| Author | Message | ||
     Bill Houghton Senior Member Username: sphinx Post Number: 64 Registered: 05-1999 Posted From: 165.247.18.40 |
Egypt is demanding that the 2000-year-old Rosetta Stone be returned to Cairo and has threatened to pursue its claim "aggressively" if the British Museum does not agree to give it back. The stone, which became the key to deciphering Egyptian hieroglyphics, was found by Napoleon's army in 1799 in the Nile delta, but has been in Britain for 200 years. "If the British want to be remembered, if they want to restore their reputation, they should volunteer to return the Rosetta Stone because it is the icon of our Egyptian identity," said Zahi Hawass, director of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo. He has begun negotiations with the museum. "Otherwise I will have to approach them using a different strategy . . . the artefacts stolen from Egypt must come back." Dr Hawass said he had been discussing a three-month loan to the Cairo Museum, before the stone's permanent return to Egypt. The Rosetta Stone, which dates from 196 BC, was discovered in 1799 in the western delta of the Nile. The stone provided a key to understanding hieroglyphic text because it was accompanied by a Greek translation. The French ceded it to Britain under the Treaty of Alexandria in 1801 and it has been exhibited in the British Museum since 1802. Vivian Davies, keeper of the Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan at the museum, indicated that a voluntary return was unlikely. "We are working with our Egyptian colleagues to preserve the heritage of today rather than concentrate on problems - or issues, perhaps I should say - that are very old," he said. The Egyptian Government has asked for the stone as part of a program to return "stolen" antiquities from all over the world. It also wants to retrieve the bust of Queen Nefertiti from the Berlin Museum, the statues of Hatshepsut in the Metropolitan Museum of New York and the obelisk in the Place de la Concorde, Paris. | ||
| bernhard a. grundl Senior Member Username: bernhard_grundl Post Number: 466 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 193.27.50.73 |
Dear BILL, yes, these are disturbing messages ! i fully accept the desire of egypt to get back all the thousands of objects, stolen and plundered over some hundred years ago ! but at the same time we have to say, that egyptian people themselfs took part on some of these sad transactions as well, becoming enriched and entering into higher positions. we all have to preserve and save the fascinating heritage of egypt. and it is the heritage of the whole civilized word as well ! but how to solve the whole complicated situations and problems in relation with this gigantic task. it seems to be the WORK OF SISYPHUS ! the problems are not simply related with the museums, institutes and private persons WorldWide, possessing ( owning ? ) ten-thousands of egyptian artifacts ! in many cases, the existence of these museums and institutes are directly depending on showing the ORIGINAL OBJECTS, not copies or imitations ! that is the thrill for thousands of visitors, who PAY for it. great research is (mostly) done by the international institutes and museums all over the world, and not only at egypt and it's institutes. and this international community finances and establishes a lot of excavations and investigations in egypt as well. and what about the people on the payrolls of these institutions ? many of them would become jobless when emptying their museums. what about the diplomatic and legal problems ( including the basics of international law ! ) when trying to launch massiv pressure to get egyptians heritage back ? what about the juristic struggle by judging, if an object has been "correctly" bought or sold ( at what time / by whom / where are the written documents / or: what about war-time and its special situation of law and order ), or had the object been stolen or plundered. by whom ? what proof do we have against a person ? ok, on what criteria do we now want to decide: this object must be transferred back, and the other must not ! ( not so famous ? not so important ? not so old ? or the owner has good "contacts" ? ) and i see the next typical human problem arising: who is then responsible, who manages this international "thanks-giving-back". what enormous financial sums will cycling in the background and "wandering" back into some people's purse, by avoiding the transfer back of an certain object. and another BIG BANG WILL NOW OCCUR: other countries worldwide will take the same right into their own account, and will start a similar worldwide action: they all want their heritage back ! ( the IRAQ / IRAN / RUSSIA / GERMANY - yes ! ) / INDIA / INDONESIA / LAOS-CAMBODJA / CHINA / JAPAN / PERU / CHILE / and so on : nearly the whole world ! sorry, sorry, this is not practicable. tell me how ? now back to egypt: what will egypt do with thousands of objects transferred back home ! stored again in the hidden and forgotten rooms of a CAIRO MUSEUM or in the subterranean key-locked halls of an ARMY LOCATION. and what will happen then ? i would say: nearly NOTHING, because they do not have the financial budget, the number of experts, the technical equipment, and the secure locations, and all other scientific infrastructure needed ! BTW, only some weeks ago we could angrily watch the risks of an totally centralized archiving location containing thousands of worldfamous objects: the NATIONAL museum of BAGHDAD ! i do not have to remember these terrific and shocking scenes. i do not want to imagine such a scenario at Cairo, MAY BE caused by war, civil-war or fanatic attacks by a political, religious or ethnic mob, without any respect of human culture, whatever it is , or where-ever it comes from !?? it sounds very strange: but there can be an advantage, if priceless artifacts of world's heritage are scattered all over the world, and (mostly) saved at relativly secure location, under professional guardance. ---- the private FOREIGN owners of egyptian artifacts are another problem. ( WHAT ABOUT EGYPTIAN OWNER OF OLD ARTIFACTS ?? ) that's clear. here we may have a more criminal background. but again: you cannot accuse every arts-loving private person, and put him into jail ! yes, it is not easy ! and last not least: the actual proceedings against museums and institutes by the SCA IS VERY VERY UNDIPLOMATIC AND WITHOUT ANY SENSIVITY ! the international atmosphere is getting more and more poisoned, and all the accused persons or institutes will enter a counter-position. co-operation will be reduced or stopped, and somewhat like a COLD-WAR WILL BE STARTED. do we not have war of all kind enough on our wonderful (still) blue planet !?? the controlling and censoring mechanisms of the SCA, in combination with massiv restriction of free access and research is onyl resulting in more and more negative effects, like a big black spider, shadowing all over egypt and its tourism as well ! there is so much to say, but i will stop here, because my heart is near to overflow. i am very disappointed ! best regards: Bernie | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 810 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.158.187 |
Well stated, Bernhard ! JD | ||
| Nicole B. Hansen Senior Member Username: nicole Post Number: 25 Registered: 03-2001 Posted From: 217.52.3.201 |
I think what is important to realize that all of this posturing that Zahi has been doing lately has everything to do with politics and very little to do with Egyptology. I have found it quite amusing watching all of the debate over whether Joanne Fletcher's claims of having found Nefertiti were founded or not. The truth is that while Zahi may have attacked her on scientific grounds, the real mistake was in that the Discovery Channel announced the discovery without any consultation or coordination with the SCA. This is not allowed according to SCA rules and is nothing new. Remember that Greek woman who worked in Siwa back in 1995 who did the same thing and got blacklisted as well? When Zahi said Fletcher was naive, I think it would be fair to say that she was naive to not realize that announcing her discovery in this manner would not get her in trouble. As for the demands on the British Museum, the Berlin Museum situation, etc., in the end, what does it matter for the sake of Egyptology where these objects are? But for appearances in internal Egyptian politics, such demands look really good to a lot of Egyptians from a nationalistic perspective. I don't think it is any coincidence that Zahi made this announcement on the day before the 51st anniversary of the 1952 Egyptian revolution, or four days before anniversary of the 1956 nationalization of the Suez Canal. It would be nice if Egyptology were able to exist without the interference of politics but realistically, it never has. How do you think the Rosetta Stone got in the British Museum in the first place? The British took it as war spoils from the French. Since its inception, Egyptology has been intertwined with politics and if someone wants to work in Egyptology they simply have to be able to deal with both academics and politics. (Message edited by nicole on July 24, 2003) Nicole B. Hansen Ph.D. candidate, Egyptology, University of Chicago Egyptologist/Editor, Theban Mapping Project Cairo, Egypt | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 813 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.114 |
