fuchs, Siegfried 146, 153, 204, 252, 253, 255, 256 Fuhrmann, Heinrich 226, 227, 252, 254, 258 Furtwängler, Adolf 70 Galassi Paluzzi, Carlo 96 Gaselee, Stephen 145 Gebauer, Kurt 142 Gennadius, Joannes 86, 87, 90, 144, 193 George II, king of Greece 115, 123, 124, 130, 131 Gerhard, Eduard 18, 19, 21, 22, 50, 224, 233 von Gerkan, Armin 153, 156, 157, 227, 251–257 Giglioli, Giulio 34 Gilliéron, Émile 131, 244 Giustinian, Marcantonio 46 Gjerstad, Einar 102, 142, 191, 192, 288 Gladstone, William Ewart 65 von Goethe, Johann Wolfgang 233 Gonella, Guido 231 Gregory XVI, pope 20, 223 Grenier, Albert 25, 163, 168, 175, 178, 179, 198, 228, 270 Gsell, Stéphane 57 Gustaf VI Adolf, king of Sweden 83, 84, 91, 94, 101, 130, 192, 275, 284, 288 Halbherr, Federico 73 von Hallerstein, Carl Haller 18 Hammond, Mason 188 Hampe, Roland 161 Haverfield, Francis John 69 Helbig, Wolfgang 17 Herbig, Reinhard 248 von Herder, Johan Gottfried 233 Hewlett, James Monroe 80, 89, 95 Hill, Bert Hodge 238 Hitler, Adolf 112, 153, 253, 254 Hobhouse, John Cam 44 Holleaux, Maurice 266 Holmberg, Erik J. 192

Homann-Wedeking, Ernst 157, 257 Homolle, Théodore 285 Homolle, Théophile 47, 48, 70, 266 Hoppenstedt, Werner 225, 253, 254, 256 von Humboldt, Alexander 223 von Humboldt, Wilhelm 19 Immerwahr, Henry 117 Jantzen, Ulf 161 Jebb, Richard Claverhouse 64–65 Johnson, Allan Chester 289 Johnson, Harold F. 188 Josi, Enrico 172 Kapodistrias, Ioannis 27 Karo, Georg 90, 239, 249 Karousos, Christos 268, 269 Kavvadias, Panayiotis 69, 70, 71, 72, 124, 238, 239 Keramopoullos, Antonios Demetriou 131, 241, 243 von Kessel, Albrecht 253, 255, 257 Kesselring, Albert 225 Kestner, August 18, 224 Kjellberg, Lennart 90 von Klenze, Leo 224 Koës, Georg 18 Kolbe, Walther 248 Koumanoudis, Stephanos 26, 28 Krischen, Friedrich 146, 204 Kübber, Edgar 204, 253, 256 Kübler, Karl 249 Kunze, Emil xxviii, 61, 62, 90, 204, 210 Kyparissis, Nikolaos 84 Laglandière, Eugène de 224 Lang, Gottfried 259, 260 Laspreyes, Paul 40 Laurance, Roberts 188 Laurenzi, Luciano 140 Lemerle, Paul 250 Leo XIII, pope 58 Levi, Doro 135, 170, 198, 199, 200 Libertini, Guido 140 Linckh, Jacob 18, 19 Linnér, Sture 159, 289

Name Index 

Lloyd, George Ambrose 121 Lord, Louis Eleazer 63–64, 141, 143, 144, 149, 150, 151, 193, 194, 284 Louis Philippe I, king of France 43, 279 Louis XIV, king of France 13 Lutyens, Edwin 77 Luynes, count (Honoré Théodoric d’Albert de Luynes, eighth Duc de Luynes) 20, 25, 224 von Mackensen, Hans Georg 252 Magi, Filippo 170 Maiuri, Amedeo 35 Mâle, Émile 108 Marinatos, Spyridon 131, 140, 243, 249, 268, 275 Mayoux, Jean-Jacques 274 McKim, Charles Follen 66, 78, 79 Mercati, Giovanni 223, 224, 226, 251, 288 Metaxas, Ioannis 111, 122, 123, 140, 207, 211 von Metternich, Klemens 223 Middeldorf, Ulrich 274 Millingen, James 224 Mingazzini, Paolino 172 Morey, Charles Rufus 152, 163, 169, 173, 174, 187, 228, 230, 231, 232, 263, 264, 270, 274, 289 Morgan, John Pierpoint 78 Müller, Kurt 90, 248 Mussolini, Benito 95, 108, 112, 113, 126, 128, 140, 178, 207, 245, 246 Myres, John Linton 29, 37, 122, 145, 160, 185, 194, 195 Napoleon I, emperor of the French, king of Italy 15, 16, 45 Napoleon III 24 Nibby, Antonio 224 Nilsson, Martin P. 29, 91, 92, 289 Nogara, Antonio 289 Nogara, Bartolomeo 114, 170 Norton, Charles Eliot 63 Nylander, Carl 289 Oikonomos, Georgios 123, 124, 126, 131, 241, 243, 249, 269 Otto I, king of Greece 52

