This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University]On: 24 November 2014, At: 16:02Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of HeritageStudiesPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjhs20

The materiality of death: human relicsand the ‘resurrection’ of the Greekmaritime past in museum spacesEleni Stefanou aa Department of Pre-School Education , University of Aegean ,25th Martiou 1, Kameiros Building, 2nd Floor, Rhodes , 85100 ,GreecePublished online: 01 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Eleni Stefanou (2012) The materiality of death: human relics and the‘resurrection’ of the Greek maritime past in museum spaces, International Journal of HeritageStudies, 18:4, 385-399, DOI: 10.1080/13527258.2011.647862

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2011.647862

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

The materiality of death: human relics and the ‘resurrection’ ofthe Greek maritime past in museum spaces

Eleni Stefanou*

Department of Pre-School Education, University of Aegean, 25th Martiou 1, KameirosBuilding, 2nd Floor, Rhodes, 85100, Greece

(Received 31 January 2010; final version received 30 October 2010)

This paper investigates three cases of preservation and exhibition of human rel-ics in Greek museums and demonstrates the ways in which they actively com-memorate the maritime past in contemporary Greece. These exhibits, widelyperceived as ‘national heirlooms’, all date from the period of the Greek War ofIndependence (1821–1830 AD): the embalmed heart of Admiral Andreas Mia-oulis, exhibited in the Historical Archive-Museum of Hydra; the embalmed heartof Admiral Konstantinos Kanaris, exhibited in the National Historical Museumin Athens and the bones of the female Admiral Laskarina Bouboulina, exhibitedin the Museum of Spetses. The display and the discourses associated with theserelics are examined within the context of the significance of material culture forthe preservation of national memory in general and maritime identity in particu-lar. It is shown that the ‘power’ of these exhibits derives from the monumentali-sation of otherwise complex life stories into bounded and concrete symbols ofthe past, which is analogous to an effort to counterpoise the immanence of deathby the materiality of human remains. The materiality of these relics provides alocus for unique convergence of religious symbolism, maritime identity andnational ideology. However, this paper attempts to go beyond an examination ofsuch exhibits as symbols and treats them as objects in themselves, arguing thattheir purported sanctity and their profanity as material objects generate ambiva-lence which lies at the heart of nationalist and religious discourses.

Keywords: maritime museum; relics; national identity; memory; materiality;religion

Introduction

This paper investigates three cases of preservation and exhibition of human relics inGreek museum displays with maritime themes. The display and the discourses asso-ciated with these relics are examined within the context of the significance of mate-rial culture for the preservation of national memory in general and maritime identityin particular. It is shown that the materiality of these relics acts as a locus for theunique convergence of maritime identity, national ideology and religioussymbolism.

These exhibits, widely perceived as ‘national heirlooms’, all date from one ofthe most significant periods of Greek national history which resulted in the forma-tion of the Greek nation-state, namely the Greek War of Independence (1821–1830

*Email: stefanou@aegean.gr

International Journal of Heritage StudiesVol. 18, No. 4, July 2012, 385–399

ISSN 1352-7258 print/ISSN 1470-3610 online� 2012 Taylor & Francishttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2011.647862http://www.tandfonline.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

AD): the embalmed heart of Admiral Andreas Miaoulis exhibited in the HistoricalArchive-Museum of Hydra1; the embalmed heart of Admiral Konstantinos Kanaris,exhibited in the National Historical Museum in Athens2 and the bones of the femaleAdmiral Laskarina Bouboulina, exhibited in the Museum of Spetses.3

The preservation and display of body parts of historical personalities in Greekmuseums is quite a unique case of representation. Apart from being highly depen-dent on religious practices in seemingly secular spaces, the only other cases withwhich it can be compared to are found in certain Greek Orthodox churches, themost prominent of which are the bones of St. George in Ioannina, the corpse ofSaint Dionysius in Zante, the corpse of St. Gerasimos on Cephalonia, the corpse ofSt. Demetrius in Thessaloniki and the corpse of Saint Spyridon in Corfu, all safe-guarded in their respective churches, open to pilgrimage and public veneration. Thistradition dates back to the Middle Ages, when saints’ corpses or their body partswere considered to be important sources of supernatural power; they symbolised thelives of individuals who were rendered holy due to their ‘heroic’ activity whilstalive; their value reflected an explicit set of beliefs on religious faith and they wereoffered for public veneration in the form of pilgrimages, prayers, offerings, etc.(Geary 1986, pp. 169–175). It is the relics’ authenticity that intrigued the pilgrims,who were not interested in the material condition of the relics, even when they werein a state of complete disintegration and therefore were not worth displaying(Barilan 2005, p. 194).

Likewise, within museum spaces the ‘power’ of the exhibited relics derivesfrom the monumentalisation of otherwise complex life stories into bounded andconcrete symbols of the past, which is analogous to an effort to counterpoise theimmanence of death and the immaterial nature of the sea by the materiality ofhuman remains. The maritime past in Greece has not left any impressive materialtraces visible in public space, such as architectural remains, as it happens in terres-trial archaeology. This lack of visible remnants generates the need for the display ofcomplete replicas, something which would have been unthinkable for Greek terres-trial archaeology. Maritime heritage representations largely comprise replicatedmaterial and post-nineteenth century private or family heirlooms and abide by dif-ferent practices of display within non-archaeological museums.

