History goes up in smoke in Egypt

[Thanas]

Yahoo news

Magdy Tahami looks in disbelief at what remains of Egypt's tiny Mallawi museum.

The ground is littered with glass from the display cabinets, which once housed its precious collection, after a mob attacked and looted the building, during a nationwide crackdown on Islamist protesters.



Before, hundreds of antiquities, statuettes, gold and jewels told the history of Egypt, from pharaonic times to the Muslim caliphs, from the Omayyad dynasty in the 7th century to the Fatimids in the 12th, and touching on Greek and Roman antiquities.

For 20 years, these historic treasures were assistant-director Tahami's whole life.

"I like this museum more than my own house, I have spent more time there than at home. It is as if it were my house that has been destroyed, burgled and pillaged," he says.

For him and his colleagues, the Mallawi museum, 70 kilometres (43 miles) from Minya, the town in Upper Egypt south of Cairo, has payed a steep price for the bloody crackdown on protests by supporters of ousted Islamist president Mohamed Morsi, toppled by the army on July 3.

On August 14, shortly after the police and army launched an operation on pro-Morsi protest camps in Cairo that killed hundreds in few hours, several hundred armed men attacked the museum.

While nobody is certain who the attackers and looters were, the walls of the museum are still daubed with pro-Morsi slogans.

Another warns: "Sisi, we are coming," referring to army chief Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the strongman who announced Morsi's overthrow on July 3 after massive rallies against the Islamist former head of state.

And the museum, with its antiquities and statues, which a minority of radical Islamists had called to be destroyed, was not the only building to be targeted.

In the region, which is home to a sizeable Christian minority, several churches and Coptic institutions have been also attacked.

Warned in advance of the bloody events in the capital, the employees closed the museum and barricaded themselves inside with a dozen policemen, but they could not stop the damage, Tahami says.

He describes the scene as a "battlefield," with automatic fire echoing from all sides so that "we did not know where they were coming from or who was firing."

After several hours, nearly all of the 1,089 museum pieces had been stolen or destroyed, says Tahami.

UNESCO said the attack had caused "irreversible damage to the history and identity of the Egyptian people" in a country full of archaeological wonders.

"They took everything. The few pieces they left, because they couldn't carry them away, they vandalised," Tahami recalls.

"Here, they burned a mummy," he says, pointing to a black stain on the ground.

Every day, the police says it has recovered more of the stolen antiquities but so far they have only found 221 items.

Fearing some of these treasures may turn up on the black market, UNESCO said the looted objects had been recorded and that selling the items is illegal both inside and outside of Egypt.

The floor of the museum's main display room is still covered with broken glass and wrecked display cases, and a similar scene of devastation can be seen in two adjoining rooms and the one upstairs.

In front of the entrance to the museum, still pocked with bullet holes and surrounded by burned-out cars, Khalil Hussein, the head of security, looks on in silence.

"The day after the attack, an official delegation came to see the damage. When they came, a sniper shot our colleague Sameh Ahmed Abdel Hafiz, who worked at the ticket desk, as he was standing in the courtyard," he says.

During the 2011 uprising that toppled former president Hosni Mubarak, several museums were pillaged, including the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities near Cairo's Tahrir square, epicentre of the demonstrations.

Man, I sure am glad that the EVIL COLONIALIST Museum of Berlin refused to hand over Nefertiti. I also await a concession of those who argued that the pieces would be perfectly safe in a third world dictatorship and that everybody who argued against handing back pieces must be doing so out of self-interest.

[Borgholio]

Is it wrong for me to feel that this kind of senseless destruction is worse than the human suffering currently in progress in Egypt? I mean they burned a fucking mummy? What, did that mummy insult Muhammed or something?

[Kuja]

It's not precisely what I'd call worse (human suffering is always a thing to be regretted) but it's something that hits you at another level. A museum is hardly a threat to anyone in a materialistic sense, being a place dedicated to preserving the past so that we may educate the future. Seeing such a place violated is something that should disturb anyone with a sense for the value of history and the knowledge of the irreplaceable nature of the artifacts held within. It's very much a tragedy, and I wish them luck in hunting down whatever was stolen.

[Simon_Jester]

Man, I sure am glad that the EVIL COLONIALIST Museum of Berlin refused to hand over Nefertiti. I also await a concession of those who argued that the pieces would be perfectly safe in a third world dictatorship and that everybody who argued against handing back pieces must be doing so out of self-interest.

I find myself in agreement, but have no memory of this conversation ever occurring on SDN. Out of sheer curiosity, roughly when was it?

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

I don't remember it being discussed here, but it's discussed a lot in general. A lot of people have issue with the fact that the colonial powers that stole the wealth and labour of most of the world also stole and (often to this day) hold onto much archaeological wealth as well, keeping the physical history away from the people who live in the areas it came from.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Is it wrong for me to feel that this kind of senseless destruction is worse than the human suffering currently in progress in Egypt? I mean they burned a fucking mummy? What, did that mummy insult Muhammed or something?

Museums preserve and disseminate knowledge, so it's akin to burning down a school. Your country can recover from physical deaths, no matter how many; it can't recover from an intellectual death.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Yeah, a country can recover from physical deaths, but countries are just a concept. Those people and those that knew them are never going to recover, but hey, they're just people.

[PeZook]

It's disturbing for the same reason seeing someone lobotomize himself with an icepick is disturbing, even if he does that only to himself and in a trench amongst bloody carnage.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Stuff like this really make me ill inside in a way that 'just' war and killing and murder does not.

The lives of humans are important, and of course special. But people will kill each other till the end of time, but "History" is something that once lost, can never be reclaimed. Even if some of this information is recorded in digital format, it is still a loss of immense depth because the original scrolls, documents, even clay tablets all hard clues and information in a physical form that just words can never give.

I had heard about this going on in Egypt and all I could think about is the Chaos shortly after the US 'Liberated' Iraq, when the museums and universities were looted, and artifacts thousands of years old were smashed, destroyed and looted. Whole warehouses full of truly priceless and irreplaceable tablets and statues gone forever. it was like loosing the Library of Alexander all over again.

[Kitsune]

Even looking at it in pure economic, such attacks hurt Egypt. . . .You destroy all your ancient treasures, tourists are not going to show up.

[Borgholio]

In regards to Iraq, it's a shame that the literal cradle of human civilization is in some of the most god-forsaken territory on Earth.

[Zwinmar]

Wtf, why do people destroy their own history? They not realize that is what sets them apart?

[PeZook]

I think the major reason why this hits is that political violence has a reason and a point. There's a dynamic that makes it possible to understand why it's happening.

But smashing a random museum that threatened nobody? It's like a soldier in war going out of his way to brutalize a dog ; Of course the human toll is by far worse than a single pooch, but torturing an innocent animal is not something that has to happen ; It's an extra travesty that's completely and utterly pointless. That museum wasn't destroyed because it was a choice between saving artifacts or saving people - it was wrecked because, well, FUCK YOU, that's why.

[Simon_Jester]

Idly I wonder how many historic treasures from around the world were destroyed in the World Wars in Europe, which would have been quite safe if they'd stayed closer to home...

Anyhow. Another big motive is, well, looting- these artifacts do have resale value. Sure, it's illegal to sell them, but it's illegal to sell stolen property anyway, so that's probably not going to deter someone who's willing to loot a building during a riot in the first place.

At the same time, you have hyped-up, violent people, some of whom probably think historical artifacts are bad because they result in idolatry anyway... which leads to vandalism as well as theft.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Yeah, a country can recover from physical deaths, but countries are just a concept. Those people and those that knew them are never going to recover, but hey, they're just people.

The last bit is sarcasm, I'm certain. There's no such thing as "just/mere people".

However, like Crossroads said these artifacts are now lost forever. We humans will keep killing each other, and while it sucks for them who get killed now, this thread is about our perspective. I wouldn't think there's someone who hasn't considered that people are dying over there.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Those people who die are lost forever, too. They're not just numbers in a population chart. We'll also keep making history and artifacts, too, but why is there loss considered more irreplaceable?

[Formless]

I think its probably because its like unpersoning the dead. Not only are they dead, you've done what you can to destroy the memory of who they were. Their people are dead, and now their physical culture is dead too.

Its not worse than death, since decay is as inevitable as death, but the two together make it feel worse. Especially to well off westerners who are a thousand miles away from the actual violence and have more of a connection to the past than the present.

[Thanas]

Those people who die are lost forever, too. They're not just numbers in a population chart. We'll also keep making history and artifacts, too, but why is there loss considered more irreplaceable?

Because while it is a tragedy, nobody in 2000 years is going to remember Joe Schmuck who got killed in a car wreck last tuesday. You probably even don't, nor would you be able to name the people killed in your own city last month. But something like historical artifacts, which transcend boundaries and become a part of the common history of mankind? Everyone who has ever gazed into the eye of Nefertiti will remember it for his life.

That is why cultural vandalism is that big of a crime. It robs people of their history and their future in one breath. People die all the time, this is nothing special. But there is only one Mona Lisa.

Idly I wonder how many historic treasures from around the world were destroyed in the World Wars in Europe, which would have been quite safe if they'd stayed closer to home...

A lot were destroyed or looted, so many in fact that we still do not know what a lot of German Museums had in their cellars. But you are assuming they would have been safer if they stayed at home - why? It is not as if the locals cared for them in most cases (for example, the famous Heroon - now in Vienna - was taken down because otherwise it would have collapsed in a few months and nobody gave a damn).

This is the thing - preserving culture is a luxury. Most of the eastern countries during WWII barely had enough to eat, much less to build infrastructure.

Man, I sure am glad that the EVIL COLONIALIST Museum of Berlin refused to hand over Nefertiti. I also await a concession of those who argued that the pieces would be perfectly safe in a third world dictatorship and that everybody who argued against handing back pieces must be doing so out of self-interest.

I find myself in agreement, but have no memory of this conversation ever occurring on SDN. Out of sheer curiosity, roughly when was it?

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 2&t=154509

[Thanas]

I don't remember it being discussed here, but it's discussed a lot in general. A lot of people have issue with the fact that the colonial powers that stole the wealth and labour of most of the world also stole and (often to this day) hold onto much archaeological wealth as well, keeping the physical history away from the people who live in the areas it came from.

a) That things were stolen is in itself not true. In most cases legal contracts existed with the local governments. Please point to issues of real theft.

b) If the people living there can demonstrate several decades of a free society with no civil wars or other disturbances, as well as prove that the objects were stolen, they can have the stolen stuff back.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Because while it is a tragedy, nobody in 2000 years is going to remember Joe Schmuck who got killed in a car wreck last tuesday. You probably even don't, nor would you be able to name the people killed in your own city last month. But something like historical artifacts, which transcend boundaries and become a part of the common history of mankind? Everyone who has ever gazed into the eye of Nefertiti will remember it for his life.

That is why cultural vandalism is that big of a crime. It robs people of their history and their future in one breath. People die all the time, this is nothing special. But there is only one Mona Lisa.

You yourself admit we don't know the names of a bunch of historical artifacts lost, as well. And there's only one Mona Lisa, but there's also only one of every person. I mean, I could just say "paintings are lost all the time, this is nothing special" just the same as the line you used up there.

A lot were destroyed or looted, so many in fact that we still do not know what a lot of German Museums had in their cellars. But you are assuming they would have been safer if they stayed at home - why? It is not as if the locals cared for them in most cases (for example, the famous Heroon - now in Vienna - was taken down because otherwise it would have collapsed in a few months and nobody gave a damn).

We know they were lost in WWII, countless more than were lost here, but you respond with just "how do we know they wouldn't have been lost just as badly elsewhere"? How about the stuff that was lost here, couldn't we say we can't know if they'd be safe elsewhere? I mean, there could've been robberies or a fire or a riot or something that causes stuff in Europe, too.

I mean, sure, Europe is probably somewhat safer than many other places, but it certainly wasn't for most of history, including a lot of times where Europe had many artifacts from elsewhere. And if we're just putting stuff where it's safest, should we relocate all of Europe's historical artifacts to Canada or something? Much less history of violence and destruction up there.

It seems as if you're applying a lot of double-standards here.

[Thanas]

I think the major reason why this hits is that political violence has a reason and a point. There's a dynamic that makes it possible to understand why it's happening.

But smashing a random museum that threatened nobody? It's like a soldier in war going out of his way to brutalize a dog ; Of course the human toll is by far worse than a single pooch, but torturing an innocent animal is not something that has to happen ; It's an extra travesty that's completely and utterly pointless. That museum wasn't destroyed because it was a choice between saving artifacts or saving people - it was wrecked because, well, FUCK YOU, that's why.

This has a political point. It is quite in line with the Muslim Brotherhood's program of turning the place into an exclusively Muslim country (and the "right" muslim, note that even previous Islamic dynasty artifacts were destroyed). It is right in line with the attack on copt churches as well as other libraries and museums.

Of course there is also the possibility that most of those were just local thugs who thought they'd get gold and jewels there. I think this is at least as likely, if not more. But you could see this politically if you wanted to.

You yourself admit we don't know the names of a bunch of historical artifacts lost, as well.

