6/14/2020 0:00:00
We will list the official history that exists now, and we will put our comments on these historical events in our discussion on our Zillow channel or recorded on our Telegram channel.
French invasion of Misr (1798-1801).
■ Why Misr?!
Making Misr a strategic base that would be the nucleus of the French Empire in the East.
■ But why this timing?
It is said that the reason was the weakness that had seeped into the Ottoman Empire, so France began looking to the Arab East again… and the reports of their men were inciting them that the appropriate moment had come and it must be seized.
There is a report by Saint-Priest, the French ambassador to Constantinople since the year (1768 AD), and Baron de Toto, the French consul in Alexandria, about the weakness of the Ottoman Empire and that it was on its way to dissolution. These reports called for the necessity of accelerating the occupation of Misr, but the French government hesitated and did not take their advice, out of caution. With its policy, which appears to be based on friendliness and friendship to the Ottoman Empire.
* This means that the occupation of Misr was a strong desire of France before the French Revolution, which means that the French Revolution followed the same old desire.
* Notice how history attributes the obstacles to maintaining friendship and friendliness with the Ottomans and not with the Egyptians……. in order to make you believe that the Ottomans are guardians of that place.
* Also notice how he does not mention the Mamluks… because according to history, Misr was under the rule of the Mamluks, which was a state independent of the Ottomans and had no relation to Misr.
■ How did France approve the campaign?
Two reports are the reasons for preparing the military campaign
1- Report by Charles Majalon, French Consul in Misr
Charles Majalon, the French consul in Misr, submitted his report to his government on February 9, 1798 AD, inciting it with the necessity of occupying Misr, explaining the importance of his country’s seizure of Misr’s products and trade, and enumerating the advantages that France is expected to reap from this.
2- Report of Talleyrand, Minister of Foreign Affairs of France
A few days after the submission of the Majalon report, the French government received another report from Talleyrand, the Minister of Foreign Affairs. This report occupies a great place in the history of the French campaign against Misr, as it presented the relations that had existed from ancient times between France and Misr, and explained in it the opinions that it called for. With the advantages of seizing Misr, he presented arguments that showed that the opportunity had become ripe for sending an expedition to Misr and conquering it. He also discussed the means of implementing the invasion project in terms of preparing the men and equipping the ships necessary to carry them and the military plan of invasion. He called for taking into account the traditions, customs and religious rituals of the people of Misr, and for attracting The Egyptians and gained their affection by venerating their scholars and sheikhs and respecting the opinionated among them. Because these scholars have a great reputation among the Egyptians.
■ Campaign decision
The two reports aroused the interest of the government that was established after the French Revolution, and the issue of the invasion of Misr also gained attention, and it moved from the stage of consideration and thinking to the stage of action and implementation.
The government issued its historic decision to place the Army of the East under the command of Napoleon Bonaparte on April 12, 1798 AD.
The decision included an introduction and six articles:
The introduction included the reasons that called for the administration’s government to send its campaign against Misr, foremost of which was the punishment of the Mamluks who mistreated the French and assaulted their money and lives, and the search for another trade route after the British seized the Cape of Good Hope route and restricted French ships from sailing there. The resolution included Napoleon was assigned to expel the English from their possessions in the East, and from the areas he could reach, to eliminate their commercial centers in the Red Sea, and to work on building the Suez Canal.
■ Prepare the campaign
Preparations were made to equip the campaign, and the leader of the campaign, General Napoleon, was supervising the preparations with all determination and activity. He personally selected the leaders, officers, scientists, engineers, and geographers. He also set out to form a committee of scholars known as the Committee of Sciences and Arts, and to collect all the Arabic typefaces present in Paris in order to provide the campaign with its own printing press.
Campaign components
35 thousand soldiers, carried by 300 ships and guarded by a French war fleet consisting of 55 ships, and a number of scientists in many fields.
What reserves were made during the preparation of the campaign?
When embarking on and preparing for any action other than a military action, there must be precautions taken, and these are among the most famous precautions that have been taken and are known in official history about which there is no disagreement.
The destination of the fleet was kept secret and confidential, to the point that almost all of the men – almost all of it – did not know the destination of the fleet. In a statement with special characteristics, Napoleon addressed the new “Army of the East,” referring to it as merely a wing of the French army preparing to invade England, and asked Sailors and soldiers had to trust him even though he could not yet determine the tasks assigned to them.
■ When did the campaign start?
The expedition sailed from the port of Toulon on May 19, 1798 AD.
■ Events that occurred before the campaign arrived?
On June 9, the French fleet appeared off the coast of Malta, and Napoleon delayed on the island for a week to reorganize the administration of the island according to the French administration model.