Therefore, the construction of images of Greek maritime heritage in national his-toriography and maritime museum displays is based on a limited array of elements,namely specific historical personalities, naval military triumphs or tragedies, andcertain historical events, which are perceived as important for the national narrative(Stefanou 2008, 2009). Among them, the nineteenth century naval struggle duringthe Greek War of Independence holds a prominent position in the national narrative.Central to this account and for nineteenth century Greek naval history in generalare three island communities, Hydra, Spetses and Psara, which are known as the‘revolutionary islands’. The naval tradition of these islands is summarised in thebiographies of the three major Greek naval heroes, who originate from the aboveislands: the Hydriote Admiral Andreas Miaoulis, Spetsiote female Captain LaskarinaBouboulina and Admiral Konstantinos Kanaris from Psara.

National historiography regards these historical personalities as naval nationalheroes and national benefactors. Miaoulis and Kanaris went on to become respectedstatesmen in the newly founded Greek Kingdom. All three are instantly recognisedpersonalities: their life and exploits are taught in the curriculum of primary school,while their portraits most frequently adorn classroom walls as well as history

386 E. Stefanou

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

textbooks. They are lauded as ‘immortal ancestors’ in anniversary celebratoryspeeches made by political and ecclesiastical personalities. They are honoured withstatues in public places, and their portraits adorned Greek coins before the adventof the Euro. Most of the Greek maritime museums refer to them directly or indi-rectly, through small-scale ship replicas, original or replicated personal memorabilia,family heirlooms, portraits, guns and so on.

The ownership and preservation of personal or other objects are not the onlyways in which institutions celebrated the memory of these historical personalities.Andreas Miaoulis and Laskarina Bouboulina in particular are also performativelyreferred to in annual maritime celebrations that take place at their place of birth.The Miaouleia (Mιαoύλɛια) is celebrated annually in the end of June on the islandof Hydra4 and the Armata (Aρμτα) is celebrated annually in the beginning of Sep-tember on the island of Spetses.5 Both celebrations involve massive audience partic-ipation (locals, Greek and foreign tourists, representatives of the political andchurch domains) and a spectacular naval battle re-enactment in which a ship replicaof the nineteenth century Turkish fleet is set on fire. The theatrical staging isenhanced by emphatic language and historical narration spoken through loudspeak-ers, dramatic music and use of fireworks with the intention to resemble cannons’sounds. The performance is concluded by a memorial service ‘for those who hero-ically fought for our faith and homeland’ (υπέρ των υπέρ πi9στɛως και πατρi9δoςɛνδόξως πɛσόντων), followed by the National Anthem and the laying of wreaths onthe waters of the islands’ ports in memory of those lost at sea (Stefanou 2008).

Both the commemorative ceremonies reinforce Greek national imagination byvisualising and materialising the intangibility of the sea which is for Greece is itsnatural frontier and its demarcated border from east, south and west. In the nationalnarrative the Aegean is the real and symbolic boundary of defence of cultural, polit-ical and military interests. This claim is substantiated not only by the state’s geo-graphical position but also by metaphysical and deterministic interpretations of thepast which assert that ‘the sea has always existed in the blood of Greeks’. Giventhat water precludes the possibility of any physical memorial, Greek maritime mate-rial representations visualise historical occurrences that took place in these waters.They produce a mnemonic locus (Hamilakis 2007, p. 397) which visibly reproducesnational imagination, not only through ship-models, replicas, photographs and paint-ings, but, even more effectively, through the display of body parts of historicalpersonalities.

Exhibiting the body

The body, in western culture, is represented in very specific ways, among which are‘the mortuary art, the freak show, the culture of relics, renaissance art and pre-modern and modern anatomy’ (Barilan 2005, p. 193). However, the preservationand public display of human body parts is nowadays usually confined in naturalhistory museums (such as the American Museum of Natural History, especially theAnne and Bernard Spitzer Hall of Human Origins)6 or archaeological/ethnologicalmuseums with collections of human skeletons and mummified bodies (such as theMusée de l’ Homme7 in Paris and the Museum of Man8 in San Diego), in medicalcollections of mostly anatomical interest (such as the London museums of Healthand Medicine and the Mutter Museum in Philadelphia),9 in ecclesiastical collectionsand churches, which display saints’ relics for public veneration (such as the

International Journal of Heritage Studies 387

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

so-called Incorruptibles in various churches of Italy)10 and in mausoleums, usuallyof political personalities (such as the Mausoleum of Lenin in Moscow).11

Among some well-known preserved body parts is the vertebra of the Philippinesnational hero Jose Rizal, who was executed by a Spanish firing squad (29 December1896), safeguarded in the Rizal Shrine along with other memorabilia in the Rizalmuseum12; the arm of St. Bonaventure, a thirteenth-century Franciscan monk,encased in a silver arm-shaped reliquary that resides in his hometown of Bagnoregio(Italy), in the parish Church of St. Nicholas13; a lock from the hair of the father ofthe American nation, George Washington, which initially belonged to his aunt, waslater donated to the Maine Historical Society14 and some of its strands were recentlysold for $17,000 in an auction15; the middle finger of Galileo Galilei’s right hand16

is on display at the Museum of the History of Science in Florence (Italy) which, on11 June 2010, reopened to the public having changed its name into Museo Gali-leo.17 It seems that the dead exist in the world of the living not only in the realm ofreligious mourning practices, in cemeteries or memorials but also outside religiouscontexts, in seemingly secular, modern institutions (Walter 2008, p. 2).