 319

Pace, Biagio 125, 127, 128, 129, 245 Pallottino, Massimo 170 Panofka, Theodor 18, 224 Paribeni, Roberto 99–100, 101 Paul I, king of Greece 194, 265 Paul VI, pope (Giovanni Battista Montini) 171, 231 Pelham, Henry Francis 69 Persson, Axel Waldemar 83, 91 Philadelpheus, Alexandros 131, 243 Picard, Charles 82, 83, 84, 85, 98, 129, 240–242, 249, 285 Picard, Olivier 277 Pittakis, Kyriakos 25 Pius VII, pope 15 Pius VIII, pope 20 Pius XI, pope 288 Pius XII, pope 157, 158, 171, 172, 223, 253 Platner, Ernst Zacharias 224 Pope, John Russell 107 Poulsen, Frederik 92, 266 Poussin, Nicolas 13 Praschniker, Camillo 248 von Premerstein, Anton Ritter 239 Radet, Georges 48 Ralegh Radford, Courtenay Arthur  113, 138, 139, 145, 146, 177, 184–186, 287 Rangavis, Alexandros Rizos 25, 26 von Ranke, Leopold 224 Renaudin, Louis 83 Revett, Nicholas 15 Riefenstahl, Leni 108 Roberts, Laurance Page 187, 188 Rodd, James Rennell 135 Rodenwaldt, Gerhart 249 Ross, Ludwig 52, 53, 124 Rossi, Attilio 102, 103 Roussel, Pierre 85, 129, 249, 285 Rust, Bernhard 120 Säflund, Gösta 102 Salat, Rudolf (Rudi) 233 Santifaller, Leo 259, 262 Sarsfield Salazar, Demetrio 145, 146

320 

 Name Index

Schede, Martin 116, 119, 120, 147, 225, 226, 227, 249 Schliemann, Heinrich 10, 28, 32, 46, 58, 247, 276 Segre, Mario 158 Sforza, Carlo 80 Shaw, Evelyn 113, 115, 138, 139, 145, 185 Sjöqvist, Erik 142, 152, 154, 156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 162, 164, 167, 169, 170, 171, 178, 186, 224, 228, 251, 257, 259, 263, 286, 288, 289 Smith, James Kellum 115, 136, 137, 138, 163, 177, 187, 188, 189, 217 Sotiriou, Georgios 131, 243, 268 Spinazzola, Vittorio 35 von Stackelberg, Otto Magnus 18, 19 Stevens, Gorham Phillip 76, 85, 86, 101, 117, 137, 141, 142, 143, 144, 275, 284 Stillwell, Richard 289 von Stradonitz, Reinhard Kekulé 60 Strong, Eugenie Sellers 186 Strutt, Arthur John 89 Stuart, James 15 Svoronos, Ioannis 70, 71, 83

Van Buren, Albert 163, 173, 257, 259, 286 Veuillot, Louis 175 Victoria, queen of the United Kingdom, empress of India 43 Vittorio Emanuele III, king of Italy, 115

Taylor, Myron Charles 173 Thompson, Homer Armstrong 183 Thorvaldsen, Bertel 224 Toesca, Pietro 228

Young, Gerard Mackworth- 35, 37, 115, 121, 125, 131, 133, 140, 145, 160 Young, Natalie 145

Valéry, Paul 102 Valmin, Natan 122, 186

Waldheim, Charles 30 Walker, John (III) 86 Ward-Perkins, John Bryan 162, 169, 185–187, 231, 257, 259, 287 Weickert, Carl 50, 171, 202, 203, 204, 223, 227, 230, 232, 233, 234, 248 von Weiszäcker, Ernst 151, 152, 158, 253 Welcker, Friedrich Gottlieb 224 Westholm, Alfred 84 Wide, Samuel (Sam) 90 Wilhelm, king of Prussia 22, 23, 223 Winckelmann, Johann Joachim 14, 15, 29, 58, 94, 130, 226, 227, 233, 246, 248 Wood, Edward, 1st Earl of Halifax (Viscount Halifax) 115 Wolff, Emil 224 Wrede, Walter 116, 126, 130, 134, 246, 248

