The Egyptologist evokes the romantic image of the archaeologist searching for ancient treasures amid the dunes. Yet, far from these clichés, Egyptology emerges as a complex discipline, interwoven with political, diplomatic, and scientific issues. Today, researchers are undertaking a historiographical reexamination of the institution that, for nearly a century, regulated archaeological excavations in Egypt: the Antiquities Service.
We speak with Carole Jarsaillon *, an Egyptologist and historian at the Collège de France.
Egyptology has long been viewed as an autonomous discipline, paying little attention to its own historical roots or its relationship with other sciences. Egyptologist Carole Jarsaillon observes that “until recently, historiographical topics in Egyptology were very rare.” But the discipline’s bicentennial, celebrated in 2022, has brought to light a trend—developing over several years—toward a reflective reexamination of its origins, institutions, and key figures.
This historiographical shift has prompted a critical reexamination of Western scientific institutions operating in Egypt, foremost among them the Antiquities Service, established in Egypt in 1858 by the Frenchman Auguste Mariette. While this institution has often been perceived as merely an extension of French cultural imperialism, Carole Jarsaillon emphasizes its dual affiliation: “It is not an institution external to Egypt. It operates under the authority of the Viceroy of Egypt, and later under that of the Egyptian government.” Auguste Mariette was certainly an influential figure, as were the successive French directors who led the institution until 1952. However, his role was part of a more nuanced interplay of actors and interests than a simplistic reading of power dynamics would suggest.
A Diplomatic History of Objects
An analysis of this institution sheds light on the complexity of the Egyptian political context at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. Following the British occupation of 1882, Egypt officially became a protectorate in 1914. Yet the Antiquities Service remained under French leadership until 1952. This paradoxical arrangement—an Egyptian government institution headed by French officials in a territory under British mandate—illustrates what Carole Jarsaillon calls an “institutional and diplomatic mille-feuille.” “The French working for the Antiquities Service are Egyptian civil servants, not employees of the French government , ” she is keen to point out, revealing a system in which several de facto sovereignties coexist. This unique diplomatic arrangement helps explain the institution’s relative stability, but also its adaptability in the face of political challenges. The Antiquities Service has thus always been integrated into Egyptian ministries, moving successively from the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Public Works to that of the Ministry of Public Education.
Far from limiting itself to the institution’s status alone, this study of the Antiquities Service allows us to examine the concrete practices that shaped archaeology in Egypt during the first half of the 20th century. “Two areas of study shed light on the issues surrounding this service. On the one hand, the allocation of excavation permits to archaeological teams, and on the other, the division of artifacts between foreign excavators and the Egyptian state , allow us to examine the political influence within the Service , ” notes the Egyptologist. However, as the researcher points out, a study of historical sources reveals a more complex dynamic. Far from systematic favoritism toward dominant nations, the allocation of permits was guided by more subtle considerations, in which diplomatic or scientific priorities did not necessarily align with the imperial interests of the French and British. This observation reflects the British government’s relative lack of interest in archaeological matters, which were deemed secondary to economic and strategic imperatives. France, on the other hand, embraced Egyptology as a means of asserting its scientific prestige. “It was a way to maintain French influence in Egypt , ” explains Carole Jarsaillon. The Antiquities Service thus became a site of symbolic confrontation between colonial powers, but also a space for negotiation between knowledge and power, between science and diplomacy.
A major turning point occurred in 1922, under the leadership of Pierre Lacau. He changed the system for dividing up excavation finds by establishing a simple rule. Until then, the rule had been that half of the objects found would go to museums in the country of origin of the archaeological mission, while the other half would remain in Egypt. “Starting in 1922, the Antiquities Service, led by Pierre Lacau, could decide whether objects found during excavations would be donated to Western museums—and which specific objects would be included , ” she explains. This was both a political and scientific move, putting an end to a system of automatic division to allow for a genuine Egyptian heritage policy. This reform took place within an emerging postcolonial context, marked by Egypt’s unilateral independence in 1922 and the beginning of a process of nationalization of archaeological practice.
A Material and Political History of Egyptology
The key to understanding these changes lies in the study of an often-neglected body of archival material. Unlike the scholarly papers, the administrative portion of the collection of Pierre Lacau—director of the Antiquities Service from 1914 to 1936—has received little attention to date. Added to this are diplomatic sources held at the National Archives in Paris and the Foreign Office archives in London, as well as scholarly correspondence scattered across various European institutions. This geographical and institutional dispersion of the documents constitutes one of the main challenges of this research. “The sources remain a challenge, because some archives are difficult to access, others are incomplete, or we discover the existence of new documents by chance.” But this archival effort addresses a critical contemporary issue: the traceability of objects. By studying the historical conditions under which these objects were shared and exported, Carole Jarsaillon provides concrete evidence for current debates on the restitution of foreign cultural heritage held in European museums. The researcher emphasizes the importance of documenting the facts: “The goal is to have data so we can understand how these objects arrived in Europe, and then make informed decisions , ” she explains. By tracing the legal and diplomatic circumstances under which these artifacts left Egypt, this work sheds light on contemporary debates about restitution.
This investigation into the Egyptian Antiquities Service illustrates how archaeological practices cannot be separated from their institutional, political, and diplomatic contexts. By reconstructing the administrative history of an institution often described in unambiguous terms as “colonial,” she brings to light the plurality of affiliations, interests, and rationales that shaped the organization of excavations in Egypt. The case of the Antiquities Service, led by the French in a country administered by the British, reveals the full complexity of the circulation of knowledge and forms of authority during the imperial era. Studying the institutional history of Egyptology thus provides a pathway to a renewed understanding of current heritage issues. By reconnecting scholarly production to its historical contexts, historiography serves here as a critical tool, capable of shedding light on the conditions under which knowledge and collections are legitimized—or called into question.
*Carole Jarsaillon is a Ph.D. candidate in Egyptology at EPHE-PSL, under the supervision of Anne-Claire Bonneville and Professor Laurent Coulon, and a research assistant at the Chair of The Civilization of Pharaonic Egypt at the Collège de France.
