The
academic community is divided on whether Egypt has the right to restitute the
Bust of Nefertiti. The legal argument in the case of the Bust of Nefertiti has
two main juridical opinions which are supported by two opposing ideas on
whether the bust should return to Egypt or stay in Germany.
The
first legal argument that this project is going to address is the one argued by
Stephen Urice, who argues that the bust of Nefertiti is legally existing in
Germany and that the Egyptian laws were applied thoroughly and correctly. He
also adds that any consequences to the partage system which was applied then is
due to the ignorance of the French archeologist Lefebvre who failed to detect
the value of the bust due to his irrelevant academic background[173].
The second legal argument that has been embodied
in the Egyptian government’s actions and the juridical expert Kurt Siehr who
claims that the bust was conveyed illegally out of Egypt. he also adds that
Egypt has the right to bring the bust back to Egypt on the grounds that the bust
found its way to Germany through deception of the Egyptian authorities [174]and
that claim is supported by two main facts. The first is that the German
archaeologist Ludwig Borchardt wrote in his diaries upon the discovery in
precise detailing and measurement while claiming that the bust was not
recognizable. The bust was described in the partage document written by
Lefebvre as made of gypsum, a bust of an Egyptian princess of the ruling house,
and that the document was written with only examining pictures of the findings[175].
From
the previous paragraph, we can conclude that partage of the bust of Nefertiti
happened with the ill intentions of Ludwig Borchardt who decided to keep the
bust for Germany by concealing its significance and identity, and adding a
small picture of the bust to the academic publication made sure that Egypt and
the whole world did not know the importance the bust[176],
which was
properly published in an independent publication once Berlin decided to
highlight the significance of the bust. Lastly, The incompleteness of the file
of legal documents proving Egypt’s eligibility to recover the statue and the
failure to treat the crisis as a legal dispute over the statue’s ownership are
the main reasons why the problem persists to this day.
As the northern hemisphere works on
improving itself, finding peace with the crimes of the past, and constructing a
future that is based on the prosperity and endurance of the people through
making peace with our common past. The states of the southern hemisphere have
suffered from waves of imperialism, cultural genocide, and westernization, these
waves made it easy for enthusiasts with the right amount of ill intention to
steal and decompose cultures. An example of the previous phenomena are the
cases of the looting of Egyptian and Jewish cultural heritage. The Jewish
culture has been looted enormously by the Nazi regime. However, the Egyptian
civilization has been looted regularly ever since the beginning of the 19th
century, leaving the people and the culture wavering.
One of the many similarities between the process
of looting Jewish and ancient Egyptian objects is that both have their cost
paid in money, blood, and fear. We know now that many workers in excavations
die due to the fact that the circumstances of their work are inhuman and in
certain times call for the use of children due to their small size when
compared to adults. In many
cases, children die from these illegal activities[177].
Excavations have also been against the law since 1835, however, the world has
seen that the demand for Egyptian artefacts is on the rise and that it is something
that destroys the native culture of the people[178].
We could
also confirm that the illegal excavations were initiated by Egyptomania since
the French campaign on Egypt[179],
which tells us that the western demand for Egyptian artefacts is the main
factor in the rise in demand for new objects to be displayed in private
collections and museums.
The Jewish population living in Nazi
Germany were also being forced to give away thousands of objects in order for
the Nazi regime to own and all sorts of art, culture, and literature,
consequently having the upper hand in controlling the art, culture, and
literature that were available for the people, and making sure that they would
publicize the things that the Nazi regime perceived as German while diminishing
the value of any other objects that were not regarded as such by the regime[180].
By
comparing the two cases that we have, we could argue that the Ancient Egyptian
artifacts are more culturally significant to the Egyptian people than the Nazi
looted art is to the jews living today in Israel. The bust of Nefertiti which is now in Germany
is an icon of Egyptian beauty and culture. The bust of the Egyptian Queen is a
symbol of Egyptian nationalism under attack ever since its display in Germany
and the refusal of Nazi authorities to bring it back to the kingdom of Egypt [181]
[182]is
an
example of the European supremacy that was exercised on Egypt
as a supplicant to British occupation since 1882[183],
although
the displacement of the famous bust is proved to be illegal and unethical.
On the other hand, Nazi looted art
from Jewish collectors was rarely representing Jewish culture and were most
probably items that represent German and European culture such as the three
angels holding baby Christ. It is
obvious that the piece was displaced illegally from the ownership of the
original owners illegally. However, the object does not represent Jewish
culture. The fact that it was claimed by the rightful heirs then sold to
another museum in Germany tells us that the object does not hold intimate value
to the heirs[184].
On the other hand, Nazi looted art
from Jewish collectors was rarely representing Jewish culture and were most
probably items that represent German and European culture such as the three
angels holding baby Christ. It is
obvious that the piece was displaced illegally from the ownership of the
original owners illegally. However, the object does not represent Jewish
culture. The fact that it was claimed by the rightful heirs then sold to
another museum in Germany tells us that the object does not hold intimate value
to the heirs[184].
On the other hand, Nazi looted art
from Jewish collectors was rarely representing Jewish culture and were most
probably items that represent German and European culture such as the three
angels holding baby Christ. It is
obvious that the piece was displaced illegally from the ownership of the
original owners illegally. However, the object does not represent Jewish
culture. The fact that it was claimed by the rightful heirs then sold to
another museum in Germany tells us that the object does not hold intimate value
to the heirs[184].
On the other hand, Nazi looted art
from Jewish collectors was rarely representing Jewish culture and were most
probably items that represent German and European culture such as the three
angels holding baby Christ. It is
obvious that the piece was displaced illegally from the ownership of the
original owners illegally. However, the object does not represent Jewish
culture. The fact that it was claimed by the rightful heirs then sold to
another museum in Germany tells us that the object does not hold intimate value
to the heirs[184].
On the other hand, Nazi looted art
from Jewish collectors was rarely representing Jewish culture and were most
probably items that represent German and European culture such as the three
angels holding baby Christ. It is
obvious that the piece was displaced illegally from the ownership of the
original owners illegally. However, the object does not represent Jewish
culture. The fact that it was claimed by the rightful heirs then sold to
another museum in Germany tells us that the object does not hold intimate value
to the heirs[184].
On the other hand, Nazi looted art
from Jewish collectors was rarely representing Jewish culture and were most
probably items that represent German and European culture such as the three
angels holding baby Christ. It is
obvious that the piece was displaced illegally from the ownership of the
original owners illegally. However, the object does not represent Jewish
culture. The fact that it was claimed by the rightful heirs then sold to
another museum in Germany tells us that the object does not hold intimate value
to the heirs[184].
On the other hand, Nazi looted art
from Jewish collectors was rarely representing Jewish culture and were most
probably items that represent German and European culture such as the three
angels holding baby Christ. It is
obvious that the piece was displaced illegally from the ownership of the
original owners illegally. However, the object does not represent Jewish
culture. The fact that it was claimed by the rightful heirs then sold to
another museum in Germany tells us that the object does not hold intimate value
to the heirs[184].
On the other hand, Nazi looted art
from Jewish collectors was rarely representing Jewish culture and were most
probably items that represent German and European culture such as the three
angels holding baby Christ. It is
obvious that the piece was displaced illegally from the ownership of the
original owners illegally. However, the object does not represent Jewish
culture. The fact that it was claimed by the rightful heirs then sold to
another museum in Germany tells us that the object does not hold intimate value
to the heirs[184].