Ziller, Ernst 10, 63 Åkerström, Åke 178

Subject Index Academic diplomacy 6, 35, 114 Académie de France, Rome 17, 24, 43, 44, 57, 78, 115, 175 Accademia dei Lincei 14, 17 Accademia delle Romane Antichità 19 Accademia di Archeologia 20 Accademia Romana 19 Acta Instituti Romani Regni Sueciae 93 Agora, Athens 31, 39, 85, 98, 99, 143, 145, 183, 245, 275 Ahnenerbe (SS) 141 Allied Control Commission (ACC) 162, 228 Altertumswissenschaft 52, 60, 94 American Academy in Rome (AAR) 3, 63, 66, 68, 76, 78, 79, 85, 88–89, 95, 101, 107, 115, 118, 136, 137, 138, 139, 162, 164, 165, 169, 173, 174, 177, 184, 187, 188, 189, 190, 207, 217, 231, 257, 263, 269, 271, 275, 286 American embassy, Rome 162, 197 American Journal of Archaeology 63 American legation 144, 145, 159 American School of Classical Studies at Athens (ASCSA) 3, 62, 63, 66, 79, 85, 86, 87, 102, 117, 135, 137, 138, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 149, 150, 151, 159, 189, 190, 191, 193, 194, 201, 238, 284 Annales Institutorum 103 Anzio 154, 161, 255, 258 Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) 63 Archaeological Society at Athens 25, 26, 27, 28, 44, 66, 69, 71, 84, 102, 107, 111, 116, 122, 123, 124, 126, 130, 131, 133, 193, 199, 200, 237, 239, 243–249, 268, 275 Archäologischer Anzeiger 61, 93 Archivio segreto 57, 58 Ardea 99, 101 Asine 83, 84, 90, 91, 191, 285 Associazione Internazionale degli Studi Mediterranei 97, 99, 100, 104, 168 Associazione Internazionale di Archeologia Classica (AIAC) 162, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 194, 208, 228, 271–273, 283, 286, 287, 288 Athenische Mitteilungen 61, 93

Australian Archaeological Institute at Athens 41–42 Austrian Archaeological Institute – at Athens 93, 102, 117, 193, 194, 239, 243 – in Vienna 117 Austrian Historical Institute in Rome 102, 118, 119, 168, 255, 259–264, 286 Biblioteca Vaticana 288 Bibliotheca Hertziana 153, 156, 168, 170, 207, 225, 228, 229, 251, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 259, 262 Bibliotheca Platneriana 256 “Big digs” xxv, xxvi, 1, 3–7, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 31, 35, 38, 39, 55, 66, 98, 212, 219 Brazilian legation, Athens 144 Brenner 154, 255 British Academy of Arts in Rome 18 British Council 121 British embassy, Rome 184 British legation to the Holy See 145, 146 British School 159 – at Athens (BSA) 3, 35, 37, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 102, 115, 116, 121, 122, 123, 126, 131, 135, 140, 144, 145, 149, 160, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 194, 200, 238, 284 – at Rome (BSR) 65, 68, 69, 77, 78, 85–86, 109, 113, 115, 121, 138, 139, 145, 146, 147, 160, 162, 169, 177, 184, 185, 186, 187, 200, 207, 271, 286, 287 Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 60, 267 Canadian Institute in Greece 41–42 Casa de Velasquez, Madrid 278, 279, 281 Casa Tarpeia 23, 24, 51, 80, 81, 147 Central Archaeological Council, Greece 218 Centre de études et de documentation économiques, juridiques et sociales (CEDEJ, Cairo) 278 Centre d’études et de recherches sur le Moyen-Orient contemporain (CERMOC, Beirut and Amman) 278 Centre Universitaire Méditerranéen (C.U.M) 102, 175, 283

