10 Reasons Why the Bust of Nefertiti Should Stay in the Neues Museum

and maybe (which is sorta related to point 5) the Egyptians don't really want it back. Maybe, like the Rosetta Stone, they just want to make the point about their heritage being so valuable that people are fighting over it--which is really more about promoting Egypt than having every item in Egypt. I am sure it is better to more people to see amazing things outside of Egypt than have to go only there.

Top ten reasons or top ten excuses?

I'm inclined to believe that the author understands that bringing Nefertiti back home is the right thing to do. What makes difficult the statue's return to Egypt are arguments mostly based on profit, pride of ownership and custody, worst of all, siding with Hitler, none of which are in the interest of art, cultural heritage or the bust itself. 

Mr Morales, you can say much about modern-day Germany (or little, as you prefer) but not accuse them of siding with Hitler. They have very strickt policy and law that prevents any adoration of Hitler or nazi parafenalia, so that one at least is a very unjust accusation to make!

The stolen pieces from Theban Tomb 15  (by Egyptians in the 1980's) and bought by the Louvre (in 2000/3) came from a tomb in an area that is supposed to be  'protected' by the SCA  guards.

Would the Nefertiti bust be safe if returned?   Displaying it in Egypt, would make it a  prime target for religious fanatics, (because of their hatred of icons). A boundary stelea at Amarna/Akhetaten was destroyed  a few years ago (and hushed up) just after we had visited the area. Artefacts supposed to be "in safe hands" in Egyptian museums,  have even been destroyed by fanatics in the past.

The display of the Nefertiti Bust in Germany always has, and will be, professionally exhibited, and protected. This treasure was displayed so as to be seen by the public,  with a feeling that upon entering the darkened room, you were in the presence of  Nefertiti herself!  Her removal to the new museum was done by means of a special anti-vibration, anti-shock metal cage and done by specially trained staff.
 
The allocation of the bust to Ludwig Borchardt (Germany) was not done by the English.  It was in fact the responsibility of the Antiquities Inspectorate in Asyut, and the inspector employed by the Egyptian government, was a Frenchman, Gustave Lefebre, a protégé of Maspero.  Nefertiti was listed at the top of the finds, and it was his responsibility to check each object and assign whether they were to stay in Egypt, or else go to Germany, as repayment for the huge expense of organising the dig.  The decision made in 1913 should not be changed because what was then not thought  to be 'significant',  is now.

The coffin trough  from KV55 was restored by the Germans, at their expense. It was 'given back' to Egypt!  At first it was displayed in the Cairo Museum with lights playing on all the wonderful golden carvings and was a breathtaking
sight. The last time I visited, it was hard to find.   The museum guards did not know where to direct me to see it.   No proper identification as to its historical significance was displayed beside it, and tour guides pushed their paying customers past it, not even stopping for a quick glance.

When Howard Carter was locked out of Tutankhamun's tomb by the Egyptian authorities, the magnificent embroidered pall found, was left on the ground in the open air by the Egyptians, and the Carter team of Egyptologists had to 'walk away'.   On their return, nothing had been done to preserve it, and this priceless treasure, after surviving thousands of years, was now destroyed forever.

History unfortunately shows, time and again,  that the safest place for many ancient artefacts,  usually is not in the land of its discovery.
 

It seems to me that the only way to resolve this thorny subject is in court, by a judge. The judge would have to make a decision based on what is best for the bust, weighed up alongside evidence of legal ownship. It seems to me that the Berlin authorities have a good case of ownership, but the Egyptian Antiqities Council may well have more information on this.

In response to one of the above comments - I hope I made it clear in the blog that the only relevance of mentioning Hitler's attachment to the bust of Nefertiti was to say that she does indeed evoke strong feelings in those who have or would like to have custody of her/it. This goes for both the Egyptian SCA as well as the Neues Museum.

As for my own opinion - provided that most important artefacts stay in the main national museums of their country, then I am much in favour of cultural artefacts being housed outside the country where they originated because this allows people from other nations who might not be able to travel to learn about and experience another culture. So Egyptian and Roman artworks should be housed in museums in India, China, Australia, the US... etc, just as people living in Italy and Egypt appreciate seeing displays on Indian, Chinese and Australian culture in their museums.

