Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:29:29.002Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ottoman Subsidies to the Hijaz, 1877–18861

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2009

William L. Ochsenwald
William L. Ochsenwald
Affiliation:
Virginia Polytechnic Instutite, Blacksburg, Virginia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Students of nineteenth-century Ottoman political history have concentrated on the central provinces of the Empire. Students of Arab political history of the same period have concentrated on anti-Ottoman nationalism centered in Cairo and Beirut. Relatively little work has yet been done to illuminate the nature of Ottoman government in the Arab provinces. The picture that is presented by Western travelers, Arab nationalists reminiscing about their youth, and diplomatic reports has been incomplete, biased against the Imperial government, and sometimes factually inaccurate.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Middle East Studies , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , July 1975 , pp. 300 - 307
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

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

page 301 note 1 France. Ministère des Affaires Étrangères. Turquie, Politique intérieure: Arabie, Yemen – Pèlerinage de la Mecque I, L. Querry (Jidda) to Hanotaux, 10 August 1896.Google Scholar

page 301 note 2 A detailed discussion of donations by Egypt falls outside the scope of this article, but it should be noted that they were substantial. In this context see Paşa, Ibrâhîm Rif'at, Mirât al-Haramayn, 2 vols. (Cairo: Matba'a Dâr al-Kutub al-Misriyya, 1344/1925).Google Scholar

page 301 note 3 Sources of unofficial income are discussed in Hurgronje, C. Snouck, Mekka (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1888), 1, 164–5.Google Scholar

page 301 note 4 Hicaz Vilayeti Salnamesi 1301 (Mecca: Hicaz Vilayeti Matbaasi, 1301/1885–1886) (hereafter HVS-1), pp. 168, 174.Google Scholar

page 302 note 1 HVS-1, pp. 178, 180.Google Scholar

page 302 note 2 HVS-1, p. 175; a similar concern with internal security at the expense of other types of expenditures can be seen in the Vilayet of Syria budgets,Google ScholarSaliba, Najib E., ‘Wilayat Sûriyyâ, 1876–1909’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1971), pp. 355–67.Google Scholar

page 302 note 3 HVS-1, p. 173.Google Scholar

page 302 note 4 HVS-1, p. 169.Google Scholar

page 302 note 5 HVS-1, p. 171.Google Scholar

page 302 note 6 The financial data provided by Paşa, Eyyub Sabri, Mir'at-ül Haremeyn, I, Part B, Mirât-i Mekke (Istanbul: Bahriye Matbaasi,1306/1888–9) (hereafter Sabri), pp. 685–717, are not dated in the text. On the basis of internal evidence, however, Sabri is probably referring to the period 1297 Maliye/1881–2 to 1306 H./1888–9 and most likely the same period as the information in HVS-1.Google Scholar

page 303 note 1 Sabri, p. 691. Sabri seems to be confused about the gifts to Mecca and Medina. The sürre figures provided on page 694 total about 2·9 million k. while on page 691 Sabri indicates Mecca and Medina received 1,074,865 and 2,416,701 k., respectively. Presumably the difference between the total of the latter numbers and the former represents a supplemental payment from outside the sürre budget itself, but this is unclear in the text.Google Scholar

page 303 note 2 My calculations based on Sabri, pp. 687–90.Google Scholar

page 303 note 3 Ibid. pp. 687–90.

page 303 note 4 Ibid. pp. 686, 690.

page 303 note 5 Ibid. pp. 693–4.

page 304 note 1 Sabri, pp. 694–5, 717. It is possible that these categories overlapped. Confusion in the accounts may exist because of the diverse sources and appropriation channels which were used to provide funds to the Hijaz.Google Scholar

page 304 note 2 Abû al-Hudâ al-Sayyâda (?–1936/7), former nakibüleşraf of Aleppo, has not yet been the object of a detailed study. The most recent reference to his career isGoogle ScholarHirszowicz, L., ‘The Sultan and the Khedive, 1892–1908’, Middle Eastern Studies, 8, 3 (10 1972), 304 ff.Google Scholar

page 304 note 3 Sabri, pp. 708–10.Google Scholar

page 304 note 4 Ibid. p. 711.

page 304 note 5 Ibid. p. 711.

page 304 note 6 Ibid. p. 713.

page 304 note 7 Ibid. pp. 713–15.

page 304 note 8 Ibid. p. 715.

page 305 note 1 Ibid. p. 715.

page 305 note 2 The Ikramiye of the 1850s is discussed in Burton, Richard, Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-Medinah and Meccah (London: Tylston and Edwards, 1893), II, 7.Google Scholar

page 305 note 3 Sabri, p. 698.Google Scholar

page 305 note 4 Ibid. pp. 697, 704.

page 305 note 5 An example of a tezkere is in Ibid. p. 704.

page 305 note 6 Ibid. p. 706.

page 306 note 1 Ibid. pp. 699–701.

page 306 note 2 Osman Nuri was in charge of the Ottoman side of the dual administration of the Hijaz even while the aged Ahmet Izzet was formally the vali from 1298/1880–1 to 1299/1881–2. Osman Paşa was vali officially from June 1882 to December 1886 (HVS-1, p. 404; Snouck Hurgronje, Mekka, I, 176).Google Scholar

page 306 note 3 HVS-1, p. 22; Sabri, pp. 776–9.Google Scholar

page 306 note 4 HVS-1, pp. 23, 41; Sabri, pp. 781–2.Google Scholar

page 306 note 5 Sabri, pp. 747–8.Google Scholar

page 307 note 1 Sabri, p. 750; HVS-1, p. 107. The head of the commission in 1301/1883–1884 was the son of a former emir, Şerif Husayn b. Şerif Yahyâ. An Ottoman military officer, Sadik Bey, supervised the construction. See HVS-1, pp. 124–5.Google Scholar

page 307 note 2 The names of some of the donors are provided in Sabri, pp. 750–2. The Egyptian newspaper ‘al-Jawa'ib’ was especially active in securing donations. Another repair of the water system of Ayn Zubayda occurred in 1906–8. Contributions for it also came from throughout the Muslim world. Great Britain, Foreign Office 95:2224 M. Hussain (Jidda) to O'Conor, 25 July 1906.Google Scholar

page 307 note 3 One Egyptian oka, the measure used in Jidda, was the equivalent of 1,050 grams.Google Scholar

page 307 note 4 Sabri, pp. 754–8.Google Scholar