Extensive research has been done on dead human body in diverse disciplines.Theoretical works in the fields of medical (Lawrence 1998, George 2004, Barilan2005) and theological (Prokes 1996, O’Grady et al. 1998) studies touch upon issuesof ethics, burial, sacred relics’ preservation practices, afterlife, personal identity andthe dead body, etc. There is also growing literature about dead body in the broaderfields of archaeology, anthropology, history and cultural studies. Archaeologicalconcern over the dead body is mainly connected to the research on human remains(Chamberlain and Parker-Pearson 2001), ethics of display (Lohman and Goodnow2006), issues of repatriation (Mihesuah 2000, Smith 2004), and lately on the bodyas a representation, as an identity and as a site of lived experience (Gillespie 2001,Hamilakis et al. 2002). Anthropology, social theory and history, on the other hand,focus on mortuary ritual (Metcalf and Huntington 1991), on the circulation of relics(Geary 1986), on Thanatology theories (Mellor and Shilling 1993, Mitchell 2007)and on ways with which the human body is perceived within different cultural andpolitical contexts in relation to social processes (Verdery 1999, Hallam and Hockey2001, Joyce 2005, Fraser and Greco 2005, Bowie 2006). Kirshenblatt-Gimblett(1998, pp. 34–35) discusses the exhibition of humans in ethnographic and anatomi-cal collections that display human specimens to satisfy morbid curiosity, scientificinterests, demands of spectacle and cultural performance. Hallam and Hockey(2001), on the other hand, discuss the relationship between death, memory andmaterial culture, focusing on the importance of the body in memory-making withindifferent cultural contexts. They view the museum, in particular, as a space of deathand a site of memory-making and reproduction, with greater repercussions to widersociocultural formations (2001, p. 7). As they advocate (2001, p. 61):

… already from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries death-related objects andaspects of memorials were not confined to sacred spaces of remembrance in churchesand cathedrals. Rather, they were reworked […] and resituated in different displaycontexts including cabinets of curiosities and museums.

The Greek context has also been studied to some extent, with works that investigatepopular memorial practices or funerary material culture (Antzoulatou-Retsila 2004,Koumarianou 2008). Particularly one study, that of Antzoulatou-Retsila (2009),

388 E. Stefanou

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

illuminates, through archival research relics in the National Historical Museum inAthens, nineteenth century perceptions of both donors and receivers towards theneed for preservation and the value of the body parts in relation to notions of his-tory, the Nation, homeland, national memory, collective remembrance and so on(Antzoulatou-Retsila 2009, p. 115). Nevertheless, none of these studies criticallyinvestigates the ‘heritagisation’ process of these body parts, nor does it questiontheir double role as organic material and as exhibits. Moreover, the role of relics inmemory production within museum contexts, and the ways this is achieved throughprocesses, such as secularisation of religion, has not been extensively investigated,despite thorough research on the sacralisation of Greek antiquities (Hamilakis andYalouri 1999, Hamilakis 2007). In this vein, this paper explores the capacity ofmaritime material heritage to act as a medium for the reinforcement of religiousidentity and national memory within museum displays in contemporary Greece.

(Object) biographies

Funerary urn with the embalmed heart of Admiral Andreas Miaoulis, HistoricalArchive-Museum of Hydra

Andreas Miaoulis died of tuberculosis on 11 June 1835. He was buried in a shoreof Piraeus named after him (Akti Miaouli). The choice of burial space was not acci-dental since it is supposed to coincide with the burial site of Themistocles, the mostimportant national history naval hero of Greek classical antiquity. Prior to theAdmiral’s burial, his heart was extracted from his body, ‘as a symbol of strength,courage and patriotism’ (Adamopoulou-Pavlou 1999), following the orders of Otto,the Bavarian King of Greece at that time. The Admiral’s heart was embalmed andplaced in a silver funerary urn, in order to be safeguarded in the Ministry of NavalAffairs, which in 1933 donated the relic to the Monastery of Hydra (Adamopoulou-Pavlou 1999, Adamopoulou-Pavlou and Prassa 2003).

The silver funerary urn with the embalmed heart of Andreas Miaoulis is dis-played prominently in the museum’s Main Hall of Exhibits18 (Figure 1), placedwithin a glass case. It bears the inscription ‘HAIL THE HEART OF ADMIRALMIAOULIS’ ({FIHT Y KFHΔIF NJΥ FNΔHTF VIFJΥΛY) and rests on a pedestalcovered with the Greek national flag. In front of it, the Admiral’s own OrthodoxCross is displayed bearing the inscriptions ‘the cross is the prop of the faithful’, ‘thecross is the opponent’s fear’. The whole ensemble is surrounded by a garland withthe white and blue colours of the national flag, and some laurel wreaths.

These funerary props, which are common performative items in memorials andnational ceremonies, are renewed on an annual basis on the anniversary of theAdmiral’s death, on 23 June. On that day, the funerary urn is taken out of themuseum and carried to the island’s cathedral by the Archbishop of Hydra. A reli-gious mass is then followed by a litany of the urn, which ends with another memo-rial service in front of the Admiral’s bust. Both are attended by representatives ofthe Parliament, the Navy and the Church.

