An expedition in time

Drawing extensively on a number of primary sources, among them the Archives de L'Armée d'Orient, which Raymond had occasion to consult at Vincennes, first-hand accounts of members of the expedition, and Al-Jabarti's chronicle, he paints a lively picture of life in Cairo at the turn of the 18th century and of the character of those who took part in this eventful chapter of Egyptian history.

In parallel, Raymond, while unravelling the various episodes of the French presence in Egypt, presents a critique of Al-Jabarti's account. The chronicle, cited by the author in counterpoint to the main discourse, is the object of his intent scrutiny, so intent in fact that one is often led to wonder if the topic of the book is not an in-depth study of Al-Jabarti's several versions of the expedition, rather than of the expedition itself.

The first part of Raymond's book deals with power games, and the uneasy balance maintained among the various protagonists who shared in ruling Egypt during the few decades preceding the arrival of the French. In deceptively simple paragraphs, the reader is introduced to the intricate social system reigning among the Mamelukes, the belligerence of the military and the dominance of the Janissaries, the place occupied by the pasha -- the representative of the Ottoman sultan -- within the hierarchy, and the role of the ulama who controlled Al-Azhar and the minds of the populace. The aristocratic Circassian beys (Mamelukes) and their armies, the Turkish pasha and the ulama represented three pillars of power around which the people rallied in the latter part of the 18th century; these three poles of influence continuously plagued the country with their internecine quarrels, the price of which was paid, more often than not, by the peasants whose toil provided for the rich and the powerful.

The scene is completed with a portrait of the bourgeoisie, craftsmen, merchants and tax-farmers, and of the ra'iya, the urban poor who, owning nothing, were always liable to be manipulated. The foreigners, the Copts, the Christian Syrians and the Jews having been cast in their respective roles, the curtain was about to rise on a totally unforeseen event: Bonaparte's arrival. A sarcastic Raymond follows the conqueror's moves to pacify the stunned population, detailing his declaration that he had come to bring peace to Egypt after centuries of Ottoman oppression, and his decision to adhere instantly to Islam to prove his good intentions.

Raymond, however, soon seems to lose interest in the preliminary antics of the French chief and his army, concentrating instead on Al-Jabarti's opinion of the uninvited guests: "One is struck at first by the fact that the chronicler, of Azharite background, appeared to be especially shocked by the poor quality of the Arabic translation of the text [Bonaparte's proclamation to the Egyptian people upon his arrival in Cairo]," writes Raymond, with what one can only surmise to be a chuckle, adding: "If it is obviously impossible to consider Al-Jabarti as a representative of Egyptian society as a whole in all its variety, one has good reason to accept the fact that he embodied the cultured bourgeoisie, to whom Bonaparte appealed in the first place, and whom he hoped to win over to his side, since he planned to use this bourgeoisie in his enterprise of domination. In the sheikh's first reaction to the arguments developed by the general, one perceives a deep mistrust of French goals and a strong conscience of the religious incompatibility which separated the French from the Muslims, no matter how hard Bonaparte tried to minimise this difference." Raymond's apparent approval of Al-Jabarti's reticence confirms the feeling that he, too, is extremely critical of the general's approach.

The second part of the work is devoted to the covert and sometimes overt struggle of the population of Egypt in general, and Cairo in particular, against the occupier. Raymond outlines the people's continually frustrated hopes for a deus ex machina that would miraculously rid them of the abhorred occupation. During the first year of the expedition, uprisings were ferociously quelled and a great many heads rolled every time a French soldier was assassinated, while the army of occupation continued to disseminate the same message of trust, peace and unity in Islam; the ulama attempted to act as mediators (their traditional role before the occupation, comments Raymond) between the new ruler and his unwilling subjects, without however completely forgetting their own safety.

The part played by the ulama during this period was quite complex, and Raymond places a special emphasis on the sheikhs' actions or passivity, but their motives remain often unclear to him in the absence of first-hand accounts. Did they help the French or frustrate their plans, albeit in a way too devious for them to comprehend? On which side were Sheikh El-Bakri and Sheikh El-Sadat? This is one area where even an enlightened reading of Al-Jabarti does not provide all the answers; an Azharite himself, he was less outspoken in his condemnation of the sheikhs than when criticising other sections of the population who had dealings with the enemy.

After Bonaparte's departure, the saga continued as Kleber and then Menou attempted to rule over a conquest that seemed to be developing into a full-blown disaster for all concerned. The French, abandoned by Bonaparte, wanted out. They were tired of putting up with the resentment of a people who had proved time and again their lack of gratitude and indifference to the enlightenment the expedition claimed to bring. The end was near, as confirmed by the signing of the treaty of Al-Arish. The Egyptians sensed that their foes would be departing soon. A last push, and all that was left was a small number of converts and a few bitter memories, which would fade in no time.

Did they win, did they lose? What was it all about, and was it worth it? In the last part of this thoroughly enjoyable book, Raymond attempts to address these questions and give an informed analysis of both sides' beliefs and prejudices with the benefit of 200 years of hindsight.

Reviewed by Fayza Hassan