Jews, Egypt and Mohammad Ali Pasha (2)

In around half of the sixteenth AD century, a fight broke out between Jewish leaders in Cairo and Istanbul over the tenure of Naqidi (Prefecture) of Egyptian Jews. This led to the dissolution of the Naqidi tenure in 1560 by the Ottoman’s Empire. Since then, Jews bankers were also appointed as head of the Jews’ head and the respectful title of "Chalabi" was granted to them. Around 1669 Chalabi was also removed and from that time chairman of the Jews of Egypt was called "Bazarkan "(from the Persian word" merchant (Bazargan)").
Influence of Jews was dependent on the influence of them on court, which sometimes spurred opposition of Egypt’s Muslim. An example is David Pasha, the powerful governor of Egypt, who in 1545, in spite of the Ottoman’s court, closed the central synagogue of Jews in Cairo. This synagogue was opened only in 1584.
Encyclopedia of Jews in the article of "Egypt" reports about numerous murders of Jewish leaders in Egypt in the seventeenth century: the murder of Solomon Al-shokr by Karim Hussein Pasha (1603), the murder of Abba Alexander at the hands of Hussein Pasha (1620), soon after the murder of Jacob thioli by Khalil Pasha, the murder of Chaim Peres to the command of the Ottoman Sultan (1650), soon after the murder of Jacob Bybas into the hands of Mohammad Ghazi Pasha, and finally the murder of Rafal Ben Youssef hin by Qarah Qosh Ali Pasha (1669). Investigation of the causes of these murders needs specialized researches. The Jewish Encyclopedia attributes these murders to the corruption and tyranny and greed of Turkish rulers to the Jewish leaders’ great wealth, which is not acceptable.
For example, in the biography of Solomon Al-shokr, wealthy Chalabi of Egyptian Jews in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century, in the same source, the story is narrated so that the Pasha commanded the murder of Al-shokr, but he was saved because of Pasha’s murder and had a prosperous life after that. Therefore, according to this narrative, Solomon Al-shokr was not murdered at all.
Aba Eskandari, other Chalabi victim in the first half of the seventeenth century, at the beginning was physician and Finance Minister of Sinan Pasha, the governor of Egypt. After appointment of Sinan as Grand Vizier of Ottomans, he went to Istanbul with him and seized the presidency of the Jews of the city. The contents of the Encyclopedia of Judaism show that Abba Alexander had an effective role in Ottoman’s regional policy, and in this regard he was once imprisoned. Stanford Shaw knows Sinan Pasha as the main factor of invasion of Ottoman to Iran during the death of Shah Tahmasib. The war that occurred in Murad III’ era, the Selim II’s eldest son and successor, started at the year 984 AH. / 1576 AD. and lasted for five years. According to Shaw, the aim of this war was "complete eradication of Shi'ism in Iran". Aba Alexander returned to Egypt after the resignation of Sinan Pasha and became the Chalabi of this land’s Jews. It is reasonable that the murder of this courtier and political Jew attributes to conflicts of the time policy, not to Judaism or his wealth.
Murder of Chaim Peres in the mid-seventeenth century was due to the appalling famine that occurred in Egypt. Sultan commanded a group to investigate the causes of the accident and recognized the Muslim in charge of financial affairs of Egypt and his Jewish agent (Chalabi Chaim Peres) as the guilty ones. The two were sent to Istanbul and both were executed. In the eighteenth century, there has been no case of murder of Jewish leaders in Egypt.
The Encyclopedia of Jews also mentions Shabtay Zoy’s communion in Egypt:
We know that Rabbi Rafal Ben Youssef Hin, very rich and influential Chalabi of Jews in Egypt, was Shabtay Zoy’s fan and during his era, Shabtay Zoy traveled to Egypt twice and eventually opened his claim, and we also know that one of the prominent leaders and theorists of Shabtay communion named Abraham Cardozo lived in Egypt and surrounding areas for years, and since 1703, he was the special doctor of Qareh Ahmed Pasha, the governor of Egypt.
