Classical versus Islamic Antiquities in Colonial Archaeology: The Russian Empire and French North Africa

Abstract

This chapter revisits the connection between nationalism and religion in a very different setting to that seen in the biblical lands (Chapter 6) and, to a certain extent, in Central, South, and Southeast Asia (Chapters 7 and 8). It analyses how religion is able to induce the creation of alternative historical discourses to those formed on the basis of the remains of the classical civilizations. On the one hand, the historical account about the Greeks, the Romans and other contemporary peoples influenced by them such as the Scythes still maintained their powerful allure as symbols of civilization and of one’s own empire. On the other, however, the weight religion had in the nineteenth century allowed for the search of the national origin in other periods with special significance for particular churches. Thus, the Byzantine period became appropriated as a Golden Age in the Russian Empire. In contrast, the Islamic past never acquired a similar status in the French colonies of North Africa. The religious undertones of particular archaeological periods were also used to undertake a racial reading of modern populations, and therefore had a direct impact on the colonization of the area. Yet, during the nineteenth century the effect of all this in archaeology was only limited, for the search for ancient remains stubbornly maintained a focus on the classical past. A comparison between the archaeology of the Russian colonies and of French North Africa reveals several similarities and differences which shed light on the processes guiding the development of archaeology in each of these areas. In both of them the historical narrative produced by the colonizers was one in which the classical periods were better regarded and valued more positively than others, following a hierarchy from classical to Byzantine, and then to the prehistoric and Islamic periods. Also, in both colonial areas archaeology was practised by many different actors: individuals from a breadth of occupations, and professionals belonging to many institutions, colonizers settled in the colonies as well as others coming from the metropolis. Nevertheless, this diversity was much more marked in North Africa than in the Russian colonies.