Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:09:03.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Origins of Private Ownership of Land in Egypt: A Reappraisal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2009

Kenneth M. Cuno
Kenneth M. Cuno
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the historiography of Egypt it has long been accepted that private ownership of land was introduced in the nineteenth century. This development in statute law has often been linked analytically to a process of “modernization.” Modernization theory posits a fundamental dichotomy between two ideal-type societies, the traditional and modern, which implies an equally sharp discontinuity between historical eras: before and after the beginning of modernization. In this view, traditional societies lack the potential for generating significant social change from within. Change results rather from the expansion of communications and diversification of technology worldwide from modern Europe and North America. In the process of modernization, traditional norms and structures break down in the host societies, and new, rational values and institutions emerge in their place. The development of Egypt's new land regime is usually considered one such change.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Middle East Studies , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , November 1980 , pp. 245 - 275
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

Author's Note: I wish to thank Dr. Afaf Lutfi al-Sayyid-Marsot and Yahya Sadowski for their many helpful suggestions and criticisms during the successive drafts of this paper.

1 Sea Gabriel, Baer, “The Development of Private Ownership of the Land,” in his Studies in the Social History of Modern Egypt (Chicago, 1969);Google Scholar and idem, A History of Landownership in Modern Egypt 1800–1950 (Oxford, 1962).Google Scholar

2 For a more extensive discussion of modernization theory and its inadequacies, see Samuel, P. Huntington, “The Change to Change: Modernization, Development, and Politics,” Comparative Politics, 3, 3 (04 1971), 283–322.Google Scholar A statement of the theory and its application in an Egyptian context is foundin Robert, Tignor, Modernization and British Colonial Rule in Egypt 1880–1914 (Princeton, 1966).Google Scholar Writers of this school have differed over whether a change in values is primary, or whether technological change first produces the necessary change from traditional to modem values. See, e.g., Manfred, Halpern, The Politics of Social Change in the Middle East and North Africa (Princeton, 1963);Google ScholarDaniel, J. Lerner, The Passing of Traditional Society: Modernizing the Middle East (Glencoe, Ill., 1958);Google ScholarJames, A. Bill and Carl, Leiden, The Middle East: Politics and Power (Boston, 1974); and, on the subject of “technicalization,”Google ScholarMarshall, G. S. Hodgson, The Venture of Islam (3 vols.; Chicago, 1974), I, 52–53.Google Scholar

3 A recent challenge to the periodicity of the modernization thesis is Peter, Gran'sThe Islamic Roots of Capitalism (Texas, 1979).Google Scholar

4 This is not to pose the question of whether “internal forces” had more effect than ‘external” influences in this period. The internal-external dichotomy is as false as the traditional-modern, since in reality processes in both realms were intertwined and cannot be separated.

5 See, for example, Jerome, Blum, The End of the Old Order in Rural Europe (Princeton, 1978);Google Scholar and James, C. Scott, The Moral Economy of the Peasant: Rebellion and Subsistence in Southeast Asia (Yale, 1976).Google Scholar

6 This discussion follows the land system's detailed description in Stanford Shaw, “Landholding and Land-Tax Revenues in Ottoman Egypt,” in Holt, P. M., ed.,Political and Social Change in Modern Egypt (Oxford, 1968), pp. 91–103;Google Scholaridem, The Financial and Administrative Organization and Development of Ottoman Egypt, 1517–1518 (Princeton, 1962), pp. 1–50;Google Scholar and Abd, al-RahimAbd, al-RahmanAbd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrifial-Qarn al-Thāmin al-Thamin 'Ashar (Cairo, 1974), pp. 65–124.Google Scholar

7 Scott, Moral Economy, Introduction.

8 Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 65–124.Google Scholar

9 The evolution of the role of Egypt's intermediaries is best described in Shaw, “Landholding and Land-Tax Revenues in Ottoman Egypt.”

10 Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rif al-Misrī, p. 78.Google Scholar

11 ibid., pp. 83–86.

