Jewish and Greek Communities in Egypt: Entrepreneurship and Business before Nasser 1784532517, 9781784532512

Table of contents :
Cover
Author
Endorsement
Title
Copyright
Dedication
Contents
List of Figures, Tables and Images
Acknowledgements
Note on Transliteration
List of Abbreviations
Introduction
1. Setting the Stage
2. Minorities and the Economy
3. Theoretical Framework
4. Minorities in Interwar Egypt
5. Minorities and the Post-WWII Era: The 1952 Coup and the Nationalization of the Egyptian Private Sector
Conclusion
Appendix
Notes
Bibliography
Index
Plates section

Citation preview

Najat Abdulhaq holds a PhD from the Department of Politics and Modern History of the Middle East in the Institute of Political Science at Friedrich-Alexander-Universita¨t Erlangen-Nu¨rnberg.

‘Jewish and Greek Communities in Egypt is a singular contribution to the economic and social history of Egypt. It is a much-needed antidote to the common conspiratorial or xenophobic explanations for why some, but decidedly not all, elements of Egypt’s Jewish and Greek communities rose to the pinnacle of economic success before their departure under duress in the mid-twentieth century. Relying on the Schumpeterian concept of entrepreneurship and network theory and buttressed by extensive archival evidence, Abdulhaq’s comprehensive, meticulous, and fair-minded account is the only one based on a systematic comparison of the economic activities of the elites of the two communities.’ Joel Beinin, Professor of Middle East History, Stanford University

JEWISH AND GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Entrepreneurship and Business before Nasser

NAJAT ABDULHAQ

First published in 2016 by I.B.Tauris & Co. Ltd London • New York www.ibtauris.com Copyright q 2016 Najat Abdulhaq The right of Najat Abdulhaq to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by the author in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in a review, this book, or any part thereof, may not be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Every attempt has been made to gain permission for the use of the images in this book. Any omissions will be rectified in future editions. References to websites were correct at the time of writing. Library of Middle East History 58 ISBN: 978 1 78453 251 2 eISBN: 978 0 85772 992 7 ePDF: 978 0 85772 795 4 A full CIP record for this book is available from the British Library A full CIP record is available from the Library of Congress Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: available Typeset in Garamond Three by OKS Prepress Services, Chennai, India Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY

To my mother Ursula and father Abbas, to my son Elias Sari

CONTENTS

List of Figures, Tables and Images Acknowledgements Note on Transliteration List of Abbreviations

ix xii xiv xv

Introduction 1. Setting the Stage 2. Minorities and the Economy 3. Theoretical Framework 4. Minorities in Interwar Egypt 5. Minorities and the Post-WWII Era: The 1952 Coup and the Nationalization of the Egyptian Private Sector Conclusion

1 7 49 93 123

Appendix Notes Bibliography Index

211 257 329 345

158 201

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND IMAGES

Figures Figure 3.1 Information within the community’s entrepreneurial activities.

99

Figure 3.2 Increasing number of newly established companies, 1885–1960.

107

Figure 3.3 Newly established companies and minority involvement.

111

Figure 3.4 Innovative companies with Greek and Jewish participation.

114

Figure 3.5 Networking at two levels.

116

Figure 3.6 The structure of first-level networking.

117

Figure 3.7 Innovation and networking.

119

Tables Table 2.1 Foreigners and minorities in Egypt.

66

Table 2.2 Jews in Egypt, 1850– 1947.

74

Table 2.3 Greeks in Egypt, 1887 –1947.

77

x

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Table 3.1 Gross number of companies established per decade.

108

Table 3.2 All companies established in Egypt 1885– 1960, overview.

109

Table 3.3 Percentage of companies with Jewish and/or Greek participation.

112

Table 3.4 Number and percentage of companies with Jewish and/or Greek participation of all innovative companies.

113

Table 3.5 Networking.

115

Table 3.6 The structure of first-level networking.

117

Table 3.7 Innovation and networking.

118

Images Image 1 Nicholas Parachimonas (right), engineer of several cotton varieties. Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET. Image 2 Ginning Factory. Christos Angelis (left), an expert of the Egyptian government on the classification and export of cotton (1950s). Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET. Image 3 Cigarette Factory Angelos Chelmis, Cairo (around 1910). Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET. Image 4 George Moraites Pharmacy, Alexandria (around 1910). Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET. Image 5 The bakery of Konstantinos Stergidis and Michael Tefos, Menouf (1916). Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET. Image 6 New London House; a store of clothes, men’s underwear, ties, shoes, shirts and sports goods located in the Suare`s Square (Midan Mustafa Kamil since 1940) was established by Jacques Abraham Arie

LIST

OF

FIGURES, TABLES

AND IMAGES

xi

(the father of Albert Arie) who immigrated from Istanbul and settled in Cairo after WWI. The store was burned on 26 January 1952 and reopened a few months later. This, and the following image, is from the re-opening in spring 1952. Private collection, Albert Arie. Image 7 New London House; Albert (right) and Jacques Arie (sitting). Private collection, Albert Arie. Image 8 Haggada Book, Passover Prayers, according to the Sephardic tradition, in Arabic (unknown year). Private collection, Nada Shalaby. Image 9 The Jewish Quarter, Cairo (1947). Private collection, Albert Arie. Image 10 Young widower Bechora Behar (1886–1974) photographed with her children Malka-Nehama (1904–1992) and Moshe (1906–2002), Cairo (around 1925). All rights reserved to Dr Moshe Behar, University of Manchester. Image 11 Cohen Brothers, Jewish store in Al-Moski, Cairo (around 1942). Vintage Egypt Personal Blog. Image 12 Ms Mathilde Goldenberg (after marriage Mathilde Arie), mother of Albert Arie (1916). Private collection, Albert Arie.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my deep thanks and sincere gratitude to all those who have contributed in bringing this book to completion. It would not have been achieved without the exceptional supervision of my doctoral advisor, Professor Thomas Philipp, may his soul rest in peace, his close attention in all phases of my work and his patience. The efforts of Professor Joel Beinin can only be described as extraordinary; I thank him for his continuous support and motivation throughout. It fills me with great pleasure to have had the opportunity to be their student. My thanks and appreciation to Professor Christoph Schumann, may his soul rest in peace, for his valuable time and unlimited encouragement. The unquestioning support and inspiration of my parents; Ursula and Abbas Abdulhaq; my sisters, Ute, Nadia and Ulla; and my brothers, Majdi and Maysara, have been a major factor behind this work, from beginning to end. They encouraged me morally, always believing in my work and their support was unlimited. I offer my most sincere gratitude for their unending love and support. Financial support in the form of scholarships from the Heinrich Bo¨ll Foundation, the Evangelisches Studienwerk Villigst e.V. and the Fo¨rderverein Familie und Wissenschaft of the Erlangen-Nu¨rnberg University were instrumental in the conduct of the research, writing the thesis and publishing it. There is, too, an almost endless list of friends to thank, though my humble words of thanks pale in comparison to their assistance and support, each in his and her own way. My special thanks go to: Albert Arie, meetings and talks with whom benefited this work beyond

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

xiii

description and were always a great joy and I must thank him also for making his private photo collection available to be used for this work; Roger Acabos, may his soul rest in peace, for recalling his memories for me; Dimitri Vafiadis, who helped me to see the remains of a cosmopolitan Alexandria; Omar Kamil, for his valuable and continuing inspiration during all phases of this work, through long, non-stop discussions and helpful criticism; Barbara Lemsch, who was always ready to lend an ear – and a solution – to problems I confronted; Marianne Wagdy, for her generosity; Mustafa Issaid, who was a great support, perhaps without his knowing it; and all the others in Cairo, Jerusalem, Milan, Leipzig and Berlin whom I do not have the chance to mention here. A special thanks to the staff of Da¯r al-Watha¯ʾiq in Cairo and to the library staff of the American University in Cairo, who spared no effort in providing all the documents I needed for the thesis during my diverse research stays in the years 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. For publishing this work, I would like express my thanks to Leila Farsakh for her inspiration, the family of Sinai Alkesandrowitch for providing the photos made by the late Ze’ev Alkesandrowitch, Albert Arie, Moshe Behar, Nada Shalaby, Maria Admantidis and Mathilda Pyrli from the Association of Greeks from Egypt (ELIA) in Athens and the site Vintage Egypt for providing unique photos. Further, I would like to express my appreciation to Patricia Kahane and the Karl Kahane Foundation for their generous support. Last but not least, many thanks to my dear son, Elias Sari, for his patience and for his special way of showing his support.

NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION

The transliteration of Arabic words in this work follows the transliteration system of the International Journal of Middle East Studies.

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

A AH AP B B1 C C1 Cine Cons D E Fina G G1 H I Indu Infra Insu Inv. Jour K K1 M MG

Armenian Austrian-Hungarian ʿAbbud Pasha Belgian Benachi Cicurel Cassel Cinema Construction Saudi Egyptian Finance Greek Government after 1952 Harrari Italian Industry Infrastructure Insurance Innovation Journalism Kanaki Khouremi Mousseri Misr Group

xvi

Ming N Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5 O P Q R R1 S S1 S2 T Trad U V W1

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Mining Name change Note 1 Note 2 Note 3 Note 4 Note 5 Others, including French, Turkish and other nationalities Palestinian Qattawi Rollo Rabbat Suare`s Salvago Sarsaq Talat Harb Trade United Arab Republic, 1958–1961 Innovative, first of its kind on the market First-level networking, joint religious, or ethnic background

INTRODUCTION

The Alexandrian poet Cavafy wrote: Well, we’re nearly there, Hermippos. Day after Tomorrow, it seems – that’s what the captain said. At least we’re sailing our seas, The waters of our own countries – Cyprus, Syria, Egypt – Waters we know and love. Why so silent? Ask your heart: Didn’t you too feel happier The further we got from Greece? What’s the point of fooling ourselves? That wouldn’t be properly Greek, would it? It’s time we admitted the truth: We’re Greek also – what else are we? – But with Asiatic tastes and feelings, Tastes and feelings Sometimes alien to Hellenism. We simply can’t be ashamed Of the Syrian and Egyptian blood in our veins; We should really honor it, delight in it.1

2

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

The Cairene Jewish poet Murad Farag (1867–1955) wrote: My homeland is Egypt, here I was born, grew up and educated She is my master and income source, and the place where I wake up and go to sleep I have no other safe place to love and will thank her ever for this love Stay and live in freedom [Egypt]. 2 From Alexandria on August 3, 1899: The city is mourning; the flags are lowered on half-mast. The funeral procession, about seven kilometers long, led by the mounted police followed by their colleagues on foot and the various consular guards. It took about one hour before the last of the crowd began to move.3 This was neither the funeral of a member of the royal family, nor of the governor of the city, but of George Averoff, who had been the president of the Alexandrine Hellenic community since 1885. His fortune not only built schools in Alexandria but also, among other projects, provided funding for the new Olympic stadium in Athens. Altogether, he left a fortune twice as great as that of the richest Manchester textile baron of the same period. Cavafy, Averoff and Murad Farag: three individuals who were born, passed their lives and died in Egypt in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Their attachment to Egypt can clearly be felt in their words and in the posthumous respect they gained from Egyptian society and its institutions. These three and a couple of hundred thousand other Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews were part of the dynamic society of Egypt before the middle of the twentieth century. Some were central figures in their communities, but many were neither isolated within the boundaries of their communities nor contained by them. Many were seminal to Egyptian society, its arts, its culture, its economy and its politics. The main concern of this work is the dynamic of entrepreneurs from minorities in the Egyptian economy. The interrelation between minorities and entrepreneurship sheds light upon the relation of these

INTRODUCTION

3

minorities to Egypt’s economy, society and culture. Many questions arise when reviewing the biographies of these people and the history of their times. How and why did they contribute to the Egyptian economy and become such important and dominant figures? What was the dynamic of their contribution? How could they amass such fortunes? What was their relation to Egyptian politics, society and culture? Looking around contemporary downtown Cairo, Alexandria and other Egyptian cities and towns today reveals some traces and imprints of these people and their pasts; but when and where did the rest go? How and when did they leave, what other traces did they leave behind? These and many other questions arise when delving into the history of minorities in Egypt. This work answers these questions and others, about Egypt’s minorities by analyzing the role of the two minority groups largest in number: the Egyptian Jews and the Egyptian Greeks. Despite the focus on the role of minorities in the economy, the work takes a multidisciplinary approach, one aimed at presenting a fairly comprehensive answer to questions about minorities’ role in Egypt’s economy. It does so because this economic role cannot be understood from a viewpoint that ignores other perspectives. Minorities in Egypt had a distinctive role in the widescale economic developments that characterized the period from 1885 to 1960. This role has been explained within the frame of colonialism and the relation of imperial metropoles with their colonies. But it is also possible to explain the economic role of minorities in terms of multi-ethnic and multireligious societies. While the role of Egyptian Greeks was undoubtedly no less significant than that of Egyptian Jews, the case of Egyptian Jews has appeared more fundamental since it is entwined with the political structure of the Middle East. Making use of the documents of the Egyptian National Archive – Da¯r al Watha¯ʾiq, primarily the company establishing decrees (marsu¯m taʾsis sharika) that were published in the official Egyptian Gazette (Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya) as a primary source of information, the decrees ˙ list the names and dates of the companys’ establisher/s. The appendix shows the companies that have been analyzed. Another source from Da¯r al Watha¯ʾiq are the files of The Companies Department at the Egyptian Ministry of Commerce and Industry, known as maslahit al˙ ˙ sharika¯t. The records of maslahit al-sharika¯t kept all registrations about ˙ ˙ the Egyptitan companies, mainly after 1947; it was the governmental

4

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

body that controlled the ‘Egyptianization’ of the companies and factories as explained later in this work. Depending on the decrees in al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya and the records of maslahit al-sharika¯t, this ˙ ˙ ˙ study goes beyond the colonial explanation of the role of minorities. It does so by examining the structures of the 759 joint stock companies that were established in Egypt in the period between 1885 and 1960. By doing so it becomes possible to refrain from a nationalistic perception of history and, indeed, to historicize the emergence of these very perceptions. The resulting analysis of the role of minorities in the Egyptian economy comprises five chapters. Chapter 1 sets the stage by presenting a critical review of the literature dealing with minorities and their economic role in general and in the Egyptian case in particular, focusing on Egyptian Greeks and Egyptians Jews. It reviews the different nationalist narratives that have sought to account for minorities’ economic role in Egypt, analyzing the contexts in which they arose, explaining the relationships between the narratives and refuting them in favor of an analysis that moves beyond nationalist determinations. Chapter 2 concentrates on minorities and the economy by outlining the definitions and terminologies used in the literature. It further presents a brief critical reading of the history of Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews before 1885. It takes as its main emphasis, though, the interaction between minorities, migration to Egypt, the Suez Canal, the dual control, British colonialism, the mixed courts and the Urabi movement; a consideration of the relation of Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks with the viceroy is not neglected. Chapter 3 presents the theoretical core of this study. This research draws on two complementary theoretical frameworks: Joseph Schumpeter’s growth theory and network theory. Schumpeter proposed that the entrepreneur has a specific role in society based on behaviors that differ from the norm. In his Theory of Economic Development (1912), he constructed an endogenous growth theory in which the entrepreneur is the source of all dynamic change in the economy.4 The Schumpeterian entrepreneur is a ‘creative rebel’ who creates disequilibrium by breaking away from existing practices and pushing for innovation.5 Other scholars have elaborated upon Schumpeter’s work; this further elaboration is also presented. The second framework is network theory. As minorities with strong ties to international

INTRODUCTION

5

diasporas, both Greeks and Jews enjoyed certain benefits that flow from the existence of strong networks, a feature of many minority groups around the world. Networks grant important benefits to their members, including trust, social capital, access to information and alternative power structures. Archival materials in the Egyptian National Archive, in particular the founding charters of companies as printed in the Egyptian Gazette, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, are the main ˙ sources of historical information used in this study, alongside other documents from Da¯r al-Watha¯ʾiq in Cairo, the Central Zionist Archive and the Central Archive for the History of Jewish People, both of the latter located in Jerusalem. The charters found in the archive concern 759 companies newly established between the years 1885 and 1960. In order best to analyze entrepreneurial behavior, I rely on Schumpeter’s theory to define innovative entrepreneurs in the context of the general political and historical conditions of Egypt and the situation of the Jewish and Greek minorities there. The same data is used to delineate the networks that existed among these entrepreneurs, as shown in the tables in the Appendix at the end of this work. The results of this classification are presented clearly in tables and figures throughout. This information provides the material and data upon which the theoretical analysis is conducted. Chapter 4 further analyzes the results of Chapter 3 to show the relationships between Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews and wider Egyptian society. These relationships were neither linear nor rigid. The levels are: the political – both internal and external, the economic, the juridical, the intellectual and the cultural. Clear changes took place between the beginning of the period considered here and its end. The relationships as they existed and debates about minorities in Egyptian society are also presented in Chapter 4, with Chapter 5 continuing chronologically from the preceding chapter. Chapter 5 considers how the status of minorities changed after World War II, doing so by focusing on Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek companies and the policies of the Egyptian authorities after 1947. The analysis here makes use of documents of the Companies Department, Maslahit al-Sharika¯t. ˙ ˙ The post-World War II era was of critical importance for Egypt’s minorities and this lengthy chapter presents and analyzes how alterations in political structures and the law, the Free Officers movement of 1952 and the progressive nationalization of the Egyptian

6

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

economy – and with it the curtailment of the Egyptian private sector – affected the country’s minorities. The chapter documents how political and legal changes and especially the abolition of the private sector deprived Egypt’s minorities of the basis for their livelihoods in Egypt and represented the beginning of the end of the rich and glorious past of minorities in Egypt.

CHAPTER 1 SETTING THE STAGE

Existing Narratives This chapter examines the way that Egyptian and non-Egyptian intellectuals, historians and scholars have explained the role of Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews in the economic development of Egypt during the period 1850–1960. As such, the chapter specifically considers scholarly approaches to the history of minorities in the Nile valley rather than the general history of Egypt. Some attention in the scholarly literature has been given to the role of minorities in the Egyptian economy, with much of it focused on the Jewish minority and less on the Greeks. The Egyptian case has characteristics making it particularly interesting to historians and other researchers looking at minorities. Within a limited time period, certain minorities grew, achieved a great deal of economic power, then lost it and were largely forced to leave the country. Those diasporas of formerly Egyptian minorities have kept the memory of their sojourn alive. Meanwhile, in the Egypt of today, their traces can still be found. The scholarly material relates not only to minorities’ numbers but also to their role in and relationship with the country. Perspectives concerning minorities have been influenced by the affiliations of Egyptians with these minorities after they left or were forced to leave, as well as to perceptions of the history of these minorities in Egypt and the continued relevance of that history in the present day. Literature on the role of minorities in Egypt explores their realities but does not always

8

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

define and categorize all the different groups in detail. The status of any group as a minority may be based on ethnicity or religion, although the lines between these are sometimes blurred. For simplicity’s sake, some researchers have reduced Egypt’s complex society to two main, supposedly antagonistic groups: the Egyptians and the minorities.

Theories of Minorities’ Role in Egypt There is a consensus in the literature that Jewish and Greek minorities successfully dominated a significant proportion of economic activities in the country.1 However, there are only a few works that deal specifically with their economic role. Most of the scholarship treats the economic lives of minorities as subordinate to other aspects of their existence.2 Minorities in Egypt have mainly been examined in three interrelated respects: privileges and special conditions applying to them; colonialism and minorities’ vested interests in colonialism; and ethnicity as a characteristic of middlemen in Egyptian society. One common and simplistic assertion is that ethnic minorities took advantage of their status as foreigners. The Capitulations and mixed courts gave them an unfair advantage, it is said, so much so that the very phrase ‘Egyptian minority’ connotes an above average rank. Of course not every author makes this simplification to the same degree. Marius Deeb ascribes this role to the privileges these minorities had as a consequence of the Capitulations and the mixed courts after 1876, the result of policies that granted foreigners special legal dispensations in the Nile valley.3 Roger Owen maintains that the legal situation that emerged from the Capitulations and the mixed courts helped Europeans feel more comfortable investing their money in the Egyptian economy.4 A second common argument, related to the first, is that the success of these minorities arose from their shared interests with the colonial powers of the day, colonial powers which protected minorities in the achievement of their common goals. Combined with the first argument concerning the special privileges of minorities in Egypt, this second argument is common among Egyptian authors discussing the history of minorities and their economic role in Egypt, such as Nabil Sayid Ahmad, Anas Mustafa Kamel and Sayid Ashmawi.5 But the argument is not limited to Egyptian authors. Ronald Robinson, for example, has theorized Egyptian minorities as ‘collaborative elites’ within an

SETTING

THE STAGE

9

imperialist framework, mediators between the centers of power – the metropolis – and the peripheries of the Empire.6 A different and also popular way of describing the role of minorities in the Ottoman Empire, including Egypt, is to conceptualize the ethnic division of work in multi-ethnic and multireligious societies. A society stratified in this way encourages different groups to specialize or even monopolize specific professions and crafts. It was, thus, normal in Ottoman and Egyptian society for particular kinds of people to have particular kinds of livelihoods. In a related way, minorities are ascribed the role of middlemen. Essentially outsiders unable fully to participate in the majority culture, minorities served as middlemen between other groups, local and foreign, while engaging in frugal lifestyles that, in turn, led to further business success. Edana Bonacich, Jonathan Turner and Yorgus Kourvetaris all advance this thesis in different ways.7 These three distinct arguments, then, have in general been employed to explain the role of minorities in Egypt. They have been used in varying degrees in different works on Egyptian history and the history of minorities and their economic roles in Egypt. It is beyond question that Egypt’s integration into the world market through its cotton production and the British colonial system in the Nile Valley had a major effect on minorities’ roles. Nonetheless, these arguments have a number of limitations. Trade and craft specialization could just as easily have led to minorities occupying lower social and economic strata instead of the highest. The ethnic division of labor cannot explain the far more complex economic activities that go beyond small trade and include investments in infrastructure, industry and large businesses, all of which involve higher risk than smaller-scale trade and production. The middlemen theory explains the activity of only one group: the Greeks and that only in part. The Egyptian Greeks were a diverse community composed of different social and cultural classes. Reducing their role solely to middlemen is a gross simplification. In addition, the theory does not discuss the dynamics and the strategies of these middlemen, making it unclear how their status as middlemen worked in practice. Privileges, special conditions and colonialism are complementary arguments. Indeed, these conditions had important effects on the emergence of minorities’ roles in Egypt. They constituted an ideal framework in which minorities could operate. Common interests shared

10

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

between the colonial powers and minorities supported economic activity and, to some extent, dominance. This approach, however, analyzes the minorities solely in terms of their relationship with the colonial power, that relationship has been generalized under the assumption that these minorities and the colonial power had constant and absolute common interests. As the following chapters will demonstrate, minorities in Egypt, Jews and Greeks in particular, each belonged to several different social classes and groups and cannot be considered an elite in their entirety. The elites among them did not always have interests shared with the British occupiers. The argument of privileges, special conditions and colonialism provides a partial answer for the economic success of the Egyptian Greeks and Jews. It explains, for example, the success of a number of Alexandrian cotton merchants and the relationship between the Jewish family Suare`s and the British business magnate Sir Ernest Cassel.8 This particular approach provides an explanation for the success of minorities in the Egyptian economy, but it fails to provide a complete explanation. Events in the Middle East in the mid-twentieth century, especially the departure and expulsion of foreign minorities from Egypt after 1952, affected the perception of the histories of different minorities in the country, particularly the Jews. Many Egyptian, Arab, Israeli and Jewish authors were trapped in this political context and, consequently, their analysis proceeds through the eye of the needle of the political and ideological schema of the Arab–Israeli conflict.9 Arguments based on these political developments and associated with their attendant ideological frameworks have misconstrued the economic factors of minorities’ success. These three arguments present some answers as to the roles of Egypt’s minorities. However, they describe the circumstances surrounding minorities’ economic success while giving no account of the reasons for that success. In this study I will go a step further and analyze the economic roles that lay beyond the political and ideological context. I construct my analysis using two interrelated elements. The first is that minorities in Egypt had an entrepreneurial role. This paved the way for their economic success. Being an entrepreneur or having entrepreneurial skills was enough to establish a business but not enough to succeed and gain a dominant position.10 Additionally, then, I use network theory to explain minorities’ social mobility. My argument is that the interrelationship

SETTING

THE STAGE

11

between entrepreneurship and networking led to the dominant economic role played by minority communities in Egypt. This cannot, however, be considered in a vacuum. To reach a clear and comprehensive analysis, it is necessary to place these two components within the Egyptian historical context, understood as forming the parameters for minorities’ legal and social statuses: these parameters being the Capitulations and the minorities’ relationships with the colonial powers. To clarify the entrepreneurial role of minorities, I present and analyze around 750 joint stock companies that were established in Egypt in the period 1887–1960, data for which is drawn from the documents of Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, the ˙ official gazette. In addition, my analysis relies on the secondary literature concerning Egypt’s history during this period, colonialism, nationalism and Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks.