That all works fine so long as the artefacts have been given, sold or loaned in an honest and legal way. The controversy comes when there are questions about how a certain artefact actually got to a foreign museum. When this happened in another century, and when it involves past colonialism and occupation of foreign territories, under governments that are far removed from their modern counterparts, then there is a very thorny issue to sort out. It is one thing to establish whether or not it was legal or fair for Borchardt to take Nefertiti's bust back to Berlin in the context of pre-war 20th century Europe. Maybe it was a fair compensation for his work in the excavation, or maybe not. Do we also now need to decide if the removal was fair by 21st century standards of law and jurisdiction?

Like I said, a thorny subject! I think the only way to sort it out is in court.

The claim that an art treasure is better safeguarded in a first world country because of religious fanaticism and government instability in a third world country is not only prejudicial but flies in the face of the fact that in Germany, Nefertiti was subjected to the rise to power of a madman that stopped an accorded transaction for her return to Egypt, twisted Egyptology in favor of his ideology and provoked a world war that almost wiped out the museum that housed the statue. The bust of Nefertiti had to endure being hidden in a mine, retrieved by American troops and moved around from place to place for provisional exhibition. Some years ago, the ancient icon was used as a prop for a modern art piece.

I'm the first to agree with Bija Knowles that the display of objects outside of their country of origin is beneficial for the knowledge and appreciation it brings to people everywhere on this planet. But like she says, "so long as the artefacts have been given, sold or loaned in an honest and legal way". This is certainly not the case here, and the reason why there are so many excuses.
 

"While we're on the subject of fakes, one very reasonable solution to all this repatriation palaver could be to make very convincing copies of the controversial objects in question. This is the temporary solution that allows the full Elgin Marbles frieze to be displayed at the New Acropolis Museum."

The British musuem offer to temporarily "lend" the marbles to Greece if Greecey renounced the Greek claim to them. Greece is not going to do that -- -and of course refused that "offer".

Even the use of the term "Elgin Marbles" is prejudicial since Mr. Elgin did nothing but take hack them off the Parthenon and cart them away to another country after giving an occupying power a bribe. The "receipt" is no different than a receipt from the Nazis for something they "liberated" from a Jewish family.

The Marbles are an integral part of the main edifice of what the Greeks and the rest of the world consider THE prime National symbol of a country.

The Parthenon Marbles are not the same as the myriad of cultural patrimony taken by early "archeologiss" who were in the main rapacious treasure hunters made legal by "receipts" from foriegn overlords or corrupt officials, that is bad enough, the marbles are a particularly unique case.

Almost all the museums in Europe and the U S A are eqquipped with stolen artifacts. Of course they wiil claim that they are ligitimate because the autorities gave them away.

Those authorities were in reality occupational forces, colonials like the British the French and the Germans. They did not care about the history of the country they occupied. That is why they gave away the ancient artifacts or stole them themselves.

The Nefertiti bust, the Rossetta stone and thousands of other artifacts the colonial forces of the FRench, the British and the Germans should return to Egypt.

The Parthenon (not Elgin) marbles lord Elgin stole and damaged in the process must return to Greece.

I only wish there was in Greece a person like Dr Hawass to claim the stolen antiquities with such force and passion. The Greek politicians are all weak and they are trembling before our "great allies".

Of course neither Germany, nor Great Britain will give back what they stole. Because if they start there wiil be no end. Their museums will lose their star exibits with vast financial loss. Nobody cares about the right thing. Money is more important.  

Taking note of some of the above comments, I've laid out a case for why the Bust of Nefertiti ought to be returned to Egypt. The Egyptians have some pretty compelling arguments, it must be said!

The only reason why the bust of Nefertiti is not in Egypt, is that we live in an Euro-centrist world. I always said if China stole one brick of the Berlin Wall, the United Nations would have made understandable clear laws to get the stolen brick back to Germany.
This issue always gets me a bit angry, however, I can't do anything but continue to boycott Germany, England and France for the 5th year now...