2000; Snodin 1991; Vlach 1995; Watkin 1992). In tune with the Enlighten-
ment, those dealing with antiquities perceived their practice as a service to the
fatherland, and reason was the main incentive for the study of the past.
Through the lessons (Cullen & von Stockhausen 1998; McClelland 1994)
learned from antiquity the nation would progress. The main diVerence with
the previous period derives from the inclusion of the appreciation of antiqui-
ties in the construction of the machinery of the state. As education was one of
the main rights citizens acquired within nationalism, this meant that the state
had to provide for it. This led to the opening of state museums such as the
Louvre, the institution embodying the principles of Liberty, Equality and
Fraternity, with the aim of educating the citizens (McClelland 1994: 9). It was
here that Egyptian archaeology wasWrst taught. A museum needed exhibits,
and for the beneWt of the French nation the forceful transfer of antiquities
from established museums, such as the Vatican in Rome, took place, as well as
the seizure of antiquities from Egypt, to be placed in the Parisian museum.
Thus, the state considered it worth appropriating antiquities from the collec-
tions of the conquered, and moving them large distances to be exhibited in
the capital city. Antiquities had become a symbolic capital (cf. Bourdieu 1977,
that is accumulated prestige and honour). This was made possible by the
consideration of classical antiquities as the embodiment of the Common
Good and the Truth, which the nation had to try and emulate to ensure
success.
The eVect of nationalism was soon felt throughout Europe and its area of
inXuence, as can be seen in the liberal revolts of the early 1820s, 1830s, and
- Although a few were successful, most of them failed thanks to the
conservative coalitions formed to oppose them. The exceptions in the 1820s
were, as discussed in Chapter 4, to be found in Greece and Latin America,
where antiquity was used in claims for independence wherever possible—
which at this time meant whenever their antiquities included spectacular
monuments of bygone eras. This was the case in Greece, Mexico, and Peru.
The main reason behind the success of the independence movements in these
countries was mainly the change in the balance of imperial power, to the
detriment of Spain, Portugal, and the Ottoman Empire. These states’ weak-
ness brought obvious advantages to Britain and France, which established
themselves as the most powerful imperial powers with overseas territories for
half a century. However, the independence of Greece and the Latin American
countries also legitimated nationalism, its discourse about the past, and its
claim that nations that could demonstrate singularity in religious and/or
linguistic terms had the right to demand political independence. Their
success encouraged other regions throughout Europe with desires for self-
government. In the case of Greece and the Latin American countries, though,
An Alternative Account 13