In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, Egypt's rulers worked to build an independent judiciary and implement codified law. In the process they consciously turned away from Islamic and Ottoman sources and towards continental Europe. How can this change be explained? Was it primarily caused by imperial penetration, a desire to construct a liberal political and economic order, or a state-building and centralization project? A study of the timing and nature of the changes, combined with an analysis of the writings of some of those involved, reveals that the role of imperialism, though significant, at most accentuated and modified already existing trends. Liberalism played a notable role as well, though the nature of that liberalism was hardly inconsistent with the primary factor: the desire to build a strong and centralized state. The imperialist, liberal, and statist pressures for legal reform will each be considered in turn. Yet because the exact nature of the late nineteenth-century reforms have often been miscast (and even overstated), it is necessary to offer an accurate understanding of the changes of that period (along with the continuation of those trends in the early twentieth century).

The construction of a new legal system in Egypt

The reforms of the late nineteenth century did mark a new departure for Egyptian legal development but also built on some trends that had been evident in earlier reforms. For several decades various efforts had been made to build a more centralized and hierarchical judiciary in addition to accentuating the role for positive legislation (without contradicting or eliminating the influence of the Islamic shari'a).