12 In particular, Baer, “The Development of Private Ownership of the Land.”

13 Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp.83–84.Google Scholar

14 Michel-Ange, Lancret, “Memoire sur le systeme d'imposition territoriale et sur l'administration des provinces d'Egypte, dans les derniers années du gouvernement des Mamlouks,” Description de l'Egypte, Etat moderne, 40, 474–475 (hereafter cited as DE).Google Scholar

14 See Maxime, Rodinson, Islam and Capitalism (Pantheon, 1973).Google Scholar

16 Blum, , The End of the Older Order. pp. 19–20.Google Scholar

17 On sixteenth-century population and prices: Fernand, Braudel, The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World of Philip II (2 vols.; Harper Torchbooks, 1975), 1. 402–410, 517–519.Google Scholar On eighteenth-century population in Europe, : Blum, , The End of the Old Order, p. 241. Given the evidence for a shared demographic experience in the sixteenth century, Middle Eastern population may have begun to increase along with Europe's in the eighteenth. This possibility is also raised in Braudel“weight of numbers” in Capitalism and Material Life 1400–1800 (2 vols.; Harper and Row, 1973), pp. 1–20.Google Scholar Egypt's population in 1800 has been underestimated by as much as one-third; see Justin, A. McCarthy, “Nineteenth-Century Egyptian Population,” Middle East Studies, 12, 3 (10. 1976), 1–139Google Scholar

18 “Between the 17305 and the first decade of the nineteenth century, cereal prices went up by 283 percent in Denmark, 259 percent in Austria, 210 percent in Germany, and 163 percent in France” (Blum, , The End of the Old Order, p. 242; on land prices and speculation: pp. 17–20; 170 241–242). In Cairo, the average prices of wheat, rice, and beans in 1791–1798 were approximately two and a half times what they were during 1680–1690 (see n. 23 below).Google Scholar

19 For Europe: ibid., pp. 17–20.

20 Braudel, , The Mediterranean, 1, 584, 591–594;Google ScholarRobert, Paris, Histoire du commerce de Marseille de 1660 à 1789, vol., Levant Le, ed. Gaston, Rambert (Paris, 1957), pp. 537–539.Google Scholar

21 The growth of French commerce in the eastern Mediterranean during the eighteenth century can be followed in Paris (ibid.); Paul, Masson, Histoire du commerce francais dans le Levant au XVIIIe siécle [Paris, 1896]).Google Scholar Textile production in parts of the eastern Mediterranean was expanding during this period, only partly in response to Europe's expansion. See Yahya Sadowski, “Eighteenth-Century Syrian Social Revolution: 1720–1840,” paper read at the 1978 Middle East Studies Association conference, Ann Arbor, Mich. The Egyptian Delta silk-finishing industry was organized by Syrians who penetrated the Egyptian economy early in the century(Girard, M. P. S., “Memoire sur l'agriculture, l'industrie, et le commerce de l'Egypte,” DE. 17, 208–209, 219–223;)Google ScholarAlbert, Hourani, “The Syrians in Egypt in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries,” Colloque Internationale sur l'Histoire du Caire (1969), pp. 222–224.Google Scholar

22 The economic history of the eastern Mediterranean in this period has yet to be approached with a region-wide perspective. The study of the Balkans is most advanced; see Peter, F. Sugar, Southeastern Europe under Ottoman Rule, 1354–1804 (Seattle and London, 1977),Google Scholar part 4. On the Lebanon: Iliya Hank, F., Politics and Change in a Traditional Society: Lebanon 1711–1845 (Princeton, 1968);Google ScholarWilliam, R. Polk, The Opening of South Lebanon. 1788–1845 (Harvard, 1963).Google Scholar On Palestine: Amnon, Cohen, Palestine in the 18th Century (Jerusalem, 1973).Google Scholar For Egypt the best discussions of countrywide production and distribution are still to be found in various articles of the Description de l'Egypte, especially Girard, “Memoire sur l'agnculture, l'industrie, et le commerce de l'Egypte.” Production and trade in Cairo is discussed in Andre Raymond, , Artisans et commerçants au Caire au XVIIIe siécle (2 vols.; Damascus, 1973).Google Scholar

