Originally Posted by Violet Indy
I never know what to think about this guy. Personally, a lot of the stuff he seems to do, is really all for personal glory.
It is quite debateable as to whether he has found anything huge a find and worthy of the text books. I think he knows that too.
Since archaeology is not known to be a profession people get rich from or people donate huge sums of money too (by that I mean enough to frequently have Research Excavations rather than salvage or CRM digs), there are people like Hawass (and others) who need the media to create funding and public awareness about archaeology. Funding being the most important, because with the proper funding archaeologists can better educate the public without the help of certain poorly written Discovery docs. Personal glory? Well, I am sure he didn't get into archaeology for the attention!
As far as finding huge finds... Come on! Most archaeologists do not find what the media would consider a huge find. What I did find interesting that he helped discover was the tomb of the pyramid builders with inscriptions proving that the workers were conscribed and no Cecile B. DeMille like slave teams. The bodies uncovered were given medical treatment, etc. as well. I think that that is a huge find, but is it golden and shiny? Can it be toured in a museum? No. Still, it is text book worthy.
But what I do not like about Hawass is his stance on egyptian artifacts in other countries. I have expressed this before on previous discussions, but the general stance I have is that it should not be about nationalism or tourism (nationalism being Hawass's stance: egypt should have everything egyptian back!), but rather about what is best for the artifacts. The Neues Museum housing the Nefertiti in Berlin has a special chamber housing ONLY the bust with guards at each entrance and in the chamber with their main function making sure tourists do not use cameras (it used to be only NO FLASH for preservation reasons, but too many people broke this rule and now it is simply no photos at the moment; a good example of putting the artifacts first).
So, in conclusion, I think he is a good egyptologist and doing what every leader or proponent of archaeology would like to do. If he likes it while helping archaeology, who cares? I would rather watch someone on TV who wants to be on TV than someone who doesn't care. And not every archaeologist will make it to the text books, but that does not mean their discoveries are any less significant. Perhaps reading a scholarly journal instead of a general or layman's text book and one can easily see how many archaeologists have been published and contributed towards history. I disagree with his stance on artifacts, but I do like his stance on the proponents of a link between the pyramids and Atlantis: Those people are 'Pyram-idiots!'; reflecting his discovery of the Pyramid builders that greatly discredits Atlantis and Aliens.
is this a zombie Indy?