The Beguiling Smile of an Ancient Egyptian Queen: Describing a Persistent Tension between Germany and Egypt in the Cultural

Arena

by: Flores, Deby Dale Y. Montalvo, Stephanie Claire P. Noto, Stefanie B.

An Undergraduate Thesis Presented to the International Studies Department

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts in International Studies

Miriam College, Quezon City March 2012

!!!!!!
!

ABSTRACT Culture has always been a dominant foundation of the existing nations we see today. Even modern civilizations draw their identities from traditional heritage and even from the smallest cultural artifacts that were passed on from generation to generation. The preservation of any cultural artifact therefore, has always been a topmost concern for all nation-states. In this research, we learn the reasons behind the battle of ownership over the famous Bust of Nefertiti between the two cultures of Egypt and Germany. Upon its discovery, there have been various accounts as to whether the Bust of Nefertiti was illegally excavated and transported out of Egyptian land by foreign German excavators. However, these varying claims are still debated up to this day. A significant part of this research also delves on an in-depth analysis on the interests of Egypt and Germany on the Bust of Nefertiti. The question on why the two nation-states continue to defend their rightful claims over the 3,400-year-old artifact has been put into focus. This includes the various means exhausted by the Egyptian governments to restitute the Bust back to its place of origin and the constant statements made by the German government rejecting the formers request for restitution. The concept of cultural security has been highlighted in this long-standing dispute between Egypt and Germany. Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Framework, which uses four core elements (namely actor, tactics, strategic value and significance), is applied in this extensive study. The purpose of which is to unravel the increasing significance of the Bust of Nefertiti throughout the years, respective for both contesting countries. For nearly a century now, the Egyptian Queen remains as an icon and eminent ambassador of Egypt in German land. Nonetheless, the Egyptian government does not cease to exhaust all means to bring back their Queen to its so-called rightful throne in Egypt. The question at hand now would be, to whom does the 3,400-year-old artifact rightly belong to?!

!!!!!!
!

"#$%&!'(!)'*+&*+,!
)-./"01!23!"-0!1040.1)-!5604"789!.9:!7"4!;.)<=1869:!! "#"!$%&'()*+&$(%!!#######################################################################################################################################################!"! "#,!'-.-/'+0!1*-.&$(%!!!###########################################################################################################################################!2! "#3!'-.-/'+0!(45-+&$6-.!!#########################################################################################################################################!2! "#2!.+(7-!/%)!8$9$&/&$(%.!!######################################################################################################################################!:! "#:!.$;%$<$+/%+-!(<!&0-!.&*)=!!###############################################################################################################################!>! "#>!/%/8=&$+/8!<'/9-?('@!!###################################################################################################################################!A! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"#"!$%&'()*+,-.$+/$012$3,01+*$!##########################################################################################################!B$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$!"#"4$526$7+-'2809:$399,;80<+-9$&-.$=<-(&)29$!############################################################################!B$ "#A!(7-'/&$(%/8!<'/9-?('@!!#############################################################################################################################!"3! "#B!9-&0()(8(;=!!####################################################################################################################################################!"A! "#C!)-<$%$&$(%!(<!&-'9.!!#######################################################################################################################################!,D! ! ! )-./"01!>3!10?70@!8A!10B."0:!B7"01."610! ,#"!$%&'()*+&$(%!!####################################################################################################################################################!,2! ,#,!/%&$1*$&$-.!&'/<<$+@$%;!/%)E('!.9*;;8$%;!(<!+*8&*'/8!;(().F!(%-!(<!&0-!8-/)$%;! $%&-'%/&$(%/8!+'$9-.!&()/=!!!############################################################################################################################!,2! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"4"!$>12$=<-($%20?22-$@A+B&A<C&0<+-$&-.$>*&-9-&0<+-&A$7*<;29$!#####################################!,>$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"4"4$DE*)&-<C2.$7*<;2F$&-.$<09$G&*<&0<+-9$!#################################################################################!,>! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"4"H$3-0<I,<0<29$J;,))A<-)$<-$@2-2*&A$&-.$<09$K;8A<'&0<+-9$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$&9$&-$K-02*-&0<+-&A$7*<;2$!#########################################################################################################!,>$ ,#3!&0-!;-'9/%!%/&$(%!/.!/!.*7-'7(?-'!!#####################################################################################################!3"! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"H"!$L*<+*$M+*A.$M&*$K$!#######################################################################################################################!3"$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"H"4$N<0A2*O9$P2<)-$Q+AA+?<-)$M+*A.$M&*$K$!##################################################################################!3,$ ,#2!(&0-'!8((&-)!+/.-.!!#######################################################################################################################################!32! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"R"!$>12$3;B2*$P++;$!##########################################################################################################################!32! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"R"4$>12$P+9200&$J0+-2$!########################################################################################################################!3>$ $ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"R"H$>12$3(9,;$J02A2S3(9,;$EB2A<9($!############################################################################################!3A! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"R"R$>12$L&*012-+-STA)<-$U&*BA29$!################################################################################################!3B! ,#:!+*8&*'/8!0-'$&/;-!!#########################################################################################################################################!3C! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"V"!$7,A0,*2$&-.$L2&'2$!########################################################################################################################!2D! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"V"4$7,A0,*2$&-.$3*0$&9$L&*0$+/$W&0<+-X%,<A.<-)!########################################################################!2"$ $ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"V"H$P2A&0<+-91<8$+/$3-0<I,<0<29$&-.$7,A0,*2$!##############################################################################!2"! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$4"V"R$7,A0,*&A$388*+8*<&0<+-$!##############################################################################################################!2,! ,#>!@-=!&0-('$-.!/%)!<'/9-?('@.!##################################################################################################################!22! ,#A!9-&0()(8(;$-.!#################################################################################################################################################!2C! ,#B!+0/7&-'!.*99/'=!############################################################################################################################################!2C!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!

!!!!!!

)-./"01!C3!=01D.9E!.9:!0=E/"3!"-0!)B.4-!8A!=10."!)7?7B7F."7894!8?01!.9! .9)709"!56009! 3#"!$%&'()*+&$(%!!####################################################################################################################################################!:,! 3#,!$%&-'%/&$(%/8!/;'--9-%&.!./<-;*/')$%;!+*8&*'/8!7'(7-'&=!###################################################!:,! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"!$@2*;&-X@*22($7+-Y2-0<+-$+/$!Z[R$!######################################################################################!:3! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"4$T,*+82&-$7+-Y2-0<+-$+/$#$U&6$!\#\!###################################################################################!:2! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"H$>12$!\[]$^WTJ7E$7+-Y2-0<+-$!##############################################################################################!:2! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"R$>12$!\[4$^WTJ7E$7+-Y2-0<+-$!##############################################################################################!:2! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"V$7,A0,*&A$L*+82*06$K;8A2;2-0&0<+-$3'0$<-$!\ZH$!##############################################################!::! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"#$K-90<0,0$K-02*-&0<+-&A$L+,*$=O^-</<'&0<+-$_,$_*+<0$L*<Y2$+*$K-02*-&0<+-&A$K-90<0,02$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$/+*$012$^-</<'&0<+-$+/$L*<Y&02$=&?$`^WK_PEK>a$7+-Y2-0<+-$+/$!\\V!########################!::$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"[$=&?$W+"$4!V$+*$!\V!$+*$=&?$+-$012$L*+02'0<+-$+/$3-0<I,<0<29$!##################################!::! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"Z$T)680O9$=&?$W+"$!![$+/$!\ZH!###################################################################################################!:>! 3#3!&0-!)$.+(6-'=!(%!&0-!4*.&!(<!%-<-'&$&$!!###############################################################################################!:A! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"H"!$@2*;&-6O9$3*'12+A+)<'&A$Tb82.<0<+-$<-$T)680$!#################################################################!:A! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"4"4$L&*0&)2c$3-$TI,&A$_<Y<9<+-$+/$Q<-.<-)9$!##############################################################################!:B! 3#2!*%6-$8$%;!&0-!-;=7&$/%!1*--%!$%!;-'9/%=!!##########################################################################################!>D! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"R"!$d&;29$J<;+-c$>12$DP<)10/,AF$E?-2*$+/$012$%,90$+/$W2/2*0<0<$! #######################################!>D! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"R"4$W2/2*0<0<O9$L,BA<'$Tb1<B<0<+-$<-$%2*A<-c$K)-<0<-)$012$7+-/A<'0$!#######################################!>,! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"R"H$T)680O9$%&00A2$0+$P2'A&<;$<09$e,22-$!#####################################################################################!>3! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$H"R"R$>12$%,90$+/$W2/2*0<0<c$U+*2$>1&-$d,90$&$>*2&9,*2$!##########################################################!>2! 3#:!+0/7&-'!.*99/'=!############################################################################################################################################!>>! ! ! )-./"01!G3!.9!.9.BE474!89!"-0!4-7A"79=!79"0104"4!8A!0=E/"!.9:!=01D.9E!89! "-0!;64"!8A!90A01"7"7!A18D!"-0!@81B:!@.1!"8!/84"H)8B:!@.1!01.! 2#"!$%&'()*+&$(%!!####################################################################################################################################################!>A! 2#,!-;=7&F!/%!/%+$-%&!?(%)-'!&0/&!.--@.!7'(&-+&$(%!!#########################################################################!>A! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$R"4"!$T)680$.,*<-)$012$M+*A.$M&*$T*&$!#########################################################################################!>B! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$R"4"4$T)680c$L+90X7+A.$M&*$!################################################################################################################!>C! 2#3!!;-'9/%=F!&0-!%-?!0(9-!(<!&0-!-;=7&$/%!1*--%!!#############################################################################!A3! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$R"H"!$M+*A.$M&*$T*&!##############################################################################################################################!A3! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$R"H"4$@2*;&-6c$L+90X7+A.$M&*$!##########################################################################################################!AA! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$R"H"H$@2*;&-6c$e,+029$!#########################################################################################################################!BD! 2#2!+0/7&-'!.*99/'=!!###########################################################################################################################################!B2! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !

!!!!!!
!

)-./"01!I3!.9.BEF79=!"-0!A7=-"!8?01!.9!7)897)!0=E/"7.9!.1"7A.)"!6479=! 017<!90D0"-J4!)6B"61.B!40)617"E!/014/0)"7?0! :#"!$%&'()*+&$(%!!####################################################################################################################################################!B>! :#,!&0-!-;=7&$/%!+8/$9!*.$%;!/!+*8&*'/8!.-+*'$&=!8-%.!!#######################################################################!B>! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$V"4"!$>&'0<'9$!#############################################################################################################################################!BA! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$V"4"4$J0*&02)<'$G&A,2!##############################################################################################################################!BB! :#3!&0-!;-'9/%!+8/$9!*.$%;!/!+*8&*'/8!.-+*'$&=!8-%.!!#########################################################################!BC! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$V"H"!$>&'0<'9$!#############################################################################################################################################!CD! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$V"H"4$J0*&02)<'$G&A,2!##############################################################################################################################!C"$$$$$$$$$$$$$! :#2!&0-!/+&!(<!/77'(7'$/&$(%!/%)!'-7/&'$/&$(%!!######################################################################################!C3! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$V"R"!$@2*;&-6c$5228<-)$012$D>*+816F$&0$N+;2$!#########################################################################!C3! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$V"R"4$T)680c$P29',<-)$012$D_&;92A$<-$_<90*299F$!##########################################################################!C2! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$V"R"H$3-&A69<9$+/$Q<-.<-)9$/+*$T)680$&-.$@2*;&-6$!###################################################################!C:! :#:!+0/7&-'!.*99/'=!!###########################################################################################################################################!C>! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! )-./"01!K3!46DD.1E!.9:!10)8DD09:."7894!!#########################################################################!CB! ! ;7;B78=1./-E!!###################################################################################################################################################!"D2! ! ! .//09:7L!!##############################################################################################################################################################!",D! ! !

!
!

!!!!!!

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Chapter 1 The Research Question and Its Background 1.1 Introduction She [Queen Nefertiti] is and remains Egypts best ambassdor in Berlin. - Hermann Parzinger, President of Prussian Cultural Heritage Who owns culture? When history and culture is put into question, how do we consider who owns artifacts when history and culture is not only owned by a group of people but the entire world? The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has taken into account that historical and cultural artifacts must be preserved and taken care of. UNESCO keeps records of artifacts as much as it could in order to protect them. There is no limit to the artifacts that can be nominated for the UNESCO recognition as long as it is based on "world significance (Dobrzynski, 2009). However, due to this agencys financial constraints, wealthier actors may have more influence over cultural artifacts, as they are apparently the ones more capable of preserving it. The Rosetta Stone, Parthenon Marbles, and Bells of Balangiga are perfect examples of treasured cultural artifacts that have been under the protection of foreigners for several years now, after they were taken away from their respective homelands. Explorers and archaeologists were charmed by the beauty of these artifacts, which brought them to the act of taking away these artifacts from where they came from, legally or not. The Bust of Nefertiti was not an exemption to this. With the radiance and uniqueness of the splitting image of the Ancient Egyptian Queen, the Bust was taken away from its home in Egypt
Figure 1: An Egyptian Queen Reigning in Germany? (Spiegel Organization, n.d.)

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>$

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

and brought to Germany. Almost a century has already passed and the Queen, up until today, still remains in her throne in Germany. The ancient queen of Egypt, Neferneferuaten-Nefertiti or more commonly known as Nefertiti, was the primary wife of King Akhenaten (formerly Amenhotep IV of the eighteenth dynasty). He reigned from 1353 to 1336 B.C. in the new capital el Amarna and founder of the cult of the sun god, Aton. The reign of King Akhenaten and Queen Nefertiti is a legendary part of Egyptian history, as they have brought significant changes such as the practice of monotheism to Egypts culture and identity (Urice, 2006). The Bust of Nefertiti was excavated in Egypt by a German national named, Ludwig Bordchardt in 1912. This intricately designed artifact started to draw attention from the masses after its public display in a German museum during the early 1920s. Concurrently heated arguments started to rise between the two countries when Egyptian authorities claimed that the Bust was illegally taken from its territory. This situation reflects one of the many cases that fall under a unique and currently rampant crime called antiquities trafficking. The 1999 United Nations Global Report stated that the illicit trade in antiquities has an estimated profit at around $7.8 billion, which ranked behind drugs ($160 billion) and arms ($100 billion) as the most profitable black market. This fact confirms that organized criminal looting and trade in cultural materials is a pressing issue that needs to be addressed especially in our globalizing era (Bowman, 2008). Egypt, a country endowed with one of the worlds richest cultural heritage, has always been suject to crimes related to looting. This prompted the government officials in Egypt to seek assitance from agencies and international organizations that fight against plundering of cultural artifacts considering that most ancient Egyptian artifacts are currently residing in different locations across the world.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Figure 2: The journey of the Bust of Nefertiti in 1912 (Microsoft Encarta, 2008)

Fortunately, Egypt has been successful with its quest for restitution on some of these artifacts such as the Valley of Kings and the Statue of Akhenaten. However, when the ownership over the Bust of Queen Nefertiti (see Figure 1) is put into question, Egypts efforts to retrieve its treasures are challenged. Germany which claims that it has rightful ownership over the Bust sparks a conflict with Egypt, from whom the Bust was excavated. This intriguing research displays how states that are involved in the issue, both creatively exhaust their abilities to defend their legal stance on this one object of antiquity. Interestingly, the conduct and measures taken by both parties somehow reflect their countrys national interest. This highly political and culturally inclined research travels to a period where the value of artifacts transforms with time. This research also aims to gain the attention of readers and show how sovereign countries uphold and promote their national interests. With the case of the Bust of Nefertiti, Germany was able to employ its advantage over Egypt with its unprecedented discovery of the Bust of Nefertiti. The latters colonized situation made it easier for the developed country to extract resources from the less developed one. As this research examines both countries claim over the long-disputed artifact, the concept of cultural security comes into play. This concept refers to the ability of actors in protecting and containing their rich cultures within their territories. Its main purpose is to preserve and strengthen an entitys cultural identity. As such, the researchers deem it proper to integrate cultural security into the Bust of Nefertiti issue. Their interpretations based on Erik Nemeths framework will serve as a conceptual prism to explain the reasons behind the contestations between Egypt and Germany.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

The researchers also intend to look into data as basis for Germanys and Egypts claims and interests over the long-debated artifact. Nemeths framework should also help both readers and researchers to discover the link of cultural security over the contested Bust. This research would bring interested readers into a journey of unveiling the hidden realities in cultural property, including how it becomes assimilated in the context of a foreign country. As of the moment, the Bust is perceived to be one of the most unique and irreplaceable artifacts that was recorded in history. It is a beautiful piece of art that symbolizes the person who contributed to the sophistication of the Egyptian culture. The question is how Germany came into the same stance as Egypt in claiming this beautiful artifact as well. In this long-standing dispute for the possession of the 3,400 year-old artifact, will the Bust of Nefertiti continue to reign in the museums of Germany, or will it smile in the event of its homecoming to Egypt?

1.2 Research Question How do Germany and Egypt signify cultural security in their competing claims over the Bust of Nefertiti?

1.3 Research Objectives To provide a historical background on the dispute of Germany and Egypt over the Bust of Nefertiti, including the formation of international agreements that safeguard cultural property starting from the World War era; To present the shift of Germanys and Egypts interests and claims of ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti from the World War to Post-Cold War era; and To apply Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Framework in understanding the claims of Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

A$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

1.4 Scope and Limitations This research presents a historical timeline on the Bust of Nefertiti from the time of its excavation in Tell el Amarna, Egypt up to its stay in its current location in Germany. The historical accounts aim to provide a justification as to why and how the Bust of Nefertiti arrived in Germany. In line with this, the historical timeline would also situate Germany in terms of its influence and power from the World War to Post-Cold War era. However, the timeline presented in this research may have varied information from other sources. The researchers recognize that as an ancient artifact, the historical accounts on the Bust of Nefertiti may present various and even contesting views. This is due to the fact that most previous accounts about ancient or antique objects may have insufficient first-hand information. In order to overcome this research constraint, the researchers thoroughly examined the literatures that were available to them in order to identify the most probable historical account based on its consistency among the various available sources. Moreover, this research intends to show the significance of the Bust of Nefertiti for both the contesting countries, as they take actions in order to uphold their countrys own interests. Steps taken by each country towards their claim or protection over the Bust demonstrate the states ability to utilize its power especially when in dispute with others. Nevertheless, the researchers would want to highlight that because of distance constraints, majority of the data to be gathered in order to study the interests of both states would be coming from sources that are only available to them, such as news articles, statements and other literature works that reflect the sides of the contending countries. Lastly, this research that aims to examine the shift on strategic value of art from the World War era to the Post-Cold War era would be studied in the light of Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Framework. Therefore, this study would only be limited on the key components that are involved in Erik Nemeths framework. The researchers recognize that this study would only present a solitary view on the issue and that there could be other different perspectives for further research on the manifestation of the countries interests and strategies in claiming the Bust of Nefertiti.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

B$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

1.5 Significance of the Study This study shows how status of countries affects their vulnerability of being exposed to antiquities trafficking. For instance, colonization has gravely affected several countries through taking advantage and abusing these vulnerable territories that they impose supremacy on. As a result of centuries of colonial ascendancy, new forms of influences come to light. Colonized countries, like Egypt, have indeed become susceptible to exploitative acts such as antiquities trafficking. The Bust of Nefertiti is an example of such a case. The Ottoman Empire, which was then allied with the German empire, was ruling over Egypt at the time when the Bust was excavated. In a way, Germany took advantage of their power over Egypt through the smuggling of the Bust. Up to this time, the Bust of Nefertiti still resides in Germany. Through time, the question of the Bust's cultural heritage becomes a rising concern, especially in Egypts point of view. Since the discovery of the Bust, the Egyptian government has been struggling to repatriate their historical artifact, which then implies its impact on both the government and the Egyptian society. For one, stripping off the original owners rights to preserve the Bust of Nefertiti in its jurisdiction reduces the possibility for present and future generations to retrieve historical information that is supposed to be embedded in that artifact. Hence, the researchers study on the Bust of Nefertiti can be considered significant, considering that its case may represent several other cases around the world, most of which are confined in the same situation. As International Politics students, the researchers deem that it is important to study the controversial case of the Bust of Nefertiti since it is first and foremost one of the leading international issues at present. The Bust, among many other culturally rich artifacts, are transported and exhibited in different parts of the world with the use of swift, yet very illegitimate means of border-to-border transport. This practice is more commonly termed as smuggling, and it might not be surprising to know that a substantial number of artifacts are still being illegally transported out of their respective home countrys borders. With this, the researchers will be tackling international laws on illicit antiquities transportation, documents on the arguments between Egypt and Germany on the issue and other pertinent data. Political relations between both nations in debate can be also seen through this case.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

C$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

In relation to Peace Studies, this research would show how repatriation of stolen goods or cultural artifacts could be a pathway to peace. Historical artifacts are fragments of the identity and culture ones country. Thus, the looting of artifacts, which is considered a form of violence, may cause cultural instability to the country that has been looted from. The quest for the repatriation of artifacts involves competing claims between the alleged looter and the victim, which could then result to hostilities as well. If looting of artifacts could be resolved, it could eventually contribute in the pursuit for peace and stability. As already mentioned above, International Studies students see this antiquities trafficking case as a global issue, considering its rampant spread in different parts of the world. However, the question of Germany hindering the request of Egypt on the repatriation of the Bust of Nefertiti is one query that is yet to be explored. In simpler terms, it seems that Germany shows the more authoritative side over this contending issue. Last but certainly not the least, the Philippines is one of those countries that was evidently colonized by a number of Western powers. Like any colonized nation, the effects would either be beneficial or detrimental, depending on the colonizers rationale behind its rule. The case of the Philippines showed how previous colonial masters had devastated and exploited its natural resources and given this reason, the country has already started to fight for the protection of their cultural heritage. As their colonial masters impose supremacy within the borders of the Philippines, their exploitation processes also started to take place. The foreigners apparent land occupation suggested a negative impact on the nations natural resources, almost synonymous to Egypts objections on Germany concerning the Bust of Nefertiti. In other words, the case of the allegedly stolen Bust of Nefertiti can then be incorporated as a replica in studying other similar accounts.

1.6 Analytical Framework Erik Nemeths diagram, Cultural Security, is an analytical framework appropriate for the investigation on the claims of both Germany and Egypt over the valued Bust of Nefertiti. A thorough description regarding the main proponent of this framework is provided, followed by extensive discussions on the analytical framework.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

D$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

1.6.1 Background of the Author Erik Nemeth is a scholar in Santa Monica, California who took interest in relations between cultural property and international security (Association for Research into Crimes against Art, n.d.). He devoted his time conducting analysis on the increasing role of cultural property with respect to international relations or foreign affairs. In order to attain this goal, Nemeth sought further research on the intersection between art history, illicit markets, and intelligence studies. Moreover, he was active in partaking in discussions about cultural intelligence, which he defines as the scholarly collaboration between cultural fields and security studies (Nemeth, 2009). In essence, the concept of cultural security became part of his area of concentration. Nemeth did not only focus on one field, but he also found comfort in delving in other branches of knowledge, including neurosciece, physiology, neuroaesthetics, and even humanities. A collaboration between these disciplines aided Nemeth to develop both the concepts of cultural intelligence and the strategic value of cultural property. Nemeth has also published several journals, with the titles, Terrorism and Political Violence and International and Counterintelligence, all of which are generally related to art history, information science and criminology. He devoted most of his time serving as one of the trustees in the Association for Research into Crimes against Art (ARCA), not to mention being involved in the editorial board of the Journal of Art Crime, an ARCA project that allows scholars to publish their studies of art crime or cultural property protection as well. He was able to contribute many of his inputs on cultural security because of his concern with the growing accounts of illegal exporting and excavating of cultural art. He holds the belief that unauthorized excavation and illicit export of cultural artifacts compromises not only the identity of local communities but also the archeological value of artworks (Nemeth, 2010). Nemeths sense of interest in the protection for cultural property resembles the motivating force of this research paper.