Funerary urn with the embalmed heart of fire-ship Captain KonstantinosKanaris, National Historical Museum, Athens (Figure 2)

Konstantinos Kanaris was buried in the First Cemetery of Athens in 1877. He diedwhilst being the Prime Minister of Greece and he was buried with honours ofa national hero. Upon the request of his family (Antzoulatou-Retsila 2009,

International Journal of Heritage Studies 389

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

pp. 173–178), his heart was extracted from his body and placed in a special funer-ary vessel for its preservation as heirloom and reminiscence of his great services tothe homeland. According to archival sources (cited in Antzoulatou-Retsila 2009,p. 178), Admiral Kanaris’ heart, whilst alive, was considered the ‘precious propertyof the nation’ that should not, therefore, be ‘appropriated by death’. So, after theAdmiral’s death on 2 September 1877, his body was transported to the Ministry ofNaval Affairs, where it could be venerated by the public prior to the extraction andembalmment of his heart, followed by his subsequent funeral.

Due to the inestimable importance of the relic, it was decided that the Admiral’sembalmed heart should be safeguarded within the Ministry of Naval Affairs (Antzo-ulatou-Retsila 2009, p. 179), which in turn donated the funerary urn to the NationalHistorical Museum (at that time Ethnology Museum) in December 1933 (Antzoula-tou-Retsila 2009, p. 172). The motives for this donation were defined by practicaland symbolic concerns. Security issues apart, it was believed that a relic of suchsignificance should be hosted in a museum among other historical relics of the Hel-lenic Navy (Antzoulatou-Retsila 2009, p. 172).

Currently, the funerary urn which contains Admiral Kanaris’ embalmed heart(Figure 2) is displayed in the museum’s hall entitled The Naval Struggle of 1821,among exhibits related to the same period.19 It is placed within a square cupboard,

Figure 1. The funerary urn in the Museum of Hydra (photo by the author, August 2008).

390 E. Stefanou

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

which is built in one of the walls. Inside it, there is a marble alcove,20 upon whichrests the funerary urn. Its lid ends in a sphere with a small cross on its top. Theinscription on the urn, in block capitals, reads: ‘HAIL THE HEART OF ADMIRALKANARIS’ ({FIHT KFHΔIF NFΥFH{JΥ KFNFHY).

Wooden container with the bones of the female Admiral Laskarina Bouboulina,Museum of Spetses

Laskarina Bouboulina was fatally shot during a family quarrel on 22 May 1825.Her funeral took place at the church of St. Ioannis of Spetses and she was buried ina family grave. In 1928 and during the centennial celebrations of the foundation ofthe Greek state, the casket containing her bones was transferred to St. Nikolaos, theCathedral church of Spetses. In 1939 her bones were finally transferred to the thennewly-founded Museum of Spetses, where they are kept to this day.21

Her relics are kept in the museum hall dedicated to the 1821–1830 War of Inde-pendence22 in a rectangular niche (Figure 3), similar to the one containing the funer-ary urn with the heart of Admiral Kanaris. Inside it, beneath a portrait of LaskarinaBouboulina, there is a wooden chest that contains her bones. A label explaining howher remains were transferred to the museum is attached to the whole display.

Beyond the grave

Even though the above exhibits are hosted in three different museums founded indifferent eras and of diverse typologies, they show remarkable similarities in themanner of their exhibition, which resembles contemporary funerary practices. Burial

Figure 2. The funerary urn with the embalmed heart of Konstantinos Kanaris in theNational Historical Museum of Athens (photo by the author, September 2009).

International Journal of Heritage Studies 391

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

apparatuses, such as the use of funerary vessels, portraiture, and the laying of laurelwreaths, are essential performative and visual elements added to the display, in away that connects commemorating practices with a sense of national honour.

The choice of the body parts for preservation is not accidental. The heart isthought to be one of the body’s most vital organs (Young 2003), the centre of thebody’s strength and powers (Antzoulatou-Retsila 2009, p. 23). The process ofembalming turns it from an invisible, internal organ and one most sensitive todecomposition to a visible artefact that defies the passage of time. The bones, onthe other hand, are the necessary bonds that hold the body together (Antzoulatou-Retsila 2009, pp. 24–25). They are the longest-lasting parts of the human body,upon which traces of the person’s life and culture are depicted. A symbolic interpre-tation would perhaps indicate that the heart and skeleton of a national hero act as aconnecting link between the Nation and its subjects. Certainly, the significance ofrelics depends on how people think of them. According to Verdery (1999, p. 28):

… a dead body is meaningful not in itself but through culturally established relationsto death and through the way a specific dead person’s importance is construed.

This is clearly demonstrated on the label describing Bouboulina (Museum ofSpetses):

She was a woman of unrestrained patriotism, […] a lionhearted heroine whose tacticsare a rare example in world history.

Figure 3. The wooden container with the bones of Laskarina Bouboulina, her portrait andthe museum’s explanatory label (photo by the author, September 2007).

392 E. Stefanou

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Hence, the authenticity of her safeguarded bones and their identification with herqualities whilst alive, attribute the exhibited relic the qualities of a living organism(Roy 1988, p. 219). This process of personification of relics facilitates the comple-tion of their life-circle: from once having a life, they were turned into objects onlyto be re-animated again (Roy 1988, p. 223) within a museum.

The materiality of objects, especially when personalised and identified withnational heroes, conceptualises abstract ideas of the national narrative into specificpowerful images. This process of concretisation of abstraction (Roy 1988, pp. 227–228) aids the shaping and maintenance of socio-political relations by providingnational ideology with visual images, the rigidity of which contradicts the inherentambiguity and multi-significance that characterises real human bodies: the relics aredisplayed as solid symbols of the naval past, enhancing its significance for thenation-building processes. The memory of the three individuals, as national heroes,does not allow any other approach to their personalities, which acquire concretemeanings contrary to the complex life they once lived (Verdery 1999, p. 29).Hence, their representation is discerned by static and monolithic approaches, whichelevate maritime heritage and concretise official perceptions of the national idea andnational origins.