Dear Nicole, Thank you for your insider view ! Politics and nationalism indeed, but still not a very pretty view. Could you elaborate on the FLETCHER matter ? Under what conditions does one have to consult the SCA prior to a publication or announce it in coordination with them ? JD | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 132 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
But politics now seems to have become an end in itself, while scholarship, archeology, and conservation, have now moved to the periphery. But I would like to emphasize that this seems to be pervading all of Archeology and not just egyptology. | ||
| bernhard a. grundl Senior Member Username: bernhard_grundl Post Number: 472 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 193.27.50.73 |
DEAR MEMBERS, this sad struggle is still going on. here the most actual news: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/story.jsp?story=426976 best regards: Bernie | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 133 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Thanks Bernhard it's not only sad but stupid. | ||
| James M. Vance Senior Member Username: jmvance Post Number: 54 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 4.35.42.10 |
Very true, Rick. I think I detect a bit of posturing on the part of Hawass. It's really too bad--I have nothing but admiration for Zahi and his work--I consider him to be one of the world's greatest scholars. This attitude is really sad. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 135 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
As anybody who studies Egyptology quickly realizes, Egyptology is not only the history of Egypt but the history of vandalism. I can see no reason to return the Rosetta stone to Egypt. | ||
| Bill Houghton Senior Member Username: sphinx Post Number: 65 Registered: 05-1999 Posted From: 165.247.17.146 |
Just before Zahi Hawass was due to begin his lecture at a British Museum colloquium on Ancient Egypt last week, the lights blew. The symbolism was not lost on many in the audience. For the new director of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt is a man much given to rupturing what has come to be regarded as the normal order of things. While he was in London for the conference, he dropped a diplomatic bombshell. At a private dinner with the British Museum's director, Dr Neil MacGregor, he calmly announced that Egypt would be applying for the return of the Rosetta Stone. No wonder the lights fused. The 2,000-year-old relic is perhaps the Bloomsbury museum's most important exhibit. It draws millions of people each year, and is seen by more of the museum's 5.5 million annual visitors than any other single object. Until recently, Dr Hawass was the director of the Pyramids at Giza, but last year he took over as secretary general of the Supreme Council of Antiquities. He has been throwing his considerable weight about ever since. In recent weeks he has fallen out with one of the world's foremost Egyptologists, the director of the Egyptian Museum in Berlin, Dieter Wildung. Wildung allowed two Hungarian artists temporarily to fuse a 3,300-year-old bust of Queen Nefertiti to a modern bronze statue - based on an actual statue from the same period in the Berlin museum - to make a video installation for the Venice Biennale. It was attached to the statue for "only a few hours", but it brought an outcry from Cairo that Wildung had "defamed Egypt's history". Wildung - and his archaeologist wife - have now been denied permission to excavate in Egypt in the future, and told that no Egyptian official will co-operate with them in any capacity. That is not all. The British Egyptologist, Dr Joann Fletcher, a mummification specialist from the University of York, recently announced that she may have found the mummy of Nefertiti, the stepmother of the legendary boy king Tutankhamun who ruled the Nile kingdom in the 14th century BC - and whose tomb, when it was discovered in 1922, became Egyptology's most famous find, containing so many artefacts that it took almost 10 years to remove them from the site. Hawass reacted furiously to Fletcher's announcement. The British academic had found, in a tomb of the right period, a mummy with a long neck similar to Nefertiti's, as well as other physical links, including the impression of a tight-fitting browband (as the queen once wore), a double-pierced ear lobe and shaved head. "Fletcher is a beginner and obtained her PhD only a short time ago and cannot, with her limited experience, judge such a discovery," Hawass fulminated. Foreign excavation teams who made incorrect announcements, he warned, would find their work stopped. One well-known British archaeologist has already been banned, according to the Cairo paper Al-Ahram. In a world of high-octane academic rivalry there are those who complain - anonymously for fear of retribution - that the new antiquities chief hates the idea of foreigners getting the glory. Certainly he has said publicly that from 2007 foreigners are to be banned from starting new work at the prime sites of Giza and Saqqara. New excavations will be exclusively by Egyptian teams. Foreign experts will only be allowed to restore existing monuments there. There was something threatening about the tone the Egyptian antiquities chief struck at the British Museum last week. Britain should voluntarily return the Rosetta Stone, he said, "otherwise I will have to approach them using a different strategy. There are various stages to our negotiations. I don't want to fight anyone now, but if the British Museum doesn't act, we will have to employ a more aggressive approach with the Government. I don't care if people know my strategy; the artefacts stolen from Egypt must come back." Given the precedent of the Elgin Marbles, you might think he has the chance of a snowball in the Sahara. The 2,500-year-old sculptures depicting religious and mythological scenes, which once adorned the Parthenon in Athens, were removed around 1804 and brought to London by the British diplomat Lord Elgin. Athens has called for their return since 1829 without success - and Neil MacGregor has recently said that they will never be returned to Greece, even on loan. As the Egyptian Antiquities department at the British Museum is perhaps the biggest and most important outside Cairo - illustrating every aspect of ancient Egyptian culture from pre-dynastic times (c4000BC) to the Coptic (Christian) period (12th century) - it might be supposed that it was immune from pressure. But the wife of its keeper of Egyptian antiquities, Vivian Davies, is the archaeologist Renée Friedman, who is the director of the American expedition to Hierakonpolis, the site of Egypt's first capital, where she discovered a full blown writing system in the pre-dynastic necropolis dating from 3500BC. Already there have been mutterings that Davies and Friedman could find themselves in the same position as Wildung and his wife. On Hawass's shopping list, as well as the stone, are the bust of Queen Nefertiti from the Berlin Museum, the statues of Hatshepsut in the Metropolitan Museum of New York, and even the obelisk in the Place de la Concorde, one of the most famous landmarks in Paris, which he wants to restore to the Luxor temple, where it was originally one of a pair. And that is just the big stuff. He also wants a 5ft red granite statue of Alexander the Great from Frankfurt museum, as well as 17 items from Norway and four from Japan. Under international agreements brokered by Unesco, governments have the right to recover antiquities stolen after 1971, but Hawass is also after artefacts such as the Rosetta Stone, which has been in the British Museum since 1802. It is not hard to see why the stone is top of his list. On the face of it, the stone is just a compact basalt slab, less than 4ft long, on which is carved a text written by a group of priests assembled at Memphis on the first anniversary of the coronation of Ptolemy V as king of all Egypt. It was an attempt to emphasise in the eyes of the Egyptian elite the legitimacy of the 13-year-old king, whose dynasty was Greek but which had ruled Egypt since the fragmentation of the empire of Alexander the Great. So it listed all the good things that the pharaoh had done for priests and people. The list was to prove the key that unlocked the door to the mysteries of Ancient Egypt. The stone was found in 1799 by French soldiers digging the foundations of an addition to a fort near the town of Rashid (Rosetta in English) in the Nile delta during Napoleon's expedition to Egypt. The stone was ceded to Britain under the Treaty of Alexandria in 1801, and the next year it was moved to the British Museum. There it puzzled cryptologists for decades. What was unique about the stone was that it said the same thing in three languages. The first was in the pictograms known as hieroglyphs - the script of official and religious texts the Egyptians used for nearly 3,500 years. It was also in demotic - the everyday language of the time. Both of these no one could read. But it was also in the Greek used by the country's Ptolemaic rulers. Until the discovery of the stone, all attempts to uncover the secrets held by the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics found on walls inside tombs had failed. The pictures were believed - wrongly - to be symbolic, each representing an object or idea. But then Thomas Young, an English physicist who studied the stone, showed that the seven elongated ovals, or cartouches, in the hieroglyphic section spelled something phonetically - the royal name of