Cleopatra's Lost Tomb

[JGolomb]

Dominican archaeologist closes in on Cleopatra, top Egyptologist says

 

This story is getting a good amount of coverage and could become huge is Cleo's actually found. The top Egyptologist is one of National Geographic's Explorers in Residence and he's stated for a couple of years now that Cleo's tomb was very close to discovery.

 

As a side note, I posted yesterday that Hawass has not given permission to the two Italian brothers who claim to have discovered the Lost Army in the Egyptian desert.

 

SANTO DOMINGO.-

[caesar novus]

As a side note, I posted yesterday that Hawass has not given permission to the two Italian brothers who claim to have discovered the Lost Army in the Egyptian desert.

Hawass should be boycotted by all archeologists, and all escavation funding frozen. What may have started as revenge for a Unesco appointment has turned into an escalating shakedown of western museums because they have been so spinelessly aquiescent. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/science/17tier.html?_r=1

 

but it can also be risky to leave everything in one place, particularly if the country is in turmoil or can

[sylla]

As a side note, I posted yesterday that Hawass has not given permission to the two Italian brothers who claim to have discovered the Lost Army in the Egyptian desert.

Hawass should be boycotted by all archeologists, and all escavation funding frozen. What may have started as revenge for a Unesco appointment has turned into an escalating shakedown of western museums because they have been so spinelessly aquiescent. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/science/17tier.html?_r=1

Why? For combating looting? Edited November 18, 2009 by sylla

[caesar novus]

Why? For combating looting?

Fine to combat contemporary examples of looting, when both sides are agreed it was "looting".

 

Not fine when Egypt or some other place unilaterally stretches the definition, then intimidates museums to accept it's terms or else face a cutoff of cherished activities. For a counter example, there is a reason for the legal concept of statute of limitation time periods. Things happened before under different mutual assumptions and with legal entities that don't exist anymore and can't be reconstructed correctly by contemporaries.

 

Western guardians of museum collections may be too happy to give lots away anyway, for that halo of political correctness. What suffers are museum goers (and taxpayers who probably fund their museums and have contributed to recent 28 billion $ foreign aid to Egypt).

[sylla]

Fine to combat contemporary examples of looting, when both sides are agreed it was "looting".

 

Not fine when Egypt or some other place unilaterally stretches the definition, then intimidates museums to accept it's terms or else face a cutoff of cherished activities. For a counter example, there is a reason for the legal concept of statute of limitation time periods. Things happened before under different mutual assumptions and with legal entities that don't exist anymore and can't be reconstructed correctly by contemporaries.

 

Western guardians of museum collections may be too happy to give lots away anyway, for that halo of political correctness. What suffers are museum goers (and taxpayers who probably fund their museums and have contributed to recent 28 billion $ foreign aid to Egypt).

Usus autem sum, ne in aliquo fallam carissimam mihi familiaritatem tuam, praecipue libris ex bibliotheca Ulpia, aetate mea thermis Diocletianis, et item ex domo Tiberiana, usus etiam [ex] regestis scribarum porticus porphyreticae, actis etiam senatus ac populi. 2 et quoniam me ad colligenda talis viri gesta ephemeris Turduli Gallicani plurimum invit, viri honestissimi ac sincerissimi, beneficium amici senis tacere non debui. 3 Cn. Pompeium, tribus fulgentem triumphis belli piratici, belli Sertoriani, belli Mithridatici multarumque rerum gestarum maiestate sublimem, quis tandem nosset, nisi eum Marcus Tullius et Titus Livius in litteras rettulissent? 4 Publ<i>um Scipionem Afric<an>um, immo Scipiones omnes, seu Lucios seu Nasicas, nonne tenebrae possiderent ac tegerent, nisi commendatores eorum historici nobiles atque ignobiles extitissent? 5 longum est omnia persequi, quae ad exemplum huiusce modi etiam nobis tacentibus usurpanda sunt. 6 illud tantum contestatum volo me et rem scripsisse, quam, si quis voluerit, honestius eloquio celsiore demonstret, et mihi quidem id animi fuit, 6 <ut> non Sallustios, Livios, Tacito<s>, Trogos atque omnes disertissimos imitarer viros in vita principum et temporibus disserendis, sed Marium Maximum, Suetonium Tranquillum, Fabium Marcellinum, Gargilium Martialem, Iulium Capitolinum, Aelium Lampridium ceterosque, qui haec et talia non tam diserte quam vere memoriae tradiderunt. 8 sum enim unus ex curiosis, quod infi[ni]t<i>as ire non possum, ince<n>dentibus vobis, qui, cum multa sciatis, scire multo plura cupitis. 9 et ne diutius ea, quae ad meum consilium pertinent, loquar, magnum et praeclarum principem et qualem historia nostra non novit, arripiam.

Edited January 1, 2010 by sylla

[JGolomb]

About a year or year-and-a-half ago, Yale University and the Peruvian Gov't entered into an agreement whereby Yale would return hundreds of artifacts found by Hiram Bingham when he "discovered" Machu Picchu in 1911. Part of the agreement included that Yale would get to keep some artifacts and/or hold onto some things on load from Peru. Peru would open a modern museum dedicated to the discovery of Machu Picchu that would spotlight Bingham's "discovery" and the returned artifacts.

 

One nuance here is that there is pretty clear documentation SIGNED by Bingham himself indicating that he was only taking the artifacts out of the country temporarily for research purposes.

 

Yale has since reneged on the agreement and the two parties are still battling it out.

 

I thought the compromise between Yale and Peru was a nice way to reconcile their differences and theoretically ensure that both parties would have a beneficial outcome.

 

Here's a recent story on the ongoing Yale-Peru battle.