The Egyptian Greeks The scale and scope of the literature on Egyptian Greeks differs substantially from that on Egyptian Jews. The Arab–Israeli conflict has cast a long shadow on historians’ work on the relationship between Egyptian society and Egyptian Jewry. This dimension is necessarily absent in the consideration of Greeks in Egypt. While both communities were forced to leave between 1956 and 1967, there has not been a history of antagonism between the modern Greek state and the modern Egyptian state. The ‘Greco-centric’ approach emphasizes the continuation of the Greek ‘race’ in Egypt since the times of Alexander the Great. Greeks are not here seen as an integral part of Egyptian society. This is consistent with Greek nationalism in Greece, where the unbroken continuation of the Greek ‘race’ forms an integral part of national identity. The Greek ‘race’, again according to this approach, had an uninterrupted political agenda: to help civilize the Eastern Mediterranean. This ‘civilizing mission’ and the implication that Greeks were in Egypt before its Coptic and Arab-Muslim inhabitants, gave the Greeks a heightened sense of entitlement to its subsequent privileged position. Athanese G. Politis’s two-volume L’Helle´nisme et l’Egypte moderne, published in 1929 and 1930 and advancing the claim that Egyptians would not be civilized were it not for the Greek role in Egypt, is an important instance of this approach.11 The problem here is that the diversity of the Greek

12

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

community within Egypt is ignored. Furthermore, Greeks played a role in the larger economic, cultural, social and political dramas taking place throughout Egyptian society in different eras. Finally, this approach also ignores Greek efforts at integration into Egyptian society, often in the face of patriarchal and elite opposition.12 More recently, scholars have conceived of the Greek presence in Egypt in terms of its status as an ethnic group and as a socially stratified unit. Examples of such work include Pandelis Glavanis’ comprehensive study of the Greek community of Alexandria and its development during the nineteenth century, Alexander Kitroeff’s The Greeks in Egypt, 1919– 1937 and Floresca Karanasou’s study of the Greeks in Egypt from 1805.13 This line of approach is often explicitly hostile to the Greco-centric approach. Antony Gorman, for example, presents different examples of the joint Greek–Egyptian struggle over the Egyptian national issue and reveals the diversity, complexity and contradictions within the Greek community and within Egyptian society.14 This approach may also be seen in the novel Drifting Cities by the Egyptian Greek author Stratis Tsirkas (1911–80). The Egyptian perspective on Egyptian Greeks is both positive and nostalgic. It differs from the attitude toward other minorities and foreigners who were resident in Egypt. Views of Egyptian Greeks in this perspective move between two poles. On the one hand, there is the stereotype of the greedy usurers and alcohol peddlers victimizing Egyptian peasants. On the other, one finds the heroes who stood up for Egyptian interests after the nationalization of the Suez Canal, doing so by keeping their positions as managers of Canal traffic. The proximity of Greeks to Egyptians is a common element of this perspective. This intimacy can be explained as follows. First, Greece was not a colonial power in Egypt, so there was no direct political conflict between the two countries. Second, the proximity of Greek and Egyptian social classes – that is, the existence of poor and middle-class Greeks – distanced them from other rich foreigners residing in the country. Furthermore, some Egyptian Greeks shared neighborhoods with native Egyptians. Egyptian Greeks were involved in different aspects of the Egyptian economy and society, in addition to their integration in left-wing political activities. Third, a common Mediterranean culture and the historic affiliation of the two countries as Ottoman provinces eased the movement and exchange between both countries and their peoples. This nostalgia is

SETTING

THE STAGE

13

reinforced by a kind of historical amnesia regarding the circumstances of Greek emigration out of Egypt in the 1960s.15

The Egyptian Jews There is considerably more literature about the Jewish minority than about the Greek minority. This does not reflect a judgment about which community was more ‘important’ in Egyptian society; it is simply a fact that historians in later periods have felt a greater need to explain the legacy of the Jewish community than that of the Greek community, a need driven by contemporary political circumstances. The literature on Egyptian Jews follows two main approaches. The arguments of the first are based on nationalist interpretations. Egyptian and Arab scholars and novelists writing after 1948 have evinced the ‘Egyptian and Arab nationalist narrative’,16 while the majority of the works of Western and Israeli scholars and novelists have presented the ‘Zionist narrative’ of Egyptian Jewry. The second approach has been critical of nationalist analyses, including works by western and Egyptian authors. There are nuances within both approaches, leading to several subdivisions that are not necessarily systematic. Literature dealing with the lives of Egyptian Jews is not insignificant and includes autobiographies, semi-autobiographies and novels. The authors have mainly been Jews – or their children – who lived in and emigrated from Egypt by the 1950s or 1960s.17 The history of Egyptian Jews is also discussed by historians who present nationalistic thought. Here the presentation is from two different perspectives reflecting two fronts: Egyptian/Arab and Israeli/Western, with contradictory historical readings of Egyptian Jewry. The first faction is dominated by an Egyptian nationalist and anticolonial attitude, which I refer to as the ‘Egyptian nationalist narrative’. Authors writing in this approach have two arguments. The Jews of Egypt had a good life in Egypt with equal rights. They misused the good circumstances which they enjoyed and turned their back on Egypt at the first opportunity. The second argument proposes that Egyptian Jews were not part of natural Egyptian society and that most of them sympathized with the Zionist movement as part of ‘global imperial dominance’,18 either publicly or privately, supporting it either financially or logistically, or both.19 This discussion is hindered by the limits of the

14

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Arab–Israeli conflict and does not go beyond it. Such works analyze the historical details in order to prove the aforementioned arguments.20 Anas Mustafa Kamel’s Jewish Capitalism in Egypt is the only extensive research in Arabic emphasizing the role of Jewish capital in the Egyptian economy.21 It garnered public interest beyond merely academic circles. This was due to its being published as a series of articles in 1981 in the newspaper Al-Ahra¯m Al-Iqtisa¯dı¯ (The Economic Ahram). It is clear that the diplomat Kamel invested a considerable amount of time and work in his articles; he used all possible evidence to prove and defend his point of view. His main assertion is that Jewish capitalism in Egypt was the henchman of Zionism and imperialism and that it harmed Egypt. Kamel’s work warrants extensive discussion. Published in 1999 after the sudden death of its author, the arguments of Jewish Capitalism in Egypt are economic in nature, with an implicitly political orientation. Kamel argues that Egyptian Jewry was involved in the Zionist movement from the outset, even before the 1897 Zionist Congress in Basel.22 At the other end of the historical spectrum, he provides an analysis of Jewish-Israeli capital after the 1967 war and identifies plans to gain a foothold in Egypt. The focus of his review of Egyptian Jewish history is the role of Sephardic Jewish families. Kamel argues that Jewish involvement in Egypt is the result of pressure by European powers, starting with Moses Montifiore in 1840 and continuing through Mohammad Ali’s dynasty. Their involvement, he claims, was aided by the protection Jews enjoyed under the Capitulations and support from the British consuls in Egypt.23 In Kamel’s narrative, Jewish banks played a crucial role in lending to Khedive Ismail and robbing the state in the 1870s. Jews were deeply involved in causing national indebtedness, which was one of the reasons for British and French intervention and, later, the British occupation of Egypt (1882– 1922). The families mentioned above and Jewish capital generally benefited from the British presence by using it to gain control over the country’s economy. Before and during the British occupation, numerous Jews received foreign passports, cementing a dominance that supported their businesses even after Egypt’s independence in 1922. Kamel further argues that Zionist leaders had extensive contacts with Alexandrian Jews by the end of the nineteenth century, collaborating with imperialist Germany and Britain in tandem to ensure their own interests. The coalition between Jewish financing companies, banks and

SETTING

THE STAGE

15

real estate companies stripped indebted Egyptian farmers and some of the landlords of their land during the Great Depression of the 1930s under the same system used at the end of the nineteenth century. Government interference, which guaranteed that banks would take over part of the debts, prevented the loss of land. According to Kamel, this explains why Jewish capital was no longer interested in land or real estate, preferring instead liquid cash to invest in a higher and more developed phase of production, industry and services and to export liquid capital to Palestine. Kamel argues that Jewish capital managed to put Jews on the board of directors of Bank Misr and later the Misr Group and succeeded in having a Jewish minister appointed to two Egyptian cabinets in the 1920s. More modest Jewish capital was heavily involved in industry, especially through the Egyptian Federation of Industries (EFI), whose secretary was Jacques Levi. The involvement of smaller capital became clearer after World War II. Those with more capital boycotted the EFI, since any flourishing industry in Egypt could affect the infant industry in Palestine.24 Jewish capital is said to have fought against nationalization for 30 years, starting in 1929 and ending with the nationalization laws of 1961. However, the 1956 war and Law No. 24 of 1957, which banned foreign-owned commercial firms, caused the closure of Jewish companies. In total, 21,000 Jews left the country in the following year. The law allowed each person leaving the country to carry only LE 30. Jewish property was confiscated by the state. Kamel estimated that about LE 8 million of Jewish property and money were ‘smuggled’ out of the country. Egypt won the battle with the laws of nationalization and socialization. These laws and processes put an end to Jewish influence and its dominance of the Egyptian economy. Kamel argues that the Jewish network he has unveiled was supported by the nature of the Jewish religion, which considered the Jews superior, as well as the family networks that connected them in all companies.25 Kamel’s work is very problematic. He operates with rigid economic and cultural categories. Hence, he classifies any firm with significant Jewish participation as ‘Jewish’.26 He ignores the consideration that Jews were an integral part of Egyptian society and avoids referring to anti-Zionist activity among Egyptian Jews. Furthermore, Kamel does not always provide detailed sources of his information. Several tables and statistical data he presents are said to be collected from the ‘knowledge of the researcher’.27

16

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

This unwillingness to make distinctions about Egyptian Jews is also evident in Siham Nassar’s work on the Jewish press in Egypt, The Egyptian Jews between Egyptianness and Zionism (1980). Nassar lists 21 newspapers and magazines owned or operated by Jews.28 She argues that the Jews of Egypt used financial pressure to block any media criticism of Zionism,29 and insists that the Zionist movement managed to influence the majority of Jews in Egypt.30 Some newspapers were clearly the press organs of the Zionist movement in Egypt, such as Le Messager Sioniste (1901), which later became Mevaseret Tzion (1902),31 and La Voix Juive (1931),32 published on behalf of the Zionist movement. Nassar’s work further explains how Jewish newspapers such as Israil (1920– 39)33 and Al-Shams (1934– 48)34 were official newspapers of the Jewish community. Nevertheless, Nassar erroneously considers all publications owned or operated by Jews as related to Zionism and regards all Jewish involvement in the Egyptian press, whether as owners, managers, or journalists, as an intrusion into this press. Her analysis has a negative approach to any Jewish activity. She tries to show the influence of events in the region in the 1940s over this press, but the reader notices that several aspects are missing. In general, the author disregards the historical context of her study. She fails to mention the flourishing press milieu in Egypt and in Cairo in particular and the leading role the Egyptian press played in the whole Arabic-speaking region during the first half of the twentieth century. The freedom of the press and publication made Cairo the headquarters for different kinds of newspapers and magazines, as well as a haven for many journalists and intellectuals to express and to practice their creativity. By missing this point, the author is unable to see the Jewish press as part of this flourishing of the press, as Jews were active members of Egyptian society. She lacks a differentiated press analysis and fails to examine the actual discourse around Zionism at that time. Within the Jewish community one found many opinions; some supported Zionism, some opposed it and some were indifferent or wavering.35 In addition, Nassar gives the impression that there were 21 Zionist newspapers issued continuously throughout the period discussed (1877–1948).36 In fact, many newspapers went out of business because of lack of readers. Furthermore, Nassar does not consider changes in the Egyptian political landscape. Nationalism (Misr al-fatah) and the rise of the

SETTING

THE STAGE

17

Muslim Brotherhood became prominent in the press. The incomplete analysis and the author’s approach37 led to a contradiction which becomes clear when she classifies the famous magazine Al-Katib al-Misri as a Jewish magazine because its publishing house, Al-Katib al-Misri, was owned by the Egyptian Jewish Harari family. Al-Katib al-Misri was the leading cultural magazine of its time.38 Taha Hussein, the editor, managed to form a group of excellent authors, such as Tawfiq al- Hakim, Sayyid Qutb,39 Mahmud Taymur and Louis Awad. Most of these authors had previously published in Al-Risala magazine, which was one of the most important and popular intellectual forums and exerted considerable influence on the print culture in Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world in the 1930s.40 Henry Cale and Jean-Paul Sartre also contributed to Al-Katib al- Misri. The debate about Taha Hussein, Al-Katib al-Misri and the accusation of its support for Zionism is the focus of an article by the Lebanese author Mohammad Dakroub. He refutes these reproaches and demands that one read the magazine’s articles before passing judgment.41 Nassar mentions that these accusations against Hussein were the result of competition, criticism of other intellectuals and the relationship between Hussein and the Egyptian government.42 Although she is aware of this, her argument does not waver from the claim that, as the Harari brothers were Jewish, so too was Al-Katib al-Misri, dismissing the fact that the Harari were also Egyptians. A Jewish family owning a publishing house was normal in the context of Egypt in the 1940s. It appears that Nassar is mixing up contexts in her work. She misses recognizing that the mixture of Egyptians, Levantines, Greeks, Jews and all others was the norm, not the exception in Egypt during the first half of the twentieth century. Despite Nassar’s investment in her research, the work is not persuasive. She does not reference all her sources.43 Although she mentions the anti-Zionist activities of Egyptian Jews and the antiZionist attitude of Rene Qattawi, the head of the Jewish community in Cairo until 194644 and thus one of the official representatives of the Jews, she sees them as representing a small minority within the community.45 This gives the impression that Zionist activities were supported by the majority of Egyptian Jews. Kamel’s and Nassar’s works are similar in this respect, a similarity that can be explained by the fact that both were published in the same political period, the early 1980s.

18

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

A different perspective is presented in Ahmad Ghuneim’s and Ahmad Abu-Kaf’s The Jews and the Zionist Movement in Egypt (1969).46 The importance of this work relates to its publication two years after the 1967 war. Surprisingly, given the political atmosphere of the time, it presents a more nuanced conception of the Zionist movement in Egypt than the works of Kamel and Nassar. The authors describe in detail the activities of the revisionist Zionists, who later became ‘The New Zionist Organization’ in Egypt and their connection to the assassination of the British minister resident in the Middle East, Lord Moyne. Ghuneim and Abu Kaf clearly understand the different factions of Zionism, the distinction between Zionists and the Jewish community and the presence of a strong anti-Zionist tendency among young intellectuals, as well as in official community institutions.47 Even more impressive is the 1964 masterpiece of Waguih Ghali, the novel Beer in the Snooker Club.48 Presenting Egyptian Jews, Ghali is perhaps the only non-Jewish Egyptian who presents a precise description of the situation of Egyptian Jews after 1952 (observing, for example, that some aspects of their fate were shared with parts of the Egyptian upper-class). Ghali’s differentiation of characters, which goes beyond any stereotyping, is not repeated in anything like the same degree in the novels by Egyptian authors that followed. There has been no direct debate between Egyptian authors and others regarding the history of Egyptian Jewry. Nonetheless, Nabil Sayyid Ahamad’s Jews in Egypt Between the Proclamation of Israel and the Suez War (1991)49 can be considered an answer to some Israeli arguments regarding Egyptian Jews.50 Ahamad discusses the situation of Egyptian Jews after 1948, mentioning anti-Zionist activities and the complicated situation of the Jews of Egypt, supporting his arguments with quotations from the Egyptian Jewish lawyer Shehata Haroun.51 He observes that only a quarter of Egyptian Jews migrated to Israel, while the rest left for Europe and the United States.52 Although he makes more effort to be nuanced, his arguments never leave the frame of Kamel and Nassar. He neglects the impact of a rising nationalist and Islamist spirit and their influence on Egyptian society and policy in the 1940s. Besides Egyptians, other Arab authors – mainly Palestinians – wrote about the Jews of Egypt, usually in the context of Jews in the Arab world and the Arab – Israeli conflict. Two works may be mentioned here. First, The Jews in Arab Countries53 published in Beirut in 1970 by Yacoub

SETTING

THE STAGE

19

Khoury, who worked for the Arab League in Cairo. This is a response to Israeli arguments about the situation of Palestinian refugees in comparison with the Jews of Arab countries. The latter issue was raised by Israel as a condition for enforcing UN Security Council Resolution 237 of June 14, 1967.54 This debate restricts the work to a political frame wherein the author focuses on refuting opposing points of view. The book has little relevance to the present study but deserves mention because of how the author reviews the history of Egyptian Jews. His arguments are similar to those of Nassar and Anas Kamel. Khoury ignores changes taking place in Egyptian society and argues that the sole reasons for the voluntary departure of the Jews were the actions of hard-working Zionists, the founding of Israel and the collaboration of Egyptian Jews with the new Israeli state.55 Second, Jews of Arab Countries56 by Ali Ibrahim Abdo and Khayriyah Qasimiyah, who worked at the Palestinian Research Centre in Beirut and published their book in 1971. Both books use arguments similar to those of Nassar and Anas Kamel. These works have to be seen and understood as part of a political debate framed by the Palestinian– Israeli and Arab–Israeli conflicts. Conformity among Egyptian authors is the result of the politicized historiography of Egyptian Jewry. The common ground of all these works is their publication in the wake of the Egyptian– Israeli peace treaties in the late 1970s. In the 20 years since the emigration and expulsion of most Egyptian Jews, their absence had barely registered as a topic of research (with the exceptions of Ghuneim and Abu Kaff). In order to understand the renewed interest in Egyptian Jewry by Egyptian intellectuals in the aftermath of the peace treaty, we must look at works from before 1948, when scholarly works about the Jewish presence in Egypt were almost nonexistent.57 This can be explained by the fact that in the first half of the twentieth century there was no need or desire to discuss the Jews in Egyptian society. There was no ‘Jewish question’ in interwar Egypt.58 Thus, if we turn to the 1953 Dictionary of Egyptian Manners and Traditions, by well-known Egyptian scholar and author Ahmad Amin (1886– 1954), we find the following: There is a big Jewish community in Egypt, it is known that they live in their own quarter preserving themselves [. . .] they have particular facial features and are famous for their commercial and

20

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

jewelry skills [. . .] Egyptians know them as an example of greediness which is also used for jokes. They are clever in making their work dominant in different fields. They had modern political and war techniques during the war of Palestine.59 Amin wrote in the late 1940s. Going back to consider the Egyptian perception of Jews, I rely on texts from the magazine Al-Risala, the cultural magazine mentioned above published in Egypt in the 1930s and an important and popular intellectual forum that had considerable influence on print culture in Egypt and in the Arab world more generally.60 The author, Muhamad Abdallah Inan (1896–1986), wrote regularly in Al-Risala as one of Egypt’s best-known authors. In one of his articles in 1934, Inan warned against the dangerous perspectives of the German Nazi Party and addressed race as well as the Jewish issue: German National Socialism does not stop its view about the racial superiority at this point, but it goes much beyond that. It announces the superiority of the Aryan race over all other races, not only over the Jewish race and considers all non-Aryan races as inferior; and the people of the south Mediterranean and the Semitic and Oriental people all generally belong to the inferior people that should be avoided by the Aryan race, which should be careful not to mix with them [. . .] there is no need to say that this theory is not based on proper science nor proper research or proper thought, it is only a new form of the attitude of hate of western people towards [others] and a new form of western colonialism.61 Inan rejected racist ideology and in particular harshly criticized the persecution of the Jews in Nazi Germany. He vehemently criticized the education of German youth under the National Socialists and the persecution of the Jews, expressing his sorrow that this attitude dominated the German culture of his time.62 The vehement critique of Italian fascism and Nazi Germany, the persecution of the Jews and the racism of the Nazi ideology were not limited to Inan’s work. Other Egyptian authors discussed it during the 1930s.63 The critique of Italian fascism and Nazi Germany in Egyptian publications of the 1930s is discussed in the work of Israel Gershoni and Go¨tz Nordbruch:

SETTING

THE STAGE

21

Sympathy and Dismay, Encounters with Fascism and National Socialism in Egypt 1922 – 1937.64 The article ‘Jews in France and Egypt’ (1898) was published in the magazine Al-Manar by its editor, one of the most famous scholars of his time, Rashid Rida (1865–1935). Writing at the end of the nineteenth century, Rida observed and condemned the anti-Semitic reaction in France over the Dreyfus case. He wondered how a nation seemingly so enlightened and tolerant could allow such persecution against the Jews: Nowadays, news spreads about interior political problems arising in France after the Dreyfus affair and the Zola case and what humiliation, discrimination and mistreatment Jews suffer. And readers should not presume that such discrimination is caused by the religious fanaticism of the French nation, since that nation’s religious dogma is a weak one and they are far from fanaticism, which stems from an exaggerated perception of religion. Thus, the source of the discrimination [against the Jews] is the racism and obnoxious enviousness, which was stirred up within the [French] nation by a group of anti-Jewish and greedy newspaper owners.65 Rida argued against religious intolerance and criticized discrimination and those who discriminated. In supporting equality, he also observed that Europeans could be hypocrites, ready to denounce ‘Orientals’ for being backward while at the same time tolerating and even taking part in home-grown extremism. He declared: If such hideous incidents took place among Orientals, the cry of those newspapers would pervade the skies; sharp tongues and pins, which are harder than arrows, would ‘boil’ the Orientals and their manners. Furthermore, if such newspapers were in countries with a weak group [that is, the object of discrimination] such as the Jews in France, they would be the first ones advocating [for their] absolute freedom and public justice for all mankind regardless of race. And this is the meaning of our statement: human beings ask – as underdogs – for justice and a tyrant ostracizes them.66 Rida staked out a pro-Jewish position not only in regards to what happened in France, but also in regards to criticism of Arab publications

22

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

that uncritically repeated French anti-Jewish sentiments. He called for civilized behavior based on the universality of humanity and equal rights consistent with modernity, adding: It is strange that this ‘sickness’ of the French newspapers has slipped into some Egyptians newspapers. They began to ‘burn’ the Jews with harsh criticism and resent them for their proficiency in earning money and their innovative ways of gaining profit. In our terms and according to our estimation, public freedom should not be monopolized by one group.67 And: Therefore, the correct civilized behavior and the real justice should guarantee all sons of mankind absolutely equal rights in gaining public advantage. Work and earning money through legal methods are the moral excellence in a society. That is why a human being should work and profit as much as possible so long as it is done by legal means; those who remonstrate against such ways violate the principle of public freedom. Having this in mind, no reasonable person of the French nation would agree to the persecution of the Jews in the past and modern times. Some of their biggest philosophers have already mentioned [anti-Jewishness] as one of the time’s sicknesses and have hoped it will disappear with the advance of modernity.68 These three texts from Rida, Inan and Amin give a snapshot of the discourse regarding Jews in Egyptian intellectual circles in the 50 years before the Nakba and the founding of Israel. Rida emphasized universal principles and equal rights regardless of religion. He defended the Jews in the name of civilized behavior and modernity. One finds neither explicit nor implicit hostility toward Jews. The arguments of Inan and his colleagues in the 1930s emerge out of the same cultural milieu as Rida’s. The text of Ahmad Amin is both descriptive and cautious. This is the result of two factors: the Jews were a minority and certainly not active in all fields of daily Egyptian life. The Palestine War in 1948 profoundly changed internal politics within the region’s societies.