Where did I say that?

And there's only one Mona Lisa, but there's also only one of every person. I mean, I could just say "paintings are lost all the time, this is nothing special" just the same as the line you used up there.

And if you don't value art or culture, you would be right to do so. However, can you name the guys who died in your city over the last month? Don't tell me you don't value culture and life to boot?

We know they were lost in WWII, countless more than were lost here, but you respond with just "how do we know they wouldn't have been lost just as badly elsewhere"?

This is not a hypothetical. We know they absolutely would have been lost there and nobody would have given a damn. How do we know that? Because we know the actions of the local people at the time and their level of education.

How about the stuff that was lost here, couldn't we say we can't know if they'd be safe elsewhere? I mean, there could've been robberies or a fire or a riot or something that causes stuff in Europe, too.

But there haven't been such riots, not for the last six decades.

I mean, sure, Europe is probably somewhat safer than many other places, but it certainly wasn't for most of history, including a lot of times where Europe had many artifacts from elsewhere.

Depends. A museum that might get bombed in a war is still better than no museum at all. And for the time since there have been professionally-run museums (something that only started in the western world in the latter half of the 19th century) most of those were safe except for a period between 1939-45. Even then museums took extreme gains to preserve all that was lost.All of that is better than no museum at all and the locals using the local monuments as quarries or local mummies as firewood. You got to be some kind of special to claim "Well, the guys there were using the mummies for firewood for centuries, but gosh, they are just safer there than in some other country that might get bombed in five years out of 150." I mean, you can't be serious, right?

BTW, the vast majority of losses of the German museums are almost all due to pillage by Russians. The museums were very good in preserving their collections out in rural parts of Germany, as well as building special bunkers in cities. Off hand I can only remember one collection that was destroyed by bombs, but even then the pieces were preserved and are now being restored.

And if we're just putting stuff where it's safest, should we relocate all of Europe's historical artifacts to Canada or something? Much less history of violence and destruction up there.

I wouldn't be opposed to relocating some stuff to safer places. On the other hand, concentrating all in Canada is pretty stupid for redundancy reasons and also pretty bad for allowing wider parts of the public access to them.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Where did I say that?

The line you said to Simon about the artifacts in Germany during the war, how we don't even know what was in those lost basements? Or did I misinterpret what you meant?

And if you don't value art or culture, you would be right to do so. However, can you name the guys who died in your city over the last month? Don't tell me you don't value culture and life to boot?

No, I think it's absolutely terrible that we're losing this stuff. It's a separate crime from the human damage, but a bad one nonetheless. I just find the idea that it's worse than the human loss to be pretty terrifying. The idea that art and artifacts are each uniquely valuable but a person is just a person like any other, especially when applied (as in this case) to foreigners, goes down a dark path in my mind.

But there haven't been such riots, not for the last six decades.

There've been a lot of riots in Europe since the war. Just two years ago in the UK there were riots that involved widescale arson and looting. Should we evacuate artifacts out of the UK since they haven't passed the test of "no damaging riots in the last 15 years"?

I admit that the damage in Egypt right now is much bigger than in the UK two years ago, but it's a matter of degree, not Europe being special. And isn't concentrating a lot of stuff in Europe similarly redundant and stifling just like the idea of concentrating stuff in Canada?

[Thanas]

Where did I say that?

The line you said to Simon about the artifacts in Germany during the war, how we don't even know what was in those lost basements? Or did I misinterpret what you meant?

We know what was lost, what we do not know is how much the Russians actually took and the details of what they took. An example (purely hypothetical but to show you the principle):
You got clay tablets from city X. Your logs show you "16 clay tablets found by X, generally describing subjects ABCD of time period E in city X". Then, you get back to find out that the tablets have been taken by the Russian forces in retaliation for Nazi lootings. So now you know in general terms what is lost. Maybe you even have a transcription of the tablets. But it is outdated and there is no way for you to know if the Russians took the tablets, what the tablets really say etc.

There are the cases of some museums saying "heck, we got so much stuff that we never really got around to cataloging them", but they are not the majority AFAIK.

None of that speaks to not valuing things.

No, I think it's absolutely terrible that we're losing this stuff. It's a separate crime from the human damage, but a bad one nonetheless. I just find the idea that it's worse than the human loss to be pretty terrifying. The idea that art and artifacts are each uniquely valuable but a person is just a person like any other, especially when applied (as in this case) to foreigners, goes down a dark path in my mind.