1.6.2 Key Concepts, Assumptions and Linkages With this study looking into the broad topic on culture, it is appropriate to find significant and specific links between Nemeths concept of cultural security and how it is depicted in
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

E$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

the case of the Bust of Nefertiti. According to Nemeth (2011), The framework helps in understanding the role of artworks and monuments in security as part of international affairs. The framework also helps to illustrate the expanding influence of cultural property in foreign policy over the past century. In a sense, culture is always seen as the foundation of this primary study. Throughout history, culture continues to influence the lives of most people, and is used at the same time to preserve their indentitys existence as well. Nemeth saw how significant culture is, and hence, realized the need to protect it especially in times of conflict. As such, Nemeths framework offers an analysis in the workings and mechanics of cultural security. Erik Nemeth's Cultural Security Framework (2009) shows in the first place the different perceptions on cultural art in contemporary times, the three timeframes namely: the World War II period, Cold War era, and Post-Cold War age. With these timeframes, Nemeth shows how a cultural good transforms its significance and value as time and various ideologies transcend. Additionally, embedded in this framework are four variables namely (1) actor, (2) tactic, (3) significance, (4) notion of victory. A direct quotation below presents how Nemeth applies his Cultural Security Framework (refer to Figure 3) in protecting cultural artifacts: In retrospect of the past century, three basic models characterize the influence of scholarship on the treatment of cultural patrimony during international conflict: 1) art historians work directly with military and intelligence services both to identify and plunder artworks and to recover and return displaced cultural property; 2) archaeologists indirectly enable illicit markets with discoveries and inform the development of treaties with scholarly publications; 3) humanists debate the protection and possession of cultural property and thereby increase the strategic value of cultural property in foreign relations. Consequently, insurgencies destroy symbolic objects in political violence, and nations leverage cultural property in security strategies. Models 1 and 3 characterize a direct influence of scholarship on the tactical significance of cultural patrimony, while model 2 characterizes an indirect influence with the creation of long-term security risks and the resulting counter measures............................................................... Placed in succession, the models reveal the evolution of the tactical significance of cultural patrimony. In World War II, actors who planned plunder targeted specific ethnicities to effect ethnic cleansing, which achieved cultural conquest. In the Post-Cold War, planned plunder has
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

F$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

evolved into organized looting for profit in illicit markets, and political violence targets cultural property in campaigns of cultural cleansing. Both types of abuse have converted cultural conquest into cultural exploitation. In reaction, nations protected cultural patrimony and, thereby, gained political goodwill, which demonstrated cultural awareness during World War II. In the Post-Cold War, reactive protection still garners political goodwill, but intelligence on cultural patrimony has the potential to effect cultural security, which would transform cultural awareness into cultural credibility in foreign relations (Nemeth, 2009).

Nemeths theoretical diagram highlights two actors that interact based on their contesting claims over cultural antiquities. These actors construct their own notions that satisfy their self-interests on one hand, and develop their sense of cultural security on the other. The self-fulfillment they achieve in this set-up is defined by how significant they perceive cultural things really are. Nemeths framework also emphasizes the importance of an actors cultural components, hence the formation of their own notions of victory, both on the state and personal level. Seeing that only two actors are involved in this process, the chance for more conflicts to arise becomes high. In accordance with the framework in Figure 3, the readers could easily see the difference between Egypts and Germanys notion of victory, and how significant they perceive the Bust is for themselves. The organization behind the website, culturalsecurity.org, presented extensive explanations on this analytical framework. For one, cultural intelligence and cultural security are always in the middle of these interactions, and through time the difference between the two are stressed. Over time, interested states who seek ownership over valued artifacts would unconsciously contribute to the study of cultural intelligence (Nemeth, 2009). The succeeding statements will express the difference in the perspectives of the two actors involved, including a presentation on the foundations of the other elements (tactic, significance, notion of victory) used in the research. The timeframe in Nemeths framework depicts the increasing value of artifacts over the different periods of time. Until the last period of the framework, two classifications of actors were shown one that ensures cultural protection and the other that continues to use illicit means of acquiring cultural artifacts. Their notions of victory also display opposing views. The insurgencies and organized crime intensify crimes of cultural
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>G$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

exploitation but it remains in the hands of academia and law enforcements to ensure that they halt this cultural exploitation. Nemeth also highlighted the presence of threats in these kinds of situation. In line with the general topic of cultural security (and those that relate to the prevention of illicit transfer and trading or antiquities), the researchers will continue to integrate Nemeth's framework with their main topic on analyzing the claims of ownership of both Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti. This may be accomplished as they form their own interpretations and employ all variables (including a historical timeline) in Nemeths framework, while at the same time, give their readers a clear-cut understanding of what these concepts and links really mean. Using this framework will assist researchers and scholars in understanding the basis of Germanys and Egypts strategies and interests as they compete over the Bust of Nefertiti. Nemeths framework allows them to compare the value of cultural artifacts during the World War era and in the current Post-Cold War era. The modified framework that will be used for this research is also inspired by the said framework and it will be discussed in the succeeding sub-chapters.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

1.7 Operational Framework With reference to Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Framework (2009), the researchers aim to incorporate Erik Nemeths four core variables (actor, tactic, significance, notion of victory) in order to understand the long-debated case of Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti. The modified framework emphasizes the two actors involved, which are Egypt and Germany. In each actors side, a shift on the tactic, significance and notions of victory from the World War to Post-Cold War is presented. With the Bust of Nefertiti being contested by both actors involved, the tactics show the ways on how Germany and Egypt uphold cultural security. Given the relevance of time and its impact in this research study, a historical timeline has also been incorporated in Figure 4. This transition shows how perceptions on cultural property differ over time. In this study, a timeline that encompasses the periods from the World War up to the contemporary time or the Post-Cold War will be used. The flow of this modified framework, as exemplified by Erik Nemeths previous guide, starts from whichever actor is deemed more compelling by the reader. Therefore, when one attempts to analyze this framework, the reader may begin from either the side of Egypt or Germany. The first two rows display Germany as an actor after proclaiming sovereignty and possession over the Bust in the early 20th century. Being an axis power, Germanys tactic during the World War era was labelled as planned plunder. As reflected in Chapter 3.3, Germany was said to deceive Egypt in claiming that the Bust of Nefertiti was made of an inexpensive material. In this regard, the act done by Germany is labelled as Archaeological theft. Moving on to the Post-Cold War era, Germanys tactic according to Nemeth is Profitable Looting. This is applicable in the case of Nefertiti as Germany had also acquired a Historical and Scholarly profit in its success in keeping the Bust of Nefertiti in its borders. As further discussed in Chapter 5.3.1, Germany wanted its museums to be at par with other musea such as the Louvre and the British Museum. It is reflected in Germanys aim that through the Bust of Nefertiti, its country would be able to gain scholarly and historically stature.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Another core variable in Nemeths framework is the significance of cultural artifacts for the actors involved. The arrival of the Bust of Nefertiti along with other Egyptian artifacts in Germany signified pride for German archaeologists. However, as compared to other artifacts, Germany views the Bust of Nefertiti to be of greater value than the others. This is because the Bust upholds its countrys political goodwill in showing that it is superior over Egypt in terms of its success in archaeology. As the bust remains in Germanys possession, notions of victory are also formed. This shows their aspirations to have a strengthened national recognition, and continued dominance over the disputed bust. As mentioned earlier, the cultural conquest or triumph of Germany is reflected in its archeological and scholarly success as it was able to conduct numerous archeological expeditions in Egypt. (see Chapter 3.3.1) Up to date, the Bust still remains in the hands of the Germans. This fact actually confirms that Germany remains successful in upholding its cultural security over the Bust of Nefertiti. The Bust being appropriated in German culture reflects Germanys notion of victory. At this point, the framework moves from Germanys to Egypts side of the story. These contrasts in outlooks regarding the possession over the Bust of Nefertiti, can be be explained further with Egypts perspective. For the other actor which is Egypt, the World War Era--the first timeframe provided by Nemeth in his framework, was not applicable to the analysis of this study on the Bust of Nefertiti. This is due to the fact that the data which leans on the side of Egypt was dated way before the World War era and thus, could not be applied in this framework. However, the researchers were still able to present the side of Egypt as they have gathered ample data to support the claims of Egypt in the Post-Cold War Era. In the Post-Cold War era, Egypt reflects its tactic, significance and notions of victory over the Bust of Nefertiti with Erik Nemeths concepts of reactive protection, cultural security and cultural credibility respectively. Egypts tactic which is reactive protection is validated with its aim to reclaim a significant cultural artifact. As elaborated on Chapter 4.2.2, Egypt, using many ways, attempted several times to retrieve the Bust of Nefertiti from Germany. With its own tactics, the significance of the Bust of Nefertiti to Egypt is to secure its culture. The Bust of Nefertiti is a symbol for its countrys prestige and should then be protected by all means.
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>A$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

In the event that the Bust is repatriated back to Egypt, it is perceived that their cultural heritage should be revived, especially after almost a century of settling in a foreign land. With this, national pride will also be strengthened and upheld. The same idea goes for the World War and Post-Cold War era. The only question in the researchers minds at this point drives back at their main research question how do Germany and Egypt signify their cultural security in their competing claims over the Bust of Nefertiti. Nemeths Cutural Security Framework in Figure 3 is useful in understanding the question at hand. The research question basically asks how both countries represent their cultural security, bearing in mind their respective intentions over the Bust of Nefertiti. As illustrated in Figure 4 of the succeeding chapter, both countries have their own forms of signifying their cultural property over the Bust of Nefertiti. Germans protect their cultural security using an intellectual and scholarly tactic that is, Germanys defense in keeping possession of the Bust lies with the fact that they were the ones who excavated and discovered it after so many years of being lost in history. Hence, they use a scholarly tactic in keeping hold or possession over the 3,400 year old artifact. On the other hand, Egypts defense on its repatriation claims for the Bust of Nefertiti would rely on the fact that the artifact has its cultural and historical roots in Egypt. Egypts side use a historical tactic, as opposed to Germanys scholarly tactic as mentioned earlier. Therefore, these contending views may also pose the difficult question on whether or not the artifact should be transported back to the land where it was excavated. In an overall analysis, the acts done by Egypt and Germany in their contestation over the Bust of Nefertiti can be delineated as acts of repatriation and appropriation, respectively. In this study, the act of repatriation (see Chapter 5.4.2) is reflected in Egypts efforts to reclaim the Bust of Nefertiti from Germany. The act of appropriation (see Chapter 2.6.4 and 5.4.1) on the other hand, refers to the process of assimilation and integration of a native artifact into a foreign culture. In this regard, the act of appropriation is reflected in Germanys efforts to integrate the Bust of Nefertiti in its own culture. $

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>B$ $

Figure 4: Application of Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Framework on the Case of the Bust of Nefertiti

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

>C$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

1.8 Methodology In studying about the case of the Bust of Nefertiti, most documents needed are taken from the qualitative approach. The design of qualitative methods for this approach is made especially for researchers and readers to understand social and cultural contexts (The University of Western Ontario, 2007). A concern in the study of the Bust of Nefertiti is the limited methods used throughout the research. There may be other extensive ways of conducting this research but only those seemingly attainable and manageable methods were used. Still, the qualitative method provides detailed descriptions and explanations of the study, thus making it particularly suitable for studying the claims of the two contending nations, Egypt and Germany, on their alleged rights over the 3,400-year-old historical Bust of Queen Nefertiti. As mentioned above, the methods of the qualitative approach meet the objectives of this research. These methods are also categorized as primary, secondary and tertiary sources in order to properly process and gain the information needed in this study. First and foremost, historical documents are one of the primary sources for this research. This method is generally called document review. Documents that provide enough information to trace the whereabouts of the Bust of Nefertiti since it has been excavated will be used in the analysis. These data concentrate on the highlights of the journey of the Bust, dated since its unearthing in 1912 up to the present debates on its proprietary rights. The documents, resolutions and the like regarding the formation and the development of international agreements on safeguarding cultural property since the World War era will also be analyzed since these play a role in studying the case of the Bust of Nefertiti. Other findings also help in the analysis of the core variables faced by both contesting countries in upholding cultural security. The compilation of records and documents undergo an in-depth process of analysis from the researchers. These secure the contextual information needed for all three objectives in this research. This way the readers and the researchers see how cultural security has affected the current state of the Bust of Nefertiti through the findings. In order to gain additional knowledge regarding the claims from the contesting parties, the researchers also reviewed official political statements and documents, which determine the assertion of the positions of both contending countries regarding the
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>D$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti. The method, which this area uses, is referred to as the review of official statements. This particular method is significant in obtaining all three objectives in this study. The secondary sources that will be used in this research will be composed of media materials such as articles, reports, translated publications and films regarding the previous and current status of the Bust of Nefertiti. Documents related to the concept of cultural security provide theoretical information on studying the said case by gathering pertinent data and findings. Studying other cases related to antiquities trafficking may also be relevant in this research. These media materials will help in further discussing the history of the said Egyptian artifact. These will also support the positions of the contesting countries, Egypt and Germany, that will be discussed when the second objective is answered later in this study. Articles, reports and translated documents will be particularly needed for all three objectives as these may affirm details taken from the primary sources. Also, in doing film analysis, the researchers extracted direct quotes from documentaries relevant to the Bust of Nefertiti. The information that will be retrieved from the film will be especially valuable not only for quoting public figures but these will give more substantive results to this research, as well. Following the odyssey of the Bust of Nefertiti, the film will be able to the researchers a clearer picture of the events that have happened in the past. Results from these methods may help in obtaining the information needed for all three objectives. Tertiary sources in the form of newspapers and other periodicals may give helpful information in the course of this research. These may provide contextual information and help determine significant data for all the objectives needed in this research. The steps in the course of this research chronologically attain the three objectives in the study of the case of the Bust of Nefertiti. Initially, the first objective provides a historical background on the dispute of Germany and Egypt over the Bust of Nefertiti, including the formation of international agreements that safeguard cultural property starting from the World War era. Reviews of documents highlight the history and background on how the Bust of Nefertiti arrived in Germany, at the same time, find out the impact of the Bust as an Egyptian cultural artifact residing in Germany.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>E$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

In order to acquire the information needed to present the shift of Germany's and Egypt's interests and claims of ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti from the World War to the Post-Cold War era, review of documents and official statements of the contending countries. These findings help in determining the claims and arguments of Germany and Egypt regarding their position on their claims of ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti since the World War up to the Post-Cold War era. The results of studies related to the same case help in this objective, as well. The last step is fulfilling the third objective, which analyzes the tactics, strategic value and threats faced by both contesting countries in upholding cultural security using Erik Nemeth's Cultural Security Framework. Determining how both countries uphold cultural security over the Bust of Nefertiti is of the utmost importance for obtaining the last objective. Document review and review of official statements is done in order to achieve this objective. By following these methods in the research regarding the case of the Bust of Nefertiti, efficient results are given in order to determine further the objectives needed for this study. Below is a table that summarizes the qualitative methods acquiring the information needed for objectives of the research on the Bust of Nefertiti. (see Appendix B for matrix of source documents) Table 1. Methods for Achieving the Objectives Needed in the Study on the Bust of Nefertiti Type of Information What is Required Method Objective 1 (Contextual) To provide a historical background on the dispute of Germany and Egypt over the Bust of Nefertiti, including the formation of international agreements that safeguard cultural property starting from the World War era Highlight of the history and background on how the Bust of Nefertiti arrived in Germany Determining the effect of the Bust as an Egyptian cultural artifact residing in Germany The development of international agreements on safeguarding cultural property since the World War era Claims and arguments of Germany and Egypt regarding their position on the repatriation of the Bust of Nefertiti Document review Review of official statements

Objective 2 (Contextual, Perceptual) To present the shift of Germany's and Egypt's

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

Document review Review of official statements

>F$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

interests and claims of ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti from the World War to Post-Cold War era Objective 3 (Contextual, Theoretical) To analyze the tactics, strategic value and threats faced by both contesting countries in upholding cultural security using Erik Nemeth's Cultural Security Framework

Determining how both countries uphold cultural security over the Bust of Nefertiti Distinguishing the tactics, strategic value and threats faced by both contesting countries in upholding cultural security over the Bust of Nefertiti

Review of official statements Document review

1.9 Definition of Terms ACTORS The concept of actors in this study are either government, military and intelligence services that help reduce the crimes of antiquities trafficking and the insurgencies and groups that plunder and exploit cultural art. These actors become instruments that either protect or incite plundered cultural artifacts (Nemeth, E., 2009). Nemeth (2011) also describes the actors as the individuals, communities, or organizations who develop or exploit the tactical value of artworks and monuments. ANTIQUITIES TRAFFICKING Antiquities trafficking is considered as one of the leading international organized crimes today. This involves the practices of illicit trading of historical and cultural artifacts across borders (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999). This crime also involves illegal extractions of cultural artifcats from its native land, without consent from the cultural heritage authorities of a state. This term can use the terms art theft or cultural goods smuggling interchangeably. CULTURAL APPROPRIATION Cultural appropriation refers to the process of assimilation and integration of a native artifact into a foreign culture.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?G$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

CULTURAL ARTIFACTS Cultural artifacts are those art works, material, man-made ornaments, and the like which have intrinsic and important value in the historical, aesthetic, ethological and anthropological point of view (UNESCO, 1972). This can also be called cultural arts, cultural goods and the like across the course of this study. CULTURAL EXPLOITATION Cultural exploitation refers to the tampering, destroying and abusing cultural and historical artifacts. This includes illegal excavations and illegal transportations of cultural artifacts, on the motives of acquiring profit. CULTURAL HERITAGE By the definition of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO): The cultural heritage may be defined as the entire corpus of material signs - either artistic or symbolic - handed on by the past to each culture and, therefore, to the whole of humankind. As a constituent part of the affirmation and enrichment of cultural identities, as a legacy belonging to all humankind, the cultural heritage gives each particular place its recognizable features and is the storehouse of human experience. The preservation and the presentation of the cultural heritage are therefore a corner-stone of any cultural policy. (UNESCO, 1989) CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE Nemeth defined cultural intelligence as the scholarly collaboration between cultural fields and security studies. In the study of cultural intelligence, one must include collection and analysis of information to assess the significance of cultural artifacts. The success of cultural intelligence lies on the communication between disciplines informed on cultural property and disciplines that support security strategies. This includes the licit and illicit transfer of antiquities and the symbolic value of historic structures and religious monuments (Nemeth, E., 2009).

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

CULTURAL PROPERTY From the 1970 UNESCO Convention, UNESCO defined cultural property as properties, on religious or secular grounds, that were considered by states of importance for archaeology, prehistory, history, literature, art or science (UNESCO, 1970). CULTURAL SECURITY Cultural security was defined as the management of the risks associated with the strategic value of cultural property. It identifies threats to cultural property and sees it as one of the components of national security that needs to be be protected. There is also a concentration on examining current tactical significance of antiquities, historic site and the like, and explores strategic potential of cultural intelligence (Nemeth, E., 2009). ILLICIT MARKETS Illicit markets or commonly known as black market is a venue for illegal tradings, where people, institutions (in this case, including museums) and even states purchase cultural artworks and goods. LOOTING Looting is the process of plundering of cultural and historical artifacts and artworks, which was specifically rampant during the World War era (Nemeth, E., 2008). NOTION OF VICTORY Nemeth (2011) relates notion of victory to The perceived significance of cultural security to achieving success in military intervention, political violence, or diplomacy. For example, the "soft power" of protecting cultural patrimony during armed conflict complements the "hard power" of military intervention. POWER PLAY In simple terms, power play is referred to as taking part with the use of power. There is usually an imbalance with the use of power. The challenge of inferior versus the superior is also present in this concept.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

??$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

RESTITUTION Restitution happens when one returns a valuable object to the original owner from which was taken with or without their consent. $ SIGNIFICANCE Although significance in a general view determines how valueable a certain artifact really is to the actor/s in their quest on retrieving cultural and historical artifacts, Erik Nemeth (2011) on the other hand, defines significance as the political, financial, or strategic value of applying a tactic. STRATEGIC VALUE In this study, strategic value pertains to how states view the significance of cultural artifacts such as the Bust of Nefertiti. TACTIC In Nemeths framework, tactics are methods used by the actors in order to regain cultural and historical artworks. Nemeth (2011) also describes this core variable as the methods by which actors exploit artworks and monuments to political or financial advantage. THREATS These refer to the possible factors that could impinge and endanger cultural security. TRANSNATIONAL CRIME It involves planning and execution of illicit activities in the international community. There is the use of systematic violence and corruption in order to attain their goals. Crimes like this would include: money laundering, human smuggling, cyber crime and various types of trafficking. This can cause the weakening of economies. Financial systems, upsets the peace and stability of nations and undermines democracy. Usually the typical prey for this type of crime are those with governments that are considered weak. Every so often, the methods used in this crime are bribery, violence or terror to achieve their goals. (National Institute of Justice, 2007)

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Chapter 2 Review of Related Literature

2.1 Introduction Who owns culture? This question remains ambiguous in this study, considering that the realities of having hassle-free modes of transportation, or convenient ways to send and access information had resulted to the common perception that Globalization has indeed made lives smooth sailing, unlike before. Most people perceive this phenomenon as something that usually produces good outcomes and more convenient ways of life. However, when putting it in a different perspective, one cannot deny how dangerous and unpredictable the world has become, and this has also been attributed from the influx of the same phenomenon. With this context, the question whether Globalization benefits or aggravates cases of looting or antiquities trafficking come into play. At the same time, issues also arise with the need to protect ones cultural security. This chapter dwells on areas of discussion that relate to contemporary looting, accounts of cultural artifacts that have been subject to looting, and those theories that attempt to expound on the motivations of looting throughout the years.

2.2 Antiquities Trafficking and/or Smuggling of Cultural Goods: One of the Leading International Crimes Today The advent of the Globalizing Age primarily drives at two significant implications. Taking a lighter view on the subject, societies can look at this global phenomenon as a repercussion with promising effects, although it would seem to eventually boil down as just a momentary, yet still valuable, asset to the international scene. Either way, it would come to everyones understanding that Globalization does not guarantee the security of states, ergo making the quest for peace an even more difficult job to partake in.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?A$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

2.2.1 The Link Between Globalization and Transnational Crimes With the general knowledge about how turn of events transpired during the infamous World Wars, it wouldnt be too much of a surprise if states today strive for increased cooperation rather than pursuing pass intimidation schemes. Though scholars may have conflicting views on whether the end of the traditional wars1 resulted to the improvement for the international system, it would still appear at this given moment that development in terms of national security are yet to be given its anticipated efforts. Apparently, the multi-faceted phenomenon of Globalization could not at all alleviate the proliferation of security threats, more of which should be extensively discussed in the latter parts. As what was being reiterated in the previous statements, it then becomes an accepted reality that the end of the Cold War has also paved the way to the rise of an even more unstable, not to mention unpredictable, international system. States deal with a variety of threats and most of which are regarded as transnational crimes, which have been major concerns of every existing government in this complex system. Mr. Epimaco Velasco, the former Secretary of the Interior and Local Government of the Republic of the Philippines, in his keynote address for an important meeting with the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP), even described this current influx as extremely dangerous and subversive, making it a cause of a worrisome trend. (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999) Needless to say, international relations at this contemporary age can inevitably be put at risk with the presence of non-traditional (more commonly termed as transnational or international) crimes. Moreover, the unrelenting factor of Globalization somehow assists, or with a lack of a better term, feeds these criminal organizations that basically oversee a booming system of covert practices. In this way, these illegal criminal organizations proliferate and perform their border-toborder illicit activities, while at the same time taking advantage of the rather liberal benefits brought forward by Globalization.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
1

Referring to the World Wars (WWI, WWII, including the Cold War), where superpowers contend in pursuit of a certain goal that usually requires the use of force and whatnot. 7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?B$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

2.2.2 Organized Crimes and its Variations As persistent as international crimes are these days, they would still have to give recognition to the underlying private criminal organizations that ensure the continuity of their illicit activities. Most international crimes therefore, deal with a concealed system of felonies, containing processes that would usually breach borders and acquire a rather large amount of profit. They come in varying forms and most of them would have a reasonably great impact to societies, as well as with the governments that assume authority over them. Hernandez and Pattugalan in their book entitled, Transnational Crime and Regional Security in the Asia Pacific, (page 29-31, 1999) provided its readers a pretty long list of activities that were considered as transnational crimes. The list includes activities such as, (1) arms trafficking, (2) art theft or antiquities trafficking, (3) arson/bombings, (4) bankruptcy fraud or scamming, (5) computer crime, (6) contract killings, (7) illegal gambling, (8) illegal immigration/alien smuggling, (9) intellectual property crime/copyright violations, and (10) money laundering (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999). Sad to say, the list goes even further, changing in structure or system of operations, but still posing grave threats to the welfare of states. This also implies an unending increase in the challenges faced by governments as they attempt to eradicate these prevailing transnational crimes. With that being said, the would now move on to the specifics of Antiquities Smuggling, and how it becomes one of the leading international crimes in this Post-Cold War world order.

