Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Cairo University and the Making of Modern Egypt

Cairo University and the Making of Modern Egypt wider range of subjects, and specialized degrees.” (p. 141) Reid also addresses the issue of Egypt’s Coptic population, which was overrepresented in the student population, underrepresented in the faculty, and underrepresented in the Ministry of Education (relative to their presence in other ministries). Nevertheless, the most interesting discussion in this chapter centered upon the case of Khalaf Allah, whose dissertation on Quranic narrative was not accepted. His case created a controversy that would eerily be replayed in the case of Nasr Abu Zaid nearly five decades later. Parts three and four, covering the years from the early 1950s through the late 1980s, are not nearly as engaging or solid as the first two sections, which form two-thirds of the book. It is not clear whether this shortcoming is related to access to primary sources or whether the author’s intent was merely to focus on the formative period. There are no more references to the university archives, and in fact there are almost no primary sources, aside from a few interviews, listed in these sections. Most of the citations come from secondary sources in English and Arabic. The earlier sections, particularly section one, were much better with respect to http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East Duke University Press

Cairo University and the Making of Modern Egypt

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/cairo-university-and-the-making-of-modern-egypt-sApgNUHKBp
Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2001 by Duke University Press
ISSN
1089-201X
eISSN
1548-226X
DOI
10.1215/1089201X-21-1-2-73
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

wider range of subjects, and specialized degrees.” (p. 141) Reid also addresses the issue of Egypt’s Coptic population, which was overrepresented in the student population, underrepresented in the faculty, and underrepresented in the Ministry of Education (relative to their presence in other ministries). Nevertheless, the most interesting discussion in this chapter centered upon the case of Khalaf Allah, whose dissertation on Quranic narrative was not accepted. His case created a controversy that would eerily be replayed in the case of Nasr Abu Zaid nearly five decades later. Parts three and four, covering the years from the early 1950s through the late 1980s, are not nearly as engaging or solid as the first two sections, which form two-thirds of the book. It is not clear whether this shortcoming is related to access to primary sources or whether the author’s intent was merely to focus on the formative period. There are no more references to the university archives, and in fact there are almost no primary sources, aside from a few interviews, listed in these sections. Most of the citations come from secondary sources in English and Arabic. The earlier sections, particularly section one, were much better with respect to

Journal

Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle EastDuke University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2001

There are no references for this article.