Despite the complete secrecy surrounding the movements of the French campaign and its destination, news of it leaked to Britain, the arch enemy of France, and the British fleet began monitoring navigation in the Mediterranean. Nelson, the commander of the fleet, was able to reach the port of Alexandria three days before the arrival of the French campaign, and he sent a small delegation to reach an understanding with Mr. (Muhammad Karim), the governor of the city, and to inform him that they had come to search for the French, who had launched a major campaign and might attack Alexandria, which would not be able to push it and resist it. But Mr. Muhammad Karim thought that it was a trick on the part of the English to occupy the city under the pretext of helping the Egyptians to repel the French, and he spoke harshly to the mission; She offered that the British fleet should stand at sea to meet the French campaign, and that it might need to be supplied with water and provisions in exchange for paying the price, but the authorities rejected this request.
Britain expected that the destination of the French campaign to Ottoman Misr would be evidence of its intention to divide areas of influence in the Arab world and their competition in choosing the most important and influential areas in it, to be the center of gravity of sovereignty and from there to proceed to the rest of the Arab region, and there was no better country than Misr to achieve this purpose. Colonial.
■ The campaign arrives in Misr
– Arrival to Alexandria
The French campaign arrived in Alexandria and succeeded in occupying the city on July 2, 1798 AD after hours of resistance by its people and its ruler, Mr. Muhammad Karim.
Napoleon began broadcasting a pamphlet to the people of Misr in which he talked about the reason for his coming to invade their country, which was to rid Misr of the Al-Jibt (Egypt) of the Mamluks who ruled over the Egyptian country. He emphasized in his pamphlet his respect for Islam and Muslims. He began the pamphlet with the two testimonies of faith and was keen to falsely and falsely show his Islam and the Islam of his soldiers, and he began presenting evidence. And the proof of the validity of his claim, and that the French are also loyal Muslims, he said: “They descended on Rome and destroyed there the seat of the Pope, who was always urging Al-Nasarah to fight Muslims,” and that they went to Malta and expelled from it the Knights of Saint John, who were claiming that Allah was asking them to fight. Muslims.
Napoleon realized the value of the historical religious ties that united the Egyptians and the Ottomans under the banner of the Islamic Caliphate. He was careful not to appear as an aggressor against the rights of the Ottoman Sultan. He worked to convince the Egyptians that the French were friends of the Ottoman Sultan.
– The road to Cairo
On the evening of July 3, 1798 AD, the campaign marched on Cairo. The campaign took two routes, one of which was land and the main route was taken by the campaign. It runs from Alexandria to Damanhour and Rahmaniyah, and Umm Dinar is 15 miles from Giza. The other route is by sea and is taken by light fleet vessels in the Rosetta Branch to meet the land campaign near Cairo.
The campaign’s path to Cairo was not easy, as its soldiers faced many hardships and efforts, and they faced resistance from the people of the country. On July 13, 1798 AD, the first naval battle took place between Mamluk ships and the French at Shubrakhit. Crowds of peasant residents were attacking the French fleet from both shores. However, the modern weapons possessed by the French fleet decided the battle in its favor, and Murad Bey, the Mamluk commander, was forced to retreat towards Cairo.
Then Murad Bey met the French at the Imbaba region on July 21, 1798 AD in a battle that the French called the Battle of the Pyramids. There he said to his soldiers his famous saying: “Forty centuries are looking forward to you.”
Once again, the French faced this attack with cannons, rifles, and fixed bayonets, killing seventy Frenchmen and one thousand five hundred Mamluks, and many of them drowned in the Nile during their reckless escape.
On July 22, the Turkish authorities in Cairo sent the keys of the city to Napoleon, which meant surrender.
On July 32, Napoleon entered Cairo without encountering resistance.
– Napoleon in Cairo
Napoleon entered the city of Cairo, surrounded by his forces on all sides, intending to consolidate his occupation of the country by showing friendliness to the Egyptians, establishing a friendly relationship with the Ottoman Empire, and respecting the beliefs of the people of the country and preserving their traditions and customs. So that he could establish a military base, and turn Misr into a strong colony from which he could direct strong blows to the British Empire.
His works:
On the second day of his entry into Cairo, which was July 25, 1798 AD, Napoleon established the Cairo Diwan of nine senior sheikhs and scholars to govern the city of Cairo.
From Cairo, he issued orders that Misr’s affairs be managed through Arab offices under his control.
He prevented his soldiers from looting and plundering and protected existing property rights, but he continued to collect taxes imposed by the invading Mamluks on the people of the country to finance his army.
He held a meeting with campaign scientists to develop plans to eliminate the plague, introduce new industries, develop Egyptian education systems, improve applicable laws, establish postal services and a transportation system, repair canals, control irrigation, and connect the Nile to the Red Sea.