 

 

Quite frankly, I don't buy the statute of limitations argument. I don't see how you can argue for a legal statute of limitations when dealing with objects that were in a region/country/whatever for hundreds, or sometimes thousands, of years.

[JGolomb]

Hawass should be boycotted by all archeologists, and all escavation funding frozen. What may have started as revenge for a Unesco appointment has turned into an escalating shakedown of western museums because they have been so spinelessly aquiescent. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/science/17tier.html?_r=1

 

Here's a pretty good editorial on Dr. Hawass and his latest drama. Some clips and thoughts below.

 

Is Repatriation Good for Archaeology? Zahi Hawass' Quest for Egypt's Antiquities

"We own that stone, the motherland should own this," Dr Hawass told an Al-Jazeera audience two years ago, referring of course to the Rosetta Stone that now takes pride of place in the British Museum. Dr Hawass lists a top five "objects that Egypt, the homeland of the pharaohs, does not have": The Rosetta Stone and Nefertiti's bust; the Dendera Zodiac in the Louvre; the Statue of Hemiunu (the architect of the Great Pyramid) in Hildesheim Museum and the Bust of Ankhhaf (architect of Khafre's Pyramid) at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Dr Hawass can rant and rave about his 'famous five' 'til the cows come home. But what power does he really wield?

museums are beginning to fear the 'Zahi Effect'. Two years ago Dr Hawass started an offensive against the St Louis Art Museum for their purchase of the mask of Ka-Nefer-Nefer. When the museum refused to back down, Dr Hawass lauched a media war, and even distributed leaflets to the city's schools telling them not to visit the artefact. This July saw the SCA suspend the Louvre's research at Saqqara over its alleged theft of tomb fragments from Thebes. The fragments were hastily handed back and work duly resumed. New York's Metropolitan Museum went one step further last October, buying an ancient shrine fragment solely to send it back to Egypt. Dr Hawass' position is clear: "If any museum will not co-operate with us, if any museum will not be fair with us, what we should do is stop any scientific operation (with) this museum.

[JGolomb]

Why? For combating looting?

Fine to combat contemporary examples of looting, when both sides are agreed it was "looting".

 

Not fine when Egypt or some other place unilaterally stretches the definition, then intimidates museums to accept it's terms or else face a cutoff of cherished activities. For a counter example, there is a reason for the legal concept of statute of limitation time periods. Things happened before under different mutual assumptions and with legal entities that don't exist anymore and can't be reconstructed correctly by contemporaries.

 

Western guardians of museum collections may be too happy to give lots away anyway, for that halo of political correctness. What suffers are museum goers (and taxpayers who probably fund their museums and have contributed to recent 28 billion $ foreign aid to Egypt).

Caesar - I'm guessing you wouldn't want this for Christmas?

Zahi Hawass Explorer Hat

[Kosmo]

I don't get why modern Egyptians and Peruvians have rights over artifacts of Incas or ancient Egyptians? Even if they were the same nation the claim would be dubious, imagine France asking for all impressionist paintings to be returned.

[sylla]

I don't get why modern Egyptians and Peruvians have rights over artifacts of Incas or ancient Egyptians? Even if they were the same nation the claim would be dubious, imagine France asking for all impressionist paintings to be returned.

Yup, that would be like Greece asking for the Elgin Marbles, or Israel for the Holocaust cultural artifacts, or Guatemala for the Mayan codices, or Poland for its stolen art in Norway, or China for all those artifacts all around the world, or Romania for ...

(Any candidates???)

[Artimi]

I don't get why modern Egyptians and Peruvians have rights over artifacts of Incas or ancient Egyptians? Even if they were the same nation the claim would be dubious, imagine France asking for all impressionist paintings to be returned.

Yup, that would be like Greece asking for the Elgin Marbles, or Israel for the Holocaust cultural artifacts, or Guatemala for the Mayan codices, or Poland for its stolen art in Norway, or China for all those artifacts all around the world, or Romania for ...

(Any candidates???)

 

 

Or Romanian for the Ukrainian provinces it says were always its..

Edited November 21, 2009 by Artimi

[Maty]

I don't get why modern Egyptians and Peruvians have rights over artifacts of Incas or ancient Egyptians? Even if they were the same nation the claim would be dubious, imagine France asking for all impressionist paintings to be returned.

Yup, that would be like Greece asking for the Elgin Marbles, or Israel for the Holocaust cultural artifacts, or Guatemala for the Mayan codices, or Poland for its stolen art in Norway, or China for all those artifacts all around the world, or Romania for ...

(Any candidates???)

 

 

Or Romanian for the Ukrainian provinces it says were always its..

 

Indeed, the British museum and the Louvre, just to name a few would be sadly depleted if they had to hand back all that was er, extracted, from countries that fell under the power of Britain or France. I know the Italians would rather like the Mona Lisa back, and actually have a saying 'Tutti Francesi sono ladri. O non tutti, ma la bouna parte' - 'All French are thieves - or not all, but a good part [or Bonaparte, which is said the same way]'.

[sylla]

I don't get why modern Egyptians and Peruvians have rights over artifacts of Incas or ancient Egyptians? Even if they were the same nation the claim would be dubious, imagine France asking for all impressionist paintings to be returned.

Yup, that would be like Greece asking for the Elgin Marbles, or Israel for the Holocaust cultural artifacts, or Guatemala for the Mayan codices, or Poland for its stolen art in Norway, or China for all those artifacts all around the world, or Romania for ...

(Any candidates???)

Or Romanian for the Ukrainian provinces it says were always its..

By "candidates" I obviously meant cultural artifacts (as all the other examples from Maty & me), not territorial reclamations. Edited November 21, 2009 by sylla