Abraham Miguel Cardozo belonged to a Jewish family of Maranovi of Iberian Peninsula that around half of the sixteenth century, a branch of them settled in North Africa and another branch of them lived and settled in the United States since eighteenth century. Abraham Cardozo was born in Spain. His brother Isaac was hidden Jewish and physician of Philip IV, King of Spain. Abraham in his 22 immigrated to Veins with his brother and learnt medicine and religious sciences from Rabbis of this town and became a famous doctor in Veins and Leghorn cities. He then went to Cairo for five years and in the city started to learn Kabbalah School and teachings of Isaac Luria. Then, he settled in Tripoli (Libya’s Centre) for ten years and got involved in promoting the mysteries ideas of Kabbalah and providing intuitions and discoveries of Christ's imminent emergence. Since the beginning of Shabtay’s movement and Nathan of Gaza (1665) Cardozo became one of the most prominent proponents of this sect. in 1673, he went to Tunisia and was the doctor of the ruler of this country for a short time. Then, he went to Leghorn and Izmir port. He was settled in Izmir, Istanbul and other Turkish ports for long times. From around 1681, he claimed to be the Messiah, son of Joseph and in the position of the leader of sect, had planned to marry the widow Shabtay. Jewish Encyclopedia writes article of dönmeh sect is full of praise of Cardozo and he has been mentioned as one of their leaders. In the years 1686-1696 he lived in Istanbul, and according to the Jewish Encyclopedia, was supported by some prominent diplomats of European states. During his stay at Izmir and Istanbul, he was accused of connection with several women and illegal children making. Then, Cardozo went to Palestine and then went to Egypt, and finally, he was killed during a fight in the family of his nephew at Alexandria.
Cardoso has written detailed treatises and letters defending Shabtay and his "mysteries apostasy” and in explaining the Kabbalah school and theology of Shabtay during years 1667-1706, which are in European archives, and many of them have been published in the twentieth century. The Encyclopedia of Jews writes he even had influential followers in countries such as the UK and Morocco.
Thus, we can recognize the land of Egypt, like Turkey, as the arena of struggle of Shabtay Zoi’s followers, and in addition to informal Jewish communities, take presence of hidden Jews’ cores and their role in Egypt's Late changes seriously.
in spite of the influence and prosperity of the Jews during three centuries of Ottoaman rule that had enjoyed in Egypt, Encyclopedia of Judaism talks about Ali Pasha’s climb with satisfaction and considers it as the beginning of a new phase of development of the Jews in Egypt and the wider Europe’s Jewish immigration to this country. It writes: In light of the "reformations of Mohammad Ali" a new era of flourishing in trade and other branches of the economy began in Egypt, and Jewish population increased due to changes in all areas of social life. European Jews settled in Egypt and Alexandria again became an important center of Jewish trade. According to the survey of 1897, 25200 Jewish people lived in Egypt that 8819 men of them (including about 1,000 Gharayi men) were in Cairo and 9831 people were in Alexandria. In 1917, the number of Jews in Egypt has been mentioned as 59581 people that 29207 of people were living in Cairo and 24829 of them were in Alexandria.
The above figures show that during the Ottoman Empire and even in the nineteenth century, despite of massive migration of Europe's Jews, the Jews of Egypt have always been a small community, and their economic and political weight was far beyond the meager quantity of them.
After the conquest of political power, the second step of Mohammad Ali Pasha was strengthening the foundations of his new government.
Due to strong and managed presence of social and political system (structure) which had been formed during the Islamic Era in Egypt and alienage and opposition of new rulers with this system, this step could not be taken except through tough anti-system (anti-structures) and settlement of a huge military dictator in Egypt and changing this land to a big barracks.
. This was the method that was adopted by Mohammad Ali.
