The paper discusses the problematic of Egypt’s identity and its fragmentation among the different currents (Coptic, Pharaonic, Islamic, Mediterranean), presenting an analytical vision that holds that identity is not rigid historical roots, but rather the final outcome and the latest development of an integrated historical becoming.
The ideas of the research revolve around the following points:
The concept of identity: affirming that identity is understood by what it is today, not by its historical origin (such as the origins of the first man or the tribes), and that it is the product of the interaction of political, social, and cultural conditions over time.
Comparative examples of the emergence of nations: reviewing how Europe (such as Germany and Italy) and the history of the United States of America merged disparate histories and formations under one broad and extended national umbrella.
Egypt and the Arab identity: presenting the idea that Arabism in Egypt is not a replacement of the identity or a “peninsular belonging from the Arabian Peninsula,” but rather the unifying melting pot and the vital field in which all the tributaries (Pharaonic, Coptic, Islamic, Mediterranean) were fused without abolishing any of them.
The mental and cultural unity: demonstrating the shared identity by the similarity of the patterns of thinking and the methods of expression and writing among the sons of one homeland regardless of their religious affiliations.
Keywords: the identity of Egypt, the Coptic Arab identity, the formation of nations, Azmi Bishara, historical traditions, national consciousness.
Introduction
This short study aspires to understand the identity of Egypt. The problematic among our peoples in the Arab region lies in understanding themselves, or how they become aware of themselves, and this lack of understanding constitutes a real identity crisis. Some see Egypt as Arab, others as Coptic, others as Pharaonic, some see it as Mediterranean like Taha Hussein, and some as Islamic or Egypt as Egyptian like Saad Zaghloul. Hence this study attempts to clarify the identity of Egypt: it is an Arab identity, because identity is the sum of the components of some personality. May Salah says:
“Identity is affected by several characteristics that the individual does not choose himself, such as race, social and economic class, political opinions, moral stances, and of course religious beliefs”[1]
Therefore this study seeks, through some ideas and examples, to prove that Egypt’s identity is Arab.
When some try to define Egypt as Coptic, Pharaonic, Mediterranean, or Islamic, they are trying to return it to some historical group or to some religion, and through this return we cannot understand the identity of a group, because identity is not understood through roots or origins, but through reaching the final state in which it is today, that is, the state by which we understand the imagined personality of Egypt. The definition of some that identity is the origin of a person makes the two words “origin” and “identity” explain each other, but in truth this understanding is erroneous of identity, for identity is not understood by what you were but by what you are today. If we say that man’s origin is an ape or the like, this does not mean that his identity is an ape, because identity explains the form and essence of the existence of some group, in its final crystallization, which was formed through a long history and many labors, and was affected by historical, social, political, and intellectual influences, conflicts, and all events and achievements. That great expression that explains and reveals to us that final becoming is called identity, which is necessarily not fixed but changes and is formed over time.
To attempt to understand the formation of national identity, I shall present two examples: the first about the emergence of the European nations and the second about the emergence of the United States, and how each of them understands itself and expresses it. The two examples are taken from the book Introduction to the Old Testament[2]:
The first example:
The European nations arose from the fusion of the tribes that came originally from northern Asia and settled in different regions of Europe. These tribes began to merge into units and came to regard themselves as a nation whose members share the one destiny that gathered them into one nation. This approach is a necessary condition without which the newly emerging nation cannot continue as one nation, for every social and political entity that ignores this basic rule dissolves under the weight of the competing pressures exercised by the small entities (and this applies in our society, where the return to origins and nationalisms threatens the social and political entity). Germany and Italy, as we know them today, are each no more than a hundred years old; the first arose in 1871 and the second in 1871. From these two times we no longer speak only of what is called Italy and Germany, but more importantly we attribute to these two countries histories extending back centuries, even to tribal times, gathering all the histories under the two Italian and German umbrellas, and all the histories became the one history of Germany or Italy.
{This applies to Egypt: a hundred years ago there was no Egypt as a state as we know it today, but we attribute to it histories deeply rooted in antiquity, reaching the Pharaohs and before them, and all those histories become the history of Egypt itself, considering that Egypt today is the final product of all the past}
In the United States, the fourth of July 1776 is considered the date of the birth of this entity. Technically there is no such thing as the United States before this date; they were British colonies. How then does this new entity speak about itself?