322 

 Subject Index

Civil war, Greece (1946–1949) xxvi, 4, 38, 182, 185, 186, 191, 192, 198, 200, 207, 218, 219 Classical archaeology – colonial legacy 12, 31, 32, 35, 43, 47, 81, 94, 98, 100, 115, 133, 207, 210, 217 – history of 1, 2, 9, 10, 11, 12, 27, 29, 47 – post-colonial legacy 12 Classical xxv, xxvi, 1, 3–7, 9, 11, 12, 16, 17, 19, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 42, 47, 49, 53, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63, 64, 69, 78, 79, 86, 88, 91, 92, 93, 96, 98, 102, 119, 128, 135, 145, 159, 172, 176, 177, 181, 186, 199, 204, 207, 208, 209, 211, 213, 214, 217, 219, 220, 220–221 – archaeology (see classical archaeology) – reception 10 – studies xxv, 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 29, 30, 66, 77, 79, 88, 92, 104, 107, 135, 138, 164, 209, 213, 219 Classics xi, 3, 29, 61, 131 Collegium Annalium Institutorum de Urbe Roma 97, 104, 168 Cosa (Ansedonia) 190 Cyrenaica, Libya 108, 187 Danish Academy, in Rome 161 Delos 55, 66, 83, 181, 241, 245, 266, 268 Delphi 39, 66, 83, 149, 181, 182, 241, 245, 266, 268 Deutsches Archäologisches Institut 49, 257 – Abteilung Athen (DAIA) xxviii, 3, 24, 52, 54, 55, 60, 61, 62, 63, 66, 90, 102, 116, 117, 125, 130, 134, 141, 142, 149, 150, 151, 193, 194, 195, 200, 202, 204, 207, 214, 227, 232, 234, 236, 238, 248, 249, 284 – Abteilung Rom (DAIR) 3, 13, 23, 24, 51, 60, 67, 80, 81, 85, 101, 108, 109, 130, 146, 147, 151, 152, 153, 155, 156, 157, 164, 166, 168, 169, 170, 171, 202, 204, 223, 224, 225, 227, 228, 229, 230, 236, 246, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 259, 271, 272, 284, 287 – Zentraldirektion, Berlin (DAI) 24, 50, 51, 60, 94, 108, 116, 119, 120, 130, 147, 155, 170, 202, 203, 223, 225, 226, 227, 230, 232, 233, 234, 236, 237, 248, 255, 283, 284, 285

Deutsches Historisches Institut (DHI), Rome 57, 168, 170, 207, 254, 259, 260, 261, 262 École française – d’Athènes (EFA) 16, 37, 42, 43, 44, 45, 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63, 66, 67, 82, 83, 84, 85, 98, 102, 111, 131, 132, 139, 148, 149, 159, 168, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 200, 201, 206, 220, 234, 238, 239, 241, 242, 250, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 276, 277, 278, 279, 285 – de Rome (EFR) 13, 23, 25, 43, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 67, 68, 89, 108, 110, 112, 114, 138, 168, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 188, 220, 234, 270, 276, 278, 279–280, 283, 287, 288 – d’Extrême-Orient (EFEO, Hanoi/Paris) 279, 280 Etruscan archaeology 38, 176, 186, 190, 219 EUR (Esposizione Universale di Roma) 109, 119 Expédition de Morée 45, 47, 98 Fasti Archaeologici 170, 271 First International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Athens, 1905 30 Fondation Hardt pour l’étude de l’Antiquité classique, Geneva xi, 219 Foreign school directors 237 Foreign schools – in Athens xxv, xxvi, 1–7, 17, 37, 39, 55, 72, 74, 77, 81, 98, 102, 103, 107, 108, 111, 116, 123, 125, 126, 127, 135, 149, 167, 172, 179, 181, 185, 200, 204, 207, 208, 210, 211, 213, 214, 219, 220–221, 238–240, 267, 275 – in Istanbul 29, 42, 51, 73, 232, 234, 237, 278 – in Rome xxv, xxvi, 1, 3–7, 16, 17, 21, 38, 39, 73, 74, 77, 87, 89, 94, 95, 96, 98, 99, 103, 107, 108, 109, 135, 162, 167, 169, 172, 181, 185, 188, 207, 208, 210, 211, 213, 214, 219, 221, 239 “Four powers treaty” (1949) 196–197 Franco-Prussian war 23, 49, 53, 55, 60, 207 French embassy, Athens 269 Fulbright Resolution (Fulbright bill) 188, 189

Subject Index 

Galeata 146, 210 Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Moderna, Rome 229, 272 Gennadius library 86, 87, 90, 144, 191, 193 German embassy to the Holy See, Rome 151, 252 German historical institute (DHI). See Deutsches Historisches Institut (DHI) “German libraries” 80, 153, 154, 156, 168, 169, 171, 195, 198, 198, 224, 225, 229, 235, 236, 251, 254, 255, 256, 286 “Great Powers” xxvi, 4, 16, 41, 49, 60, 64, 72, 90, 92, 115, 119, 211, 219 Greek Archaeological Council 82 Greek archaeological service 84 Heritageography 5 Hungarian Academy in Rome 42 Hyperboreisch-römische Gesellschaft 18, 20, 22 Institut de France 283 Institut de recherce sur le Maghreb contemporain (IRMC, Tunis) 278 Institut français – d’archeologie du Proche-Orient (IFAPO, Beirut, Damascus and Amman, since 2003 the Institut francais du Proche-Orient, IFPO, a merger of IFEAD, IFAPO and CERMOC) 278 – d’archéologie orientale (IFAO, Cairo) 278, 279, 280 – d’Athènes 111, 266 – d’études anatoliennes (IFEA, Istanbul) 278 – d’études arabes de Damas (IFEAD, Damascus) 278 – Florence, Rome, Naples 112 Instituto di corrispondenza archeologia (ICA) 9, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 44, 49, 50, 55, 56, 81, 94, 97, 104, 168, 223, 224, 230, 233, 236, 287 International Congress of Classical Archaeology – Athens (1905) 70, 72, 77 – Berlin (1939) 119 International Institute of International Cooperation (IIIC) 102