SETTING

THE STAGE

23

Nonetheless, although Amin’s text did not defend Jews, it was neither harshly negative and nor did it attack them. This changed dramatically following the Palestine War. In general it can be said that Egyptian society was unable to think of Egyptian Jewry outside the scope of what was taking place in Palestine. The strong feelings of solidarity with the Palestinian cause translated into a negative and suspicious attitude toward Egyptian Jewry.

Between Economy and Culture – Jews and Egyptianness The qualitative shift in and the timing of the debate concerning Egyptian Jews, a debate that did not exist before the late 1970s, has to be clarified. Furthermore, it must be asked why there was such a time lag. Anas Mustafa Kamel conducted his research in 1981, though Operation Susannah and other events related to Egyptian Jews mostly took place in the 1950s. The answer is related to political events taking place in Egypt. On November 9, 1977, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat addressed the Egyptian parliament and stated his willingness to go to the ends of the earth to achieve peace, including going to the Knesset, Israel’s parliament. This declaration was followed by his visit to Jerusalem and his speech to the Knesset on November 17, 1977. Both events together defined a turning point in Egyptian policy toward Israel, which had previously been marked only by armed conflict. Thus, on an Egyptian – Israeli level and on an Arab level, Sadat broke ranks with the Arab policy of not recognizing Israel, a policy essentially driven by the claim that Israel was not a legitimate state. This turning point led to the most significant moment in Arab–Israeli relations since the 1973 war. Ten months after his speech in Jerusalem, on September 17, 1978, Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin signed the Camp David accords at the White House in Washington, DC. The Camp David accords were a formal outline of the Egyptian– Israeli peace treaty set to be signed in May 1979. The accords and the treaty unleashed a torrent of political and intellectual debate in Egypt and the Arab world.69 The debate was framed in two respects: first, a high level of skepticism toward the treaty in Egyptian political and intellectual circles and second, by visiting Israel and signing a treaty, Sadat had reopened every internal social issue in any way related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, including the history of

24

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Jews in Arab and Muslim lands. The unstated policy of ignoring that history was replaced by an effort to mine that history for arguments that could be used in contemporary political debate. Anas Mustafa Kamel’s research and published articles should be understood as part of this debate and part of the politicization of Jewish history in Egypt. The timing of this resurgence of interest in Egyptian Jewry is clear. But what shaped the contours of the debate? The revolution (coup) of 1952 and its ideology labeled the period before 1952 as a dark period in Egyptian history.70 The Free Officer’s Revolt (al-dubba¯t ˙ ˙ al-ʾahra¯r) represented the very moment when the Egyptian nation ˙ moved from subjugation to foreign powers to national pride. It also marked a huge leap forward in the secularization and nationalization of Egyptian society. This affected historical interpretation after 1952. The explanation for the perceptual shift is rooted in the change of the Jews’ legal status. During centuries of Muslim rule, Jews in Ottoman lands were defined as a religious minority. As individuals with the legal status of a dhimmi,71 their affairs were regulated through the millet system and through the relationship between the millets and the ruler. Until the 1950s, awareness of Jews and other religious minorities in Egyptian society was a reflection of the historical experience they had shared over long centuries. This can be read between the lines of Ahmad Amin’s perception of Egyptian Jewry, since Ahmad Amin belonged to the generation that grew up in that very historical context where minorities were defined through the millet system. The termination of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the establishment of the nation state and the slogan of the 1919 revolution, ‘Religion for God and Homeland for Everyone’: these were the beginning of the end for the millet system, as well as for the legal burden of being a dhimmi. Thus, the foundation for the perceptual shift mentioned above was laid during this period of Egyptian history. Furthermore, the Egyptian constitution of 1923 granted, in Article 3, equal rights to all Egyptians.72 The Egyptian citizenship laws of 1926 and 1929 reinforced this development by proclaiming that all state citizens, regardless of religion, had equal rights before the law.73 Jews, as a minority, became citizens on the same level as the majority. However, the context differed from Ottoman times: here Jews were simultaneously ‘equal’ and a minority.

SETTING

THE STAGE

25

The proclamation of the state of Israel as a Jewish state in 1948 changed the perception of Jews as individuals and as a community. In a rather short period of time (1918– 48), Jews in Egypt went from dhimmi status to possibly being agents of a foreign power that had defeated Egypt in a war. This perception had not entirely come together by 1948 or even by 1952, yet by then they were perceived either as Egyptians or as a minority living in Egypt. But by 1980, after the wars of 1956, 1967 and 1973, this state – Israel – and its citizens had become a challenge. If Israel was ‘the Jewish State’ then all Jews were implicated as actual or potential agents of that state. With this challenge, the perception of Egyptian Jews as the ‘potential citizens of this state’ developed a different and more threatening tone. Sadiq al-Azm’s critical work about the 1967 war refers to the trap into which historical analysis falls, an analysis which is dominated by divine destiny and conspiracy powers rather than historical facts and their interaction.74 Kamel, Nassar and other Egyptian and Arab authors who wrote in the 1970s also stumbled into that trap. They can be considered a new generation who grew up in the context of Nasserite Egypt, who had not experienced Egyptian Jews as a normal feature of Egypt. They analyzed the role of Jews in the Egyptian economy, society, press and in history in general with the new conception of the Jew as a foreign agent and cast this understanding backwards in time. This projection ignores historical context, which was not constant and unchanging before or after 1948. Here the historical contexts are misinterpreted and this fault gives these works an ahistorical character and presents an ideological perception of history. Kamel, for example, reconstructs history as though Israel was always present as an enemy state with the Jews – including Egyptian Jews – as its agents. He judges the relationship between Egypt and Israel in the late 1970s and uses this judgment as the foundation for his discussion of the history of Egyptian Jews.

Mitzraim Sheli (My Egypt): The Zionist Perspective There are few publications about Egyptian Jewry in English to be found before 1978. The earliest is Jewish Communities in the Muslim Countries of the Middle East: A Survey for the American-Jewish Committee and the AngloJewish Association of 1950, written by Siegfried Landshut. The report was published in The Jewish Chronicle in London in 1950 and, later, as a book in 1976. It has a clear perspective on developments in Egypt:

26

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

in the light of these facts, it is easier to understand that outbreaks of mob violence against the Jews in Egypt – such as those of 1948 – were due in the main less to anti-Semitism than to hatred of all foreigners from the powerful west.75 The author of the survey adds: Failure to appreciate this point may easily lead to erroneous conclusions, such as those of the American Jewish Committee’s Report on the Situation in Egypt, 1949, to the effect that the outbursts of brutal and sometimes vicious hatred against the Jewish community were due to a ‘systematic, through-going antiSemitism [. . .] too firmly rooted to be expected to disappear’ [. . .] . This view does not correspond to the facts. It is not the normal anti-Jewish feeling, so firmly rooted in the Muslim masses, which is responsible for these outbreaks but a universal hatred of all Western foreigners, whatever their nationality or creed.76 This publication becomes more interesting when compared with another from the 1950s: the report of the American Jewish Congress published seven years later and titled ‘The Black Record: Nasser’s Persecution of Egyptian Jewry’.77 This was neither a scholarly nor a bibliographical work, but a report from an official pro-Zionist body. This was one of the first publications that evinced the Zionist doctrine concerning Egyptian Jewry, a doctrine based on two arguments: Jews cannot belong to the states, countries, or lands where they live as part of a diaspora (e.g., Egypt), but only to the Israeli state and (following from this) Jews cannot live in Egypt after the state (Israel) has been established. They have no other place to live except Israel. The report thus musters all possible arguments in order to reach the conclusion that Jews should no longer remain in Egypt. Such a conclusion had the additional advantage of offending the Nasser regime: ‘A once economically independent community has been reduced to poverty and want and faces a desperate future’.78 In the period 1948– 78, two further books were published about Egyptian Jewry in Israel. Rahel Maccabi, whose autobiographical novel Mitzraim Sheli (My Egypt) appeared in 1968, was the first Egyptian Jew to discuss the history of her community for an Israeli audience. While

SETTING

THE STAGE

27

Jacob Landau’s scholarly work of 1969, Jews in Nineteenth-Century Egypt, is a significant source of information about its subject matter.79 The Egyptian –Israeli peace treaty of 1978 had a similar influence in Israel as in Egypt. The number of scholarly writings and novels about Egyptian Jewry increased after that date. This similarity in influence had a difference in content, though. The changed political climate offered possibilities for evoking and even celebrating positive memories of Jewish life in Egypt which might have previously been suppressed. This resulted in an increased number of autobiographical and semi-autobiographical novels, such as those of Jacqueline Kahanoff and Yitzhak Gormezano-Goren.80 Simon Shamir’s The Jews of Egypt: A Mediterranean Society in Modern Times (1987) covers the period of Egyptian Jewish history from the eighteenth century onward. Shamir, an academic and diplomat – he was the Israeli ambassador to Egypt from 1988 to 1990 – as well as other contributors considered experts in Egyptian Jewish history lend weight to the importance of the work. Although it covers most aspects of Jewish life in Egypt, it does not take into consideration, and in fact fails to mention, the role of the Zionist movement in distancing Egyptian Jews from Egypt and its culture. As a result, the reader gets the impression that the perceptual shift regarding Jews in Egypt was limited to internal Egyptian circumstances. This discourse fits neatly into the Zionist narrative and supports the argument that the Jews ultimately cannot belong to the states, countries, or lands of the diaspora. Hence, what happened in Egypt even before 1948 proves that they should not have stayed. Michael Laskier’s The Jews of Egypt, 1920– 1970: In the Midst of Zionism, Anti-Semitism and the Middle East Conflict (1992) presents an alternative view. The book is mainly about Zionist activities and how successful they were. The title of the book declares that anti-Semitism was a fact of life in Egypt. The work focuses on how awful conditions were for Egyptian Jews and the efforts to assist them in leaving Egypt. Crucially, Laskier gives a detailed overview of the activities of Zionist emissaries sent to Cairo advocating the Zionist case after 1942. He expresses doubt about the success of all attempts at aliya from Egypt that had been organized by the various emissaries, agents of the Haganah and the Mossad, by juxtaposing the different statements of agents and emissaries. He insists that the statistics concerning the 200 – 1,000

28

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Jews who left Egypt secretly in 1946 during Operation Passover are exaggerated. What was truly significant about Operation Passover, he argues, was the aliya of a Zionist elite, which included people who would play an integral role during the late 1940s and early 1950s as Mossad Le’Aliya and Jewish Agency emissaries in Egypt and North Africa. But statistically, Operation Passover was not particularly unique or significant.81 Laskiers’s work is supportive of the Zionist narrative to the end. But he conflates anti-Zionist activity with anti-Semitism, rejecting any difference between the two.82 Anti-Semitic feelings, public hostility toward Jews and Nazi sympathies before and after World War II are detailed to such an extent that the only humane solution appears to be to help these people leave. Laskier rarely relies on Egyptian witnesses who are not associated with the Zionist movement, such as anti-Zionists or non-Jews. He avoids mentioning the role of the Jewish community and its leaders. His perspective on Egyptian Jewish history before 1948 is loaded with negative connotations and compels the reader to search for the infamous ‘golden age’ of Egyptian Jewry between the lines of Laskier’s text. The work is historically accurate in its treatment of the Zionist emissaries but ahistorical when it analyzes the majority of the Egyptian Jewish community and the facts of political, social and economic developments in Egyptian society.

Egyptian and Zionist Narratives: Complementary Contradictions The preceding review of both dominant narratives shows that while each argument might be convincing and acceptable on some points, they are less convincing and acceptable on others. It is clear that extensive efforts have been invested in substantiating each perspective. Juxtaposing both perspectives reveals paradoxes. Although both tend to move in opposite directions in perceiving Egyptian Jewish history, they do have commonalities. First, both perceive the history of Egyptian Jewry through the lens of nationalism. Each interpretation serves its own purposes, but both rely on a shared body of thought regarding that history. Second, they deliver an analysis that focuses only on developments within Egypt, neglecting or even ignoring developments occurring outside Egyptian geographical and intellectual space. Furthermore, both narratives agree and support each other in significant ways.

SETTING

THE STAGE

29

The Zionist attention to Jews living in Arab and Islamic countries certainly influenced the course of events in the years before and after 1948. The ‘discovery of the Arab Jews’ is a term used by Yehuda Shenhav in his book The Arab Jews: A Postcolonial Reading of Nationalism, Religion and Ethnicity.83 The term ‘Arab Jew’ used by Shenhav has been debated among scholars.84 While for Lital Levy the term ‘Arab Jew’ has been reclaimed by scholars as part of a political project of intervention into the normative terms of Zionist discourse, those who use the term ‘cannot assume the historic existence of a pristine Arab Jewish subject whose holistic identity was shattered by colonialism, Zionism and Arab nationalism’.85 Moshe Behar does not use the term but suggests that instead we use ‘Arabized-Jews’, which he describes as still imperfect but nevertheless outweighing ‘quantitatively and qualitatively the properties of nearly 20 alternative signifiers’.86 The term might indeed be imperfect, as will any fixed term used to define border-zone identities; but in this book, I will use it to describe Jews who lived in Arab contexts. To clarify the term ‘Arab Jew’, a differentiation on three levels is necessary: the historical context in which the ‘Arabs’ started defining themselves as such, the diversity of development among the countries involved and the diversity of cultural and linguistic affiliation of the social classes of Jewish societies in these countries and the particular structures of these societies in each country. The debate about the ideology of Arab nationalism is neither a part nor an aim of this work, though it is necessary to summarize the ideology and the intellectual debate concerning it. The historical context, then, began with a generation of intellectuals, residing mainly in Syria, Lebanon and Egypt in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the ideology gained ground. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the failure of the reestablishment of the Khilafa supported ideas that undermined Ottomanism and called for an awareness of being Arab.87 Arab, that is, not simply in a linguistic sense but also in a ‘racial’,88 cultural and a political sense. Although there were supporters of these ideas after World War I in different countries of the Arab world, there were no indications that the population identified itself as Arab in the first three decades of the twentieth century. Egypt followed a different path, on which Egyptian identity and its Pharaonic past was proclaimed by, among others, Taha Hussein and

30

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Ahmad Lutfi al-Sayyid. This historical link was predominant when considered beside the idea of Arab identity. This raises the question whether the population, religious affiliations notwithstanding, resident in these countries identified as Arab in some cultural and political sense during the first three decades of the twentieth century as populations clearly did in the second half of the same century. This question raises the need for awareness of the historical context in which this definition – Arab – is used, a definition, that is, of the historic existence of a clearly Arab Jewish subject whose complete, organic identity was shattered by colonialism, Zionism and Arab nationalism.89 The second level affecting the accuracy of the term ‘Arab Jew’ is the debate surrounding and the ultimate adoption of the idea and, later, the ideology of Arabness in the various countries of the region. The ideology of Arab nationalism registered differently – and politically – in Syria and Iraq than it did in Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt in the first half of the twentieth century, not to mention Arab nationalism as an ideology in the Maghreb. King Faisal of Syria, and later of Iraq, invited adherents of this ideology to take up positions in the educational system, a situation which was not the case in other countries. The third level concerns Jewish societies in Arab countries themselves. First, one must consider the structure of these societies, where, in Iraq for example, the Jewish minority was mainly of Iraqi, Arabic and Judeo –Arabic-speaking Jews, in addition to speaking French that was the main teaching language at the Alliance Israe´lite Universelle schools attended by Jewish pupils.90 Iraqi Jews were part of the Arab culture and their significant role in music and literature is well known. These Iraqi Jews would perhaps have defined themselves as Arabs in the 1940s and 1950s, a self-definition in a cultural sense if not in a political one. Jewish society in Egypt, as we shall see in the following chapter, was heterogeneous, composed of varied cultural and linguistic backgrounds. The Arabic-speaking Karaites and other Arabic-speaking Jews, mainly those living in harit al-Yahu¯d, would have identified themselves as ˙ Egyptians but less as Arabs, like the majority of Muslim and Coptic Egyptians in the first half of the twentieth century and like Taha Hussein himself. Another feature was the class structure of Jewish societies within the surrounding societies. Education was a class issue; high quality education was general confined to missionary establishments and

SETTING

THE STAGE

31

schools in most countries, although to the Alliance schools in Iraq and some other countries.91 The dominance of Francophone culture and education was not alien to the Egyptian upper-class, among them the Egyptian Jewish upper- and middle-class. Similar observations can be made about the Jewish upper-classes in Iraq and Syria. I argue that the term ‘Arab’ contains several components, a cultural (linguistic), a geographical, historical and a political one. Today it is evident that the political component dominates discussion of the term. When considering the other two components and, in doing so, reducing the importance of the political component, one can use the term ‘Arab Jews’ when referring to Jews of Arab countries with Arab culture. The usage of the term in the Egyptian context, though, is imprecise. ‘Egyptian Jews’ will be used in this book to denote Jews who resided in Egypt. To return to our earlier discussion, Shenhav argues that the fathers of the Zionist movement, particularly Ben-Gurion, discovered the Jews of Arab and Islamic lands in 1942, after details emerged about the mass murder of European Jews during World War II. In 1942, Ben-Gurion described a plan to bring a million Arabic-speaking Jews to Palestine in response to the need to populate Palestine with many Jews within a limited period of time. This responded to a new understanding that Europe simply could not supply those numbers.92 This plan is important for the analysis of Egyptian Jewry and the arguments of both narratives. It marks a turning point – which became clear five years later – in the relationship between the Zionist movement and Jews of Arab countries. This turning point is expressed on two levels. The first level is the Zionist movement itself. Zionism as epitomized by Herzl was a movement born in European thought that aimed to rescue the European Jews.93 Ben-Gurion’s version took it for granted that Zionism was conceived by Jews of European descent for (Ashkenazi) Jews coming from Europe.94 The experience of Jews in Europe and the increased anti-Semitism in the late nineteenth century is completely different than what Jews experienced under Islamic rule. Historians agree that mass violence against Jews in Islamic countries – a hallmark of the European experience – was rare and divergent.95 Within this context, the term ‘Jew’ meant exclusively European Jewry; Jews were equated with Ashkenazim in Herzl’s writings.96 The Ashkenazi world was aware of the existence of Jews in the Orient. They were supported

32

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

logistically to improve their living conditions, but were peripheral to the Zionist project.97 The tide of events in Europe challenged the Zionists, with the project for Ashkenazi Jews coming close to failure. Ben-Gurion realized this fact when he wrote: ‘Hitler destroyed the substance, the main and eminent building power of the state. The state was established, however it did not find the nation that was waiting for it’.98 Ben-Gurion’s statement contains the seeds for a new consideration of Arab Jews, drifting from the ‘orthodox’ attitude of Zionism which considered the state primarily for Ashkenazi Jews. Jews of Arab and Islamic lands were not part of Zionist ambitions and did not gain any remarkable role before the 1940s. By the 1940s, though, the challenges facing the yishuv became overwhelmingly logistical, not ideological. The founders of Israel needed masses of immigrants to build the state and in the absence of sufficient numbers from Europe, Jews from Arab lands would have to do. This resulted in a change of policy toward Arab Jews, meaning an increase in Zionist activity in Arab and Islamic countries. This was evident in Egypt and other countries by the late 1940s and the early 1950s. The Zionist narrative claims that the goal was to save and to rescue these Jews. This myth was cultivated in Zionist thought and became the rationale for Jewish emigration from Arab countries.99 Arab Jews were never publicly mentioned as a replacement for the absent Europeans, but as beneficiaries of Israel’s founding. Zionist emissaries were sent, undercover, to recruit Arab Jews to immigrate to Palestine and to arrange the needed transportation logistics.100 The leadership, security service and the Jewish Agency cooperated in getting Arab Jews out. They did not spare any effort, money, propaganda, or shy away, in some cases, from using violence to achieve their aim.101 Mossad agents took advantage of the worsening living conditions of Jewish minorities in Arab countries.102 Leading figures of the Jewish Agency such as Berl Locker demanded immediate action in a staff meeting of the Jewish Agency: ‘Even Jews, who are not willing to leave, have to be forced to come’.103 It can be seen, then, that the Zionist movement did not have a clear attitude toward Arab Jews until 1942 and after.104 In Egypt, other than the newspaper Israʾil mentioned above, there were no Zionist publications in French or in English, not to mention Arabic.105