2.2.3 Antiquities Smuggling In General and its Implications as an International Crime Antiquities smuggling2 also familiar with the name Cultural Goods Smuggling, does not rank far from the other leading international crimes today. As a matter of fact, this multi-million dollar business belongs to the fourth place in the list, right after notorious drug smuggling deals, illicit weapons proliferation and money laundering events (St. Hilaire, 2007). Considering this previously mentioned point makes the

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
2

The act of illegally transporting a cultural artifact to another land to gain an amount of profit.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?C$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

crime of art theft even more alarming, especially when it is being compared to the most dangerous, and possibly life-threatening, law-breaking activities. The interest of human race on ancient art has clearly prevailed even as civilizations undergo their inevitable transitions. Apparently though, theft and smuggling of these artifacts has also been regarded as a so-called trend in this evolving world. Criminally inclined people see effortless ways in earning profits through a variety of illegal activities, this including the smuggling of antiques. Studies have also proven that antiquities trafficking garners a good volume of earnings, all directed to the hands of one who could confidently face all the risks that lie before this rising transnational crime. This 4th ranking global crime entails complex processes contrary to the usually obtrusive looting scenes people find in most adventure-themed movies. The entire trafficking chain starts with the looters, who carry out all the excavating operations in preserved archeological sites. From there, the excavated artifacts are removed from their original homeland by these looters and are transported to other states with interested buyers. The market will be wide open for these items, which brings us to our third role in this chain, the sellers. According to Hilaires article International Antiquities Trafficking: Theft By Another Name, these sellers come in two forms. They can either be dealers or auction houses. We should take into consideration though that not all dealers and auction houses operate inconsistently with the implemented laws, some are really admissible by governments, some prefer to do their businesses in the privacy of their own homes where minimal authority inspections are guaranteed. The receivers are the last people found in the antiquities chain, and these would comprise of mostly the museums and the collectors, in other words, those individuals who possess a certain level of interest on cultural goods (St. Hilaire, 2007). The most popular prosecution case that has something to do with antiquities trafficking goes to a man named Frederick Schultz. Knowing that he purchased an $800,000 stolen sculptured Bust of Amenhotep, Schultz still sought for transferring the artifacts ownership to another collector, with the inflated price of $1.2 million dollars. After some time, Schultz was convicted with the reason of violating the US

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?D$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

National Stolen Property Act. Laws combating this crime require another chapter for extensive comprehensions. While there may not be a definite year recorded under the outbreak of antiquities theft, its impact on both the civil society and state levels still continues to be indefinite, ergo limitless in terms of its effects. its processes add to the spread of global crimes. Globalization by definition is the process in which societies undergo a state of integration through a connected network of communication, transportation and trade (Anasarias, 2010). At the outset, this phenomenon may appear to be advantageous, but the reality that it brings even more burden is very apparent at the present age. For one, it helps antiquities trafficking to expand by reducing barriers between national borders, allowing those illegally extracted artifacts to move without much regard for customs authorities. In short, with less restrictions on the flow of goods and services transported from border to border, the government sectors would also be incapable of enforcing appropriate customs laws, hence the further decline of the states role and its ability of imposing intervention. (Anasarias, 2010) As what has already been established in the earlier discussions, antiquities trafficking is a distinct form of transnational crime that has major implications in components such as the civil society, and the government which administers over them (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999). The two cannot probably exist without the other, which also implies how they can also share detrimental effects. In the case of illegal activities concerning antiquities, both categories (state and civil society) experience the adversities resulting from the given crime in more ways than one. At this point, a deeper analysis on impacts taken by the societal and governmental levels should be under way. If traditional crimes bring a state of instability, then would non-traditional crimes such as antiquities trafficking bring in more intensified effects into the discussion. The prevalence of this crime can result to first and foremost, a prevalence of social problems. (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999) These problems may encompass political and even cultural challenges, perhaps depending on the development of the crime
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

The consecutive discussions will

center on these lingering impacts, and a prior description on how Globalization and

?E$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

within the country. Focusing on antiquities trafficking as the primary crime at hand, scholars might have the tendency to settle with the cultural challenges, seeing that culture plays a major role in dealing with looted artifacts. For that reason, a brief explanation on how culture is associated with antiquities may be in order. Most literatures had made mention of the term cultural heritage in discussion concerning antiquities trafficking. UNESCO defines the term as, the entire corpus of material signs either artistic or symbolic handed on by the past to each culture and, therefore, to the whole of humankind (UNESCO, 1969). In simpler terms, a cultural good implies a binding sense of custody in the mother states perspective. That is to say, when a certain power extracts an artifact from the soil of another state, the latters authorities might resort to the rational maneuvers theyd see fit, and that is to protest and reclaim what was once excavated and illegally exported from their homeland. The famous Aksum Stele, controversial Elgin Marbles, and the contested Bust of Queen Nefertiti are just a few out of the many artifacts that had undergone struggles to be repatriated back to their homeland. Some were lucky enough to have been returned after series of discourses in accordance with the existing international treaties on cultural goods. In short, stealing a particular artifact from a culturally-rich country (such as Egypt) will surely be an offensive gesture and might even cause the disintegration of state relations. Included in this crimes societal ills are the groups of people that secretly perpetuate their financially rewarding, yet outlawed businesses. Italian Mafia groups or the Japanese Yakuza for instance, are perfect examples for these law-breaking individuals (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999). These criminal groups would essentially persevere with institutions that directly go against the states laws, as long as they could gain wealth, even an influential status in the process. As for other individuals, theyd infiltrate into societies from time to time, and take advantage of the crimes benefits while they dodge the already implemented laws in particular states. Similar with antiquities trafficking cases, laws battling against illegal exports are only existent in a few countries, but as integration of states occur, more laws are formulated by governments who see this crime as a rising concern.
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

?F$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Stealing a piece of history also strips off the opportunity for future generations to know about historical accounts (St. Hilaire, 2007). Most of the time, art theft deals with problems like these, usually related to cultural heritage and whatnot, but as one would expect, the problem does not stop there. It extends to broader fields, just like how a deteriorating human cell alters the other healthy cells wandering in the rest of the body. To put it in another way, antiquities trafficking can also affect the state, despite its rather extensive range. After all, if it can weaken the stability of the civil society, then it wouldnt be impossible for it to strike a blow on the bigger target this of course referring to the state and the elements embedded in it. Moving in on more politically oriented discussions, it is presumed that more relevant concepts will come to light. True enough, this discussion wouldnt be as thoughtprovoking as it is without the underlying essentials that make up the ideal state. Unfortunately, this ideal state is a rather complicated objective to attain especially since almost everything right now is easily accessible and available for everyone, whether theyd have ethical or morally wrong intentions. Nevertheless, this liberating condition also suggests both positive and negative consequences. Antiquities trafficking affect the state in various ways. For one, the crime manages to weaken an ideal states institutions (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999), and if thered be one tactic to overturn the viability of the state, it would be to strike its supplementary units down first. That being the case, it is believed that the success (or failure) of states somewhat rely on the success (or failure) of institutions, which is also true the other way around. Another major impact of transnational crimes on states would be its capability to hamper state building, not to mention set off a streak of violence in the process. The penetration of corrupt individuals in the different sectors of the government has always been a strong supplement in transnational crimes, in addition to the inefficient government authorities and politically unstable institutions that fail to curtail the global crime. Likewise, state security has also been endangered with all the rampant activities that sprout from international crimes. Those organized criminal groups that were discussed earlier, form a vulnerable relationship with the state, one that clashes with

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@G$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

the original and ethical regulations of the latter, which then makes them a threat to national security and the society embedded within it. The presence of smuggling in a country also signifies how weak their political systems are, just as how corruption makes a country seem less viable (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999). This would lead to the supposition that political system leaning more on democracy are eventually impaired and chances for them to implement their principal objectives become slimmer than before. The economic effects are not to be ignored as well since they also take a lot of concerns relating to these global crimes. Antiquities trafficking, and all the other leading trans-border crimes at present, have accumulated colossal amounts of money using their illicit transactions with various organized criminal groups. Profit accumulations in these illegal businesses even exceed those profits garnered by legal transactions, which definitely makes this crime more formidable and harder to defeat. (Hernandez & Pattugalan, 1999) It is now very evident that transnational crimes impose great burden on the different sectors of the society, may it be political, economic or social. The question now remains with how interstate relations plan to address these progressing crimes. To sum everything up, antiquities trafficking has been a serious issue in the PostCold War era and unfortunately, international cooperation hasnt been enough so far to eradicate the crimes existence. The influx of the Globalization process hasnt been of much help at all, bearing in mind how its alleged benefits can easily be used as accessories for present (and future) felonies.

2.3 The German Nation as a Superpower 2.3.1 Prior World War I For the Germans there were always two sides to the German Question: that of territory and that of constitution, or to be more precise, the question of the relationship between unity and freedom. (Frankfurter Societts-Medien, n.d.) Germany has held a position of great influence and power for quite some time, especially as its coal, iron, steel, chemicals, and railways industry progressed in the

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

mid-1800s. It has transformed from a predominantly rural nation to an urban one with its rapid development in the areas mentioned earlier. Unfortunately, the nation was plunged into the territorial question of having a small Germany that did not include Austria or on the other hand, a larger Germany that included Austria in the picture. The latter situation, which was lead by a series of Prussian Emperors, was the situation that came into reality. It was in fact the Iron Chancellor, Otto von Bismark, who took the lead role in building a more united, powerful, and advanced German nation. He also built the industries of Germany through setting up colonial realms in Africa (Togoland, Cameroon, German Southwest Africa, German East Africa), China (Jiaozhou Bay in Shandong Province), and the Pacific (Kaisier Wilhelms Land, Bismark Archipelago, Caroline Islands). (History World International, n.d.) In other words, prior World War I, the German nation was a great power compared to the other nations at that time. It had a prosperous economy and trained one of the most powerful armies in the world. This status however, trickled down after Bismark and Emperor Wilhelm I ended their reign. The new leader, Wilhelm II was inconsistent with the previous leaders achievements. Whats more, when the first ever World War erupted in 1914, Germany had a weaker stance compared to its adversaries, hence, the decline of the power and influence of the superpower known as Germany. (History World International, n.d.)

2.3.2 Hitlers Reign Following WWI After its defeat in World War I, the German people decided to form a national assembly, most importantly, a constitution for a democratic republic. This act led to the election of Friedrich Ebert, the first president of the nation. (History World International, n.d.) Societal problems were still very much apparent at this period. Likewise, progression through its industry sectors appeared impossible as well. Its economy was unstable, and the stock market crash in 1929 left not only the German nation, but also the whole world to plummet into a state of depression. Despite this severe

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

economic depression, there were some factions of power that rose in this drastic situation they were no other than the notorious Nazi power. The reelected Hindenburg presidency in 1932, supported by the infamous man named Adolf Hitler, led Germany to an era of bloodbaths and massacres. From a liberal democratic state, a centralized totalitarian state was established (Germany travel guide, 2011). Hitler gained even more influence and power when he entered in Austria in 1938, and won the votes of many Austrians as he guaranteed the annexation of their country to Germany. (History World International, n.d.) Eventually, the Nazi regime, wherein Hitler played a major role, prepared the country for World War II. They imposed their supremacy through occupying other countries with brute force and left about 11 million casualties, both from the Jewish and non-Jewish faiths. Hitler employed his armys strength to the fullest, ensuring that Germany remains in a position of power in the international scene. Ironically, much of the German nation was left in ruins, not to mention being left with a legacy of guilt and shame as well. It wasnt until the early 1950s where Germany started its recovery stage, partly with the help of US aid through the so-called Marshall Plan loans3. Soon enough, East Germany became the richest, most advanced country in the Warsaw Pact, but many of its citizens looked to the West for political freedoms and economic prosperity. (Germany travel guide, 2011) Fortunately, relations between East and West Germany improved in time, and was even later on admitted to the United Nations in 1973. Formal reunification of the two happened in 1990 when East German authorities suddenly allowed its citizens to cross over the West. Since then, Germany became into a country of remarkable diversity, with cultural differences, although Germans will never forget their dark past. (Germany travel guide, 2011)

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
3

Originally termed as the European Recovery Program, the Marshall Plan was generally a US aid program that helped in the recovery of the economies of Western Europe after the World Wars. (Ritschl, 2010)$ 7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

2.4 Other Looted Cases 2.4.1 The Amber Room The Amber Room was also a victim of rampant looting during the Second World War. This room that was entirely decorated with amber and was originally owned by King Frederick I of Prussia but was then given as a diplomatic gift to Peter the Great of Russia by King Fredericks successor, Frederick William I in 1716. The room was then disassembled and was shipped from Knigsberg Castle to Peter the Greats winter palace in St. Petersberg, Russia. Years passed when Peters daughter, Empress Elizabeth showed interest in the valuable room and ordered for it to be transported in her Catherine summer palace at Tsarskoe Selo. This small but luxurious room served as a meeting place for the empress and other foreign ambassadors. The exquisite treasure remained peacefully in the Catherine Palace until 1941the early years of the Second World War. (Akinsha & Kozlov, 1995) In 1941, the Nazi regime ruled by Adolf Hitler launched a campaign that aimed to seize Russia, which was led by Stalin under communist rule during that time. The campaign which was called Operation Barbosa 4 caused the German troops to penetrate into the depths of Russia and managed to capture Tsarskoe Selo. Prolific lootings were done in the luxuries of the Catherine Palace but the Amber room was regarded by the Germans as their own since Prussia was considered as part of German territories. It was again disassembled and transported back to where it originally came from in Knigsberg, Germany. The Amber room was displayed in the Knigsberg Castle along with other war loot where it kept its residence until 1945 (Amber Room and Beutekunst, no author, no date). The German army was faced with an incursion by the Red Army5 and was forced to flee the territory. The last German document related to the Amber room was dated January 12, 1945. During that time, the room was said to be packed up again because German officials had decided to bring the room to Saxony. What happened after the said date remains a mystery. On January 15, Knigsberg was surrounded

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
4

More information on Operation Barbosa go to http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/operation_barbarossa.htm

5

Read more about the Red Army in http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSred.htm

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@A$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

by Soviet troops and on the tenth of April, the city was almost completely destroyed. A month later, a Soviet commission began to investigate on the whereabouts of the Amber room. Dr. Alfred Rohde who was the main informant of the investigation claimed that the amber panels were still present in the castle on April 5. But when the castle burned, Rohde said that the Amber room burned too. Because of this, the investigation came to a halt and Moscow was informed that the famous room had been destroyed (Akinsha & Kozlov, 1995). The story of the Amber room should have ended after Rohdes statement about it. However, in March 1946, a curator of czarist palaces named Anatoly Kuchumov went sifting through the castle where Rhode have showed the remains of the Amber room to the previous investigating team. But Kuchumov did not find any remains of the amber room, and have decided that although other elements of the room might have burned up, the precious amber panels have not. A new search was ordered, but Rohde was nowhere to be found. Rohdes mysterious disappearance made the police conclude that his press releases regarding the Amber room was all a lie. The Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation remained unsatisfied with the results of the searches, and have organized a geological-archaeological expedition in Kaliningrad (previously called Knigsberg). The expedition was named neutrally but was actually an attempt for another search of the Amber room. The search went on for more or less thirty years, but the presence of the Amber room remained to be unsolved (Akinsha & Kozlov, 1995). Rumours and different speculations on the Amber Room amplified in heaps. One version of the story states that some SS men6 forced Russian prisoners to hide the Amber Room and then shot them so they could never reveal where the treasure was. Another version of the story says that the room sunk with the Wilhelm Gustloff when it was planned to be transported from Knigsberg to Danzig. Until 1984, the Russian expedition looked for the treasure in various places in Kaliningrad and in nearby castles and country estates. With this, the Russian Ministry of Culture finally decided that future searches would already be useless. Thus, they ended the operation and the amber room remains to be an unsolved mystery (Akinsha & Kozlov, 1995).

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@B$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

2.4.2 The Rosetta Stone The French are all thieves. Not all, but most - Pasquino The discovery of the Rosetta Stone was dated way back in the 18th century when Napoleon Bonaparte aimed to claim Egypt for France through the Egyptian Campaign. Colonizing Egypt was Frances initial preparation to conquer the most valuable territories located in the East one major prospect was India. domination of culture and resources. Bonaparte included Their infiltration in Egypt was not concentrated on military attacks but also through a mathematicians, mineralogists, chemists, engineers, art historians and zoologists (called the Institute of Egypt) in his voyage to the East. (Keener, n.d.) Unfortunately, Bonapartes arrival in the coast of Egypt in 1788 was attacked by the British navy. Bonaparte and his troops were stranded in Egypt for almost twenty years since the British navy have destroyed all their ships during the attack. With no choice, the French settled around the Nile Delta7 building forts while others exploring artifactss and exploring ruins. (Keener, n.d.) In 1799, Bonapartes soldiers demolished ancient walls in order to expand their Fort in the town of Rosetta. While doing so, a soldier noticed a polished fragment of carved stone. He handed it over to the institute because he knew that it might be something significant. The institute determined that the stone was some kind of declaration and immediately began translations. In honour of the town in which the stone was discovered, the institutes scholars named it the Rosetta Stone. (Keener, n.d.) In order to hide the stone from the British, after they defeated Napoleon Bonaparte, the stone was handed over to General Jacques-Francois de Menou8. Unluckily, the British were still able to get hold of the stone from General de Menou but different stories were told on how they wrested the stone. In 1802, the Rosetta Stone was

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
7

The Nile Delta is located in Northern Egypt where the Nile river spreads out and drains into the Mediterranean sea.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@C$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

taken permanently for display at the British Museum. Except for its short travel to the Louvre in 1972, the stone has not left the country since. Like many treasures in the British Museum, the possession of the Rosetta stone remains a controversy. Egypt would like the stone back, while the British Museum believes that its ownership over the stone is already well established. (Keener, n.d.)

2.4.3 The Aksum Stele / Aksum Obelisk Important cultural artifacts have always been the booty of war. - Marc Lacey Among other looted relics, the Aksum Stele was the only artifact that was retrieved and brought back to its founding place. The Aksum Stele, a sacred symbol for the Ethiopians, was over a thousand years old before it was taken by Italian soldiers. The place where the Aksum Stele was taken is a holy place because of its role in the expansion of Coptic Christianity. Thus, the Aksum Stele was as valuable and important as its proper residence for the Aksumites9 The giant granite Stele was looted by Mussolinis troops in 1937 during his occupation in Ethiopia. The Aksum Stele was brought in the Piazza di Porta Capenamin in Rome and stayed there for decades near the Arch of Constantine. (Lacey, 2002) The Italians left Ethiopia at the end of the Second World War but Rome still had the Stele. The Ethiopians waged campaigns for the return of the holy granite but it took a really long time for them to achieve what they were fighting for. In 1947, Italy signed a treaty that obliged Rome to return looted items within eighteen months. However, the Stele was not yet returned. Nine years later (1956), another agreement was signed that the Stele was subject to restitution to Ethiopia but this agreement did not bring the Stele back either. In 1997, another treaty with the same objective (to return the Aksum Stele) was again signed. But as expected, the Stele still remained in Rome. (Lacey, 2002) Years passed and some Aksumites have already lost their hopes for the return of the precious giant granite. The Italian administration that was constantly changing was

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
9

The Aksumites are the residents in the town of Aksum, Ethiopia

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@D$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

said to be a factor of the prolonged return of the Stele. Even Ethiopias Ministry of Youth, Sports and Culture released a statement saying: The patience of the Ethiopian people is being tested to the limit and it is wearing thin. (Toga, 2002). The Italians refused to return the obelisk because it claims that they couldnt risk the monument that was well-kept to be destroyed. Because of this, the Ethiopians got mad at the notion that they could not keep their own obelisk safe. The people of Aksum say that the Aksum Stele is their treasure and they ought to have it retuned. (Lacey, 2002). After several years of trying to retrieve the Aksum Stele back, the people of Ethiopia witnessed with great delight, the return of the first part of the Aksum obelisk on April 20, 2005. The second and the last part of the Aksum arrived on April 22 and April 25, 2005 respectively. The final arrival of the last piece of the Aksum Stele was marked by a joyous celebration throughout Africa (Bekerie, 2005).

2.4.4 The Parthenon / Elgin Marbles The Parthenon collection of large marble sculptures, more popularly known as the Elgin marbles, was illegally brought by Thomas Bruce - the 7th Earl of Elgin, from Parthenon to the Duveen Gallery British Museum in London from 1801 to 1804. In 1816, these artifactss were sold to the British government in order to settle the disputes on the issue of the marbles ownership. It was decided that the marbles would be better off as a public property for Britain and was to remain legally held by the country. (Wilde, n.d.) Since then, the marble sculptures were publicly exhibited by its holding country. The debate of whether the sculptures were to be returned to Athens or not heated in the international arena. Many factors were made involved in the issue that it turned out to be difficult to investigate which actions were legally executed or not. Issues on proper care and preservation of the antiquities were also raised in the dispute. Nevertheless, the concern still mainly boils down to matters of cultural ownership. (Beard, 2010) Similar with other looted cases, Britain refuses to return the controversial art pieces and its stand on the matter stands rigid: The British Museums Trustees argue that
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@E$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

the Parthenon Sculptures are integral to the Museums purpose as a world museum telling the story of human cultural achievement. Greeces cultural links with the other great civilizations of the ancient world, especially Egypt, Assyria, Persia and Rome, can be clearly seen, and the vital contribution of ancient Greece to the development of later cultural achievements in Europe, Asia, and Africa can be followed and understood. The current division of the surviving sculptures between museums in eight countries, with about equal quantities present in Athens and London, allows different and complementary stories to be told about them, focusing respectively on their importance for the history of Athens and Greece, and their significance for world culture. This, the Museums Trustees believe, is an arrangement that gives maximum public benefit for the world at large and affirms the universal nature of the Greek legacy. (Wilde, n.d.)

2.5 Cultural Heritage The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has been a popular organ of the UN that works to create the conditions for dialogue among cultures and peoples, based upon respect for commonly shared values. This lies at the heart of UNESCOs vision for the world, ensuring that all states continue to exhibit mutual respect in all the aspects of social development. With the many criminal cases that undermine the significance of culture, the body of UNESCO saw the impending need for laws that promote cultural regard in every state. Edward Burnett Tylor in his book Primitive Culture (1871) defines the concept culture as that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society (Jokilehto, 2005). Way of life or learned behaviors are some simpler notions of culture but Tylors (1871) version is really as elaborate as it can get. On the other hand, the concept of cultural heritage is also one that requires attention from scholars who intend to do a study on art theft. UNESCO defines the term with the excerpt below: The cultural heritage may be defined as the entire corpus of material signs - either artistic or symbolic - handed on by the past to each culture and, therefore, to the whole of humankind. As a constituent part of the affirmation and enrichment of cultural
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

@F$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

identities, as a legacy belonging to all humankind, the cultural heritage gives each particular place its recognizable features and is the storehouse of human experience. The preservation and the presentation of the cultural heritage are therefore a corner-stone of any cultural policy. (UNESCO, 1989) This stated definition brings UNESCOs primary aim to light, where public awareness of the concept at hand shouldve been increased and valued, even with the radical transitions undergone with the era of industrialization, globalization and/or urbanization. Moreover, awareness on cultural heritage can also contribute to the developmental efforts seen in recent policies that are being administered by the different governments. Rest assured that UNESCO will pursue measures in protecting and promoting cultural heritage in compliance with its roles as a principal organ of the United Nations.

2.5.1 Culture and Peace Culture can reveal a lot about the character of a group of people. According to social researchers, culture is referred to as the techniques of doing anything, items, dogma created by a group (Culture, 2010). These could be activities, things, subject, etc. that is part of the everyday lives of people. Culture could be related with human activities in fields of music, arts, literature and the like. Culture can be a great influence to the group of people who established their own culture and to other people who adapt to that group of people (Culture, 2010). Culture and tradition comes hand in hand. According to Castro & Galace (2008), the teachings of different traditions aim to achieve peace and harmony. In their research, the essential mission of each tradition is to seek peace. Castro & Galace used the examples of the traditions of various religions in order to point out that spiritual and faithful traditions do not strive for conflict and violence. Even with indigenous communities, they have their own set of traditions and their own culture. Most of their teachings give reverence to nature. Their practices only hope for the safety of the environment and keep peace in their land (Castro & Galace, 2008).
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

AG$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Castro & Galace quoted Machado saying, "the conflicts were actually rooted not in matters of faith, or even of religion, but in conflicting claims to social and political (and economic) goals (2008)." This shows that tradition and culture do not bring about contentions. Rather, culture upholds peace and safety across the world.

2.5.2 Culture and Art as Part of Nation-Building According to Khasi, Culture is one among the key components involved in nation building. It has the unique ability to foster national unity and cohesiveness. Art as part of the whole culture has also a major role in crafting social development frameworks, additionally fosters the creation of national identity. (Khasi, 2011) Art captures emotions, ideas, and even conditions of people who create it. It may convey beauty, love and joy but may also convey justice, dignity, and resistance. Every piece of art is a piece of a nations culture and identity. It is important as it transcends time and generations. Art speaks to places that other languages cant and affects consciousness on a level that we dont understand and cant map (Khasi, 2011) True understanding of human life and history can come only by relating one event to another and eventually to the entire stream of universal life from which each derives its significance, in achieving such a reaction art laid the vital role. (Khasi, 2011). $ 2.5.3 Relationship of Antiquities and Culture Art and culture are two pillars on which all societies build both identity and a sense of community.$ - Hoffman$ $ Clifford Geertz defined culture as the entire way of life of a people, including their technology and material artifacts, or that as everything one would need to know to become a functioning member of a society. (Geertz, 1973) In addition, the Arts and Humanities Research Council claims that artifacts are perhaps the most obvious feature of culture. (Arts and Humanities
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

Table 2: Concerns on Cultural Exploitation (Ziff & Rao, 1997)

A>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Research Council, n.d.) Thus, it is understood that culture and antiquities are inextricably linked together since antiquities (which are artifacts) is a major component of ones culture. $ $

2.5.4 Cultural Appropriation On another perspective however, Rogers (2006) introduces to us the major concerns or criticisms on Cultural Exploitation. Most of which perfectly outline the case of Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti. These concerns have been lifted from the research of Ziff and Rao (1997) in their essay, Introduction to Cultural Appropriation: A Framework for Analysis. These four major concerns are identified in in Table 3. The first concern identified by Ziff and Rao (1997) is on cultural degradation. Simply put, this would explain the damaging effects of appropriation on an exploited culture, considering that the act almost usually distort the identity of the exploited culture. With the neocolonial thinking today, appropriation may indeed overpower the marginalized element of culture, especially if it is immersed in the environment of the other culture. This is exactly similar to the Egyptian Bust being well-preserved Germany, whereas Egypt struggles to bring it back to its real home. The second concern concerns the preservation of cultural elements, which only suggests that cultural elements are better preserved in the context where it originally belongs. Cultural elements may either be in the form of objects, symbols or practices and it is through the preservation of all these that the integrity of a marginalized culture can be sustained. This concern also pertains to the physical removal of cultural objects from archeological sites and bringing it to museums, hence further distorting the understanding on the exploited culture. The third concern is on the apparent deprivation of material advantage on the part of the marginalized culture. This concern however, brings a more economic sense into focus. By depriving the exploited culture of material advantage, the culture in control gets the financial gain (Ziff & Rao, 1997).