Ptolemy. This suggested that hieroglyphs did not have only symbolic meaning, but that they also served as a "spoken language". Gradually others built on his work. Finally, in 1822, the French scholar J-F Champollion worked out, cross-referring to modern Coptic, what the seven demotic equivalents were. Then he began tracing these demotic signs back to hieroglyphic signs, enlarging Young's list of phonetic hieroglyphs until he had laid bare the foundations of the ancient language. It was, as a previous director of the British Museum, Graham Green, put it with forgiveable hyperbole, "the most important event of the second millennium". Which explains why Zahi Hawass is anxious to have the stone in his collection in Cairo. The arguments against returning it are the same as those for hanging on to the Elgin Marbles. They can - in the words of Neil MacGregor, at the time when he ended discussions with a British campaign group seeking their return to Greece - "do most good" in their current home, where they can be seen in a broader historical context. "The British Museum is one of the great cultural achievements of mankind: it is very important that there is a place where all the world can store its achievements. I personally don't see any difference between Greek visual culture and the visual culture of Italy and Holland, which is also spread around the world," MacGregor said. The Rosetta Stone is the centrepiece of the British Museum's Egyptology collection. If it were to be moved to the Cairo Museum, which has less than half the British Museum's number of visitors, it would be seen by far fewer people. Which is why the British are taking the same line on the Rosetta Stone as on the Marbles. "What curator in the British Museum would actually want to see leave an object that is absolutely core to our function as an institution?" the museum's Egyptian curator, Vivian Davies, has said. But they can expect Zahi Hawass to fight tough. Within weeks of taking up his new office he created a new Department of Foreign Archaeological Missions, which has sent ripples of concern moving through non-Egyptian archaeologists. They are now required to submit a plan defining the borders of the excavation area, which cannot be subsequently extended. They are allowed only one excavation per season. They must now submit archaeological reports in Arabic as well as their own language. In the prime areas of Giza and Saqqara, they have to wind up their work within four years. "Our policy is not to decrease the number of foreign archaeological missions in Egypt, nor to make things more difficult for them," Hawass told Al-Ahram, "but to control the excavations and encourage documentation, publication, restoration and conservation." But foreign archaeologists are anxious. "We thought he was one of us until he got this job," said one, "but he seems to have gone power-mad; either that or he is exacting revenge for what he sees as slights in the past." (Hawass has been criticised by Dieter Wildung and others for starring in TV documentaries that use Hollywood clips and computer graphics). The Egyptian himself is rather more philosophical. "If this [control of foreign archaeologists] is not done now, 100 years hence most of our marvellous monuments will be beyond repair," he has said. But he is emotional, too. When statues discovered in his excavations were sent, temporarily, to an exhibition at the Louvre, he said: "I was very sad that day because they were taking my children away from me." And he has offered a mystical justification, too. "We [modern Egyptians] are the descendants of the pharaohs. If you look at the faces of the people of Upper Egypt, the relationship between modern and ancient Egypt is very clear." His government - his special backer is the President's wife, Suzanne Mubarak - sees in his cultural nationalism a tool to appease the discontent of Islamic fundamentalists who argue that Egypt is too pro-Western. One prominent Egyptian politician denounced Berlin's Nefertiti experiment as "un-Islamic", despite the fact that the queen co-ruled with the pharaoh Akhenaton, who changed Egyptian society to worship one god, the sun god, some 2,000 years before the Prophet Mohammed was born. "Zahi Hawass is doing his job quite aggressively," said one British archaeologist, with considerable understatement. "The fear is," said another Egyptologist, "that Zahi has really got it in for foreigners and that in five years there will be no foreign-run digs in Egypt. He has said that he thinks that only about 30 per cent of Egyptian monuments have been unearthed, and he wants to make sure that the other 70 per cent are found by Egyptians. Meantime, he wants to get back as much as he can from foreign museums." As he left to return to Egypt, Dr Hawass offered a compromise - "a possible three-month loan of the stone". Officials at the British Museum have publicly described the idea as "constructive". Privately, they fear they might never get it back. Perhaps the loan should be reciprocal. The iconic golden death mask of King Tut could come west as the Rosetta Stone goes east. The idea of a hostage is, after all, one which should be familiar to anyone who knows the intrigues of that ancient land. | ||
| Sonya Denise Joynson New member Username: sonya Post Number: 7 Registered: 10-2002 Posted From: 80.225.174.83 |
How can Dr Hawass really expect the return of the obelisk on the Concorde in France as it was a gift from Mohammed (i think that is right) I thought that you could only claim back stolen artifacts from 1971 onwards. Most of the artifacts were actually removed by the egyptologists who found them as they were allowed to keep a percentage of the goods found within the excavations unless it was a tomb that was intact when it all belonged in Egypt. If all the Egyptian artifacts were returned to Egypt they would have a problem storing or exhibiting them as they already say that the present musuem isnt large enough and judging by the state of the present musuem would be safer where they are. | ||
| Bill Houghton Senior Member Username: sphinx Post Number: 68 Registered: 05-1999 Posted From: 165.247.18.123 |
Since Egypt does not have room to store nor display these items from overseas, it is prudent that foreign museums continue to hold onto these ancient Egyptian artifacts. The focus should be on the preservation of these artifacts instead of returning them to Egypt. | ||
| Nicole B. Hansen Senior Member Username: nicole Post Number: 26 Registered: 03-2001 Posted From: 217.52.3.197 |
A lot of what is in this article is rumors and so one can't really say what is going to happen. My impression is not that Zahi wants to get rid of foreigners completely from Egypt, but he wants to have more say over where they work and what sort of work they do there. It isn't simply a matter of the foreigner picking a site to work at anymore, it is more a matter of Zahi picking who he thinks is qualified to do the work that needs to be done, and that can mean Egyptians. As a colleague who will remain anonymous said, "Zahi has desires that must be fulfilled." Those that fulfill them will continue to be allowed to work in Egypt, those that don't, are out. Although I think it is stretching it to try and control what goes on outside Egypt. I think this strategy has positive potential if done in the right way, because there are too many sites to be able to ever excavate them all and priorities need to be set about what should be excavated and preserved and I think some sort of centralized prioritizing is needed for this. A lot of universities in the world (with the exception of the US) have a system of assigning dissertation topics to their students. The student compete to obtain a place to write a dissertation on a specific topic. Why not do the same with Egyptian sites? Put out a list of sites that can be excavated and invite people to apply to excavate them. In the end, you will get the most important sites excavated and by the most qualified people. Nicole B. Hansen Ph.D. candidate, Egyptology, University of Chicago Egyptologist/Editor, Theban Mapping Project Cairo, Egypt | ||
| Janine Williams Senior Member Username: janine Post Number: 743 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.162.236.176 |
Good idea, Nicole. To all: From the article Bernie posted, it is my understanding that after 2007, Zahi does not want any more foreign archaeologists digging in Giza and Saqqara, only, not all of Egypt. It is also my understanding that there are about 26 major antiquities that he would like to have back in Egypt, which he may or may not get...not all the Egyptian artifacts in the world. (Where would they put them?) Many foreign archaeologists have made major discoveries in Egypt and, I assume, their backers PAID for them. This is desirable. On the other hand, it is understandable to want to monitor archaeologists who damage the monuments (and leave it!), dig in areas outside of the permission area, or stay years beyond the length of time required. (There is so much still buried in Egypt, they could dig forever!) There are so many sides to this, maybe we should see what develops...All of these things are not in the same category...yet they are being treated as if they were. Janine | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 137 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Nicole- You wrote "As a colleague who will remain anonymous said, "Zahi has desires that must be fulfilled." Those that fulfill them will continue to be allowed to work in Egypt, those that don't, are out. Although I think it is stretching it to try and control what goes on outside Egypt." "Anonymous colleague", "Those that fullfill them... will be allowed to continue those that don't are out..." No matter how many times I read and reread your statements it sounds to me like a menacing new era has arrived in Egyptology. | ||
