Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- Note on transliteration and dates
- Introduction
- 1 A brief portrait of Cairo under Ottoman rule
- 2 Cairo's legal system: institutions and actors
- 3 Royal justice: The Dīvān-i Hümāyūn and the Dīvān al-cAlī
- 4 Government authority, the interpretation of fiqh, and the production of applied law
- 5 The privatization of justice: dispute resolution as a domain of political competition
- 6 A culture of disputing: how did Cairenes use the legal system?
- Conclusion: Ottoman Cairo's legal system and grand narratives
- Appendix: examples of documents used in this study
- Notes
- Map of Cairo in the eighteenth century
- Glossary
- Sources and works cited
- Index
5 - The privatization of justice: dispute resolution as a domain of political competition
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 April 2017
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- Note on transliteration and dates
- Introduction
- 1 A brief portrait of Cairo under Ottoman rule
- 2 Cairo's legal system: institutions and actors
- 3 Royal justice: The Dīvān-i Hümāyūn and the Dīvān al-cAlī
- 4 Government authority, the interpretation of fiqh, and the production of applied law
- 5 The privatization of justice: dispute resolution as a domain of political competition
- 6 A culture of disputing: how did Cairenes use the legal system?
- Conclusion: Ottoman Cairo's legal system and grand narratives
- Appendix: examples of documents used in this study
- Notes
- Map of Cairo in the eighteenth century
- Glossary
- Sources and works cited
- Index
Summary
In Jabartī's biography of cUthmān Bey Dhū cl-Faqār, a prominent figure in Cairo politics during the first half of the eighteenth century, there is the following intriguing passage:
[cUthmān Bey] held sessions in his house to hear cases involving the common people and to dispense justice to the oppressed against their oppressors. He established a special dīwān to hear cases involving women and to dispense sentences in strict accordance with sharīca law (wa lā yajrī aḥkāmuhu illā calā muqtaḍā cl-sharīca). He refused bribes and punished those who gave them. He supervised matters of hḥisba in person. As a kindness to the poor, he fixed the price of bread and other items, including wax, coal, and similar commodities. He forbade the muhḥtasib from taking bribes, and he chased false witnesses from the courts. He used to send his retainers to supervise the gathering of shares due (for pious purposes), even from the amīrs. He was never known to have confiscated anyone's property or to have taken any share of anyone's inheritance.
This passage is fascinating on a number of levels; here I will draw out two aspects. First, cUthmān Bey is said to have founded his own court to resolve disputes among Cairenes. cUthmān Bey held a number of important positions in the administration of Ottoman Egypt: he was appointed amīr al-ḥajj for a total of four years, and was also appointed supervisor of three of the great blocs of awqāf al-ḥaramayn in Egypt: the Murādiyya, the Khāṣakiyya, and the Vālide Sulṭān. He was one of the most important figures in Cairo during the late 1720s and 1730s; by the early 1740s he was, according to Damurdāshī, the most powerful man in the city. But he was never appointed as either qāḍī or governor in Egypt, and so was never formally charged with operating a court. His establishment of his personal dīwān reflected the privatization of the provision of justice in eighteenth-century Egypt. It was an act of personal aggrandizement that sought to bolster cUthmān Bey's power and his reputation among the Cairo populace; it was also a direct challenge to the authority of the governor.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Islamic Law and Empire in Ottoman Cairo , pp. 99 - 116Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2017