Although a large group of Mamluk elders and Sheikh were killed during the brutal French invasion, but still their remaining was the most influential social and political force in Egypt. The presence of Mamluks absolutely blocked the desirable political system’s path of Mohammad Ali and institutions supporting him. In late 1806 and early 1807, within four months, Al-bardisi and Al-alfa, two influential Mamluk figures, suddenly died, and in this way a deep vacuum was created in the leadership of Mamluks. There was no Individual who had enough merit and acceptability to unite Mamulks against Mohammad Ali and the Mamluks were divided into small groups of "Bais" (Bigs). Ali Mohammad to end Mamluks’ life, used the policy of "division and rule". He used to unite this and that Beig against another Beig, and after the finishing of the process, started another fight. Finally Mohammad Ali planned a huge genocide and executed it in 5th Safar of 1226/ first of Mars 1811 C. He invited about 500 heads of Mamluks to the Hijaz in the name of his journey to a party at the Cairo’s castle; in the course of party , he cowardly killed them and thousands of their comrades were slaughtered in the streets of the city. Not only Mohammad Ali Pasha disappeared this influential group of leaders of Egyptian society and the Egyptian Islamic political traditions’ heritors, but he also seized all their properties. Thus, he became the biggest landowner in Egypt overnight. In the same year he made his son, Ibrahim Pasha, as the officer of vast estate and eliminating the remnants of local influence of Mamluks in Upper Egypt by changes in the political and territorial structure of the country.
Ibrahim Pasha with methods that Helen Rivlin has called as "incredibly cruel" established new Mohammad Ali’s rule over rustic areas of Upper Egypt.
Mohammad Ali could attract favorable opinion of influential town groups with dissemble at first and with their support, despite Mamluk’s leaders, could take over the affairs of Egypt, after the complete consolidation of his rule, began their invasion. Among all these, scholars had a great importance as the most influential, traditional, political institution in Egyptian society.
A.R.Toledano, a professor at Tel Aviv University and biographer of Mohammad Ali Pasha, writes in the Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden): At this stage, Mohammad Ali started trying to unseat leaders of the political power of urban Egypt that the most prominent of them were "scholars". "Influential leadership" of this group was feeding through endowments, religious benefits (obligations) and some commercial activities. The body of this group was involved in providing religious and educational and juridical services and had a moderate life by the salary that was paid directly to them or from sacred money. In this way Mohammad Ali began trying to end the influence of scholars in Egypt and ruling over them. His first target was Umar Makram in the "Naqib al-Ashraf" place was known as the most respected and most influential Egyptian cleric. According to Toldano, Umar Makram was united with Mohammad Ali during the 1804-1805 crises and helped in his favor in Cairo’s great men. Nevertheless, his strong and independent thoughts and wealth made him the potential focus to attract the Governor's opponents. Therefore, in mid-1809, Mohhamd Ali began scholars’ invasion by interfering in endowments of northwestern of Bahireh state. Scholars were led by Umar Makram to protest this action and stood up to oppose him. Mohammad Ali relying on his military power and by creating divisions among them through intimidation and bribe, made Umar Makram isolated and eventually exiled him.
Mrs M. Rivlin wrote that Mohammad Ali in order to eliminate the authority of the Egyptian Muslim clerics cut their sources of income and ended their supervision on the general education system in Egypt. He started to build new governmental schools instead of old educational centers in Egypt and entered missioners of Europe to this land. Mohammad Ali practically dismissed Muslims from political power by omitting major groups of traditional elites and collapsing their political centers and built a complete strange system with the society of Egypt. Important jobs were given to Coptic people and freemasonries in Mohammad Ali’s system.
Since 1815, Mohammad Ali continued the process of divesting ownership and political power from all remained Mamluks and Muslim elites, and in the words of Ms. Rivilin “most of Egypt region was turned into a huge governmental farmland which was under the head of governmental bureaucracy management”.
Ms. Rivlin adds, Mohammad Ali during the removal of traditional Egyptian private institutions, “at the beginning did not encourage new private property formation because he wanted profits of agriculture for himself. On the other hand, he did not want the Turkish authorities gain a position to control or exert their personal influence on the people of Egypt, thus Mohammad Ali Pasha based a focused political barracks system that he was at the head of that system by removing all the old structures of political and social groups that used to carry these structures and traditions. In this period, there was no distinction between the Egyptian dictatorship sovereign’s private riches and governmental wealth.