| Ken Member Username: ken Post Number: 31 Registered: 06-2000 Posted From: 68.214.66.216  |
 I believe the promotion Dr. Hawass received has gone to his head. No one has a problem with having the most qualified doing research and exploration in Egypt, but if the choosing is slanted more toward egyptians than it becomes discrimination and that cheapens the selection process. I also feel that if those countries that Dr. Hawass is putting public pressure on to "give back" ancient egyptian items, those that were given away by previous egyptian governments or taken by egyptologists as legal payment for discoveries, were to bring to the present Egyptian President that due to those demands, perhaps a anti-egyptian groundswell backlash would reduce tourism to Egypt. Perhaps that would get the present egyptian government to sit up and take notice of what's happening since they depend so much on tourists.  Ken | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 138 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
I think that the whole field of archeology is going to implode pretty soon. I did a google search and came up with over 3,000 hits on lawsuits. There's even archeology insurance against lawsuits! How can anything new or original be discovered in such a hostile and intellectually oppressive enviornment? | ||
| bernhard a. grundl Senior Member Username: bernhard_grundl Post Number: 475 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 193.27.50.73 |
dear Rick and Ken and Others ! day by day the situation seems to escalate. the most recent news from a KUWAIT news agency are speaking of the "return of ALL stolen pieces" ! please read by yourself : ***** CAIRO, July 30 (KUNA) -- UK museum officials refused to return the "Rasheed stone" to Egypt as a loan, fearing that it might affect the number of visitors who annually visit the museum to view the unique pieces presented in the Egyptian history sections. The officials in the museum said, in accordance to Al-Ahram daily that "the Rasheed stone which encoded the hieroglyphic language, is exhibited in the UK museum since 1802." Head of the Supreme council for ancient monuments in Egypt Dr. Zahi Hawas had requested from officials in the UK museum to return the stone for 3-6 months to be exhibited in the new Egyptian museum, but the request was refused. Meanwhile, Dr. Hawas said that his country launched a campaign to return all ancient monuments, as it requested from Berlin's museum to return the head of the Queen Nefertiti statue to Egypt. Hawas said to the press today, that "Egypt is determined to return all stolen pieces." He added, that it's Egypt's right to return all its national treasures, in accordance with UNESCO agreement in 1972. Article originally published by Kuwait News Agency (KUNA) 30-Jul-03 ***** so far the news from kuwait ! ciao: Bernie | ||
| Nicole B. Hansen Senior Member Username: nicole Post Number: 27 Registered: 03-2001 Posted From: 213.158.162.21 |
As for the colleague remaining anonymous, I do this out of respect for others' privacy. You should not see it as a statement that was made by someone who fears or dislikes Zahi, because it was not made in that manner at all. Rather, it was what I consider to be a very astute observation of Zahi's management style. Personally, I don't think it would hurt if the Egyptians make the rules stricter for foreigners. Contrary to popular ideas on the subject, I do not think Egypt's history is the "history of mankind." It's the history of Egypt and those who want to pass it off as the history of mankind do so often with the intention of taking a piece of it for themselves. The Afrocentrists noticed this first, although I don't agree with their positions either. But the point is you don't see Egyptians or French or Indians trying to claim that British history is the "history of mankind" and saying that they have a right to Stonehenge. You could say that the ancient Egyptians contributed the 24 hour day to the rest of the world, but Henry Ford also contributed the automobile and you don't see other people trying to claim American history as their own. And just because the records we have from ancient Egypt are older than those from most other places doesn't mean they are records of other people. Other people had a history of their own, it just didn't survive or it hasn't been recorded properly. Egypt has changed a lot since ancient times, that is obvious, but every day I see and hear things here in Egypt that have made me realize that even with all the changes, there is no place in the world that has inherited the ancient Egyptian heritage than Egypt itself. Sometimes it is in material ways, sometimes in more intangible ways like in the behavior of the people, but I firmly believe that it is the Egyptians who have the most rights over their heritage and foreigners working in archaeology here in Egypt are doing it as a privelege, not a right, granted to them by the Egyptians themselves, and that is what some people need to realize. Nicole B. Hansen Ph.D. candidate, Egyptology, University of Chicago Egyptologist/Editor, Theban Mapping Project Cairo, Egypt | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 837 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.158.135 |
Hi Nicole, If the British government had plans to dismantle Stonehenge to build a road, don't you think there would be an international outcry ? Like Egypt, Stonehenge is part of the inheritance of all mankind ! Nor do I think that the Taliban had the right to destroy the Buddhas even if these were situated in the country over which they ruled. There are limits to a state's sovereignty, in the field of human rights but also in that of cultural monuments, IMHO. Also, do you think that the modern Egyptians feel a strong link with their pre-Christian / pre-Islamic ancestors and their productions ? As seen from outside Egypt, there's more genuine enthusiasm abroad for AE antiquities than in Egypt proper. From conversations I've had in Egypt with Egyptians, I gathered the same impression (but I never was immersed in Egyptian society as you are, and the people you know may be of a higher socio-economic level and have different ideas). Stated otherwise, if it hadn't been for Westerners, where would Egyptology be ? What would be the state of Egyptian antiquities ? Most of them would have been dismantled as happened during the reign of Mohammed Ali (complete temples vanished between the publication of the Description de l'Egypte and LEPSIUS' expedition). This isn't to state that Egyptians don't have a say in the manner, of course ! A good cooperation such as has happened during the last decades is the best solution, IMHO. The nationalist bashing of Westerners by mediocre high officials isn't ! JD | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 139 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Hicole-Yes I realize that the use of "anonymous" is a standard method to protect someones confidentiality. It came off far more sinister than I meant. So in order to keep the discussion on course I withdraw the comment, before it clouds the larger issue. However I stand by the second comment. I've seen Zahi's management style before in private industry, and it has always been, without exception, disastrous. "I do not think Egypt's history is the "history of mankind." It's the history of Egypt and those who want to pass it off as the history of mankind do so often with the intention of taking a piece of it for themselves." I more or less agree. Yes Egyptology is first and foremost the history of Egypt. But Egypt doesn't and never has (no matter how hard they tried) lived in isolation from the rest of the world. The world has intruded into Egypt from time immemorial and the Egyptians have played their part on the world stage too. So Egyptian history is very much a part of the history of mankind. But this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. It seems to me that the world is caught up in somekind of superpatriotic cultural fervor. The Egyptians along with everybody else want everything returned to their countries, and cultures RIGHT NOW. Of course where they're going to put them or how they're going to take care of them is none of our business. What we get is more politically correct happy talk. As such I have a difficult time taking the return of the Rosetta Stone and Nefertiti's bust as anything more than political posturing. However, as J.D. pointed out a number of relics that "vanished" (i.e. were utterly destroyed)at the hands of the Egyptians. But,he left out the single most destructive act in Egyptian history. The construction of the Aswan dam. Who knows how many thousands of sites were destroyed during its creation? How many millions of artifacts were obliterated when the waters began to rise? It took the resources of the world to rescue Abu Simbel, the rest of the artifacts were drowned. But the destruction is continuing. Ground water is building up now destroying even more tombs and temples from what I've read I get the impression that there is nothing that can be done to stop this destruction. But what is at the top of the Hawass's agenda? Getting the bust of Neferititi and the Rosetta Stone returned. Hardly the premiere problems in Egyptology, but it makes great headlines and delfcts attention from the tombs and temples that are crumbling before our eyes. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 140 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Nicole_I'm sorry I mispelled your name! I gotta put my glasses on in the future! | ||
