Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T05:43:13.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fāṭimid Grain Policy and the Post of the Muḥtasib

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2009

Boaz Shoshan
Boaz Shoshan
Affiliation:
Ben Gurion University Beersheva, Israel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Students of Islamic history more or less agree that the Fātimid regime conducted what may be loosely termed a liberal economic policy, and that the rulers of tenth- to twelfth-century Egypt intervened in the Egyptian economy to a minimal degree. Goitein, maintaining that the Fātimid period “was one of relative tolerance and liberalism, if compared with the preceding and, in particular, the following periods,” also stresses the x201C;comparatively little interference by the [Fātimid] governments in the trade of their subjects.” Ashtor tells us that “a striking feature of the Fātimid regime was freedom of enterprise,” and that “ all sectors of economic life were free — crafts, industry and trade.” Staffa asserts that “the [Fātimid] government made no attempt to impose strict control over the economy.” It may be suspected that the notion of Fātimid “liberalism,” as opposed, say, to Ayyūbid or Mamluk “conservatism,” had helped some decades ago to mole the thesis (now generally discarded) that the origins of guilds and professional organizations in the Islamic Near East are to be sought in the Fātmid state.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Middle East Studies , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , May 1981 , pp. 181 - 189
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

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

Author's note: The author is indebted to the reader for IJMES for helpful suggestions.

1 Goitein, S. D., A Mediterranean Society, Vol. I, Economic Foundations (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967), pp. 29, 31, 33.Google Scholar

2 Ashtor, E., A Social and Economic History of the Near East in the Middle Ages (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1976), p. 193.Google Scholar

3 Susan, J. Staffa, Conquest and Fusion: The Social Evolution of Cairo A.D. 642–1850 (Leiden, 1977), p. 61.Google Scholar

4 “Liberal” and “conservative” in this context are, of course, dissimilar, one may-say entirely the opposite, of what we mean by these terms in a modern political economy.

5 The pioneering works by Louis Massignon and Bernard Lewis on the subject are well known.

6 Goitein, , A Mediterranean Society. 1, 267.Google Scholar

7 Subhi, Labib, “Egyptian Commerical Policy in the Middle Ages,” in Studies in the Economic History of the Middle East, ed. Cook, M. A. (London, 1970), pp. 66–67;Google Scholaridem, Handelsgeschichte ägyptens im Spätmittelalter, 1171–1517 (Wiesbaden, 1965), p. 25; Cl. Cahen, “Ayyubids,” E.I.2, s.v.Google Scholar

8 Goitein, , A Mediterranean Society, 1, 38.Google Scholar

9 Hassanein, Rabie, The Financial System of Egypt, A.H. 564–741/A. D.1169–1341 (London, 1972), p. 92.Google Scholar See also Cook, M. A., “Economic Developments,” in The Legacy of Islam, 2d ed.Joseph, Schacht and Bosworth, C. E. (Oxford, 1974), p. 223.Google Scholar For a detailed description of the matjar in the late Fātimid and early Ayyūbid periods according to the administrative works by Ibn Mammātī and al-Makhzūmīi see Cl., Cahen, “Douanes et commerce dans les ports méditerranées de l'égypte médiévale d'apràs le Minhādj d'al-Makhzūmī,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 7 (1964), 217–314.Google Scholar

10 Goitein, , A Mediterranean Society, 1, 268.Google Scholar

11 Ashtor, , A Social and Economic History, pp. 151, 198.Google Scholar

12 It appears from the Geniza that “the normal form of production was that of a small workshop run by a single craftsman, a family, a clan, or by a number of partners, usually not more than five.” The “big” sugar plant, owned by the two Jewish brothers sons of Ibn al-Lebdī, appears to be an exception (see Goitein, , A Mediterranean Society, 1, 80–81, 367).Google Scholar

13 See my “Grain Riots and the ‘Moral Economy’: Cairo. 1350–1517.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History, X, 3(Winter, 1980), 459–478. Information on this topic for other periods seems too scarce to allow a similar analysis.Google Scholar

14 Ashtor, , A Social and Economic History. p. 193.Google Scholar See also Rāshid, al-Barāwī, Hālat Misr al-iqtisādiyya fī 'ahd al-Fātimiyyīn (Cairo, 1948), pp. 191–192.Google Scholar