Napoleon ordered the publication of the official political newspaper, the mouthpiece of the French army, entitled “Misr Post” (“Courie d’Misr”) on August 29, 1798. It was published every five days, and 116 issues were issued. It was followed by the “Egyptian Publican” newspaper (Dakad Agbesian). It was issued every ten days (it was in fact a quarterly issue, of which only three issues were issued). It is the mouthpiece of the scientific mission accompanying the French army. The readers of these two newspapers in the French language were mainly French people accompanying the military campaign.
In compliance with Napoleon’s orders, several newspapers were published in the Arabic language in Cairo, including the “Daily Incidents” newspaper, which was still shrouded in ambiguity about the circumstances of its establishment.
– Heading to the Levant
When Napoleon heard that the Turks were preparing an army to recapture Misr, he was determined to face the challenge, so he prepared thirteen thousand of his men for Syria. He set out on February 10, 1799, captured Arish, and completed the crossing of the Sinai Desert. A letter Napoleon wrote on February 27 shows us some aspects of this ordeal: heat and thirst. And water that is not fresh, full of salt, and sometimes no water at all. We have eaten dogs, donkeys, and camels.” They found in Gaza – to their happiness – after a harsh battle – fresh vegetables and orchards with unparalleled fruits.
On March 3, 1799, the French forces stopped in front of the city of Jaffa, which had walls, a hostile population, and a fortress defended by 2,700 valiant Turkish fighters. Napoleon sent to offer them conditions, but they rejected them. On March 7, French military engineers created a breach in the city walls through which the soldiers rushed, killing the residents who resisted them. They plundered the city, and Napoleon sent Eugene de Beauharnais to restore order in the city. He offered the right of safe exit to anyone who surrendered. The soldiers of the fort handed over their weapons so that the French would not inflict further destruction on the city. They took prisoners to Napoleon. He raised his hands in fear and asked: “What can I do?” With them?” Napoleon could not take 2,700 prisoners with him on his march. The French men did their best to find food and drink for themselves, and he could not arrange a sufficient number of guards to take these prisoners to be imprisoned in Cairo. If he released them, what would prevent them from warring with the French again? Napoleon held a meeting. Militarily, he asked them about their opinion on this problem. Their opinion was that the best solution was to kill these prisoners. About three hundred of them were pardoned, and 1,442 were killed by stabbing them with bayonets to provide ammunition.
The invaders continued their march, and on March 18, 1799, they reached the heavily fortified city of Acre. The resistance was led by Al-Jazzar Pasha, assisted by Antoine de Filippo – who was a classmate of Napoleon in Brienne. The French besieged the city without siege cannons, because the siege cannons that had been sent from Alexandria By sea, an English fleet led by Sir William Sidney seized it, delivered it to the city’s fortress (Acre), and began supplying its garrison with food and materials needed during the siege. On May 20, after the French spent two months in front of the city walls and suffered heavy losses, Napoleon ordered them to return to Misr. Napoleon later stated with sorrow: “Philippeau made me retreat from Acre. If it were not for him, I would have become the master of the key to the East and I would have been able to go to Constantinople and restore the Eastern Empire.”
– Return to Misr
The return to Misr along the coast was in successive days of bad luck. The army would sometimes march for up to eleven hours a day between wells whose water was undrinkable in most cases, poisoning the body and hardly quenching thirst. Napoleon asked the campaign’s doctors to administer lethal doses of opium to eliminate those suffering from incurable diseases, but the doctors refused and Napoleon withdrew his proposal, and ordered him to abandon horse riding and leave it to the sick. He made himself a role model for his officers by walking on his feet, abandoning his sick horse. On June 14, 1799, the exhausted French army entered the city of Cairo with a victorious entry and displayed seventeen enemy flags and sixteen Turkish prisoners, as proof that the campaign had achieved a proud victory. Their entry into Cairo was after an arduous journey in which they crossed 300 in twenty-six days.
On July 11, 1799, 100 ships landed on the coast of Abu Qir Bay, a Turkish army to expel the French from Misr, so Napoleon left Cairo, heading north at the head of his best soldiers, and attacked the Turkish army, inflicting on it a terrible defeat on July 25, to the point that many Turks preferred to rush into the sea to die. Drowned instead of facing the violently charging French knights.
– Napoleon returns to France
In mid-July, he received from the administration’s government an order that had been sent to him on May 26…instructing him to return to Paris immediately. He was determined to return to France somehow, despite the British blockade, to make his way to power, and to remove the wrong leaders who had allowed all his gains in Italy to be lost so quickly.
Napoleon organized military and administrative matters in Cairo.