He began to give up ownership of agricultural lands to his associates and close people to him from the late 1820s and let to build the foundations of a new ruling elite class. He also enjoyed this privilege for a change in the structure of the Egyptian population and the foreign communities were gradually settled in Egypt in light of this policy. Mohammad Ali ceded vast areas especially to groups of Greek merchants and money-changers and placed them in Egypt. These groups gained great wealth and became bankruptcy and the destruction factor of Muslim traditional landlords and turned to big traders and landowners of Egypt. He also transferred vast lands (25,000 acres / 62,000 hectares) to some English merchants from 1840. According to the Court of Ottoman, settled Europeans in Egypt were exempt of the payment of any property (including the ransom and tribute) and had the right of capitulation. Thus, in the era of Mohammad Ali, Egypt turned to "paradise" of European businessmen and wealthy people and became a large cotton and sugar farm for Europe’s Bazars.
The new political system imposed on Egypt’s society by Mohammad Ali was highly a centralized and authoritarian system. This new order had fundamental difference with rule of Ottoman, the era of "Code”.
Mohammad Ali established two political institutions in 1240 AH. / 1824-1825 AD. One of them was Almajles al-Aali al-Milki that had to observe governmental system, and other one was Al-jahadyeh which was in charge of the military affairs. But these two institutions were in fact manipulated by Mohammad Ali and he had no authority without his opinions. Mohammad Ali’s governmental system included six Courts (ministry): the Interior, Finance, War, Sea Affairs, Public Affairs, and Foreign Affairs. A strong police force called the Court of Auditors also oversaw the country which was set by Mohammad Ali. Later (1837) there was some changes and the Court of industry was added. Ministry of Foreign Affairs was in fact, as its name indicates, focused on the business relationship with Europe. It was extremely corrupted and unpopular among Egyptians that received taxes from people with the "cruelest methods". The aim of establishing this bureaucracy was the creation of an appropriate instrument to impose his personal power. Mohammad Ali repeatedly complained to his European friends that he could not trust anyone in accomplishing his policies.
In the words of Ms. Rivlin, in spite of the period of great Mamluks’ authority that cultivation affairs were completely in hands of farmers, and they were allowed to use the benefit of their own products after paying tax, Mohammad Ali left no outlet for personal gain to the peasants. In the past, only the Sheikh of the village used to face with the government and people of the village had full autonomy in internal affairs of their own. During the Mohammad Ali’s era “bureaucracy under the relentless pressure of emergence of Pasha" denied any autonomy of peasants and prevailed a dictatorial system over them. ”The result was poverty and deprivation of farming people of Egypt”. Thus "a combination of inefficient, corrupted and sullen bureaucracy with oppressed farmers" is known as key factors in the failure of the political system of Mohammad Ali. The rule of Mohammad Ali is reflected in the adage of farmers of his era: "they raised their palaces and destroyed Egypt.). The result of this policy can be downloaded from the comparison of Mohammad Ali’s annual revenues that from 8 million francs in 1805 (the beginning of his reign) reached to more than 75 million francs in 1847 (the end of his reign).
In conclusion of Ms. Helen Rivlin’s study, researcher at Harvard University, some of the consequences of the Mohammad Ali Pasha’s rule have been described in this way:
Mohammad Ali attracted a large number of European businessmen into Egypt and thus caused a close trade link with Europe. "He entered Egypt to Europe’s trade circuit that inevitably brought Egypt into the sphere of European civilization”. Mohammad Ali established the foundation of the national government in Egypt with opening the way of Europe's influence in Egypt and with the intensification of [Europeans] trade and acceleration of growth of cities in Egypt and with expansion of bureaucrats and military classes, or the establishment of a hereditary dynasty ruling. "He" undermined the Ottoman Empire and thereby opened way to Western colonial rule. His westernized trends in Egypt’s commerce increased this country's dependence on European markets.”