23 Raymond, , Artisans et commerçants, 1, 53–65.Google Scholar Raymond stresses local conditions and events as determining fluctuations in the prices of basic commodities. Yet the century-long rise in commodity prices is roughly in accord with that of contemporary Europe. See n. 18, above, and Fernand, Braudel and Ernest, Labrousse, eds., Histoire economique et sociale de Ia France (2 vols.; Paris, 1970), I, 383–391.Google Scholar

24 Paris, Histoire du commerce de Marseille, p. 523.

25 Bistra, Cvetkova, “Quelques problémes du féodalisme ottoman a l'époque du XVIe siécle au XVIIIe siécle,” Actes du premier congrés international des études balcaniques et sud-est européenes, Sofia, 1966 (5 vols.; Sofia, 1966–1970), III, 709–720.Google Scholar

26 Trian, Stoianovich, “Land Tenure and Related Sectors of the Balkan Economy, Journal of Economic History, 13 (Fall, 1953), 402–403.Google Scholar

27 Deena, R. Sadat, “Rumeli Ayanlari: The Eighteenth Century,” Journal of Modern History 44 (09. 1972), 346–363.Google Scholar The literature discussing this has been summarized in Sugar, Southeastern Europe under Ottoman Rule, pp. 211–221.Google Scholar

28 Domique, Chevallier, “Aspects sociaux de la question d'Orient,” Annales, 14 (1959) 35–64;Google ScholarHank, , Politics and Change, on waqf, pp. 83–85, 93–95.Google Scholar

29 Cohen, Palestine in the 18th Century, passim.

30 Cvetkova, “Quelques problèmes du féodalism,” pp. 717–718.Google Scholar

31 Stanford, Shaw, History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey (2 vols.; Cambridge, 1976), 1, 232, 238.Google Scholar

32 ibid., pp. 246–247, 256–257.

33 Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 83–84.Google Scholar

34 Raymond, , Artisans et commercants, II, 721.Google Scholar

35 ibid., pp. 721–722; Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 113–114.Google Scholar

36 Terence, Walz, The Trade between Egypt and Bilād al-Sudān 1700–1820 (Cairo, 1978), pp. 110–112, 115.Google Scholar

37 Abe, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, p. 95.Google Scholar

38 Raymond, , Artisans et commerçants, II, 722–726, and I, 292.Google Scholar

39 Afaf, Marsot, ” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 16 (12. 1973), 130–154;Google Scholaridem, “The Ulama of Cairo in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries,” in Nikki, R. Keddie, ed., Scholars, Saints and Sufis (California, 1972), pp. 149–166;Google Scholaridem, “The Wealth of the Ulama in Late Eighteenth Century Cairo,” in Thomas, Naff and Roger, Owen, eds., Studies in Eighteenth Century Islamic History (Southern Illinois, 1977), pp. 205–216.Google Scholar

40 Raymond, , Artisans et commerçants, I, 79–80.Google Scholar

41 Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 87–91.Google Scholar

42 ibid., pp. 87–91.

43 ibid., p. 80. Cf., Blum, The End of the Old Order, pp. 206–207.Google Scholar

44 Lancret, , “Memoire sur le systeme d'imposition territoriale,” pp. 474–475, 483.Google Scholar

45 Abd, al-Rahman al-Jabarti, Merveilles biographiques et historiques ou chroniques du Cheikh Abd-el-Rahman el-Djabarti (Cairo, 1888–1896), VIII, 320–321; using Jacotin's figures (see table).Google Scholar

46 ibid., VIII, 95–96.

47 Sadat, , “Rumeli Ayanlari,” p. 348.Google Scholar

48 Dubois-Aymé, M. M. and Jollois, , “Voyage dans l'interieur du Delta, contenant des recherches géographiques sur quelques villes anciennes, et des observations sur les moeurs et les usages des Egyptians modernes,” DE, 12, 188–189.Google Scholar

49 The existence of production for the market should not be taken as abandonment of subsistence-oriented agriculture. Peasants satisfied subsistence needs first. Some cash cropping and household industry may well have been necessary to maintain the family's subsistence and to pay taxes.