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

A?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Last but not the least, Ziff and Rao (1997) supposes the sovereignty as another issue to be dealt with in this art of appropriation. The failure to recognize sovereign claims supposes that appropriation prevents those indigenous groups to fully take control over the already being appropriated cultural object. In other words, the heritage of indigenous people, as it is being appropriated, ironically becomes something distant. And so, these indigenous people are just forced to accept the socalled commodification10 of that object. These concerns are fairly highlighted by Rogers (2006) in his essay though his conclusion does not negate the usefulness of the act of appropriation. Young (2010) too, affirms this statement, though arguing that there are three sorts of appropriation of the arts, other than the ones stated by Rogers. These three sorts of appropriation according to Young are, Object Appropriation, Content Appropriation, and Subject or

Table 3: Types of Cultural Appropriation (Young, 2010)

Voice Appropriation, all of which are defined in Table 4.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
10

Commodification abstracts the value of a cultural object, therefore removing it from its original context and transforming its meaning and function, as opposed to what the indigenous culture pushes for instead. (Rogers, 2006) 7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

A@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Provided with these three simpler categories, Young arrives at a conclusion that is both in favor and against appropriation. He sees the logic behind the act, but recognizes the immorality behind it in some cases as well. (Young, 2010)

2.6 Key Theories and Frameworks After the extensive reviews done by the researchers upon the completion of this paper, they have come to realize the diverse studies that complement their own. For one, the Bells of Contention: Formation of U.S. and Philippines claims to war time victory in the Balangiga Bells Conflict. (Teves et al., 2008), showed much similarity in the researchers study. For this reason, the research group made immediate analysis on the frameworks used by the Bells of Balangiga thesis paper and by some means, integrate it with prior studies already skimmed through by them. Teves et al. (2008) had utilized Alexander Wendts Interactionist Social Theory, wherein it explains how states have the natural tendency to promote their own interests, but at the same time maintain the concept of the Self and the Other, where the former sees itself superior in opposition to the latter. In the case of the Bells of Balangiga11, the United States practically took the role of being the Self, therefore forming their claims to retain the bells in their jurisdiction. In conclusion, their dissertation stands with the idea that the U.S. government considers the Balangiga bells as war trophies. However, the Philippine state, which is now called the Other (counterpart of the Self), claims the opposite, which is to retrieve the bells back from U.S. possession. For the Philippines, the Balangiga bells symbolizes independence from their U.S. colonial masters, ergo their incessant petitions to bring the bells back to its original home. Other studies showed similar involvement regarding the issue on antiquities theft, and one case in particular has been a contentious subject used in scholarly exchanges. The previous statement is referring to no other than Frederick Schultz

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
11

Teves et al. attempted to pursue a research study on the construction of national interest on both the Philippine and U.S. context over the Balangiga bells, that essentially gained much importance after the September 28, 1901 ambush on the US Soldiers that claimed more than forty lives. 7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

AA$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

case, in which the researchers found very stimulating to do a study on. In the course of future analysis on this subject, theoretical approaches from Dr. Sherry Hutt, a renowned expert on cultural property law, will be infused in the succeeding discussions. A number of theoretical approaches were even provided by Dr. Hutt, that aided the researchers venture on their review of literature. These approaches basically sought to explain the arguments of parties that usually engage in cultural property case (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). It is actually a good thing that Schultz case applies to most of these approaches. The first approach makes use of the Market Theorist of cultural property. In a nutshell, this theory supports free trade, and views artifacts or antiquities with their so-called monetary value. It holds on the idea of bona fide purchasers of antiquities and even asserts that they are not subject to prosecution as long as they are proven to be in good faith and with good intentions. Frederick Schultz apparently fits with this theoretical approach since he is regarded as a bona fide purchaser, and therefore not subject to criminal punishment though lack of evidences backing up Schultz led to his eventual conviction. Clearly, Schultz goes well with the Market Theory because he regarded antiquities based on their monetary value, instead of their cultural values. Considering the previous accounts makes Market Theory a greatly criticized approach since it allows the likelihood for cultural properties, antiquities or archaeological resources to lose its cultural and aesthetic worth. Another theory that might go hand in hand with the preceding approach is the Internationalist Theory of cultural property. This theory could be immediately rejected by museums and collectors of art because of the fact that it sees the logic in art theft or antiquities trafficking. Internationalist theorists have this notion that antiquities should remain in the hands of those affluent collectors. In general, this theory believes that artifacts should belong to mankind, and should also be tended by those with the resources to do so. Obviously, the individuals that internationalist theory deals with at this point are specifically those wealthy personas who are financially capable to protect cultural artifacts. In the case of Germanys possession over the Egyptian Bust of Nefertiti, international theorists may argue that a personas ability to illegally take an artifact from its country of origin, also implies that that country of origin is incapable to take care of own cultural resources. The

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

AB$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

situation of Schultz should be justified to keep hold of cultural artifacts seeing the opulence that is granted to him (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). The Nationalist Theory strives for the contrasting view in opposition to the first two approaches stance on this issue. This theory is usually put into practice by states that intend to undergo the process of repatriation, just like what Egypt did with its disputes on the Schultz case, and also with its current case vis--vis Germany. Cultural goods possess ascertain regard when it is in its native country, and therefore, the theory suggests that foreign occupants are prohibited to own another nations cultural property. However, this also insinuates the possibility that objects that were successfully repatriated back to their home countries may not or will not be taken care of their original owners (using the Internationalist Theory). Schultz on the other hand, adhering to the line of reasoning presented by the Market and Internationalist Theory, opposes this theory and even insists on the idea that the United States should not abide to the cultural property laws of other countries. A similar approach would take the Moralist Theory into account, since it also pushes for social justice and does not approve of private property ownership inasmuch as it restricts the public to gain access over it. Thus, the moralist theory seeks to have the right end product, though the question of what is moral? or whose morals? sounds pretty complicated when applying it to existing situations. Proponents of the moralist theory rejoiced with the outcome of Schultz case because moralist views played a big role in his conviction (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). Another theoretical approach that is also useful in resolving cultural property disputes is called the Property Law Theory. This theory can be considered complex in a such a way that it tries to find out who is authorized to sell or export a cultural product, and at the same time, sets things straight that possession does not mean legal ownership as well. It does not always consider the best interest of the cultural good, and also establishes the chance that an individuals intention to preserve an important artifact may overrule the capability of a private and rich owner to keep the artifact under its close watch and whatnot (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). Last but certainly not the least, Hutts sixth theory regarding cultural property is called the Scientific Theory where the reputed scientists apparently have the
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

AC$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

superior right to claim access to cultural objects. True enough, scientists do play a major role in supplementing peoples minds with more knowledge, including general knowledge embedded in antiquities, but to a certain degree it disregards the concerns of cultural and descendant groups. The theory also poses conflicting views on the duration provided to these scientists for their actions on controlling cultural property, therefore making their acquisitions an unfair business as well. On a lighter note, the scientific theory on cultural property also has its advantages. One for instance puts forward the agenda of these scientists to end the looting processes seeing that illicit excavations destroys present and future archeological researches. The theory also pursues actions that would preserve the goods and their historical significance within through the protection of cultural heritage sites. Considering everything, the people who plan to convict Schultz can use pro-Nationalist perspectives, also including the just mentioned approach. This is also proven with the filing of a wealthy scientific organization called the Archaeological Institute of America against the criminal offenses by Shultz that is believed to cause irreversible damage on archeological reports and the like (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). Aside from all the theories that associate with the primary topic of antiquities or art theft, another theoretical approach proposed by Erik Nemeth, a scholar who was interested in the correlation of cultural property and international security. This interest paved his discussions on cultural security (Cultural Security Organization, n.d.), most of which are useful for the researchers study on the contentions of Germany and Egypt over the Bust of Nefertiti. In essence, Nemeths framework, with the unofficial label, Influence of Scholarship on the Strategic Value of Art, concerns several elements that are also manifested in the previous case studies done by the researchers. The earlier chapters focused on the prevalence of transnational or international crimes, including how they come about and whatnot. It also made discussions on the interrelationship between the global phenomenon of Globalization and so-called transnational crimes, which was then concluded how the former serves as form of encouragements for the looting crimes to persist.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

AD$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$ Figure 5 : Movement of Actors Involved in Transnational Organized Crimes

In any case, the diagram shown above can clearly be applied with the cases encountered by the researchers, because it exhibits the same processes and cycles as to what was already studied beforehand. Nemeths cycle starts with the usual sources (e.g. terrorists, impoverished people, etc.) that are held responsible for the rampant trafficking of cultural artifacts, and gradually works its way through the bigger picture, that is international terrorism. This cycle gives a certain state the notion of reduced cultural heritage, as a result of the creation of international art markets that would be always under pursuit of profits and gains (Nemeth, Art Intelligence Programs: The Relevance of the Clandestine Art World to Foreign Intelligence, 2008). The existence of transnational organized crime, and all the roles therein, makes Nemeths framework an even more straightforward and more understandable one. The diagram makes use of simple concepts that can easily be grasped by readers at a quick scan. In conclusion, the researchers saw how Nemeths simple, but at the same time theoretical approach, suits the nature of their analysis regarding the Bust of Nefertiti very well.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

AE$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

2.7 Methodologies of Similar Studies A similar study entitled Bells of Contention: Formation of U.S. and Philippines claims to war victory in the Balangiga Bells Conflict, used data collection and documentary analysis as their method of study. In the said dissertation, the authors Teves,C. et al. analysed and interpreted the documents that presented the competing claims of the two countries involved in ownership of the Balangiga bells, which is the United States and the Philippines. Additionally, works and studies of scholars were also evaluated and scrutinized by the authors as they aimed to discern how both concerned parties were able to construct and identify their countrys identity and interest over the bells. Discourse analysis, another study methodology, was also used by the above dissertation (Bells of Contention). Discourse analysis according to Eamon Fulcher, is focused on any form of written or spoken language. Its interest is to discover underlying social structures which are usually played out within the texts and conversations (Fulcher, n.d.). Discourse analysis is also concerned with the types of tools and strategies that people utilize when they engage in communication such as using metaphors, the choice of words to display affect and the like (Fulcher, n.d.). Another similar study, is an analysis on The Illicit Trade in Chinese Antiquities12 - a case study by Soudijin and Tijhuis. In their case study, the authors used extensive analysis as a method to discuss the status of antiquities trafficking in China despite the presence of organizations and laws against antiquities trafficking. Soudijin and Tijhuis also cited factors that cause antiquities trafficking to persist. Moreover, the case study also included specific cases of looted artifacts in China such as the Bodhisattva statue which further supported their study.

2.8 Summary The venture of the researchers on this study had exposed them even further to the factors which augment the occurrence of the so-called art theft, after it has been established as a type of trans-border crime. For one, they realized the impact brought by Globalization on transnational (or trans-border) crimes. Scholars would

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
12

A case study by Melvin Soudjin and Edgar Tijhuis

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

AF$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

assume the underlying disadvantages and advantages brought forward by Globalization. In other words, while porous borders allow the free flowing commodities and services to transport from border to border, it also encourages the criminal organizations to take advantage of this Globalization asset, after all, restrictions in doing such are minimal, and are easy to get away with because of politically unstable countries. Another factor that helps the easy, yet illicit, extraction of cultural objects sprouts from the age of colonialism. This era in particular, allows the former colonial masters to take whatever they want in the territory they are occupying, this including the thoughtless excavations of historical artifacts that makes up the cultural heritage of a nation. Theoretical approaches and methodologies of similar studies were also analyzed with hopes of gaining a systematic attitude in all the extensive researches that were compiled as part of the completion for this review of literature. In general, those theories and methodologies are also attempts to see both parties view, therefore having an evidently sensible deduction in the latter parts of this review. As for the silences and gaps that the researchers encountered as they come to the final phases of their review, a few were distinguished based on what theyve read throughout the entire duration of composing the significant chapters of their own literature. Also included in the research gaps is the lack of justification of accused countries on why they claim possession on cultural artifacts. First and foremost, those artifacts really originate from another nation, hence the question of foreign ownership, unless of course a legal and contractual sale was performed, then there would be no conflict to begin with. An analysis on the imported (may it be illegal or legal in context) antiquities, depending on the theoretical approach it makes use of, still doesnt explain the reason why countries wanted to keep it in their respective jurisdictions. With regard to the colonization period, a gap can also be distinguished because there are also no supporting ideas on the correlation between accumulation of antiquities and power especially during the colonization period. There were several

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

BG$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

artifacts obtained during the process of colonization, but clarifications on the link between the two elements are still absent. Last but not the least, there is also the lack on direct/specific impact of antiquities trafficking on society. It brings the researchers to the even narrower question on what ways does antiquities trafficking impact the state. Art theft remains to be the fourth among the leading transnational crimes at this day and age. Having this reputation would surely occupy the attention of government administrations, but then, the researchers fail to recognize its effects on the society in general, aside from it affecting a nations cultural heritage. The researchers find this study significant after seeing the gaps in the review of literature because they would like to understand why looters claim ownership over looted artifacts, thus the venture on the research question, how the Bust of Nefertiti can be presumably regarded as a German, or a German citizen for that matter.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

B>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Chapter 3 Germany and Egypt: The Clash of Great Civilizations Over an Ancient Queen

3.1 Introduction From the time of its excavation in Tel El-Amarna, Egypt up to the present era, the contention over the Bust of Nefertiti has continually gained international spotlight. The chances for resolving this dispute, however, appear to be slim, considering how both countries fail to reach a consensus even after nearly a century of continuous appeals and negotiations. This chapter discusses the first research objective, which is to provide a historical background on the dispute between Germany and Egypt over the Bust of Nefertiti, including the formation of international agreements that safeguard cultural property starting from the World War I period. This chapter focuses mostly on the historical foundations that sparked the debate of ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti between Egypt and Germany. It also provides an overview on the events that significantly developed the story line of this research, including the major role played by international agreements in protecting cultural property. This chapter is organized into three parts. The first one presents international laws and agreements, such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Conventions and the Institut International Pour LUnification Du Droit Prive or International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) conventions. The second part delves on the events that led to the controversial discovery of the intricately designed Bust of Nefertiti. Finally, the third part uncovers the events that transpired from the year 1923 that triggered the contentions between Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti.

3.2 International Agreements Safeguarding Cultural Property A case study in 2006 by Kurt G. Siehr entitled The Beautiful One has Come To Return highlighted the fact that no international law or convention currently exists to directly
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

B?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

govern the request for return of the Bust of Nefertiti to Egypt. Despite this, existing international laws could still help strengthen and support the Egyptian government in its endeavours in trying to retrieve the bust. Through time, illicit trafficking of antiquities became a rampant crime. For this reason, the international community realized the need to address this at the national, regional, and international levels. (Siehr, 2006) The 1996 UNESCO Declaration of Principles of International Cultural Co-operation states that every culture has a dignity and value which must be respected and preserved. (Article 1 of the 1996 UNESCO Convention) Thus, every state possesses the right and obligation to safeguard its own national heritage or culture. Moreover, the International Journal of Cultural Property presented three principles regarding disputes on cultural products or heritage: 1. A state may forbid the transfer of any of its cultural pieces without government approval; 2. If cultural pieces have been illegally acquired, the state which currently has the piece shall return the said item to its state of origin, and; 3.Those (states/parties) who have purchased an illegally exported cultural object will be compensated and shall be willing to return the object to its state of origin. (Siehr, 2006) Aside from the 1996 UNESCO Declaration and the International Journal of Cultural Property, which provide a foundation on studying culture and its disputes, this part of the research aims also to present other existing international agreements that seek to address problems on the preservation of cultural property and antiquities trafficking.

3.2.1 German-Greek Convention of 1874 One of the oldest conventions that recognized the need to safeguard cultural property is the German-Greek Convention of 1874. This particular agreement applied only to the archeological findings that were extracted by foreign excavators, specifically in the land of Olympia, Greece. Article 6 of the Convention provides that all archeological finds in Olympia will always be Greeces property (Siehr, 2006). This agreement implies that allimportant cultural property excavated from Greece should be displayed in the cities of Greece.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

B@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

3.2.2 European Convention of 6 May 1969 This particular convention was established through the combined efforts of the memberstates involved in the Council of Europe. This instrument stressed the importance of protecting Archeological Heritage as a source of the European collective memory and as an instrument for historical and scientific study. (Council of Europe, 1992) This was also used as an instrument to prevent illicit excavations and plundering of finds. Also, this convention strengthened the roles of domestic authorities in combating these crimes.

3.2.3 The 1970 UNESCO Convention The Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property or otherwise known as the 1970 UNESCO Convention was established on the 16th session of the General Conference of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization which was held in Paris, France on November 14, 1970. The UNESCO, through this convention, has expressed the urgent need to protect cultural property and preserve cultural heritage. As a preliminary step to address the issue, this convention concretely defined cultural property as property which, on religious or secular grounds, is specifically designated by each State as being of importance for (its) archaeology, prehistory, history, literature, art or science and which belongs to the different enumerated categories (Article 1, UNESCO 1970 Convention); and has affirmed that the illicit import, export and transfer of ownership of cultural property is one of the main causes of the impoverishment of the cultural heritage of countries. And that to end this, the State Parties should implement measures to eradicate the root causes and current practices of illicit import and export (Article 2, UNESCO 1970 Convention).

3.2.4 The 1972 UNESCO Convention The 1972 UNESCO Convention or the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage is an agreement that provided the following recommendations to state parties: The Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, Rules of Procedure of the Intergovernmental Committee
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

BA$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly of States Parties to the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage Heritage Fund. (UNESCO, 1972) and the Financial Regulations for the World

3.2.5 Cultural Property Implementation Act in 1983 The United States spearheaded this act after ratifying the 1970 UNESCO Convention that also pushed for the decline of illegal trafficking of antiquities. The prime purpose of this policy is to preserve the cultural antiquities that are valued both in the country where they originate and also for the rest of the international community. One way to achieve this goal is to take immediate action on the destruction of archeological sites and historical documents, which according to the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) deprives countries of their cultural patrimony and the world of important knowledge of its past.13 (Archeological Institute of America, 2010).

3.2.6 Institut International Pour LUnification Du Droit Prive or International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT) Convention of 1995 The latest provision that has been established in the international arena as of today is the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects. As clearly stated in Article 3 of the Convention, all cultural objects that are legally excavated but have been illegally retained are considered stolen, and hence should be returned by whoever has possession over it. (UNIDROIT, 1995)

3.2.7 Law No. 215 of 1951 or Law on the Protection of Antiquities Before the year 1951, the Arab Republic of Egypt has been battling with the problems of looting and antiquities trafficking. The passing of the Law No. 215 was the first legislation

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
13

In recent years, there has been an increase of interest in the native American, Hawaiian, and Alaskan cultural artifacts. Unfortunately, this resulted to the plundering of many historical sites and documents. Events like these prompted the US government to join the other countries in the fight against illegal trafficking of antiquities and protection of heritage sites. 7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

BB$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

addressing this problem. The role of this law was to help in the protection of antiquities (Herrington, 2008). Unfortunately, despite the existence of this law, foreign parties were still able to take portions of their expedition findings (Manar, Nadeen, et al., 2011). With its inefficiency and lack of further protection on cultural antiquities, another law was implemented in 1983 throuugh Law No. 117.

3.2.8 Egypts Law No. 117 of 198314 This national legislation is also labeled as the Law on the Protection of Antiquities. Though implemented only in Egypt, this law also creates a connection with looted artifacts extracted from Egypt. A clear-cut definition of what antiquities are is presented in Article 1. It was also mentioned that those cultural objects that were dated before the establishment of this law, are still considered antiquities all of which need to be protected, conserved and remain part of Egypts national interest (Hawass, 2010). This law also explained the role of the Egyptian Antiquities Organization in preserving, protecting and promoting antiquities, historic and archaeological sites and monuments. Just recently the Peoples Assembly has amended the said law. In the article of Riad Abu Awad (2010), he quoted Dr. Zahi Hawass, the current minister for the Ministry of State for Antiquities, Parliament agreed on article eight that forbids trade in antiquities but allows possession of antiquities with some individuals, on condition that they cannot use them to benefit others, or to damage and neglect them.

While this section presents how international agreements countering antiquities trafficking evolve through time, alongside the narration of the Bust of Nefertitis odyssey, the link between the two is deemed weak. Despite the presence of these international agreements, the dispute over the Bust of Nefertiti remains unresolved.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
14

The Law No. 117 of 1983 was amended by Law No. 3 of 2010 (Promulgating the Antiquities Protection Law). This was also published in the Official Gazette on February 14, 2010.$ 7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

BC$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

3.3 The Discovery of the Bust of Nefertiti This section deals with the significant series of events showing how Germany gained custody over the Egyptian-descent Bust of Nefertiti in 1912 when an expedition of German archeologists led to the whereabouts of the Bust of Nefertiti. The beauty of the Bust of Nefertiti was simply irresistible to the Germans. At this point, the Germans were willing to exhaust all means to keep possession of the Bust

3.3.1 Germanys Archaeological Expedition in Egypt A couple of years before the First World War transpired, the prosperous nation of Germany had already developed strong ties with the Ottoman Empire. This alliance had served a good purpose for Germany, especially for the German Oriental Society or Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft, which from here on will be referred to as DOG. This society had its interests fixed on promoting archeological research through regular explorations across continents. From this timeline, it could be inferred that Germany had easy access to Egypt before the First World War. DOG gained permission from the Ottomans to excavate in Egypt (Urice, 2006). It wasnt until 1912 when DOG, headed by Egyptologist and Director of the Imperial German Institute for Egyptian Archaeology Ludwig Bordchardt, unearthed an interesting artifact that immediately caught the Egyptologists vigilant eye (Urice, 2006). According to Rolf Krauss, The purpose of the excavation was the extraction of finds which would be loaned (from the excavation permit holder) to the Egyptian department of the Royal Museums in Berlin for exhibit purposes." (Urice, 2006). This would however deviate from the published excavation reports from DOG, which show that their archaeological purpose was primarily for studying and learning about Ancient Egypt.15 Several sources were able to clearly point out a single date when this excavation took place. In all accounts, the Bust was excavated on December 6, 1912 (Urice, 2006: p. 136 & Siehr, 2006: p.115), specifically in Thutmoses workshop, where some of his unfinished works of art were also recovered (Siehr, 2006, p.115).

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
15

These reports began as early as 1916.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

BD$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

With Bordchardts expertise on ancient Egyptian art, it was evident that it didnt take him a long time to recognize the actual value of the artifact uncovered, considering also how the Bust was made of limestone and not of mere plaster. The material of which an artifact was produced had great implications during those days of archeological discovery. It was an obligation of the Egyptian Antiquities Authority to inspect and record inventories of newly excavated artifacts that were allowed to go beyond Egypts borders, and those artifacts that werent permitted to do so (Ben Morales-Correa, n.d.). Gustave Lefbvre, who apparently lacked training as an Egyptologist, was the inspector for the Antiquities Inspectorate at that time (Ben Morales-Correa, n.d.). The turn of events became fortunate for the Germans since Lefbvre gave them license to move all gypsum or plaster-made artifacts out of Egypt, not realizing the great impact this lowgrade inspection has made on Egypts cultural heritage. Bordchardt being fully aware of this protocol, listed the bust of the Queen as a bust of painted plaster of a princess of the royal family (Ben Morales-Correa, n.d.), and presented obscure pictures of the object to Lefbvre (Ben Morales-Correa, n.d.). History had then taken its regular course.

