Plain Talk

By Mursi Saad El-Din

---

The person I am introducing this week is quite unique. Lt. Col. PG Elgood was an army officer, yet by all tokens he was an academic and a distinguished intellectual. His interest in Egypt was such that he had five books to his name on the country: Egypt and the Army published in 1924, The Transit of Egypt which appeared in 1928, followed by Bonaparte's Adventure in Egypt in 1931, which was followed seven years later by Ptolemies of Egypt in 1938. Finally there came the book I am presenting here which is entitled Egypt, a Brief History from Ancient until Modern Times.

It is clear that Elgood was a historian more by hobby than by profession. Yet the accuracy of his historical survey of Egypt reflects great professionalism. The book I am discussing here was first published in England in 1935, then it was reprinted later in Cairo first in 1943, but the edition I have on my book shelves came out in 1949 and was published by the Anglo-Egyptian Book shop.

The book starts with Pharaonic Egypt, followed by the Ptolemies, then the Roman-Byzantine period, Arab Suzerainty, the Memlukes and the Turkish Suzerainty, Bonaparte's Expedition, and finally from the time of Mohamed Aly, until World War II.

As far as the history discussed in this book is concerned there can be very little to comment upon. What is really worth noting is Elgood's chronological table of Egyptian history starting with the Ancient Empire in 3200 BC and ending with the leader of the Wafd Party Mustafa El-Nahas in 1942. This table is very comprehensive, giving names of ancient rulers, Kings, Caliphs, Prime Ministers, and British Agents and High Commissioners.

While, as I said earlier, there is very little one can say about the historical survey, one can still comment on some of Elgood's interpretations of the history of Egypt. It is always said that historians must be scientific and impartial in their investigation, yet, somehow, most of them cannot easily escape some partiality. In this respect I would like to quote what Elgood had to say about Cleopatra who seems to have enchanted him as she had enchanted Caesar and Antony.

"It is easy to understand Antony's sudden passion for Cleopatra; it is more difficult to explain the attraction Cleopatra felt for him. She did not grant her favours lightly, nor has history coupled her name with a series of promiscuous lovers". This is a view contrary to what other historians claim of the life and loves of Cleopatra.

Again, when dealing with Mohamed Aly (1805-1849), Elgood shows great sympathy and love: "No doubt his affection for Egypt was greater than his regard for its people. He was a Turk, they were Egyptian; their submission he expected as his right, their disobedience he punished as a duty. None the less he kept an eye upon their welfare, maintaining order, remedying injustice, initiating useful public works... If he missed the independence that he coveted, the failure was not ignoble: for he laid the foundations of Modern Egypt. Of the accomplishments that stand to his credit, the introduction of perennial irrigation and the cultivation of long staple cotton alone are sufficient to perpetuate his memory. Above all, he died in 1849, leaving his country burdened with no debt: a remarkable achievement for a Turk of his time and of his type."

Elgood then goes into details of the British rule of Egypt, the role of Sir R Wingate, Kitchner and Allenby. He describes the formation of the Wafd Party and the emergence of Saad Zaghloul as a nationalist leader. He describes events in Derrut in Upper Egypt and the punitive measures taken by the British. In describing political events one can clearly see the strong influence of Saad Zaghloul over the people. When Saad Zaghloul asked the people to boycott the Milner Commission they did and Milner's mission was completely ignored. This compelled the British to negotiate with Saad Zaghloul and the two men, Zaghloul and Milner met in London in 1920. "It was something of a triumph for Zaghloul" says Elgood.

Leaving politics aside, I would like to move on to some opinions of a general nature expressed by Elgood. He seems to have confidence in Egypt and her people: "Despite domestic differences" he says "Egypt may well face the future with confidence, Egypt's financial situation is one that many countries burdened with legacies of the war may well envy. Her public debt stands at the modest figure of LE 91,000,000; a reserve fund swollen with budget surpluses of prosperous years equals approximately one-third of the debt."

Then he goes on to describe the inevitability of change: "Men who speak lightly of Egypt as unchanging and unchangeable deceive themselves," he says. "Standards and conceptions, indeed, are altering radically".

Finally I would like to end with what Elgood says about national unity: "Muslims and Copts live side by side in peace. The Muslim invokes the name of the Almighty in the Mosque, the Copt in the Church, otherwise the two are hardly distinguishable from one another."