[Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review]
This book originates from a conference held online in November 2020, hosted by the Dutch National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden and Leiden University, and organized by Patricia Kret, Timo Epping, and Kim Beerden. The last two also serve as the editors of the volume under review. Most of the book addresses what Frits Naerebout in his introduction terms the ‘distortion’ and ‘the misuse of the ancient world’ (p. 32) within the present-day political arena, especially among supporters of right-wing parties and movements. In addition, it examines the ways in which the material remains of the ancient world are often misrepresented or inadequately explored in museum settings and heritage sites.
The book is divided into three parts. The first part, titled ‘Introduction,’ features a preface by Kim Beerden (pp. 9-14) and an extensive introduction by Frits Naerebout (pp. 15-39). Together, these two pieces set the coordinates for the collection. Beerden explains the background and aims of the volume, while Naerebout’s introduction presents the subject of right-wing appropriations of antiquity in America and, to a lesser degree, Europe, framing the book in activist terms. The second part, ‘Controversies and Literary Traditions,’ comprises six chapters (pp. 41-153) that broadly explore the political and ideological appropriations of antiquity. This section chiefly focuses on the right-wing receptions of Christian Rome, ancient Sparta, and Vergil’s Aeneid in different cultural contexts in the USA and Europe. The third part, ‘Controversies and Heritage Ethics,’ includes four chapters (pp. 155-229) that examine the various ways in which the classical heritage is framed and represented in the heritage sector, mainly in the Netherlands. Despite their varying subjects and approaches, the chapters consistently interrogate, with varying degrees of explicit criticism, right-wing and conservative agendas in the materials and settings they study.
The book’s activist scope is clearly articulated in Naerebout’s impassioned introduction. The collection is presented as an effort to ‘stop the steal’ of academic subjects, specifically targeting what is considered ‘conservative’ appropriations of antiquity. While the declared focus is on the ‘fundamentalists among the conservatives,’ in practice the volume covers right-wing positions more generally, including mainstream conservatism. The use of terms such as ‘misuse’ and ‘abuse’ of antiquity, which recur especially throughout Part I of the book, implies that there is a good and legitimate use on the other side of the political spectrum. If antiquity can be stolen, it apparently has a place where it rightfully belongs—and according to Naerebout, that place is evidently not on the conservative side. This rhetoric infuses the activist motivation of the collection with a polemical tone.
While Part I succeeds in articulating with brio the activist motivation behind the collection, it is less strong in providing an academic and theoretical framework that would give the collected articles coherence and embed them in existing scholarship. For example, the discussion of Classical Reception Studies (pp. 9-14) does not engage with Critical Classical Reception. This strand within Classical Reception Studies, further defined by Johanna Hanink in 2017, advocates for an open activist agenda and acknowledges that Greek and Roman antiquity have played a major role in constructing and authorizing violent societal structures such as racism, colonialism, and patriarchy.[1] Other kindred initiatives also remain unmentioned. For instance, Pharos: Doing Justice to the Classics, launched in 2017 and directed by Curtis Dozier, focuses on appropriations of Greco-Roman antiquity by hate groups online.[2] The relevance of these initiatives to the collection’s activist programme is clear, and by not seriously engaging with them, the introductory sections of the book may run the risk of overstating the collection’s novelty. In this regard, it is unfortunate that Donna Zuckerberg, who delivered a keynote at the conference (p. 9), could not eventually bring her perspective to the volume with a written contribution.
The book includes some fine case studies that offer food for thought and further discussion. While it is unclear to what extent individual authors would agree with the points raised in the introductory section, most chapters are engaged in deconstructing and addressing the masculinist, white supremacist, homophobic, xenophobic, and/or colonialist implications of their objects of study. In the second part, two articles on Roman traditions frame three chapters dealing with the Spartan tradition. Renske Jansen’s chapter explores the subject of how Christian Rome has been appropriated in American public debates about the country’s Christian identity. While the study of political receptions of ancient Rome often focuses on the Roman Empire, especially Augustan Rome, this chapter reminds readers that Christian Rome also has a rich political reception history that remains relevant to present-day political discourses.