| Bill Houghton Senior Member Username: sphinx Post Number: 69 Registered: 05-1999 Posted From: 165.247.19.40 |
Secretary-General of the Supreme Council for Antiquities (SCA), Dr Zahi Hawas announced launching a campaign for the return of all Egyptian antiquities from museums abroad. A request has already been sent to the British Museum in London for the return of the Rosetta Stone, and to the Berlin Museum in Germany for the head of Queen Nefertiti, Dr Hawas said, noting that the Rosetta Stone would be back in Egypt for only three months, because when it was taken to Britain in 1801, there was no law against taking ancient artifacts out of Egypt. However, Egypt has the right to recall all stolen antiquities in accordance with the 1972 UNESCO agreement, Dr Hawas said. The Ministry of Culture and the SCA have both called for the return of the head of Nefertiti, because it had been taken out of the country illegally. | ||
| Nicole B. Hansen Senior Member Username: nicole Post Number: 28 Registered: 03-2001 Posted From: 213.158.162.28 |
This is mainly in response to JD and Rick's messages. People in the West are very wealthy compared to Egyptians in general. They have leisure time to buy books about ancient Egypt and chat on groups like this and take Nile cruises to visit the temples of Upper Egypt. And 150 years ago and even today there are a lot of people in the west who have the money to buy antiquities simply to put them on a shelf to look at. A recent survey of visitors to the British Museum found that 5 percent believed there was no difference whatsoever between ancient and modern Egypt, while another 64 percent regarded modern Egypt simply as the place wherein the ancient monuments are found. I find such statistics saddening, because they are reflected in the behavior of a lot of foreign visitors in Egypt who think the modern Egyptians are a doormat to walk over to visit the antiquities. Most Egyptians don't have time or the resources for hobbies. They are busy trying to put food on the table and a roof over their heads and this consumes the vast majority of their time and energy if it even sufffices. But that doesn't mean that the antiquities aren't important to Egyptians. For a large number of Egyptians, the antiquities ARE very important, from an economic standpoint, not a hobby standpoint. Ask any Egyptian what the most important sources of income are for Egypt from the age of 8 up and they will be able to tell you that tourism to see the monuments is one of them. And as an American, I can tell you that in my own country interest in the nation's history and knowledge of it are embarrassingly low. Does that give foreigners the right to come in and tell us Americans how to preserve our heritage? Another factor is that while the west has spurred the interest in ancient Egypt, western Egyptologists have done very little to spur an interest in ancient Egypt among Egyptians. They established the first departments of Egyptology in western universities. They published their discoveries in English, French and German, not Arabic. They appear a lot more frequently on the Discovery Channel, because they get paid to appear there, than they do on Egyptian television. When Egypt put its Tut treasures on tour in the west in the 1970s it generated a huge amount of enthusiasm. Of course, if the foreign museums that Zahi wants to loan objects to the Egyptian Museum to make a special exhibition here in Egypt agreed, it would also generate a huge amount of enthusiasm among Egyptians as well. I am not against the preservation of the monuments. But I find such statements such as criticizing the Egyptians for building the dams unfair. The first dam, the Aswan Dam, was built by the British, in order to provide year-round irrigation in Egypt in order to increase crop yields for the benefit of the British themselves, naturally. And of course, it destroyed archaeological sites. As for the building of the High Dam, it was done by the Egyptians themselves in order to feed a burgeoning population. If that High Dam wasn't there, Egypt would have suffered the same droughts that Ethiopia has and you would have seen poor Egyptian children starving on your television back in the 1980s. Can you tell me that the preservation of some skeletons is more important than the health and welfare of people living today? As for the destruction of ancient Egyptian artifacts mentioned, the Egyptians do not deserve the blame you are placing on them, because you are judging what happened in the past by current standards and interests. First of all, the ancient Egyptians were already destroying one another's monuments and defacing them. Think Rameses II. Where did Amenhetep III's memorial temple go? Into Merneptah's. And after the coming of Christianity and Islam to Egypt and before the development of a WESTERN interest in collecting ancient Egyptian monuments, what reason was there to preserve any of these monuments? No one was interested in preserving them, in Egypt or in the west. If you need a stone to grind your grain, why wouldn't you go take one from the local unused temple that was just sitting there filling up with dirt? And once the westerners became interested in ancient Egypt, and there finally was a reason at all to preserve this stuff, do you think that westerners would have made a special trip to Egypt to destroy what was there? Of course not, so don't give them too much credit. And if you want to talk about destroying monuments, think of all the information that was lost when westerners just plowed through the ancient temples to clear them without preserving anything inside? Of course, it would be unfair to judge them too because in those days no one cared about pot sherds, just pretty artifacts. The point of all this is, please be careful not to judge what has been done in the past by today's standards because if you do so you will find blame in everyone. I don't think this should turn into a West vs. Egypt thing. But I believe in the sovereignity of every country to set its own laws and policies and make its own decisions for the benefit of the people living in that country, first and foremost. And I also believe that the basic needs of human beings should be of more importance than luxury entertainment. The two are not mutually exclusive, preserving the monuments and making new discoveries makes tourism a sustainable economic resource. Nicole B. Hansen Ph.D. candidate, Egyptology, University of Chicago Egyptologist/Editor, Theban Mapping Project Cairo, Egypt | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 842 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 80.236.134.218 |
Dear Nicole, Thank you for your precious insider view. It is true that it isn't usually the poor or the lower classes who care for a country's cultural heritage : they're usually unschooled and have other worries (such as to feed their children). In the West one has a large middle class and few rich people and few poor. So with the first two groups many people feel concerned by culture. In Egypt one has almost no middle class, a few very rich people and an immense majority of poor to very poor people. What we have here (the way I see it from abroad) is a high official belonging to the rich ruling class, using Egyptology in a petty nationalist way, no doubt to play the traditional trick (known to all dictatorships) of placating the poor which his class oppresses. Does he hope to stem the rising unrest of the people, who feel socially abandoned by their rulers, but supported through the zakat from the most radical mosques ? Hitting back on the West is playing with fire and a trick that will only cause more problems as time goes on. In any case, if Egypt wants to keep or increase its tourism and the income thereof, the method used is the wrong one. Making foreign excavation teams and researchers feel welcome in the most traditional Egyptian way –but without complacency !