3.3.2 Partage: An Equal Division of Findings During the early decades of the twentieth century, partage was a long-standing system among international archaeological expeditions. This system was usually practiced by scientific experts who operate archaeological expeditions in a foreign land. After an excavation of a foreign archaeological team, an equal division of spoils or objects found during the dig will be done between the foreign archeological team and its source nation. Eventually, the practice of the partage system declined, as the concept of cultural nationalism became a worldwide trend in the mid-twentieth century among source nations (Merryman, 2006). The historic and elegant Bust of Nefertiti was acquired by the
Figure 6: Ludwig Bordchardt of the German Expedition & Gustav Lefbvre inspector of the Antiquities deciding the fate of the Bust of Nefertiti (Holmes, 2010)

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

BE$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Germans through the partage system after the excavations of DOG, as headed by Ludwig Borchardt, in 1912 (Holmes, 2010). Based on what was discussed above, in partage, the finds were divided between Egypt and the foreign holder of the excavation license. There were contestations on how legitimate this exchange between both parties really was. According to BBC News (2009), there were findings that Borchardt had the bust among the least valuable artifacts, saying in his report that it was a worthless piece of gypsum and hid it in a box. Recent events in the twenty-first century unveil the accounts that happened during this encounter of dividing the spoils, in relation to the discovery of Nefertitis bust. The agreement was to divide the item equally among the parties but as stated earlier, Borchardt was determined to keep the precious Bust. Thus, in the inventory of the archaeologist's discoveries between Borchardt and an inspector of antiquities, Borchardt described the artifact as made of gypsum or plaster, whereas the features of the Bust were painted on limestone. The Bust of Nefertiti was tightly wrapped, placed in a box in a poorly lit chamber and kept hidden. A photo (see Figure 6) was taken showing this encounter of Borchardt receiving the Bust during the partage (BBC, 2009). As mentioned above, the inspector during the process of division between the discoveries from the expedition of DOG was Gustave Lefbvre. According to Holmes, Lefbvre wasnt really a fully trained Egyptologist. That means he was in no circumstances perfectly qualified for the position of the division of artifacts. He practically gave the permit for the Germans to bring home the objects made from plaster. It seemed that Borchardt claimed that the precious artifact was a bust of painted plaster of a princess of the royal family, knowing that it was otherwise, in order to speed up the process of partage. Borchardt was fairly knowledgeable of the true value of the Bust (Holmes, 2010), as what was reiterated in the previous sections of this chapter. In fact, Borchardt described it in his diary by exclaiming, Suddenly, we had the most alive Egyptian artwork in our hands. You cannot describe it with words. You can only see it. This quotation definitely reveals the contradiction of Borchardts description of the genuine Bust to the Egyptian Antiquities Service during partage (Holmes, 2010). Egyptian Antiquities Service authorities then failed to recognize the importance of the Bust of Nefertiti and took the other limestone statues of King Akhenaton and Queen

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

BF$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Nefertiti, leaving the bust along with other lesser valuable objects to Germany (SCA, 2006).

3.4 Unveiling the Egyptian Queen in Germany [The bust of Nefertiti is] a unique masterpiece, an ornament, a true treasure16 - Adolf Hitler

German archeologists during the 20th century are like emissaries sent to culturally rich venues in order to collect treasures. For every progress, it is a necessity for these emissaries to bring home the bacon and to assert German civilization.

3.4.1 James Simon: The Rightful Owner of the Bust of Nefertiti Apart from all those supposedly accurate accounts of the discovery of the Bust and transport outside the Egyptian border, questions still remain from this controversial story. Ludwig Bordchardt might have been a primary actor in the excavations in Tel El-Amarna, as what was narrated in the previous sections of this chapter, but those excavations wouldnt likely take place if it wasnt for James Simon (1851-1932), a major financer of the DOG, otherwise known as the German Oriental Society (see figure 7). It was about time to honor this man, said Dr. Ulrich Sewekow, one of the board directors of DOG (Bodenstein, n.d.). Clearly,
Figure 7: James Simon, the Jewish ArtPatron (DArcy, 2009)

the man being referred to by Dr. Sewekow was no other than the renowned James Simon, a Jewish art enthusiast that had made great contributions to the Prussian art heritage one that

was even considered greater than Napoleon himself (D'Arcy, 2009).

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ >C$Adolf Hitlers statement regarding the Bust of Nefertiti when he declined its return to Egypt.

Retrieved ftom the acticle entitled: Is this Nefertiti-or a 100 year-old fake? by Cannolly, K. (2009)$ 7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

CG$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

It is unmistakable how revered James Simon truly is in Berlin, both during the time of the Bust of Nefertitis unearthing and even up until this contemporary age. His fortune enabled him to satisfy his passion for art by purchasing a number of Venetian Renaissance paintings and Medieval Christian sculptures, not to mention sponsoring archeological digs in culturally rich places like Babylon, Egypt, Palestine, and Mesopotamia (now known as Iraq). The 1912 exploration in Tel El-Amarna was one of these expeditions financed by Simon. It was also this same expedition that had instantly made Simon a prominent Jewish art-patron more than he ever was before. As DArcy puts it, Simon might have even surpassed Napoleon Bonapartes so-called legacy as the only man that had extracted innumerable artifacts from Egypt. This would indicate the thousands of artwork that Simon legally purchased, as opposed to the thousands that have been practically stolen by Napoleon during his regime (D'Arcy, 2009). Whats even interesting is the fact that Simon also voluntarily gave away all the artwork he legally possessed to various museums in Berlin. Like the notorious French emperor kept possession of all his spoils, Simon donated all of his for the German nation instead. Among these donations was the famous Bust of Nefertiti, which has been handed over to a state institution in 1920, along with the rest of Simons Egyptian art collection (D'Arcy, 2009). His generosity towards the promotion of art made him a nationwide icon, proving the statement that Simon really wanted philology rather than business to be his vocation (D'Arcy, 2009). Upon the Busts arrival in Germany, Simon took custody of it and kept the Queen in his abode. The Bust resided in this Berlin residence for several years, which also made Simon severely proud to show off this captivating artifact to his friends and acquaintances that visited his home (Grundle, n.d.). Among these high-ranking companions of his was Kaiser Wilhelm II (a prominent monarch in Germany), who had gained admiration at a first glance at the Bust of Nefertiti. Simon was able to produce a replica of the Bust, which was presented as a gift to the Kaiser on October 3, 1913 (Bodenstein, n.d.). It wasnt until 1920 when Simon decided to donate the Bust of Nefertiti to the German state. Hitlers reign wasnt until about a decade after, so in other words, Simon was able

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

C>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

to make a smart move to donate all his collections before the Nazis could even plunder whatever artifacts that he mightve left behind privately (D'Arcy, 2009). James Simon obviously devoted most of his life admiring the aesthetics of art. His concerns werent so much about gaining profit, but were mostly about the development of the general publics knowledge of art. Being a major financer in the 1912 exploration in Tel El-Amarna, he was also the holder of the excavation permit. Sources have mentioned that even though Simon was a major factor in this excavation, there is nothing to argue about him not abiding by the Egyptian Law at that time (Merryman, 2006). Though despite all these gathered information, the right of ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti still remains uncertain. Either way, the period of truce between Egypt and Germany on the issue of Bust of Nefertiti will remain as vague as it already was before.

3.4.2 Nefertitis Public Exhibition in Berlin: Igniting the Conflict It was in 1923 that James Simon decided to donate the Bust of the Egyptian queen to the German public. After a decade residing in the protection of James Simon, the Bust of Nefertiti was displayed in the prestigious Egyptian Museum in Berlin (Holmes, 2010). Berlins Egyptian museum houses ancient Egyptian artifacts. The museum holds precious relics and lost treasures from Egypts past (Cruz, 2008). The Bust of Nefertiti was their prized possession. It was mentioned in Time magazine (1930) that for a few dollars the museum could actually provide colored plaster reproductions of the genuine artifact. According to Curry (2007), Queen Nefertitis bust has been the jewel of the Berlin museum system since it was first put on display in 1923! This indeed revealed the value of the Bust of Nefertiti to German historians, scholars, curators and the general public. The Egyptian officials were oblivious to the existence of the Bust since its excavation in 1912. They only became aware of the Bust of Nefertiti in Germany when the ancient queen was unveiled in Berlin.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

C?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Throughout the years, Ludwig Borchardt remained silent about his marvelous discovery. As it was mentioned earlier in this chapter, Borchardt led the excavation in Egypt that brought the discovery of the Bust of Nefertiti. He could no longer hide the existence of the beautiful artifact and was left with no choice. Borchardt published a book entitled, Portrts der Knigin Nofret-ete or Portrait of the Queen Nefertiti. It contained detailed descriptions of the Bust and intricate photographs of the artifact. The book was published on 1924, the same year the Bust of Nefetiti was open to the public in Berlins Egyptian Museum (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). These revelations sparked the temper of Egyptians. The value of the Bust of Nefertiti was more than its worth in money or jewels. The regal Bust was believed to have magical properties with it. Scholars worldwide also pronounced this artifact to be one of the most unique and lovely creations of the ancient dynasties (Time, 1930). Ever since the Egyptian officials learned about the existence of the Bust, they have tried to reclaim their ancient queen and question the legality of Germanys acquisition.

3.4.3 Egypts Battle to Reclaim its Queen The Bust of Nefertiti became one of the famous and favorite attractions of the Egyptian museum in Berlin since its public display in 1924. Upon Egypts discovery that its Egyptian Queen was in a foreign land, it immediately initiated efforts in order to retrieve her (the Bust). According to Siehr (2006), the government of Egypt officially asked Germany to return the Bust of Nefertiti and initially did it in at least four different ways. First, in 1925, two years after the public expedition of the Bust in Berlin, the Egyptian government had refused to grant Germany further excavation permits in the country unless Germany would return the Bust of Nefertiti or at least agree to the arbitration conditions over the Bust. Despite what was at stake for Germany, it declined to return the Bust. (Siehr, 2006) Second, in 1929, Egypt tried to sweep Germany off its feet by offering some of its welltreasured relics in exchange of Nefertitis homecoming. According to Salam in his article entitled Nefertiti Bust must Stay in Germany, Egypt was actually more than willing to sacrifice its other superior quality objects from the Egyptian Museum in Cairo for the sake of Nefertitis homecoming in Egypt. As tempting as it may sound, Germany remained taut as it declined the offer in 1930. (Siehr, 2006)
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

C@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

In 1933, a slight twist of fate had happened. Hermann Gring, the Prussian Prime Minister and also the handler of Berlin Museums at that time, (with reasons unstated) had decided to grant the Bust of Nefertiti its independence to return to its homeland. It was planned that October 10th of that year would be the expected date of arrival of the Bust as the said Prime Minister informed the Egyptian Embassy. With its high hopes, Egypt was again brought to disappointment. The totalitarian ruler, Adolf Hitler, obstructed Nefertitis way home as he wanted to keep the Bust in its capital city at all costs. The claim of Egypt on the Bust of Nefertiti has weakened during this time because of Germany and Hitlers annihilating power. (Siehr, 2006) Several years later, in the 1950s, Egypt again attempted to check on the Bust of Nefertiti and see whether Germany would be persuaded to engage in a about the return of the Bust. These efforts didnt have good outcomes. (Siehr, 2006) To date, Egypt has been persistent in trying to retrieve the Bust of Nefertiti. Zahi Hawass, the former Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities and also the recently reinstated Minister of State for Antiquities, is known for his intense endeavours in repossessing the Bust. Along with the creation of international treaties or laws regarding looted antiquities and also the numerous launching of campaigns for the restitution of any significant cultural antiquity, the Bust of Nefertiti still remains in the possession of Germany. (Siehr, 2006)
Figure 8: The image of the Bust of Nefertiti used in Germanys posted stamp. (http://www.archive.org/detail s/EgyptianQueenNefertitiHonour edOnPostageStamps)

3.4.4 The Bust of Nefertiti: More than just a Treasure The Bust of Nefertiti, an intricately designed artifact, has been known for being one of the most beautiful faces of antiquity. While most people associate Nefertitis beauty and exquisiteness with the Busts significance, the Egyptians value the bust as part of its rich cultural property. The Bust of Nefertiti is a treasure for the Egyptians not only because of its beauty but also because it upholds a certain significant historical account on Egypts dynastic heritage and symbolizes Egyptian civilization and refinement (Boyes, 2009). The International Council of Museums and the UNESCO endorsed a Code of Ethics which requires the holders of cultural antiquities to take initiative in negotiations for its
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

CA$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

eventual return. This Code of Ethics, in its principles and decree, highlights the need for Co-operation and the Return or Restitution of Cultural Property. (Siehr, 2006) In the 21st century, actions toward the return of cultural objects or antiquities have strengthened. According to Dr. Kwame Opoku, in his article entitled Nefertiti in Absurdity, there already have been developments on the legal, social and ethical grounds of reclaiming cultural objects. In fact, the return of cultural objects has now been directly linked to the rights of humanity in terms of its preservation of cultural identity and preservation of world heritage (Opoku, 2011). Despite these developments, the Egyptian government remains unsuccessful in its struggle to redeem its queen. The Bust of Nefertiti has been in the hands of the Germans for over a hundred years now. Until this present day, the Germans remain strong with its stand that Nefertiti rightfully belongs to them. The Germans assert that the Bust of Nefertiti is also a fragment of their culture. It was said that the Bust had reestablished the Imperial German National Identity after 1918 (Siehr, 2006). In 1989, the face of the Bust of Nefertiti has been flaunted in Berlins post-cards and also in Germanys postage stamps. The Germans showed its pride and honour in revealing that their national icon was an Egyptian queen. Tourism have also boomed in Berlin since almost 500,000 people visit the country every year in order to get a glimpse on the Egyptian queen. (Siehr, 2006) Dr. Kwame Opoku also mentioned in his article that Egypt being deprived with the Bust of Nefertiti as its cultural object, is one of the worst cases that demonstrate cultural imperialism. The UNESCO states that a nation shall be given its full control in building, strengthening and preserving its own cultural identity. Regardless of its status or capacity in maintaining cultural objects, Egypt should then have its full ownership rights on the Bust of Nefertiti. (Opoku, 2011) Additionally, the emerging laws regarding cultural treasures state that objects that have been lost in times of occupation or dependence have to be returned to their countries of origin. Such a claim is neither time barred nor barred by any other exception. (Siehr, 2006) Despite all these, the plea of Egypt for the return of the Bust of Nefertiti remains unheard. They (Germans) say that she (The Bust of Nefertiti) is the very essence of beauty. The question now according to Dr. Opoku is: Was there no any other icons of
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

CB$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

beauty in German culture before the Egyptian queen was sneaked out of Egypt in 1913? (Opoku, 2011)

3.5 Chapter Summary This chapter delved on the first research objective, which is to provide a historical background on the dispute between Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti. International agreements that aim to safeguard cultural property were also introduced and explained in this chapter. This chapter examined the significant timeline of events on the dispute between Egypt and Germany, regarding attempts at repatriation by the former and the firm stand by the latter appropriating the 3,400-year old Bust of Nefertiti. Detailed accounts on how the actual transfer of the Bust from Egypt to Berlin were provided in this chapter. From the time of the Busts excavation, several reports provided varying stories on the actual deception allegedly made by Ludwig Bordchardt, the head of the excavation team in Egypt in 1912, as Egyptian authorities inspected the teams archeological spoils. Sources did show that Bordchardt already knew the real value of the Bust, but decided to keep this knowledge to himself. However, the inspector assigned during that time, Gustave Lefbvre, failed to conduct a thorough inspection of the spoils, and hence, allowed the German exploration team to bring the Bust of the Queen beyond Egyptian borders. With the contestations on the real ownership of the Bust, the fact still remains that the Bust of Nefertiti is more than just an intricately designed artifact. It is apparent that the Bust had integrated itself in the cultures and ways of life of both Egypt and Germany.$

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

CC$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Chapter 4 An Analysis on the Shifting Interests of Egypt and Germany on the Bust of Nefertiti From the World War to Post-Cold War Era 4.1 Introduction Germany will either be a world power or will not be at all Adolf Hitler Across the years, the two great nations of Germany and Egypt have had the longest contestation over the Bust of Nefertiti since its great revelation in 1923 in Berlin. The Egyptian Queen had left its imprints into the hearts of both countries each demonstrating how both of them have interests (whether political, cultural, economic etc.) on the 3,400-year old Bust. In this chapter, the shift of the interests and claims of the two contesting countries over the Bust is discussed. This section covers the events from the World War era until the Post-Cold War era, in relation to how the Bust was able to roam the country while there was an ongoing conflict. This also discloses the actions of Germany and Egypt on how they would exhaust all measures just to protect the Bust of Nefertiti, or maybe hopefully bring it back home to its homeland instead. This chapter is categorized in two main parts. The first part discusses on the shift of claims and interests of Egypt. In this section of the chapter, Egypts interests are relayed from the World War era and then the Post-Cold War era. Similarly, the latter part concentrates on the side of Germany, analyzing its interests over the precious Bust from the World War era up until the Post-Cold War era. All in all, this chapter showcases the true significance of the Bust of Nefertiti to the two contesting countries.

4.2 Egypt: An Ancient Wonder that Seeks Protection In this contemporary era, the Bust of Nefertiti continuously enchants thousands of tourists who visit the city of Berlin. The Busts impressively preserved and perfect features never cease to stimulate mystery, at the same time, spark absolute interest on this Egyptian Queen. Egyptians in the past and present take pride on the elegance of

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

CD$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

this Queen, though they still continue to strive hard in bringing the Egyptian royalty back to her throne in Egypt.

4.2.1 Egypt during the World War Era Egypt, which traces back its recorded history six thousand years ago, perfected the art of beauty and sophistication. Being known as one of the Cradles of Civilization, Egypt has served as a cultural trend-setter to different societies that have already been established. Despite the developments that the world has gone through, the traces of ancient Egyptian culture remain distinct and can still be manifested even in todays way of life. In one way or another, with its early form of government and the way it has influenced ancient writing and art, Egypt was able to contribute bits and pieces on the totality of what we call knowledge today. Because of its abounding culture, the country of Egypt became very susceptible to external dwellers that were tantalized with what the country could offer. From the rule of the Ottoman Empire to becoming a British protectorate, Egypt was faced with series of unfortunate events that have challenged its ability to preserve and strengthen its genuine customs despite its force assimilation with other nations. On the contrary, regardless of its condition as a colony, Egypt stood strong with its stance in safeguarding its rich culture. As early as 1859, a government sector called the Supreme Council of Antiquities, which was then called the Department of Antiquities, already existed in Egypt. Though this sector may not have been fervent as compared to how it is now, the Department of Antiquities was held responsible for the conservation and protection of all antiquities and archaeological finds in the Egypt. In 1914, Britain then declared that Egypt was now its protectorate and is cut off with its relations with the Ottoman Empire. With this, Egyptspecifically Cairo, served as the assembly grounds of British allies during the First World War. Troops from New Zealand and Australia gathered in Egypt to show its support to its British ally and at the same time prepare for war.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

CE$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

4.2.2 Egypt: Post Cold War The revelation of the Bust of Nefertiti at Berlin in 1923 sparked the battle for repatriation of the Egyptian Queen. Egypt has attempted in many ways to retrieve the Bust since then. From restricting the regulations of the division of findings to bribing reasonable amounts of artifacts in return of the Bust to diplomatic claims, Egypt tried to do its best to get back their Ancient Queen. The battle continued since then. Just the year before the Cold War ended in 1989, the Egyptian President of State Mohamed Mubarak gave the Bust of Nefertiti a visit. Mubarak called the precious artifact as the best ambassador for Egypt in Berlin. This only shows the Bust is truly more than just a piece of artwork (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). Then, in the latter part of 1990, an international campaign called, Movement for the Restitution of Cultural Assets, was started by Medico International. Campaigns of Nefertiti Wants to go Home have spread out as a brochure (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). The Egyptian Minister for Culture Farouk Hosny then requested again for the return of the Bust in 1995. He said that a grand museum was being built in Egypt and that it is only fitting for Egypt to be reunited with its Queen. The Bust of Nefertiti would be important for the exhibition of this museum. Still, Hosny failed at his attempt. Egypt did give it another try on the repatriation after Hosnys attempt for the return of their Queen (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, no date). Upon his inauguration, as the head of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities, Dr. Zahi Hawass began the massive campaign of the repatriation of Egyptian ancient artifacts from international collections in 2002 and the Bust was no exception. The approach of Hawass was direct, hoping for the return of the history and culture of Egypt (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). In 2003, an art exhibit by artists Andrs Glol and Blint Havas was permitted by the director of the Egyptian Museum in Berlin to use the Bust as part of their exhibit. This exhibit portrayed the Bust with an almost naked bronze body, even a video of this was viewed at the Bienalle in Venice. Naturally, Egypt was caught off guard again and was offended by this. Hosny referred to the art event as an act of sabotage. According to the
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

CF$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Egyptian Minister for Culture, there were no previous attempts for reclaiming the Bust because of the good relations between both nations but this art event only reignited the faltering flame of Egypts longing for the Bust of their Queen. The art event was just unacceptable. Both directors of the Egyptian Museum in Berlin and Munich were banned for future excavations in Egypt and communications between them and Egypt were broken off. Egypt then asked UNESCO for aid in their problem in the repatriation of the Bust of Nefertiti (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). Hawass was interviewed in Egypt Today in the same year. He referred to the Bust as a very valuable cultural asset to Egypt, claiming that the Bust is part of the Egyptian culture. Here, Hawass openly said that he questioned the legality of the Bust being in Germany from partage back in 1913. This time Germany was the one offended and said that further talks on the return of the Bust will be ceased (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). One of the greatest museums in the Arab world was being built in the archaeological site El Fustat, southeast of Cairo, early 2004. This would be another reason for the Bust to return to its home. Just like Hawass, the new director of this museum, Wafaa El-Saddik, claimed that the Bust was not brought to Germany in legal terms. El-Saddik attempted to request for the return of the Bust but failed (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). In 2005, UNESCO had a meeting on the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin in Paris. Hawass presented five cases on the repatriation of Egyptian artifacts, including the Bust of Nefertiti. He called for the mediation of UNESCO, although it has not yet been able to do so. He also mentioned that concerned countries seeking for the restitution of their cultural properties should work together for a more advantageous future (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). Again in 2006, El-Saddik asked Germany for the repatriation of the Bust of Nefertiti. This time the Egyptian director suggested for a joint exhibition wherein portraits of Nefertiti and the Bust of Nefertiti will be displayed both in Cairo as well as in Berlin. Egypt has offered its sunken treasures to Germany for exhibition in Berlin, as a diplomatic step to work towards the repatriation of Nefertiti. Presidents of both countries, President of State Mubarak of Egypt and Federal President Khler of Germany, were present in the opening of the said exhibition (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.).
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

DG$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

This event gave hope to Hawass wishing for a visit by Queen Nefertiti. There was an exhibition planned for 2007 and Hawass wanted the Bust to be a part of this. In exchange, Egypt would be giving Germany a beautiful piece from Egypt. The Supreme Council of Antiquities was prepared for settling arrangements that will guarantee Germany the return of the Bust after the exhibition. This was again turned down by Germany saying that the fragile Bust was not fit for travelling across nations. The Berlin museum director also pointed out that Germany has all the recognized international agreements saying that they have legal ownership to the Bust (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). This suddenly became an international ordeal. Still on the same year, Hawass declared 2007 a year for the return of the Bust of Nefertiti with the help of other archaeologists from across the world. Invitations to China, Greece, Mexico, Italy, Syria and Lebanon were given to settle a communal international list of items they wish to loan or seek for complete restitution to their respective countries. El-Saddik also had an idea of asking international museums that hold Egyptian artifacts to have entrance fees and give one Euro or one dollar per ticket to Egypt, claiming that these museums earn a lot from artifacts belonging to Egypt (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). On 2007, Egypt gave letters of request to German Cultural Minister Bernd Neumann for the campaign Nefertiti Travels and just like the past requests, Egypt was refused. Hawass criticized the refusal of Neumann. He still wanted to continue to request for the return of the Bust in time for the opening of the new museum in Cairo in 2012. Hosny also said that Germany is making a mistake if they continue refusing the requests of Egypt. The Egyptian Cultural Minister claims that, The Egyptians have the right to admire the rare examples of their antiquities (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). On the same year, Hawass requested the return of the Bust in line with the special exhibition for the jubilee celebration of the German Archaeological Institute (DAI). This celebration was to be held in Cairo but still the request was with no success (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d). Hawass continued to speculate on the legality of the case of the Bust of Nefertiti. Early 2009, upon knowing the situation, he shared to the media that he contacted DOG and requested legal documents during partage in 1913. He said, If it is authentic we will
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

D>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

work with all our power with the German government to bring back the statue. Hawass said to the media that this time he was very much serious about this case (Spiegel Online International, 2009). At the same time of the preparation for the move of the precious Bust to Neues Museum in 2009, still in Berlin, Egypt was also preparing the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization that will open in the same year. Egypt was planning to create a place of honor for their Ancient Queen (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). A two-day conference in April 2010 entitled, 'International Cooperation for the Protection and Repatriation of Culture Heritage' was held in Cairo. Here, Hawass mentioned to the participating countries the top 5 of the most valued artifacts that Egypt claims for repatriation. The first on his list was the Bust of Nefertiti (Wuyts, 2009 & 2011). After a four year extensive research by a legal committee, consisting of legal personnel and Egyptologists, Hawass began 2011 with sending an official request to the president of the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, Dr. Hermann Parzinger, for the restitution of the Bust of Nefertiti to Egypt. This was approved both by the Prime Minister of Egypt, Dr. Ahmed Nazif, and Minister of Culture, Farouk Hosny. Hawass says that this request only tries to fulfill the longstanding policy of Egypt on the restitution of its cultural artifacts (Wuyts, 2011). Upon these claims of Egypt in the Post-Cold War era, it is evident how much the great nation values its rich culture and astonishing art. There are five cultural objects that Egypt considered as keys to its heritage. One of these is the world-renowned Rosetta Stone that resides in the British Museum. The others are: the statues of Hemiunnu in Roemer-Pelizaeus Museum at Hilesheim, the Dendara Temple Zodiac resting in the Lourve Museum, and the Bust of Ankhaf that was a Kephren pyramid builder in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. The last but definitely not the least of these objects is the Bust of Nefertiti. Egypt considers these cultural artifacts as instruments of unearthing its culture and history. They are the symbols of the rich culture of one of the greatest ancient civilizations in the world (SCA, 2006). Egypt is a nation that holds abundant secrets of the worlds past. As time passes, Egypt becomes more and more connected to its culture and history. Up until the present time, Egypt continues to fight for the return of the Bust of Nefertiti. The Egyptian royalty is part
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

D?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

of their history and culture and Egypt has no plans of stopping on calling back its Queen, wishing for her to come home.