50 On the village shaykh in general, see Gabriel, Baer, “The Village Shaykh 1800–1950,” in Studies, pp. 30–61;Google Scholar on the shaykh, khūlī and other village officials: Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 18–36.Google Scholar

51 Lancret, , “Memoire sur la systeme d'imposition territoriale,” pp. 477–483.Google Scholar

52 Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 111;Google ScholarLancret, , “Memoire sur la systeme d'imposition territoriale,” pp. 469–470.Google Scholar

53 Mengin, F., Histoire de l'Egypte sous le gouvernement de Mohammed-Aly (2 vols.; Paris, 1823), II, 338.Google Scholar

54 Egyptian peasants at various times had recourse to violence in defense of their interests. What makes these cases remarkable is their degree of success. See Gabriel, Baer, “Submissiveness and Revolt of the Fallah,” in Studies, pp. 93–108.Google Scholar

55 Le, Citoyen Shulkowski, “Description de la route du Kaire à Salehhyéh,” La décade égyptienne, Vol. I (Cairo, Year VII), p. 25.Google Scholar

56 ibid., pp. 23–26; Le, Général Anderossy, “Memoire sur le lac Menzaléh,“ La décade égyptienne, Vol. 1 (Cairo, Year VII [1798–99]), p. 193.Google Scholar

57 Le, Citoyen Malus, “Memoire sur un voyage fait a la fin de frimaire sur la Branche Tantique du Nil,” La décade égyptiene, Vol. I (Cairo, Year VII), pp. 136–137, 138–139;Google ScholarShulkowski, , “Description,” p. 24;Google ScholarGénéral, Reynier, Mémoires du général Reynier sur les operations de l'armée d'orient, ou de l'Egypte après la bataille d'éeliopolis (Paris, 1827), pp. 50–52.Google Scholar

58 ibid.; Shulkowski, , “Description,” pp. 26, 28.Google Scholar

59 Jomard, E., “Observations sur les Arabes de l'Égypte moyenne,” DE, 12, 269–272, 278–280.Google Scholar

60 Lancret, , “Memoire sur la systeme d'imposition territoriale,” p. 491.Google Scholar

61 Jomard, , “Observations,” p. 280.Google Scholar

62 See Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 113;Google Scholar and Ali, Barakat, Tatawwur al-Milkiyya al-Zirā'iyya fi Misr wa Atharuh alā al-Haraka al-Siyāsiyya 1813–1914 (Cairo, 1977), p. 15.Google Scholar

63 Girard, , “Memoire sur l'agriculture, l'industrie, et le commerce de l'Egypte,” pp. 117,172 ff.;Google Scholaridem, “Notice sur l'amenagement et le produit des terres de la province de Damietta,” La décade égyptienne, Vol. I (Cairo, Year VII), pp. 229–245.Google Scholar

64 Stanford, Shaw, trans. and ed., Ottoman Egypt in the Age of the French Revolution (Cambridge, Mass., 1964), p. 123.Google Scholar For a survey of the politics of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, see Raymond, , Artisans et commercants, 1, 1–16;Google ScholarHolt, P. M., “The Pattern of Egyptian Political History from 1517 to 1798,” in Political and Social Change in Modern Egypt, pp. 79–90.Google Scholar

65 Livingstone, J. W., “Ali Bey al-Kabir and the Jews,” Middle East Studies, 7(1971), 221–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

66 Shaw, , Financial and Administrative Organization, p. 78.Google Scholar

67 Shaw, , Ottoman Egypt in the Age of the French Revolution, pp. 145–146, 157–158.Google Scholar

68 Shaw, , Financial and Administrative Organization, pp. 7–8.Google Scholar

69 Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 117–119;Google ScholarJabarti, , Mervilles, 8, 206–207;Google ScholarIbrahim, el-Mouelhy, “L'Enregistrement de la propriété en Égypte durant l'occupation française (1798–1801),” Bulletin de l'Institut d'Égypte, 30 (1947–1948), 197–228.Google Scholar

70 Girard, , “Memoire sur l'agriculture, l'industrie, et le commerce de l'Egypte,” p. 368:Google ScholarLe, Compte Estève, “Memoire sur les finances de l'Egypte, depuis sa conqu^ete par le sultan Selym ler, jusqu'a celle du général en chef Bonaparte,” DE, 12, 148.Google Scholar