A basic prerequisite for this concretisation of the abstract national narrative isvisual language, through which ideas are reflected onto objects that, in turn, act asthe material expressions of these ideas. In our case, the relics reinforce nationalmemory by materialising and visualising the intangibility of the sea, upon whichthe foundations of the modern Greek state are supposed to have been laid. In thenational narrative and the material representations of the maritime past, the Aegeanis the real and symbolic cultural, political and military boundary of the Greek state.Since water precludes the possibility of any physical memorial, the material repre-sentations of the maritime past visualise historical occurrences that took place inthese waters by positioning the dead among the living (Stefanou 2008).

The memory-making process is further reinforced by the temporal and performa-tive quality of the funerary inscriptions that adorn the body parts on display. Theuse of the verb vαi9ρɛ (hail, salute) in the present simple tense on the inscriptions ofboth funerary urns eradicates any notion of temporality. As a result, the subjects, towhom the inscriptions are dedicated, are instantly placed within a continuousnational present (Koumarianou 2008, p. 119). Inscriptions further reinforce thememory-making process by being interpreted as performative texts: when readunder appropriate circumstances, inscriptions encourage people to perform an act(hail, vαi9ρɛ), which is generated by the simultaneous presence of two temporalities,that of the text and of the act (Koumarianou 2008, pp. 143–144). Performative lan-guage generates the ritual act of honouring the nation’s dead because not only doesit provide a description of a certain action but it also constitutes an action in itself(Connerton 1989, p. 58). Consequently, performative utterances within the museumpresuppose certain attitudes by the visitors, who acquire the dual role of a spectatorand a participant of the commemorative ritual. Museum visitors become, therefore,the ‘compulsory witnesses’ (Parker and Kosofsky-Sedgwick 1995, pp. 10–11) ofthe commemorative act, which exists in and for the eyes of these witnesses andwould not have the same validity if it were not for them.

The commemoration of the dead in the present is also aided by portraiture. Inall cases, portraits of the dead accompany the deceased as an attempt to visualisethem, certainly not as decomposed corpses (Koumarianou 2008, p. 150). The

International Journal of Heritage Studies 393

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

portrait, as a form of atemporal representation, exonerates any indication of ageingand presents the subjects at their greatest moments. By opposing any notion of tem-poral reality, portraits aid the effect produced by the text on the inscriptions by pro-longing the subjects’ eternal youth and fame in the present tense. The interaction ofwritten and visual sources and the relationship these two means of representationdevelop around the relics lead to the diachronic reminiscence of the dead in thepresent – in any present.

If recollecting the dead means recollecting absence, then the inscriptions, as tex-tual evidence, act as the connecting link between what is obvious/material (imagescreated by portraits, funerary vessels), what is invisible (safeguarded human relics)and immaterial (death, physical absence of the deceased), in order to verballydenote and perform the presence within the museum space. Therefore, had theabove exhibits been placed outside museum contexts or had they been displayedindividually, the specific act of commemoration would probably have not takenplace. The absence of inscriptions on the funerary vessels and the lack of informa-tory material within the museum would completely alter both the context and thedegree of the relics’ significance.

Hence, the identification of the body parts with certain images and verbal asso-ciations is determining for the transformation of the museum space into a commem-orative space. In this context, portraits in those museums act like icons forveneration within churches: they create fixed images around the relics which, albeitinvisible, acquire a specific reflection. The deceased are attributed lifelong imagesand some kind of permanent visibility which the dead otherwise lack. The contra-diction of the deceased publicly looking at their own remains, as well as theremains’ actual materiality, exaggerates the absurdity of dead individuals being soimmensely present (Verdery 1999, p. 12).

Their allegedly authentic appearance within the museum space not only createsrigid images of the nation’s dead but also produces one single idiom in which thesepersonalities must be interpreted, despite the complex lives they once lived (Verdery1999, p. 29). Their relics are venerated and respected, not so much because of theirinherent features, as hearts and bones, but due to their material link with thenational heroes, who themselves ‘function’ as relics of what they used to be. Conse-quently, their importance for the national narrative is further reinforced by the mate-rial link with their own past (Breeur and Burms 2008, p. 134). In the same vein,Hallam and Hockey (2001, p. 131) raise the question of

How are material fragments and traces of the dead animated in efforts to sustainrelationships in the face of loss?

The answer lies on the relics’ capacity to trigger and shape the memories of theliving, which, in turn, crucially depends upon the ways in which death is conceptu-alized as either as continuity and rebirth or as the absolute end of life (Hallam andHockey 2001, p. 131).

In Greek religious and nationalist discourses death is conceptualised as rebirth,the fact which empowers human relics to generate or reinforce the memories of theliving by providing them a sense of continuity. Greek Orthodox religion holds thatbody and soul will be properly reunited in the afterlife, since the dead body is notregarded as a decaying corpse but as an entity with intellectual and moral qualities.In this context, Orthodox religion praises the unity of the body-person and rejects

394 E. Stefanou

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

the concept of Cartesian dualism, which originates from the philosophy of Platoand Aristotle, and advocates that the human soul cannot be identified with the phys-ical body. Orthodoxy holds, instead, that the concept of Dualism ‘provides ways ofcoping with the anxieties that characterise embodied life in a material universe’ andit therefore refers to ‘the antagonistic division between “body” and “soul”, betweenthe “material” and the “spiritual”’ (Prokes 1996, p. 7). This stance eradicates theproblem created with the post-mortem separation of body and soul, which renders abody with consciousness a human but a body without consciousness a corpse(Oestigaard 2004, p. 24). As a result, even though the deceased ceases being aliving entity and becomes a rotting dead body,

