Mary Beard, historian: ‘There is a deeply far-right appropriation of the classics’

These days, the classical world is an object of desire for a far right that is trying to appropriate its imperial ideas and aesthetics; but fortunately, this world has a defender who was here long before them: Mary Beard, with her energy and vehemence still intact at age 71. The leading expert on ancient Greeks and Romans, emeritus professor at the University of Cambridge and recipient of the 2016 Princess of Asturias Award, addresses the phenomenon in her latest book, Talking Classics: The Shock of the Old, a demonstration that knowledge is best paired with engagement and enthusiasm.

Question. Why do the classics inspire the far right today?

Answer. There is a deeply far-right appropriation of the classics. But the classics don’t have a politics. They have also been reference points for the left, for democracy, for social change… They inspired the French and American revolutions, and Marx wrote his thesis on Greek philosophy. The classics are at once revolutionary and conservative, which is why they are interesting.

Q. But you tell us in your book that they have been appropriated more strongly today than before.

A. In the 20th century it was the case with Hitler and Mussolini, and today Trump is very committed to classical architecture. We need to recognize and confront that, to be aware that the legacy of the ancient world addressed civic values, thought, politics and community life. Take Spartacus, a rebellious slave who broke barriers and has been a symbol of freedom for the enslaved for centuries. The extreme right is using the ancient world, but they do not have a monopoly on that cause.

Q. Are they manipulating it?

A. They simplify it and generally get it wrong. The ancient world is there for everyone, not just academics. But my job is sometimes to say, look, the classical world wasn’t like you claim it was. One of the very obvious cases is the way there has been an admiration amongst the far-right for pure, white, classical sculpture. My obligation as an academic is to say Rome was not like in the movies. It was colorful, smelly, dirty, diverse, and to me that made it more interesting, not less. It is important that we counter those things. No one has the right to control the classical world; it is part of the way we think about things.

Q. Which films are the most faithful to reality?

A. Parts of Gladiator, like the battle scenes or the gladiator combat, are. Ridley Scott got it right. The sequel is terrible, lousy.

Q. What about Ben-Hur or Spartacus?

A. I love Ben-Hur, although I think the chariot race was probably very tame compared with real-life chariot racing. I also love Spartacus, although I’m not sure that solidarity among slaves was historically accurate. But he was a real person; we have some evidence. Spartacus was a movie produced and made and written by people who’d been banned under McCarthy. So it’s a very left-wing movie. It shows that Roman symbolism is not solely right-wing — Spartacus wasn’t.

Q. You describe how Mussolini redesigned ancient Rome. Do we still see it through his eyes?

A. Yes. But the exciting thing about Rome is that you don’t have to dig very deep to find many other things about women, the poor, and a little bit about the slaves. We enjoy the magisterial exterior that appealed to Mussolini, and can also think about the smelly back streets of Pompeii, the dirt.

Q. Do all empires end in ruins?

A. The Romans would have put it this way: empires rise and fall. They knew that one day there would be no Roman Empire. When the Roman general Scipio brutally conquered Carthage, he wept, and when asked why, he said: “This will happen to Rome one day.” The Roman idea was that empires do not last.

Q. And what do you believe?

A. I would be very surprised if in 300 years we still found the same imperial powers we see today. Had we lived in the 19th century, we would have believed the British Empire would be everlasting, but it wasn’t. Empires are very fragile, and empires are attacked from within. Rome shows us that the most powerful critics come from inside the empire. Tacitus puts the words in the mouth of a British rebel that best summarize what empires are: “They make a desert, and they call it peace.” In the 21st century, we are still making deserts and calling it peace.

Q. What does Latin mean to you?

A. It was used to exclude people, and some of that remains. I would never tell people not to read translations, but the pleasure of entering the version of the world the Romans themselves wrote allows us to understand them. It is thrilling to read Virgil’s Aeneid in Latin and discover how it was written and what it really says. It is a literature that has expanded for 2,000 years. The opening words, “Arma virumque cano” [“I sing of arms and the man”], practically make no sense in English, but it is not a boring bit of Latin; it means: I will give you battles, I will give you arms, I will give you the man, I will give you the Homeric hero. If you only look at the translation, you get bored. But it is exciting to enter the mindset of a different culture, especially one so remote. You see the world differently. The world is different in different languages and even more so in Latin. One of the bad things in the modern world is not asking how things are for others. We see everybody thinking that their own point of view is the only point of view that there is. For me, learning languages is learning that the world is different for different people. And that does not mean I want to be Roman or that they were right.

Q. Why should we continue studying the classics?

A. I would never say — as was once said — that it is the only way to understand Western civilization, but there is something in the West that has always been in conversation with the ancient world: political ideas, citizenship, justice, laws… And seeing where debates began helps you understand them. If you ask me what I would miss most if I could not read Latin or Greek, it would be Homer’s Odyssey, from which, by the way, a major new film by Christopher Nolan is now coming. The Odyssey is integrated into our Western culture, and if you remove it you lose the beginning of what we are. Some students today believe the debate over freedom of expression began with social media. When you tell them it has been going on for 2,000 years, they first don’t believe you and then they begin to see things differently. Many people are wrong to think the ancient world offers a single answer — it does not — but it does offer different perspectives that help you think through your debates. When Nelson Mandela was imprisoned, he staged Antigone for the other prisoners; it was a way to speak to them. And it helped him formulate his thoughts on conscience, political morality and tyranny.

Q. Should the Parthenon marbles or the bust of Nefertiti be returned?

A. I am a trustee of the British Museum’s board, but I speak personally. And the issue is always more complicated than the way it is presented. It is usually posed like a divorce struggle: which parent gets the children, Greece or England? What I would like to see, though I will probably not live to see it, is for these treasures to be shared with the world. I would like to see museums as lending libraries and for major works of art to be lent, to travel, to be shared. Some objects transcend ownership. Who owns the Mona Lisa? The Louvre, yes, but that is a very narrow way to see it. I would like us to think of a global culture in which we could share. Major works of art should be shared.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition