German officials claim that the artifact’s constitution has already been evaluated and she is too fragile for travel, and that the Nefertiti Summit was never about the merits of Egypt’s case to begin with.

Meanwhile, Zahi Hawass intends to assemble a repatriation alliance based on his own model.  “Our strategy became a good case for everyone…. China announced they will do same as we do” (Source: M&C: “Egypt to aid return of Asian, African stolen artifacts”).

It seems rather convenient timing for Berlin to announce after the Nefertiti Summit had ended in stalemate that the analysis of the artifact’s travel worthiness had already been conducted, and with results favorable to Germany.  One would think that Berlin would have been more transparent about the evaluation from the beginning, and that such news might have been deemed relevant to the December 20, 2009, meeting between Dr. Zahi Hawass and Dr. Friederike Seyfried of the Berlin Egyptian Museum.

An independent evaluation of the artifact’s ability to withstand transport has been something those of us on the sidelines have been asking for all along.  For us, watching this debacle has been like watching a favorite niece being jerked around by self-centered parents in a nasty divorce.  But Germany’s thirteenth-hour claim that such a study has been conducted, sans details, invites healthy skepticism. 

Regarding the documentary evidence, neither Egypt nor Germany has changed their stand one inch.  According to Dr. Seyfried, “The position of the German side is clear and unambiguous – the acquisition of the bust by the Prussian state [of Germany] was legal,” (Source:  BBC:  “Germany refuses to return Nefertiti bust to Egypt”).

But Germany and Egypt seem to have had different expectations regarding December 20 meeting from the very beginning.  Seyfried, contrary to both the Egyptians and the world media, denies that the meeting was ever about Nefertiti, but was instead an opportunity to discuss future joint exhibitions (Source:  AFP:  “Germany dismisses Egyptian claims to Nefertiti bust”). 

This is contrary to Dr. Hawass’ press release which states specifically that the talks were for the purpose of discussing the bust, and that Dr. Seyfried was to “act as liaison between Dr. Hawass and the relevant German officials” (Source: Zahi Hawass’ Blog:  Press Release -Meeting with Berlin Museum Director).

This leads one to wonder if the media savvy Hawass essentially hijacked the occasion to focus attention on his own agenda.  Certainly Hawass has always made the repatriation of artifacts a priority, but is the current steroidal emphasis on the subject intended to solidify his new role as Vice Minister of Culture?

Zahi Hawass has always enjoyed a cosmopolitan appeal, but his new position as a Vice Minister adds a more official element to his international dealings.  As champion of Egyptian culture, it would be easy for Dr. Hawass to justify (in his own mind, at least) redefining the purpose of the meeting with Dr. Seyfried from a general administrative function to a summit discussing the repatriation of the bust of Nefertiti. 

And the media, current company included, has been complicit.  Germany has insisted, quite openly, that the meeting was not about the fate of Nefertiti.  In my own defense I might add that Berlin’s protestations could have been a little less vague regarding the purpose of the meeting, and the fact that Dr. Seyfried did use the occasion to present Germany’s evidence that the bust was acquired legally shows that the issue was at least on the menu.

But Dr. Hawass is an old hand at playing to the media, and his repatriation efforts seem to be expanding in both momentum and scope.  According to a speech he gave last week, he intends to build a coalition of nations who feel they have been cheated out of their heritages.

“At the end of March,” Hawass proclaimed, “we will hold a conference to meet with others who suffered like us from stolen artifacts and to discuss how to help all of us in efforts to return the stolen artifacts” (Source: M&C: “Egypt to aid return of Asian, African stolen artifacts”).

Whether Nefertiti is ever returned to Egypt or not, she is clearly serving a diplomatic role for Egypt as a royal hostage to the West.  Given the probable fragility of the artifact, proving Borchardt’s deceptiveness in acquiring it for Germany was always more of a moral than practical goal.  If nothing else, it would place Germany awkwardly in debt to Egypt.

Meanwhile, the camera lights shine, the presses roll, and cyberspace remains honed-in on Zahi Hawass and his growing crusade to free not only Egyptian artifacts from the evil doers, but to lead all the downtrodden nations in a charge to reclaim what is theirs.  Of course, western universities are welcome to continue to expend resources on, western corporations are welcome to continue to invest in, writers to write about, and Hollywood to exaggerate, Egypt’s culture.  Just be sure to pay a visit to the Vice Minister of Culture’s Office.

Update

An article from M&C News (“German museum confirms travel ban for Queen Nefertiti“) has provided some additional details about the examination of the bust of Nefertiti with regard to determining her mobility. 

‘An examination in 2007 of the state of preservation of the bust ruled it unsuitable for transport or loans,’ said the Prussian Heritage Foundation, the parent corporation of the museum. ‘Further tests which have not yet been completed only confirm this’ (Source).

And if that isn’t plain enough:

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s top culture aide, Bernd Neumann, said Tuesday through a spokesman that a loan was now “absolutely out of the question on conservation grounds alone” (Source).

Copyright by Keith Payne, 2009.  All rights reserved.

Photograph “Berlin 053” by RinzeWind is used in accordance with this Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. 

The short version:  Egypt offered no new evidence, but Germany was kind enough to offer some old evidence that seems to favor Egypt, who now feels justified in officially demanding the return of the bust of Nefertiti.

For the long version…

On Sunday, December 20, 2009, Dr. Zahi Hawass met with Dr. Friederike Seyfried, Director of Berlin’s Egyptian Museum and Papyrus Collection, to discuss the evidence related to the removal of the bust of Nefertiti from Egypt in the early days of the Twentieth Century.  Egypt maintains that Ludwig Borchardt, the German archaeologist who discovered the bust, used “unethical tactics” to secure her for Germany.  The position of the Germans has always been that the artifact was acquired legally and through proper channels.

The debate hinges on whether or not the bust could be considered a unique artifact, and if so, did Borchardt know and try to conceal this fact to acquire the bust for Germany.  According to the rules under which Borchardt was operating, objects sans pareil (without equal, or unique) became part of the Egyptian national collection and Germany was entitled to half of what remained.   In hindsight, the bust of Nefertiti is clearly a unique artifact, but did Borchardt know this at the time, and did he purposely misrepresent the value of the bust in order to keep it?

Back in August, 2009, Dr. Hawass stated that he was compiling evidence that Borchardt had indeed acted unethically and that he would reveal this evidence when he made a formal request to Berlin to return the bust.  But it would seem that the only evidence offered at the December meeting between Hawass and Seyfried was presented by the Germans. 

In particular, Dr. Seyfried presented the original protocol agreed to by Gustave Lefevre of the Egyptian Antiquities Services, which was under French directorship at the time.  The protocol details how the artifacts discovered by Borchardt were to be divided between Egypt and Germany.  Dr. Seyfried also presented Borchardt’s diary, which seems to be the smoking gun. 

The protocol describes the bust of Nefertiti as simply a “painted plaster bust of a princess.”  But according to a press release issued from Dr. Hawass’ website, Borchardt’s diary indicates that he knew the artifact was actually made of limestone covered with plaster, and the he knew it depicted the famous queen herself.  Says Dr. Hawass:

It seems that there was an agreement between Borchardt and Lefevre that all the plaster pieces (which included an important group of plaster masks of the royal family at Amarna) would go to Berlin, and this appears to have been one way that Borchardt misled Lefevre to ensure that the bust would also go to Berlin.  (Source:  Press Release -Meeting with Berlin Museum Director)

There has been no official response from the Germans as of yet, but judging from previous statements it would seem that they feel the evidence presented can be interpreted in more than one way.  In a statement made on December 18, 2009, wherein German officials denied that the Nefertiti Summit was intended to negotiate the terms of their surrender of the bust, it was pointed out that the artifact was photographed and presented in a way that was anything but deceptive.  “The cases stood open for appraisal,” the statement concludes.   ”There can be no talk of deception” (Source:  Haaretz:  “Egypt to demand Germany return bust of Queen Nefertiti”).

But where does the bust’s safety factor into the equation?  Germany has contended for years that regardless of how the bust came to Berlin, it is too fragile now to risk transportation.  Without having the artifact appraised for just that purpose it is impossible to know if this is a genuine consideration or an attempt to keep her in Berlin. 

And who will do the appraisal?  Egypt has a standing demand for the return of artifacts from the British (the Rosetta Stone) and the U.S. (the bust of Ankhaf and the mask of Ka Nefer Nefer), just to name a few.  If experts from any country currently in possession of a disputed artifact decide against the bust of Nefertiti being moved, will that invite a cry of bias from Egypt?

It does seem from Borchardt’s own journal that he knew he was spiriting something away from Egypt that Germany probably had no right to.  But if the bust of Nefertiti is unfit for transport then a shift from talks of repatriation to talks of reparation may be the only solution to this century-old custody battle.

Copyright by Keith Payne, 2009.  All rights reserved.

In a previous article that appeared on France 24, Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities, stated that the director of the Egyptian antiquities department would be coming to Cairo on December 8, 2009, to present his evidence that the famous bust of Nefertiti had been removed from Egypt via “proper channels” (Source).

The iconic statue was brought to Germany in the early days of the Twentieth Century by archaeologist Ludwig Borchardt.  But since 1930 Egypt has insisted the acquisition violated the rules in place at the time, which required that singularly unique artifacts were to remain in Egypt.  Hawass insists that Egypt is in possession of evidence that Borchardt knowingly and illegally removed the bust by deception. 

According to The Peninsula, the director of the Egyptian Papyrus Collection will represent Berlin’s Neues Museum at the December 20 summit.  Dr. Hawass will speak for Egypt.  “The only thing we are going to discuss is whether the director has any legal papers to show that the bust of Nefertiti left Egypt legally,” Hawass said. “All evidence that I collected till now shows the bust of Nefertiti left Egypt illegally” [story no longer online].

The Bust of Nefertiti—still stirring hearts after all these years (Photo by RinzeWind)

The bust of Nefertiti was moved from the Altes Museum to the newly-restored Neues Museum on September 4, 2009, and has been on public display since October 17.  Dietrich Wildung, director of Berlin’s Egyptian Museum, had originally dug in his heels regarding the issue of repatriation, but Hawass’ recent success with forcing the Louvre to return five sections of a wall removed from the tomb of Tetaki (TT15) seems to have everyone in the mood to discuss their options again.

Ultimately the entire argument may prove to be moot.  Wildung claims that the artifact is too delicate to risk moving to Cairo, and regardless of who may have legal claims to it, the statue’s safety must be the primary concern.  It would seem that the logical first step would be to have a neutral third party of experts evaluate the condition of Nefertiti and determine whether or not she is safe to travel.  But having a decision before Hawass is allowed to present his evidence might rob Egypt of an opportunity to strike a moral victory, if not actually bring the queen home.

See also:

• The Nefertiti Summit: Will the Evidence Finally be Revealed?
• Nefertiti, the Life and Death of King Tut, and KV64: The October Checklist
• The Year of Nefertiti: Will Zahi Hawass’ Final Year at the SCA be a Last Dance with a Queen?

Copyright by Keith Payne, 2009.  All rights reserved. 

Photographs “la belle est venue” by Audinou and “Berlin 053” by RinzeWind are used in accordance with this Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. 

In a recent Em Hotep! article (Nefertiti, the Life and Death of King Tut, and KV64: The October Checklist) we noted that Dr. Zahi Hawass had promised to reveal his evidence that German archeologist Ludwig Borchardt had used “unethical tactics” to acquire the famous bust of Nefertiti for his home country.  In particular, the evidence was to be made public in October when he wrote a letter to Berlin demanding the artifact’s return.  It now seems that the evidence is being withheld for the upcoming Nefertiti Summit.

According to a November 4, 2009, article from France 24, Germany and Egypt plan talks over Nefertiti statue, the German and Egyptian panels both intend to present their facts at the December 8^th meeting.  The article quotes Hawass as stating:

“Our side will highlight documents showing the statue left in an illegal way, including ones that prove that in the allocation of antiquities discovered by a German team, (nothing) indicated the presence of a statue in the German share.”

There is actually nothing new about that particular revelation.  In a late August article that appeared on Al-Ahram Weekly On-line, Queen of Egypt’s Heart, Jill Kamil explained:

“According to the excavation regulations of the Antiquities Service, which was under French control until the 1952 Revolution, objects sans pareil (i.e. without equal, or unique) would be retained in Egypt as part of the national collection, and the excavator was entitled to half of whatever remained provided that the result of his work was published within two years. The excavation was well documented by Borchardt but no mention was made of the painted bust of Nefertiti, which was taken out of the country in unclear circumstances.”

Dr. Hawass does reveal one fascinating tidbit—Borchardt may have smuggled the iconic statue out of Germany under a coating of clay.  Exactly how, and why, this particular fact came to be documented will be interesting to see.

Germany is expected to provide evidence that the bust was acquired legally and above the board.  This evidence will also have to be particularly compelling, as the bust of Nefertiti seems to pass the sans pareil test pretty easily.  It would seem that in order for the Germans to be able to lay claim to such an artifact “through legal channels” somebody fairly high up in the Egyptian Antiquities Service must have signed off on the exchange.  Given that the Antiquities Service was under French management at the time, it is unlikely the Egyptians will be satisfied with Germany’s evidentiary documentation regardless of whose signature is attached.

The Nefertiti Summit seems to indicate Dr. Hawass has renewed his resolve to repatriate the bust of Nefertiti.  In a recent interview with Spiegel Online International Hawass seemed to have softened his stance, being open to a possible future trade of other artifacts in exchange for the bust, or even borrowing it on the condition it would be returned to the Neues Museum (source).  Given Berlin’s position that the bust is too fragile to move, rationalizing moving it twice for a loan seems contradictory.  Hopefully the issue will be put to rest one way or another on December 8^th.

See also:

• Nefertiti, the Life and Death of King Tut, and KV64: The October Checklist
• Nefertiti: The Fight over an Iconic Egyptian Artifact Continues
• The Year of Nefertiti: Will Zahi Hawass’ Final Year at the SCA be a Last Dance with a Queen?

Copyright by Keith Payne, 2009.  All rights reserved.

It is kind of hard to say someone had a bad month when they successfully reclaimed five artifacts from the Louvre and were appointed Vice Minister of Culture.  So call me a taskmaster, but those two things were not on the list…

In the last week of October Zahi Hawass was named Egypt’s Vice Minister of Culture by decree of President Hosni Mubarak.  Dr. Hawass was set for retirement from the Supreme Council of Antiquities next spring, although he certainly had no plans to slow down.  With at least a half dozen books planned to be released in the next year, and a list of projects to be completed in the Valley of the Kings, Zahi Hawass was full steam ahead in both his professional and public life.  But with the sort of legacy he was leaving, he was concerned over who might end up replacing him at the helm of the SCA.

With a clear preference for blue-collar archaeology, Dr. Hawass was worried that his replacement might be an academician with no practical experience, rather than someone who had come up through the ranks at the SCA.  In particular, he was…

“…concerned that the government might decide to appoint someone from the University to fill my position who did not have experience in archaeology.  Such a person might be impressed by the glory of the job and not focus on the monuments, and all the projects I have initiated would be abandoned.” (source)

Although not stated explicitly, Dr. Hawass’ new position with the Ministry of Culture will assure that he has some sway over who will be appointed as his replacement.  Rather than a book-smart professor type, more interested in glory and fame, Dr. Hawass’ trademark khakis, denim shirt, and Indiana Jones fedora will be handed down to someone not afraid to get his hands dirty.  Or at least they would be, if Dr. Hawass wasn’t planning to return to the field himself.

Dr. Hawass’ new position will also allow him to continue with other projects of particular importance to him.  The construction of new museums, not to mention the renovation of old ones, will continue under his guidance, as will the training programs he initiated for museum personnel and archaeologists.  Site management has been one of Zahi Hawass’ priorities, and as Vice Minister of Culture he will be able to maintain a watchful eye over these programs as well.

Another priority for Zahi Hawass has been the repatriation of Egyptian artifacts that have found themselves in foreign lands under questionable circumstances.  October saw an agreement by France’s Louvre to return a set of five wall paintings hacked from the tomb of Tetaki (TT 15), an Eighteenth Dynasty court official buried in the Tombs of the Nobles section of the Theban Necropolis. 

The agreement was reached after Dr. Hawass suspended the Louvre’ s activities in Egypt, citing a letter that had been sent eighteen months earlier requesting the return of the tomb paintings.  Frederic Mitterrand, France’s Minister of Culture, was sympathetic and agreed the fragments should be returned, but noted that France had only been aware of the fact they had been stolen following the rediscovery of the tomb in November, 2008 (source).  Oddly enough, this would have been seven months after the letter was supposedly sent, but regardless of such minor details, a victory is a victory. 

Efforts to reclaim another much higher profile Egyptian artifact have been less conclusive, which leads us to the October Checklist.

Ludwig Borchardt’s “Unethical Tactics”

Back in August, when I interviewed Zahi Hawass on behalf of Heritage Key, I asked about the status of his campaign to have the bust of Nefertiti returned to Egypt.  In particular, I asked him when he intended to reveal the evidence of “unethical tactics” Ludwig Borchardt allegedly used to obtain the bust of Nefertiti for Germany.  Dr. Hawass responded that the evidence was still being gathered, and would be publicly revealed when he wrote to Berlin in October to request the return of the artifact.

October did see changes in Nefertiti’s status.  For their part, the Germans moved her to her “new permanent home” in Berlin.  For his part, Dr. Hawass seemed to lower his expectations, stating to Spiegel Online that he was “not by any means” insisting that Nefertiti be removed from her new home (source).  But it wasn’t Nefertiti’s return we were looking for with the Checklist, it was Dr. Hawass’ evidence that Borchardt was dishonest in his dealings. 

There has been legitimate debate over whether or not the bust of Nefertiti should be returned to Egypt, even if Borchardt did remove her under false pretenses.  On the one hand, there are those who say that regardless of the circumstances under which she came to Berlin, she is safe and well cared for, open for public viewing, and too fragile to transport to Egypt.  On the other hand, there are those who say that she is an important and unique artifact and part of the heritage of the Egyptian people and belongs in an Egyptian museum.  But whether or not she should return home or remain in Berlin was not the point the October Checklist was trying to address.

What makes an artifact an artifact is its history, and that history includes not only the circumstances of its creation, it includes how that artifact and its discovery have changed our understanding of the past and how we view ourselves in the present.  An important part of Tutankhamun’s history is his tour of the world’s museums thirty years ago, and is why Dr. Hawass includes him among the world’s ambassadors.  Likewise, the history of the bust of Nefertiti consists of not just the early years of its existence, it includes the story of all that has happened ever since.

Is she, as some have insisted, a forgery foisted on the German people by Borchardt?  Is she the real deal, smuggled quietly out of Egypt by Borchardt and only revealed to the world a decade later when her kidnapper deemed it safe to do so?  Or was she acquired under what were the standards of the day with regard to which discoveries archaeologists were allowed to take back to their home countries, and which were to be left in Egypt?  All of these questions are as much a part of the bust’s history as everything thing that led up to them. 

If the Supreme Council of Antiquities is privy to the answers of some of these questions, then they should make them public.  What is the advantage of hanging on to evidence of an alleged crime that occurred a century ago?  It’s not as if the prosecution is going to call some last-minute surprise witness who will burst into the courtroom with the Damning Evidence, as everyone turns and gasps.  Nor is the evidence, if it exists, the private domain of a few men to distribute arbitrarily.  It is not the task of historians and archaeologists to hide secrets, but rather to unearth them.

King Tut’s Daughter

When Howard Carter discovered the tomb of Tutankhamun in 1922 he also discovered the mummified bodies of two young girls—one who is believed to have been miscarried at about six months, and another believed to have been stillborn.  The fact that they had been interred with the young king suggests they may have been his daughters.  This potential link is vital to the genetic mapping of the Eighteenth Dynasty, because if they are the daughters of Tutankhamun and his wife, Ankhesenamun, then their genetic profile could help identify Ankhesenamun’s mummy.  This could open an entire branch of the family tree, possibly leading to the identification of Nefertiti and other Eighteenth Dynasty celebrities.

A DNA sample was taken from the older of the two and subjected to testing in 2008, and again in 2009, supposedly with encouraging results.  On August 7^th, 2009, at a lecture at Butler University’s Clowes Hall which I covered for Heritage Key, Dr. Hawass stated that both tests had indicated that Tutankhamun was likely the father of the child.  He further stated that the results would be published in a paper “next week” (source).

August passed with no further word.  Six weeks later, in a September 20, 2009, article for the Sacramento Bee, spokesperson Jill Lynch stated “this fall, Dr. Zahi Hawass is going to announce the results of a DNA study that will determine the parenthood of the two fetuses found buried with King Tut.”  According to the article, the DNA results would be announced in “the next few weeks.”  It has been yet another six weeks, with no announcement.

The declaration that a paper detailing the DNA studies would be published “next week” was met with applause at Clowes Hall because people follow the story with excitement.  We want to know the ongoing status of this work, even if such reports only announce that the results so far are inconclusive.  Stating that a paper is to be published next week, or an announcement is coming in a few weeks, implies that the work has been done, so why continue to withhold it from the public? 

Nobody is suggesting that a researcher doesn’t have a right to hold back their work until it is ready for publication, and nobody wants to deny an archaeologist his or her much-deserved moment in the sun.  And everybody can appreciate the fact that sometimes things come up and schedules change.  But when we are told that an exciting event will happen by a certain date, the date passes without the event or an explanation, only for the same exciting announcement to be repeated again a little later, people begin to wonder if these announcements are really worth the excitement they generate. 

A New Tomb

Again quoting the above-cited lecture at Clowes Hall, Dr. Hawass stated in August that he hoped his “all Egyptian team” would be announcing the discovery of a new tomb in October of 2009 (source).  This new tomb, which according to the naming conventions for the Valley of the Kings is already known as KV64, is a favorite topic of discussion and speculation in Egyptological community, particularly on the blogosphere.  It is known that Dr. Hawass has been in hot pursuit of the tombs of Nefertiti, Ramesses VIII, and Queen Tiye in recent years. 

And although the lecture seemed to imply that the discovery would be made at the Valley of the Kings area (the proclamation was made in the context of discussing recent work in the Valley of the Kings), it is entirely possible the next tomb to be announced may not be KV64.  Rather than the Valley of the Kings, what if the new tomb is in Alexandria?  Work was to resume in October at (or near) Alexandria on a tomb Dr. Hawass believes may belong to one of ancient history’s most famous femmes fatales, Cleopatra VII (source).  It is entirely possible this year’s digging season may uncover the tombs of both Cleopatra and Nefertiti, two of the most powerful women in Egypt’s history.

But wishful thinking aside, no new tombs were announced in October.  One might point out that the operative word above was hoped, as in, Dr. Hawass hoped to make the announcement in October, but made no promises.  Fair enough, but again, why keep us in the dark?  Why not give us an update?  “We hoped to make an announcement this month, but ran into problems.  We hope that we will be making an announcement in January.”  Instead, another date passes without an explanation, or even an acknowledgement. 

What Killed Tut?

Again, to return to the lecture at Clowes Hall, on August 7^th, 2009, Dr. Hawass assured the audience that contrary to popular belief King Tutankhamun was not murdered, and that he would be announcing the cause of Tut’s death “in one month” (source).  It has been nearly three months now, and to my knowledge Dr. Hawass has made no announcements regarding the cause of Tutankhamun’s death.

A little later today (November 4, 2009) an important event is scheduled to take place in Luxor, Egypt—the opening of the Carter House to the public.  Dr. Hawass will be present and is scheduled to address those gathered for the occasion.  In the comments section of a previous Em Hotep! article on this very subject, King Tut: And the Cause of Death is… To Be Announced, one of our readers (Ann) suggested that this event would be an ideal time to announce the cause of Tut’s death, seeing as how Howard Carter discovered his tomb.

I am inclined to agree with Ann.  It makes perfect sense to hold onto this news for the opening of the Carter House.  The two events are related and it would pay double homage to a famous and beloved Egyptologist, Howard Carter.  But once the decision was made to postpone this historic revelation, why not announce the change?  The earlier date had been set in a public forum, why not relate the change in an equally public manner, such as an announcement on Zahi Hawass’ blog that instead of September the cause of Tutankhamun’s early demise would be disclosed at the opening of the Carter House?

This, of course, presumes that Dr. Hawass will be sharing this knowledge later today at the Carter House.  Without the facts, all we can do is speculate.

Zahi TV

This item on the Checklist was sort of tongue-in-cheek.  There were rumors that The History Channel might be filming a sort of archaeology reality show with Dr. Hawass beginning in October of 2009 (source).  There has been no further mention of these plans that I have been able to track down, but it is easy enough to find Zahi TV as it is.  Not just The History Channel, but The Discovery Channel, National Geographic documentaries, possibly even the Weather Channel have all featured Dr. Hawass and will undoubtedly continue to do so for years to come.

And that’s ok.  Even the grand-standing is ok because it generates interest in Egyptology.  Zahi Hawass seems to have the ability to pull a press conference out of thin air.  Even he has joked about arriving unannounced at dig sites only to find the cameras already there waiting for him.  The desire to always have some exciting news to break must be quite compelling.  It is certainly understandable that he is concerned his replacement might be someone who is merely “impressed by the glory of the job.”

Maybe the October Checklist delivered more of a bite than I originally wanted.  It was intended to be fun, and I had really hoped to see the “inventor of the twenty-four hour workday” knock these five (ok, make that four) pitches out of the park.  They were, after all, things he himself had “promised, hinted, and suggested.”  But I can’t help but note that these major announcements were made so lightly, and apparently forgotten with the same ease. 

I sincerely hope that the cause of Tutankhamun’s death will be revealed at the Carter House in a few hours.  Otherwise, it is just another announcement dropped and then, well, just dropped.

Copyright by Keith Payne, 2009.  All rights reserved.

Photographs “Egypt.Zahi.Hawass.01.jpg” by Hajor, ”Nefertiti berlin.jpg” by Zserghei, ”DSC093719.JPG” by E. Michael Smith, and “Rubble being cleared” by drewnoakes are provided courtesy of Wikimedia Commons  and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 License. In short: you are free to share and make derivative works of those files under the conditions that you appropriately attribute them, and that you distribute them only under a license identical to this one. Official license 

What could this portent for our October Checklist?  With eleven days to go, maybe it’s time we reviewed.

When I interviewed Dr. Hawass back in early August, 2009, for Heritage Key, I asked him when he intended to reveal the evidence that Ludwig Borchardt had used “unethical tactics” to bring the bust of Nefertiti to Germany.  At that time he replied that the evidence was still being gathered and would be revealed in October when he wrote to the Germans to request her return.  So I added this disclosure of evidence to a short checklist I put together, just for fun, of accomplish-ments promised, implied, or hinted at for October. 

To be certain, Dr. Hawass has been anything but idle!  Although some of the details and timing are, in this writer’s opinion, a little hazy, Dr. Hawass did demand and secure the return of a set of four, er, make that five stelae from the Louvre.  I didn’t foresee that when coming up with the checklist.

Something else that I missed was the search for the tomb of Mark Antony and Cleopatra, which Dr. Hawass told Ria Novosti would resume in October.  With Spiegel Online he was even more specific.  “The final excavations,” he states, “which had to be postponed for months, will continue next Sunday.”  Final excavations?  Sounds like he is pretty certain he has found the famous star-crossed lovers.  By the way, any rumors out there about Dr. Hawass’ collaboration with Dr. Kathleen Martinez on a book about Cleopatra?  The timing couldn’t be better…

But as for the checklist, with eleven days of October to go, it’s looking pretty tight. 

First we have Tutankhamun’s paternity tests, a key factor in the genetic mapping of the Eighteenth Dynasty.  According to a September 20, 2009, article on the Sacramento Bee website, the results of the DNA testing done on a fetus discovered by Howard Carter in Tutankhamun’s tomb in 1922 were to be announced in “the next few weeks.”  As of today, we are at four weeks and counting.  But there is still time.

Then there is the cause of Tutankhamun’s death, which way back in August was promised to be revealed “in one month.”  In all fairness, as has been speculated in the comments section of the Checklist, Dr. Hawass is due to speak in November at the opening of the restored Carter House, which would really be a more appropriate time and place to reveal this news.  So if he has decided to renege on this particular promise, as he obviously has, then I can see giving him a pass, but hopefully he will indeed break this news next month.

What about Z-TV?  The History Channel was rumored to be planning a sort of reality show featuring Dr. Hawass and a team of student archaeologists that was to begin filming “roughly October 2009.”  As best as I can tell, this seems to be possibly related to projects on the Past Preservers’ website, although Dr. Hawass is not specifically mentioned.  As the casting call is still out, I would presume filming will probably not begin in the next eleven days.  But to be honest, this entry on the Checklist was even more for fun than the rest, so if work really does begin this month on the Mark Antony and Cleopatra site, we’ll swap that for this and call it even.

On a much more serious note is KV64.  In a lecture delivered at Clowes Memorial Hall in Indianapolis, the very night I interviewed him, in fact, Dr. Hawass proclaimed that a new tomb would hopefully be revealed by the all-Egyptian team in October.  There has been much speculation about whose tomb this might be—Ramesses VIII?  Nefertiti?  The mysterious “Great Wife” mentioned on an ostracon found in the hotbed of activity around the Eighteenth Dynasty tombs?  Again, there is still time, but we aren’t seeing the sort of buildup that normally precedes a major announcement from Dr. Hawass.

And then there is Nefertiti. 

The checklist did not specify she had to be returned, but simply that the catalogue of Herr Borchardt’s crimes and misdeeds would be revealed when Dr. Hawass wrote to Berlin to demand her return, which was to occur in October.  But it would seem that the evidence is still “being gathered.”  On one hand, he states that the issue will be put to rest when he has clear evidence that the bust was acquired legally, but on the other he says he has evidence that she did indeed leave Egypt illegally.  He doesn’t want to “jump to any premature conclusions,” even though Berlin’s failure to cooperate “seems suspicious.”

Add to that Dr. Hawass’ statement that he is “not by any means” seeking to take Nefertiti from her new home, which would just be “wishful thinking,” it seems that some clarity is not likely to come in October.  Again, there is still time, but as the goal moves from demands of repatriation to an artifact swap sometime in the future, or a temporary loan ten years from now, it seems the spirit of Ludwig Borchardt may continue to rest in peace.

One good bit of news from the interview is Dr. Hawass’ statement that he has no plans to evoke the nuclear option of suspending relations with Berlin.  Although this move apparently worked with the Louvre, in the end it is not the curators, the ministers, or other “deciders” who suffer from such strategies.  It is the researcher in the field who has his or her work suspended, and that hurts all of us.

Copyright by Keith Payne, 2009.  All rights reserved.

Photographs ”Nefertiti berlin.jpg” by Zserghei, ”DSC093719.JPG” by E. Michael Smith, and “Rubble being cleared” by drewnoakes are provided courtesy of Wikimedia Commons  and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 License. In short: you are free to share and make derivative works of those files under the conditions that you appropriately attribute them, and that you distribute them only under a license identical to this one. Official license 

When I interviewed Dr. Zahi Hawass on August 7, 2009, for Heritage Key  I asked him about the famous bust of Nefertiti.  Previous statements had indicated that the Egyptian position was that the German archaeologist Ludwig Borchardt had used “unethical tactics” to acquire the statue.  At that time Hawass stated that the evidence was being collected and that he would reveal it when he wrote a letter to the museum in Berlin demanding her return to Egypt.

But Germany, who has had possession of the bust since shortly after her discovery by Borchardt in 1913, and where she has been on display since 1923, considers the queen to be a part of their own “cultural heritage.”  In an article that appeared in the August 20-26, 2009, online issue of Al-Ahram, Queen of Egypt’s heart, Wildung made it clear that Germany had no plans to relinquish the artifact.

“We could never be certain that she would arrive in good health,” Wildung told Al-Ahram.  “The bust, which is made of limestone and thick layers of plaster, is very sensitive to vibration, shock, and any change of temperature, and is too fragile to travel.”

But travel she has.  According to ABC News, Nefertiti Bust Moved to New Berlin Home [story no longer available], the bust of Nefertiti was moved on Sunday, September 4^th, “with the greatest care” from the Altes Museum to the recently restored Neues Museum, where she will go on public display on October 17, 2009.  Granted, the Neues is just next door to the Altes, but it does raise the question of why an equal amount of care could not be exercised for a trip to Cairo.

A depiction of the Neues Museum circa 1862. It was destroyed during WWII but has been recently restored and will reopen October 17, 2009. From a lithograph by Eduard Gaertner.

According to an article appearing last week in Ria Novosti, Egyptian archaeologists to search for Cleopatra tomb, Hawass is supposed to send his letter demanding Nefertiti back this week.  Given that she has just settled into her new “permanent home,” and that Hawass will be retiring from his position with the Supreme Council of Antiquities in less than a year, one is tempted to see his efforts with the bust of Nefertiti as purely symbolic.  Dr. Hawass, no doubt, would protest that notion, and in his defense, Hawass is credited for having repatriated over six thousand artifacts for Egypt in the last seven years.

I promised back on September 25^th with our October Checklist that this was going to be an exciting month!  Keep checking in with Em Hotep! for the latest.

Photographs ”Nefertiti berlin.jpg” by Zserghei, “Neues Museum Aegyptischer Hof.jpg” by ONAR are provided courtesy of Wikimedia Commons  and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 License. In short: you are free to share and make derivative works of those files under the conditions that you appropriately attribute them, and that you distribute them only under a license identical to this one. Official license 

ALL OTHER photographs and text are copyright by Keith Payne, 2009, all rights reserved.

The search for the famous queen of the Ptolemaic Dynasty has been tightening around Alexandria in recent years, and this year’s dig season could bring us even closer.  Also, Dr. Hawass confirms an item from our October checklist!

Source Article-  Ria Novosti:  “Egyptian archaeologists to search for Cleopatra”

It is the quintessential story of star-crossed lovers.  Long before there was Romeo and Juliet, there was Mark Antony and Cleopatra.  Whether you prefer saucy Claudette Colbert in the 1934 Cecil B. Demille classic, divaesque Liz Taylor in the 1963 epic, or the uber-hot Lyndsey Marshal of HBO’s Rome, Cleopatra is the very image of the woman for whom you would give it all up. 

As for Zahi Hawass, he gives us another October promise.  According to Ria Novosti, the search will begin in earnest in mid-October, so while there is no promise of results, we do have one more reason to welcome the mild winds of October.

We also have a reaffirmation for our check list, A Banner Month for Egyptology.  “Hawass also said that Egyptian authorities would next week demand a Nefertiti bust from a Berlin museum as Cairo has proof the artifact was taken out of the country illegally,” says Ria Novosti.

If you are participating in an October betting pool, you might want to put Nefertiti’s bust close to the top.  As for what the Germans will do, that is another matter altogether.  So far they have dug in for a long fight, and  with Dr. Hawass set to retire next year, time may be on  their side.  But regardless of the outcome, they will always have the bust of Cleopatra.

Photographs ”DSC093719.JPG” by E. Michael Smith, and “Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1984, MiNr 708.jpg” by Nightflyer, are provided courtesy of Wikimedia Commons  and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 License. In short: you are free to share and make derivative works of those files under the conditions that you appropriately attribute them, and that you distribute them only under a license identical to this one. Official license 

ALL OTHER photographs and text are copyright by Keith Payne, 2009, all rights reserved.

Dr. Hawass has promised, hinted, and suggested that October 2009 is going to be a particularly active month.  Just for fun, let’s make a checklist…

Nefertiti’s Bust

Dr. Hawass has stated that the evidence that Ludwig Borchardt used “unethical tactics” to acquire the bust of Nefertiti for Germany will be publicly revealed this October when he writes to the Altes Museum in Berlin to request the iconic artifact be returned to Egypt.

Source:  Exclusive Interview: Dr Zahi Hawass in Indianapolis

Tutankhamun’s Paternity Tests

The results of DNA tests conducted on a mummified fetus recovered from Tut’s tomb by Howard Carter in 1922 will be announced.

Source:  The Sacramento Bee:  Spotlight on Exhibits [story no longer available]

KV64

Dr. Hawass expressed at a lecture in Indianapolis on August 7^th, 2009, that a new tomb will hopefully be revealed by the all-Egyptian team in October. 

Source:  Lecture Review: Zahi Hawass’ Mysteries of King Tut Revealed

The Cause of Tutankhamun’s Death

The cause of Tutankhamun’s death would be revealed “in one month”.  This statement was made on August 7^th.  As it hasn’t occurred yet, hoping for this rather tantalizing tidbit to be delivered in October is not too unreasonable!

Source:  Lecture Review: Zahi Hawass’ Mysteries of King Tut Revealed

Zahi Reality TV

This is another one that might be a stretch, but it is in print, sort of.  Work is to begin “roughly October 2009” on a History Channel television show where Dr. Hawass will travel with a small team of students to a variety of sites in Egypt.

Source:  New TV show with Dr Zahi Hawass – Archaeologists Wanted

So there you have it—five things to look forward to in October!  I think that obviously KV64 and the DNA results are the most important for Egyptology, but the cause of Tut’s death and the repatriation of Nefertiti’s bust are far from insignificant. 

As for the TV show..  I don’t know.  Maybe if they spice it up a bit.  Each week our intrepid young Egyptologists should have to justify their worthiness, and the least convincing gets voted off the show.  At the end of the season the winner gets to keep Nefertiti’s bust.

Copyright by Keith Payne, 2009.  All rights reserved.

But somehow Nefertiti seems to keep slipping back into the story.

When I interviewed Zahi Hawass for Heritage Key back in August (see Exclusive Interview: Dr Zahi Hawass in Indianapolis) a lot of interesting hints were tossed out for the curious.  It’s no secret that he will be retiring from the Supreme Council of Antiquities, but it’s also no surprise that Dr. Hawass’ influence will continue to be felt in Egyptology for years, probably decades.  After all, he is retiring his position, not his pick and shovel.

In the same interview Dr. Hawass revealed that he would not only continue writing, but that his work in the Valley of the Kings is far from over, so weep not for the Good Doctor just yet.  Zahi Hawass is like the Terminator—so long as there is a spark alive within him he will continue to dig.  But nonetheless, what will the last year at the helm of the SCA hold for Egyptology’s consummate showman?

There are the secret doors in the Great Pyramid, where he has hinted that a major breakthrough has already occurred (See Goings-on at Giza in Lecture Review: Zahi Hawass’ Mysteries of King Tut Revealed in my blog on Heritage Key).  No doubt the news will be exciting.  Personally, I think it would be wonderful, poetic, and kind of funny all at once if what he discovered was Jean-Pierre Houdin’s internal ramp, but you can expect more about that on Em Hotep! in coming weeks.  Stranger things have happened…

There is the restoration work taking place in the complex of Djoser and the tomb of Seti I, and practically everywhere in Thebes.  Historic mosques, even churches and synagogues, are benefitting from conservation efforts as well.  All important, to be certain, but not quite the sort of headline grabbers that get a National Geographic Explorer special.

Let’s not forget the forensic mummy studies.  In the Lecture at Clowes Hall that preceded the interview, Dr. Hawass let drop that he would be revealing sometime in September exactly what caused the death of Tutankhamun.  That’s pretty exciting. 

Then there are the DNA studies…

One of Dr. Hawass’ most exciting projects has been the genetic mapping of the Eighteenth Dynasty.  This is important because there are a lot of anonymous New Kingdom mummies, and hidden somewhere within the pile are such luminaries as Tutankhamun’s parents, Queen Tiye, and yes, Nefertiti.

Another fact Dr. Hawass mentioned in the above lecture is that a second lab has confirmed that Tutankhamun is the father of one of the fetuses recovered from his tomb, and that both studies have been submitted for peer review.  If it turns out that Tut is the father, then cross analysis will also identify the mother, Ankhesenamun, who happens to be the daughter of Nefertiti.

A couple of weeks ago, Dr. Hawass revealed in an article on Al-Ahram Weekly On-Line (“Dig Days:  The Search for Queen Mutnodjmet”) that a genetic profile was to be constructed for Queen Mutnodjmet, as soon as they could relocate her missing mummy.  He goes on to say that this would bring us closer to identifying Queen Nefertiti, who happens to be Mutnodjmet’s sister  is thought by some, including Dr. Hawass, to be Mutnojmet’s sister.  For the full story, see my blog entry at Heritage Key, Queen Mutnodjmet: Another Branch in Tutankhamun’s Genetic Line Found (and Lost)?

This is called triangulation.  I am no Dominick Dunne, may he rest in peace, but identifying Queen Nefertiti through both Ankhesenamun and Mutnodjmet [given that they are sisters--Ed.] seems to make a pretty solid case.  So assuming final confirmation of Tut’s paternity and the subsequent cross analysis of the fetus, and assuming the AWOL Queen Mutnodjmet makes a show, we may have the positive identification of Nefertiti’s mummy some time this year.

If I may again refer to the August 7^th lecture at Indianapolis, Dr. Hawass stated that he hopes to reveal a “new tomb” in October.  He then states later that he hopes to reveal the location of Nefertiti’s tomb this winter (2009/10).  To speculate on a connection here would be, well, speculation.  But it would not be unlike Dr. Hawass to announce the location of a new tomb one month, and then identify it several months later.  He is a master of suspense.

The smart money, however, is on the “October Surprise” being KV64, and I have to admit that I tend to agree.  That wouldn’t be a bad thing.  Getting both KV64 and Nefertiti’s tomb within months of each other would make my Christmas merry, and I’m a Buddhist.  But either way, Dr. Hawass did state explicitly that he hopes to reveal the location of Nefertiti’s tomb this winter, probably under a modern rest house just northeast of Seti I’s tomb.  So far that gives us the mummy and tomb of Nefertiti.

To refer again to the Heritage Key interview, one of the things I asked Dr. Hawass about was the repatriation of the bust of Nefertiti.  He responded that he would be writing a letter this October to the Altes Museum in Berlin requesting that the artifact be returned.  In another recent article in Al-Ahram Weekly (“Queen of Egypt’s Heart”) we learn that Germany is prepared for a fight, but so is the dauntless Dr. Hawass.  For more on this, see my blog entry at Heritage Key, The Bust of Nefertiti – A Century-Old Archaeological Detective Story Nearing an End?

Dr. Hawass mentioned in the interview that he has about ten (!) books coming out in the next year, eight of which he more or less identified.  That leaves two.  Who wants to bet one of them will be about Nefertiti?  Of course, I could be way off base with all of this, and Nefertiti may end up playing a bit part in Dr. Hawass’ Final Act with the Supreme Council of Antiquities.  And stockbrokers are hardly reliable these days.  But I stand by my advice—if you are investing in Egyptian personas this year, buy Nefertiti.  You’ll thank me.

Copyright 2009, all rights reserved.