Kléber appointed the oppositionist to be at the head of what remained of France’s dream of annexing Misr to it. The treasury was empty, in addition to being indebted to six million francs. There were arrears to the soldiers amounting to four million francs, and the number of French soldiers was decreasing day by day, as was their morale, while The country’s resistant people are growing stronger and are waiting for the opportunity to carry out another revolution. It was possible at any time for Turkey and Great Britain to send military forces to Misr that could – with the help of the people of the country – sooner or later force the French to surrender. Napoleon knew all of this and could not justify his departure from Misr except by saying that he was wanted in Paris and had an order to return.
When he was bidding farewell to his soldiers, he raised his voice and said: “If I am lucky and reach France, the rule of these foolish talkative people must end.” Support must be sent to these besieged conquerors. This support never arrived (it is noteworthy that Napoleon had promised – earlier – to provide each of his soldiers with six hectares of land after they returned victorious to their country).
The two frigates Muiron and Carre`re had escaped the annihilation inflicted by the British fleet on the French fleet at Abu Qir, so Napoleon sent an order to equip them in an attempt to reach France. On August 23, 1799, he boarded the ship Muiron. Due to fog and good luck, the two ships escaped the surveillance of Nelson’s spies and his fleet. Napoleon and those with him were unable to stop in Malta because the victorious British had seized this fortified site on February 9. On October 9, the ships anchored off Fréjus, and Napoleon and his aides rowed to the shore at St.Raphae`l. Now it was either “the Tsar or nobody.”
■ End of the French campaign
When Napoleon left his fleet in Alexandria, heading to Cairo, he had ordered Vice Admiral [François-Paul Broy] to unload all his cargo of materials needed for the soldiers and then sail as quickly as possible to Corfu, which the French had captured. He also ordered him to take all measures to avoid The British intervened, but bad weather delayed Brueys’ sailing, and during this period of delay he anchored his fleet in nearby Abu Qir Bay, and there, on July 13, 1798, Nelson saw him and quickly attacked him. The two confronting naval forces seemed equal: the English naval forces consisted of 41 warships and a two-masted ship. The French naval forces consisted of 31 warships and four frigates. But the French sailors’ longing to return to their country had increased and they were not sufficiently trained. As for the British sailors, the sea was their second home, which they had become accustomed to and familiar with, and now their (the British) organization was the most superior and their ingenuity. The navy and their bravery prevailed all day and night because the bloody battle continued until dawn on the first of August.
At ten o’clock on July 13, the command ship (which had 120 guns on it) exploded, and almost everyone on board was killed, including the naval general himself, who was forty-five years old. Only two French ships were able to escape, and they reached French losses were more than 1,750 killed and 1,500 wounded, while British losses were 812 killed and 276 wounded (including Nelson).
This battle (the naval battle of Abu Qir, in addition to the Battle of Trafalgar (1805)… are the last two attempts made by Napoleonic France to challenge English sovereignty over the seas. When news of this sweeping setback reached Napoleon in Cairo, he became certain that his conquest of Misr had become meaningless. .
The adventurers accompanying him were now surrounded by land and sea and there was no way for French aid to reach them, and they would soon be at the mercy of the country’s hostile people and the unfavorable environment.
In the naval battle of Abu Qir, after the siege of the Egyptian shores, the French fleet was destroyed and sank as a whole, so General Menno then signed the handover agreement with the English army and they departed fully equipped from Misr on board the English ships.
The departure of the French was in… 1801
—————————-
What did the French do throughout their presence in Misr?
The French printing press was established immediately, and 146 French scientists established two schools to teach their children born in Misr in the European style. They established an acting theatre, an Egyptian scientific complex, a center for medicine and pharmacy, a five-hundred-bed hospital, a karantina (quarantine) service, a chemical laboratory, an astronomical observatory, a painting gallery, and a zoo. And a museum of natural history, an engineering corps, workshops for producing consumer materials, industries, factories, mills… and so on.
In July 1799, the Egyptian Scientific Institute was organized by Egyptian scholars and campaign scholars… and the scholars were the ones who prepared the twenty-four huge volumes that were financed and published by the French government, entitled Description de L`Egypte (9081-8281), and one of these scholars we do not know. However, his name is Bouchard. In the year 9971, in a city thirty miles from Alexandria, the Rosetta Stone was found bearing inscriptions in two languages and three scripts (hieroglyphics, demotic, and Greek).
Napoleon’s goal in establishing the Egyptian Institute was focused, on the one hand, on performing a civilizational cultural message represented by disseminating the achievements of European science and technology among the Egyptian people, and on the other hand, on benefiting from the medieval Arab-Islamic heritage in the field of developing French science.
It is worth noting that the efforts of French scientists at the institute have been crowned with complete success in its work, and among the work it has undertaken are:
– Writing a French-Arabic conversation book
– Manufacture of an Egyptian Coptic-European harmonic calendar
– Collecting and examining ancient Arabic manuscripts, and carefully studying ancient Egyptian history, Pharaonic civilization, ethnography, folklore, geography, botany, zoology, minerals, and other fields of science and knowledge.