This concept is not really applied to foreigners only, so let's get that hidden accusation of racism out of the way. As to whether it is worse, absolutely it is, in terms of the cultural impact. Or are you denying that the Mona Lisa has brought more to mankind than a single unnamed peasant who died in the time of Leonardo da Vinci? Artifacts enrich people far beyond our own lifetime. We ourselves do not have that capability once we are dead, except in caring for the artifacts.

What I think you are confusing is that this does not mean one should formulate a moral judgement out of that, aka condoning people dieing if only to generate better art. Today we would be outraged at working peasants to death to finance St Peter and rightly so. But does that mean that the general contribution of St Peter to humanity over the course of its existence is less than that of a peasant who did nothing but work and then die?

Again, this does not mean that it gives us carte blanche. If an art gallery and a maternity ward is on fire, save the maternity ward first. But that is a moral judgement based on us judging humans worth by virtue of being humans ourselves and not based from the viewpoint of positive contributions to society.

There've been a lot of riots in Europe since the war. Just two years ago in the UK there were riots that involved widescale arson and looting. Should we evacuate artifacts out of the UK since they haven't passed the test of "no damaging riots in the last 15 years"?

I admit that the damage in Egypt right now is much bigger than in the UK two years ago, but it's a matter of degree, not Europe being special.

You can't be serious. Point to the museums looted and burnt during the riots. Oh wait, there were none. This comparison is silly, because scale matters. Also, nobody argued for SPECIAL EUROPE here. You'll note that for example Japan takes care of its artifacts without being European. It is just the fact that most of the artifacts taken from the Middle East are now in European and American (and some Canadian, Australian and NZ) museums, all of which are stable societies which protect their museums (the americans and brits do less of a good job of that when they are occupying but they do protect their own ones).

And isn't concentrating a lot of stuff in Europe similarly redundant and stifling just like the idea of concentrating stuff in Canada?

No, as Europe is filled with different states and societies, as well as plenty redundancies.

Admit it, your idea here was "Let's present canada in hope of Thanas outing himself as a BIG BAD EUROCENTRIC".

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

We know what was lost, what we do not know is how much the Russians actually took and the details of what they took. An example (purely hypothetical but to show you the principle):
You got clay tablets from city X. Your logs show you "16 clay tablets found by X, generally describing subjects ABCD of time period E in city X". Then, you get back to find out that the tablets have been taken by the Russian forces in retaliation for Nazi lootings. So now you know in general terms what is lost. Maybe you even have a transcription of the tablets. But it is outdated and there is no way for you to know if the Russians took the tablets, what the tablets really say etc.

There are the cases of some museums saying "heck, we got so much stuff that we never really got around to cataloging them", but they are not the majority AFAIK.

None of that speaks to not valuing things.

Ohh, ok. Thanks for the clarification!

If an art gallery and a maternity ward is on fire, save the maternity ward first. But that is a moral judgement based on us judging humans worth by virtue of being humans ourselves and not based from the viewpoint of positive contributions to society.

Ok, if you talk about it this way, it's not as bad as it was sounding. Or maybe the other people in the thread would disagree? Either way it seems as if there may have been a misunderstanding here then on my part as to what you were advocating, and I was kind of arguing by proxy with other people who'd posted in this thread about the artifact loss being more important than the deaths.

Admit it, your idea here was "Let's present canada in hope of Thanas outing himself as a BIG BAD EUROCENTRIC".

Honestly, it was because Canada is the safest place that comes to mind for me with respect to both violence and natural disasters, barring something absurd like Greenland :L

[Simon_Jester]

Idly I wonder how many historic treasures from around the world were destroyed in the World Wars in Europe, which would have been quite safe if they'd stayed closer to home...

A lot were destroyed or looted, so many in fact that we still do not know what a lot of German Museums had in their cellars. But you are assuming they would have been safer if they stayed at home - why? It is not as if the locals cared for them in most cases (for example, the famous Heroon - now in Vienna - was taken down because otherwise it would have collapsed in a few months and nobody gave a damn).

[emphasis added- SJ]

Thanas, please review what I actually said, and try taking it a bit more literally. I don't recall assuming a thing.

I do wonder how many historic treasures, which would have been safe at home, were instead destroyed. I also wonder how many treasures preserved in the museums would not have been safe at home, which is the converse question.

To put it simply, I asked a question. If you consider it a leading question, fine- but please don't make too many assumptions about what I "must be" thinking as a result of your own personal reading of the tone of my question.