SETTING

THE STAGE

33

I argue that the understanding of political Zionism and awareness about it among Jews in Arab countries was different; it did not necessarily mean the abandonment of their positions in order to live in Israel. Zionist ideas were not addressed to Arab or Egyptian Jews; it was an issue outside the social, religious, economic and political realm of their lives. This might explain why the first recruitment efforts of the Zionist movement in Egypt achieved only limited success and that was mainly among the Ashkenazi community.106 Other factors affected the living conditions of Jewish minorities in Arab countries. One of them was the growing impact of nationalism as a force in public life. This ran counter to the urban cosmopolitanism that had been a hallmark of Middle Eastern societies, especially those that served as hubs of the Ottoman Empire. This rising tide of nationalism was able to play off Zionist activities in Palestine in the service of its own goals: and to the detriment of Jews living in Arab society. The relationship between the Zionist movement and Arab Jews explains the rising Zionist activities in Egypt by the mid-1940s. Furthermore, this analysis puts into perspective the argument repeated by several Egyptian authors that there was, from the beginning, a very clear relationship between Egyptian Jews and Zionist plans. While there was contact between the two, it was quite limited and did not reflect any kind of base-building in Egypt. Given this mismatch, how can it be said that the two historical narratives complement each other? The Egyptian nationalist perspective argues that Jews had a good life in Egypt with equal rights; they abused their good fortune and turned their backs on Egypt at the first opportunity. This kind of argument rejects the Jews as an organic component of Egyptian society and sees them as guests, with ‘authentic’ Egyptians as hosts. Such a reading finds agreement with the Zionist perspective; both believe that to be a Jew is to be fundamentally an outsider in every society except that of Israel. Analyzing the diversity of Egyptian Jewry shows that the issue was more complex than having a single religious and homeland identity. The second argument raised by Arab nationalists was that most Egyptian Jews were sympathetic to Zionism and willingly part of a project aiming at ‘global dominance’ beyond simply the establishment of Israel. This concurs with the Zionist claim that Egyptian Jews were attracted to Zionism and interested in migration to Israel. The discussion

34

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

in Laskier’s work about Operation Passover and the circulation of exaggerated data shows how there was a need for the Zionist movement to prove that there were sufficient Zionists and potential immigrants. Laskier acknowledges his own doubts about the operation’s success. In toto this makes clear that both arguments are based on ideology as opposed to evidence. Hence, each side rewrites the history of Egyptian Jewry, forcing it into a frame that advances a pre-existing narrative. The fact that the first writings of Egyptian Jews did not reflect positively on their time in Egypt can be explained by observing that such a description would not fit into the frame of their ‘new homeland’. One of the main reasons and justifications for founding Israel was the persecution of the Jews in Europe, which culminated in the Holocaust. In the modern era, as never before, the willingness to make use of claims of victimization to realize a political agenda was rewarded by the international community and in the court of public opinion. Thus, in the 1960s, the cultivation of victimhood followed by the redemption of statehood made for a compelling narrative not only when directed at the world, but also when directed inward toward all the different elements of Israeli society. It coincided with the need to unite the diverse Jewish populations in Israel into a more cohesive society. Another factor is the cultivation of a new notion within Israel of the hatred of all Arabs in the surrounding countries. It would be hard to talk about good memories in such a setting. In addition, Arab Jews were shocked after coming to Israel because they were not always treated well. Jews from Arab countries were pushed to live at the edges of big cities, but not in them. They had no resources for writing and the establishment ignored their stories.

Critical Perspectives Another major group of writings to deal with the history of Egyptian Jews expresses a view distinct from and critical of both nationalist narratives. One of the most important of such studies is Gudrun Kra¨mer’s impeccably researched Minderheit, Millet, Nation? Die Juden in A¨gypten, 1914– 1952 (1982).107 Kra¨mer clearly shows, down to the last nuance, the differences in cultural habits, countries of origin and mother tongues that divided the different sub-communities of Egyptian Jewry, which historians had hitherto treated as one homogenous group. Another work, meriting extensive comment, is Jacques Hassoun’s

SETTING

THE STAGE

35

Histoire des Juifs du Nil (1990), an anthology providing a unique insight into the lives of Hassoun and other Egyptian Jews.108 Hassoun (1936–99) was an Egyptian Jew, born in Alexandria, but compelled to leave Egypt because of his political involvement in the communist movement HADETU.109 His book provides details of the social and cultural life of Egyptian Jewry unavailable in any other work and on the basis of which the various authors argue that the Jews of Egypt were a fully integrated part of Egyptian society, strongly linked to Egyptian culture and traditions. Importantly, the book was translated into Arabic and published in 2007 under the title Ta¯rı¯kh Yahu¯d al-Nı¯l (History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile) by Yusuf Darwish (1910– 2006).110 The details given in Hassoun’s work about Egyptian Jewry and their social, cultural and religious lives are not available in any other work. The authors report on religious ceremonies such as the feast of lailat al-tawheed on the first of April (fourteen days before the Jewish Passover), an important religious event that is practiced only by the Jews of Egypt.111 Included are descriptions of the ceremony on the Jewish New Year,112 Egyptian Purim,113 the Jewish prayers for the Nile floods,114 and the pilgrim season to Ben Ezra synagogue115 and to Mahallah (a city in the Nile delta). Also described are the customs of praying in a mosque if there was no synagogue in the area116 and other Jewish rituals and habits in Egypt. Other cultural and social aspects, besides those strictly concerning religious life, are presented, such as typical Egyptian meals prepared by Jews for Sabbath and on Jewish holidays, the preparation of non-Jewish merchants for Jewish holidays,117 and the closure of banks and stock exchanges on Saturday. Through these details of religious, cultural and social life, the authors argue that the Jews of Egypt were a fully integrated part of Egyptian society and were strongly linked to Egyptian culture and traditions. The book is not limited to the daily life of the Jews in Egypt. Alfred Morabia takes on the widespread theory of Jewish abstention from political life in Egypt. He agrees that, in general, Jews appeared to be less interested in politics than others, but he argues that the younger generation had been active in the Wafd since 1919 and that there was active involvement in politics from the 1920s to the 1950s. Many young Jews, such as Joseph Rosenthal, Henri Curiel and Hilel Schwartz were attracted to leftist and Marxist movements, others to liberalism, both currents including Jews in the mainstream of the Egyptian nation,

36

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

though this was less possible in nationalist currents. This involvement in leftist and communist activities was the reason they were accused – as were other Muslim Egyptians – of violating the interests of the nation in the 1950s. Newly arrived Ashkenazi Jews were attracted by Zionist thought while Sephardim were hostile and clearly against it. The authorities demonstrated a certain amount of tolerance toward the Zionist movement by allowing it to open a club on Murad Street,118 while at the same time limiting the activities of The Association Against Zionism in 1947, a group organized by leftist Jews, among them Shehata Haroun and Albert Arie.119 Hassoun and his co-authors assure readers that there was no doubt about the deep Jewish loyalty to the country, the royal family and the king. The royal family did not question Jewish loyalty. At this point, the authors indicate that any change of power or ruler was always a delicate issue in minorities’ histories, the Jewish minority included.120 Iglal Errera declares that the Egyptian nationalist movement made it clear from the beginning that the movement was for all Egyptians. The slogan ‘Egypt for Egyptians’ meant all Egyptians regardless of faith; there were no barriers blocking Jews from activity in the Egyptian nationalist movement. And there were several Jews active in the Wafd party. Their affinity toward leftist organizations rather than nationalist ones is related to the divergence of nationalist movements toward pan-Arabism and Islamism, particularly in the 1940s. Both of these had a skeptical attitude toward Egyptians of ‘mixed’ origin and toward foreigners in the country. The Palestine issue played a major role in these developments.121 An Egyptian Jewish historical perspective and interpretation from within Egyptian society about crucial issues enriches the literature about Egyptian Jewry. What is missing in the different contributions in the volume, though, is the Egyptian Jewish perspective about leaving Egypt. This might be accounted for by Hassoun’s desire to avoid any political statements that would detract from his work. Still, one wonders if it were not his way of keeping the memories of Egyptian Jewry alive. Other writers who develop critical perspectives include Joel Beinin, Mohamad Abu Al-Ghar, Didar Rossano-Fawzi and Shehata Haroun. Beinin’s 1998 study of the dispersion of Egyptian Jewry (translated into Arabic in 2007) critically reviews official Zionist and Egyptian narratives, shifts discussion of Egyptian Jewry from essentialist to multidisciplinary

SETTING

THE STAGE

37

discussion of identity and follows the lives of his subjects past the exit from Egypt, thereby establishing that not all Egyptian Jews settled in Israel. Abu al-Ghar’s popular study of Egyptian Jewry (2004) shows that discussion of this subject is still going on in Egypt. Abu al-Ghar shows how the Jews were part of Egyptian society and shared its culture and political life. He is critical of the Zionist narrative but presents the official Egyptian line uncritically.122 The memoirs of Didar Rossano-Fawzi (1920–2011) provide an interesting record of the lives of the members of leftist movements in Egypt.123 Finally, Shehata Haroun, a Jewish communist lawyer who refused to leave Egypt and never missed a chance to assert his Egyptianness, provides a unique perspective in his series of essays published in Cairo in 1985, A Jew in Cairo.124 In summing up our review we can begin with the observation that, in contrast to writing about Egyptian Greeks, work on Egyptian Jews has been part of a wider discussion and intellectual fomentation. The perception of Egyptian Jewry has been limited in each sphere of thought and has been expressed in narratives based on political argumentation. This has placed the scholar between two fronts, in the challenging position of having to revise both narratives and reconsider different sources and analyses. Among Arab and Egyptian authors, one can see a difference in the tone of analysis and the perception of history depending on whether or not they experienced life in a multireligious and multicultural society. Accordingly, authors can be classified in two generational categories: the generation before 1952, among them Ahmad Amin, Abu Al-ghar, Abukaff, Ihsan Abd al-Quddus, Kamal Rahim, Hassoun and his co-authors, Shehata Haroun, Didar Rossano-Fawzi and Waguih Ghali; and the generation that grew up in the era of Arab nationalism and the Arab– Israeli conflict. The latter is very much attached to political events and the ideological atmosphere of the 1960s and 1970s. Their works mostly comprise a reaction to political events and debates. This is clear in the works of Kamel, Nassar, Qasimiyah and Khoury. On the Israeli side, one observes that the degree of support for the official narrative varies among authors. As much as both narratives differ in illustrating the history of Egyptian Jewry, they complement each other and indirectly support their opposing arguments. Works that go beyond nationalist sentiments have enriched historical understanding of Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews by documenting

38

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

the diversity, heterogeneity and realities of multiple identities in Egyptian society. What is most remarkable is the number of biographical works and memoirs coming from Egyptian Jews, more than four decades after the Jews abandoned Egypt, or Egypt abandoned them. It is clear that this experience is still alive among people who went through it and that they still have the desire to tell their stories. It is also clear that this experience is unique enough that there is a market ready to buy these books to find out about the story of Egyptian Jewry. This phenomenon is not limited to the first generation of Egyptian Jews to have left the county, like the book of Andre Aciman, Out of Egypt;125 it includes also the second generation of Egyptian Jews, who also define themselves as Egyptian Jews, although they have spent little – if any – time in Egypt. For example, The Man in the White Sharkskin Suit (2007) is a biographical novel in which Lucette Lagnado, the daughter of an Egyptian Jew, writes the biography of her father and her family who left Egypt and settled in the United States.126 Lagnado’s novel was translated into Arabic in 2010.127 In 2011, Lagnado published a second novel of her own biography and memories of Egypt, The Arrogant Years.128 The Lost World of the Egyptian Jews (2007) by Liliane Dammond, born in Egypt in 1925, is a collection of interviews with Egyptian Jews living in the United States concerning their lives in Egypt.129 Dream Homes by Joyce Zonana is a 2008 story by a woman who left Egypt as a little child. Also in 2008 appeared the novel Sipping from the Nile: My Exodus from Egypt by Jean Naggar.130 Lagnado’s, Zonana’s and Naggar’s works describe life and the Egyptianness of their families in Egypt and in the diaspora.131 Odette is a biographical novel by Youssef Cohen, telling the stories of his mother, Odette, the family and the different types of Egyptian Jews, among them the devout, the rich and the communists. The work includes the story of the family’s emigration to Brazil and his own visit to Basatin cemetery in Cairo.132 Growing up Jewish in Alexandria, by Lucienne Carasso,133 and The Journey: From Ismaeleya to Higienopolis, by Alain Bigio, both published in 2014, are stories of Egyptian Jewish families.134 The Smouha City Venture: Alexandria 1923– 1958 is a book that contains the history of the Alexandrian Jewish family Smouha and the history of Alexandria. Smouha is a famous quarter in the city named after its creator, Joseph Smouha.135 While most of the books reflect personal stories and experiences, others were

SETTING

THE STAGE

39

inspired by their family’s history in Egypt as material for fiction; in spring 2014, the novel City of the Sun was published by Juliana Maio, herself an Egyptian Jew born in Cairo and forced to emigrate, along with other French/Italian citizens, on the eve of the Suez War in 1956.136 Even in Egypt, albeit on a smaller scale in the beginning, the discussion is ongoing and the growth in the number of novels and other fiction writings debating the history of the country’s Jews in the last two years reflects an increasing interest in this particular dimension of Egypt’s history. The young author and film director Mutaz Fatiha published the third edition of his novel, The Last Jews of Alexandria, in the fall of 2010.137 The trilogy, of which Days of Dispersion (2008)138 was a sequel to Exhausted Hearts (2004),139 itself following Dreams of Return (2011),140 was written by the lawyer Kamal Rahim and deals with the complex biography of an Egyptian born of a Muslim father and a Jewish mother. Days of Dispersion and Exhausted Hearts were translated by Sarah Enany as Days in the Diaspora (2012)141 and Diary of a Muslim Jew, respectively (2014).142 Fatima Al Oreid published her novel Book of Excudus in 2013, a biography of an Egyptian Jewish woman who stays in Egypt after other Jews have left,143 followed by the novel of Rasha Adli, The Tatoo, a story of an Egyptian Jewish family in 2014.144 In addition to that, two of the most interesting books about Egyptian Jewry, Histoire des Juifs du Nil and The Dispersion of Egyptian Jewry were translated into Arabic and published in Cairo in 2007, giving the Arabic reader the chance to get a different and critical perspective on this controversial part of Egyptian history. Interest in the history of Egyptian Jews, even if indirect, is not limited to novels. Three documentary films have been screened between 2007 and 2014; the first, Salata Baladi (2007), is the family story of the filmmaker Nadia Kamel, daughter of an Egyptian Jewish – Muslim family; followed by a two-part documentary by Amir Ramsis, Jews of Egypt (2013) and Jews of Egypt the End of a Journey (2014). While Nadia Kamels’ film created a controversial debate that led to the threat of her expulsion from the Egyptian Artists Union, Amir Ramsis’ films were screened in public cinemas in Cairo and Alexandria in 2013 and 2014. During Ramadan in 2009, a TV-series about the famous Jewish – Egyptian singer Laila Murad was successfully broadcast on different Arab TV stations.

40

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Egyptian Jews and Zionism A number of the works mentioned above by Egyptian and other authors have discussed Zionism in Egypt. Most Egyptian authors have tended to consider the majority of Egyptian Jews as Zionists. They are seen as implicitly supporting Israel, regarding it as the only just cause and, as a result, refusing Palestinians any rights. Notable exceptions to this tendency are the works of Abu Kaf and Ghuneim, who clearly address the anti-Zionist movement in Egypt,145 and those of Jacques Hassoun and Shehata Haroun. A common feature of the majority of Egyptian works on Jews in Egypt, however, is the scarce attention paid to various and particular details of Zionism and to changes in Zionist ideology and the Zionist movement from its official beginning in 1897 through to the proclamation of Israel in 1948 and onward to the 1980s. Exemplifying this are the works of Anas Kamel and Siham Nassar: the details and changing fortunes of Zionism are widely ignored. Treating the topic in this manner leads to the specious analysis of all press related to Egyptian Jews as Zionist press, as in Nassar’s work for example. It also gives rise to the dubious understanding of all economic activities of Egyptian Jews in Egypt within the frame of Zionism’s strategy of destroying the Egyptian economy, as well as arguments concerning the overall success of Jewish aliya (immigration) to Israel. Such simple assertions do not bear up to complexity of the details of Egyptian Jews and their relationship with Zionism, as the following analysis of the historical context and particular details of Zionism in Egypt make clear. Zionism as an ideology and movement had its roots in Europe: it was, in the first instance, a European movement, established and contested in a Europe far removed from the Jews of Arab countries, be they Arab Jews, Egyptian Jews, or any other. Zionism, then, is a post-Emancipation phenomenon. While drawing on a historical bond with the ancestral Land of Israel, it made into an active, historical-practical focus a symbol that had lain dormant, passive though potent, in the Jewish religious tradition. Jewish nationalism was the one specific aspect of the impact of the ideas and social structures unleashed by the French Revolution, modernism and secularism. It was a response to the challenges of liberalism and nationalism much more than a

SETTING

THE STAGE

41

response merely to anti-Semitism and for this reason it could not have occurred at any period before the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.146 Furthermore: The Zionist movement started as a minority phenomenon among Jews and until the 1940s it could not, by any stretch of the imagination, be viewed as the mainstream of Jewish life. Orthodox and Reform rabbis, bourgeois assimilationists and socialist revolutionaries, Bundists and Jewish communists alike – all of them viewed Zionism as a marginal phenomenon, an aberration soon to disappear; and indeed, in its beginnings Zionism was nothing more, both in terms of its normative standing among Jews as well as in terms of sheer numbers.147 In general terms, the history of Zionism shows, on the one hand, that Zionist ideology and the Zionist movement were viewed with suspicion and to some extent hostility by the Jewish religious establishment in Orthodox Eastern Europe and the more liberal reform movement in Western Europe in the late nineteenth century.148 On the other hand, there were several ways in which Zionism was understood. Theodor Herzl’s ‘political Zionism’, also known as ‘territorial Zionism’, was but one of them, however influential it may have been. The core of Herzl’s Zionism concerned territory: the salvation of the Jewish people can come only through their possession of their own state. Herzl and his followers argued that as Palestine was devoid of people, it awaited the Jews to establish a state there. Another important way of conceiving of Zionism was ‘cultural Zionism’, represented by the views of the rabbi Ahad Ha’am and Martin Buber, among others. They opposed the ‘political Zionism’ advocated by Theodor Herzl and his adherents. Cultural Zionism emphasized the fostering of Jewish culture and the learning of Jewish traditions over the acquisition of a Jewish state in Palestine. As such, cultural Zionists supported a vision of a Jewish ‘spiritual center’ in Palestine, in a more symbolic sense less linked to territorial control over the land.149 Ahad Ha’am, for example, was well aware that the land of his dreams was not an abundant land: a view clearly expressed in his ‘Truth from Eretz Israel’

42

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

after his first visit to Palestine in 1891.150 He was prescient in appreciating the political dimensions of a possible Jewish state in Palestine.151 Despite some success at the beginning of the twentieth century, cultural Zionism fell into the shadows as political Zionism flourished in the following decades. Martin Buber resigned from his position as editor of the Zionist weekly (Die Welt) in Vienna after clashing with Theodor Herzl and Ahad Ha’am died in 1927. This faction within Zionism that did not favor territorial nationalism and realized the potential violence that would occur in the establishment of a state for the Jews in Palestine, failed to have a lasting influence on Zionist organizing. Perhaps the major achievement of the cultural Zionist tradition was the development of institutions such as the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.152 Alongside Zionist debates concerning the relationship between religion, identity and territory, another crucial topic of concern within Zionist organizations and, indeed, within Jewish history was the question of diaspora. While Zionism developed in the early twentieth century toward a territorial Jewish nationalism as an answer to the Jewish predicament within Europe, others proposed alternatives to Zionism; today, they are viewed as anti-Zionist alternatives. Perhaps the most famous was the approach to solving the problem of diasporic Jewish nationalism generally known as ‘autonomism’ or ‘Dubnovism’. Dubnovism took its name from Simon Dubnov (1860– 1941), one of the most prominent advocates of this path in Jewish thought.153 Diaspora nationalism rejected territorial nationalism for minorities in general and the Jews in particular – thus rejecting political and territorial Zionism – and proposed a political system that would retain existing geopolitical structures while also enabling minorities to maintain their identities and have a share in political power. It considered Jews as a nation, ʿam yisraʾel, as Zionists and other Jewish movements do. The difference is that the essence of nationalism, for these Dubnovists was spiritual, not territorial.154 Diaspora nationalism called on the Jews to be integrated into existing states without relinquishing their distinctiveness. Furthermore, it did not see any contradiction between minorities’ loyalties to the state on the one hand and to their minority groups on the other.155 This conception of nationalism stressed the preservation of discrete cultural features through the minorities’ relations with the states in which they lived. Parties that adopted the

SETTING

THE STAGE

43

idea of diaspora nationalism or incorporated it into a broader ideological perspective, such as the Bund, flourished.156 It was not, however, only parties with links to Jewish workers’ movements that were attracted by this solution to diaspora nationalism: The ‘transformist’ Jewish intelligentsia, which combined Jewish cultural capital with the constituted majorities’ high cultural capital, was especially drawn into diaspora nationalism, since it legitimized their desire for integration into the state and a share in its power.157 The existing historiography of Zionism has generally found the origins of the idea of a Jewish nation within an emerging movement for territory-centrist nations. As such, the concept of diaspora nationalism has been pushed aside.158 The roots for the later dominance of political Zionism within the Zionist movement and, later, within the state of Israel can be found in the Yishuv, the Jewish community in Palestine from 1882 to 1948. While Herzl and Weizmann were active in convincing European powers and the Ottomans negotiating with them to support establishing a Jewish state, David Ben-Gurion, a strident supporter of political Zionism, managed to organize the Jews in Palestine, known as the ‘Pioneers’ who shared the principle belief of political Zionism. Ben-Gurion and the Pioneers began to build the Yishuv, the state before any European support was manifest. They were known both as Pioneers and as ‘labor Zionists’, the latter because of their socialist orientations. In time, this group gained hegemony within Jewish society and played a fundamental role in the period before Israel’s establishment, founding state-like institutions such as the Jewish Agency in August 1929.159 With cultural Zionism fading, the skepticism of religious Jews toward a territorially-centered political Zionism faded too. Rabbi Abraham Kook (1865–1935), who became the first Ashkenazi chief rabbi of Palestine under the British mandate, bridged the social and political divide that existed between religious Judaism and secular Zionism, presenting a comprehensive Zionist religious-nationalist philosophy. Through Kook, political Zionism gained a Jewish-national dimension.160 The so-called national religious faction of political Zionism was pivotal in consolidating political Zionism and in boosting its appeal.161

