Nefertiti Back Home

Contesting arguments of the academic community

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].

References