They also came up with the idea of a project to build a canal between the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea.
They planned year-round navigation on the Nile River, establishing irrigation canals, securing drinking water, eliminating rampant diseases and epidemics, planting new agricultural crops and other projects that found their way to implementation in a very short time. They also paid special attention to restoring and lighting the streets in each of Cairo and Alexandria, as well as improving working and living conditions there
The results of their study appeared in 24 huge volumes of the book “Description of Misr.”
■ What are the repercussions that this campaign had?
The majority of foreign opinions on the long-term repercussions of the military campaign are:
1- “Napoleon shook with his strong hand those pillars on which the East believed it stood with firm convictions. The Egyptian campaign was the spark that awakened the East from its long slumber. The prestige of our mighty armies and their victories sparked a major revolution in the thinking of the Easterners.”
2- “The French victories eliminated the Mamluks, demonstrated to the Arabs the reality of the weakness and abandonment of their tyrannical rulers, and paved the way for the revival and revival of the Arab nation.”
3- The flexible tolerance that Napoleon showed towards the religious beliefs and moral values of the occupied people (the Arabs) motivated him, albeit belatedly, to make extensive contacts with Europe and to move towards Western civilization.
As for Egyptian historians and thinkers, some of them have different points of view, including:
1- The achievements of French science and technology, and French cultural projects and measures, were a great revelation that pushed Egyptians towards conscious, purposeful thinking.
2- It laid the foundations for French-Egyptian communications.
3- The devastating blows suffered by the Mamluks paved the way for the reformist Muhammad Ali to take over the reins of power.
4- The Egyptian Renaissance began following the Bonapartist campaign (1798-1801) under the ruler – the reformer Muhammad Ali (1805-1848). However, the coordination of scientific ideas and opinions scattered throughout the multiplication of his book allows us to conclude that the late East’s aspiration to absorb European scientific and technical thought was one of The main incentives for the Egyptian Renaissance. This led to European-style reforms. This aspiration and ambition were born among the Egyptian people as a result of their contact with Napoleon Bonaparte.
—————————-
The important question: What activities did the French campaign leave behind in Misr?
■ Scientific results
1- The French campaign took many scholars in various fields to research the Egyptian environment, the Egyptian people, customs and traditions, antiquities, and Egyptology. They also brought with them two printing presses, one French and the other Arabic, as well as translators. The result was a book describing Misr, in which they extensively mentioned everything related to Misr, including history, geography, and topography. , provided with illustrated diagrams in several large volumes.
2- Deciphering the ancient Egyptian language, which was mysterious to the world, by French scientist Champollion, after the discovery of the Rosetta Stone.
■ Political results
1- The French campaign against Misr drew the attention of the Western world to Misr and its strategic location, especially England.
2- Raising national awareness among Egyptians and drawing their attention to the unity of the goals of the occupier, regardless of their backgrounds.
■ Social outcomes
1- The Egyptians learned about Western civilization with its advantages and disadvantages
2- The Egyptians knew some administrative systems from the French, including birth and death records, as well as the French trial system.
——————–
But the important logical question is always absent, and it is the question that must be asked and not any other question:
What did France benefit from this campaign, or what did it achieve?!
This huge campaign, with all this equipment, secrecy, and secrecy, and three years, did not benefit France at all.
This campaign has achieved nothing of benefit to the country of France, which loves money and plunder… The campaign went to write 24 volumes for the Encyclopedia of Misr and discover the Rosetta Stone.
One of the campaign’s achievements is writing a book about Misr
Ridiculous lol
24 volumes that France could have written in France by its scholars or sent ten scholars to write them, and it would not have required an invasion.
France could have sent scientists to excavate antiquities in order to decipher the inscriptions of Misr, and chance could have led them to discover the Rosetta Stone.
A popular proverb says: There is no pilgrim who does not seek forgiveness.
Especially since we believe that the campaign succeeded and did not fail and achieved all its goals, because the leader of the campaign, Napoleon, was promoted to a very senior position. He was crowned Emperor of France in 1804.
—————————
So….we have to read and read the campaign memoirs, to know what France did in Misr during the campaign…..because a huge campaign and 3 years and France leaving so easily is illogical, because France stayed for 130 years in Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia. She was only expelled by force.
But when we go to investigate this matter, strange precautions appear before us again… When we go to read the memoirs of the soldiers on the campaign, we will find that writing any memoirs about the campaign was prohibited, censorship of any book that talks about the campaign, and revisions took place on those writings.
————-
I will quote you an article found on the Internet
(Napoleon Bonaparte in Misr through the eyes of his military campaign officers whom he tried to silence) Wael Gamal El-Din BBC – November 28, 2019.
