Dimitra Seres
17231 Barneston Court
Granada Hills, CA 91344

Mr. Dennis Forbes- Editor
KMT, A Modern Journal of Ancient Egypt
1553 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94115

Dear Mr. Forbes:

Journalistic hypocrisy seems to run rampant these days; and you sir are a great contributor. Before I illustrate your own words of contradiction I would like to point out the many flaws in your recent "Book report" in KMT Spring 1996, issue on The Scandal of the Century- The Mansoor Amarna Exposé by Christine Mansoor. Your review merely reports a slew of misconceptions about the Mansoor Collection regardless of the true hard facts.

The review provides no indication that the " facts " reported by your reviewers ( Greg Reeder and James Fierro ), are nothing but rumor.

Assuming these two gentlemen read "The Scandal..." let's analyze their article and discuss some of the facts they overlooked..

PARAGRAPH ONE:

1) " Generally failed to persuade the world of Egyptology..." Not true. Of the 106 pieces purchased by the late Mr. M.A. Mansoor, his family owns or controls 32 pieces. The remaining 74 sculptures are owned by The Louvre ( 1 ), The Vatican Museum ( 2 ), The Denver Art Museum ( 2 ), San Francisco State University ( 3 ), and more than 60 pieces are owned by private collectors in Europe, the U.S., and Egypt ( including the late King Farouk ( 12 pieces ). So when they say "generally failed to persuade" they are misleading the reader. Since the majority of the Collection is owned by others, most of whom paid good money, one must believe that these buyers knew something about Ancient Egyptian Art.

2) "Fewer that half a dozen in the field...". Absolutely not true. Strike Two ! I myself interviewed four notable Egyptologists on the subject in 1986; Dr. Christiane Desroches Noblecourt, Professor ( father ) Pierre du Bourguet, Dr. ( Msgr.) Gianfranco Nolli and Dr. Andreina Becker-Colonna, who were a small fraction of a list of Egyptologists who studied the Mansoor Amarna sculptures and issued a written report. Why don't you ask the Mansoor Amarna Corp. to mail you a list ?

3. " Egyptologists in Europe and the US...". Another strike! Only one European Egyptologist, Hans Wolfgang Muller of Munich, wrote a negative report. No other Egyptologist ever wrote a negative report. I see your Advisory Board boasts the name of Dietrich Wildung, but I'm sure an unbiased Magazine such as KMT would not be pressured by ego rather than facts.

4) "Egyptologists...have dismissed these sculptures as blatant ( even ugly ) forgeries..." Another strike...you're out ! Name the Egyptologists ! I dare you. Are they the same " phantoms " who spread rumors and talked to Sylvia Hochfield of ARTnews for her article in 1978, and who so far remain nameless ? Where is the ethics of your writer if they cannot back their statements with verifiable facts ? Did they read Dr. Colonna's aesthetic description of the Mansoor sculptures ? I had the pleasure of first meeting Dr. Colonna in 1985 and I'm sure she'd be insulted at this very ugly attempt to discredit such a collection with misinformation. Did they read Prof. Sergio Pernigotti's article in ARCHEO, April 1994 issue ? The English translation is in "The Scandal .." page 282. You Mr. Forbes wrote in KMT, Winter 1991-1992 Second Anniversary issue, page 34, "... I found the individual pieces, subject matter aside, to be highly attractive examples of stone carving in the round and relief, with especially appealing 'patina', and apparent ' weathering '". I also do not see Mr. Wildung on your " Advisory Board " in that issue. Could there be a connection ?

PARAGRAPH TWO:

1) "...somewhat biased, detailed documented history..." All the pertinent facts were published several times, in books, publications, correspondence and even videotape that I myself documented over the years. So how can factual, technical ( objective ) details and documents be called "biased" and "marked paranoia" ?

1) ...to defend their own father's reputation as a thoroughly honest man of high reputation ( who would not have dealt in fakes) ". The late Mr. Mansoor's integrity was never in question and that is insulting and petty on your part.

3) "... to validate the opinions of several non-Egyptologists specialists ( geologists, chemists, etc...)". Scholars rely on scientists to validate their opinions, not the other way around. In one of her most recent books " La Grande Nubiade ", Dr. Christiane Desroches Noblecourt, one of the greatest scholars of Egyptology, describes how an art object enters The Louvre ( translation ) :" it is necessary to have it first analyzed at the laboratory of The National Museums, to collect the maximum ' material ' proofs of its authenticity". So why do the great museums of the world keep at great cost their research laboratories, if not to validate the opinion of the scholars ? The Chinese have a saying, " ELIMINATE IGNORANCE, RESPECT SCIENCE ". Follow their advice.

4) " ...however much they do not fit into the rather large corpus of accepted Amarna art. " Whose opinion in that ? Theirs, or is it hearsay ? This is quite a subjective statement.

Mr. Forbes, journalistic integrity requires a reviewer to make some efforts to verify his facts before publication or seriously consider a retraction thereafter. Don't embarrass our field by ignoring simple ethics.

IT IS AMAZING THAT THE SAME STRONG PASSION WHICH COMPELS MEN TO CREATE GREAT WORKS OF ART, MAKES OTHERS WANT TO DESTROY THEM.

With my regrets.

Dimitra Seres (signed)