The recent visit of the former king of Egypt, Ahmed Fuad II, and his son, Mohamed Ali Farouk, at the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization (NMEC) in Fustat, evokes a symbolic and revealing moment on the way in which Egyptian history and identity are experienced and transferred through generations. This excursion, embellished with a reflected commentary on the features and importance of the NMEC, raises several questions about the way in which the past is preserved and interpreted in the present.
The NMEC, inaugurated in 2021, asserts itself as a unique space in the Egyptian museum landscape, presenting not only objects, but also the continuity of the country’s cultural identity. Mohamed Ali Farouk underlined this dimension by saying that the museum “tells the story of Egypt in its continuity, from prehistoric times to today.” Through this declaration, it highlights a fundamental aspect: the valuation of cultural heritage as a common thread of national identity.
The choices from one museum to another, such as the large Egyptian museum or the NMEC, may seem harmless at first glance, but they carry a deep signication. The great Egyptian museum, although particularly impressive by its resources and modern architecture, often focuses on pharaonic treasures and ancient wonders. On the other hand, the NMEC aims to offer a more integrative vision, highlighting the spiritual, material and human dimensions that have shaped Egypt. This choice reflects a desire to anchor the values of Egyptian identity in a richer and diversified story.
In this regard, the creation of the Association of Friends of the NMEC, of which Mohamed Ali Farouk is a founding member, represents a collective effort to support this institution. It is essential to wonder what role can play such associations in the promotion of cultural and educational values within Egyptian society. By facilitating access to quality educational experiences, they help to strengthen the link between heritage and the population, while cultivating a feeling of belonging and identity.
However, how to explain the attention gap granted between the NMEC and the great Egyptian museum? This situation could be perceived as an opportunity for dialogue on the way in which the different narrations of history can coexist. The existence of a “living museum”, as Farouk describes, arouses reflections on how to encourage not only preservation, but also discussion and interaction with cultural heritage.
The visits to historical figures like Ahmed Fuad II to the NMEC also have a symbolic weight. They can be interpreted as an attempt to reconnect with a royal past which, although over, continues to influence contemporary identity. The presence of the old monarchy, from a historical point of view, raises relevant reflections on the way in which traditional symbols can coexist with modern values.
In the era of globalization, the preservation of cultural identity becomes a major issue for many countries, including Egypt. The need to find a balance between heritage and contemporary evolution is essential to avoid fractures within society. The NMEC, through its narrative and immersive approach, could become a formidable model for the way in which nations can approach their own history, taking into account the lessons of the past while projecting themselves towards the future.
In conclusion, the visit of Ahmed Fuad II and his son to the NMEC, as well as the reflections which result from it, open a window on broader issues concerning national identity, the preservation of heritage and historical narration in Egypt. What avenues of improvement can be explored to promote a better interaction between the past and the present, and the way in which the different generations can collaborate to shape a faithful and inclusive vision of their history? The answer to this question could well be the key to a constructive dialogue on the cultural future of Egypt.