The period that followed the French campaign against Misr led by Napoleon Bonaparte (1798-1801) witnessed a remarkable passion for writing the history of that short and controversial period, on both the French and Egyptian levels, prompting its contemporaries to record testimonies that they wrote in memoirs and diaries that carried the character of history and documentation for the period, but they were launched with motives Personality towards their leader.
These writings, especially in the first half of the nineteenth century, were affected by a state of division in opinion among the eyewitnesses of the French leaders themselves, according to their intellectual tendencies and the degree of their loyalty to the leader of the campaign, Bonaparte. Their writings emerged differing in terms of the reality of the historical narrative and its interpretation.
These memoirs, written by some commanders, officers, and sometimes simple soldiers, were in line with the whims of Bonaparte, who wanted to maximize his glory by covering up military failures in Misr, while others were revealing facts that posed a threat to the young leader’s future, his glory, and his political and military victories in Europe under the banner of the French Revolution. .
The writings, especially in the first half of the nineteenth century, were influenced by a state of division among eyewitnesses of French leaders, intellectual divisions and trends.
Historians monitor three intellectual trends that dominated French society during the nineteenth century, and played a role in writing the history of the French campaign against Misr in general, and Bonaparte in particular:
– A trend that began in the person of Bonaparte, “the Emperor,” that made him a subject for narrating the facts of his campaign. It focused on glorifying him as a prominent leader, covering up or justifying his failures before French society and European public opinion.
– A trend that followed the fall of Bonaparte’s rule in 1815, a trend supported by the returning French monarchy in the Bourbon dynasty (1815-1830). It focused on exposing Bonaparte’s propaganda and belittling his status, and considering the Misr campaign as his first failed campaign and the beginning of France’s defeats under his leadership. A trend that was described as nationalist. Hafez His supporters viewed the gains of the French Revolution as a legacy that could not be limited to one person, no matter how great his status. He focused on considering the Misr campaign as one of the “distinctive” wars of the revolution to spread its principles outside French borders. “Napoleonic” challenges
The French authority, represented by Bonaparte at the time, took a very hostile stance towards everything that was written negatively in the memoirs of military leaders who participated in his campaign against Misr. His severity was evident in his reaction to the memoirs of General René, one of his most prominent commanders, which he published in Paris in 1802, after… One year after the army returned to France, under the title “Misr after the Battle of Heliopolis.”
In his memoirs, René revealed the state of confusion and disorder of the French army in Misr, and that his country, represented by the “Directorate (Administration)” government at the time, suffered heavy human and material losses, which prompted Bonaparte to issue a decision prohibiting the circulation of René’s memoirs, persecuting them in libraries, and confiscating their copies.
René’s memoirs reinforced Bonaparte’s desire to try to get rid of documents and reports that might incriminate him
Bonaparte realized the danger of publishing sensitive facts and information about the Misr campaign, and that this might make him lose his military and political luster, because it would open the way for opponents waiting for the opportunity to overthrow him, hold him accountable for his failure to achieve the goals he promoted, and then remove him from the French scene.
However, England, France’s historical enemy, succeeded in obtaining a copy of René’s memoirs, translated them into English, published them in the same year under the same title, and presented them to Europe with praise from its publisher, who described René as impartial in conveying his information.
René’s memoirs reinforced Bonaparte’s desire to try to get rid of documents and reports that might incriminate him, preserved in French archives. Historical sources say that on June 17, 1802, he sent his private secretary, Louis de Buren, to an official in charge of the archives and demanded that he hand over all the papers and documents in his possession. Related to Misr.
Prosecutions and penalties
Bonaparte began tracking everything that was published about him in the context of his Egyptian campaign, especially after the release of another memoir written by a French soldier who participated in the campaign called Jacques Mew, entitled “Memoirs of the History of the Campaigns against Misr and Syria during the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Years of the French Republic,” in which he exposed the deteriorating conditions of the soldiers and army of the campaign. Bonaparte ordered the formation of a committee concerned with reviewing books before their publication and revising what was contained in them. The procedure included everything written about the Misr campaign specifically and the French Revolutionary Wars in general.
The French authority, represented by Bonaparte, took a very hostile stance towards everything that was written negatively in the memoirs of military leaders.
The French historian Felix Bontai says in his study “Napoleon I and the System of Authority in France” that the consolidation of Napoleon’s rule “made him tighten his control over the publication of the memoirs of his military men who participated with him in his campaign against Misr, and he gave broad powers to the Council of State that reached the point of determining the number of copies of the book and deleting information that he considered… The Council is not appropriate, and sometimes imposes financial fines on the writer or issues arrest warrants and confiscation of his property. The Council is a body that protects the interests of France represented by the state of Emperor Bonaparte.”
