{"title":"Appropriation and Its Consequences: Archaeology under Colonial Rule in Egypt and India","authors":"Shereen Ratnagar","doi":"10.1163/18741665-12340055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe beginnings of archaeology in Egypt and in India are the subject of this paper. In both countries, antiquities were carried away by the powerful. Moreover, the hubris of the colonial powers ruling both countries made it inevitable that not only antiquities, but knowledge about the past, were appropriated in different ways. For modern Egyptians, the Pharaonic past was remote in culture and distant in time. The people themselves were until fairly recently prevented from learning the Pharaonic writing, once it was deciphered, by various ways and means. In contrast, in India the colonial administration relied on Indian scholars to teach British personnel the ancient languages, texts, and religion. In neither country was the history of the ancient period taught in schools until the foreign rulers had left. But Indian archaeology became involved in Indian identity and in the framing of the nation as Hindu, and thereby acquired an ugly twist. Self-identification in Egypt in the earlier twentieth century, on the other hand, was possibly more with the Arab world than with the pyramid builders.","PeriodicalId":41016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Egyptian History","volume":"13 1","pages":"207-226"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Egyptian History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18741665-12340055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
The beginnings of archaeology in Egypt and in India are the subject of this paper. In both countries, antiquities were carried away by the powerful. Moreover, the hubris of the colonial powers ruling both countries made it inevitable that not only antiquities, but knowledge about the past, were appropriated in different ways. For modern Egyptians, the Pharaonic past was remote in culture and distant in time. The people themselves were until fairly recently prevented from learning the Pharaonic writing, once it was deciphered, by various ways and means. In contrast, in India the colonial administration relied on Indian scholars to teach British personnel the ancient languages, texts, and religion. In neither country was the history of the ancient period taught in schools until the foreign rulers had left. But Indian archaeology became involved in Indian identity and in the framing of the nation as Hindu, and thereby acquired an ugly twist. Self-identification in Egypt in the earlier twentieth century, on the other hand, was possibly more with the Arab world than with the pyramid builders.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Egyptian History (JEgH) aims to encourage and stimulate a focused debate on writing and interpreting Egyptian history ranging from the Neolithic foundations of Ancient Egypt to its modern reception. It covers all aspects of Ancient Egyptian history (political, social, economic, and intellectual) and of modern historiography about Ancient Egypt (methodologies, hermeneutics, interplay between historiography and other disciplines, and history of modern Egyptological historiography). The journal is open to contributions in English, German, and French.