The Arabic or Islamic conquest of Egypt in 639-642 CE had far-reaching consequences. Discussions of this historical event play a major role in modern Muslim-Christian discussions. Christians speak of a conquest whereas Muslims tend to speak of the opening of Egypt or liberation of Egypt from its Roman/Byzantine occupiers.

The shifting views of German Coptologist C. Detlef G. Müller, who in 1981 still saw Arabs as the liberators of the Copts^[i] or Egyptians, but no longer did so in 1985, are interesting.

In 1985, Müller published an article about the attitudes of the Coptic patriarchs vis-à-vis the Islamic authorities and Islam based on his analysis of the History of the Patriarchs. Nothing in the History provides evidence that the Orthodox Copts received the Muslims as liberators. Relations between the Copts and their Muslim rulers were much more complex. We have only few texts from this period and nearly all come from Miaphysite or Coptic Orthodox sources.[ii] We thus need to be cautious in making far-reaching claims. Clearly, much more research should be conducted.

Discussion of the conquest of Egypt is fraught with sensitivities because it has been misused for political ends. Some contemporary Coptic activists use the conquest to argue that they are the only true Egyptians or the only true descendants of pre-Islamic Egypt, ignoring that practically all Egyptians have Christian forebears who converted to Islam during the intervening centuries.

Historical research should make the reader cautious. Researchers should steer away from a selective use of historical sources for contemporary political purposes.