The decision contributed to the reluctance of military personnel to actually write testimonies and memoirs for fear of new procedures, even if they were Bonaparte supporters in the army, such as Officer Huet, who wrote in the introduction to his memoirs entitled “The Misr Campaign: Memoirs of an Officer in the French Army,” which is preserved in the National Archives in Cairo. , that he was serving in General Rene’s division.
Howe asserted that “his writing of the history of military operations in Misr and Syria is a response to everyone who tries to insult Napoleon’s campaign in Misr” and the accusations directed at him that he had inflicted great losses on the army and the state. Thus, Howe made the French campaign and its leader, in writing his memoirs, an essential part of the national history of France.
Howe mentioned the marginalization of the image of Egyptian resistance to Bonaparte, and he portrayed the Egyptians as a society “submissive without will.”
Howet warned against presenting a “dark and distorted” picture of the Egyptian campaign and its leader, because this trend “will lead to the obliteration of all the great and impressive results achieved by our valiant army,” which Howet saw as “deserving of praise and to be a source of pride for successive generations in France.”
Howé followed a rhetorical style that produced a text worthy of addressing the French reader to the history of the campaign against Misr on both the cultural and military levels, using linguistic formulas that raised the status of his military institution and its leader.
Howie also tried to marginalize the image of the Egyptian resistance to Bonaparte, and portrayed the Egyptians as a society that “surrendered without will.” He even did not talk about the first Cairo revolution against Bonaparte except in part of one page. Rather, he tried to reduce its importance and described it in text as “a general rebellion and a popular uprising.” “, although he gives it a subtitle in the margin of his memoirs as “The Revolution of Cairo and the Provinces of October 22 to 26 (1798).”
Howe made the causes of the revolution merely an Egyptian objection to the new administration of the country established by Bonaparte, and blamed the Mamluks as its driver in defense of their personal interests, in order to raise the glory of his leader before the French reader and obscure some of the failures.
Bonaparte was keen to provide perceptions and explanations in his memoirs known as “The Memorial”, which he dictated to Count Lacaze.
“Farewell to glory”
The Egyptian campaign pursued Bonaparte until his exile on the island of St. Helena in 1815, which is evident in his keenness to provide perceptions and explanations, briefly while recounting the facts of the history of his wars in his memoirs known as “The Memorial,” which he dictated to Count Lacaze, and in detail in other memoirs he dictated to the general. Bertrand entitled The Campaigns of Misr and Syria 1798-1799: Memoirs of the History of Napoleon as Dictated by Himself at St. Helena, published in 1847.
The field of publishing military memoirs witnessed great activity after the fall of Bonaparte in 1815 and the return of the monarchy to France in the Bourbon family (1815-1830), which benefited from the state of dissatisfaction with the censorship of the publishing movement and the silencing of mouths. Therefore, the new monarchy unleashed the memoirs of the campaign officers, who opposed Bonaparte. What is evident is a reference to a confession written by a publisher named Morisot in 1818 in the introduction to a memoir entitled Memoirs on the Misr Campaign, written by Youssef Marie Moiret, one of the officers participating in the campaign.
The publisher asserts in the introduction to Moiret’s memoirs that “it has now become possible to reveal the truth, there is no reason for silence, and we no longer fear the power of the censors.”
The publication of Moiret’s memoirs provided an opportunity for the officer to seize it to publicly criticize Bonaparte in more than one place, especially when he spoke about the incident of handing over the authority of the General Command of the army to his successor, General Kleber, and Bonaparte’s secret escape to France, as Moiret resorted to the trick of textual comparison to compare the two most prominent leaders of the campaign.
Moiret says: “Bonaparte was only working for his own personal benefit, and had nothing before his eyes except the elevation of his status. As for General Kléber, who did not think about himself, he only expected elevation from what he actually deserved without seeking it. Even if the first (Bonaparte) did not see any hope of the possibility of assuming supreme power in his homeland (France), so he remained in Misr, to establish for himself an independent state whose price would be in the blood of all of us.”
He adds: “He (Bonaparte) is like Caesar. He thinks it is better to be the first man in Cairo, rather than the second man in Paris.”
The new monarchy took a measure different from Bonaparte’s position, although similar in purpose, as it also imposed censorship on the publication of memoirs or military writings that highlight Bonaparte as a hero or open a way for his republican supporters to restore his reputation, which is what Houet confirmed in the introduction to his memoirs, indicating that the monarchy ” Newspapers were forced to disparage the military glories of the period.”