71 Edouard, Driault, Mohamed Aly el Napoléon (1807–1814). Correspondence des consuls de France en Egypte (Cairo, 1925), pp. 59, 73, 97, 132–133, 227;Google ScholarJabarti, , Merveilles, 8, 297;Google ScholarMengin, , Histoire, 2, 397–398.Google Scholar

72 Driault, , Mohamed Aly et Napoléon, pp. 8, 12–13, 25, 32–33, 54–55, 59, 69–71, 81–82.Google Scholar

73 Jabarti, , Merveilles, 8, 313.Google Scholar

74 ibid., pp. 129–130, 132, 148–149, 176–178. Whether a significant number were relocated to Buhayra is unknown.

75 ibid., pp. 206–215, 277–279.

76 ibid., pp. 244–245, 320–323, 347–348.

77 ibid., IX, 92.

78 Yacoub, Artin, La propriété foncière en Egypte (Cairo, 1883), pp. 311–312, 89;Google ScholarJabarti, , Merveilles, 9, 91.Google Scholar

79 Artin, , Propriété foncière, p. 89;Google ScholarHelen, Rivlin, The Agricultural Policy of Muhammad Ali in Egypt (Cambridge, Mass., 1961), pp. 89 ff.Google Scholar

80 Jabarti, , Merveilles, 9, 87–93.Google Scholar

81 ibid., pp. 137–138; Mengin, , Histoire, 2, 49–55.Google Scholar

82 Jabarti, , Merveilles, 9, 90–93, 122–123;Google ScholarRivlin, , Agricultural Policy. pp. 57, 121;Google ScholarAmin, Sami, Taqwim al-Nīl (4 vols.; Cairo, 1915–1936), 2, 266–270.Google Scholar

83 Rivlin, , Agricultural Policy, p. 59.Google Scholar

84 Abd, al-Rahim, Al-Rīf al-Misrī, pp. 71–73;Google ScholarShaw, , Financial and Administrative Organization, pp. 1–7;Google Scholaridem, “Landholding and Land-Tax Revenues,” pp. 93–94.

85 Levon Marashlian, “The Armenian Boghos Bey Yusufian in the Viceregency of Muhammad Au Pasha,” forthcoming in Armenian Review.

86 For example, Raymond describes how Cairo's beys engaged in commercial activities: Artisans et commerçants, II, 717–719. Cavalla itself was an entrepot to the rich region of cotton, rice, tobacco, and silk farming dominated by the commercial center of Salonica. During Muhammad Ali's thirty years there the area saw the rapid development of çiftilk cotton farming (Stoianovich, “Land Tenure and Related Sectors of the Balkan Economy,” pp. 402–404).Google Scholar

87 Descriptions of this fleet and its activities before the 1820s show its function to be primarily commercial-diplomatic: Georges, Durand-Viel, Les campagnes navales de Mohammad-Aly et d'Ibrahim (2 vols.; Paris, 1935), I, 100–102, 152, 155–157, 210;Google ScholarDriault, , Mohammad-Aly et Napoleon, pp. 132–133, 136, 188;Google Scholaridem, La formation de l'empire de Mohamed Aly de l'Arabie au Soudan (1814–1823) (Cairo, 1927), pp. 104–105.Google Scholar

88 Rubin Adalian, “The Armenian Colony in Egypt during the Reign of Muhammad Au,” paper read at the Middle East Studies Association conference, 1978, Ann Arbor, Mich.; Politis, A. G., L'Héllenisme et l'Egypte moderne (2 vols.: Paris, 1928), I, 179–180, 189, 194;Google ScholarAuriant, , “Mehemet-Ali et les grecs,” Arcopole, 1, (01–03 1927), 24–43 – all give some examples. No systematic treatment of Egyptian commerce in this period exists, and references to non-European merchants' roles are scattered. This picture of commerce under state patronage has emerged from work still in progress.Google Scholar

89 Moustafa, Fahmy, La révolution de l'industrie en Egypte et ses consequences sociales (Leiden, 1954), pp. 23–25.Google Scholar