- will work much better. Do you, as an Egyptologist, feel that the present situation on digs warrants the increase of bureaucratic control as introduced by Mr. HAWASS (you have to define the surface to excavate, the timing of the dig, the names of participants once and for all, without a possibility to change this, it's forbidden to take objects abroad for restoration or study, etc. : what's the advantage of such rigidity ?) ? Expanding a dig will be linked with negotiations as it has always been. Prolonging it will give locals more work opportunities. Does one want to protect a sleepy bureaucracy ? Or indeed, as I wrote, hit back on the West for past and present wrongs ? This doesn't mean that things aren't open for improvement. A list of sites to excavate, considered as priorities by the SCA, and from which foreign teams would have to choose, may not be such a bad idea (although it would leave you jobless unless you went to dig up some muddy Delta site). Putting some order inside the SCA itself wouldn't be bad either, and I'm sure many foreign institutions would be more than willing to help, for free. What's the use of claiming back objects taken out of Egypt centuries ago (Rosetta Stone) or offered to foreign countries by the rulers of the time (Paris obelisk) : they will never be returned, the whole matter will only worsen contacts with the countries involved, from which Egyptian economy depends. JD | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 141 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Hi Nicole As a fellow American who is solidly middle class I do feel for those Egyptians who are poor, dirt poor, and desperately poor. So, no I would never pull down the Aswan dam or have stopped it from being built in the first place. The good it has done has far exceeded the destruction it caused. I for one think that everything that can be done should be done to preserve the past, but if it reaches a point between improving the lives of millions of people today or keeping a few old temples and gravesites in pristine condition for a handful of archeologists to dig around in, well then the choice is obvious the dam must be built, salvage archeologists can rescue what they can and the rest will have to be saved for the archeologists of 2.5k years from now. That is just the way life is and always has been. But as we all know the temples are in danger of being destroyed, I mean they are being destroyed, by water damage. Dr. Hawass has enormous personal charisma and I'm sure that if he turned that towards getting funds to save the monuments and restore them to their original splendor then cash both from tourists and endowments would come flowing into Egypt in Nile river proportions. I understand Hatshepsut's temple is one of the premiere tourist sites. Virtually all of his lectures are sold out months in advance. The man is a money and film magnet. His "live" opening of tombs and drilling behind the block in the GP were universally blasted on BB's but the television screens in America lit up like a christmas tree because he made it interesting. So he has tremendous personal appeal and fully understands western civilization while being utterly committed to preserving his own countries way of life. So why not take advantage of this have a "This Week with Dr. Hawass" on discovery channel. Have him show us some of the tombs that are never shown. Each week a different tomb in the VOK and not just Tut's for the 97,000th time. But KV 55, Horemhab's tomb, Ay's tomb, Akhenaten's smashed up tomb. Or keep it in the VOK for ease of production. Just keep moving down the line and you could have a couple of seasons of videos in a month or two. Thousands of Egyptians would be put to work. Millions of dollars would be made in distribution of films, everybody gets a piece of the pie. And then somewhere in each film you bury your message, Egypt would like to see the Rosetta stone returned, Nefertiti's bust belongs in Egypt, bring Nefertiti back to Egypt and on and on, until there's a great tidal wave of sympathy to return these antiques to Egypt. | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 843 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.158.61 |
Well put Rick ! The "nice" approach would certainly be much more productive for Egypt and everybody else ! But it clashes with the political agenda of the Islamists and the present government seems to feel obliged to give in. JD | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 142 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Thanks J.D. it took me many years to realize that slow steady "pressure" can push the continents across the earth, spin planets in space and move galaxies across the universe. But short explosions whether it's a firecracker or a supernova light up the sky for a few moments, then disapear and are forgotten about forever. | ||
| Bill Houghton Senior Member Username: sphinx Post Number: 70 Registered: 05-1999 Posted From: 80.201.39.215 |
I do not expect any of the important artifacts to be returned to Egypt. I would be surprised otherwise if that happened. Too much time has passed and these famous museums are already doing a good job of taking care of these ancient Egyptian artifacts. I believe Egypt needs to concentrate on preserving the artifacts that are already in museums around the world. Besides, Egypt does not have the space to store, much less put them on display, in their own museums! | ||
| Brent Benjamin Senior Member Username: brent Post Number: 38 Registered: 04-2000 Posted From: 12.4.169.51 |
Last Thursday, the British Museum responded: "No." There are really two issues here: (1) the return of artifacts to Egypt, and (2) Zahi's management style. With respect to the return of artifacts, Egypt is entitled to the return of all artifacts illegally taken from the country. It's as simple as that. Such artifacts are Egypt's by law. With respect to artifacts legally removed from Egypt, Egypt may press a case for their return, but museums and countries will likely be reticent to return them as, in many cases, they have become cultural fixtures in their new countries. This is an area where diplomacy and politics will determine outcomes. The legal case for return of things such as the Rosetta Stone is not strong. As noted above, the French obtained the stone by conquest and it was legally ceded to the British by treaty. Likewise, this applies to objects such as obelisks which were gifts by the then-legitimate Egyptian government. On the other hand, objects such as Nefertiti's bust are less certain. The Egyptians may have a legal case there. One must consider Egypt's laws as well as a number of treaties and related international laws. Perhaps Zahi is so controversial because his style is so dramatically different from that of his predecessor, Gaballah. I don't think one can fairly say that what he does is good or bad. Some of the new initiatives pursued by Zahi have long been needed. Timely required publication is one such thing. Conservation and preservation taking preference over excavation is another. On the other hand, I hope that the guidelines can be relaxed in important instances where findings require that concessions be modified or amended during the season. As for Wildung, the Nefertiti problem may go deeper. As I alluded to, there is a legitimate question of ownership on the piece. And remember the KV55 coffin matter with Schoske? She is Wildung's wife. The Egyptians may be excused for not wanting to feel like the colonial subject anymore. The location of artifacts is a subject of political and legal interactions. I hope that such posturing, however, remains separate from the science of archaeology. History is replete with unfortunate examples of end-oriented "political archaeology." It goes without saying that the cultivation of a strong sense of history and cultural pride in Egypt is probably something not favored by the Islamists. Regards, Brent | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 143 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Hi Brent-As I understand it the bust of Nefertiti was hidden among some other material that the Germans had obtained legally. I imagine this crosses the thin grey line between "legal" and "illegal". I can just imagine that a good attorney would argue that since the Egyptians didn't excercise due diligence and they approved the shipment to be sent to Germany that it was compeletely legal and didn't constitute smuggling. So what is there to argue about? However I'm sure that the attorney for the Egyptians would have a robust argument against that one. Frankly, I think a little quiet diplomacy would solve this problem with ease. If it was done to press conferences and the clinking of champagne glasses Wildung would look like a hero; Hawass would look like a hero and everybody would be happy. As far as getting the Rosetta stone back, will I think the Greeks will get the Elgin marbles back before the Egyptians get the Rosetta stone. | ||
| Janine Williams Senior Member Username: janine Post Number: 755 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.67.114 |
Rick: Think you have a second calling! Agree. Incidentally, I would love to see productions of "This week with Zahi Hawass." He is is the very one that knows interesting anecdotes about the tombs and people...which brings history to life. This I would far prefer to some presentations, which feel compelled to accompany anything of interest with a lot of spooky organ music. Janine | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 144 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Janine-I would love to see it too. Actually, film has always been my first calling, but I'm not temperamentally inclined to put up with all of the baloney needed to be a filmaker. As far as the presentation went, there would be no spooky organ music, or long, long, long, lingering shots of the sphinx that dissolve to another long, lingering shot of the G.P. with dialogue delivered by somebody who sounds like he's about to collapse from boredom. It would move at "Indiana Jones" or "Tomb Raider" speed. The closest I came was writing a script on the "Unknown Man E" and who he was for a film class (The script, is now sadly lost)the class loved it. Next I wanted to do a film on the Amarna letters. I wanted to use actual quotes from the Amarna letters so people could get a feel for what "real" Egyptology is like. But when I e-mailed the publisher for permission nobody knew who owned the film and video rights or even if there were any film and video rights to be sold. I tried to find out of copyright editions of the Letters but couldn't find them. So I let it drop...However maybe somebody will make "This Week with Dr. Hawass." | ||