Mohammad Ali also deprived “clergy class” of Egypt from their authority and defeated “the only class that was able to have a deterrent role against the excesses of the ruling class.” Thus, Mohammad Ali destroyed “all institutions that over the centuries served as a Trustee of the unlimited oppression.” “He" weakened leaders of the people and destroyed supportive institutions without raising new leader or institutions that a healthy society must have been built on it in Egypt at the same time. After omitting traditional class of village great men, Mohammad Ali Pasha began to provide a new class of landowners which were generally made of his relatives and trustees.
Mohammad Ali also destroyed native merchants and craftsmen’s class in Egypt and thus, he became as a hinder of development of middle class and growth of industry in this country. His Industrial experience turned into a painful defeat; his workshops were closed and workers were returned to their homes or farms. Thus the growth of the industrial skilled working class in Egypt was seriously delayed.”
Thus, while according to Ms. M. Rivlin that says Mohammad Ali is" the founder of the national government "in Egypt, is the founder of all economic and social disasters that Egyptian society has been suffering from so far.
both the tricks that Mohammad Ali used in the process of seizing and strengthening political power and social policies that were followed during his rule, that in the words of official history writing of the West, built the foundations of “national state” in Egypt, are strangely similar to the actions which were taken by Reza Shah in Iran during the next century.
These similarities can be so strong that the rule of Mohammad Ali Pasha can be described as previous historical example of Pahlavi dynasty in Iran.
Reza Khan took advantage of a historic opportunity like Mohammad Ali Pasha. He first rose as a superior military power also in regional chaos, during degeneration and weakness of the Qajar era, relying on pro-Western politicians within the government and with hidden support of West conspirator centers. He represented himself as the only way of fulfillment of military order and peace among city influential social groups. Then, he strengthened his rule through conspiracy and playing with varied groups of traditional political elites and finally became as the position of arbitrary power in Iran.
Reza Shah like Mohammad Ali Pasha established a system of centralized, political and military barracks by following the removal of all institutions and native political structures in the society of Iran and through the violent destruction of the traditional great men’s groups (elites). He, like Mohammad Ali Pasha, alongside omitting the organs of Iranian society and anti-structuralization, established a new bureaucracy to run the country that served in his personal power. This bureaucracy was highly corrupted and inefficient like its Egyptian prototype. Reza Shah like Mohammad Ali Pasha started the expropriation of the large amount of Iran's landowners and became as the country's biggest landowner with ownership of their properties. He also established a new class of political elites in society with letting his family members and brokers and their affiliates to loot of public money through the levers of government.
Reza Shah like Mohammad Ali Pasha saw himself as an alien to the Iranian traditions and society, and so those whom he appointed in important positions in government were as an alien or contrary to this tissue (society). Thus, members of certain religious groups (especially Babi and Baha'i) or the ones who belonged to the family of the seventeenth and eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that had settled in Iran, were in charge of main levers in handling the Pahlavid bureaucracy and turned to the most important political and economic powers.
Similarities are numerous including historical background and approach and the role of Copts in Egypt of nineteenth and twentieth centuries which have strange similarity to the role of Indian Parsis in contemporary changes of Iran. This similarity is also reflected in cultural attitudes of these two groups. In new culture of Egypt a similar process to Iran occurred as well and a huge wave of anciently happened in form of extremist approach to history of Pharaohs and Hellenic- Roman era of Egypt and humiliation of Islamic history of this land. At the end, the conclusion that Ms. Rivlin says about the results of Mohammad Ali Pasha’s policies which call them as the factor of all social and economic miseries of Egypt’s society till today, are all true about the rule of Reza Shah in Iran. In assumption of the writer, all the tragedies that Iran’s society is suffering from till today are due to deep social anti-structuralization, vast delete of elites and native political institutions, faking and forcing a corrupted, inefficient bureaucracy which was alien with the society and other policies that Reza Shah executed them. These policies disrupted natural growth of Iranian society’s process and made an organ less child who became more and more sterile during the last decades.