15 Bernard, Lewis implies the absence of a muhtusib in the Fātimid state in his “The Islamic Guilds,” Economic History Review, 8 (1937), 25.Google Scholar Goitein, relying on the silence of the Geniza, maintains that the office became prominent in Egypt only by the twelfth century, owing to Mesopotamian influence in Egypt and Syria during Ayyūbid timàs (see A Mediterranean Society, I, 270;Google Scholar Vol. II, The Community [Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1971], p. 369).Google Scholar According to Staffa the muhtasib “does not appear in Egypt … until the Ayyūbid period” (see Conquest and Fusion, 157 n. 2). Ashtor should be credited for first suggesting the existence of the post in the Fātimid period in his “L'administration urbaine en Syrie médiévale,” Rivista degli Studi Orientali, 31 (1956), 83.Google Scholar The importance of the hisba in Fātimid bureaucracy is also discussed in Emile, Tyan, Histoire de l'organization judiciaire en pays d'Islam (Leiden, 1960), p. 624.Google Scholar

16 For state granaries (ahrā', al-makhāzin al-sultāniyya) in Fātimid Egypt see al-Maqrīzī, , Itti'āz al-hunafā' bi akhbār al-a'ima al-fātimiyyin al-khulafā' (Cairo, 1967–1973), II, 224, 226; III, 72, 86, 165–166, 341 (hereafter Itti'āz). The Fātimid granaries are reported to have stored as much as million irdabbs or 70,000 tons during the vizierate of the famous al-Afdal (487/1094–515/1121) (see III, 72).Google Scholar

17 Shoshan, , “Grain Riots,” p. 468.Google Scholar

18 Itti'āz, II, 144.Google Scholar

91 Or over 100,000 irdabbs, that is, over 7,000 tons, if we accept Ashtor's calculation that the normal price of 100 kg of wheat at the beginning of the eleventh century was about I dinar (see Eliyahu, Ashtor, Histoire des prix et des salaires dons l'Orient médiéval [Paris, 1969], p. 124).Google Scholar

20 Itti'āz, II, 225;Google ScholarRabie, , Financial System, 92.Google Scholar

21 Itti'āz, III, 244.Google Scholar

22 Itti'āz, II, 74.Google Scholar

23 Ibid pp. 134–135.

24 His father Jaysh, b. Samsāma was one of the first Fātimid governors of Damascus (see details in Ibn al-Qalānisī, History of Damascus [Leiden, 1908]).Google Scholar

25 Itti'āz, II, 164–165.Google Scholar

26 Ibid., pp. 169–170. The grain crisis of 414/1023–415/1025 is now carefully analyzed in Thierry, Bianquis, “Une crise frumentaire dans l'Egypte Fatimide,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 23 (1980), 67–101. The author has utilized the rich information contained in Musabbihī's chronicle Akhbār Misr.Google Scholar

27 For 386/996 see Itti'āz, 1, 291.Google Scholar For 395/1004–5 see al-Maqrīzī, Ighathat al-umma bi kashf alghumma (Cairo, 1957), p. 16 (hereafter Ighāthat).Google Scholar For 446/1054–5 see Itti'āz, II, 226.Google Scholar See also Ighāthat, p. 28.Google Scholar

28 For 359/970 see Itti'āz, 1, 120;Google ScholarIghāthat, p. 13.Google Scholar For 398/1007 see Itti'āz, 11, 71;Google ScholarIghāthat, p. 16.Google Scholar In 415/1025 several bakers were punished for mixing flour with orgil (see Itti'āz, II, 166).Google Scholar

29 There is uncertainty about the precise meaning of the term khabbāz. Lapidus, writing about the Mamluk period makes a distinction between farrān and khabbāz. The former was a baker or, literally, an oven owner or operator, who received dough from the people and baked bread but did not sell it. The khabbāz baked bread and sold it as well (see Ira, M. Lapidus, “The Grain Economy of Mamluk Egypt,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 12 [1969], 10–11).Google Scholar A remark in a source for the Mamluk period suggests that the khabbāz was a shopkeeper specializing in the sale of bread who received bread from bakeries (see Ibn, Hajar al'Asqalānī, Inbā' al-ghumr bi anbā' al-'umr, Vol. III [Cairo, 1973], p. 70).Google Scholar

30 Itti'āz, II, 224–225;Google ScholarIghāthat, p. 18. For the 'arīf see, e.g.,Google ScholarGoitein, , A Mediterranean Society, 1, 84.Google Scholar

31 For the Mamluk period see my “Grain Riots,” p. 466.

32 For these terms see Ashtor, E., “The Diet of Salaried Classes in the Medieval Near East,” in Biology of Man in History, ed. Robert, Forster and Orest, Ranum (Baltimore, 1975), pp. 127, 128.Google Scholar