The publication of Moiret’s memoirs provided an opportunity for the officer to seize it to publicly criticize Bonaparte in more than one place. Transformations and Pressures
The Scientific Encyclopedia of the Description of Misr was not spared from new procedures, as the scholar Champollion-Vijac points out in his study “Fourier and Napoleon: Misr and a Hundred Days,” published in Paris in 1844, that “the royal censorship extended to the volumes of the Encyclopedia (Description of Misr) itself and began reviewing everything, both small and large.” For nothing other than that it is the huge cultural project attributed to Bonaparte and his campaign,” in order to delete everything that clearly refers to the person of its leader.
Secrets and paradoxes that tell the story of the book “Description of Misr”
The Bourbon authority tightened its grip on the writing of memoirs and testimonies of soldiers loyal to Bonaparte, accusing them of loyalty to him and his period of rule. A new state of silence occurred, waiting for the favorable political opportunity to narrate testimonies characterized by independent opinion, which might correct the course, according to the point of view of its writers, away from the pressures of ruling regimes.
Colonel Chalbran says in his memoirs, “The French in Misr, or Memories of the Misr and Syria Campaigns,” published in Paris in 1855, that these pressures “pushed the generation of soldiers retired from military service loyal to Bonaparte to hold meetings (most likely secret) to discuss everything published about their campaign and to review The documents they have to begin writing memoirs serve to correct the course of those interpretations that they considered distorted their campaign and their leader.”
In his memoirs, Howet describes that the Misr campaign “suffered from distortion and falsification of facts over the course of 30 years after the return of the Army of the East (the army of the campaign) to the country,” and he describes these writings as “a product of stupidity,” while General Buren, the Minister of Foreign Affairs during the reign of Bonaparte, described them In his memoirs, they were the writings of “impostors” who gave them a “historical character.”
The Bourbon authority tightened its control over the writing of memoirs and testimonies of soldiers loyal to Bonaparte, a hopeful breakthrough
Some leaders broke their silence, taking advantage of the dissatisfaction prevailing in society at the time in protest against the conditions that France had reached after the collapse of the “Bonaparte Empire,” in addition to the ignition of societal anger due to the methods of repression that the monarchy resorted to, which led to a revolution that overthrew the Bourbon family in 1830. According to historian Muhammad Fouad Shukri in his study “The Conflict between the Bourgeoisie and Feudalism 1789-1848.”
The revolution and the overthrow of the Bourbon dynasty did not produce a new republican regime. Rather, Shukri points out in his study that Europe “feared the establishment of a warlike republican regime in France similar to what followed the French Revolution in 1789, and it was self-evident that the new ruling Orléans dynasty (1830- 1848) as a kind of censorship to remain in power, and a state of caution and caution against publishing memoirs that exalted Bonaparte and the republican system became corrupt again.
Napoleon’s correspondence reveals his “project to establish an empire in Dar al-Islam” from Misr
Examples can be observed such as the testimony of Officer Charles Richardard and his memoirs entitled “New Memoirs on the French Army’s Campaign against Misr and Syria,” which was waiting for the opportunity for the fall of the monarchy and the declaration of the Second French Republic in 1848, as well as General Baron De Vernois, who participated in most of the French wars and was reluctant to publish his memoirs. It is titled “With Bonaparte in Italy and Misr,” because of his “discontent with the monarchy in France,” as he refers to it.
Although the censorship of the publication of memoirs by soldiers with different intellectual and political tendencies contributed to the disparity in the picture of that period and of Bonaparte during the first half of the nineteenth century, a state of relief emerged at the beginning of the twentieth century, and created the opportunity to publish documents in a more independent manner, as the Frenchman Lagonquière pointed out. In his study The Misr Campaign, consisting of five volumes, which he published between 1897 and 1906.
Lagonquière says: “The critical circumstances of France at that time hindered the dissemination of facts, and now, after a century has passed since the campaign, the controversy over it has lost its usefulness, the myth has receded, and objective, neutral history has become an open book.”
Writing the history of Bonaparte’s campaign against Misr reflected historical confusion at the military and political levels during the first half of the nineteenth century. Although the revolutionary trend in writing the history of that campaign had declined in strength with the return of the monarchy to France, the second half of the same century witnessed a new launch for this trend. In writing, especially in the wake of the 1871 Revolution and the establishment of the Third French Republic in 1880.
Coronation ceremony of Bonaparte as Emperor of France in 1804
Laila Anan, professor of French civilization at Cairo University, says in her study, “The French campaign: enlightenment or fraud?” The reasons for the French campaign against Misr, like any event, historical or non-historical, are manifold and rooted in a distant past.
Annan adds: “Some see it as the last of the Crusades, and others see it as the first wave of sweeping European colonial invasion in the nineteenth century, but some historians treat it as a secondary event, and pass over it as they recount the history of France, and others deal with it separately from what preceded it or Events befell it, as if it were a fruit that came out of nowhere, without a tree to carry it, except for its relationship with its famous leader (Bonaparte), who became an emperor who changed the course of events in all of Europe.