90 John, Bowring, “Report on Egypt and Candia,” Parliamentary Papers 1840, 21, pp. 23, 24;Google ScholarGeorges, Douin, La mission du Baron de Boislecomte. L'Egypte et la Syrie en 1833 (Cairo, 1927), p.85;Google ScholarDriault, , Formation de l'empire, pp. 60, 63, 89, 99.Google Scholar

91 Bowring, , “Report on Egypt and Candia,” p.25;Google ScholarArtin, , Propriété foncière, pp. 26–27, 181–182, 195, 257–259.Google Scholar

92 Jabarti, , Merveilles, 9, 198–199, 233–234, 305–306, 310.Google Scholar Rivlin conjectures that the total cultivated area declined is untenable (Agricultural Policy, P.270).Google Scholar

93 Jabarti, , Merveilles, p. 18.Google Scholar

94 ibid., p. 191; Mengin, , Histoire sommaire de l'Egypte sous le gouvernement de Mohamad Ali (1823–1838) (Paris, 1839), pp. 119–121.Google Scholar

95 Douin, , La mission de Baron de Boislecomte, p. 111.Google Scholar

96 Artin, , Propriété foncière, pp. 254, 256;Google ScholarBaer, , Landownership, pp. 16–17;Google ScholarRivlin, , Agricultural Policy, p. 62;Google ScholarOwen, E. R. J., Cotton and the Egyptian Economy 1820–1914 (Oxford, 1969). p. 61;Google ScholarBarakat, , Tatawwur al-Milkiyya, pp. 33–34.Google Scholar

97 ibid., pp. 34–38.

98 Artin, , Propriété fonciére, pp. 261–262.Google Scholar

99 ibid., pp. 263–264; idem, “Essai sur les causes de renchérissement de la vie materielle au Caire dans le courant de XIX siècle,” Memoires presentées a l'Institut Egyptien, V. 2, (Cairo, 1907), 71–72;Google ScholarRa'uf, Abbas Hamid, Al-Nizām al-Ijtimā'īfī Misr fī Zill al-Milkiyyāt al-Zirā'iyya al-Kabīra 1837–1914 (Cairo, 1973), p.68.Google Scholar

100 Jabarti, , Merveilles, 8, 352;Google ScholarBowring, , “Report on Egypt and Candia,” p. 26.Google Scholar

101 See Baer, “The Village Shaykh,” passim.

102 Sami, , Taqwīm al-Nīl, 2, 245.Google Scholar

103 Jabarti, , Merveilles, 9, 316.Google Scholar Others have implied that masmūh was granted in Lower Egypt during the first cadaster, but there is no evidence for this. The Royal Council's register, Sijill al-Dīiwān al-Khidīwī, written at some time after the grants in question were made and quoted by Barakat, contains a contradictory account. First, it mentions 440,127 faddans in Lower Egypt not taxed in 1815–1816, and 1,775,611 faddans in Upper Egypt not taxed in 1820–1821, “because it was būr “meaning either fallow or waste land” at that time.” Then, in summing up, it states, “The total of the land of Upper and Lower Egypt upon which no tax was assessed, then, was 2,215,738 faddans, including ib'ādiyyas, the multazims' ūsya, masmūh al-mashaikh, … masmüh al-mastaba, … and bür … (Barakat, , Tatawwur al-Milkiyya, pp. 27–28).Google Scholar

104 Jabarti, , Merveilles, 9, 316;Google ScholarBarakat, , Tatawwur al-Milkiyya, p. 31.Google Scholar

105 Artin, , Propriété foncière, p. 293.Google Scholar

106 Baer, , “The Village Shaykh,” pp. 37–46.Google Scholar

107 Artin, , Propriété foncière, pp. 100–102.Google Scholar

108 Mengin, , Histoire sommaire, pp. 100–102.Google Scholar

109 Hamont, P. N., L'Egypre sous Méhémet-Ali (2 vols.; Paris, 1843), I, 103–104.Google Scholar

110 René, Cattaui Bey, La régne de Mohamed Aly d'aprés les archives russes en Egypte (4 vols.; Cairo and Rome, 1931–1936), II, part 2, 373.Google Scholar