33 ltti'āz, II, 151.Google Scholar For another case in the same year see II, 165. For 397/1006 see ibid., II, 69; Ighāthat, pp. 15–16;Google ScholarBianquis, , “Une crise frumentaire,” p. 81.Google Scholar

34 For 359/969–70 see Itti'āz, I, 120, 122;Google ScholarIghāthat, pp. 13–14.Google Scholar For 398/1007–8 see Ighāthat, p. 18.Google Scholar For the later Fātimid period see Ighāthat, pp. 27–28.Google Scholar See also Bianquis, , “Une crise frumentaire,” p.91.Google Scholar

35 For the tillīs see Ashtor, , Histoire des prix, p. 124 n. I.Google Scholar

36 Itti'āz, II, 226;Google ScholarIghāthat, pp. 20–22.Google Scholar

37 Itti'āz, III, 86;Google ScholarIghāthat, p. 29.Google Scholar

38 Itti'āz, III, 140. al-Maqrīzī's remark that the vizier's act was intended to enhance his reputation does not detract from the relevance of this example for our purpose.Google Scholar

39 Itti'āz, III, 165–166.Google Scholar

40 al-Qalqashandī, , Subh al-a'sha, Vol. III (Cairo, 1914), p. 487 (hereafter Subh al-a'sha).Google Scholar

41 On this source see Bianquis, , “Une crise frumentaire,” pp. 67–71.Google Scholar

42 Itti'āz, I, 117, 122;Google ScholarIghāthat, pp. 13–14.Google Scholar

43 Itti'āz, II, 225; III, 55.Google Scholar

44 Jere, L. Bacharach, “Circassian Mamluk Historians and their Quantitative Economic Data,” Journal of American Research Center in Egypt, 12 (1975), 77.Google Scholar

45 Cl. Cahen and M. Talbi (“Hisba”, E.l.2, s.v.) state that the muhiasib checked prices, although he did not normally have the power to fix them. He reprimanded and even punished merchants who charged exorbitant prices, particularly in periods of scarcity. He also dealt severely with hoarding.

46 For the Mamluk muhtasib see my “Grain Riots,” pp. 466, 470–474.Google Scholar

47 Itti'āz, I, 277;Google Scholar II, 135 III, 342; Subh al-a' sha, III, 487.Google Scholar

48 Itti'āz, I, 277; II, 96.Google Scholar

49 Ibid., 1, 276, 277.

50 Ibid., 1, 144–145, 217, 277; II, 73; III, 342; Subh al-a'sha, III, 487. The frequently repeated phrase is kutiba lahu sijjil.Google Scholar

51 Itti'āz, I, 217, 276; II, 135.Google Scholar

52 Ibid., 1, 217; Ibn, Hajar al-'Asqalānī, Raf al-isr 'an qudāt Misr (Cairo, 1957), 1, 208;Google ScholarSubh al-a'sha, III, 487.Google Scholar

53 al-Asqalānī, , Raf al-isr, 1, 101.Google Scholar

54 Itti'āz, II, 73, 83, 91, 100, 150–151;Google Scholar III, 55; Subh al-a'sha, III, 487.Google Scholar Goitein, relying on the Geniza, considers the wālī, literally “governor,” head of police (see A Mediterranean Society, II, 368). In the Arabic sources, however, the wālī and the prefect appear as two distinct positions.Google Scholar

55 Itti'āz, II, 43.Google Scholar

56 Ibid., I, 144–145.

57 Ibn, 'Imād, Shadharāt al-dhahab fī akhbār man dhahab, Vol. III (Cairo, 1931), p. 193.Google Scholar

58 For examples, in the year 359/969–70 see Itti'āz, 1, 120, 122.Google Scholar For 395/1004–5 see Ighāthat, p. 16.Google Scholar

59 For 383/993–4 see Itti'āz, I, 277; for 390/1000 see 11, 31; for 414/1023 see II, 135.Google Scholar

60 1n addition to references cited in n. 33 above see also Itti'āz. 11, 135.Google Scholar

61 Ibid., p. 165; Bianquis, , “Une crise frumentaire,” 84.Google Scholar

62 Ibid., 1, 132. Bankers working in dār al-sarf, the Exchange of Fustāt, had a semiofficial status (see Goitein, , A Mediterrenean Society, 1, 238).Google Scholar

63 Itti'āz, II, 149–150.Google Scholar