| Bruno Member Username: ben_the_vizier Post Number: 107 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 194.65.14.76 |
Dear all, FIRST, about the return of Antiquities to Egypt - My opinion about the return of “stolen” antiquities to Egypt can be “resumed” in a sentence - put yourselves in Dr. Hawass’s position. The love Dr. Hawass has for his country is immense. I can notice his love and his emotion while he is talking about Egypt, both Old and Modern. As the director of the SCA, he has the authority over all the Antiquities in Egypt. It is, in my opinion, perfectly understandable and correct that Dr. Hawass, not only as the director of the SCA BUT ALSO AS AN EGYPTIAN CITIZEN, demands the return to Egypt of ALL the Antiquities stolen IN A TIME WHEN THERE WAS NO LAW FOR ANTIQUITIES - you know that 200 years ago everyone could go to Egypt and bring a souvenir - and do you consider this act to be good? How would you feel if you were Egyptian, seeing your past being stolen? How would you feel if you were the director of the SCA, with power over all the Egyptian Antiquities, seeing that you were not able to retrieve what is YOURS FROM RIGHT just because it is in foreign countries? The Rosetta Stone, the bust of Nefertiti, the statues of Hatshepsut, AND THE OBELISK OF PLACE DE LA CONCORDE are PATRIMONY OF EGYPT, NOT OF THE COUNTRIES WERE THEY ARE CURRENTLY! How can the countries were these Antiquities are now say “No!” to a demand made from the person who has the power over the Antiquities, a demand made from Egypt, the country the Antiquities belong to? In my opinion, what is of Egypt should be returned to Egypt immediately, no matter how many years it has been in foreign countries. SECOND, about putting the bust of Nefertiti to a nude-woman bronze statue - My opinion is that NO ONE SHOULD CRITICIZE NEITHER DR. HAWASS NOR ANYONE ELSE FOR SAYING THAT PUTTING THE BUST OF NEFERTITI IN A NUDE WOMAN’S BODY HAD “DEFAMED EGYPT’S HISTORY”. That is my opinion also, it has defamed Egypt’s history, and it was a tremendous error from the director of the Berlin Museum. THIRD, about some members here criticizing Dr. Hawass for whichever thing Dr. Hawass says or does - Dear members who do this, Imagine how Dr. Hawass would feel if he read what you said: - “I believe the promotion Dr. Hawass received has gone to his head.” - Ken - “I've seen Zahi's management style before in private industry, and it has always been, without exception, disastrous.” - Rick - Other sentences… HAVING OR HAVING NOT THE RIGHTS TO DEMAND THE RETURN OF STOLEN ANTIQUITIES, SAYING THAT THE MUMMY FOUND WASN’T THAT OF NEFERTITI, AND SAYING THAT THE DIRECTOR OF THE BERLIN MUSEUM “DEFAMED EGYPT’S HISTORY, Dr. Hawass shouldn’t be criticized like that just because you have an opinion different of that of Dr. Hawass. I am not criticizing you as hardly as you criticized Dr. Hawass, and I have a DIFFERENT OPINION THAN THAT YOU HAVE. And I won’t criticize you as hardly because I have a different opinion. I will respect your opinion, even if I think you are wrong. And I think you should do the same, IMHO. ------ I have just written my humble opinion, and if I had to rewrite it, I wouldn’t change a word. I hope that after this post, we will all continue to be great friends. My intention wasn’t, in any way and in any moment, to offend any one. Best regards, Bruno - EDIT: NEWS ABOUT ANTIQUITIES:} From Taipei Times: Egypt asks for its history back, but its pleas fall on deaf ears AFP Saturday, Aug 02, 2003,Page 9 With calls for Britain to agree to a three-month loan of the celebrated Rosetta stone and demands for Germany to relinquish a priceless bust of Queen Nefertiti, Egypt has launched a massive campaign for the return of its antiquities from Western museums. Chief architect of the campaign is Zahi Hawass, general secretary of Egypt's Supreme Council for Antiquities, who with his trademark panama hat has long graced foreign television cameras with his inflammatory calls for the return of ancient treasures. And to mark the 100th anniversary of Cairo's Egyptian Museum in December, the truculent archaeologist told egyptologists across the globe of his intention to "recover all the antiquities stolen from Egypt." "Next year, I hope we can mount an exhibition of stolen artefacts," he said. At the heart of his vision are some of the most prestigious treasures in the world's best museums, such as the glittering Egyptian collection at the British Museum. He has already approached London over a "three-month" loan of the renowned basalt Rosetta stone, but British authorities were said to be reluctant to agree as they feared the stone might never return to London. "We have asked the British Museum to allow us to display the Rosetta stone in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo for three months, to mark the renovation of the entire museum," he said on Monday. He insisted that it was not a permanent request, even though the stone was uncovered in Egypt before being shipped off to Britain, because at the time "there was no legislation in place concerning antiquities." But, according to the British press, at a recent private dinner Hawass asked British Museum director Neil MacGregor for the outright return of the stone to Egypt. It was only then, that he reduced the demand to a simple loan request. The Rosetta stone was unearthed in 1799 by a French soldier at the Rosetta fort in the Egyptian Mediterranean port of Rashid. It later enabled Jean-Francois Champollion to decipher the writings of ancient Egypt as it contained a decree by Ptolemy V in hieroglyphics and Greek scripts, opening the door to an understanding of the ancient Egyptian writing. The stone passed into British hands in 1801 and has since been on display in London's British Museum, where it attracts millions of visitors each year. But Hawass has also reignited calls for Germany to return a 3,300-year-old bust of legendary beauty Queen Nefertiti, currently housed in a Berlin museum. "We're asking for the return of this statue, which was smuggled out of Egypt illegally," he said. An all-out row erupted between Egypt and Germany in June when the Berlin museum allowed artists to temporarily fuse the limestone bust to a bronze statue of a scantily clad woman. The horrified Egyptian press slammed it a "crime," while Hawass denounced the exhibit as "an insult to Egypt's history" and Culture Minister Faruq Hosni demanded the return of the Pharaonic bust. Director of the Egyptian Museum at Berlin-Charlottenburg, Dietrich Wildung, dismissed the uproar as "tasteless and absurd." He said that the bronze statue was a model of an ancient Egyptian figure of the same period, wearing transparent clothing. The bust was sculpted around 1372BC, during the 18th dynasty, and discovered in 1912 in Tell al-Amarna, in southern Egypt. Egyptologist Mohamed Saleh said that German archeologist Ludwig Borchadt, who worked in Egypt in the early 1900s, took the bust back to Germany under a law that allowed him take 50 percent of what had been excavated. Egypt has frequently asked for the return of the bust in the past, but Germany has cited its claim to the work based on a 1913 agreement that granted Nefertiti and a number of other important artifacts to their German discoverers. One of history's great beauties, Nefertiti was the wife of pharaoh Akhenaton, remembered in history for having switched his kingdom to monotheism with the worship of the one sun god, Aton. He established his capital in Tell al-Amarna. - Best regards, Bruno (Message edited by Ben The Vizier on August 05, 2003) | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 146 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Bruno you quoted me as saying- “I've seen Zahi's management style before in private industry, and it has always been, without exception, disastrous.” - Rick But this was in response to Nicole Hansen's post that had the following paragraph.... "Zahi has desires that must be fulfilled." Those that fulfill them will continue to be allowed to work in Egypt, those that don't, are out. Although I think it is stretching it to try and control what goes on outside Egypt. Yes I've seen that management style before and what happens is it always develops a climate of fear and loathing. You become dedicated to pleasing the boss. If you doubt how disastrous it can be look at Enron, World Com, Martha Stewart, Arthur Anderson and others. Everybody told the leaders of those company what they wanted to hear not what they needed to know. Unfortunately the few courageous people who "blew the whistle" were instantly fired and "blacklisted". But please keep in mind that I have nothing but the utmost respect and even affection of for Dr. Hawass. It's my sincere hope that he will modify his policies and allow greater freedom on all fronts not less which seems to be the direction that the SCA is going. And yes I think that putting the bust of Nefertiti on a bronze statue was one of the stupidest things that has ever been done. I've protested loudly and on other lists and was astonished at how many people didn't think it was an insult at all. But this hit a very big button with me for a number of reasons. But I agree solidly with Dr. Hawass, Nefertiti should be returned to Egypt all the evidence is that it was stolen and even if it was obtained legally I still think it should be returned. | ||
| Janine Williams Senior Member Username: janine Post Number: 758 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.67.114 |