4.3 Germany: The New Home of the Egyptian Queen With around 100,000 visitors every month, and approximately 4,000 people entering and exiting the doors of the Neues Museum each day (Neues Museum, 2010), it is very evident how successful the Neues Museum officials are in enriching their showcase of treasures in their museum from around the world. The famous Bust of Nefertiti, which is one of the most well cared for artifact in the exhibit, was presumed to be accountable for the considerable mass of people regularly visiting the museum. Germany has been firm with its decisions on keeping the valued artifact in its capital, considering how widely popular the Queen is among the Germans, not to mention other traveling foreigners.
Figure 8: Crowds take a close look as they admire the famous Bust of Nefertiti - during the re-opening of Neues Museum in 10/20/09. (Spiegel International, 2009)$

4.3.1 World War Era Upon the Queens arrival in Germany, several accounts have consistently reported how James Simon, the major financer of the Tell el Amarna expedition in 1912, immediately took custody over this grand discovery. For about a decade or so, the Bust of Queen Nefertiti was only able to radiate her elegance in isolation, restricting the larger German public to view its unrivaled beauty. As Germany gradually rebuilds its war-stricken state after World War I, the 3,400-year old Egyptian royalty still awaits its public introduction to the German society. It wasnt long after such an event happened which established the Queen as probably the best (and hopefully permanent) Egyptian ambassador to Berlin. In this particular study, it can be inferred that Germanys interests on the Bust emanates from its early notions of an ideology called Nationalistic Archeology (Young, 2002).
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

D@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Germanys union of the concepts of nationalism and archeology came into light as early as the mid-1800s. Essentially, this notion dealt with the use of archeology in its very nature to reach particularly significant nationalist goals. Nationalistic archeology also makes us conscious of a common human humanity, without differentiations between race, language and culture (Fawcett & Kohl, 1995). With Germanys situation after World War I, the study of archeology took the role of strengthening the so-called Germanic pride, in addition to its efforts on further nation-building (Young, 2002). Although the concept itself signified the malicious intents of German Nazis, as fueled by their idea of a superior German race, nationalistic archaeology continued to be regarded as an integral component in the formation of possibly another unconquerable German Empire. With reference to the article written by Young (2002) entitled Nazis Archeology, the concept of culture has been mentioned several times, indicating how important this factor really is in Germanys constant quest for expansion throughout the pre-World War and World War era. The German Nazis also saw this as a good strategy to promote their beliefs on a superior German race, which also meant persuading the future generations to lean toward Nazi principles and beliefs. Moving into more concrete reasons behind Germanys high regard for archeology and culture, Young (2002) further introduces a new perspective from a German Minister, as he looks at the significance of archeology in enhancing historical knowledge. This Minister credited the German race for solely paving the way to the establishment of other civilizations in Europe and the Near East. Moreover he claims that, archeological evidence points to German invasions of Asia, North Africa, and Egypt as early as the 5th millennium B.C. resulting in the advanced Indians, Medes, Persians, and Hittites all being descendants of the Germanic race. This last statement also insinuates the theory of German ascendancy over all the supposedly inferior races. To some extent, this indicates how most civilizations, if not all, followed after the footsteps of the Germanic race. This would give a new sense to the underlying interests of Germans in other cultures or maybe even in archeology per se. A constricted thinking as such can be viewed with utmost disapproval and objection, though the mentality of a Germanic-based genesis can actually be possible if one takes a deeper view on the so-called superior race. During this period of Nazi influence, radical change
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

DA$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

was also very apparent and never went unnoticed in the international community. The origin of great civilizations that might as well include their different cultures, have all been attributed to this superior race. Needless to say, Germany during the World War era cannot be even more aggressive than it was during its Nazi ideology campaign. Young (2002) also pointed out that there were some German archeologists who rejected the idea of Nazism, considering that they felt that archeology was being misused. But at the end of the day, it would still boil down to the concept of nationalistic archeology, in which case would give meaning to Germanys claim over the Bust of Nefertiti. The concept here gives justification to Germanys assertion of ownership on the Egyptian artifact, bearing in mind that it has always been assertive in its expansionist goals, and its excavation practices have its historical foundations in German history (as reiterated in the first paragraphs of this section). Although technically, the Bust was extracted prior World War I, it is still logical for Germany to allow organizations like the DOG, to proceed with their excavations firstly because it serves as an opportunity for the Germans to exhibit their expertise in archeological digs, and secondly because they took pride in their archeological successes, especially with the famous 1912 discovery in Tell el Amarna. Recalling what was discussed in Chapter 3, one can also derive some points of interest associated with Germanys point of view. DOG, for instance, has been transparent with their objectives in promoting archeological research. DOGs goal is also articulated in their tagline, Seit 1898 im Dienst der Erforschung der Geschichte des antiken Vorderen Orients (Since 1898 in the service of researching the history of the ancient Near East) (Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft, n.d.). This association reaffirms once more, Germanys long-lasting appeal on archeological discoveries in different parts of the world (ShangriLa Publications, n.d.). Another source that might incite interest in this extensive study involved the infamous dictator Adolf Hitler and his affections for the Bust of Nefertiti. It was surprising to know how this notorious character became a passionate and avid fan of the Bust itself (Shangri-La Publications, n.d.). At this time, Hitler even wrote to the Egyptian embassy, professing his admiration towards the Bust with the words:

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

DB$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

I have viewed and marveled at it many times. Nefertiti continually delights me. The Bust is a unique masterpiece, an ornament, a true treasure!. - Adolf Hitler Questions still arise on Hitlers wide interest on the Bust, and more doubts came about when he committed to construct a new Egyptian Museum in Berlin with a big chamber and large dome to house the Queen (Shangri-La Publications, n.d.). Hitler was even bold enough to express his claims on keeping the head of the Queen, as he called it. But the question still remains on whether he had the right to claim such an artifact, and from what basis did his claim sprout from. Some sources assume that it was the Queens Aryan features that captured the eye of Hitler (MacDonald, 2003). Aside from the previously stated manifestations of interests and claims of ownership over the 3,400-year old Bust, Merryman (2006) develops the research even more with his presentation of other non-legal claims to cultural property, using Paul Bators (1982) An Essay on the International Trade in Art as a close reference in his as well. The first justifiable claim discussed by Merryman (2006) concerns what he calls the Preservation Value, which argues that a certain cultural artifact must always remain in a secure environment that also requires the presence of capable and qualified museum personnel. This doesnt necessarily give advantage to either Egypt or Germany with regard to the Busts ownership simply because both countries are equipped with secure environments for the preservation of valued artifacts. Another important factor to consider in strengthening our claims lies with what Merryman (2006) calls Historical Wrongs. According to him, it is important to know the existing rules and agreements between an ongoing transaction or negotiation. In the case of the Egypt-German division of excavation finds in 1912, the partage system went accordingly. In fact, both parties were benefited with this system. Egypt was able to gain knowledge of its culture and history through the investments brought in by those excavation experts. On the other hand, Germany was able to gain the so-called German prestige with each of their archeological successes, at the same time bring home valuable treasures, and also gain an international repute with other archeologists across the world.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

DC$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

There is also such an aspect called Access Value, which merely refers to the accessibility of works of art to the larger public. Merryman (2006) presumes that the wealth gap between Egypt and Germany allows more tourists to visit the Bust in Berlin rather than in Cairo. Also, Egypts museums are already fully enriched with various cultural artifacts from the Amarna period, hence the Bust of Nefertiti was not necessary to demonstrate to Egyptians or visitors to Egypt the significance of the Amarna period. All of these are just some of the claims of ownership used as a defense of Germany on the Bust of Nefertiti during the World War era. The succeeding chapters will dwell on the transition of ideas and interests of Germany on the Bust from the World War to PostCold War era.

4.3.2 Germany: Post Cold War Germany had firmly held its ground since the attempts of Egypt on repatriation began way back in 1923. With repetitive compromises like loan requests, unsettled questions of legality, and the presence of internal conflicts, Germany has consistently taken a strong stance in its battle of legal ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti. The years of the World War era have witnessed these seemingly nonstop contentions between Egypt and Germany over the 3,400-year old Egyptian artifact. Most importantly, the proposed solutions that could help alleviate the cultural conflict still remains elusive at this point. As the transition of eras took place from the World War to the Post-Cold War, the battle for the Queen continues to take place. It was exactly the year 1990 that marked the end of the Cold War and permanently changed the societys views on international relations. The end of the Cold War also ignited the reunification of Germany, which in turn allowed museum curators to find an apt and secure location for the Bust of Nefertiti and other significant artifacts. The museum collections were apparently divided and scattered during the war, but were all brought together again afterwards. They were rearranged and returned to the Museum Island in Berlin. (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). With regards to their initial decisions on the Bust of Nefertiti, the German parliament took a different plan of action around the earlier part of 1990s. The speaker of the Green parliament party, Brigitte Schumann, generally questioned the legality of the Bust of Nefertiti as well as its stay in Berlin to the Foundation of Prussian Cultural Property. Gerd von Paczensky wrote a book entitled, Nefertiti Wants to go Home which she
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

DD$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

wrote along with Albert Eckert, her colleague from Berlin. The book suggests that the artifact in question should at least be alternately exhibited in both Berlin and Cairo, but Eckert did not support the full restitution of the Bust of Nefertiti to Egypt (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). The claims of Egypt on the Bust remained silent until 2003. Two artists, Andrs Glol and Blint Havas, were permitted by the director of the Egyptian museum in Berlin, Dietrich Wildung, to use the Bust of Nefertiti for an art event. They placed the Bust on an almost bare naked bronze body. The artwork was photographed and video taped. The event was also present at the Bienalle in Venice, Italy. This move heightened the emotions of the Egyptians for the return of the Bust. For this, Wildung and his wife, who was the director of the Egyptian Museum in Munich as well, were not granted further excavations in Egypt. Also, contact with them was broken off by Egypt. Announcements regarding the art event from the website of the museum were removed. Wildung only said that the event was for a limited time in promoting the museum. The museum did not anymore answer questions relating to the issue (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). Again, Egypt attempted to seek out for the return of the Bust in 2004. Wafaa El-Saddik, the director of the Egyptian museum in Cairo, appealed for the return of the adored Bust even if it was only for a two month exhibition. Germany still decline Egypts request (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). The next year, the Bust of Nefertiti went on a mini expedition. The Egyptian Queen left Charlottenburg, Berlin on February 25, 2005 and was later seen in an exhibition in the Culture Forum. After the Hieroglyphs about Nefertiti exhibition, the delicate artifact moved to the Egyptian Museum on the Museum Island still in Berlin (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). It was not always a conflicting relationship between the contesting nations, Germany and Egypt. The year 2006 was a year where both countries tried to set aside their differences and worked together in the name of archeological admiration. Germany was given the opportunity of Egypt to host the worldwide exhibition of Egypts Sunken Treasures in Berlin on 2006. There were around 500 Egyptian underwater archeological artifacts that were showcased in the exhibition. The presence of the heads of state of both nations, President of State Mubarak of Egypt and Federal President Khler of Germany, showed an amiable relationship between the two nations despite
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

DE$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

their standoff issue regarding the Bust of Nefertiti (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.; SCA, 2006). Lepsius, who was a German Egyptologist, was given a three-month tribute exhibition in the Egyptian Museum in Cairo from November 1, 2006. Although this was a very much significant exhibition for Germany, it only shared sketches from Lepsius collection and not his vast collection of archeological finds (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). In April of 2007, Egypt began its campaign for the travel of Nefertiti to return home. The letters patent given by Egypt to Germany was not considered by Cultural Minister Bernd Neumann. Neumann stated that the Bust was not fit for travel because of conservatory reasons. The Bust of Nefertiti was considered very delicate and that the travel of going across continents, let alone nations, will be very risky (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). Both countries still continued their agreeable relationship. The German Archaeological Institute (DAI) in Cairo celebrated their jubilee in collaboration with the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA) in November 12, 2007. There was an attempt of Hawass to retrieve the Bust for this event but it was without success (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). For years, Germany has tried to prepare and reconstruct the damaged Museum Island. By 2009, the archaeological collections were ready to be moved to their new home. The precious Bust of Nefertiti was then moved to its current residence, the Neues Museum in Berlin (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.). The fight for the repatriation of the Egyptian Queen continued early in 2011 when Germany received a letter asking for the return of the Bust to Egypt. When Berlin officials read the letter, they did not acknowledge it as an official letter for it was not sponsored by the Egyptian Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif. Instead, it was only signed by Hawass. Hagen Philipp Wolf, who worked under Neumann, confirmed that the letter was indeed not signed by the prime minister of Egypt. Wolf, therefore, said the Egypt did not have legal claim on the Bust (Earth Times, 2011). Germany continues to claim that it has legal ownership of the Bust of the Egyptian Queen since the division of finds between Borchardt and Lefebvre. The German organization DOG claims to have a written document that relays the accounts of a meeting on January 20, 1913 between Borchardt and an Egyptian official (Spiegel Online International, 2009).
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

DF$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Germany has very much express how much it values art, culture, archaeology and history. The Bust of Nefertiti became an image of the Egyptian Museums in Germany. It would, for the longest time, become one of the most prized possessions of Germany. A symbol of archaeological success, the Bust was treated with royal treatment in her stay after the Cold War. The Bust was only provided with state of the art equipments in order to protect its quality. Germany technology was believed to be far more advanced and this means that it is more capable of taking care of the delicate artifact (Knowles, 2009). As mentioned earlier in this part of the chapter, the current abode of Queen Nefertiti, which is the Neues Musuem, receives an average of 100,000 visitors each month. These visitors were not only art enthusiasts, they may be students on field trips, or merely tourists who came to gaze upon one of the highlights the cultural collection, the beauty of the Egyptian Bust of Nefertiti. Indeed, Germany can educate more people for it seems that it is more expensive to visit the actual ruins in Egypt, rather than just visit a museum. This only disclosed another side of how much valuable the Bust is to the Germans. The most prized possession of the Egyptian Museum was not only valued for its exquisiteness but also for its capability to help in the monetary division of the museum. With numerous visitors annually, the Bust was definitely a source of money (Neues Museum, 2010; Knowles, 2009). What is next for the ancient Egyptian Queen? Only the future can tell on whose side in this tug-of-war story will the very much-adored Bust of Nefertiti finally be inclined to.

4.3.3 Germany: Quotes YEAR 1912 STATEMENT Suddenly, we had the most alive Egyptian artwork in our hands. You cannot describe it with words. You can only see it. I have viewed and marveled at it many times. Nefertiti continually delights me. The Bust is a unique masterpiece, an ornament, a true treasure! SPEAKER Ludwig Borchardt SOURCE As seen in Chapter 3.3.2

1933

Adolf Hitler

As seen in Chapter 4.3.1

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

EG$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

1933

I will never give the head of the queen off. It is a masterpiece, a jewelry, a treasure. I will build her a museum in Berlin and I dream of pleasing this wonder in the middle of a stately home crowned by a dome. "I'm going to build a new Egyptian museum in Berlin ... In the middle, this wonder, Nefertiti, will be enthroned." Nefertiti Wants to go Home (Book) The book suggests that the Bust of Nefertiti should at least be alternately exhibited in both Berlin and Cairo, but Eckert did not support the full restitution of the Bust of Nefertiti to Egypt The Germans claim that Nefertiti has become an integral part of our cultural identity here in Germany, which we are not prepared to part with. And the Egyptians say she is our Egyptian Queen and thus part of our culture,

Adolf Hitler

(National Geographic, 2008)

1933

Adolf Hitler

(Sontheimer Knfel, 2011)

&

19901992

Gerd von (Nofretete geht auf Paczensky & Reisen, n.d.) Albert Eckert

2007

Lena Blosat of (Moore, 2007) the Cultur Cooperation

Today, even allowing the bust to be exhibited in Egypt for three months is an issue which museum directors are obviously not willing to discuss.

2007

(On the material and design of the Bust) That way the model could be adjusted and altered, I think it makes her much more beautiful, Shes a ripe woman, not a cover girl from some TV magazine.

Dietrich Wildung, (Curry, 2007) head of Berlins Egyptian Museum

2007

The structure of Nefertitis material, plaster over limestone, is very sensitive,

Dietrich Wildung, (Associated head of Berlins 2007)

Press,

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

E>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Our Egyptian colleagues know very well that Nefertiti will never leave Berlin for two reasons: Firstly, due to reasons of conservation ... Secondly, for security reasons. 2009 (On the the existence of the document during the partage of the Bust of Nefertiti) "Nefertiti was at the top of the exchange list. The inspector could have looked at everything closely at the time," "It's not admissible to complain about the deal reached at the time." 2010 "(Nefertiti is) the most beautiful ambassador of Egyptian art and culture in Germany." The governments position on Nefertiti is well known and hasnt changed.

Egyptian Museum

A spokesperson (Spiegel Online of the German International, 2009) Oriental Society

Bernd Neumann, (Sontheimer German Minister Knfel, 2011) for Culture Andreas (Kassem, 2011) Peschke, a German Foreign Ministry spokesman Professor (Lorenzi, 2011) Hermann Parzinger, president of Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation

&

2011

2011

The foundations position regarding a return of the bust of Nefertiti is unchanged. She is and remains Egypt's best ambassador in Berlin,

The timeline in this part of Chapter 4 shows the quotations from significant German actors and personalities. This timeline begins from the discovery of the Bust of Nefertiti up until the present time. Hopefully, this timeline may give a more perceptible look on how the importance of the Bust of the Egyptian Queen to Germany has transformed over the years. As seen in Chapter 3.3.2, Ludwig Borchardt described the exceptional beauty of the Bust of Nefertiti as it was discovered. Borchardt exclaimed that the artifact was indeed
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

E?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

unique and that it was something that he could not let go of. It was something Borchardt was definitely proud of having discovered. He went did everything he could just so he could bring the Bust to Germany. The Bust was then transferred to Germany. When it was eventually displayed in 1923, the Bust became a special and distinguished part of Germany. Andrew Curry (2007) mentioned in his article that, "Queen Nefertitis Bust has been the jewel of the Berlin museum system since it was first put on display in 1923." This goes to show that the Bust became an important Egyptian artifact that, in a way, became a crowning achievement of Germany. The importance of the Bust became magnified when Adolf Hitler hindered the return of the Bust in 1933. Hitler emphasized how he was marveled by the beauty of the Bust of Nefertiti, just as Borchardt was. Instead of returning the Bust, he was more determined of giving the Queen a more substantial home in Berlin (Sontheimer & Knfel, 2011). From the end of the Cold War in the early 1990's until the early 2000's, some German actors became vocal about letting the Bust of Nefertiti travel back to Egypt. Some agree on letting it permanently return to its homeland but others only suggest the Bust to travel only for a period of time. Of course, most do not agree with this suggestion. Berlin's Egyptian Museum truly gave importance to it and said that the Bust was in a very delicate condition. Thus, it is impossible for it to be in a good state to travel (Associated Press, 2007). Cultur Cooperation, a group that seeks for the return of the Bust, knows the value of the Bust to Germany in the modern times. Cultur Cooperation was completely aware that the German government and the Egyptian Museum of Berlin would not be willing to grant the request of the return of the Bust. Blosat said, The Germans claim that Nefertiti has become an integral part of our cultural identity here in Germany, which we are not prepared to part with. And the Egyptians say she is our Egyptian Queen and thus part of our culture. Thus, she mentioned that the Bust is already engraved in the German culture, making it harder to let go of one of the most unique artifacts in the world (Moore, 2007). In 2009, there became arguments of the legitimacy of the ownership of the Bust of Nefertiti. Throughout these arguments the German Oriental Society did not give up in

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

E@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

protecting their side of the story. Germany was not about to let go of "the most beautiful ambassador of Egyptian art and culture in Germany," (Sontheimer & Knfel, 2011). In 2011, Germanys position has not changed. Professor Hermann Parzinger even reemphasized that "She (the Bust) is and remains Egypt's best ambassador in Berlin. In a way, this shows that how Germany has the upper hand (Lorenzi, 2011). In the August 2011 article of Michael Sontheimer and Ulrike Knfel, they said that "For the Germans, Nefertiti is their perceived property, a national cultural treasure, their entry in the canon of the sublime. ... Nefertiti is Berlin's Mona Lisa, except that she is perhaps even more beautiful, more mysterious and more magnificent." From Hitlers unique master piece to Neumanns most beautiful ambassador, the Bust of Nefertiti became more than just an ancient artifact to Germans. The Queen was not anymore just the radiant royal face in Berlin's Egyptian Museum. She became a new symbol of culture in Germany.

4.4 Chapter Summary This chapter delved on the second research objective, which is to present the shift of Germanys and Egypts interests and claims over the Bust of Nefertiti from the World War era to the Post-Cold War era. The analysis of the actions made by both countries transcend through the World War I to the Post-Cold War years. This chapter generally examined the significant justifications and line of defense of both Egypt and Germany, regarding attempts at the repatriation by the former and decisions on appropriating the 3,400-year old Bust of Nefertiti for the latter. Detailed accounts on what the impact of both conflicting interests are with each other were also provided in this chapter. From the time of the Busts arrival in Germany, the financer of the Tell el Amarna excavation in 1912, James Simon took hold of the Bust of Nefertiti. Later on, he donated the Bust to a German-state institution, which had paved the way for Queen Nefertitis popularity among the people of Berlin, not to mention, other tourists who travel across the world just to see the beauty of the Egyptian. The Bust of Nefertiti has remained within the borders of Germany since then.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

EA$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

In this chapter, it was shown how Egypt has tried to bring home their Queen and how Germany kept a firm grip on the Egyptian royalty throughout the years. It was clear how Egypt was persistent in its goal. Also, it was revealed how the value and importance of the Bust of Nefertiti changed over time in the perspective of Germans. The following chapter will further discuss on the actions taken by both contesting countries in the light of Erik Nemeths concepts in his Cultural Security Framework.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

EB$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Chapter 5 Analyzing the Fight Over an Iconic Egyptian Artifact using Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Perspective

5.1 Introduction As shown in the previous chapters of this study, the 3,400-year old Bust of Nefertiti had gradually integrated itself to the German culture and society. In section 4.3 of the previous chapter, the Germans increased regard over the remarkable Egyptian artifact had prolonged their conflict with the Egytian authorities. With both parties unrelenting claims over the Bust of Nefertiti, respective strategies were constructed to bolster their claims over the Bust. This chapter intends to expound on the concepts used in Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Framework (see Figure 3 in Chapter 1, namely the tactics, strategic value and threats). Moreover, the same section uses the Bust of Nefertitis case, at the same time associates it with the concepts of cultural security (see Figure 4) in Erik Nemeths perspective. The entire chapter concludes with a comprehensive presentation of the acts that aim to uphold cultural security, which is the act of appropriation by Germany and the act of repatriation by Egypt. Overall, this chapter delves on the third and final objective of the study which is to apply Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Framework in understanding the claims of Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti. The three main categories included in this chapter respond to the objective of Chapter 5, namely, discussions on Germanys side; presentation of Egypts side; and the Acts of Appropriation and Repatriation, which explain the claims of ownership by the two countries over the Bust of Nefertiti.

5.2 The Egyptian Claim using a Cultural Security Lens In the world of art, a bust is a sculpture that illustrates a persons physical attribute. It is specifically focused on the representation of a subjects head-to-shoulder. Nevertheless, no matter how simple it may seem, the Bust of Nefertiti will always be
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

EC$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

more than just a piece of artwork or sculpture to the Egyptians. In fact, Nefertitis Bust serves as a memory, a remembrance and an evidence of how Egypt came to be one of the Cradles of Civilizations. In this regard, this section analyzes Egypts claim of ownership on the Bust of Nefertiti using Erik Nemeths view on cultural security.

5.2.1 Tactics From 1925 when the Egyptian government made its first move to reclaim the Bust of Nefertiti up to this present day when Egypts former Supreme Council of Antiquities, Zahi Hawass, continues to exert all efforts to reclaim their Egyptian Queen (see Chapter 3.4.3), it is evident that Egypt has and will always have unyielding statements with regard to being the rightful owner of the Bust of Nefertiti. In its claiming endeavors, Egypt has always referred to historical records and documents, such as the partage law, in order to support its legal stance over the bust. In 2003, Mr. Zahi Hawass, in his interviews with Klner Stadt-Anzeiger and Spiegel Online, said that his office (Egyptian Council of Antiquities) has already started an official investigation on how Nefertiti arrived in Germany. In these investigations, Hawass office tried its best to find the oldest possible data they could acquire. Borchardts diary entry (see Chapter 3.3.2), which is dated way back 1912 may be one of the earliest and best records that have supported Egypts legal claim on the Bust. This diary entry was said to portray Germanys unethical tactic in acquiring the Bust because it explains how Ludwig Borchardt have misled Egyptian authorities to escape with the Bust (Sesen, 2009).$ Aside from historical accounts relating to the 1912 discovery of the Bust of Nefertiti, it is also relevant to know the Queen behind the 3,400-year old artifact. NeferneferuatenNefertiti, or Queen Nefertiti in short, is a renowned ancient Egyptian Queen who reigned beside King Akhenaton. Being a Chief Queen who managed to lead a religious revolution that changed Egypt, Nefertiti will always be considered part of Egyptian history and culture.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

ED$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

In sum, on the Egypt-German contestation over the Bust of Nefertiti, Egypt uses reactive protection in establishing its ownership over the artifact. In an article entitled: Nefertiti, the Life and Death of King Tut, and KV64: The October Checklist, Shemsu Sesen asserts: 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!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 (Sesen, 2009).$ Supported by historical and cultural basis as narrated above, Egypt continues to assert ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti through constantly countering the claims of ownership of the Germans. As time transcend from the World War to the Post-Cold War eras, the Egyptian side exhibits an increased sense of responsibility with regard to protecting cultural property. The primary tactic for Egypt in this research study would be to reclaim and eventually repatriate cultural artifacts such as the Bust of Nefertiti. Figure 4 displays Egypts tactics in claiming owenership over the 3,400 year-old Bust, which has also been referenced to Chapter 4.2.2. Likewise, as presented in Figure 4, it is also apparent how Egypts stance in the Post-Cold War era remain firm with their interests to protect and reclaim Egyptian artifacts that are looted or extracted illegally from culturally-rich countries like Egypt.

