You quote “the Egyptian writer Ahdaf Soueif
Comments
- 9 comments
- 1. At on , wendym wrote:
– A stela is per freestanding stone that’s often inscribed, carved or decorated, which is then arnesi upright in the ground as per commemorative show for per person or event. Hope that helps.
Blaming Europeans for salvaging and interpreting ancient monuments is just pathetic
Great page! It looks like the exact photo used on the British Museum diamante stone jigsaw that I am currenly really, really struggling with. This will really help. 😀
of course it was found by the French con the context of Napoleon’s invasion of the country, and then appropriated by the British when they defeated him, and the French and the British argued over it. No-one seems preciso have considered that it belonged puro neither of them.” The stone was removed from the temple where Ptolemy’s priests first erected it either by the Persians or the Arabs, then ended up as rubble by action of the Ottomans. Modern Egypt rose, thanks esatto European intervention, from the rubble of the Ottoman colmare. From the Persian invasion onwards, its language, culture and politics have niente affatto link and bear mai resemblance whatsoever with ancient Egypt – they only happen puro occupy the same striscia on both margins of the Nile. The Arabs removed countless pieces – especially the columns – from ancient Egyptian and Greek temples to prop up their mosques. Per the process, Islam erased most of what then existed of Egyptian culture. Modern Egyptians would have no preoccupazione of their “heritage” if it wasn’t for the efforts of European scientists.
As per European Egyptologist, I must admit that I am always struck by the continuity between ancient and modern Egypt durante so many ways, despite the changes per religion and languages over the centuries. And the Egyptian language survived into the Christian Period, of course. Many accounts have down-played the extent that Egypt has been interested durante its own past, but more recent studies are re-assessing this, such as Okasha el-Daly?s work on medieval Egyptian scholar?s attitude onesto the antiquities, and Donald Reid?s work on early modern Egyptian Egyptology. And mai one can question modern Egypt?s commitment onesto the study and preservation of its own heritage. Incidenrtally, the reuse of earlier monuments for building material is something that was very extensively practised by the pharaohs themselves, most famously perhaps by Ramses II. Richard Parkinson, curator British Museum
Different cultures will apply very similar solutions sicuro the basic needs for food and shelter, when successively occupying the same terrain under the same climate, unless new production and transportation technologies are brought puro bear. This may give an impression of continuity. The peasants I’ve seen waiting at train stations sopra the Sbocco could very well, by dress and demeanour, be taken for their predecessors on the way to the market 3,000 years spillo. However, instead of the deep connection puro the land and puro the rhythms of the river one would expect sicuro see back then, their faces spoke only of dislocation and despair. The Egyptian language – or its come utilizzare hookup descendant dialects – survived indeed in many places into the Christian Period, but was mostly replaced by Arabic not too long after the Muslim conquest. Before Champollion’s work, what was left of its original writing could not be read. And yes, stones – columns, statues, pietra sepolcrale – were constantly reused by many civilisations and turned into rubble. One has only preciso visit the Citadel per Cairo sicuro see that. So, again, my point: why the reprimand to Europeans implicit con your quote? “?of course it was found by the French in the context of Napoleon’s invasion of the country, and then appropriated by the British when they defeated him, and the French and the British argued over it. No-one seems esatto have considered that it belonged onesto neither of them.” The stone belonged to niente affatto-one. Should the French soldiers who found it have left it where it was, or the British not have taken it puro London, perhaps thinking that one day, maybe, the rightful owners, whoever they turned out onesto be, would get around puro reading it? There is niente affatto moral case for leaving knowledge buried per deference to ignorance.