44

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Several ways of conceiving Zionism and several political approaches to it, then, as well as alternatives to Zionism, emerged in the first half of the twentieth century, from the first Zionist conference in Basel in 1897 to the proclamation of the state of Israel in 1948. Debates about the ideas of Zionism, clashes over political programs, religious skepticism: all these animated European Jewish communities as well as the communities of Eastern Europeans newly arrived in Palestine. Until the 1940s, there was no discussion about the Jews of the Middle East, nor were they involved in these debates. Given the dynamism and wide range of views and political positions within Zionism in the first half of the twentieth century, the existing treatment of Egyptian Jews and their relationship to Zionism seems all the more troubling. A lack of knowledge about Zionism’s European development has led to many Egyptian and Arab authors assuming that it was only political Zionism that influenced Jews all over the world and Egyptian and Arab Jews in particular. Yet the complexity of the different ideas within European Zionism and the various political programs that resulted from them, requires a less stark and absolute examination of Egyptian Jews’ historical encounter with Zionism. Probably the earliest apostle of Zionism in Egypt took to it in the late nineteenth century at the behest of a young Turkish Jew named Joseph Marco Baruch.162 Yet efforts on his part to instigate Zionist activity at that time does not necessarily equate to him being a proponent of political Zionism or, if he were, an advocate of the creation of a Jewish state that demanded the expulsion of the indigenous Palestinian population. Political Zionism, in these years, was strongly related to the Yishuv and to the Jewish European context, especially that of the Ashkenazim. The Sephardic Jews of Egypt – the majority among Egyptian Jews – had different religious traditions and were deeply engaged in commerce and finance in the country. The Yishuv leaders who visited Egypt in 1913 observed the weak solidarity among Egyptian Jews with Palestinian Jews. Egyptian Jews were industrious businessmen; they were keen on making money and on ensuring their families’ well-being. They often sent their children to mission schools rather than to Jewish ones and they bent – and sometimes broke – religious customs such as those surrounding food purity.163 In 1937 Richart Lichtheim, a Zionist emissary, described Egyptian Jews as lazy, ‘oriental’ and unspiritual. He asserted that they were ‘good Jews’ but not

SETTING

THE STAGE

45

Zionists.164 While there was some support for Zionism among Egyptian Jews, it seems not to have been very deeply felt. The French Zionist magazine La Renaissance Juive ceased publication after two years (1912– 14), largely because of poor subscription (only 80).165 Several thousand Egyptian Jews (between 3,000 and 8,000) participated in events organized by Zionist groups in the country during and after World War I.166 The Egyptian Jewish elite showed little sympathy for Zionism. Jack N. Mosseri, the youngest son of the banker, the businessman Joseph Nessim Mosseri and his cousin Dr Albert Mosseri were exceptions. They were part of the handful of active elite sympathizers with the political Zionist cause.167 Most supporters of Zionism were members of the Jewish lower-middle class.168 With the end of World War I and the collapse of the two multireligious and multi-ethnic empires of Austria – Hungary and the Ottoman lands, political Zionism was in the ascendency within the world of Zionism, though many Ashkenazi Jews did not embrace Zionism until the 1940s and after. In Egypt, however, the involvement of the Egyptian Jewish elite, mainly the Sephardim, in Egyptian politics weakened the Zionist movement in the country; it lost adherents and numbered but a few hundred throughout the 1920s. The religious leadership, represented by Rabi Haim Nahum, was not generally supportive of Zionist activities in Egypt, believing that such activities would harm Egyptian Jews was their relationship with Egyptian society and the powers that were.169 One reason for the general disinterest in political Zionism among Egyptian Jews was their relatively positive historical experience in Egypt, including their participation in public and political life, their presence among the country’s cultural and economic elite and their closeness and loyalty to the royal family. They might well have had, furthermore, an understanding of their own community as a diaspora minority. Thus, they could have had a greater affinity for diaspora nationalism similar to Dubnovism, one quite different from the territorial nationalism promoted by political Zionism. They sought to be integrated into society and the state without relinquishing their cultural and religious distinctiveness, being loyal both to the state and to their own Jewish community. Examining the details of the history of Egyptian Jewry in the nineteenth century and the early beginnings of the twentieth century – their daily life, their religious and other traditions, their culture, their

46

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

business activities, their language(s), their political activities in the different Egyptian parties, their relations to with the royal family, the traditions of their rabbis, their institutions – reveals a high degree of integration with an equally strong maintenance of their distinctiveness. Their situation tends to be closer to Dubnovism than to political Zionism. Having this in mind puts the visit of a hundred representatives of the Egyptian Jewish community as part of the Egyptian delegation to the opening ceremony of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem in 1925 in a different light. These representatives saw no contradiction in representing Egyptian Jewry and in celebrating the founding of the most important Jewish educational institution in Palestine. Besides them in Jerusalem was Ahmad Lutfi al-Sayid, the president of the Egyptian University and his participation clearly indicates that the Egyptian state and its educational institutions had no problem in having contact with Jewish educational institutions in Palestine.170 Of course in 1925, radical political – and territorial – Zionism had yet to reach its peak, nationalism and political Islam still did not feature in the Egyptian political equation and there was a minimum of bloodshed in Palestine.171 It was a different political map than two decades later. The Hebrew University was the strongest representation of cultural Zionism. Between the two world wars, there was no Jewish question in Egypt. Zionism seemed to be irrelevant to the situation of Egyptian Jews. This was certainly the case when compared with the situation of any Jewish community in Eastern Europe.172 The reaction to and involvement in Zionist activities on the part of Egyptian Jews were diverse. The Zionist Union in Cairo complained that they had no success among the Karaite Jews. (The famous Moushe Marzuq, the head of Israeli espionage in 1950s Cairo, was a member of the Jewish Karaite community.173) Ruth Kimche argues in a recent study that Zionism’s weak appeal among Egyptian Jews resulted from its emphasis on the collective, the community. The indifference of the majority of Egyptian Jews toward politics and political activities in general and for a ‘foreign’ political movement like Zionism in particular, stemmed from the lifestyle Egyptian Jews had, based as it was on achieving personal security and economic success. The dominant ethos was belief in the individual, in contrast to the ethos of Zionism based on the collective. This collective ethic was of little practical use to Egypt’s Jews and it was only with difficulty that it was adapted. The relationship of the Yishuv with

SETTING

THE STAGE

47

socialism, Bolshevism and class struggle stood in stark contrast to the realities of the well-educated and financially well-situated bourgeois Jewish minority in Egypt. The Zionist ideology that emerged in the Eastern European context sought to solve problems that Egyptian Jews did not have. What was more, the movement enacted a collectivist ethic that was alien to them and could easily destroy their social, political and economic positions in Egypt. Furthermore, Zionism lay largely in opposition to their patriarchal culture and view of the world. Opposition to Zionism grew, Kimche has argued, as the Zionist ideology became one advocating a sovereign state within the context of increasing Arab– Jewish confrontation in Palestine. The leaders of the community in Egypt sought the safety of their community’s members and, thus, did not support Zionism.174 This changed after 1943. Beinin has examined the activities of several small Zionist organizations in the 1940s. With clear French cultural influences, leftist and Marxist groups at the time, such as can be seen in Ha-Shomer-Ha-Tsaʿir’s activities, debated how best to marry leftist politics, Marxism and Zionism together. Some rejected the latter entirely, while others sought to combine Marxism with Zionism.175 Leftist, communist and Marxist movements attracted most Egyptian Jews who were interested in politics.176 They established groups such as the Israelite Association against Zionism and their activities were soon banned by the Egyptian government, generally because of the communist and Marxist background orientation of the groups.177 Kimche’s analysis did not consider that many Egyptian Jews were communists and had a vital role in the leftist movements in the Nile valley. There was no crisis with and in the Egyptian Jewish community as there was in Eastern Europe; Egyptian Jews were simply not in need of Zionism. So Zionist activism did take place among Egyptian Jews, but it seems clear that the ideology could never have gained the upper hand in the community. Many opposed it, resisted it, or refused to accept it for different political, social and economic reasons. While evidence for the lack of appeal of political Zionism exists – it was most interesting and most important in the early 1940s and after Israel’s founding – there is little evidence and scarcely any research on other Zionist thinking and organizing in Egypt. Thus it remains uncertain if all ‘Zionists’ were indeed political Zionists and whether they were critical of the idea of Jewish statehood in Palestine. Furthermore, it remains unclear if Zionism’s appeal

48

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

changed over time, perhaps being enthusiastically embraced in the beginning but abandoned later, especially once the political Zionism under the banner of Ben-Gurion gained the upper hand in the movement and it became clear to Egyptian Jews that a Jewish state in Palestine would lead to violence, confrontation and antipathy in the region. Regardless, it is clear that Egyptian Jews who sympathized with Zionism continued to see no contradiction in being an Egyptian Jew and a Zionist, a fact marshaled by Egyptian authors as evidence of the disingenuousness of Egyptian Jews and Zionists. Yet Jewish failure to see this contradiction need not be evidence of their shallow commitment to Egypt; it could instead be seen as an idealistic and, to some extent, naive conception of Zionism, not as a movement uprooting Palestinians but as a means of living peacefully with them on the same land. Many Egyptian Jews saw themselves as apostles of peace and mediators in the conflict. They also expected the Zionist movement to appreciate their experience and knowledge of the region. A resident of Alexandria at the time, Maurice Fargoun put forward this view after a lecture by Taha Hussein to the Jewish community in Alexandria in November 1943 on the topic of Jewish– Arab relations: We have always hoped that a movement of Jewish–Arab rapprochement would be initiated by the Jews of Egypt. By their geographical position, the Jews of this country are particularly well-placed to serve a connecting link between these two vital branches of the human family tree, Islam and Judaism. Jews and Arabs are brothers not only historically, but demographically. In fact, the Jews are Arabs.178 The variations of Zionist thought and possible alternatives have been completely ignored in many Egyptian and Arab authors’ work on Egyptian Jews. The possibility certainly exists that Egyptian Jews did not know or discuss Dubnovism, yet their way of life and integration into every level of Egyptian society without relinquishing their distinctiveness demonstrates a diaspora nationalism. While leftist and Marxist political activism among Egyptian Jews has some affinity with the bund in Eastern Europe, there are many differences. More research on this question might lead to clarity.

CHAPTER 2 MINORITIES AND THE ECONOMY

The phenomenon of minorities having a special role in the economic process can be seen in numerous geographic areas and different periods of history. Depending on the particular geographic, demographic, social and historical conditions of each time and place, minorities are defined by ethnicity, religion and in some cases both. Some of the most wellknown and longstanding examples of economic minorities include the Chinese in southeast Asia, Indians in Burma and east Africa and the Lebanese in west Africa,1 but there are many others. This role has mainly been observed in trade; economic minorities play a particular role as middlemen between regions, ethnic groups and economic powers. A few other examples include the Nepalese in India,2 the trade of Baghdadi Jews in India and China,3 and the Jewish role in maritime trade in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.4 There are few times and places not touched by the role of such groups. The best known, of course, are the many economic niches inhabited by Jews in Europe over the last 1,000 years.5 The Ottoman Empire stands as a crucial example of the multi-ethnic empire. It bridges the age of empires with that of the modern nationstate, supplies a great deal of primary source material and straddles many of the links in the vital trade networks of its time. There, too, a number of distinct economic minorities played a key and enduring role. This can be explained by the fact that subjects under Ottoman rule consisted of numerous ethnic and religious groups. The interaction between these

50

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

groups and the other regional powers served to enhance the minorities’ own roles as agents of economic and political interests. We see this in the important role Armenians had in financial administration and trade, both on a domestic and an international level.6 Other examples include the Christian Orthodox merchants in the Balkans who managed trade networks with Western Europe and parts of Russia.7 The Syrian Christians may have been less significant across the Empire, but they nevertheless played a key role within the Arab provinces we now call Syria, Lebanon and Palestine (Israel). By the eighteenth century they had a major role in Egypt.8 Notwithstanding the aforementioned minorities and their roles, the most significant economic role in different parts of the Ottoman Empire – in small-scale trade, import–export, industry and maritime trade – belonged to the Greeks. Charles Issawi has presented data that show this clearly in the banking sector and in industry: The predominance of non-Muslims in finance is shown by the fact that of the 40 private bankers listed in Istanbul in 1912 not one bore a Muslim name. Of those that could be identified with a reasonable degree of confidence, 12 were Greeks, 12, Armenians, 8 Jews and 5 Levantines or Europeans. Similarly, of the 34 stockholders in Istanbul, 18 were Greek, 6 Jews, 5 Armenians [. . .] As for the provinces, in the European parts there were 32 bankers and bank managers: of those identifiable, 22 were Greeks, 3 Armenians, 3 Jews and 3 Levantines or Europeans. In Asian parts – excluding the Arab provinces – out of the 90 bankers: 40 were Greek, 27 Armenians, 6 Levantines or Europeans and 2 Turks.9 It was not rare that Greeks and others migrated within the boundaries of the Empire looking for better economic chances, a fact demonstrated by the migration of Ottoman Greeks from Asia Minor and the Greek islands to Egypt.10 Their trade activities and networks acted beyond the terrestrial and maritime boundaries of the Ottoman Empire. Greek maritime trade was not limited to the Mediterranean, Aegean, Adriatic, or the Black Sea; it reached India, West Africa, the Americas and as far north as St Petersburg and the Baltic Sea.11 Greeks also assumed the role of middlemen, particularly in Asia Minor and Egypt.12 In the sixteenth century, Jewish immigrants to the Ottoman Empire from Spain and Portugal added to the already existing Jewish role in medicine and trade.

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

51

Their knowledge of European languages and training at Iberian and Italian universities, as well as their contacts with European Jewish networks, gave them a decisive advantage over all other groups. Although the economic role of Jews in the Ottoman Empire was less prominent, it was no less important than the role of the other minorities mentioned above.13 The economic role of minorities throughout the Ottoman Empire can be seen in miniature in Egypt, a province of the Ottoman Empire from 1517 to 1914. The economic prominence of minorities increased from the second half of the nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century, making it an excellent case study.

The Ubiquity of Minorities in Egypt: The Jews, the Greeks and Others A close examination of the history of minorities in Egypt raises a number of questions about their role in society. A number of different terms have been used to designate these groups and the relationship between them and the dominant social groups of Muslims, Arabs and Ottomans: millet, minority, community, local, foreign, capitulations and dhimmis. A first step in analysis is the untangling of these labels and their placement in their proper historical context.

Universal Definition When it comes to defining the term ‘minority’ we almost have too many choices. This can be accounted for by the ways in which minorities are perceived: socially, geographically, culturally and historically.14 For the purpose of clarity I will present some definitions: Minorities are particular racial, cultural, religious or national groups, who, although living among other groups, do not fully share in the culture that they are part of.15 This is the definition used by the United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities: those nondominant groups in a population which possess and wish to preserve stable ethnic, religious, or linguistic traditions or characteristics markedly different from the rest of the population.16

52

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

A definition from the social sciences by Serge Moscovici emphasizes the number and nature of minorities: We can define a minority by its antinomic position or by its numerical inferiority, but most accurately by both [. . .] Neither the positions adapted nor the number alone are sufficient to specify a minority. And to this it should be added that the label, by historical tradition, has the symbolic power of evoking images and giving rise to particular reactions.17 Notice here that these definitions do not show a big difference in the principal understanding of the term and tend to be rendered in general terms, whereas considering particular details will lead to sub-definitions related to the historical developments of states and societies. This is shown clearly by the attempt of Friedrich Heckmann to develop a typology of the national minority, the regional minority, the immigrant minority, minority people and new national minorities.18 Serge Moscovici’s definition derives from a concept of social psychology that discusses minorities based on their behavioral style.19 This definition and others show that a universal definition has to be general, without boundaries and has to have the ability to allow for every possible variance.20 Nonetheless, when carrying out a meticulous and serious analysis about minorities and their roles in particular societies, it is necessary to go beyond standard, structural definitions and consider the specific details, historical context and unique specialties of minorities in their specific societies.

Millet, Dhimmi and Capitulations In the case of Egypt, the terminology includes three major terms related to ‘non-Egyptians’ residing in Egypt: the first is millet, the second dhimmi and the third ‘Capitulations’. Each of the three terms has a historical background that needs clarification. The term millet in the Egyptian context derives from the term’s use in the Ottoman Empire. As a province of the Empire, imperial administrative and juridical systems were applied to the country. Davison has offered three related meanings: Three closely related, yet distinguishable, meanings have been attached to the term. The first and most common, meaning of

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

53

millet is a community of people, a collection of individuals, who get their identity from a common religious affiliation. In this sense millet has also been used for the umma, the people of Islam, the milleti Islamiye, which Cevdet Pacha Sa’id was equated in the popular mind to the milleti hakime, the ruling millet. For this paper however, the term millet will throughout refer only to one or more of the non-Islamic millets, the millet-i mahkume, the ruled millets, as Rasid Pasha once called them, who together with the Muslims made up the traditional millel-i erbaa of the Ottoman Empire, the four religious communities: Muslim, Greeks, Armenian and Jews. In addition to denoting a group of people belonging to the same religious confession, the term millet has also at times been used as an adjective, to denote primarily the body of doctrine and practice common to one of these confessions: millet worship, millet ritual and millet law, especially the law of civil status. The third use of millet has been to refer to a formal organization of the religious community: its ecclesiastical hierarchy; its clerical or judicial organs; its constitution; its partial autonomy as recognized by the Ottoman sultans.21 The use of the term millet was not necessarily limited to non-Muslim communities, but the common usage of millet was to describe a nonMuslim religious community in the Ottoman Empire, recognized by the Sultan and organized with limited autonomy under a religious figure who was responsible for the community’s duties vis-a`-vis the authorities.22 Moreover, the millet system is not to be understood as a comprehensive system that was applied similarly throughout the centuries and in all areas under Ottoman rule. Research has suggested that many of the accepted details regarding the millet system may be inaccurate and that its systemic nature may have been greatly exaggerated. Rather than a uniformly adopted system, it may be more accurately described as a series of ad hoc arrangements made over the years, which gave each of the major religious communities a degree of legal autonomy and authority with the acquiescence of the Ottoman state. The first to be recognized soon after the fall of Constantinople was the Greek Orthodox millet, followed by the Jewish and Armenian millets. By the end of the nineteenth century there were a total of

54

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

14 millets.23 Thus, the term described the framework within which the Ottoman state ruled its non-Muslim subjects. The use of the term millet in this sense for periods before the nineteenth century has been called into question by research.24 The millet system as it was known in the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century was related to the term dhimmi, which described the status of non-Muslim subjects under Islamic rule.25 These were general conditions that were not necessarily enforced throughout the whole period of Islamic rule; there was, thus, a gap between theory and practice.26 In the historical literature, the term dhimmi has been used in writings discussing the history of early Islam. Literature referring to the Ottoman Empire in particular after the period of reforms in the beginning of the nineteenth century tends to use the term millet.27 The concept of millet was part of the systemization of Ottoman administration in the nineteenth century. It reached its limits by the end of the century since it started conflicting with the concept of citizenship of all subjects of the Empire regardless of their religious or ethnic status. Millet status started to change and the members of the millet emancipated themselves from the religious status by establishing secular bodies to represent the different communities, as will be shown in the following. This emancipation was a general phenomenon among millets and it questioned the various religious leaderships. The status of dhimmis in the Islamic state depended on different factors, such as the relationship between the Muslim ruler and the religious leadership of the community, the attitude of the majority toward the particular minority, the relationship between the minority and the European powers and the relationship amongst the different minorities themselves.28 Millet is more of an Ottoman concept than an Egyptian one. Egypt as an Ottoman province adapted it for those where the central religious leadership was in Istanbul. In the Egyptian context, the Greek Orthodox millet included not only Greeks (Greek-speaking Greek Orthodox Christians) but also Syrian Arabs (Arabic-speaking Greek Orthodox Christians); both had distinct religious leadership. Arabicspeaking Greek Catholics, mainly Syrian, were not part of the Greek Orthodox millet and were not granted the status of millet until the nineteenth century.29 The Jewish millet did not differentiate between the Sephardic and Ashkenazi communities.30 This clearly explains why today’s understanding of a ‘minority’ in the nineteenth century

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

55

Ottoman Empire and, consequently, in Egypt then meant having a different religious affiliation than the Muslim majority. The selfconsciousness of the millets shifted gradually from being religious to having national characters, especially among the Greeks and Armenians in the Ottoman context. This shift varied from one group to another: Copts and some Egyptian Jews were Egyptian with a different religious affiliation. Furthermore, understandings of ethnicity at the time were not so clearly synonymous with what today is thought of as ‘nationality’.31 It is true that some millets acquired foreign passports or were under the protection of foreign powers, a circumstance that emerged during the second half of the nineteenth century. This resulted from two developments. First, there were the Capitulations, a series of treaties contracted between the Sublime Porte and several western states. The first treaty was agreed in 1535 when the first French Capitulatory treaty was signed; the last dates from 1855 when Greece became a Capitulatory power. The term derived from the Latin word ‘capitilum’, or ‘chapter’, because they were divided into chapters; the term did not derive from the word ‘capitulate’. These treaties regulated the position of foreigners in the Ottoman Empire, guaranteeing personal, religious and commercial freedom, the inviolability of domicile and exemption from Ottoman law in civil and penal matters. In other words, foreign subjects in the Ottoman Empire did not pay taxes and were tried by their own consular authorities.32 The principle was that a Muslim must be judged by a Muslim, a Christian by a Christian. These treaties were signed at a time when the Ottoman Empire was at the peak of its glory.33 It was not until later that the Capitulations came to symbolize the weakness of the Ottoman Empire. The Capitulations formed the political and legal framework that operated in the Empire in the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries.34 It was in force for Christians who were not Ottoman subjects: Christians of other countries. The second development regarding the foreign treatment of various millets was the protection – or lack thereof – that Ottoman subjects had from arbitrary decision making on the part of officials. Researchers have described how Ottoman subjects had more obstacles to running their businesses than foreigners. They were subject to high taxation and the risk of property confiscation, thus making it very difficult for them to serve as commercial agents for foreign firms. As a result, many firms