5.2.2 Strategic Value Egypts undying hope for the Bust of Nefertitis homecoming shows how valuable and priceless the artifact is for its people. A study in 2010 by Valerie Egan entitled PostColonial Politics and Cultural Heritage discusses the links between Egyptian repatriation requests and European Museums. Egan says that there involves certain ideological principles when states fight for antiquity repatriation. To support this idea and to uncover the reasons behind Egypts firm grip on its ownership for the Bust of Nefertiti, here are some excerpts from the Egans study: Kwame Opoku (2010) describes the repatriation movement as the ever increasing desire and determination of former colonies and States
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

EE$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

dominated by the Western powers to seek more and more freedom to organize their own affairs (para. 6). Explicitly linking contemporary foreign affairs to repatriation suggests that the return of objects is a universal responsibility, as well as an act of empowerment for long-oppressed, postcolonial nations (Egan, 2010). Source nations often argue that iconic cultural objects have a unique and irreplaceable power as symbols of identity, integral to national identity. This logic implies that to deprive the modern nation of its icons is to unjustly impair the collective national identity (Egan, 2010).

From this study, it can be implied that the Bust of Nefertitis strategic value for Egypt has something to do with its sense of nation building (History World International, n.d.). Nemeths Cultural Security Framework however, does not present this increase in strategic value of the Bust through time. Nevertheless, it is important to note that Egypt sees the need to protect the distinct factors that are unique to their cultural identity, which is where cultural security comes into the picture. While parties concerned in this dispute over the Bust of Nefertiti continue to prove and present their highly logical and well-researched claims of ownership, we should also recognize the importance of certain cultural properties to the peoples and countries from which they originated, as sources of communal pride in their cultural identity (Quarles, n.d.). Considering all these, Egypt sees the need to secure cultural symbols like the 3,400 year-old Bust of a prominent Queen. The act of repatriation, which is discussed further in Chapter 5.4, is considered a notion of victory for Egypt at the present era. To finally repatriate the Bust of Nefertiti would restore Egypts cultural credibility in the international arena as well.

5.3 The German Claim using Cultural Security Lens It has been almost a hundred years since the 3,400-year old Bust of Nefertiti has been resting in the arms of the Germans. After all these years, the Germans have shown all their might in keeping the Bust within the borders of their country. From the covert actions of Borchardt to Berlins first class security and high technology, it is obvious that the Germans are not about to let go of their most precious Egyptian artifact.$$

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

EF$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

This section will discuss on Germanys side in the battle for ownership of the Bust of Nefertiti. It presents the tactics of Germany on how it practices cultural security, the strategic value of the Bust to Germany and the threats that Germany encounters in keeping the Bust.

5.3.1 Tactics The Bust of Nefertiti has been residing in Berlin, Germany since the year 1912. All throughout these years, Germany has put its best foot forward in possessing and protecting the precious Egyptian artifact. In a documentary by the National Geographic entitled Nefertitis Odyssey (2008), it was mentioned that at the time Borchardt was residing in Egypt, he was searching for valuable and rare pieces of artifacts that would help put Germany at par with musea like the Louvre and the British Museum. The Egyptologist knew that it would be a great success if he was able to transport the valuable Queen to Germany. In other words, Germanys tactic during this era would relate to planned plunder, considering how the German discoverer of the Bust of Nefertiti, Ludwig Borchardt, already knew the real value of the Bust and used his own means to make the Egyptian inspector overlook the very valuable artifact upon his inspection (see Chapter 3.3.2 for further explanations on this event). It may be implied therefore that Germanys tactic in the World War era is archeological theft and deception. On the other hand however, the Post-Cold War era changed Germanys tactic from planned plunder to profitable looting, which simply refers to looting with the agenda of obtaining profit as carefully-preserved antiquities arrive from source nations like Egypt. In the same view, Germany has also used its historical and scholarly tactics in order to maintain its ownership over the Egyptian artifact. In this Post-Cold War era, Germanys tactics boast its nations remarkable ability to excavate, research, and use advanced mechanisms in archeological explorations. Germany saw that the Bust was very important and the way that it showed this was through the exhibition of the Egyptian artifact. The previous chapters explained on how
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

FG$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

the Bust of Nefertiti has been exposed to the public, from its revelation in 1924, to the transfer of the Bust within Germany during the Cold War, until its current status today. The scholarly tactic of Germany was its way of practicing cultural security over the Bust of Nefertiti, among other cultural artifacts in its possession. Germany tries to come up with workable solutions to promote and protect Egyptian cultural artifacts, which in this case is the Bust of Nefertiti. German musea which has top-of-the-line security defense systems ensure complete preservation of Egyptian collections are concrete examples that show Germanys capability in securing culture. Then again, it is through their prestige in the field of archeology before and at the present that stregnthened their tactics in keeping possession or claiming cultural artifacts like the Bust of Nefertiti.

5.3.2 Strategic Value From the arrival of the Bust in 1912 until the time it was placed in its new palace, Germanys political goodwill is upheld as the Bust of Nefertiti evidently shows that over the years the Egyptian artifact continues to be very relevant to the German society, not only because of academic reasons, but also because of cultural reasons (discussed further in Chapter 5.4.1). From the previous chapters, it can be said that Germany keeps hold of the Bust because it was seen as a mark and a symbol of its scholarly success. Germany is indeed proud being able to possess the Bust, and Borchardt could not be even happier since he was mainly the reason for this achievement. To show importance and in order for the Egyptian Queen to feel respected, Germany has only given her the best services it could offer. Although over the years this scholarly claim has been maintained, newer and more relevant reasons for their possession of the Bust are slowly being recognized. Several significant characters have admitted about how important the Queen was for them and for Germany. In 1933, Adolf Hitler referred to Nefertiti as his personal icon. He said, I will never give the head of the queen off. It is a masterpiece, a jewelry, a treasure. I will build her a museum in Berlin and I dream of pleasing this
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

F>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

wonder in the middle of a stately home crowned by a dome. (National Geographic, 2008)

It is obvious that Hitler knew the importance of the Bust even at a crucial time when he was still building up his armies for the war that was on the way. In more recent times, other people have stated the relevance of the Bust to Germans. When the campaign Nefertiti Travels was brewing in Germany, people from the CulturCooperation, which initiated this campaign, still admitted how significant the role of the Bust is to Germany. Lena Blosat of the CulturCooperation said, The Germans claim that Nefertiti has become an integral part of our cultural identity here in Germany, which we are not prepared to part with. And the Egyptians say she is our Egyptian Queen and thus part of our culture, Today, even allowing the bust to be exhibited in Egypt for three months is an issue which museum directors are obviously not willing to discuss (Moore, 2007). Even Wildung from the Egyptian Museum referred to the Egyptian Queen as someone of importance, saying that she is the best ambassador of Egypt to Berlin. Also, he said that even though she is unique and different, the Bust is still accepted by the Germans and must stay with the Germans (Moore, 2007). In another view, the Bust of Nefertiti also contributes to the economic sector of Germany as it attracts a significant number of tourists to the country (see Chapter 4.3.2). From those statements, it is perceivable that the Bust of Nefertiti is not just an archeological success and a scholastic trophy for the Germans. The Bust is steeped within Germanys culture as it reflects its archeological superiority among other countries. It is not just a symbol of Egypts ancient past but is also a symbol of Germanys interest over scholarly works, archeology and history.

5.4 The Act of Appropriation and Repatriation Germany, being the current actor possessing the Bust, remains firm with its efforts to keep hold of the Queen in the German society. On the other hand, Egypt, backed by its

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

F?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

lingering feelings of bitterness and resentment on the stolen Bust, continues to strengthen its measures of regaining it.

5.4.1 Germany: Keeping the Trophy at Home Appropriation, as defined in Chapter 1, is basically the act of taking something, usually without an owners consent, and using it for its own gain. The concept itself has been a constant topic of debate between artists, art critics and enthusiasts, philosophers, and even human rights advocates (No Author, 2011). Parties either see the practice of appropriation as immoral or something that is necessary and essential (Young, 2010). With regard to the Bust of Nefertitis case, the concept of cultural appropriation, which is more specific and is part of the bigger concept of appropriation, was used. Cultural appropriation simply refers to the use of a cultures symbols, artifacts, genres, rituals, or technologies by members of another culture (Rogers, 2006). Rogers (2006) had also pointed out that cultural appropriation is inevitable, especially when different cultures come into contact. Throughout history, interaction with other cultures has been a consistent trend, that being so, cultural appropriation is indeed an unavoidable phenomenon. After nearly a hundred years under German possession, the Bust of Nefertitis fate remains uncertain, but then again, the German owners argue differently. The authorities that keep a close eye on the Egyptian Queen hold on to their firm stance in keeping the Bust inside Germany. The German Culture Minister Bernd Neumann and Foreign Ministry Spokesman Andreas Peschke, for instance, explicitly laid out their governments position on the Egyptian artifact, stating further that Germanys stand is already wellknown and remains the same for the past several decades (Kassem, 2011). Given these accounts, and referring again to the modified Cultural Security framework on Figure 4, it is logical to say that Germany has been under the process of appropriating Queen Nefertiti, probably since its first public exhibition in 1924. Although there were reports retelling how Germany considered giving the Bust back to its homeland, it may not be of use to the debate today since the German nation practically

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

F@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

followed through the unwavering passion of Adolf Hitler to the Egyptian Queen (see Chapter 4.3.1 and Chapter 4.3.3 for further discussion on Hitlers interest on the Queen).

5.4.2 Egypt: Rescuing the Damsel in Distress For nearly a century now, the Egyptian community still longs for the presence of their revered Queen who continues to seek solace in the highly developed Neues Museum in Berlin. Efforts from the Egyptian governments cultural antiquities protection sector are evident. But despite these persistent efforts from Egypt, appeals to regain the 3,400-year old Queen Nefertiti have still been constantly turned down by the German government. Up to this day, the rescue for Queen Nefertiti is still being pursued. Zahi Hawass, though unfortunately discharged from his position as the Minister of State for Antiquities recently, had his priorities set on retrieving valued Egyptian artifacts from mostly its European holders. At the same time, he had ignited the feelings of the present Egyptian generation and influences them to continue fighting for the right of the Egyptian culture to claim ownership over those artifacts. The best term that best describes this context where Hawass somehow encourages his fellow Egyptians to fight for the return of their Egyptian treasures and antiquities therefore, is no other than Cultural Repatriation. Unlike other Egyptian artifacts, such as the coffin of Imesy, the Ramesses I mummy and the limestone stele of the Old Kingdom period (c. 2649-2134 BC), which already have found their way home, the Bust of the Queen Nefertiti still remains on the wish list of antiquities to be repatriated. This aspiration of Egypt, however, is truly a complex and complicated one, especially when one lacks convincing documents to prove and defend its claim. Considering the accounts in 1912 that stirred issues on the part of Germany regarding deception and illegal transfer of the Bust of Nefertiti, clear-cut answers are hard to come by until now. Whats more evident though are the persistent efforts of the Egyptian government to recover either looted or secretly transferred cultural artifacts. In 2002, as Hawass took the position of the Secretary General of Egypts Supreme Council of Antiquities, radical

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

FA$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

actions have been on the top of his agenda of repatriating Egyptian artifacts taken throughout history (ECHO, 2011). He introduced new security measures that would address threats to antiquities, such as theft, smuggling or illegal trafficking. Aside from updating the already existing security measures, he also aimed to catalogue all artifacts published in magazines and books all across Egypt. Hawass also wanted to train people to guard historical sites in Egypt, thereby preventing looters to gain access. All these advocacies of Hawass have made it possible for museums and custom officials all over the world to turn a new leaf and help Egyptian officials in repatriating their artifacts (ECHO, 2011). It cannot be emphasized even more how determined the Egyptian government is in locating and at least trying to repatriate their artifacts scattered all across the globe. As of this contemporary age, their stance remains unfaltering that is to work towards repatriating more and more of their lost antiquities as a way of upholding cultural security.

5.4.3 Analysis of Findings for Egypt and Germany The issue on the Bust of Nefertiti, among many other similar disputes on real ownership of antiquities, is a cultural case that can clearly be subject to discussions of appropriation. In the Busts case however, appropriation takes a more specific form, which is Cultural Appropriation. Simply put, this is the act employed by the current possessor of the Bust, as opposed to the Repatriation efforts pushed for by its Egyptian descent.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

FB$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Table 2: Summary of Findings behind Egypts & Germanys Claims

Egypts Claim
use of historical data/records confirming, fortifying, and reinforcing history return of objects as universal responsibility state empowerment national identity cultural properties as instruments for nation building theft

Germanys Claim
profuse resources to present cultural antiquities Germany asserting its competition among other states a symbol for Germanys scholarly success maintaining scholastic excellence

Tactics

Strategic Value

Threats

parties contesting their ownership over the Bust

Overall Analysis

Bust of Nefertiti to be repatriated.

Bust of Nefertiti to stay and be appropriated in German culture.

Table 2 presents the summary of the main findings and significant points relevant in the Bust of Nefertitis case. The given findings were synthesized to form a conclusion on the measures taken by both Egypt and Germany regarding how they uphold their concept of cultural security. The Egyptians form their strategies to regain the Queen based on the act of repatriation. The Germans on the other hand, have the same objective to keep the Queen in its possession but use the act of appropriation instead. In analyzing the claims and tactics of both Germany and Egypt, it is important to reconsider the factors introduced by Nemeth in his Cultural Security Framework before even reaching the aforementioned conclusion. In Table 2, Nemeths three important concepts, tactics, strategic value, and threats were expounded in accordance with the claims of the contesting parties on the Bust of Nefertiti. Given the considerable information gathered from different secondary sources, Table 2 strived to summarize the implications of the Busts issue on Nemeths three core factors.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

FC$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

5.5 Chapter Summary Overall, this chapter brought the tactics, strategic value and threats in upholding cultural security by both Egypt and Germany into the focus of attention. In the same way, Erik Nemeths notions based on his cultural security framework also guided this chapter as it explored on where the Egyptian and German stance really inclined on. The sections of this chapter had also detailed on the respective strategies employed by the competing countries, at the same time ensuring that these strategies uphold their nations cultural security. As reiterated, the sections were able to provide interesting analysis relating to the actual maneuvers taken by both Egypt and Germany as they continue to claim the famous Egyptian bust for their own. The extensive analysis devoted to academic journals had also shed light on both nations rationale on pursuing efforts of repatriating (for Egypt) and appropriating (for Germany). The Germans for instance, use the art of appropriation as a means of upholding cultural security, basing it from crucial factors such as economic profit, showcase of dominating power, and the undeniable capability of a developed European country (such as Germany) to exhibit its advancements in fields of world explorations and the like. On the other hand, Egypt also strives to uphold its version of cultural though it differs from Germanys tactics in the Bust of Nefertiti case. Egypt played the role of a knight in shining armor in this scenario wherein rescuing the damsel-in-distress (played by Queen Nefertiti) is the main priority. In more realistic terms however, Egypt does this with repatriation tactics, involving the use of influential characters and the power of legislations to almost force the adversary to give in to its demands. In the arguments and supporting evidences that were shown in the previous chapters of this study, it has been consistent how both Egypt and Germany utilize their resources to continue asserting ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti. These efforts show how both competing countries preserve cultural security in their own terms. Considering these accounts, it appears that the fate of the 3,400-year old Queen remains an elusive one, maybe even for the next century or so.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

FD$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Chapter 6 Summary and Conclusions

Egyptian historical artifacts, or any culturally significant artifact for that matter, have been spread around the world throughout historical and momentous events. One of the principal antiquities that are still on the process of debates is the Bust of Nefertiti, an intricately designed sculpture symbolizing the character of an ancient Egyptian Queen. The Bust has been confined in the possession of Germany for numerous years ever since it has been excavated in 1912. For years, Egypt has tried to recover the Bust from its captor but their efforts were not enough to regain the artifact. The case of the Bust of Nefertiti is a perfect example of antiquities trafficking. International laws were made in order to prevent the illicit transport of antiquities but even with these existing laws, the 3,400-year-old Bust of the ancient Queen still awaits its repatriation back to its original home. In the long years that the Bust of Nefertiti has remained in German land, is it even possible to still regard this artifact as an Egyptian one? Or should it already be considered German, considering its long-term stay within the European region? With these questions at hand, the need to secure culture is emphasized. Cultural Security as defined in Chapter 1.9, is the management of threats that are closely related to the strategic value and tactics of any cultural property, and is something that implies the need to protect the national and cultural significance of antiquities. Almost a hundred years ago, this concept of cultural security has been put to the test with Borchardts excavation of the 3,400-year old Bust of Nefertiti. In the case of a remarkable cultural artifact such as the Egyptian Bust that was transported away from its country of origin, it is inevitable for disputes to materialize. Placing the influences of globalization at this point would lead to the question, how do Germany and Egypt signify cultural security in their competing claims over the Bust of Nefertiti? The three research objectives of this study (see Chapter 1.3) were motivated by the desire to understand how states today perceive cultural security, and also explicitly describe the respective tactics they use to assert and protect their own cultural identities.
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

FE$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Chapter 3 focused on drawing out all the significant actors and events that were involved in the Bust of Nefertitis case in nearly the past century from the Queens odyssey from her Egyptian homeland, to the foreign grounds of Germany. From this narration, the roles of both contesting countries, Egypt and Germany, have been reinforced and presented in detail. The gathered findings in this chapter still leaned on the fact that both states had strong positions in this case. In other words, both Egypt and Germany believe that they have legal claims over the Bust of Nefertiti and therefore have continuously deemed themselves as legal owners of this 3,400-year old artifact. In the second objective where the aim was to analyze the shift in the interests and claims of the parties in dispute/conflict from the World War to Post-World War era, it was concluded that the value of a certain cultural artifact increases as years pass, and a nations interest increases along with it, and vice-versa. The influx of globalization has been a major influence in this shift especially in this Post-Cold War context at the present day. Firstly, because globalization brings in the idea of a more integrated world, and secondly because a more integrated world with porous and easy-to-access borders incite more threats that endanger ones cultural identity. Therefore, it is important to point out that as the value of a cultural artifact increases in time, as shown in the example of the case of the Bust of Nefertiti, the claims and interests of the parties interested in the same artifact is also reinforced. Hence, the parties will further their efforts in asserting ownership over the artifact, in the same way as both Germany and Egypt persist on finding ways to claim the Bust for its own pride and nation. The third objective, which was expounded in the fifth chapter, centered mostly on Erik Nemeths notions on Cultural Security. This chapter is also the application of Erik Nemeths Cultural Security Framework. Hence, this framework was used as a guide by the researchers, in their efforts to analyze the tactics and strategic values that characterize both Egypt and Germany claim of ownership over the Nefertiti Bust. After relating these three core components of Nemeths Cultural Security Framework to the long-standing debate over the Bust of Nefertiti, it was concluded that cultural security becomes harder to uphold over time. Chapter 5 also shows that Germanys approach was applied to the Cultural Security Framework of Erik Nemeth. The results revealed that all the elements needed for the framework was fitting to the approach of Germany in
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

FF$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

their appropriation for the Bust of Nefertiti. The case of Egypts approach, on the other hand, was not entirely applicable to the said framework of Nemeth in their quest for the repatriation of their Egyptian Queen because it was seen that Egypt did not play an eminent role during the World War era, especially in relation to the case of the Bust of Nefertiti. Considering that the transition of time from the World War era to the Post-Cold War era is a relevant factor in Erik Nemeths framework, it was then evident that this framework was not applicable in the part of Egypt. Still, the results reveal how the approach done by both countries contribute to the persistent tension in the cultural arena on the case of the Bust of Nefertiti. Regardless of Egypts and Germanys means to assert ownership over the Bust of Nefertiti, the fact remains that protecting cultural security will be harder and more challenging in the future. This research was aimed at awakening the long disputed and unresolved case of the Bust of Nefertiti in our present era. In doing so, Erik Nemeths idea on cultural security served as a platform in the analysis of how Egypt and Germany strengthen their stance on the Bust. It is through Nemeths notion on culture that the researchers were able to generalize that the transcendence of time and the developments brought by Globalization affect how states uphold and secure their culture. With the aim of this research to understand how states signify cultural security, the researchers study on the case of the Bust of Nefertiti surfaced the idea that a states rank in the international arena affects its behavior in upholding cultural security. With the presentation of Egypts and Germanys claims on the Bust, it can be derived that Germanys stronghold on the Bust was reinforced because as a developed nation, it can most likely preserve and uphold a valuable artifact such as the Bust of Nefertiti. Despite the unequal realities that both nations face, this research was aimed at deeply examining the perspectives of both countries by laying down their claims on fair scale. In this regard, the researchers acknowledge that the solitary concept of cultural security is packaged with a lot of complexities and overlapping ideas that may indeed result to disputes such as the contestation of Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti. In studying both contesting countries, the researchers have come up with the idea that manifestation of cultural security purely relies on who defines it and how it is defined. In the field of international relations, this study on the contestation of Egypt and Germany over the Bust of Nefertiti reflects how the two states involved practice
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>GG$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

diplomacy. The means in which the two states negotiate and deal with their contestations over the 3,400 year-old Bust of Nefertiti exhibited subtleness so as to ensure the practice of diplomacy. Overall, the researchers have contemplated on the idea that the Bust of Nefertiti is an epitome of a multifaceted cultural symbol. The ownership on the Bust has long been disputed because of the many ways both states define and uphold their cultural stance. The ways as to how Egypt and Germany asserted the legalities of ownership over the Bust, from the time of Nefertitis discovery up to this era, showed the increased importance and appreciation for valuing culture. On the contrary, their intensified defense for culture has unfortunately obscured the prospect in setting a verdict on who legally owns the Bust of Nefertiti. After this extensive research on the case of the Bust of Nefertiti, the researchers would still like to raise a few ideas that could be possible entry points for future research studies . The following are recommendations for the interest of future researchers: 1. International laws and conventions made by International Organizations, like the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), in relation to antiquities trafficking were mentioned earlier in this research. This paper could suggest to future researchers to further study the role of International Organizations that serve as mediators in cases of antiquities trafficking among contesting countries. How would the mandates of International Organizations affect these cases? What would be the impact of International Organizations on the contesting countries? The steps that have been taken by INTERPOL, as an organization that counters threats to public safety and world security, as well as, the actions done by UNESCO in their role to accomplish their mission "to contribute to the building of peace, the eradication of poverty, sustainable development and intercultural dialogue through education, the sciences, culture, communication and information (UNESCO, n.d.)" can further be studied. 2. Considering that the Bust of Nefertiti was designed to portray the ancient Egyptian Queen Nefertiti, it could be suggested that this study be done using a gender perspective. In this way, the research can focus solely on Queen Nefertiti as a woman of beauty and authority.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>G>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

3. It was determined in this research that Egypt and Germany each had their own interpretation of cultural security. Possibly, a future study could be done on seeking out which of the said countries had a better interpretation or a more successful use of cultural security. 4. There were also other possible methodologies that could have been used apart from the ones that were done in this research. Also, other methodologies such as discourse analysis can be used for further studies. Discourse analysis aims to discover underlying social structures, which are usually played out within texts and conversations (Fulcher, n.d.). 5. Another recommendation would be breaking away from the concept of culture. This research on the case of the Bust of Nefertiti concentrated on the study of cultural security. It could be advised to future researchers to move away from a cultural lens and look at the situation at a different angle. 6. In this research, the Cultural Security framework of Erik Nemeth was used but there several frameworks that could actually be used in studying this case. Several frameworks that could be used in studying the case of the Bust of Nefertiti were mentioned in Chapter 2 of this paper. These frameworks were namely: a. Alexander Wendts Social Interactionist Theory was used in the study of Teves et al. (2008),$ Bells of Contention: Formation of U.S. and Philippines claims to war time victory in the Balangiga Bells Conflict, wherein it explains how states have the natural tendency to promote their own interests, but at the same time maintain the concept of the Self and the Other, where the former sees itself superior in opposition to the latter. b. There were also the theoretical approaches from Dr. Sherry Hutt, a renowned expert on cultural property law (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.): i. The first approach made use of the Market Theorist of cultural property. In a nutshell, this theory supports free trade, and views artifacts or antiquities with their so-called monetary value (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). ii. Internationalist Theory of cultural property has this notion that antiquities should remain in the hands of those affluent collectors.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>G?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

