Tags: anthology of texts on Egypt written by French explorers, travellers and archaeologists; Ernest Rehan on the survival of Egyptian architectural constructions (or why urban development is the scourge of archaeologists); alliterations; Salagassos; the Great Pyramid; machine translation

Renan on why some ancient Egyptian monuments have survived, or his take on stone cannibalisation, the destructive process of industrialisation and monument preservation in ancient Egypt (1865)

I cannot really recall what spurred me to borrow L’Égypte : écrivains voyageurs et savants archéologues, an anthology of texts penned mostly in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries by French explorers, travellers and archaeologists (this collection was gathered/edited by Mrs Anne Jouffroy and Hélène Renard and published by Flammarion in 2014). I suppose that it must have had to do with my interest in finding anecdotal evidence for contrarian interpretations as to why the French under Napoleon Bonaparte started to carve out an empire in Egypt and the Levant – the latter being a region the French government still sees in many ways as France’s backyard. The book is overdue; I had been thinking of returning it on Saturday. As I had not read it (I tend to have ten books on loan at any given time), I thought that I had to peruse it at least a second time (I usually do so for the first time either at the library itself, when walking back home or once I have taken the book(s) out of my back and placed it/them in an armchair in my living-room). This time I started from the end and I stumbled across two excerpts I had not seen the first time I had skimmed through the anthology – simply because I had stopped half way through, thinking that I would have to take a second look at the book, i.e. at a more leisurely pace, when I could afford the time to do so.

The first excerpt that caught my attention is the concluding part of an article initially published in 1865 by the French man of letters, Bible scholar, Levantine archaeologist and political polemicist Ernest Rehan. (https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ernest-Renan). Although I disagree with Rehan’s claim (posited in 1865, to be fair) that great architectural works of the past have disappeared primarily because the main building material of ancient times – stone – would be recycled into subsequent architectural constructions, I still felt compelled to add this interesting text to this website, firstly because of its value as a historical document, secondly on account of its textual beauty.

As an aside, personally, I would think that wars, dereliction, natural erosion and, of course, ‘construction cannibalisation’ (my coinage) all play a part, which will vary depending on a city’s particular historical or geopolitical, geographical or climatological circumstances – the fate of the ancient Roman city of Salagassos which was located in modern day Turkey being a case in point regarding the impact a rise in temperatures has had on some ancient cities that did not make it beyond the transition from late Antiquity into the early Middle Ages.

As the ‘shelf life’ of web pages is rather short, I did not bother to go for a translation that would stand the test of time – to be honest, I divided the French texts into three chunks which I then pasted into the online translation provider Deepl.com, which yielded a translation (in UK English) sufficiently good for me to have to make only very few changes to the text, here and there, for it to be allowed to go on this website. So, yes, machine-based translation seems to have improved quite substantially since such services first became available for free, roughly twenty years ago, as the results are now very close to professional standards – at least for the French-to-English language pair. However, the English reads in some places as a little outdated, which was my intention, because the original text was published in 1865 and it is a little flowery at times. Finally, I tried to have the letters ‘d’ and ‘m’ appear on as many an instance as possible in the first paragraph, so as to underline (through alliteration) two of the main themes of this text: monuments and destruction.

Enjoy.

     What has indeed earned Upper Egypt a privileged situation for the preservation of the monuments of antiquity is the state of death and isolation in which it has been placed since its adjunction into the great Roman, Byzantine, Muslim and Turkish empires. This long green strip, sometimes only a few metres wide, stretching along the Nile, enjoyed, thanks to the protection of the great empires, absolute peace. All life was concentrated in Lower Egypt. Alexandria devoured Sais, the immense constructions of Cairo were fatal to Memphis and Heliopolis; beyond that, all movement disappeared. The crusades, which destroyed so many ancient monuments in Syria, did not penetrate Egypt; no colossal fortresses were built there, which were the tombs of antiquity, and no great cities were built there. This because large ancient materials are only moved and cut up for use. Revolutions, wars, sieges, the action of the climate, to which it is customary to attribute the demolition of monuments, contribute little to this. The climate hardly counts. Combined with the poor quality of the stone, it can dull the inscriptions and destroy the delicacy of the ornaments; but it takes very special circumstances for it to undermine a great construction. War only affects the surface. To break up the blocks of a building, to throw down the stones from the top, is not to destroy it from the point of view of the antiquarian. An architect, by a study of a few hours, has soon repaired the damage caused by the fiercest of conquerors. To destroy a building for archaeological purposes is to remove the materials. But stones several metres long will command respect. Never has a conquering army, in the aftermath of victory, taken pleasure in carting off or cutting up such blocks. The same must be said of revolutions. Revolutions rarely have time to destroy buildings; during these months of fever, there are many other things to do. The destruction that is attributed to the French Revolution in particular took place during the Empire, or even during the Restoration, when industry and public prosperity began to revive.

     Only one cause, in fact, destroys ancient monuments: it is the movement which, after the ruin of a civilisation, develops on the same soil another civilisation, thereby requiring new constructions. The countries where antiquity has been best preserved, for example the Ḥawrān, Peraea, Palmyra, the region of Lambæsis in Algeria, are the countries occupied by tribes who live in tents; in other words, those countries where, since the ruin of ancient civilisation, there has been no building activity. What has caused the disappearance of so many beautiful Romanesque or Gothic churches is the factory that was established in the neighbourhood in the early years of this century. That which at the present time is causing the demolition of so many beautiful ancient ramparts in provincial towns is the municipal council, which wants what is called in modern jargon ‘a boulevard’. As far as Egypt is concerned, the extraordinary activity which has developed there since Mehmet-Ali has destroyed more monuments in a quarter of a century than the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Christians and the Moslems combined. Sugar factories, steam factories, palaces have devoured more than ten temples. An engineer advised the destruction of the great pyramid to Mehmet-Ali! This is sad to say but this gigantic construction, the miracle of human strength in this world, is now being more seriously threatened than it has ever been. Should scholarly Europe cease for a moment to exert its moral authority for the custody of such treasures, and this mass of beautiful cut stones will be exploited as a quarry for the construction of dykes, bridges and dams! The work of Cheops is now facing the greatest dangers it has encountered in six thousand years.