Three chapters then address the appropriation of ancient Spartan history and symbolism. Stephen Hodkinson discusses the recent far-right appropriations of Spartan militarism in the USA, including the use of ancient Greek in the slogan ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ (‘come and take [them]’, referring to weapons), and places them against their historical background. Johannes Siapkas and Thomas Sjösvärd shift the focus to Europe, exploring appropriations of Sparta and the Battle of Thermopylae in Swedish literature, while also setting it in its broader European context. Julia Müller examines the reception of Sparta in right-wing movements, with specific emphasis on the German and French contexts, represented by the ‘Identitäre Bewegung Deutschland’ and the ‘Génération Identitaire’ in France.
The political appropriation of Vergil’s Aeneid cannot be omitted in a collection like this, and Marco Gay duly explores its use in Italian migration debates, focussing on the Sea-Watch 3 case in January 2019, when the Italian government refused the docking of a vessel carrying 47 migrants from Libya. The chapter that concludes this section, written by Barbara Holler, deviates somewhat from the rest as it does not address appropriations of antiquity but rather representations of classical scholars in contemporary literature. Although this chapter is interesting in its own right, its subject matter contributes to a sense of thematic fragmentation within this part of the book.
Because of its focus on the heritage sector, the third section is more homogeneous. Patricia Kret, one of the organizers of the conference from which this volume originates, explores representations of death in European museum displays. She demonstrates how these displays are usually presented within dominant European notions of death, emotion, and ritual, and she asks how common approaches can be diversified to include the emotional and sensory experience of death in antiquity. Suus van den Berg uses the collection of the National Museum of Antiquity in Leiden as a starting point to examine ways to include LGBTQI+ subjects and histories in museum collections and narratives, drawing comparisons with examples from the British Museum, the Victoria & Albert Museum, and the Van Abbemuseum in Eindhoven in the Netherlands. Daniel Soliman discusses the representation of Egyptian bodies in the popular Dutch children’s book series Dummie de Mummie, which is used in educational programs developed by the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden. He highlights how such educational material can promote derogatory Orientalist stereotypes at the expense of both modern and ancient Egyptian cultures. Finally, Liesbeth Claes explores issues of cultural ownership using the case study of the Via Belgica, the road between Boulogne-sur-Mer and Cologne, paying particular attention to how perceptions of the road have been historically embedded in regional and national interests.
One of the noteworthy strengths of the book is the diversity of media and cultural contexts it covers. The materials examined include literature and public discourse, such as opinion pieces and blogs, as well as material culture items such as balloons, T-shirts, and helmets, and performative settings. Similarly, the book spans various geographical areas, including the United States, the Netherlands, Sweden, Britain, Germany, France, and Italy. This kaleidoscopic approach beneficially highlights the different areas in which classical references play a role and the diversity of audiences that engage with classical heritage to communicate political or ideological messages. However, it also carries the risk of fragmentation. While Part I sets the coordinates of the collection, it does not discuss the role of media and materiality in the political receptions of antiquity, nor does it address the cultural and geographical diversity of the case studies. One might, for instance, note the absence of representation from Eastern or Central Europe. For such a broad approach to succeed, a well-reasoned comparative framework could have helped readers better understand the roles of specific media and regional settings in the ways antiquity is used in political discourse. This is particularly important for the European context, where engagements with antiquity are often heavily invested in local, regional, and national traditions. The current volume nicely illustrates this with the example of the Via Belgica.
