Revolt Against Zahi Hawass ...

Revolt in Egypt Dims Star Power of Zahi Hawass - NYTimes.com:

"Until recently Zahi Hawass, Egypt’s antiquities minister, was a global symbol of Egyptian national pride. A famous archaeologist in an Indiana Jones hat, he was virtually unassailable in the old Egypt, protected by his success in boosting tourism, his efforts to reclaim lost artifacts and his closeness to the country’s first lady, Suzanne Mubarak. ..."

Hawass maybe have done good things for archaeology in Egypt, but he is a bully. He recently told an American journalist he had thick files of dirt on archaeologists that had criticised him ... so when he's resorting to those sorts of lies (see also his claims not to have supported Mubarak after going on the BBC to do so), it no longer become a matter of opinion if he's right or wrong, and I for one hope he's made to resign and the charges against him are properly investigated so that he can either be condemned or found innocent once and for all. Since National Geographic, who pay him highly to be their Explorer in Residence, is owned by News International, currently embroiled in a phone hacking and bribing police scandal, I assume they don't object to his methods.


  1. It is indeed time for hawass to account for his deeds and be replaced. His claims and hot air have to long over shadowed Egypt's great legacy.

  2. Hi Dorothy,
    Thanks for your post. One correction: News International is part of News Corp, which is the majority owner of the National Geographic Channel. The National Geographic Society actually has two parts — a for-profit side (inc the Channel) and a not-for-profit side (inc National Geographic Magazine).

    That said, I share your general distaste re Zahi's methods — and the support he receives from National Geographic. In case you're interested, please see: http://societymatters.org/?s=zahi+hawass

  3. Thank you for the clarification - you're right, it's more complex and I was simplifying too much


I do not moderate comments, but I remove spam, overt self-promotion ("read [link] my much better post on this") and what I consider hate speech (racism, homophobia etc).

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.