… his qualities are incorporated in the resurrection and re-structuring of a society asan ancestor. (Oestigaard 2004, p. 23)

In this process religious presence in museum displays with maritime focus hastwo different expressions: the first is the expression of religion as a set of beliefsand the second is its actual practice in the form of ritual. Orthodoxy as a set ofbeliefs relates to notions of faith, resurrection, eternity, immortality and unques-tionable knowledge. These beliefs, apart from being inscribed on the displays’context, are also essential discourses of the national narrative, since religion andnationalism share a common rhetoric and similar practices. Their analogies alsoexist in religious and political aspects of the Greek reality; they influence percep-tions of cultural heritage; they characterise the public presentation of the Greekmaritime past, where syncretism between religious and nationalist elements oftenappears as natural, unseen or disregarded (Stewart 1994, p. 127). Therefore, reli-gion and nationalism can be treated as two comparable systems of belief for cer-tain reasons, such as the employment of ritual for the induction and unificationof people under ties created by joint participation and performance in collectiveceremonies; the dependence on the use of symbols (be they saints’ relics andicons or flags and heroes) for the visualisation and material production of theirideal, the utilisation of a certain type of emotive language for the verbal perfor-mance of their aspirations about the religious and the national community, theproclamation of perceptions of symbolic immortality on a personal, religious andnational level.

These ideological elements and practices highly define representations of Greekmaritime heritage overall: sacredness, as an expression of religion, and the nationalidea, as the expression of the secular, blur through common rhetoric and aspirationsand depict aspects of the contemporary Greek society (Stefanou 2008). The notionof veneration in museum spaces demonstrates the ambiguity that exists regardingthe unclear distinction between the secular and the sacred. This is not uncommonfor museums overall, since scholars who examine museum sites as religious sites(Duncan 1995, O’Neil 1996, Durrans 2000) advocate that museums resemblechurches because they require a certain element of performance, normally encoun-tered in religious spaces: they are considered ritual sites because of the concept ofpilgrimage they uphold, the specified route and narrative they follow, and their spa-tial and cultural designation (Duncan 1995, O’Neil 1996 Kong 2005, p. 496, Mac-Donald 2005). It is also the case that the veneration of art forms a new religion insecular societies, which substitutes the veneration of the fading religion in churchesand the pursuit of religious beliefs through the worship of icons and relics. This

International Journal of Heritage Studies 395

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

depoliticised religion is supposed to have been substituted by the secular religion ofnationalism and by art and museums in modern societies in which secularisation isan intrinsic part of modernisation (Gellner 1983, Duncan 1995, pp. 7–8, Van derVeer 1995, p. 7, O’Neil 1996).

Yet, Greek museums are ritualised spaces not because of the absence of reli-gion in the Greek society or because of the need for a different kind of perfor-mance, since the museum veneration of sacred and profane objects/relics does notsubstitute for the fading orthodox religion. Rather, as religion plays a crucial rolein the Greek state, the metaphorical attribution of sanctity to the past is so deeplyestablished as a concept that the idea of museum visits as pilgrimages can becomparable to any pilgrimage to a sacred place. In light of these, a new kind ofre-contextualisation of objects and meanings takes place as museums are trans-formed into religious sites, where non-religious forms of heritage are being rev-ered with the same respect attributed to religious contexts. Body parts inmuseums are ascribed religious terms, no matter how much the supernaturalinspired them (Durrans 2000, p. 76), and exercise their ideological power onmuseums’ visitors as they are not worshipped in themselves but are the aids tothe veneration of perceived national heroes (Roy 1988, p. 227) and to the celebra-tion of national memory.

Epilogue

The National Historical Museum, the Historical Archive-Museum of Hydra and theMuseum of Spetses manage to revive the intangible nature of naval activity throughthe materiality of human relics. They act as a tribute to the national heroes’ actions,their death, their memory and eventually their national contribution. They becomemnemonic loci of national values by resembling shrines and memorial sites, bothspiritually (i.e. in the feeling of sacredness and reverence) and aesthetically (i.e. lay-out-funerary space, visual effects-dimmed lights and funerary objects). Museum vis-its become symbolic pilgrimages to history, denote worship of the past, andcommemorate collective identity through reverential practices. Albeit de-contextua-lised, relics are thought to represent the achievements of the three historical person-alities and become the objects of veneration themselves (Ward 1994, pp. 52–53):they animate these personalities as reminiscences of their braveries whilst alive;they commemorate the naval heroes’ spiritual and physical existence in contempo-rary Greek society; they accentuate the significance of the maritime past for thenation-building processes and the existence of the Greek state. Relics create a livingbond between the national present and the historical past (Lindholm 2002, p. 332),with a twofold outcome: the sanctification of the heroic past and the celebration ofnaval heritage, which provides a vigorous and reverential sense of historical conti-nuity. Andreas Miaoulis, Konstantinos Kanaris and Laskarina Bouboulina are notjust remembered as the nation’s dead but as the people who enabled the Greeknational resurrection. Their displayed body parts produce mnemonic loci (Hamilakis2007, p. 397) which visibly reproduce the national imagination and host the uniqueconvergence of religious symbolism, national ideology and maritime identity. Theembalmed hearts and the preserved bones are synonyms of immortality; they repre-sent naval struggle and national pride; they embody the sea, which is rendered aninherent value of Greekness by being the heart, the soul and the body of the Greeknation.