Another strength of the collection is its assembly of scholars from diverse fields that engage with the study of ancient Greek and Roman worlds and their traditions. While the majority are historians, the contributors also include classical philologists, literary scholars, an archaeologist, an Egyptologist, as well as museum and heritage professionals. Some of the contributors operate at the intersection of multiple sectors or disciplines. Given the range of backgrounds the authors represent, readers might have benefited from a more explicit discussion of the varied perspectives and distinct terms and concepts that these scholars use to address similar questions within their respective fields. The intersections between scholarship and outreach, academia and the heritage sector, highlighted in the preface, may be navigated differently across disciplines and geographical areas, not least between the USA and Europe. While different disciplines and sectors have the potential to learn from one another in these regards, these issues are not elaborated in this volume beyond the individual case studies, if at all. This reader was left eager to learn more about the crossover discussions that took place during the conference. Reflections on these conversations—perhaps in Part I or in the form of a response piece?—would have enhanced the transdisciplinary value of the collection beyond the merits of the individual case studies.
The book overwhelmingly focuses on right-wing uses of Greek and Roman antiquity. This choice might be justified, yet the title, Classical Controversies, suggests broader coverage. Controversy typically involves at least two parties competing for control over discourse. However, there is limited room for discussion and critique of left-wing, progressive, or liberal appropriations of the classical tradition. With the exception of Renske Jansen’s and Marco Gay’s articles, which examine perspectives across the political spectrum, the volume hardly engages with the notion of ‘non-conservative’ uses—or dare we say abuses?—of antiquity. The reader is left wondering to what extent, and if so how, conservative uses of antiquity respond to non-conservative uses, and vice versa. Or do these appropriations of antiquity across the political spectrum largely stand in isolation, not interacting or responding to each other? Alternatively, ‘classical controversies’ might be understood as disputes over claims to antiquity between the book’s editors and authors—possibly representing parts of academia and the heritage sector—and ‘right-wing appropriators’ of various stripes and colours. In that case, the controversy is certainly truncated, with largely self-selected opponents who are unlikely to hear the counterarguments presented in the book. Either way, the book’s scope should perhaps have been made clearer in the title. As it stands, it might mislead readers into thinking that the collection offers a balanced account of how ancient references have been used across the political spectrum. That it does not do so, however, should not detract from the valuable insights offered by its individual chapters, and the book as a whole remains a welcome contribution to an ongoing debate likely to continue for some decades to come.
Classical Controversies will interest anyone concerned with the political appropriation of antiquity and classical reception in the present day, including historians, classicists, archaeologists, and students in these disciplines. The third part will also hold relevance for heritage professionals and educators.
Authors and Titles
Part I: Introduction
Preface
Kim Beerden
- Introduction: Stop the Steal!
Frederick G. Naerebout
Part II: Controversies and Literary Traditions
- Whose persecution? Early Christianity as a Metaphor in Contemporary American Political Discourse
K.P.S. (Renske) Janssen - Spartans on the Capitol: Recent Far-Right Appropriations of Spartan Militarism in the USA and their Historical Roots
Stephen Hodkinson - Leonidas Goes North: Swedish Appropriations of Sparta and the Battle of Thermopylae and their Wider European Context
Johannes Siapkas and Thomas Sjösvärd - Pop Culture against Modernity: New Right-Wing Movements and the Reception of Sparta
Julia Müller - Fato Profugus. Aeneas the Refugee: an Italian Debate
Marco Gay - The Classicist as a Literary Character in Contemporary Literature: the Depiction of a Discipline
Barbara Holler
Part III: Controversies and Heritage Ethics
- Ancient Death and the Contemporary World: the Role of Graeco-Roman Death in Museum Display
Patricia Kret - Queering the National Museum of Antiquities
Suus van den Berg - Dummie de Mummie: an Egyptian Body as the Undead, Oriental Other
Daniel Soliman - Who Owns the Road to the Roman Past? The Case of the Via Vipsania aka the chaussée romaine, the Römerstrasse, the Romeinse kassei, aka the Via Belgica
Liesbeth Claes
Notes
[1] Johanna Hanink, “It’s Time to Embrace Critical Classical Reception,” Eidolon (1 May 2017).