Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΜύ permalink

How fake is the bust of Nefertiti

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 12 of 12
  • Message 1.Μύ

    Posted by fredkinstein (U14154862) on Wednesday, 30th September 2009

    The bust of Nefertiti that now resides in pride of place in the Berlin Museum.
    It is thought by some to be a total fake.
    It was supposedly lifted directly from the sand.
    Could plaster and pigmentation possibly survive 3000 yrs subjected to the elements?
    It has always looked phoney to me.
    The cut through shoulders and Art Nouveau style.
    dead givaway.
    The Bolton museum some time ago purchased a sculpture for 100s of thousands which was knocked out by a guy in his back bedroom. {The armani Princess I think it was called} Red faces there then.
    So my question is this... How genuine is this fantastic piece of art?

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by geordiejarrovian (U14132427) on Thursday, 1st October 2009

    Fredkinstein,

    As far as I'm concerned it appears to be genuine. It's amazing what conservancy the dessicating properties of sand has. There are many plaster artifacts preserved, in full colour, in museums worldwide. Many parts of the Egyptian temple complexes still retain to this day their original colours (some vividly) after years being buried in sand. The Valley of the Kings tombs are remarkable too. The wall paintings on plaster are as if new. Much of this is New Kingdom, but many artifacts and wall paintings from Old Kingdom still exist. I've seen some in the mastaba tombs at Suqquara. I must admit until you've actually seen the remaining colour it's hard to credit its survival.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by TwinProbe (U4077936) on Thursday, 1st October 2009

    Hi fredkinstein,

    Recently the controversy over Berlin's Nefertiti bust has been whether it should be loaned, or given, back to Egypt. The issue of whether it is genuine or not has rather been placed on the back burner. In theory it was discovered by an excavator, not offered for sale by a dealer, which suggests that it is indeed genuine. Examination of the excavation diaries would be helpful here. I gather that the piece is painted plaster formed on a limestone core. I believe (but I'm no expert on Egyptian art) that the colouration has been looked at and doesn't contain any modern pigments. I think that in the very unusual conditions in Egypt inorganic pigments could have survived 3000 years, but there is always the possibility that the bust is intrinsically genuine but has been 'improved' after excavation in an attempt at conservation.

    The Amarna Princess is certainly believed to have been produced by a notorious Bolton faking family. But be sympathetic to the good burghers of Bolton Council; the same family faked the Roman silver 'Risley Park Lanx' which was on display in the British Museum for years, and was pictured in half a dozen textbooks.

    I'm quite certain that a substantial fraction of the works on display in museums is indeed fraudulent. Material acquired from dealers (as opposed to being excavated in context) is always inherently suspect. Things that are too good to be true, usually are. I can only think of two excavated artefacts that are probably fakes. One is the 'Shepton Mallet amulet' of presumed pre-Christian silver, the other is the apparently Palaeolithic figurine found in Grime's Graves Neolithic flint mines. The motives of the fakers is puzzling; clearly not profit in these cases but possibly malicious attempts to outwit the excavation teams.

    TP

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Thursday, 1st October 2009

    There was a TV documentary on som etime ago about som ewoman who was investigating a mummy which she believed to be that of a female pharaoh. They did a computer modelled facial reconstruction of the mummy and th eresult looked remarkably like the Nefertiti bust. Now, yuo must be careful of taking TV evidence too strongly and I have always been dubious about the accuracy of facial reconstructions, but it was interesting none the less.

    I have seen the Berlin bust and, fake or not, it is certainly a striking piece of artwork.

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Mike Alexander (U1706714) on Friday, 2nd October 2009

    The "Art Noveau" style - hmmm, I thought the style was supposed to be typical of the radical shift in art during Akhenaten's reign? All members of the royal family were depicted in a stylised manner, with elongated limbs and necks.

    I would have thought it would be fairly simple to use something like carbon-dating on the pigments. Of course, it wouldn't eliminate a *good* fake, but it would rule out a *bad* one.

    Carbon-dating was used a few years back to prove that the supposed 'lance of Longinus' that so obsessed Hitler was actually made far too late - round about the 7th century.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by fredkinstein (U14154862) on Friday, 2nd October 2009

    Striking. Ill give you that. Genuine I think not.
    I have been delving a little into the background of the guy who discovered it. "Ludwic Bouchard"
    I gather He had been cought out previously trying to sell fakes.
    Maybe he thought he had gone a little over the top with this one. thats why it wasnt presented for inspection for years after its supposed discovery.
    he was excavating an atrists workshop. and admitted finding philes of paint that he had reconstituated. Hence the paint being 3000yrs old. I think it was made to look like what a wealthy German would want an Egyptian Queen to look like.
    Any links to any other images of Nefertiti would be welcome.
    Theres so many inconsistencies, for instance

    French archaeologists present at the site never mentioned the finding and neither did written accounts of the digs.
    The earliest detailed scientific report appeared in 1923, 11 years after the discovery.

