Mohamed 1

Sultan Mohamed

Professor Watson

History of Architecture before 1400

2 October 2022

Module 2: Self Reflection

I have learned over the past weeks a lot about ancient Greek architecture, namely the

Acropolis and the Parthenon. I learned things from the more literal side, like the orders of Ionic,

Doric, and Corinthian columns, to the more figurative like the specific placement of buildings in

the Acropolis and its symbolism. The trip to the Parthenon here in Nashville gave me a better

understanding of the Parthenon itself. But the one part of this module that caused me to think the

most was the readings on the Acropolis Museum. Maybe it was due to the recency of it since we

are talking about a building completed only fifteen years ago compared to two thousand, but the

idea of restoring this great history in the article resonated with me. I was also conflicted about

the decision to build it on that specific site.

As an architect major, it had me excited that a museum dedicated to the Acropolis was

built; the design choices of the museum respect and honor Ancient Greece of 2500 years ago. As

a person of everyday life, I cannot ignore that the museum ignores the wide gap that is between

the past and the present. I also cannot ignore the choice of the museum being in a residential area

and demolishing existing residents to build that museum (Hubert and Theocbaropoulou 46). I

could imagine many people of Athens being upset at this time because the government is

honoring the people of the past when they should concern themselves with the people of the
 Mohamed 2

present. This leads me to the question: How important is the preservation of some architectural

history when it neglects not only the people of today but also ignores the history of another time?

The history between the times of antiquity and the present is separated by a lot of periods

of times Greeks would rather forget. Namely, the four hundred years prior to Greek

independence, the Ottoman Empire ruled the area. During this time, the Acropolis was not what

it was, and the Parthenon housed a mosque within its ruins. After Greek independence, the new

authority wanted to erase the “barbarity” left by the Ottomans and cleanse the Acropolis (Hubert

and Theocbaropoulou 44). This idea of restoration occurred because of being under the rule of

people you do not like and contrasting you in every way. One clear difference was the religion;

the ottomans being Muslim, forced the Greeks to pay jizya, and Islamic tax for non-Muslims. To

me, the museum is one of many steps of bringing back Greece to its prior state and trying to

erase as much displeasure of Ottoman rule as possible. I can understand the reason for the

neglect of Ottoman rule, but the construction of the Acropolis Museum needed the destruction of

other buildings.

Polykatoikas that housed multiple people were demolished by the dozens, and a rare art-

deco-style apartment was facing demolition. Despite its history, the government wants the

building gone since it blocks the connection between the museum and the Acropolis (Hubert and

Theocbaropoulou 44-46). It is somewhat funny that this is a literal representation of Greece

ignoring the history between the Acropolis, and the present time, by cutting it down. These

buildings were built after Greece’s independence and were commonly criticized due to their

“unregulated fashion” and the chaotic growth of these structures, due to an urgent need for

housing (Hubert and Theocbaropoulou 44). On the other hand, these were representations of

early Greek nationalism and a start of independence after rule by the Ottomans. These buildings’
 Mohamed 3

symbolic nature was disrespected and trampled on to appeal to an ancient Greece that did not fall

into all these things. This time of purity, before being intruded upon by “barbarity”, is what I

thought modern Greece was aiming for with the museum’s construction. With the museum’s

opening, Greece is not neglecting that past, but instead escaping it and returning to a period of

purity.

If I was a person of Athens, this museum and history would not affect my life in any way,

nor does it affect most people there. Going to the grocery store, doing work, sleeping, and any

normal things of life will not be affected by the inclusion of the Acropolis Museum. My point is

for a large museum that does not affect the everyday life of almost everyone in the city, why

should it be a reason to destroy 35 apartments in the city? As important as history is, there could

be a better site than a residential area, one that does not demolish as many residents (Hubert and

Theocbaropoulou 46). Why does a building honoring a site built over two millennia ago, have to

sacrifice the current times in order to do so? I am sure there were bigger issues going on in

Greece and despite the importance of history, the real importance is the present.

Despite all the thoughts that have been circulating throughout my mind, I do not have a

specific opinion on whether some of the choices Greece made were right or wrong and I do not

think I ever will. You have choices to make; if you do a, you cannot do b, and vice versa. This

divide between what is important and what is not is something I think I will frequently encounter

throughout this architectural program and even after. Like now, I am not sure if I will be able to

find an answer that is sufficient, but that is not necessarily bad.

 Mohamed 4

Works Cited

- Hubert, C., & Theocbaropoulou, I. (2010). Musee Imaginarie. JSTOR. Retrieved October
4, 2022, from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41765319.pdf