SCA led by Dr. Hawassem has complete control over most archeological excavations and research in Egypt and when and how they will be reported. This is evident in the case of Gantenbrink, which he violated rules and also in the case of Dr. Abbas, to whom the official newspaper Giza report blocked for a long time publishing any articles. My sources have confirmed to me that they have to wait a long time before their articles come out and whether they are at all. This is definitely not a serious scientific approach. It acts as a targeted control and censorship. Someone might note that there is an interest in hiding some unpopular information.

Let's seriously ask why SCA does it give such severe sanctions for someone publishing the results of their work without their consent? The punishment usually consists in preventing the person from entering Egyptian archeological sites. In some cases, he is denied entry into Egypt itself.

No one can claim that Egypt itself has the opportunity to decide when, where and to what extent to dig with a clear connection SCA a ARCE. However, if permission has already been granted, interested scientists and organizers should have the right to decide when and where to publish the results of their work in place to be bound by a SCA decision that controls the results very strictly (without censoring?) Without any external controls.

One of the sources went so far as to say that Hawasse's approach was primarily based on misinformation: because Hawass bends very carefully the results of scientific work that do not fit into the standard view of ancient Egyptian history; and that when he exercises exclusive control and is himself a media personality (he himself gives himself a press statement), he can simply keep the status quo of Egyptian history quite simply. This Hawass's imprint we can clearly see in his 2009 report on the groundwater below the Sphinx. The key question still remains: Why? Why is it hapenning?

The answer was actually given: Hawass seeks to maintain a consensus about the established understanding of ancient Egyptian history. That's why he often protests against people like Graham Hancock, Robert Bauval, or John Anthony West. Hawass is aware that they are one of the most noisy and dangerous parties that may go against it. But they are not alone in feeling his anger. Hawass denies any findings that do not fit his agenda. He slanders anyone who comes up boldly with a different idea of ​​history - all the more so because he presents the matter not in an official way through his SCA.

In 2008, Professor Barry Kemp presented his research on the ancient Egyptian city of Amarna, which was built by a rebel pharaoh. Achnaton. He was clearly despised by Pharaoh, and after his death the ancient Egyptians tried to remove any mention of his existence. It was reported that Professor Kemp and his team had found skeletal remains near the town Achetaton, on the basis of which he concluded that they show indications of malnutrition, extreme work and a low age of mortality ... According to his ideas, this evidence confirms that Achnaton created a brutal regime that some were proud of.

Professor Kemp's discoveries were immediately criticized by Dr. Hawasse. He used it Egyptian state intelligence service to accuse researchers of history distortion. He declared their findings se they do not establish any acceptable scientific evidence and added that city Achetaton it was an obsession of the ancient Egyptians, like the pyramids of Giza, and the workers wanted to implement a national project at all costs that they could be proud of. Hawass was later accused of having indulges in empty chauvinism.

Hawass is also proud to have he worked for reinforcement Of the Egyptian Antiques Act and that in 2002 it drafted a new law banning excavations in Upper Egypt… to promote documentation and conservation rather than excavation. In fact, Hawass is proud to have stopped all the excavation work in Upper Egypt. One would still wonder why !? No one will doubt that documentation and archiving is important, but exclude anything else by law, instead of just an internal directive?

Finally, let's say that when he was with Dr. Hawassem interviewed about the discoveries made by geologist Robert Schoch, who came up with the theory that the Sphinx and is much older than the pyramids, Hawass replied: If geologists prove what Schoch says, it is still, in my view as an egyptologist, that the date of the Sphinx is clear to us. In short, regardless of the evidence, Hawass claims that everything is clear. From this it can be concluded that for Hawass, Egyptology is a religion, not a science. Many people would agree with this statement that this is the case Egyptology under Hawass, and that they would love to change it.

... next week ...

• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (4.): Robots and Servants
• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (3.): Scandal in SCA
• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (2.): Sphinx Fingers in the Dry
• Dr. Zahi Hawass: Intrigue in the Background of Egyptology (1.)