Egypt Threatens Removal of Ancient Central Park Obelisk

livescience ^ | 06 January 2011 | Andrea Leontiou

[JoeProBono]

Since 1881, the obelisk known as Cleopatra's Needle has stood in New York's Central Park, but a letter from the secretary general of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities indicates that this may change if the monument is not taken better care of.

Recently, Zahi Hawass, the aforementioned secretary general and archaeologist, wrote to the Central Park Conservancy and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg to inform them that if steps are not taken to protect the obelisk, it would be removed.

"I am glad that this monument has become such an integral part of New York City, but I am dismayed at the lack of care and attention that it has been given," Hawass wrote. "Recent photographs that I have received show the severe damage that has been done to the obelisk, particularly to the hieroglyphic text, which in places has been completely worn away.

I have a duty to protect all Egyptian monuments whether they are inside or outside of Egypt. If the Central Park Conservancy and the City of New York cannot properly care for this obelisk, I will take the necessary steps to bring this precious artifact home and save it from ruin."

[eleni121]

Well the Italians had the good grace to return the Obelisk of Axum to Ethiopia a few years back...Bloomie should do the same but I doubt that he has any grace. HE won’t even push to rebuild Saint Nicholas Church destroyed on 9-11.

Send it back.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelisk_of_Axum#The_controversial_return

[eleni121]

IN a sense you are right. The obelisk is considered blasphemous by Muslims—but Hawass is claiming his patrimony and he has the superior argument. The muslim Emir who gave it away deserves the blame, and the stupid immoral Americans who wanted it do too. Return it.

I won’t be suprised if at some point in the future Muslims desecrate it if it goes back.

[JerseyHighlander]

Hawass is a lunatic, however he did not send this letter without a lobbying effort by NYC metro area based archaeologists and historians and egyptoligists lobbying him to do so.

The obelisk is in pretty bad shape, and the pigeons are destroying it. The particulate pollution in NYC is intense... it eats all stonework...

[airborne]

Take the U.N. with you!

[JoeProBono]

[SunkenCiv]

Blasphemy against the Prophet?!? Jihad! Jihad! Jihad!

[americanophile]

I'm sure it would be much better protected at the bottom of Lake Nasser, like the scores of known ancient Nubian sites that were flooded by the construction of the Aswan Dam. God only knows what was lost. Or perhaps better off in the Cairo Museum, which is, without question, the most poorly kept museum I have ever been in...and I've been in many. Half the cases are cracked and taped together, without any kind of humidity control, etc., you have items that are 1000s of years old that are readily handled by people, and could be plucked off the walls with the greatest of ease. They even have broken windows, and pigeons flying through the building defecating where they like. The museum is utterly appauling, especially given the treasures inside - many of which can't be seen because of the ruefully inadequate light. You literally need a flashlight. Moreover, the miserable urban hole that is Cairo must be seen to be believed, with mounds of trash and dead animals - including horses - laying in the streets and dumped in canals. The endless expanse of half-finshed shanties now extends immediately next to the Sphinx and pyramids, making the classical scene of the pyramids from the lush Nile marshes only a memory. Of course they are so obscured by smog that they can hardly be appreciated anyway. Cairo is an unimaginable dump and in my opinion, every nation on the earth that has a piece of Egyptian art has absolute moral authority to keep and conserve it given with the Arab Egyptians have done to what remains. An absolute disgrace.

[flaglady47]

The muslim Emir who gave it away deserves the blame, and the stupid immoral Americans who wanted it do too. Return it.

I’m totally against the attitude that one must return antiquities to the country they originally came from. That’s nutz. Everyone would be exchanging everything with everybody. Ridiculous. We’ve got it, we keep it. But that means we take care of it too. Fix it up; it’s a priceless piece of history.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

The Metropolitan Museum built an addition in the early 1980’s to house artifacts on indefinite loan from the Government of Egypt. This was around the time that the King Tut artifacts were touring the U.S. to packed houses and long lines. He could legimately threatened to recall those.

The Brooklyn Museum long had the country’s best Egyptology collection, built up one item at a time over a century, but they were instantly eclipsed by that loan. In a sense this would restore the Brooklyn Museum prestige, but it would be a loss for New Yorkers and the rest of America.

[eleni121]

I respectfully disagree. Many works of art and artifacts residing in museums all over the world are there because they have been stolen or obtained in highly immoral ways.

One example that comes to mind is the collection of art obtained by Mellon who got it at a cut rate from Stalin. Then when Mellon had tax problems he “donated” it to start the Natl Gallery. As horrible as this is, there are far worse examples of crooked art dealings.

These objects - many of which are an intrinsic part of the history of the place where they were created - belong in the places where they were created as much as is possible.

[DakotaGator]

Very interesting. Am constantly amazed by what Freepers know.

Thanks for the info!

[JEC]

My suggestion would be to cut it in two and shove one piece up hawass’s butt and the other in gloomberg’s butt because we know that gloomberg is already making arrangements to send it back.

[Liberty Valance]

Interesting. Thanks for posting.

[dsc]

“stupid immoral Americans”

Bite me.

[dsc]

“One example that comes to mind is the collection of art obtained by Mellon who got it at a cut rate from Stalin. Then when Mellon had tax problems he “donated” it to start the Natl Gallery. As horrible as this is”

Mellon rescued those works from behind the Iron Curtain, where they could have been destroyed or lost forever, and now they reside safely in one of the world’s premier facilities for the whole world to enjoy. Horrible? Take a hike.

[eleni121]

You need to learn how to differentiate Nimmrod.

[eleni121]

Mellon did not rescue any works of art. If he were rescuing them he would have stipulated that they be returned to the place he got them upon the end of the Soviet Union. He did not. Instead he paid little to a tyrannical brute and used them to open a museum thus rescuing his fortune from taxation. Fact is that those items belong to the Russian people NOT the Natl Gallery.

You need to find out thpse facts before you spout off trivial BS.

[gleeaikin]

I certainly hope this motivates the city/museum to right by the monument. I also wonder what the condition of its mate in Great Britain is like.

[dsc]

“Mellon did not rescue any works of art.”

Road apples.

“If he were rescuing them he would have stipulated that they be returned to the place he got them upon the end of the Soviet Union.”

Road apples.

“Instead he paid little to a tyrannical brute and used them to open a museum”

He got them out of the hands of a tyrannical brute and donated them to one of the world’s premier museums, where they are properly cared for.

“thus rescuing his fortune from taxation.”

To quote Wilde, “Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.”

“Fact is that those items belong to the Russian people NOT the Natl Gallery.”

Road apples.

“You need to find out thpse facts before you spout off trivial BS.”

Facts? Bilgewater. You have a strong and risibly erroneous opinion on this subject. That doesn’t fall in the category of “facts.”

[dsc]

“You need to learn how to differentiate Nimmrod.”

I don’t know how one would go about “differentiating Nimmrod,” or even what Nimmrod might be.

I have heard of a man called Nimrod, who was a mighty hunter.

I doubt that he would share your ridiculous opinion on the ownership of works of art, though.