Banner
    Egyptians: Zahi Hawass Is Next
    By Hank Campbell | February 14th 2011 04:18 PM | 13 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    About Hank

    I'm the founder of Science 2.0® and co-author of "Science Left Behind".

    A wise man once said Darwin had the greatest idea anyone...

    View Hank's Profile
    While many in America were happy about the collapse of the Mubarak government, they were likely happy for the wrong reasons.   Optimists, it is said, are people who do not learn from experience and the toppling of a dictator in Egypt looks a lot more like Iran in 1979 than it does America in 1776.

    But regardless of the irrational optimism of many in the political spectrum, plenty of scientists are going to be happy that protesters have now turned their sights on Zawi Hawass, a man who could only have gotten his job in a dictatorship and wielded his position just like one.

    (See also Young Archaeologist Inspiration, Courtesy Of Egyptian Megalomaniac Zahi Hawass

    Protesters had bigger fish to fry, as it were, but suddenly today there were chants of "Get out" outside his offices.   Hawass, whose actual title is Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities, makes people call him "Pharaoh" and pretend they just do it naturally - if you don't like it, you'll never go anywhere in Egypt.    But protesters are on a roll and the Egyptian military likely did not think much of him either, since warnings about protesting did not extend to him.    His public support of ousted dictator Mubarak likely did not help.

    Hawass has been uncharacteristically quiet - odd for a fellow who has maintained his showmanship, bullying and self-promotion was for the benefit of all Egyptians.    Until he talks, enjoy this clip from the rather ridiculous "Chasing Mummies" show, courtesy of the History Channel while I recap my top 5 favorite Hawass quotes:

    1. "I will announce some of the tombs I found next to the great pyramid of Khufu. One is an intact tomb that I have not opened yet."

    2. "I am damn good. I am doing all this for Egypt and nothing else."

    3. "I found in one of the tombs an inscription saying, 'If you touch my tomb, you will be eaten by a crocodile and hippopotamus.' It doesn't mean the hippo will eat you, it means the person really wanted his tomb to be protected."

    4. “What’s happening? We’re having a curse here”

    5. On Jews and Israel. "For 18 centuries, they were dispersed throughout the world. They went to America and took control of its economy. They have a plan. Although they are few in number, they control the entire world."




    Comments

    American Indians have taught us about the sacred nature of the burial grounds of their ancestors. After a couple of centuries of excavations, some archaeologists today still do not understand that people who have passed and are buried should remain buried, their person and graves to remain untouched. The rights of those buried trump the academic hogwash about "knowledge".

    Hank
    Really?   Bones and stone tools from 12,000 years ago should not be studied?  Exactly what 'native American' culture do you think they were?   Wouldn't they be Asian instead?
    Want more no-nonsense, independent science? Buy Science Left Behind
    Let me get this straight. Are you asking whether a particular bone or a specific stone found today, 12,000 years later, may be or needs to be identified as coming from today's continent called America or today's continent called Asia ---as though that were really possible? Is that the question that substantiates digging up someone's buried body? This discussion, I thought, was resolved in academia during the last century. Please, excuse me, I misunderstood the thrust of the critical approach in your article.

    Hank
    I am asking if the beliefs of 1,000 different religions trumps science for eternity.
    Want more no-nonsense, independent science? Buy Science Left Behind
    Speaking as an American Indian, and as someone with a scientific and technical background, I have to say that the vast majority of American Indians actually encourage scientific study of our past, including the study of our lands and artifacts, when done with the proper respect. Knowledge and education are valued very highly in our cultures. If you were to actually familiarize yourself with the subject, you would find that in almost all cases, what American Indians have in fact been protesting since at least the 1960s is shoddy treatment and hording of our artifacts, including human remains, by museums, and huge inaccuracies perpetuated by those museums (tools labeled as weapons, for example), by those same museums. Our protests led to the passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in 1990. You can start by reading about the act here: http://goo.gl/yg4wM and http://goo.gl/JKKzT

    We encourage scientific research when it is carried out with respect. What we did have a problem with was museums snatching up over 600,000 human remains and keeping them, in some cases thousands of miles from their burial sites, and all of the other problems as explained on the linked pages. The problems were not with honest scientific investigation.

    In closing, I've spent most of my life working for some of the best colleges and universities in the United States, including seven years in medical research. I speak for the vast majority of American Indians when I say that if you want to flaunt your disdain for the "academic hogwash about 'knowledge'" then, as far as we are concerned, you're on your own.

    vongehr
    Good news this. Any news about whether El Naschie goes down, too?
    I see he was treated already on Science2.0, too.
    Hello everybody. I am not sure how this discussion got out of hand. I read Hank Campbell's comments about "the rather ridiculous 'Chasing Mummies' Show", and thought that he was denouncing the disrespectful treatment of mummies. So, I merely seconded that idea by referencing how at times the dead and buried are mistreated in the name of "knowledge" by academics or so-called academics. Then I was contested by the idea of finding a bone and a stone somewhere in America or Asia and thus distinguishing a People in that manner. I apologized for misunderstanding Campbell's critique, when he critiqued the program about Egyptian mummies I thought that he was defending the rights of the dead. The debate between knowledge produced by archaeologists and the contradictions of the practice of disturbing and/or respecting the dead is well documented. In my mind, it is simple, our need for knowledge of the past stops at the grave site. It's like non-invasive surgery, the need for a non-invasive cognitive research tool in the study of our past. If you all want to argue in favor of cognition in abstractio over and above all human thought, religious beliefs and such, and distinguish between a right way and a wrong way to dig up a grave, there is not much for me to say.

    Get this bum out of our ancsestor's tombs. He's not kemetic, he's merely a camel ridding arab. Those who build the Pyramids are kemetic. And these people come to America and stop me on the street exclaiming to me that I am the real Egyptian. I appreciate. But I already know that.

    Ciao!

    Hank
    He's not kemetic, he's merely a camel ridding arab.
    Good to know Kemet had intolerance 4,000 years ago, though I don't recall seeing any pictures of that on temple walls.
    Want more no-nonsense, independent science? Buy Science Left Behind
    Where Exactly did I say "Camel riding Arabs" was a bad thing. Or even Camel riding tourists? Intolerance? Pishaw! Just knowing what I'm looking at when I'm looking at it is all. And that includes those who would teach me about my own Ancsestors. I think I have that right.

    Ikahn El

    rholley
    A view from Egypt:  Tomb raiders

    Zahi Hawass himself comes in about half-way through the article.
    Robert H. Olley Quondam Physics Department University of Reading England
    Hank
    Hawass is the kind of shyster who gets ahead in a corrupt dictatorship - the reason so many Egyptians were willing to turn on him and their own heritage is because people like him made sure it is not their heritage at all, but his personal toy chest.    The only thing worse for antiquities in the short term is not having him, though.
    Want more no-nonsense, independent science? Buy Science Left Behind
    Sorry, I must have missed something. There are so many people to hate it's hard to keep up. Why are we hating Zawi Hawass now? Is it something to do with his hat?