     As for me, I consider it one of my great pleasures to have contemplated this strange world, unattractive if you like, but striking in the highest degree, and to have had as my guide, on this journey among the oldest of the dead, the one [PZ: Auguste Mariette] who has opened the access to their tombs.

The original version, in French:

     Ce qui en effet a valu à la Haute-Égypte une situation privilégiée pour la conservation des monumens de l’antiquité, c’est l’état de mort et d’isolement où elle fut placée depuis son adjonction aux grands empires romain, byzantin, musulman, turc. Cette longue bande verte, parfois de quelques mètres de largeur, s’étendant au bord du Nil, jouit, grâce à la protection des grands empires, d’une paix absolue. Toute la vie se concentra dans la Basse-Égypte. Alexandrie dévora Saïs, les immenses constructions du Caire furent fatales à Memphis, à Héliopolis ; au-delà, tout mouvement disparut. Les croisades, qui firent en Syrie une si grande destruction des monumens anciens, ne pénétrèrent pas en Égypte ; on n’y bâtit pas de ces forteresses colossales qui ont été le tombeau de l’antiquité, il ne s’y éleva pas de grandes villes. Or on ne déplace et on ne débite de grands matériaux antiques que pour s’en servir. Les révolutions, les guerres, les sièges, l’action du climat, auxquels on a coutume d’attribuer la démolition des monumens, y contribuent assez peu. Le climat compte à peine. Combiné avec la mauvaise qualité de la pierre, il peut bien émousser les inscriptions, détruire la délicatesse des ornemens ; mais il faut des circonstances bien particulières pour qu’il mine une grande construction. La guerre n’atteint non plus que la surface. Désunir les blocs d’un édifice, jeter à bas les pierres du sommet, n’est pas le détruire au point de vue de l’antiquaire. Un architecte, par une étude de quelques heures, a bientôt réparé le tort causé par le plus farouche conquérant. Détruire un édifice pour l’archéologie, c’est en faire disparaître les matériaux. Or des pierres de plusieurs mètres de long se font respecter. Jamais il ne s’est trouvé d’armée conquérante qui, au lendemain de la victoire, se soit donné de gaîté de cœur le plaisir de charrier ou de dépecer de tels blocs. Il en faut dire autant des révolutions. Les révolutions ont rarement le temps de détruire les édifices ; on a durant ces mois de fièvre bien autre chose à faire. Les destructions qu’on met sur le compte de la révolution française en particulier ont eu lieu sous l’empire, ou même sous la restauration, quand l’industrie et la prospérité publique commencèrent à renaître.

     Une seule cause, à vrai dire, détruit les monumens anciens : c’est le mouvement qui, après la ruine d’une civilisation, développe sur le même sol une autre civilisation exigeant de nouvelles constructions. Les pays où l’antiquité s’est le mieux conservée, par exemple le Hauran, la Pérée, Palmyre, la région de Lambèse en Algérie, sont les pays occupés par des tribus qui vivent sous la tente, en d’autres termes ceux où, depuis la ruine de la civilisation antique, on n’a point bâti. Ce qui a fait disparaître tant de belles églises romanes ou gothiques, c’est l’usine qui, dans les premières années de ce siècle, s’est établie dans le voisinage. Ce qui, à l’heure présente, fait abattre dans les villes de province tant de beaux remparts antiques, c’est le conseil municipal, qui veut ce qu’on appelle dans le jargon moderne « un boulevard. » En ce qui concerne l’Égypte, l’activité extraordinaire qui s’y est développée depuis Méhémet-Ali a plus détruit de monumens en un quart de siècle que les Perses, les Grecs, les Romains, les chrétiens, les musulmans réunis. Les sucreries, les usines à vapeur, les palais ont dévoré plus de dix temples. Un ingénieur conseilla la destruction de la grande pyramide à Méhémet-Ali ! Cela est triste à dire ; mais cette gigantesque construction, le miracle de la force humaine en ce monde, est plus sérieusement menacée qu’elle ne l’a jamais été. Qu’un moment l’Europe savante cesse de peser de son autorité morale pour la garde de tels trésors, et cette masse de belles pierres taillées sera exploitée comme une carrière pour la construction de digues, de ponts, de barrages ! L’œuvre de Chéops court aujourd’hui les plus grands dangers qu’elle ait traversés depuis six mille ans.

     Pour moi, j’estime au nombre de mes grandes jouissances d’avoir contemplé ce monde étrange, peu attrayant, si l’on veut, mais saisissant au plus haut degré, et d’avoir eu pour guide, en ce voyage chez les plus vieux d’entre les morts, celui qui a ouvert l’accès de leurs tombeaux.

Originally published in the first issue of the bimonthly La Revue des Deux Mondes of April 1865 (https://www.revuedesdeuxmondes.fr/article-revue/souvenirs-de-mon-voyage-en-egypte) and then reprinted in volume 56 of the same La Revue des Deux Mondes as compiled in a quarterly format for the year 1865 (https://archive.org/details/revuedesdeuxmond18652pari/page/688/mode/2up).

This entry was published on the twenty-fourth day of May 2021.