56

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

employed subjects of their own states as agents or they granted protection to local subjects who could then work as foreign agents and manage trade more easily for them. Quite a large number of merchants who were members of Ottoman millets circumvented these obstacles by acquiring foreign protection.35 The height of this trend likely occurred in the middle of the nineteenth century, by which time the foreign protection of minorities had greatly increased. Merchants and millet members of other professions within reach of a foreign consul looked to the consul for protection and redress. For example, in 1837 all but one of the 72 merchants engaged in foreign trade in Alexandria had foreign citizenship or protection. At the same time, the Ottoman government began reforming relevant laws and the government’s treatment of millet minorities. In Egypt, Mohamed Ali carried this policy even further.36 Pragmatic considerations, such as the security of trade and the terms of the Capitulations, were the two reasons traders acquired foreign protection, even though most traders were Ottoman millet subjects. Merchants were not the only ones with a ‘transactional’ approach toward citizenship and nationality.37 A third development was the influx of merchants and others of non-Egyptian origin – such as Greeks who arrived from independent Greece after 1833, Italian Jews and others – who chose Egypt as a new homeland but who retained their original citizenship. These developments explain why many minorities remained foreign nationals. The Egyptian case was special in this regard. Some Greeks had been Ottoman subjects and became Greek citizens later and Jewish migration to Egypt had included both Ottoman and non-Ottoman Jews. To conclude, the term ‘minority’ is a modern one, developed in the nineteenth century mainly in Europe; its usage within international law began in the 1930s.38 For the Ottoman Empire of the nineteenth century, millet was the term that was used and it came specifically to describe non-Muslim religious communities. The term ‘minority’ is a secular term, which includes different types of people who do not belong to the majority of a society, among them religious minorities. Consequently, it would include millets. In the literature, both terms are used, at times synonymously. However, millet is used more when discussing the period before 1850. When referring to the period after 1850, the use of the term ‘minority’ becomes more common.39 The substitution and synonymous use of the terms millet and ‘minority’ is

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

57

not just a matter of preference; it reflects historical developments that took place among the different millets. A millet was an official religious body with its own religious leadership. Until the mid-nineteenth century, the various Christian patriarchs and Jewish rabbis who represented their members before the ruler were responsible for the legal and religious affairs of the millet’s members. The autonomy of internal affairs that non-Muslims obtained through the millet system meant that they were better off than their Muslim counterparts in some respects, since they were the only groups that were able functionally to hold power with alternative legitimating systems and were able to manage their own institutions.40 Starting in the second half of the nineteenth century, the different millets of the Ottoman Empire, including those in Egypt, went through an internal emancipation process. One of the results of this process was that another form of leadership was formed with an institutional, nonreligious nature that represented the interests of community members. These communities (or ‘community councils’, ‘al-majlis al-milli’)41 were established in several cities with structures regulated by electoral procedures; they were mostly independent of the religious leadership. Well-known and influential economic and social figures were usually the heads of these councils. This dual leadership (religious and non-religious) had existed in the Ottoman Jewish community since the fifteenth century.42 The famous Hellenic ‘Kinotis’43 – the Community Council of Alexandria, founded in 1843 – is another example of this leadership. It became the institutional model adopted by other Egyptian Greeks throughout Egypt. This Community was defined by its secular, communitarian structure, regulated by electoral procedures, independent of the Orthodox Church and responsible for managing communal life.44 It divested itself from the supervision of the Church – the official representative – of the Greek millet in the country and was at odds with the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria for many years. In this instance the Greek community represents both a special and a complex case. Its particular situation resulted from the fact that it constituted a pioneering step toward the establishment of a bourgeois democracy with a civil society separate from church and state. This was in conjunction with a new, well-educated middle-class. The model was the first of its kind for any Greek community. With the exception of this Greek Alexandrian Community, no minority group

58

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

made the separation between civil society on the one hand and the clergy and spiritual, religious leadership on the other in as clear and institutionalized form.45 This complex situation resulted from the different legal status of Greeks residing in Egypt after 1833. Those who came from areas under the control of the independent modern Greek state became Greek citizens and were represented by the Greek consulate and enjoyed Capitulary privileges. Others who came from areas under Ottoman control remained Ottoman subjects and members of the Greek Orthodox millet.46 This development, related as it was to the emancipation process of millet members, was enhanced by the Ottoman reform decree of 1856 that granted equality to all non-Muslims in the Empire.47 The Ottoman citizenship law of 1869 formulated a new concept of Ottoman citizenship, which included all the subjects of the Sultan regardless of religion, with rights and obligations from that time on in theory contracted between the state and the individual, flowing in both directions, without any mediating bodies in between such as religious organizations.48 By that time, the Communities and their leadership had influential power both within the Communities and in relation to the central Ottoman political institutions. This power was backed by the rising economic power of millet members. If the traditional leadership enjoyed spiritual sovereignty over the souls of its parishioners, it had no economic or financial control with which to influence the actions of the Communities.49 The emancipated Communities questioned the power of the religious leadership and reinforced thier own. The reforms of the Ottomans aimed at abolishing the millet system. In actuality, these reforms strongly diminished the power of the religious leadership and empowered the secular structures of the Communities that were interested in keeping their special status. The case of the Greek Community in Alexandria and its head from 1885 to 1889, George Averoff, demonstrates this clearly.50 The increased influence of the Communities challenged the power of the traditional religious leadership epitomized by the patriarch or rabbi. The Egyptian Jews went through a similar development as the Greeks. While in the early nineteenth century the rabbi had the sole authority over his millet members, this authority was challenged and limited to spiritual and religious affairs in the second half of the century. This challenge escalated with the increased influence and power of laymen in the Community. Over time, the authority of the religious

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

59

leadership diminished to comprise only the regulation of limited religious affairs. In the bylaws of the Jewish Community in 1927, the chief rabbi of Cairo was not even responsible for the administration of the synagogue. The Community had complete independence from the religious leadership regarding the administration and finance of the synagogues and the community more generally. Influential families, such as the Qattawi (Cattaoui) and Mosseri were the heads of the Jewish Community in Cairo for generations, the same phenomenon holding in Alexandria.51 These transformations were not limited to Greeks and Jews in Egypt. The Syrian Greek Catholics followed a different historical evolution as millets and were not recognized as such before the nineteenth century. The absence of an officially recognized religious leadership supported the non-religious community structure that was very influential from the beginning.52 In 1907, the Armenian Orthodox53 millet council had five religious figures out of its 35 members; in this case, the dual leadership was part of the council’s structure.54 The Armenian Orthodox millet council was established in Cairo on April 3, 1864, with 223 members having voting rights. The name and functions of the council show that it represented both religious and civil-societal factions of the community.55 Available writings about Armenians in Egypt have not referred to the leadership structure before that date. This might be related to the fact that extensive Armenian immigration into Egypt took place only in the last decade of the nineteenth century and that the community had been a small one without a council structure before then.56 Nonetheless, there are no indications that the Armenian millet went through a process different than the other millets. The shift of power from religious to non-religious leadership in the different millets in Egypt in the second half of the nineteenth century and the continuation of this shift later on reflected a transformation in the nature of these millets and their emancipation. This was a transformation from a religious understanding of their nature and status and thus of their obedience to their religious authorities to a more secular status with limitations on the religious leadership that restricted them to purely religious affairs. Consequently, their perception of themselves changed and, with it, the way they were perceived by others. This, in turn, affected the Muslim majority. This emancipation process,

60

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

backed by Ottoman reform laws, took these communities out of the millet framework and into the secular framework of minorities. Therefore the word ‘minority’ was – and is – not only a different term than millet; it entailed a different meaning than millet. By the beginning of the twentieth century, the Jewish and Christian communities in Egypt transformed from millets to minorities. Aron Rodrigue has noted that the emancipation of the communities and the shift from millet to nonreligiously defined minority was a development that slowly eroded the communal autonomy which non-Muslim communities had enjoyed under the Ottoman Empire, along with the millet privileges that had preserved their existence among the Muslim majority.57

Terminology Used in the Literature Scholars writing about ‘non-Egyptians’ who lived in Egypt have used different concepts. Take, for example, ‘local foreign minorities’. This concept, used by Marius Deeb, included non-Arabic-speaking foreigners such as Greeks, Armenians, Italians and other Europeans who immigrated to Egypt in the nineteenth century, as well as other Arabic-speaking communities such as Syrians and Jews.58 The legal status of these foreign and local communities varied, as implied by the term. From an Egyptian perspective in the first half of the twentieth century, being Egyptian was not necessarily related to the official status of having Egyptian citizenship, but rather was more related to one’s cultural background.59 Deeb’s terminology is therefore accurate since these communities shared the condition of being simultaneously foreign and local. Alexander Kitroeff has used ‘community’ to refer to the Greeks in Egypt. Historically, the Greeks were regarded primarily as a millet and only later and through emancipation did they consider themselves an ethnic entity. He has also used the word ‘community’ when referring to Egyptian Jewry.60 Floresca Karanasou has followed Kitroeff by using the term ‘community’ to refer to Egyptian Greeks.61 The German title of Gudrun Kra¨mer’s 1982 work – Minderheit, Millet, Nation? Die Juden in A¨gypten 1914–1952 – has shown the complexity of defining the Jews of Egypt. The author has used both the notions millet and ‘minority’ to describe Egyptian Jewry, referring meticulously to its diversity.62 She has questioned a broader conceptualization by using the term ‘nation’: were the Jews a component of the Egyptian nation or of the Jewish nation?63 Kra¨mer does not resolve this question in her work, yet her

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

61

research shows that the majority of the Egyptian Jews considered themselves as part of the Egyptian nation. Kra¨mer has also used Deeb’s concept of ‘local foreign minorities’ in a later publication about Egyptian Jewry.64 Robert Tignor, like Kitroeff and Kra¨mer, has used the term millet, while adding ‘foreign residents’ when referring to the groups mentioned above without specifying whether they had foreign citizenship or not.65 Tignor has gone a step beyond religious and ethnic affiliations by using a class-based definition when describing elements of these groups and a part of Egyptian society as ‘haute bourgeoisie’.66 Thomas Philipp has used the term ‘community’ when referring to Syrian Greek Catholics and Jews in Egypt.67 So has Joel Beinin when referring to the Jews.68 In his book about Armenians in Egypt, al-Imam has generally used ‘the Armenians’, without using other terms such as ‘minority’ or ‘community’. Only in a few passages has he used the term ‘community’.69 Roger Owen referred to ‘Egypt’s foreign community’.70 Another term, that of Eric Davis in his work about Bank Misr, Challenging Colonialism, is ‘third nationals’, used in a context referring to Egyptian Jews. Davis has not provided a more detailed definition of this term and its background, or why he preferred to use it instead of other terms used by other authors.71 Arab authors have also used different terms. While Sayyid ʿAshmawy has used the term ‘ja¯liya’ – ‘immigrant community’ – to refer to the Greeks in Egypt,72 Saʿida Husni has used ‘ta¯ʾifa’,73 or ‘religious ˙ community’, to refer to the Jews in Egypt.74 Others, such as Zubyada Atta, have used the term ‘Jews’ without further definition.75 These different notions – local foreign minorities, community, minority, millet and foreign residents – reflect the diversity and heterogeneity among these groups on the one hand and the processes of change these communities went through on the other, as well as the changing historical context. This fact of historical transformation limits the possibilities of using one term that could provide an accurate description for all circumstances in the historical context of nineteenth- and twentieth-century Egypt. Thus, the terminology is so confused because the actual status of the minorities was unstable. So Greeks mainly were Greek citizens. For that reason, no matter how established in Egypt they were, they could not be considered Egyptians. The term ‘foreign minority’ is the one that best applies here. Armenians were Ottoman citizens who fled national persecution. They did not consider themselves

62

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Egyptian. A few gained Egyptian citizenship, but many remained stateless for decades. The Jews are obviously the most complicated. Many did consider themselves Egyptians – both the haute bourgeoisie and the poorest in particular. And they were completely culturally integrated. Some Jews did not consider themselves Egyptians, not only because they had foreign citizenship but, more importantly, they were not and did not want to be culturally integrated: they did not, nor did they want to, speak Arabic, for example. This part of Egyptian Jews was a ‘foreign minority’; the Maltese and other Europeans residing in the country were similar in this regard. Lord Cromer mentioned this confusion in defining the communities and minorities of Egypt in his book, Modern Egypt, published in 1908 after his departure from Egypt. He wrote: The classification by nationalities, though important in many respects, is misleading to this extent, that when it is said that there are 24,000 Italians, 14,000 Frenchmen, 7,000 Austrians and so on in Egypt, it is not to be supposed that there are that number of Italians, Frenchmen, or Austrians in the country possessing the special national characteristics. Which are generally held to belong to the inhabitants of Italy, France, or Austria. Apart from the fact that there are a large number of protected subjects, who are often Orientals, it is to be observed that in many cases the Frenchman resident in Egypt is only technically Frenchman.76 The perspective of Cromer – who did not see the Egyptians as a nation – differs from the authors mentioned above. While others have tried to clarify the status of these communities and minorities within Egyptian society, Cromer was concerned about whether they were Europeans or not. His argument made clear that he preferred not to consider them Europeans. The second thing Cromer noted was that a neat separation and classification between minorities and European subjects or Egyptians in nineteenth century Egypt was not easy and appeared to be a problem from his point of view. Cromer did not depart from his European perspective and his prejudices in regarding Egyptian Jews as foreigners. A shift in perspective can untangle this complicated mix. Concerning the societies of the Ottoman Empire, Aron Rodrigue has argued that the ‘difference was a given and accepted as such’,77 meaning

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

63

that individuals within the different religious and ethnic groups did not themselves see any contradiction in their own differentiation by religion and ethnic background on the one hand and their being Ottoman or Egyptian as any Muslim or Arabic-speaking person of the majority on the other. The Muslim majority itself was not a homogeneous group in society. In this work I use the term ‘minority’ to describe Egyptian Jewry and Egyptian Greeks. In doing so I do not ignore their diversity and that they were and still are, communities with attendant structures, organizations and daily lives. Being a community does not exclude being a minority. I consider this to be the correct term because, by the beginning of the twentieth century at the latest and certainly after the independence of Egypt in 1922 and the enactment of the Egyptian laws of citizenship, the social and legal statuses of Jews and Greeks were no longer those of millets, neither from the state’s perspective nor from their own.

Minorities in Egypt – Statistics Egypt had a diverse mix of foreigners and religious and ethnic minorities: Jews, Greeks, Italians, Syrians, Turks, Armenians, French, Britons, Maltese and Belgians, to name but a few.78 The main and most substantial minority in Egypt were – and are – the Copts, although in current Egyptian nationalist political discourse, they are not considered as such. Despite this, the present study does not discuss the Copts or their economic role. The Copts have their own particular circumstances that distinguish them from Greeks and the other minorities mentioned above, not least their being an unambiguously organic component of Egyptian society. Copts and some Egyptian Jews, who were also an organic component of Egyptian society, share some common features. The Copts nevertheless deserve to be analyzed in an independent work.79 Therefore, the Copts are excluded from this analysis. Due to historical reasons (Egypt’s status as a province of the Ottoman Empire with a degree of autonomy, the British occupation from 1882 to 1922 and Egypt’s existence as an independent kingdom since 1922, to name but three), no single Egyptian source exists with data showing the numbers of foreigners and minorities in Egypt throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Thus, one has to make use of

64

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

different sources in order to construct these details. Among these sources are the official censuses of 1927, 1937 and 1947, conducted by the Department of Statistics at the Egyptian Ministry for Finance and Economics.80 The decline of the Austro –Hungarian and Ottoman Empires after World War I changed the status of many Ottoman and Austro–Hungarian subjects, among them the ones who lived in Egypt. The available data show some of this change; they do not, however, provide for much clarity. It is noteworthy that the available statistical data after 1952 do not refer to any religious classifications among the Egyptian population, making it impossible to construct a complete data series regarding minorities in Egypt. This makes an accurate observation of the numbers comprising the Greek and Jewish minorities in Egypt after 1952 a complex task.81 Table 2.1 shows figures, collected from various sources, for the approximate number of foreigners residing in Egypt over a 100-year time span. Although these data indicate how the number of minorities changed in Egypt, they should be considered cautiously. Deeb has asserted that the total number of foreigners in 1882 of 91,000 is underestimated, noting that 130,000 would be closer to the actual number.82 As the data in Table 2.1 show,83 the Jews84 and Greeks represented the largest ethno religious and religious minorities in the country. Their numbers corresponded with their role in the economy, a correspondence that explains why they represent a good case study for examining minorities as economic actors in Egypt. Alexander Kitroeff has noted that there are different figures in Egyptian and Greek sources concerning the Greeks in Egypt. According to Greek sources, the Greeks numbered 82,658 in 1917, 99,793 in 1927 and 80,466 in 1937. This difference from the official Egyptian data is due to the fact that not all Greeks or persons of Greek origin had Greek citizenship.85 The same phenomenon can be observed in the number of Jews in Egypt, where differences between official and non-official data exist. These statistical differences are not limited to Greeks and Jews. There is similar confusion in the case of Armenians who were mainly Ottoman subjects. Egyptian sources counted 7,747 Armenians in 1907, but according to Armenian sources there were between 10,000 and 15,000. This variance became sharper in 1927, when Egyptian sources counted 17,188 and Armenian sources 25,000. It became yet starker in 1947, with 3,926 according to official numbers and 35,000– 40,000 in Armenian sources.86 Al-Imam has

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

65

argued that Armenian sources exaggerated the population of the community. If so, the reason might be that the community hoped to gain more governmental support and social prestige in Egyptian society. In addition, the official census did not include Armenians with other citizenship and ignored Protestant Armenians – a minority among the Armenians – as well as stateless Armenians who were not a minority.87 Table 2.1 shows another difference in the official count of Armenians, explained by the fact that Armenians were Ottoman citizens and were regarded as a religious minority. Therefore, they were not necessarily listed separately in the census. Differences in these data are also an indication of the diversity of the population and the problem of how to define who was what in terms of ethnicity and the nationality of religious and ethnic minorities in Egypt. Furthermore, the discrepancy in numbers shows that there was an overlap between religious and ethnic identity of some members of the different communities, that is, belonging to the Jewish faith and being Greek, Italian, Syrian, or Egyptian, or being Ottoman or Turk by residence (or former residence) and a member of the Armenian millet. Members of the minority could have been counted in one sense according to their ethnic identity or official nationality and in another according to their religious affiliation. The discrepancy also reflects the complexity of perceiving one component of an individual’s identity, comprising as it did eclectic elements and the difficulty of establishing one unified definition for these groups.

The History of Greek and Jewish Minorities until the Nineteenth Century Both minorities trace their communities’ histories in the Nile valley back more than 3,000 years.88 The development of each community was different, as are the respective sources on their histories: against the scarcity of sources on Greek history in Egypt after the Muslim conquest, the Cairo genizah provides detailed information about the lives of Jews in Egypt. It is also the case that while Egyptian Jews under Islamic rule played a central role both in the country and for other Jewish communities in the region, the numbers of Greeks and the importance of the Greek Church in Egypt declined after the Muslim conquest.89

206,000 56,735 82,658 40,198 24,365 21,270 225,500 76,264 99,793 52,462 34,169 24,332

186,500 68,559 80,466 47,706 31,523 18,821 146,000 57,427 27,958 28,246 9,720

1917 1927

1937 1947

3,200 5,380

30,796 9,280

69,725

498 592 (3,926)

(17,188)

(7,747)

2,000

See p. 64 for an explanation of why there are double entries for Greeks, Armenians and Jews.

15,000 6,000 17,000 13,906 6,000 17,000 18,665 6,120 15,716 24,454 19,562 14,172 34,926 20,653 14,591

800 700

34,000 34,000 37,000 38,208 62,973

1,100 200

81,000 80,000 91,000 113,000 181,000

2,000 6,000

2,000 5,000

6,250 14,340

1840 1843 1850 1860ff 1871 1882 1897 1907

35 – 40,000

25,000

10 – 15,000

Greeks Greeks Italians British French Ottomans Armenians Armenians

Total

Foreigners and minorities in Egypt

Year

Table 2.1 Jews

59,000 63,000 75,000– 80,000 62,000 65,000 100,000

25,000 38,000

57,000

Jews

17,272 15,734,179 17,189 18,966,767

32,643 29,921 13,952,264

8,990 8,850 13,086 16,178 10,547

250 440

Others Egyptians

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

67

Although the history of Greek and Jews in Egypt before the nineteenth century does not fall within the scope of this study, a few comments might be helpful. In the wake of the conquest, Egypt’s nonMuslim minorities were subject to the formalities outlined in the dhimmi conditions.90 The Fatimid (969– 1171) and Ayyubid (1171– 1250) periods that followed were years of social, intellectual and political prosperity, both for Egypt in general and for its Jewish communities in particular, with Cairo becoming an important intellectual center for Judaism.91 These years saw also the emergence of a Jewish merchant class and the influx of Jews from North Africa, Persia and elsewhere to Egypt. Jews advanced to important political and court positions (Maimonides being the most notable) and while some converted to Islam, most retained their Jewish faith.92 The martial rule of the Mamluks (1250– 1517) coincided with the Crusades, a Mogul threat on the Syrian border and internal political challenges. The result was a lessening of tolerance and rising hostility toward non-Muslims.93 For all that, Egypt was an important haven for Jewish refugees from Spain in the fifteenth century and Spanish Jews began to assert a leading role within Egypt’s Jewish community.94 In the second half of the fifteenth century, Greece became an Ottoman province, as did Egypt early in the next century. Greeks, like other Ottoman subjects, could now move, travel and live without legal restriction in different areas of the Empire. Small Greek settlements had existed in Egypt since the seventeenth century, an estimated 3,000 families.95 Meanwhile, the Egyptian Jewish community regained stability under Ottoman rule. Jews were appointed as civil servants with great responsibility in financial matters, taking positions such as tax collector, sarraf and coin minter, a tradition that carried on for several centuries. Relations between Greeks and Jews and the ruling power were regulated through the millet system. The Greeks were the rumi96 millet, that is, Orthodox Christians who were under the authority of the Sultan like the Jewish millet that represented Ottoman Jews.97 The initiation of the tradition – which continued for several centuries – whereby the Chief Rabbi of Istanbul was responsible for nominating the Grand Rabbi of Egypt began with the Ottomans. Something similar was true for the Greeks: the patriarch and the Holy Synod were free to appoint the clergy. They were the supervisors of churches and monasteries throughout the Empire including Alexandria.

68

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

The actual government had no right to arrest, dismiss, or banish bishops or priests and rabbis without the approval of the religious leadership of the millet.98 Jews rose to prominence under the Ottomans in part because they were in general educated and yet their limited numbers and dhimmi status meant they could never pursue political power.99 This weakness guaranteed for the ruler that this group would not challenge his authority at a time when power struggles were common in the country. This implied both the power and the vulnerability of dhimmis in serving the rulers and managing their financial matters. Nevertheless, there are no indications that the Greeks held similar roles as tax collectors or civil servants in the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in Egypt. The most serious challenge for Egyptian Jews in this period came from Syrian Greek Catholics, who began to settle in Egypt in the eighteenth century.100 Several positions that were traditionally held by Jews – such as those of tax farmers and customs officials – were taken over by these new immigrants,101 and, in general, power shifted from the Jews to the newcomers. During the eighteenth century, the Nile valley was de facto dominated by a new generation of Mamluks and not by the Sultan in Istanbul. The struggle for power among the Mamluks themselves dominated day-to-day politics by the end of the century.102 This instability negatively affected both the well-being and the political allegiances of Egypt’s religious minorities. Although the Mamluk era was one in which the country flourished, the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries saw nearly continuous warfare, in which French and British forces briefly participated alongside Ottomans and Mamluks.103 According to the testimony of Al-Jabarti, Egypt was in a miserable administrative situation when Bonaparte’s ships anchored in Alexandria in 1798.104 Napoleon’s landing in the Nile valley in 1798–1801 can be considered a turning point in two ways. First and specifically in relation to Egypt, the period that followed the French invasion of Egypt in 1801 witnessed the weakening of the Mamluks’ ability to maintain law and order.105 Second, in relation to Europe, it called into question the balance of power between Orient and Occident. Jews and other religious minorities in the country, as part of Egyptian society, were initially affected adversely by Napoleon’s invasion.