The second example:
Before this date, speaking of the colonies is as though they possessed the same spirit and the same existence as the United States, and thereby the history of the colonies came to be regarded as the history of the United States; nay, more, as though it leads us to the actual founding of the United States. The histories of the thirteen states were necessarily considered one history, even though the history of the state of Connecticut arose when it separated from the state of Massachusetts, the concept of one history is fundamental to the states. And the history of the states after the date of 1776 is fundamental,
Moreover, this history itself becomes the history of every naturalized American citizen, despite the personal origins of the latter, and his personal history that was for several centuries an essential part of the history of a different nation; he is now an American even if his origins return him to the heart of Mongolia. Everyone therefore is aware of this new truth.
Here we note that the official history of the United States is not a mixing of the histories of the different colonies and lands, but everything is viewed through the self-consciousness of the new entity.
And from here
The identity of Egypt is the clear expression of itself, and Arabness is that identity which, when you mention it, you find yourself before a collective personality, or a group conscious of itself, and you in turn are conscious of it and realize who it is and what its history is. But it is worth noting: when I say “I am an Arab,” this never means my belonging to the Arabian Peninsula — this is what I call peninsular belonging. We are not peninsular, because the Arab defines himself as an Arab Syrian, Palestinian, or Iraqi. The thinker Azmi Bishara says:
“It was natural for the Arab to define himself as an Arab Palestinian, an Arab Tunisian, or an Arab Algerian. Even if this was not familiar to the Egyptian, Egypt constitutes the most important Arab cultural center, and is known as the largest Arab country, and the Egyptian, despite the strength of his belonging to Egypt, defines himself as an Arab among the Arabs”[3].
The Arab identity was never a replacement of one identity with another, entirely contrary to what happens in the occupation of some country; if you became French because of the occupation, here you replace your identity with another. But in the case of the Arab identity, all the previous cultures and identities were fused in one crucible, and all those previous tributaries poured into one stream, and Arabness was formed. Our saying that Egypt is Arab never means the replacement of Egypt’s identity with another; rather it means precisely that it is the clearest expression of all the previous histories without diminution, mixture, or confusion. When we say Egypt is Arab, we shall understand directly its components: Coptic, Pharaonic, Mediterranean, Islamic, African, etc. But if we say only Coptic, we are here before a diminution of its total identity.
The most important confirmation of the Arab identity of the Egyptians is the logic of thinking, its methods, and its tools, for all Egyptians possess the same pattern of thinking and mentality; you find Muslims and Christians thinking in the same way and writing in the same way. Even the Christian apologetic theological books and the Islamic books, you will find them similar in style, and there is no difference in the mental logic of the two sides.
Conclusion
The identity of Egypt constitutes a great problematic among many of the disputants, but in order to understand Egypt completely and be conscious of its true personality, we must say Egypt is Arab. Then we understand completely the personality of Egypt, because present Egypt was formed and shaped through many labors, to which all civilizations, cultures, and histories contributed, in one crucible. When it was formed as a state with its current borders nearly a century ago, it was formed through borders made by colonialism; as for its identity, it was made by its personality, which it formed from many components — Coptic, Islamic, Pharaonic, and others — under one umbrella: Egypt is Arab.
References
- Bishara, Azmi. Reflections on the Question of Identity. Tabayyun magazine, 41 (Summer 2022), 15-48.
- Tarazi, Paul. Historical Traditions. Introduction to the Old Testament, Part One. Beirut: Al-Nour Publications, 1998.
- Taha, Hussein. The Future of Culture in Egypt. Cairo, Hindawi Foundation for Education and Culture, 2012.
- Salah, May. “The Egyptian Identity” between Past, Present, and Future”, The Egyptian Observatory, 20 June 2022, accessed on 21/6/2022, available at: https://marsad.ecss.com.eg/70858/
Footnotes
[1] May Salah, “The Egyptian Identity” between Past, Present, and Future”, The Egyptian Observatory, 20 June 2022, accessed on 21/6/2022, available at: https://marsad.ecss.com.eg/70858/
[2] Paul Tarazi, Historical Traditions, Introduction to the Old Testament, Part One, (Beirut, Al-Nour Publications, 1998), p. 32.
[3] Azmi Bishara, ((Reflections on the Question of Identity)) in the periodical Tabayyun, 41 (2022), p. 33.