396 E. Stefanou

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

AcknowledgementsPreliminary research on parts of this paper was conducted during my PhD at the Universityof Southampton, funded by the Greek State Scholarships Foundation (IKY). I am grateful toYannis Hamilakis for inspiring me to work on the ideological perceptions of the past in thepresent. I also wish to thank Aris Anagnostopoulos for his editing skills and his commentson this draft. Special mention should be made of the director of the Historical Archive-Museum of Hydra, Mrs. Konstantina Adamopoulou-Pavlou, the staff of the NationalHistorical Museum of Greece and the Museum of Spetses. Lastly, I would like to show mygratitude to the editors of this volume and the two anonymous referees for their valuablecomments.

Notes on contributorEleni Stefanou is an adjunct lecturer of museum education and museum studies at theDepartment of Pre-School Education and the Educational Design, University of the Aegean,Rhodes, Greece. Her research interests evolve around the ideological uses of the past in thepresent, as these are shaped through museum and heritage representations, memory practicesand education, i.e. the predominant fields that shape the intimate relationship of varioussocial groups with the past.

Notes1. http://www.iamy.gr.2. http://www.nhmuseum.gr.3. http://www.culture.gr/h/1/gh151.jsp?obj_id=3378.4. For the commemorative ceremony in memory of the naval activity of Admiral Andreas

Miaoulis visit http://www.miaouleia.gr.5. For the re-enactment of the Naval Battle of Spetses (8 September 1822) visit http://

www.nomarhiapeiraia.gr/.6. http://www.amnh.org/.7. http://www.museums-of-paris.com/musee_fr.php?code=342.8. http://www.museumofman.org/9. http://www.medicalmuseums.org/ and http://www.collphyphil.org/MUTTER.ASP.10. http://www.lifeinitaly.com/religion/incorruptibles.asp.11. http://www.aha.ru/~mausoleu/.12. http://cebuheritage.com/heritage-of-cebu/govt-edifices/rizal-memorial-library-museum/

and http://usp.pixelsplasher.com/USP.Rizal.Museum.html.13. http://www.franciscan-archive.org/bonaventura/parish.html.14. http://www.mainememory.net/bin/Features?t=fp&feat=59.15. http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2008-02-26-washington-hair_N.htm.16. http://catalogue.museogalileo.it/object/MiddleFingerGalileosRightHand.html.17. The finger was detached from the body by Anton Francesco Gori (12 March 1737),

when Galileo’s remains were moved from the original grave to his monumental tomb.The finger became the property of Angelo Maria Bandini and was long exhibited at theBiblioteca Laurenziana. In 1841, the relic was transferred to the just-opened Tribuna diGalileo in the Museo di Fisica e Storia Naturale. Together with the Medici-Lorraineinstruments, it was eventually moved to the Museo di Storia della Scienza in 1927. Onthe marble base is carved a commemorative inscription by Tommaso Perelli.

18. This hall includes guns, coins, medals, portraits and personal belongings of Admirals,ship owners, and wealthy individuals of the nineteenth century Hydrean society, and theHydrean revolutionary flag.

19. These are: the revolutionary flags of the three ottoman-occupied islands that participatedin the naval struggle (Hydra, Spetses and Psara), portraits of Greek admirals and fire-ship captains, some personal belongings of ship-owners, ships’ figureheads and a fewship models of 1821 fire-ships.

20. For a detailed description of the funerary urn’s decorations (see Antzoulatou-Retsila2009, pp. 171–172).

International Journal of Heritage Studies 397

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

21. Information provided to me by the personnel of the Museum of Spetses, 9 September2005.

22. This hall displays the island’s revolutionary flag, portraits of admirals and fire-ship cap-tains, some personal belongings such as guns, and some painting depicting the navalevents of the era.

References

Adamopoulou-Pavlou, K., 1999. Istoriko Arheio – Mouseio Ydras [Historical archive –museum of Hydra]. Hydra: Ekdosi tou Somateiou ton Filon tou Istorikou Arxeiou –Mouseiou Ydras.

Adamopoulou-Pavlou, K. and Prassa, A.N., eds., 2003. Andreas Miaoulis. Athens: Estia.Antzoulatou-Retsila, E., 2004. Mnimis Tekmiria [Testimonies of Memory]. Athens: Papazisi.Antzoulatou-Retsila, E., 2009. Soma kai Mnimi [Body and Memory]. Athens: Papazisi.Barilan, Y.M., 2005. The story of the body and the story of the person: towards an ethics of

representing human bodies and body-parts. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 8,193–205.

Bowie, F., 2006. The anthropology of religion: an introduction. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Breeur, R. and Burms, A., 2008. Persons and relics. Ratio (New Series), XXI, 134–146.Chamberlain, A.T. and Parker-Pearson, M., 2001. Earthly remains: the history and science

of preserved human bodies. London: The British Museum Press.Connerton, P., 1989. How societies remember. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Duncan, C., 1995. Civilising rituals: inside public art museums. London: Routledge.Durrans, B., 2000. (Not) religion in museums. In: C. Paine, ed. Godly things: museums,

objects, and religion. London: Leicester University Press, 57–79.Fraser, M. and Greco, M., 2005. The body: a reader. New York, NY: Routledge.Geary, P., 1986. Sacred commodities: the circulation of medieval relics. In: A. Appadurai,

ed. The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspectives. New York, NY:Cambridge University Press, 169–191.