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

69

In 1805, following the French withdrawal, the country suffered a power vacuum, with numerous groups competing for control. A bimbashi (captain) in the Ottoman army, whose name is inseparable from the history of modern Egypt, emerged victorious in Cairo:106 Mohmmad Ali Pasha.107 The Mohammad Ali era (1805 – 49) was marked by substantial changes in the Nile valley. While still constituting a part of the Ottoman Empire, Egypt assumed an increasingly independent stance and was granted as a hereditary domain to Mohammad Ali by Sultan Abd al-Majid in 1841.108 During his long reign, the Pasha managed to tighten Cairo’s control over the provinces by eliminating corruption in the local bureaucracy, reforming land ownership (abolishing the tax farming system known as iltizam) and canceling tax immunities on agricultural land belonging to mosques and pious foundations (awqaf). The Pasha undertook several projects to develop the economy. The foundation and expansion of infrastructure, in particular the canal and irrigation systems, led to more effective agricultural production with higher crop yields. He also made serious efforts to promote industry. Mohammad Ali’s attention was also directed toward Europe, which he viewed with a mixture of caution and admiration. The Pasha introduced a wide-ranging policy of monopolies, bringing to an end the existing local and regional market systems.109 The result was the eight-fold increase of annual revenues between 1805 and 1821, enabling the undertaking of projects inconceivable during the long period of Ottoman rule.110 The following decades saw the introduction of long-staple cotton ( jumel)111 and the founding of a modern conscript army – the twin pillars of the Pasha’s regime and, by far, the most significant innovations of the nineteenth century.112 The large-scale cultivation of long-staple cotton radically changed both the nature of Egyptian agriculture and Cairo’s relationship with the provinces. The significant increase in the government’s budget as a result of its monopoly on cotton pricing allowed it to finance the newly established army and considerably increased Egypt’s links to the European economy. The growth of the army triggered the need to establish more and more institutions, such as the factories that were needed to produce commodities for the use of the army, the numerous schools that were opened mainly to train officers and the modern hospitals that were primarily military hospitals.113

70

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

The Pasha’s ambitious projects would not have been conceivable, particularly in trade, without the Greeks. Mohammad Ali called upon foreign agricultural experts, factory managers and skilled workers in his factories. He used the services of Greek and Levantine merchants, who came to Egypt to establish their businesses, in his expansion of foreign trade with Europe. The rise of the modern Greek community in Egypt took place in response to the growth of the power of the Pasha. Mohammad Ali practiced a policy of reform and opened the country to European markets and influences.114 The Pasha and the Greeks had mutual interests. He relied on their functioning trade network in the east Mediterranean while they benefited from the monopoly on trade granted by the Pasha. ‘The development of this Greek merchant diaspora had the paradoxical result that the Greeks controlled a commercial empire before they had gained political independence’.115 The increased commerce and the policies of the Pasha encouraged an unprecedented influx of Europeans, Muslims and non-Muslims from the different areas of the Ottoman Empire, Greeks among them. The Greek merchant community in Alexandria was involved in the import–export business with Europe and the Levant; this business led to an expansion of their operations into finance and credit activities. By 1851, the greater part of capital available in Egypt was in Greek hands. In addition to the merchants, other Greeks came to Egypt as slaves after the intervention of Mohammad Ali’s army in support of the Ottoman Sultan in the Greek War of Independence in 1825– 26.116 While Greek contribution to Egyptian agriculture was important (if sometimes exaggerated),117 merchants such as the Tossitsas, de A´nastasis and Zizinias played an important role in political and economic life in the first half of the nineteenth century. These families received state patronage and were thus able to make substantial profits through the monopoly system.118 The most prominent of these merchants, Michel Tossitsas, became the first Greek consul in Alexandria (1833 – 54).119 With the support of Mohammad Ali, the Greek government and the strong merchant community in the city, the Greeks of Alexandria were one of the first communities to organize themselves beyond the boundaries of the millet system. This was a challenge to the Greek Orthodox Church, the official representation of the Greeks in the Ottoman Empire and a source of struggle within the Greek community for decades.120

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

71

The record of Mohammad Ali’s projects was mixed and has been debated by historians.121 The first historical narrative portrayed Mohammad Ali as a conscientious, national Egyptian ruler and a leader with a vision for Egypt. His projects were regarded as part of an integrated master plan he himself developed with the aim not only of transforming the Egyptian economy and ‘modernizing’ its society but also of gaining Egyptian independence from the perceived, cruel Ottoman control under which Egyptians had been suffering for nearly three centuries. According to this narrative, the failure of this national development and independence was caused by British economic policies and the combination of British, French and Ottoman strategic and political designs against the Pasha. What brought these European colonial powers together was the fact that they could not allow a strong presence such as Egypt’s in the region.122 The second approach has been more critical. It has analyzed the failure of the Pasha’s projects – while not ignoring the role of external factors – including an assessment of the details of the Pasha’s projects and his military and industrial policies. In this approach, the major reasons for failure are seen to include the monopoly system, the mismanagement of the factories, the Pasha’s brand of despotic one-man rule and the intense opposition of peasants to conscription.123 Putting Mohammad Ali in this historical context, as the Ottoman ruler of one of the most important provinces of the Empire suggests that he was interested in laying the foundation for his own power by building up his army and wanted to guarantee the rule of his dynasty in Egypt and the Sudan.124 The debate about the success and failure of the Pasha’s projects aside, he was the longest-serving Ottoman governor of the province of Egypt and the one who best managed to make its economy more efficient and to improve the performance of its bureaucracy. He was also responsible for undertaking large infrastructure projects in order to develop trade and agriculture. The quintessential project was the Mahmudiyya Canal linking Alexandria to the western branch of the Nile (1817–20). Moreover, by using his army the Pasha managed, albeit for a short time, to extend his control over wide areas of the Middle East, including the Hijaz, the Sudan, Syria and parts of southern Anatolia. Egypt’s relationship with these areas thus changed radically.125 Tolerance under Pasha Ali’s reign was not limited to tolerance of the Greeks; it also extended to many other minorities who

72

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

either resided in or entered the country, among them the Jews. In 1830, Mohammad Ali donated money from his personal coffers and called upon the services of Italian architects to assist in the rebuilding of the Eliahou Ha-Nanabi synagogue in Alexandria126 that had been destroyed by Napoleon in 1797.127 By the early nineteenth century, a considerable number of Egyptian Jews were active in trade and financial services,128 among them Jacob de Menace.129 Testimonies of foreigners who lived in Egypt in the years 1825–35 state that the Jews were mainly engaged as [s]arrafs (bankers and moneylenders); others are seyrefees [small money lenders and changers] and are esteemed men of strict probity. Some are goldsmiths or silversmiths; and others pursue the trades of retail grocer or furniture, etc. A few of the more wealthy are general merchants.130 The Pasha also maintained good relations with the Armenians: there were Armenians among the students in the Pasha’s famous educational missions to Europe, along with Egyptians and others from different ethnic backgrounds. In general, then, during the reign of Mohammad Ali the status of Greeks and Jews took a turn for the better and continued to improve.131

Greek, Jews and Egyptian Cotton Mohammad Ali’s successor was his son Ibrahim Pasha, who ruled for several months before his sudden death.132 Ibrahim Pasha was followed by, Abbas Hilmi I (1848–54), who practiced a policy of reticence toward Europe. In contrast, Saʿid Pasha (1854– 63) resumed Ali’s policy of modernization and adopted a liberal economic policy aimed at abolishing internal tariffs and monopolies. He was the ruler under whom private land ownership rights expanded greatly and became entrenched. Saʿid’s weakness, however, proved especially deleterious to the welfare of Egypt, opening the door as it did to interference by foreign consuls.133 In this way, the process of European economic and cultural penetration was underway after the application of the 1838 Anglo–Ottoman trade convention to Egypt and the 1840 Treaty of London. The latter reduced the size of the army, until then the largest consumer of manufactured

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

73

products,134 and all these agreements pushed European penetration to its furthest extent with the rise of cotton as a major export. Ismail Pasha (1863– 79), Khedive Ismail after 1867,135 continued the tendency toward greater foreign involvement in Egypt’s affairs. Both later rulers had the aim of modernizing Egypt, often conflated with ‘civilizing’ or ‘Europeanizing’ the country. There was even a sense in which the goal was to make Egypt ‘part of Europe’. Since the 1850s the country had opened itself to the world, especially with regard to the global economy and the international cotton trade.136 The forerunners of this integration into the global marketplace were the export-oriented agricultural products, dominated by cotton, whose production intensified in the 1860s. From the 1850s to the 1870s, cotton cultivation increased rapidly and, with it, the export of cotton and the influx of foreign capital.137 In addition to the abolition of state monopolies for agriculture and trade mentioned above, two additional factors contributed to this growth in cotton. First were the laws issued by Sa’id in 1855 and 1858 that regulated inheritance rights and which were important steps in the establishment of private landownership in the country.138 Second and most important, was the outbreak of the American Civil War (1861 – 65). This war deprived the European textile industry of the majority of its American cotton supply. Egypt took advantage of this favorable situation. The cotton crop grew four-fold and the land under cultivation grew five-fold. From that date, cotton became, once and for all, the crop that absorbed the largest portion of Egyptian energy and produced the overwhelming share of its export revenue.139 As cotton prices in England quadrupled between 1861 and 1864, jumel – the high-quality type of Egyptian cotton – increased its market share there from three to twelve per cent during the same period.140 Prosperity in the country and the persecution of Jews in Eastern Europe and Morocco141 made Egypt a safe and attractive destination for Jews. The flourishing cotton trade also attracted Greeks, some of whom had previously left as a result of the Crimean War and Greece’s role in it.142 In 1864, immigration of non-Egyptians exceeded emigration by nearly 12,000, comprising Greeks, English, French and Austrians. This brought the total European population of the country to roughly 90,000– 130,000.143 Some of those who arrived in Egypt during the boom would

74

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

later become some of the best-known names in Egyptian business.144 This influx, mainly through Alexandria, generated a construction boom that eventually saw the city expand and Europeanize rapidly.145

Transformations in the Community Structure The influx of people from different areas changed the classic structure of the Jewish and Greek communities. The Jews In 1850, there were 5,000– 7,000 Jews in Egypt, according to official estimates.146 The community grew to 63,550 by 1927 and to 65,639 people in 1947. Other sources indicate different numbers.147 As is clear in Table 2.2, other sources indicate that the official number of Jews in Egypt has been underestimated. Experts agree that the official figures were lower than the real ones.148 Egyptian Jews themselves maintained that the number was much larger.149 The fivefold increase in the population of the Jewish minority in the second half of the nineteenth century (1897) reflected the average increase in the populations of other minorities. Egypt attracted many immigrants from southern Europe, North Africa and other provinces of the Ottoman Empire. The number of immigrants to Egypt in relation to Jewish immigration (the unofficial numbers) shows a high proportion of Jewish and Greek immigrants compared with others.150 Economic prosperity brought about by the cotton boom, economic and political liberalism and religious tolerance: all these demonstrated the safety of the country in the eyes of Jewish immigrants, a situation which could not be said to exist in many of their lands of origin. The majority of the immigrants were Sephardic Jews, yet by the mid-1850s, Ashkenazi Jews from Eastern Europe were arriving as well. Table 2.2 Year

Jews in Egypt, 1850 –1947151 1850

1897

1907

1917

1927

1937

1947

Total 5– 25,000 38,000 59,000 63,000 62,000 65,000 number 7,000 Other 75– 100,000 sources 80,000

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

75

This immigration led to a change in the structure of the community, heterogeneous by its nature. The community consisted of four main groups. First were native Egyptian Jews who spoke Arabic. They were mostly concentrated in the small Jewish communities of the Nile delta, Upper Egypt and in the Jewish quarter of Cairo and the port district of Alexandria.152 These were the bulk of the 5,000– 7,000 Jews estimated to live in Egypt in 1850. They were distinguished by a high degree of assimilation into Egyptian society – its habits, clothes and food – compared with recently arrived Jewish immigrants.153 Second, the Karaites – an Arab Jewish community – were a minority within the Jewish minority.154 They followed a different Jewish legal tradition that rejected the oral law (the Talmud) as the equal to the five books of Moses (the Torah). The Karaites had their own quarter, though they also lived elsewhere in Cairo, too. Their rituals were very much integrated into their surrounding environment; their habits, clothes and food did not differ from those of other Egyptians of their class.155 Third, the Sephardic, Oriental and Italian Jews divided themselves according to their cultural and linguistic background. They spoke Ladino, Turkish, Italian and Arabic.156 This group was the largest, becoming dominant and forming the backbone of the merchant middle-class. Some of them rose to become an integral part of the Egyptian upper-class.157 Fourth were the Ashkenazi, the majority of whom migrated to Egypt from Eastern Europe between 1880 and 1914.158 Darb al-Barabira was the quarter of Ashkenazi Jews in Cairo. Generally speaking, they had no economic power or influence comparable to that of the Sephardic community, with the exception of a short period during World War I. They spoke Yiddish at home.159 Different cultural, linguistic and religious spheres characterized each group of the Jewish minority. Arabic, Ladino, Yiddish, French and Italian were fluently spoken, depending on the origin of the community members and their social class.160 Language was the connection to Egyptian society and its different classes. French was the lingua franca of the Egyptian upper class and upper-middle class, especially in the twentieth century, regardless of their cultural or religious background, as it was for the Jewish upper class and the Syrian – Greek Catholic – upper class.161

76

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

The high incidence of Jewish migration from the Mediterranean area and the Ottoman Empire reinforced the dominance of the Sephardim while also bringing about a transition in the social and legal positions of the Jewish minority, as well as a transformation of their economic role and cultural orientation. For decades, Sephardic and native Egyptian families by and large took the leading positions on the Jewish community council in Cairo and Alexandria.162 The Qattawi family was a native Egyptian Jewish family originating from the village Qatta in the Giza district.163 It should be noted that the level of power and wealth the Qattawis attained was not a common phenomenon among native Egyptian Jews; it was more often associated with the Sephardic Jews. The family is mentioned as early as the seventeenth century, when the learned Sambari Qattawi (1640– 1703) wrote a history of the Jews under the Mamluks. This is indicative of the fact that the family was in a social position that could produce a scholar.164 Since there were no detailed registers for migrants in the sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, it is difficult definitively to determine whether all families were native Egyptians, Sephardic Egyptian with Spanish or Portuguese ancestors, or if they were ‘new’ immigrants, i.e., those who immigrated in the second half of the nineteenth century. The details of each individual case remain important. This diversity among Egyptian Jewry was not limited to culture and language; it also included the legal status of community members, with many Jews holding multiple nationalities – not only Italian and Ottoman, but also Austrian, French and Greek, among others. The Capitulation system inadvertently encouraged this state of affairs. Decades later and through the dissolution of states and empires and the rise of others, the legal status of the Jewish minority changed. Available data on the number of Jews acquiring Egyptian citizenship after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire are contradictory.165 However, in the mid-twentieth century, 10– 22 per cent of the Jews in Egypt held foreign citizenship.166 Others were Egyptian or stateless.167

The Greeks By the start of the third decade of the nineteenth century, Greeks from Greece and other parts of the Ottoman Empire were already settled in Egypt and numbered about 10,000.168 In 1837, about 7,000 Greeks resided in Egypt. This number increased sharply as a result of the cotton

MINORITIES Table 2.3 Year

AND THE ECONOMY

77

Greeks in Egypt, 1887 – 1947169 1837

1897

1907

1917

1927

1937

1947

Total number 7,000 38,208 62,973 56,735 76,264 68,559 57,427 Other sources 82,658 99,793 80,466

boom of the 1860s. By the end of the century, their number reached 38,208. About half of them resided in Alexandria, the main center for Egyptian Greeks.170 The number of Greeks peaked in 1927 at 76,264 (99,793).171 With 57,427 Greeks in 1947,172 it was the second largest minority in Egypt after the Jews.173 The cotton boom consolidated the position of the larger merchants in the Greek community. Many Greeks were involved in agriculture, particularly cotton and its trade. In contrast with other minorities in the country, Greeks were unique in that they extended their small trade beyond Alexandria and Cairo to the Nile delta, middle and upper Egypt,174 where they were involved in small-scale trading, money lending and work as middlemen, an important link in the chain of cotton production.175 The Greeks were involved in every stage of cotton production, from the small middlemen in the provinces to the important exporters in Alexandria.176 They were thus represented in all the classes of society. Alexander Kitroeff has described this diversity in terms of social class among the Greeks of Egypt, when compared with Egyptian society in general, as ‘a diamond-shaped figure’ with the bulk of it in the middle stratum.177

Greeks’ Role in the Economy and their Function in Transformation Being middlemen between Egyptian peasants and landlords on the one hand and cotton traders on the other was by far the most important role assumed by Greeks in the chain of cotton production. Its importance emerged from the fact that they provided the capital needed by Egyptian peasants to cultivate cotton178 and was critical as it closed a loophole in a system that did not, or could not, provide the capital needed for the expansion of cotton production.179 Expanded cotton cultivation would not have been possible without the capital provided by Greek middlemen. It is important to note that the general tax level was raised

78

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

and revenues from land-tax increased approximately 50 per cent between 1853 and 1858, compelling peasants to obtain loans to meet their tax obligations.180 However, Greek involvement extended to the spread of technical innovations. In the early 1850s the Greek Theodoros Rallis, who was living in Talha – a village near Mansura in the Nile delta – was the first to introduce mechanical, steam-powered cotton gins into the Egyptian village. This was an important technological innovation for two reasons. First, it meant that more cotton could be packed into a single cargo ship. Second, Lancashire textile mills no longer needed to engage in the tiresome business of ginning the cotton. This technological innovation, on the eve of the American Civil War, was to prove invaluable. He became one of the wealthiest merchants in Alexandria, where he settled permanently.181 Cotton-ginning, furthermore, produced a new product: cotton seeds. These were used primarily for fuel, but Greek entrepreneurs initiated a manufacturing innovation, extracting the oil and then making various products such as soap, cooking oils and the like.182 Greek family names were always involved with cotton affairs in the nineteenth century. The Cavafy merchant firm, owned by Petros Cavafy, himself the father of the modern Greek poet Kostantinos Cavafy, was among the top ten firms in Alexandria by the early 1860s. His activities were not limited to the cotton trade; he established his first cottonginning factory in Kafr al-Zayyat in 1860. By 1863, the Cavafy firm had already established braches in eight different locations within and outside Egypt: Alexandria, Kafr al-Zayyat in the Nile delta, Cairo, Minya in upper Egypt, London, Liverpool, Manchester and Marseilles. Konstantinos Zervoudachis also started with a cotton trading company in Kafr al-Zayyat in 1865. By the end of 1870, he had emerged as an important cotton exporter in Alexandria.183 Some of the Greeks were newcomers, attracted to Alexandria by the cotton boom as representatives of foreign companies. Ioannas Choremis came in 1857 as a representative for the Choremis-Moller Company and established a new cotton export firm with an additional partner, Davis. This new company, Choremis-Mellor-Davis & Co., was soon to become one of the leading cotton-export firms in the city.184 His future partner, Emmanuil Benakis, established a rather small cotton export company with his brother in 1868. He was then appointed as a director of Choremi-Mellor & Co. and later left to run the firm’s business in Liverpool. In 1876, he

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

79

returned to Alexandria as an equal partner in a new firm called ChoremiBanki & Co. after Davis and Meller had left the firm.185 Choremi-Banki & Co. dominated the cotton export market until the twentieth century. Many of the 31 firms that exported cotton at the beginning of the twentieth century were established before 1882.186 Other Greeks such as Ioannis Sinadinos were very much involved in finance and banking. Along with the French Pastre´ brothers and Hambro of London, he initiated an innovation in the Egyptian banking sector and established the first private commercial bank in Egypt in 1864: The Anglo– Egyptian Bank.187 In the late 1860s, the Briton Henry Oppenheim, the Frenchman Edward Dervieu and Ioannis Sinadinos effectively controlled the whole banking and financial structure in Egypt. A few years later Jewish bankers joined them. In the following decade, industries other than those related to cotton were established by Greeks. Nestor Gianaclis, a famous Greek name associated with the Egyptian cigarette industry, established the first cigarette factory in Egypt in the year 1871. He and several other Greeks secured their entrepreneurial position as pioneers since they enjoyed the advantage of being first in the field. The cigarette industry was dominated by Greek names such as Kiriazi Fre`res, Dimitrino, Vafiadis, Melachrino and Soussa Fre`res for several decades.188 At first glance, it would seem that no Jew had an immediate relationship to cotton and its boom. Unlike the Greeks, spread as they were throughout the whole country, Jews lived near the two main cities, mainly in towns and villages in the Nile delta.189 Jewish traders owned shops in the bazaars in the larger towns, Jacob Rollo being one example. With an increase in tourism, more and more Jews entered the importexport trade in antiques and souvenirs.190 Jacob Landau has referred to documents of the British consulate of the nineteenth century which show that there were silk-dyers in Cairo and Jewish silk-spinners in Alexandria and that Jews worked in other crafts, such as tailoring and cigarette rolling, in addition to working as ritual slaughterers, all essential services for the community.191 These occupations do not indicate a direct association with cotton. Although Jewish involvement in the cotton trade differed from that of the Greeks, their involvement overlapped in the finance and banking sectors, with Jews predominating. The names of well-known Jewish families, such as Qattawi, de Menasce, Mosseri, Rollo, Suare`s and

80

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Aghion, were associated with moneylending and money-changing sarraf and sarraf bashi positions in the service of the rulers.192 Jacob (Yaʿqub) Qattawi was appointed chief Egyptian moneychanger during the reign of Saʿid Pasha.193 The sarraf position was the beginning of a crucial involvement in the Egyptian economy. Around 1875, the Suare`s brothers – Joseph, Felix and Raphael, along with Simon Rollo, all from an old Jewish merchant family – established the Maison de Banque Suare`s Fre`res & Cie., followed in 1876 by the first family-owned bank, J.N. Mosseri Fils & Co.194

