political relationship with former EgyptianPresident Hosni Mubarak.xxxix Despite theundercurrent of jealousy within thecommunity and questionable conduct of Dr.Zahi Hawass, it is difficult to deny theamount of attention Hawass has brought tothe issue of repatriating the Bust of Nefertitias well as other stolen artifacts fromantiquity. As the protagonist of the “fight” tobring Nefertiti back to Egypt, Hawass asleader of the Supreme Council of Antiquitiesheld an International Conference to reopenthe dialogue about these stolen artifacts.xlHowever, what was seen at this conferencewas a body of people frustrated with whatseems to be a one-sided dialogue ofcommunication.But what has sparked this new stringof Egyptian demands from the earlieraccounts? It is no longer constant and albeitdesperate pleas for the artifact. Now, Egypthas what it claims to be undeniable evidencethreatening the lawfulness of the bust’sremoval to Germany. And the base of theirargument begins with the intent ofBorchardt. Law scholar Kurt Siehr explainsthis theory in greater detail:“It seems to be very likely thatBorchardt, eager to preserve the bustof Nefertiti for Germany, either didnot reveal the find to the Egyptianantiquities authority . . . at all ordiligently hid the bust underneathsome unimportant antiquities orGustave Lefebvre as an epigraphistand papyrologist did not recognizethe importance of the bust ofNefertiti.”xliThe Egyptian Supreme Council ofAntiquities hired a panel of lawyers to delveinto the events of December 4, 1912 andanalyze the movement of the bust. Manytheories have run rampant in the media thathave aided Egypt’s argument. Egyptvehemently argues that Borchardt obscuredthe quality of the object by leaving it thickwith grime. Allegedly Borchardt initiallydescribed the bust as an image of a princess,which was nothing of extraordinarymeasures.xlii Lawyers for the EgyptianSupreme Council of Antiquities used thisstatement from Borchardt’s personal diaryas a basis for forming his intent: “…[y]oucannot describe it with words. You must seeit.”xliii Dr. Zahi Hawass argues thatBorchardt knew the identity of Nefertitifrom the moment she was unearthed.xliv Thisbelief is merited by the claim that Borchardtlisted her as a simple Egyptian princesscombined with Lefebvre’s lack ofknowledge on the subject; it then enabledBorchardt to change the bust’s identity.Cultural heritage Law scholar Stephen Uriceclarifies this claim with a translation fromBorchardt ten years after the bust’sdiscovery:It took a considerable amount of timeuntil the whole piece was completelyfreed from all the dirt and rubble.This was due to the fact that aportrait head of the king, which layclose to the [Nefertiti] bust, had to berecovered first. After that, weconcentrated on the bust, and weheld the most lively … piece ofEgyptian art in our hands. It wasalmost complete. Parts of the earswere missing, and there was no inlayin the left eye.xlvIt is interesting to note that Borchardtand his team shifted greater concentration onexcavating Nefertiti’s bust with more senseof eager than the work depicting Akhenaten.He speaks as if the Akhenaten portrait waswhat stood between him and “the mostlively…piece of Egyptian art…”xlvi Thisaffirmation from Borchardt does validate the7Bearden: Repatriating the Bust of NefertitiPublished by DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University, 2012