    The archaeologist "didn't even bother to supply a description, which is amazing for an exceptional work found intact".

    "He left the piece for 10 years in his sponsor's sitting-room. It's as if he'd left Tutankhamen's mask in his own sitting-room."


    Seeing as how it is one of Berlin's prime attractions it will move into its own hall at the newly renovated Neues Museum
    They will not be in a hurry to delve too deap into its authenticity

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Friday, 2nd October 2009


    I would have thought it would be fairly simple to use something like carbon-dating on the pigments.
    Μύ


    Being mineral, unfortunately not. A sample of beeswax from the eye of the bust however was carbon dated to around 3,000 years ago, but the test was conducted in a rather casual manner (the wax had been removed from the statue many years previously and stored in a sample bag in someone's drawer prior to testing), so the conspiracy theorists dismiss it.

    Contrary to the notion that the Neues Museum is trying to stop investigation, they have allowed the statue to be examined by the Rathgen Research Laboratory, which is used by many German museums to forensically verify artefacts and date them. They have concluded that the gypsum mix has exactly the constituency associated with Tel el-Armana finds (of which Nefertiti is arguably the most famous) and that Borchardt could not have known this. The "Armana-mix" was identified afterwards. More conclusive evidence for its genuineness would be further carbon dating of beeswax residue from the empty eye socket on the statue, though this is causing contention between the museum and the laboratory as the former say it cannot be extracted without damaging the artefact.

    In the meantime the museum is enthusiastically enagaging in the "debate", presumably on the basis that no publicity is bad publicity, and a cynic might therefore be forgiven for noting that Stierlen's recent book challenging the bust's authenticity could ironically serve to delay concerted efforts to settle the matter rather than contribute to their resolution.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Friday, 2nd October 2009

    The painting was often a bad habit of early archaiologists who were too curious to see how art looked like so they tried to apply painting over the originally painted surfaces usually on the basis of painting traces - but not rarely out of guess. The best exemple is the work of Evans in Crete... he really "re-invented" the Cretan art.

    It is true that the statue of Nefertite is not typical of traditional "rigid" Egyptian art, but it is in line with the naturalistic art that flourished under Pharao Akenaton - himself was depicted even with his slight genetic deformity (he was a supported of "truth" and "reality" so he let artists depict him as he was).

    However, whether this artifact is really genuine is another question - yes we have to ask this for this and for quite a lot of artifacts, at the end of the day "you never know", archaiology has a long tradition of false artifacts many of which were not identified early on and found their ways to museums.

    There is a also a 3rd option, this being a copy of the ancient bust. Who knows? IF true, the details you give about its finding are indeed suspicious. Museums have the obligation to check well before accepting anything and for the old ones they have to repeat controls cos you never know anyway... (people can even replace original ones with a perfect copy so as to sell the original etc....).

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Friday, 2nd October 2009


    at the end of the day "you never know"
    Μύ


    Rubbish. After a carbon dating test of any available beeswax residue we'd know.

    Not that scientific evidence should ever get in the way of a good conspiracy theory of course ...

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by fredkinstein (U14154862) on Friday, 2nd October 2009

    Its just so pristine. I have never seen an artifact lifted from the sand
    {as opposed to being taken from an intact tomb as in Tutankamens}as perfect as this.
    Ok Akhenatons brief reign was radical.
    The sculpures of this period do not conform to the usual rigid style.
    I have seen some in Luxor and Cairo museums. They do look lifelike, still styalised but realistic I grant you.
    They are still very archaic looking though.
    Nothing that could pass for Art Nouveau.
    Nefertiti looks positively 20th century.
    Has there ever been another bust from Ancient Egypt {Including Greek or Roman periods}that was cut through the shoulders vertically?
    I dont know of any.
    And Bouchard being an amateur archeologist would have realised the significance of this unique find. Why did he keep it a secret?

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by WarsawPact (U1831709) on Monday, 26th October 2009

    "How fake is the bust of Nefertiti"

    Another occassion when a thread fails to live up to the promise of it's title.

    The search for the first recorded use of silicone implants continues...

    smiley - smiley

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by Mike Alexander (U1706714) on Tuesday, 27th October 2009

    Ah yes - her name has an interesting etymology. As many an Egyptian commented at the time: "Those are fake - they are nefer titis!" smiley - winkeye

    Report message12

Back to top

About this Board

The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.

or Μύto take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

The message board is closed for posting.

This messageboard is .

Find out more about this board's

Search this Board

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation

Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.