Rick: Yes,indeed. Two more suggestions for when you don your riding boots and take the directors chair. Throw out: Five minutes+ of dull dusty drives to the site! AND: Five minutes+ of "Cast of thousands" crossing the river...I would rather take the narrators word for it. So often they use this type of "filler"...I believe some of these specials did not have enough good material, and either should have been 30 min shows...or shelved until they did. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 147 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Hi Janine-Agreed. I've seen videos that were little more than one long dusty road show as the archeologists/paleontologists whoever drove and drove and drove and drove, then set up camp and horse around for an hour. Then the next day find a couple of arrowheads, potsherds or whatever and then drive and drive and drive back to whereever they came from. And spend the rest of the show discussing what the arrowheads, potsherds all mean. Boring!!!!! The audience ain't stupid guys. Cut to the chase!!!! | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 887 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 80.236.150.42 |
Much ado about nothing, again ? See : http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/651/he2.htm (from Larry ORCUTT's weekly archaeological news). JD | ||
| Nicole B. Hansen Senior Member Username: nicole Post Number: 31 Registered: 03-2001 Posted From: 213.158.162.13 |
He's finally setting the record straight about Fletcher. I knew all along that it was the violation of the antiquities law that got her in trouble. In the new SCA laws, such a violation explicitly is stated as one which will lead to losing one's permission to work in Egypt. Nicole B. Hansen Ph.D. candidate, Egyptology, University of Chicago Egyptologist/Editor, Theban Mapping Project Cairo, Egypt | ||
| Ken Member Username: ken Post Number: 33 Registered: 06-2000 Posted From: 68.214.66.235 |
I believe the key words here are "new SCA laws", it would be interesting to hear Joann Fletcher's side of the story, does anyone know if she has given any interviews and where they might be found. Secondly, if I were the British, I would be very wary of lending any AE artifacts to Egypt for a temporary period of time with Hawass asking that all be given back to Egypt, they might never be returned. | ||
| Marianne Luban New member Username: marianne_luban Post Number: 1 Registered: 07-2003 Posted From: 209.179.228.217 |
What is the verdict, then, Nicole? Do you think Hawass will actually ban Fletcher from working in Egypt? | ||
| Janine Williams Senior Member Username: janine Post Number: 783 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.67.114 |
JD: Thankyou very much for posting Zahi's article. It is disgusting that such distorted and invented misinformation can make it to print! As if Sahi doesn't have enough problems to deal with. Meanwhile, if the bust of Nefertiti is loaned to Egypt for three months...I hope they will compare it to the stone bust, side by side, with three angles of photographs : front, 3/4ths, and profile. The stone head appears to be the more commanding, regal of bearing, and prettier one. (The straight profile of the stone head is spectacular.) With only minor discrepancies, both could be renditions of Nefertiti - since they were done in different mediums and may have been done by different artists. Or, (heaven forbid!) obvious differences show up and we have two different women. (In that case, I guess I would vote for the prettier one, since that reputation outlasted her doings.) I have wished for years that these two busts would be compared side by side. Besides beauty, one has the great bearing and expression of a powerful Egyptian queen. The other is attractive enough, but does not seem to be extra-ordinary in any way. Janine | ||
| Brent Benjamin Senior Member Username: brent Post Number: 40 Registered: 04-2000 Posted From: 12.4.169.51 |
Rick, Sorry for the delay. You know my schedule. Query: you are in a store and buying some magazines. Somehow an $8.00 KMT is hidden between the other magazines, a benefit you discover when you get home. Is it yours? Do you have title? Or how about: Your car is parked on your neighbor's driveway. Someone without your authority put it there, perhaps your son. Is the car your neighbor's or is it still yours? Who has the right to convey title to property? Only the owner does. Can title to property be transferred without the mutual assent of the parties? No. Finally, what consideration did Egypt receive for the hidden object. If there was none, then there was no enforceable contract. I wonder if the Egyptians would like counsel? A small contingency would be fine!  Brent | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 168 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.50 |
Thanks Brent; I can think of no better counselor than you. But then every counselor needs an assistant to carry his brief case, make sure the charts are set up etc. But since this deals with the bust of Nefertiti you would also need somebody who is also familiar with the Amarna age. Somebody who has a working knowledge of the Amarna letters. Somebody who has worked tirelessly to understand the nuances of the Amarna era. What a coincidence why, that sounds like a perfect description of me. | ||
| Wendy DeBoer New member Username: wendy_deboer Post Number: 1 Registered: 10-2002 Posted From: 68.99.20.57 |
Brent-- As you will recall, this is a topic that fascinates me, so I would love to hear input on some ideas rattling around in my head. Here's a little of my logic of property law with respect to these artifacts... True owners will retain title to property even if they lose the property because someone picks it up by accident (or outright steals it.) If I remember back to property law, however, the true owner is not a country. The true owner would be the person who actually owned the item. When it comes to a bust of Nefertiti, we would have to know more about Egyptian property law in the Armarna era to determine who the original true owner was. Did Pharaoh have title to all objects depicting his queen, did the artist? Obviously the "true owner" under this kind of analysis is long dead. Okay, so can we say this property is abandoned? The Nefertiti bust may have been (in antiquity). Then what? Who owns it when the true owner is gone or has abandoned it? The finder? The rules for abandoned property in the states says whoever finds it gets it. Isn't the old law-school adage "possession is nine-tenths of the law?" So, according to my rather tenuous logic, at least in U.S. law, finders have the right to possession against all but the true owners. Obviously places like Egypt have made laws about the findings of ancient artifacts which modify the common law of finders keepers. But, when did they modify these laws? If the first modification was the UNESCO 1972 laws, then it would seem that everything before 1972 is governed by possession or whatever the traditional approach was in Egypt (but I am guessing that is possession.) I am fairly certain Egypt had antiquity laws long before UNESCO. Correct me if I am wrong. My interpretation of international law, therefore, is that we apply the law of the situs where the property was found, i.e. Egypt, at the time it was found to determine who has title. Does anyone know what Egyptian property law said about artifacts (or moveable property in general) at the time of the discovery of the Rosetta stone? Since we may have trouble distinguishing what law was the "legitimate" law of Egypt at the precise moments of the discovery of some objects (especially those discovered quite a long time ago) I am assuming we may not have any definite answers to these questions. If we cannot positively show that Egypt has proper title to objects found prior to 1971, how can Egypt expect to get them back? It seems to me that proper "title" cannot be found with respect to these objects. Egypt's claim to such objects seems to come from a general "owning" of its own land, a connection based on geography rather than cultural similarities. Would it matter if the items were discovered on private land? Private landowners may not currently have title to antiquities found on their property, but prior to antiquity laws they might have. Conclusion: Discovering who has "legal title" to antiquities excavated hundreds of years ago is unproductive. Legal title implies that our legal systems --across the entire world-- have the capacity to deconstruct themselves and find mutually consistent answers. This is not going to happen. For anything before countries signed a document (UNESCO) controlling how they would behave, there is no way to resolve the multitudes of national laws governing these issues. As a result, I believe this is a worldwide issue that cannot be resolved by law, but must be resolved by diplomacy, patience, cooperation and a broader view of "ownership." Egyptian antiquities do represent a larger history than the history of the people who live within the current geographic borders of modern Egypt. The peoples who lived and worked in ancient Egypt have descendants throughout the world. Granted, the largest population is in this geographic location. Even so, antiquities have shaped lives and cultures outside of Egypt. Think of the cultural references, the advances to archeological methodology which wouldn't have occurred absent the antiquities in Egypt. What would western culture be like if Ancient Egypt had never existed? Who knows. Again, we cannot deconstruct the past. We can only control the present and the future. |