Gellner, E, 1983. Nations and nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell.George, A., 2004. Is ‘property’ necessary? On owning the human body and its parts. Res

Publica, 10, 15–42.Gillespie, S., 2001. Personhood, agency and mortuary ritual: a case study from the ancient

Maya. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 20, 73–112.Hallam, E. and Hockey, J., eds., 2001. Death, memory and material culture. Oxford: Berg.Hamilakis, Y., 2007. The nation and its ruins: antiquity, archaeology, and national imagina-

tion in Greece. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Hamilakis, Y. and Yalouri, E., 1999. Sacralising the past. Archaeological Dialogues, 2,

115–160.Hamilakis, Y., Pluciennik, M., and Tarlow, S., eds., 2002. Thinking through the body:

archaeologies of corporeality. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.Joyce, R.A., 2005. Archaeology of the body. Annual Review of Anthropology, 34, 139–158.Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B., 1998. Destination culture: tourism, museums, and heritage.

Berkley, CA: University of California Press.Kong, L., 2005. Representing the religious: nation, community, and identity in museums.

Social and Cultural Geography, 6 (4), 495–513.Koumarianou, M.K., 2008. Mnimeia kai Nekroi: To Fantasiako tou Thanatou sti Syxroni

Ellada. Mia Anthropologiki kai Simeiologiki Prosegisi ton Astikon Nekrotafeion [Monu-ments and the dead: the imaginary of death in modern Greece. An anthropological andsemiotic approach to urban cemeteries]. Athens: Dodoni.

Lawrence, S.C., 1998. Beyond the Grave – The Use and Meaning of Human Body Parts: AHistorical Introduction. In: R.F. Weir, ed. Stored Tissue Samples: Ethical, Legal, andPublic Policy Implications. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 111–142.

Lindholm, Ch., 2002. Authenticity, anthropology, and the sacred. Anthropological Quarterly,75 (2), 331–338.

Lohman, J. and Goodnow, K., 2006. Human remains and museum practice. London:UNESCO and The Museum of London.

398 E. Stefanou

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Macdonald, S., 2005. Enchantment and its dilemmas: the museum as a ritual site. In: M.Bouquet and N. Porto, eds. Science, magic, and religion: the ritual processes of museummagic. Oxford: Berghahn Books, 209–227.

Mellor, P. and Shilling, C., 1993. Modernity, self-identity and the sequestration of death.Sociology, 27 (3), 411–432.

Metcalf, P. and Huntington, R., 1991. Celebrations of death: the anthropology of mortuaryritual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mihesuah, D.A., 2000. Repatriation reader: who owns American Indian remains? Lincoln:University of Nebraska Press.

Mitchell, M., 2007. Constructing immortality: the role of the dead in everyday life. In: M.Mitchell, ed. Remember me: constructing immortality. London: Routledge, 1–18.

Oestigaard, T., 2004. Death and ambivalent materiality – human flesh as culture and cosmol-ogy. In: T. Oestigaard, N. Anfinset, and T. Saetersdal, eds. Combining the past and thepresent archaeological perspectives on society. Proceedings from the conference ‘Pre-history in a global perspective’, Bergen, August 31st–September 2nd 2001. Bergen:Archaeolpress-BAR S1210, 23–30.

O’Grady, K., Gilroy, A.L., and Gray, J., 1998. Bodies, lives, voices: gender in theology.Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

O’Neil, M., 1996. Making histories of religion. In: G. Kavanagh, ed. Making histories inmuseums. London: Leicester University Press, 188–199.

Parker, A. and Kosofsky-Sedgwick, E., eds., 1995. Performativity and performance. NewYork, NY: Routledge.

Prokes, M.T., 1996. Toward a theology of the body. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans PublishingCompany.

Roy, E., 1988. Fetishism. Man – New Series, 23 (2), 213–235.Smith, L., 2004. The repatriation of human remains – problem or opportunity? Antiquity, 78

(300), 404–413.Stefanou, E., 2008. Aspects of identity and nationhood: commemorating, representing and

replicating the Greek maritime past. Thesis (PhD). Southampton University.Stefanou E., 2009. Anaparastaseis tou Parelthontos sta Nautika Mouseia tis Elladas kai tou

Exoterikou [Representations of the past in maritime museums of Greece and abroad].Museology – International Scientific Electronic Journal [online], 5, 49–62. Availablefrom: http://museology.ct.aegean.gr/articles/200992415657.pdf [Accessed 28 October2010].

Stewart, C., 1994. Syncretism as a dimension of nationalist discourse in modern Greece. In:C. Stewart and R. Shaw, eds. Syncretism/anti-syncretism: the politics of religious synthe-sis. London: Routledge, 127–144.

Van der Veer, P., 1995. The secular production of religion. Etnofoor, 8 (2), 5–14.Verdery, K., 1999. The political lives of dead bodies. New York, NY: Columbia University

Press.Walter, T., 2008. The presence of the dead in society. Paper presented at the Conference on

Death & Dying in 18–21c Europe, Alba Iulia, Romania, September. Available from: http://www.bath.ac.uk/cdas/people/cdasmem/Romania%202008%20article%20(web%20version). doc [Accessed 28 October 2010].

Ward, L., 1994. The cult of relics: Pasteur material at the Science Museum. Medical History,38, 52–72.

Young, L., 2003. The book of heart. New York, NY: Doubleday.

International Journal of Heritage Studies 399

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

02 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014