111 See Rivlin, , Agriculgural Policy, pp. 117–118.Google Scholar

112 McCarthy, , “Nineteenth-Century Egyptian Population,” pp. 28–29.Google Scholar

113 Jabarti, , Merveilles, 9, 115, 224–227, 229, 231–232.Google Scholar

114 Bowring, , “Report on Egypt and Candia,” pp.28 ff.;Google ScholarEdward, Lane, Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians (London, 1966 ed.)pp. 133–134;Google ScholarBayle, St. John, Village Life in Egypt, with Sketches of the Said (2 vols.; London, 1852), 1, xvii;Google ScholarRivlin, , Agricultural Policy, p. 205; Baer, “Submissiveness and Revolt of the Fallah,” passim.Google Scholar

115 See Barrington, Moore's remarks in Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Boston, 1966), pp. 453 ff., esp. pp. 471–475.Google Scholar

116 Natural disasters were not decisive, however, as they occurred both earlier and later without producing crises of these proportions.

117 Artin, , Propriété foncière, p. 129.Google Scholar

118 ibid., pp. 129–130; Rivlin, , Agricultural Policy, p.64;Google ScholarBaer, , Landownership, pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

119 Owen, , Cotton, p. 62.Google Scholar

120 Barakat, , Tatawwur al-Milkiyya, pp. 94.Google Scholar

121 Rivlin, , Agricultural Policy, pp. 68–69.Google Scholar

122 Barakat, , Tatawwur al-Milkiyya, pp. 85–94. The Balta Liman tariffs were not actually put into effect in Egypt until after the retreat from Syria in the spring of 1841, and various delaying tactics.Google Scholar

123 ibid., p. 106.

124 ibid., pp. 106–107.

125 ibid., pp. 85–94. The evidence for court factionalism has been uncovered by Dr. Afaf Marsot in the course of current research.

126 See Baer, , Landownership, p. 17.Google Scholar

127 Artin, , Propriété foncière, pp. 333–336.Google Scholar

128 ibid., p. 100; Baer, , Landownership, p. 7.Google Scholar

129 See John, W. Livingstone, “Au Bey al-Kabir and the Mamluk Renaissance in Egypt, 1760– 1772,” unpublished Ph. D. diss., Princeton, 1968, chap. 4.Google Scholar

130 Note the role of the Mouelhy family, soldiers and silk merchants established in the Hijaz and in Cairo, in Muhammad Ali's early campaigns in Arabia: Ibrahim, el-Mouelhy, “Ibrahim elMouelhy Pacha. Les Mouelhy en Egypte,” Cahiers d'histoire égyptienne, 2, 2 (03–02, 1950) 313.Google Scholar

131 Uhdas, : Artin, , Propriété foncière, p. 131.Google Scholar Bedouin ib'ādiyyas: idem, “Essai,” pp. 71–72. Monopolies: Angelo, Sammarco, Précis de l'histoire d'Egypte, vol. 4, Les règnes de Abbas de Said et d'Ismail (1848 –1879) (Rome, 1935), pp. 10–11.Google Scholar

132 Barakat, , Tatawwur al-Milkiyya, pp. 97ff.Google Scholar

133 Export price of wheat: 180 50 P. T./ardebb 1852 66 P. T./ardebb 1859 74 P. T./ardebb Source: Owen, , Cotton, p. 80.Google Scholar Export price of cotton: average, 1851–1855 9.85 dollars/qantar average, 1856–1860 13.45 dollars/qantar Source: Mahmoud, el Darwish, “Note on the Movement of Prices of Egyptian Cotton, 1820–1899,” in Charles, Issawi, ed., The Economic History of the Middle East 1800–1914 (Chicago, 1975), p. 8.Google Scholar

134 Artin, , Propriété foncière, pp. 280–281, 283, 287.Google Scholar

135 Baer, , “The Development of Private Ownership of Land,” p. 68.Google Scholar

136 Artin, , Propriété foncière, p. 161.Google Scholar

137 Baer, , “The Village Shaykh,” pp. 40–41.Google Scholar