 323

Istituto di Studi Romani (ISR) 96, 287 Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft 225 Kaiser Wilhelm Institut für Kunstwissenschaft/ Kunstgeschichte (Kaiser-Wilhelm-Institut für Kunst-und Kulturwissenschaft (Bibliotheca Hertziana)) 251, 253, 256, 257, 262 Kalaureia (Poros) 90 Keats and Shelley House, Rome 287 Kerameikos 247, 249 Kunsthistorisches Institut, Florence 168, 228, 229, 287 Marshall Plan 189 Mélanges de l’architecture et de l’histoire 58, 93 Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 79, 93 MFAA, Allied Monuments and Fine Arts Section 184, 185–186. See also Subcommission Montecassino 161, 255 Monumenta Germaniae Historica 229 Morea (Peloponnese) 45, 46, 47, 161, 240 Morgantina (Sicily) 289 Mostra Augustea della Romanità 34, 122 National Archaeological Museum, Athens 28, 130, 226, 243, 269 Neoclassical 48, 52, 63, 86 Olympia 35, 36, 37, 39, 45, 55, 60, 66, 108, 204, 227, 235, 237, 246, 248 Orlov revolt 45 Palazzo Caffarelli 21, 223 Palazzo Vidoni 263, 272 Papers of the British School at Rome 93, 186 Partage 12, 60 Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia 20 Prisoners of war 145, 225 Red Cross 136, 159, 160, 270 Romanian Academy in Rome 42, 142–143, 188 Romanian Archaelogical Institute in Athens 219–220 Romanità 33, 34, 35, 95, 96, 107, 126, 128

324 

 Subject Index

Römische Mitteilungen 61, 93 Römisch-Germanische Kommission 227, 237 Royal Netherlands Institute in Rome (KNIR) 138, 143, 188 Salerno 154, 253, 255 Scuola Archeologica Italiana di Atene (SAIA) 31, 72, 73, 81, 82, 103, 108, 117, 135, 149, 150, 158, 160, 190, 193, 194, 198, 199, 200, 285 “Scuola svedese” 102 Slovakian Historical Institute in Rome 220 Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 64 Spanish academy, Rome (Royal Spanish Academy) 13 Subcommission (MFAA) 162, 164, 286, 287 Swedish Institute 156, 158, 256 – at Athens (SIA) 4, 83–84, 90, 149, 150, 157, 158, 170, 190–193, 201, 219, 285, 287 – in Rome (SIR) 4, 41, 88, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 99, 100, 101, 108, 109, 215, 122, 135, 142, 143, 147, 152, 155, 156, 159, 161, 164, 167, 169, 177, 178, 181, 188, 191–192, 224, 227, 252, 253, 255, 271, 287, 288 Swiss legation – in Athens 149, 159, 160 – in Rome 139, 146, 165 Swiss School of Archaeology in Greece 219

Terni 154 The Journal of Hellenic Studies 64 UNESCO 172, 196, 228, 262, 263, 272, 274, 283 Union Académique Internationale 97 Unione 104, 168, 170, 171, 194, 195, 197, 208, 220, 221, 228, 230, 231, 272, 274, 283, 287, 288 United Nations (UN) 172, 228, 229, 272 Valle Giulia 35, 77, 78, 86, 94, 108, 109, 118, 138, 142, 147, 224, 227 Vatican 58, 68, 113, 137, 152–157, 165, 168, 169, 171, 172, 223, 224, 227, 231, 251, 252, 253, 255, 257, 262, 288 Vichy 148, 175, 283 Villa Amelung 81, 226 Villa Aurelia 174 Villa Caffarelli 166 Villa Lante 17 Villa Massimo 17 West, western xxv, xxvi, 1, 9, 11, 15, 23, 31, 32, 41, 42, 44, 49, 72, 77, 88, 114, 147, 208, 209, 214, 217 Xenioi (Xeneion) 3, 18