This article I have to translate into italian for our site egittologia.net, I think it's interesting for all of us.....
Please, if you can, let me know what you think about that! I wish to add some impressions...

Thanx

http://www.egypttoday.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=3383

I never knew he was just pulled apart. I have never seen Tut's body ever so I wouldn't know. I don't think I've seen it anyway. Since he's not ALL THERE, he needs to stay where he is. Like the guy said, There's no telling if he'll be in any incident and we lose the most famous mummy.

I have my idea about that....I also think that somebody is finally trying to destroy the figure and the authority of Zahi Hawass, I wish to know what you think about the figure of Hawass. Everybody is calling him "the pharaoh" due to his way of acting and treating archaeologyst of all over the world.....
In this interview to Doct. Saleh, he says that Hawass didn't question the best experts about the different chances they might have to move the mummy because the y have to satisfy different needs, like those of TV rights to sell to National Geografic or others....in order to make money on it...this is the point, I guess!

Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying.

Maatkara, I think that Hawass is certainly exhiibiting an inflated ego. He has been made chief of the SCA, and it seems that his primary objective is to get back all Egyptian artifacts from the various museums--a goal that is unrealitic at best. He has been said that he is one of the out-standing authorities on Egypt, and I'm afraid that the praise has had a very poor effect on him. He seems to think that now his every word is the absolute, ultimate truth and that any further discussion is un-necessary, he has made his "pronouncment".
That said it must be stated that he IS a very dedicted man. His enthusiam for hia country and his work is quite obvious when you see him speak. I know him personally, and I can honestly saw that he is a very honest, extremely funny and personally charming man. His manner at times seems unnecessarily brisk, but that is just the way he is--he means no disrespect of others with his briskness, but hasn't the time or the patience for things that he considers to be obvious.
All in all, the world of Egyptology is fortunate to have him.

I really do not like Hawass. I find him to be so arrogant and frankly at times unproffesional as he lets his own pride and ego get in the way of his work. Anyone trying to rip him to pieces has my full backing.

I don't have a problem with him. He IS right about Egyptian artifacts, they need to be taken back home. Nefertiti's bust is NOT the Berlin Museum's property.

Political power ranger he is no doubt.
Ya know full of himself ... like a bag of chips and all that!
Not discing what he does, just wish there was less political intrigue to him.

Maatkara, you've described him very well. He's a first-rate Egyptologist, and a very knowledgable man. But he is very concerned--at times, too much so--with his public image. He seems to go out of his way to get mentioned by the press in some way, and it doesn't seem to matter to him if it's good or bad press--as long as he's mentioned!

Bel, it's not right to say "bag of chips" as an example since they aren't even half a bag anymore.

I don't understand this "concerned with public image" thing.

My uncle floor-managed both the American and British programmes in which Zahi opened the tombs at the Bahariya and has thus worked in close proximity to him. He described him as 'an instantly dislikeable figure', who was bent on self-publicisation and seemed to care little for the artifacts themselves. My uncle was appaled to see the unprofessional manner with which Zahi conducted himself, and yes, the tombs really were opened in twenty minutes flat. Despite pleas from nearby British archaologists working nearby, Zahi insisted on breaking into the tomb as quickly as possible in order to have something to show the TV audience and the press. I really do not like him at all. His methods are dated, and despite his 'enthusiasm' for Egypt, he is being dwarfed by the more accurate (if less impressive) methods of new Egyptian Egyptologists. I would argue that he is doing more harm than good at the moment.

In response to the issue of returning treasures to Egypt, I know this is harsh, but Egypt cannot handle any more artifacts. It saddens me to think of the crowded Cairo museum, with its dated facilities and limited funds, in which many objects are just left in glass cases to decay. The British Museum, the Berlin Museums and the other major Egyptian Museums around the globe are doing Egypt a favour by preserving her treasures, and until Egypt can cope it would be a crime to return the artifacts. Besides- they were alll obtained legitimately. . .

I afree with your criticizm of Hawass, Psusennes. Everything you say about his is, alas, true.
But you really can't belittle his enthusiasm. He really DOES love ancient Egypt, even though his methods are a bit underhanded. I'm sure the new school of Egyptologist are much better at methodology than he. His main goal is to promote Hawass to the press, and he takes advantage of every opportunity to do so.
But I'm really drawn up short by your comment that all the pieces of Egyptian art in museums was obtain legally. Three immediately come to mind, and I'm sure there are plenty others. The head of Nefertiti, know and recognized around the world, was taken out of Egypt and sent to Berlin by a German excavation team after it had been covered with clay, and said--by their experts--to be worthless. The Rosetta Stone, originally found by the French, taken to the British Museum as a spoils of war. The mummy-bands from the mummy found in KV55, "disappearing" and being found years later in Austria.
True, the Cairo museum is overcrowded with objects--that's why the SCA wants to build a new museum, with 4 x as much space, at Giza. Construction is to begin next year, with a completion date of 2008. It will be a state-of-the-art facility, and will FINALLY have enough room to show the objects currently stored in the basement of the Cairo Museum.

I disagree completely- the French invaded Egypt. France conquered Egypt, and attempted to export many Egyptian artifacts back to France for study. When we (the British) repelled the French Armada and forced the Napoleon to surrender, we plundered the ships carrying treasure and returned them to Montague House- what was to later become the British museum. This was in 1799- we had conquered a third of the globe, and preserved (perhaps inadvertently) the cultures of many civillisations that since then have all but dissapeared. Whilst our actions also diluted cultures in places such as India, where British actions are regretteable, our overall actions I feel have improved the global community. What if we had left the Rosetta stone in an Egyptian port? What about the people who cannot afford to go to Egypt nowerdays- but still want to see a Museum that has artifacts from around the globe? I'm sure you'd be hugely dissapointed if your museum only had relics from the local area, and nothing else. I admit that thinga being taken from tombs secretly is a no-go, but in the case of, say, Howard Carter, he was expecting no reward for a discovery that had resulted in bankruptcy for his company and the loss of his house. Whilst some objects could be said to have been stolen, the vast majority are, at least at the present, being protected from the Egyptians.