This theory believes that artifacts should belong to mankind, and should also be tended by those with the resources to do so (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). iii. The Nationalist Theory was usually put into practice by states that intend to undergo the process of repatriation. The theory suggested that foreign occupants are prohibited to own another nations cultural property (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). iv. The Moralist Theory pushed for social justice and does not approve of private property ownership as much as it restricts the public to gain access over it (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). v. The Property Law Theory can be considered complex in a such a way that it tries to find out who is authorized to sell or export a cultural product, and at the same time, sets things straight that possession does not mean legal ownership as well (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). vi. The Scientific Theory said that the reputed scientists apparently have the superior right to claim access to cultural objects (Saving Antiquities Organization, n.d.). c. Erik Nemeths framework, with the unofficial label, Influence of Scholarship on the Strategic Value of Art took on the interrelationship between the global phenomenon of Globalization and so-called transnational crimes, which was then concluded how the former serves as form of encouragements for the looting crimes to persist (Nemeth, 2008). These are just some recommendations arising from the study that would hopefully spark interest and further understanding on how states signify cultural security. However, securing culture does not only equate to the mere preservation of cultural antiquities such as the 3,400 year-old Bust of Nefertiti. It would require a collective effort from the international community to safeguard a person, a community, and a nations identity.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>G@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Bibliography

Akinsha, & Kozlov. (1995). Beautiful Loot. New York: Random House. Al-Jazeera Agencies. (2010, April 7). Egypt host antiquities meeting. Retrieved December 2010, from Al-Jazeera News:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/04/2010/04/20104763826498609.html Al Jazeera Agencies. (2010, April 10). Egypt Hosts Antiquities Meeting Gathering in Cairo to Chalk Out Global Strategy for Bringing Back Artefacts Taken Away. Retrieved December 18, 2010, from Aljazeera.net:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/04/20104763826498609.html Al Jazeera Agencies. (2007, May 11). 'Hands of my Bust' says Egypt Prof: Antiquities Chief Promises to Fight World's Museum. Retrieved December 17, 2010, from http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2007/05/200852513175881109.html Anasarias, E. (2010). Globalization as an International Issue. Miriam College, IS Department. Archeological Institute of America. (2010, April). Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) of 1983. Retrieved June 26, 2011, from Archeaological.org: http://www.archaeological.org/news/sitepreservation/75 ASEAN Secretariat. (2009, October). ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights. Retrieved September 2011, from ASEANSec: http://www.aseansec.org/DOCTOR-AHRB.pdf

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>GA$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Associated Press. (2007). Egypt wants Nefertiti Bust. Retrieved September 2011, from msnbc.msn.com: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18608193/ Author, N. (n.d.). Amber Room and Beutekunst. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from Scribd.com: http://www.scribd.com/doc/904147/Amber-Room Awad, R. (2010, February 1). Egyptians tightens penalties for relic robbers, smugglers. Retrieved June 24, 2011, from Google News:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hnylwyk_1Xh7ZU4W_oBxmVXD2gw Association for Research into Crimes against Art (ARCA). (n.d.). ARCA: Staff. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from www.Artcime.info: http://www.artcrime.info/staff.htm BBC News. (2009, February 11). German Guile Won Queen Nefertiti. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7883102.stm Beard, M. (2010). Lord Elgin - Saviour or Vandal? Retrieved from BBC.co.uk: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/greeks/parthenon_debate_01.shtml Bekerie, A. (2005). The Rise of the Aksum Obelisk is the Rise of Ethiopian History. PhD Paper, Cornell University, Africana Studies and Research Center, Massachussetts. Ben Morales-Correa. (n.d.). Amazing Discovery of the Bust of Nefertiti. Retrieved June 20, 2011, from All About Egypt: http://www.all-about-egypt.com/queen-nefertiti.html Bishop, L. (2011, June 10). Egypt's antiquities minister to speak at Aronoff. Retrieved June 19, 2011, from http://news.cincinnati.com:

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>GB$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110610/ENT07/106100320/Egypt-s-antiquitiesminister-speak-Aronoff?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CEntertainment%7Cs Blue, G. (2002). Colonialism and the Modern World: Selected Studies (Vol. New York). M.E. Shape, Inc. Bodenstein, J. (n.d.). 98-nefertiti-berlin. Retrieved June 23, 2011, from Meaus.com: http://www.meaus.com/98-nefertiti-berlin.htm Bowman, B. (2008). Plunder of Antiquities . Retrieved from Saving Antiquities.org: http://www.savingantiquities.org.crime.php Boyes, R. (2009). Neues Museum refuses to return the bust of Queen Nefertiti to Egyptian Museum. The Times . London. Boyes, R. (2009, February 11). Secret note reveals how Germany smuggled Queen Nefertiti bust from Egypt. Retrieved January 2011, from Timesonline.co.uk:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5702671.ece Canolly, K. (2009). Is this Nefertiti-or a 100 year-old fake? Retrieved June 23, 2011, from Guardian.com: http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2009/may/07/nefertiti-bust-

berlin-egypt-authenticity Castro, L., & Galace, J. (2008). Peace Education: A Pathway to a Culture of Peace. Quezon City, Philippines: Center for Peace Education. Chalermpalanupap, T. (2008, December 27). ASEAN charter is a new commitment to rights. Retrieved September 10, 2011, from ThinkCenter.org:

http://www.thinkcentre.org/article.cfm?ArticleID=2962

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>GC$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Chalermpalanupap, T. (n.d.). Promoting & Protecting Human Rights in ASEAN. Retrieved September 2011, from ASEAN: http://www.asean.org/HLP-OtherDoc-2.pdf Chamberlin, R. (1983). Loot : The Heritage of Plunder. Sutton Publishing Limited. Council of Europe. (1992). ETS no. 143 - European Convention on the Protection of the Archeological Heritage. Retrieved June 26, 2011, from conventions.coe.int:

http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/143.htm Cruz, G. (2008, November 6). Who Owns Ancient Treasures? Retrieved June 24, 2011, from www.time.com: http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1856543,00.html Cultural Security Organization. (2010, April). "The Art of Cultural Intelligence" Archaeology in Conflict. Retrieved from http://culturalsecurity.net/cs/inex.htm Cultural Policy Research Institute. (n.d.). Cultural Heritage Legislation in Egypt. Retrieved January 3, 2011, from http://sites.google.com/a/cprints.org/www/culturalheritage-legislation-in-egpyt Curry, A. (2007). Beauty of the Nile Spree. Retrieved September 10, 2011, from Spiegel.net: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,482217,00.html Curry, A. (2007, May 10). Egypt and Germany Fight Over Nefertiti: beauty of teh Nile Trapped on the Spree. Retrieved June 24, 2011, from Spiegel Online International: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,482217,00.html D'Arcy, D. (2009, January 8). The Hyperbolic Philathrophy of James Simon. Retrieved June 23, 2011 , from www.forward.com: http://www.forward.com/articles/14886/

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>GD$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft. (n.d.). Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft. Retrieved July 12, 2011, from orient-gesellschaft.de: http://www.orient-gesellschaft.de/ Discovery News. (2009, October 9). Stolen Egyptian Relics on their Way Home. Retrieved February 25, 2011, from Discovery News:

http://news.discovery.com/archaeology/ancient-egypt-relics-louvre.html Earth Times. (2011, January 11). Germany Rejects Cairo Request to Return Nefertiti Bust . Retrieved July 12, 2011, from Earth Times:

htt://www.earthtimes.org/articles/news/363944,nefertiti-bust-summary.html ECHO. (2011, June 27). Egyptian Cultural Heritage Organization. Retrieved July 24, 2011, from E-C-H-O.org: http://www.e-c-h-o.org/Repatriation.htm Fox News. (2011, February 17). Statue of Akhenaten, Other Stolen Antiquities Recovered. Retrieved February 25, 2011, from

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/17/cairo-teen-finds-looted-pharaoh-akhenatonstatue/ Fawcett, C., & Kohl, P. (1995). Nationalism, Politics & the Practice of Archaeology. Boston: Cambridge University Press. Frankfurter Societts-Medien. (n.d.). Facts About Germany. Retrieved from

www.tatsachen-ueber-deutschland.de:

http://www.tatsachen-ueber-deutschland.de/e

n/history/main-content-03/1830-1848-the-vormaerz.html Fulcher, E. (n.d.). What is Discourse Analysis? Retrieved January 3, 2011, from Eamonfulcher.com: http://www.eamonfulcher.com/discourse_analysis.html

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>GE$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Hawass, Z. (2010, February 14). Law No. 117 of 1983. Retrieved June 26, 2011, from UNESCO.org: http://www.unesco.org/culture/natlaws/media/pdf/egypt/egypt_law3_2010_entof.pdf Hernandez, C., & Pattugalan, G. (1999). Transnational Crime and Regional Security in the Asia Pacific. Hetherington, N. (2008, March 21). Why a Flood of New Archeological Discoveries? Retrieved June 24, 2011, from DailyStarEgypt.com:

http://www.dailystaregypt.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=12634 Hickley, C. (2009, October 16). Queen Nefertiti's Home, A Ruin for 70 Years, Opens in Berlin. Retrieved December 17, 2010, from Bloomberg.com:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newarchive&sid=aymZF9XfTIBQ History World International. (n.d.). German History. Retrieved September 2011, from History World Organization: http://history-world.org/German%20History.htm Holmes, T. (2010, June 29). The Bust of Nefertiti. Retrieved from

talesofancientegypt.blogspot.com: http://talesofancientegypt.blogspot.com/2010/06/bustof-nefertiti-perhaps-most-readily.html Geertz, C. (1973). Toward an Interpretative Theory of Culture. In The Interpretation of Culture. New York: Basic Books. German Oriental Society. (2010). Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft e.V. Retrieved March 25, 2011, from Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft: http://www.orient-

gesellschaft.de/index.php

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>GF$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Germany travel guide. (2011). German History . Retrieved September 2011, from Justgermany.org: http://www.justgermany.org/germany/germany-history.asp Grundle, B. (n.d.). Short-History-Bust-Nefertiti. Retrieved June 23, 2011, from euler.slu.edu: http://euler.slu.edu/~bart/egyptianhtml/kings%20and%20Queens/Short-

history-bust-Nefertiti.html Hoffman, B. T. (n.d.). World Politics Review. Cultural Politics and the Return of Looted Antiquities Ivey, N. (2006). Brazil's Technology Sector. Library of Congress, Federal Research Division, Washington, DC. Jokilehto, J. (2005, January 15). Definitions of Cultural Heritage. Nemeth, E. (2010, September 1). Market Value of Culture. Retrieved March 8, 2011, from www.creativeleadershipsummit.org:

http://culturalsecurity.net/cs/Assets/Market_Value_of_Culture_ENemeth.pdf Kassem, M. (2011). Egypt Demands Return of Nefertiti Bust from Germany. Retrieved September 2011, from bloomberg.com: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-

24/egypt-demands-return-of-3-400-year-old-queen-nefertiti-bust-from-germany.html Keener, C. (n.d.). How the Rosetta Stone Works. Retrieved from history.com: http://www.history.howstuffworks.com/rosetta-stone.htm Khasi, A. (2011). Where Culture and Nation-Building Intersect. Retrieved from Shabait.com: http://www.shabait.com/categoryblog/6544-where-culture-and-nation-

building-intersect-part-i

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>G$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Kassem, M. (2011, January 24). Egypt Demands Return of Nefertiti Bust from Germany. Retrieved July 24, 2011, from Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0124/egypt-demands-return-of-3-400-year-old-queen-nefertiti-bust-from-germany.html Knight, K. (2009). Catholic Encyclopedia: Crusades. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from New Advent Org.: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm Knofel, U., & Sontheimer, M. (2011, August). Nefertiti: Sparring Over Berlin's 'Mona Lisa'. Retrieved September 2011, from Abcnews.go.com:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/nefertiti-sparring-berlins-monalisa/story?id=14326400 Knowles, B. (2009, October 17). 10 Reasons Why the Bust og Nefertiti Shoudl Stay in the Neues Museum. Retrieved July 12, 2011, from Heritage Key: http://heritagekey.com/blogs/bija-knowles/10-reasons-why-bust-nefertiti-should-stay-neues-museum Lacey, M. (2002). Looted Obelisk Casts a Long Shadow as Ethiopia Awaits its Return. Aksum Journal . LL.B., C.I. (1899, July 29). Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague II). Retrieved December 18, 2010, from Avalon Project:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/hague02.asp LL.B., C.I. (1907, October 18). Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV). Retrieved December 18, 2010, from Avalon Project:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hague04.asp Lorenzi, R. (2011). Egypt wants Nefertiti Bust back. Retrieved September 2011, from Discovery.com: http://news.discovery.com/history/egypt-wants-nefertiti-bust-back.html
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>>$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

MacDonald, S. (2003). Consuming Ancient Egypt. (M. Rice, Editor, & U. S. Publishing, Producer) Retrieved July 12, 2011, from Google:

http://books.google.com/books?id=8ZbfGFwCu28C&pg=PA21&dq=hitler+and+nefertiti& hl=en&ei=IFIeTtfSHebRmAWu5LS1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ve d=0CC0Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=hitler%20and%20nefertiti&f=false Merryman, J. (2006). Imperialism, Art and Restitution. New York: Cambridge University Press. Mohsen, M., Shaker, N., Najjar, F., & Kamaly, R. (2011, April 9). Documents reveal origin of artifacts beneath Ewart Hall . Retrieved June 24, 2011, from CARAVAN: Carrying the Voice of the American University in Cairo Community:

http://academic.aucegypt.edu/caravan/story/documents-reveal-origin-artifacts-beneathewart-hall Moore, T. (2007, May 7). Row Over Nefertiti Bust Continues. Retrieved July 24, 2011, from BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6632021.stm National Institute of Justice. (2007, November 15). Transnational Organized Crime . Retrieved from National Institute of Justice:

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/topics/crime/transnational-organized-crime Nemeth, E. (2008). Art Intelligence Programs: The Relevance of the Clandestine Art World to Foreign Intelligence. International Journal of Intelligence and

CounterIntelligence , 355-374. Nemeth, E. (2009, November 9). Cultural Security. Retrieved January 31, 2011, from CulturalSecurity.net: http://culturalsecurity.net/cs/Assets/briefing.pdf

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>?$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Nemeth, E. (2011, October). See Appendix A. Nofretete geht auf Reisen. (n.d.). The Bust of Nefertiti: A Chronology. Retrieved July 12, 2011, from Nofretete geht auf Reisen/Nefertiti Travels: http://www.nofretete-geht-aufreisen.de/echronol.htm No Author. (2009). Did Germany cheat to get Bust of Nefertiti? Retrieved September 2011, from Spiegel.de: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,606525,00.html No Author. (2009, October 16). Nefertiti Gets a New Palace: Revamped Neues Finally Opens in Berlin. Retrieved July 24, 2011, from Spiegel International Online: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,655577,00.html No Author. (2010, December 16). What is Culture. Retrieved September 2011, from Culture.co: http://www.culture.co.in/what-is-culture/ No Author. (2011, July 23). Cultural Appropriation and Its Effects On Other Cultures. Retrieved July 24, 2011, from 123HelpMe.com:

http://www.123HelpMe.com/view.asp?id=122431 Nofretete geht auf Reisen. (n.d.). The Bust of Nefertiti: A Chronology. Retrieved July 12, 2011, from Nofretete geht auf Reisen/Nefertiti Travels: http://www.nofretete-geht-aufreisen.de/echronol.htm Opoku, K. (2011). Nefertiti in Absurdity: how often must Egyptians ask Germans for the Retun of the Egytian Queen? Retrieved June 23, 2011, from Modernghana.com: http://www.modernghana.com/news/314307/1/nefertiti-in-absurdity-how-often-mustegyptians-as.html

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Perry, M. (1989). A History of the World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Pradhan, K., & Liyanage, H. (2007). South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation. Retrieved June 28, 2011, from International Development Research Centre:

http://web.idrc.ca/fr/ev-140844-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html Ritschl, A. (2010, February 10). The Marshall Plan, 1948-1951. (R. Whaples, Editor) Retrieved September 15, 2011, from EH.Net Encyclopedia:

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/Ritschl.Marshall.Plan Rogers, R. (2006). From Cultural Exchange to Transculturation: A Review and Reconceptualization of Cultural Appropriation. School of Communication, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ 86011. Sacred Destinations. (2011). Pergamon Museum, Berlin. Retrieved September 2011, from Sacred Destinations.com: http://www.sacred-destinations.com/germany/berlin-

pergamon-museum Safire, W. (1994, May 1). On Language: Trophy Wife. Retrieved Spetember 9, 2011, from nytimes.ocm: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/05/01/magazine/on-language-trophywife.html?src=pm Saving Antiquities Organization. (n.d.). Saving Cultural Property Law Theory and United States v. Schultz. Retrieved from Saving Antiquities for Antiquities:

http://savingantiquities.org/feature_page.php?featureID=13 SCA. (2006). Egypts Sunken Treasures. Antiquities of Egypt: SCAs Monthly Newsletter.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>A$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Schulte, R. (Ed.). (2006). The Body of the Queen: Gender and Rule in the Courtly World (1500-2000). Berghahn Books. Schwartzman, S. (1993, November). Science and Technology Policy in Brazil: A new policy for a global world. So Paulo, Brazil. Schwartzman, S. (1993, November). Science and Technology Policy in Brazil. So Paulo, Brazil. Retrieved from Science and Technology Policy in Brazil: A new Policy for a Global World. Scott, J. (1909). Peace Conference at the Hague 1899: Instructions to the International (Peace) Conference at the Hague. Retrieved December 18, 2010, from Avalon Project: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/hag99-03.asp Shangri-La . (n.d.). Adolph Hitler's Strange Interest n Nefertiti (NOFRETETE). Retrieved July 13, 2011, from shagri-la.com: http://shangri-la.0catch.com/press/nefertiti.html Shangri-La Publications. (n.d.). Adolph Hitler's Strange Interest in Nefertiti

(NOFRETETE). Retrieved July 13, 2011, from shangril-la website: http://shangrila.0catch.com/press/nefertiti.html Siehr, K. (2006). The Beautiful One Has Come to Return. (J. Merryman, Ed.) Imperialism, Art and Restitution , 114-134. Soudijin, M., & Tijhuis, E. (n.d.). The Illicit Trade in Chinese Antiquities . Cultural Heritage Watch.

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>B$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Spiegel Online International. (n.d.). Archeological Controversy: Did Germany Cheat to get the Bust of Nefertiti? Retrieved February 25, 2011, from Spiegel Online: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,606525,00.html Spiegel Online International. (n.d.). Archeological Controversy: Did Germany Cheat to Get the Bust of Nefertiti? . Retrieved February 25, 2011 , from Spiegel Online: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,grossbild-1430250-606525,00.html Spiegel Online International. (n.d.). Did Germany Cheat to Get the Bust of Nefertiti? Retrieved from Spiegel Online International:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,606525,00.html Spiegel Online International. (2009, October 20). Berlin's Nefertiti Trouble: Egyptian Officials Calls Museum Behaviro 'Suspicious'. Retrieved July 12, 2011, from spiegel.de: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/bild-656046-24832.html St. Hilaire, R. (2007, Feb.-Mar.). International Antiquities Trafficking: Theft by Another Name. Strategies for Saving Our Cultural Heritage . Sussman, P. (2006, December 12). Antiquities Smuggling: 'A Crime Against Humanity'. Retrieved December 17, 2010, from CNN.com:

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/11/illegal.antiquities/index.html?iref=allse arch The University of Western Ontario. (2007). Retrieved March 4, 2011, from Qualitative Research Design and Analysis: publish.uwo.ca/~pakvis/Qualitative.ppt. Time. (1930, May 26). Art: Nefertiti. Retrieved June 23, 2011, from www.time.com: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,739330,00.html
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>C$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Tyldesley, J. (n.d.). Nefertiti. Retrieved December 19, 2010, from History.com: http://www.history.com/topics/nefertiti UNESCO. (n.d.). Introducing UNESCO: What We Are. Retrieved September 9, 2011, from UNESCO.org: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/about-us/who-we-

are/introducing-unesco/ UNESCO. (n.d.). Collection of legislative texts concerning the protection of movable cultural property. Retrieved June 24, 2011, from Cultural Property Training Resource: Egypt (Exercise Bright Star):

http://www.cemml.colostate.edu/cultural/09476/pdf/egyptian-law-117-of-1983.pdf UNESCO. (1954, May 14). Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of the Convention 1954. Retrieved December 18, 2010, from UNESCO.org: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=13637&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO. (1969). Preservation and Revival of the Cultural Heritage Background. UNESCO Draft Medium Term Plan 2000-2005, III, p. 57. UNESCO. (1970, November 14). Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property 1970. Retrieved December 17, 2010, from UNESCO.org: http://poral.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=13039&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html UNESCO. (1972, November 21). World Heritage Convention: Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. Retrieved December 17, 2010, from UNESCO.org: http://whc.unesco.org/archive/convention-en.pdf

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>D$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

UNESCO. (1989). Programme III, 2: Preservation and Revival of the Cultural Heritage Background. UNESCO Draft Medium Term Plan 1990-1995 , p. 57. UNIDROIT. (1995, June 24). Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects. Retrieved December 18, 2010, from UNIDROIT.org:

http://www.unidroit.org/english/conventions/1995culturalproperty/1995culturalpropertye.htm Urice, S. (2006). The Beautiful One Has Come to Stay. (J. Merryman, Ed.) Imperialism, Art and Restitution , 135-138. Wagner-Roos, L. (Producer), & Wagner-Roos, L. (Writer). (2008). Nefertiti's Odyssey [Motion Picture]. Wilde, R. (n.d.). The Elgin Marbles : Parthenon Sculptures. Retrieved from European History: http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/historybycountry/a/elginmarbles.htm Windfuhr, V. (2009, October 20). Berlin's Nefertiti Trouble: Egyptian Official Calls Museum Behavior 'Suspicious' . Retrieved December 18, 2010, from Spiegel.de: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,656046,00.html Yakutchik, M. (2003, August). Who was Nefertiti? Retrieved December 2010, from wysinger.com: http://wysinger.homestead.com/nefertiti.html Toga, T. (2002, January). Ethiopia's Ministry of Youth, Sports and Culture. Woodward, D. (2010, October 15). The Middle East during World War One. Retrieved January 2011, from bbc.co.uk:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/wwone/middle_east_01.shtml

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>E$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

Young, J. (2006). Art, Authenticity and Appropriation. Frontiers of Philosophy in China , I (No. 3), 455-276. Young, M. (2002, January 1). Nazi's Archeology. Retrieved July 10, 2011, from digitalcommons.unl.edu: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nebanthro/78 Ziff, B., & Rao, P. V. (1997). Introduction to Cultural Appropriation: A Framework for Analysis. In B. Ziff, & P. V. Rao, Borrowed Power: Essays on Cultural Appropriation (pp. pp.1-27). New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>>F$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

APPENDIX A

!
7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>?G$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

APPENDIX B SOURCE DOCUMENTS (NEUTRAL) Chapter 3: Germany and Egypt: The Clash of Great Civilizations OveR AN Ancient Queen (Urice, 2006) (Siehr, 2006) (Ben Morales-Correa, n.d.) (Merryman, 2006) (Holmes, 2010) (BBC, 2009) (SCA, 2006) (Bodenstein, n.d.) (D'Arcy, 2009) (Grundle, n.d.) (Cruz, 2008) (Time, 1930) (Curry, 2007) (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.) (Boyes, 2009) (Opoku, 2011) SOURCE SOURCE DOCUMENTS DOCUMENTS (FOR EGYPT) (NEUTRAL) (Nofretete geht (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.) auf Reisen, n.d.) (Spiegel Online International, 2009) (Wuyts, 2009) (Wuyts, 2011) (SCA, 2006)

CHapter 4: An analysis on the shifting interests of egypt and germany on the bust of nefertiti from the world war to postcold war era

SOURCE DOCUMENTS (FOR GERMANY) (Nofretete geht auf Reisen, n.d.) (Spiegel Online International, 2009) (Neues Museum, 2010) (Young, 2002) (Fawcett & Kohl, 1995) (Deutschen OrientGesellschaft, n.d.) (Shangri-La Publications, n.d.) (MacDonald, 2003) (Merryman, 2006) (Bator, 1982) (Earth Times, 2011) (Knowles, 2009)
>?>$ $

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

CHapter 5: Analyzing the fight over an iconic egyptian artifact using erik nemeths cultural security perspective

(Sesen, 2009) (Egan, 2010) (Opoku, 2010) (History World International, n.d.) (Quarles, n.d.) (ECHO, 2011)

(National Geographic, 2008) (Sontheimer & Knfel, 2011) (Moore, 2007) (Curry, 2007) (Associated Press, 2007) (Kassem, 2011) (Lorenzi, 2011) (Holmes, 2010) (National Geographic, 2008) (Spiegel Online International, 2009) (Moore, 2007) (Young, 2010) (Rogers, 2006) (Kassem, 2011)

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>??$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

APPENDIX C

$ $

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>?@$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

APPENDIX D

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>?A$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>?B$ $

!"#$%#&'()(*&$+,()#$-.$/*$0*1(#*2$3&452(/*$6'##*$

APPENDIX E

7)-8#9:$;-*2/)<-:$=-2-$$$$$!
$

>?C$ $