The Suez Canal, the Mixed Courts, the Dual Control and the ʿUrabi movement The Suez Canal was the most significant and far-reaching project of nineteenth– century Egyptian history; it is still a vital part of contemporary Egypt. Although there is no direct relationship between Greeks and Jews and the project, it nonetheless affected Greeks and Jews for decades to follow. Construction began with the establishment of the joint stock company, Companie Universelle du Canal Maritime de Suez and large-scale borrowing by the Egyptian state from European banks.195 Initial planning began in 1859, the flourishing state of the cotton market apparently providing the Egyptian government with a confidence regarding repayment of the large loans. The official opening was in 1869, during the reign of Khedive Ismail. In the years following the opening of the Canal, public debt continued to increase, even in the face of a sharp decrease in cotton revenues in the second half of the 1860s after the end of the American Civil War. The decreased revenues of the cotton owners, already indebted through increased tax obligations to the government or through credit repayments to other financiers, in turn decreased government revenues. Egyptian scholars have emphasized the government’s mistaken policies and misguided decision making with regard to credit and finance during the reigns of Saʿid and Ismail.196 Different measures were taken by the government to increase revenues from the agricultural sector, the most infamous being the advance-payment land tax, known as the muqabala. But the muqabala tax, the low revenues from the Canal and other measures failed to cover the ever-growing public debt.197 These financial entanglements put Egypt in a dilemma: bonds were necessary to finance important investments in infrastructure and to

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

81

expand cotton production. However, the expansion of cotton production made Egypt more integrated into and dependent on the world market, particularly the cotton market, thus making the country vulnerable to negative changes in market prices and increasing the risk of economic crisis. The financial situation grew even worse after 1868, when the Sublime Porte prohibited the Khedive from issuing more public bonds, following the collapse of financial markets in Paris during the Franco– German war of 1870 –71. By 1876, Egypt was officially bankrupt.198 The creditors, mainly French and British, demanded a guarantee that, despite Egypt’s bankruptcy, they would not lose their money. They received political support from their representatives in Cairo and appointed inspectors who audited the finances of the country, a system referred to as ‘dual control’.199 The newly established Egyptian government in 1878 had a British minister of finance and a French minister of public works; this extreme interference in Egypt’s affairs was the de facto disempowerment of Khedive Ismail. He was removed, by decree, as the Ottoman Sultan in the spring of 1879. His son, Tawfiq (1879 – 92), became his successor but did nothing to resist the growing European interference in Egypt’s political and financial affairs.200 It now became necessary to develop models for the orderly resolution of disputes between Egyptians and non-Egyptians. Upon an initiative from the Egyptian side, the ‘mixed courts’ were established. The first court case to be brought was in 1876 and the courts continued to operate until they were abolished in 1949 by the Montreux agreement.201 The mixed courts were an attempt to introduce the Egyptian legal system in such cases and to avoid keeping the legal affairs of foreigners only in the hands of their respective consuls, while also somewhat limiting their privileges. Over time this Egyptian-initiated legal reform intended to strengthen the Egyptian government’s hand became a cornerstone in a system that sanctioned foreign domination. The mixed courts became a symbol of the unequal and humiliating status of Egypt vis-a`-vis foreign powers.202 Greeks with Greek citizenship and Jews who bore foreign passports could make use of the mixed courts to protect their interests, where they could get more favorable hearings. This judicial system increased the security of European and other foreign investors in the country.203

82

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Resistance emerged among some Egyptian elites after the removal of Khedive Ismail. They founded what became known as the ʿUrabi movement, named after its leader the Egyptian officer Ahmad ʿUrabi. Nationalist historiography has tended to use the term ‘revolution’ when describing the events of 1881–82.204 The power vacuum that began in 1876 threw Egypt into a political crisis. The interpretation of the complex developments that led to this movement are not within the scope of this research; I will simply present this movement in brief as it bears on events of 1882, a key year in Egyptian history. ‘Egypt for the Egyptians’ was the slogan of a political coalition of various social groups formed in the autumn of 1881.205 First among them were army officers, including Colonel ʿUrabi, who were angered by European demands that the army be reduced in size for budgetary reasons and also aggrieved that higher ranks of the military were the preserve of the Turco–Circassion elite. A second group comprised the major landlords, notables and merchants, whose status and power had been eclipsed by the growing penetration of European merchants backed by the Capitulations, the mixed courts and their powerful consuls in Cairo. The third group comprised intellectuals from the different provinces, Muslim reformers such as Muhammad Abdu, other ulama, Syrian journalists and native technocrats. This coalition, formed in the second half of 1881, represented the new political elite of the country and was in ascendancy from January to May 1882. Its program was opposed to the policies followed by Ismail.206 Ultimately, however, the coalition broke apart and failed because of its own internal contradictions; splitting in the face of the challenge of British military intervention.207 The situation escalated in the form of armed clashes in June 1882. The first British ships anchored off Alexandria harbor and bombed the city on July 11 and July 12, 1882.208 One month later, Sir Garrett Wolseley and 20,000 troops landed in Alexandria with orders to crush the ʿUrabi movement by any means necessary. An escalation in military activities in September 1882 ended the ʿUrabi era, with the movement’s namesake being exiled.209 The British army remained in Egypt until the Tripartite Aggression of 1956. In Aspects of the Economic and Social History of the Greek Community in Alexandria during the Nineteenth Century, Pandelis Glavanis refutes the claim that British intervention was aimed at ‘stopping the massacre against Europeans in Alexandria’. Glavanis argues cogently that events in Alexandria simply provided the British

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

83

with an excuse to invade the country and secure their economic and political interests.210 Despite financial entanglements and the debate surrounding his policies, Ismail’s reign was one of the most interesting in Egyptian history. Investments in infrastructure (the Suez Canal, irrigation canals, bridges, the docks in Suez, railroads and the telegraphy network) supported the economic modernization of the country, which also meant a closer integration with Europe. This of course proved to be a double-edged sword. The period also witnessed the flourishing of cultural life in Cairo and Alexandria and the beginnings of an Arabic-Islamic renaissance, the origins of which were in Egypt.211 Diverse publishing and cultural opportunities attracted many intellectuals, among them numerous Lebanese and Syrians who shaped the Egyptian press for the century to come. Egypt was also a safe haven for many intellectuals and other people escaping Ottoman and other censorship and repression.212 All these developments laid the foundations for an evolving and new middle-class, comprising many minority members, foreigners and Egyptians.213 Cotton was the key economic factor behind all these developments. Each stage of its production – cultivation, ginning and trade – offered profit-making opportunities. Roger Owen has claimed that not only exporters, moneylenders and ginners, but even growers and peasants had a share, even if very limited, of the prosperity brought by cotton. Eating habits shaped by the livelihoods and income of peasants were transformed; corn flour was replaced by wheat. Apparently peasants could afford to consume more and to invest more in gold, pilgrimages, housing construction and the purchase of silk, furniture and slaves than ever before.214 Capital provided by banks and foreigners was necessary for infrastructure investment and the lack of these facilities hindered the transportation of cotton from producers to port in Alexandria.215

Greeks, Jews and the Viceroy The British occupation of Egypt (1882– 1956); British imperialism in the region; and the complex of issues associated with Britain, Egypt, Sudan and the whole region, are wide-ranging topics that have been considered in numerous studies.216 The scope of this work does not concern these wider discussions and the following will focus only on the minorities examined here.

84

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Evelyn Baring, who became Lord Cromer in 1892, exemplified the British occupation of the Victorian era. He molded Egypt’s destiny to such an extent that the British occupation is more associated with the day Cromer arrived in Cairo as Her Majesty’s Agent and Consul-General in September 1883217 than the day the British troops landed in Alexandria in summer 1882. His appointment seemed an obvious choice; an expert in the British financial control of Egypt due to his work in Cairo in the period 1877–80,218 he was uniquely qualified for his work in Egypt.219 Cromer was expected to follow the policy laid down in the Dufferin Report and to carry out the suggested reforms. In addition, he was expected to effect a rapid evacuation of British troops from Egypt. Cromer realized very quickly, however, that these expectations could not be carried out simultaneously. Reforms could not be carried out if the evacuation was to be immediate. Problems surrounding the country’s foreign debt and international control; relations with France, Germany, the Ottoman Empire and Russia; the Mahdist revolt in Sudan; and the failure of the Hicks military expedition, all served to postpone any troop evacuation.220 Cromer soon consolidated his power in Egypt.221 This was a result of deep involvement in the decisions made by the Egyptian government, especially after the troubles in Sudan.222 Gaps in knowledge and information on the part of officials in London made his reports influential for decision makers there.223 In the years following 1882, Egypt became strategically important for Great Britain in keeping its naval presence in the Mediterranean and maintaining control over the Suez Canal.224 The pattern was set for a permanent occupation of Egypt. Furthermore, Lord Cromer was not one to believe in the ability of Egyptians, Levantines, or perhaps any people aside from the British to rule themselves. He was convinced of the necessity of the British presence in the country to save the downtrodden peasantry from the tyranny and fecklessness of native rulers.225 In different parts of his book Modern Egypt, Cromer described the native people as ignorant, credulous and improvident and therefore easily despoiled – and with low moral standards to boot.226

Diverse Sentiments among the Greeks Most writings about the relationship between minorities, foreigners and the British occupation have simplified the issue to one of the ongoing

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

85

vested interests. They have further viewed resistance to the British presence in Egypt as solely an Egyptian concern. Looking beyond this viewpoint shows that the relationship was far more complex. Cromer’s stereotyping was not limited to the Muslim native Egyptians and ‘Orientals’. In his description of Europeans in Egypt on several occasions, the viceroy mentioned that the Greeks formed a lower class practicing the professions of usurers, alcohol sellers and so on.227 Cromer further commented on the Greek presence throughout the country: The Greek of this class has an extraordinary talent for retail trade. He will risk his life in the pursuit of petty gain. It is not only that a Greek usurer or a bakal (general trader) is established in almost every village in Egypt, the Greek pushes his way into the most remote parts of the Sudan and of Abyssinia. Wherever, in fact, there is the smallest prospect of buying in a cheap and selling in a dear market, there will the petty Greek trader be found.228 He continued his description and expressed stereotypes toward more groups than the Greeks: We may, therefore, give the low-class Greek credit for his enterprising commercial spirit. Nevertheless, his presence in Egypt is often hurtful. Whatever healthy moral and political influence remain untouched after the Turco –Egyptian Pasha, the tyrannical Sheikh and the fanatical ‘Alim’ have done their worst, these the low-class Greeks seek to destroy.229 Cromer used this characterization of Greeks in his reports to London and some scholars have been very dependent on his portrayal and interpretation of politics and society in Egypt.230 But scholarly reliance on British and French sources, such as Cromer’s work and the documents of the Foreign Office, rather than on Greek sources, such as the documents of the Greek Community in Alexandria, Greek newspapers published in Egypt and the different Greek institutions, have hindered understanding of the dynamics of modern Egyptian history.231 The Greek reaction toward the British occupation was diverse. Some members of the Community sent a congratulatory telegram to Gladstone; others, such as Menandros Zizinia, refused to sign the

86

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

telegram and did not receive any indemnities from the British.232 These ‘British’ indemnities, totaling some £4 million, were taken from the budget of the Egyptian government.233 The Greek press expressed its dissatisfaction with British policies on several occasions.234 In 1885, Theodoros Rallis was forced to resign from his post as the elected president of the Alexandrian Greek Community due to his anti-British attitude.235 The heir of the Rallis brothers’ fortune, Amvorsios Rallis, born and educated in Britain, rose to the post of vice-president of the Alexandria city council in 1896 – itself Lord Cromer’s brainchild – rather than seeking to be elected to the Greek Community council.236 The antipathy between the British and some Egyptian Greeks was not only associated with the bombardment of Alexandria. From the beginning, Greeks were formidable competitors for British merchants. During the Crimean wars (1853–56), Sir Murray, the British ConsulGeneral, advised Khedive Abbas Hilmi I to expel the Greeks from the country for their government’s support of Russia. Greek merchants, though, who were associated with British capital were to be excluded.237 The British occupation accelerated changes within the Greek merchant community, leading to the emergence of a new business elite. This was the result of several factors, not least being the decline of the older merchant families. The Zizinias, for example, saw their prestige vanish after the British bombing.238 Another factor was the political and financial deterioration of the country. The new business elite emerged through tight links to British capital and took advantage of the dramatic depreciation of Egyptian government bonds, real estate and agricultural land after the country’s bankruptcy. Merchants investing in low value bonds, real estate, or land reaped very high profits after the British occupation as prices increased rapidly and overtook their pre-1875 value.239 To give the example of one family: the Salvagos established their cotton trading firm in 1865. Despite belonging to the ‘old’ elite, they were also part of the ‘new’ elite since their business was not limited to the cotton trade but also involved banking and financial enterprises such as the National Bank of Egypt, the Alexandria Water Company, the Alexandria Ramleh Railway Company Limited, the Socie´te´ Anonyme du Behera, the Filature Nationale d’Egypte (a spinning and weaving mill) and various other joint stock companies that were linked to British capital. Salvago was elected as the second vice-president of the Greek

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

87

Community, becoming its president in 1900 after the death of Averoff. His son followed in his father’s footsteps by expanding the family’s enterprises and intensifying work with British interests. He was the president of the Mohammad Ali club, vice president of the Egyptian industrialists and a member of the Higher Economic Council of the Egyptian State, all three pro-British organizations. The entrepreneurial ambitions of the son, Mikes Salvago, were not limited to the aforementioned companies and social positions. He expanded the business and was associated with the most important joint stock companies in the country, among them the Socie´te´ Egyptienne des Industries Textiles, the Land Bank of Egypt, the Gabbari Land Company, the National Bank of Egypt, the National Insurance Company and the Bank of Athens. In addition, he kept up the family tradition of being a prominent member of the Community. He was a long-serving president, from 1919 to 1944. His connections to British capital influenced the Community, which adopted a rather pro-British attitude that primarily reflected the interests of Greek bankers and financiers in Alexandria.240

Prominent Jews during the British Occupation The development of Jewish capital and its involvement in Egypt was similar to that of the Greeks in that famous bankers and merchants were involved in business and held important positions in the Jewish Community. Notable names included the Mosseris and Qattawis in Cairo241 and the de Menasces in Alexandria.242 Most of these bankers were Egyptian Jews of Sephardic background, although some of them bore Italian or Austrian citizenship. Qattawi, de Menasce, Mosseri, Rollo, Suare`s and Aghion: all started their careers in the years before the British occupation. They benefited from the cotton boom in the 1860s, as well as from the financing of infrastructure projects, the acquisition of land, the import – export trade, transportation and construction. Jewish capital had an active role in the development of Egypt during the reign of Said and Ismail. Jews, like Greeks, were involved in joint stock companies. There was considerable cooperation in business, supported by marriages between the families of the Suare`s, Qattawi, de Menasce, Mosseri and Rollo.243 The Suare`s family took on a pioneering role when, around 1875, they established the bank Maison de Banque Suare`s Fre`res & Co. The

88

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Qattawis followed this with their bank, Cattaoui Figli & Cie. These and other Jewish banks in Egypt, such as those of Mosseri, de Menasce and Zilkha, played an intermediary role between European capital and Egyptian investors. The Suare`s bank gained importance in directing French capital in 1880 with the Cre´dit Foncier Egyptien, which became the main provider of finance for Egyptian landlords. Later on, Raphael Suare`s cooperated closely with the British business magnate Sir Ernest Cassel, a business partner of Lord Cromer’s brother. With British capital, he undertook and completed three major projects that began in 1898: the construction of the Aswan Dam, the first authorized bank of issue, the National Bank of Egypt and the ‘sale’ of the da¯ʾira saniyya (the royal domain). The da¯ʾira saniyya comprised roughly 500,000 feddans owned by the Khedivial Family. It had been set aside by Khedive Ismail in 1870 as security against the loan of Bischoffsheim & Goldschmidt Bank. This property was managed by an Egyptian– French– British council and began to realize losses in the beginning of 1890. Raphael Suare`s managed to acquire a purchasing option on the da¯ʾira saniyya for £6 million, a price less than its then estimated value. It was later sold for £13 million.244 These three projects reveal a strong link to British capital, similar to that of the Greeks Salvagos and Benakis. The successful sale of the da¯ʾira saniyya precipitated the establishment of numerous land companies that invested in land either for agricultural or commercial purposes. Investments in railroads were also a specialty of Egyptian Jewish investors, with investments in companies such as the Metropolitan and Cairo–Helwan Railway Company in 1880,245 Cairo–Asyut Railways Company in 1890, Qina–Aswan Railways Company in 1896,246 and the Eastern Economic Railway in 1897.247 The first public transportation company of Cairo, a horse tramway, was established by the Suare`s family; the company’s services were known in the city as ‘araba¯t Su¯wa¯ris’.248 Jewish capital also blazed the trail in the Egyptian sugar industry, building on the ruins of the state-owned sugar company established by Khedive Ismail in his attempt to diversify Egypt’s agro-industrial sector. In 1881, Raphael Suare`s built a new sugar refinery at Hawmadiya in partnership with two foreign residents of Egypt.249 In 1893, the Suare`s family bank provided the lion’s share of the capital for a new sugar partnership with the French investor C. Say to form the Sucrerie Raffinerie d’Egypte.250 This enterprise merged in 1897 with another

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

89

sugar refinery to form the Socie´te´ Ge´ne´rale des Sucreries et de la Raffineries d’Egypte. The company’s building was on part of the former da¯ʾira saniyya land in upper Egypt; the company expanded quickly and by 1902 had several sugar refineries and sugar production factories, all owned by an Anglo – Egyptian group led by Ernest Cassel. Overly rapid expansion and ineptness led to bankruptcy threatening the firm in 1905 and it was taken over by the Socie´te´ du Wadi Kom Ombo, one of the most prominent joint enterprises of the Qattawi – Suare`s – Rollo group. The enterprise comprised an area of some 70,000 feddans. The directors of the company were a Belgian, Henri Naus and Sir Victor Harari, a Jew born in Lebanon, British citizen and former high-ranking official in the Egyptian Ministry of Finance who served as a local agent for Ernest Cassel. These men managed to resuscitate the company and earned considerable profits, especially during and after World War I.251 The investment was not limited to the mere financial aspect of capital investment; they also invested in expertise. Yusuf Qattawi, a member of the Qattawi family, studied engineering in France, returned to Egypt to work for the ministry of public works and then left to study the sugar-refining industry in Moravia. Upon returning to Egypt once more, he became a director at the Egyptian Sugar Company and president of the Kom Ombo Company.252 From the 1920s until 1955, the company held a de facto monopoly in the sugar industry and employed over 20,000 people, becoming one of the largest enterprises in the agricultural sector. Until the 1930s or even later, members of the Qattawi family were delegated to the Egyptian parliament by Kom Ombo.253 New members of the Jewish business elite continued to join in their business, but it cannot be said that a new elite emerged during British rule. The Suare`s, Qattawi, Mosseri and de Menace families often acted together as one business group and were in many ways the successors of their fathers who had already gained positions of importance in the world of Egyptian finance before 1882. Cromer did not refer to the Jews in Egypt as he did the Greeks or other minorities such as the Armenians and Syrians. This could be a result of the fact that he saw the Jews as foreigners or at least holders of foreign citizenship. It could equally be because the business partner of his brother Cassel was in partnership with Egyptian Jews. It is possible that the viceroy was neither concerned with nor well-informed about the

90

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

diverse backgrounds and origins of the Jewish minority in Egypt and, therefore, did not see any need to mention them. Egyptian Jews began other industries. It was not uncommon for them to partner with Greek, British and French investors in addition to other Egyptians. One example was the Greek-initiated Egyptian Oil and Soap Company established in 1889 with, among others, Greeks, Jewish (de Menasce) and Egyptian partners.254 The outstanding Jewish and Greek role in infrastructural and industrial development in the period 1882–1914 and before did not preclude the participation of other minorities such as Syrians and Armenians, among them Sarsaq and Matosian. Many Europeans considered Egypt a safe and profitable place for investment, as can be seen with the likes of the Frenchman Say and the Briton Cassel. The difference was that Greek, Jewish, Syrian and Armenian entrepreneurs operated in Egypt and were residents of the country. Several industrial enterprises were established in the 1890s and in the first decade of the twentieth century: cotton-ginning; factories for ice, paper, glass and cigarettes; metal casting; agro-industrial companies; land companies; transportation enterprises; hotels; shipping companies; and real estate companies.

Cromer, Entrepreneurs and Diverse Interests There has been a consensus in the literature that Egypt enjoyed an unprecedented run of prosperity, especially in the 1890s. This was supposedly brought about both by Cromer’s financial policy, based on low taxation, efficient fiscal administration, careful expenditure on remunerative public works and minimum interference in the internal and external traffic of goods, as well as Egypt’s natural ability to return to growth as a result of its fertile soil.255 Cromer’s fiscal policies have been praised, but his attitudes toward industrialization in Egypt, particularly cotton industry, were hardly laudable.256 This attitude and conviction were applied even in the 1890s when groups of British entrepreneurs tried to establish textile factories in Egypt. Cromer declared this to be unreasonable competition to the Lancashire textile industry.257 In his article, ‘Lord Cromer and the Development of Egyptian Industry, 1883–1907’,258 Roger Owen has given a detailed explanation of the different factors that led to the failure of the Egyptian textile industry.259 The free-trade policy was a combination of different economic policies and schools of economic thought. The benefit to any

MINORITIES

AND THE ECONOMY

91

particular industry cannot be decided solely on the basis of the end price of a product in the short run. Infrastructure, the labor force, education and state policies, among others, are all factors that stand in a reciprocal relationship with profitable industries. If Cromer was not actually opposed to industrialization in Egypt as such, it can at least be said that he was neither interested in nor concerned with any particular vision for Egyptian industry. Otherwise, he would have applied different policies. The anti-industry attitude of Lord Cromer had the support of Egyptian landowners who had emerged as a significant social and political force after 1882, enabling them to dominate the country’s political institutions. They were not interested in other bourgeois groups challenging their positions at the top of society.260 Some have argued that Cromer, despite being in favor of low taxation, still imposed customs duties of eight per cent on imported coal and, in so doing, suppressed the tobacco and textile industry in order to increase the government’s revenue through imported goods. The argument is that Cromer was a ‘free trader’ and could not conceive of protective tariffs; he believed that if an industry could not thrive without protection, then it must be left to die.261 The question here is whether Lord Cromer was such a free trader when it came to protecting British industries and British interests. Being a free trader was a good argument for protecting the already established British textile industry. As will become clear in the tables in Chapter Three, many entrepreneurial industrialists were members of the Jewish and Greek minorities. Several examples from among them demonstrate that Cromer was not at all in favor of these industries and did not undertake any measures to support them, despite the fact that a flourishing industry would be a boon to the state’s revenues and would increase economic performance. There was thus an additional conflict between the British colonial administration, in particular Cromer and entrepreneurial industrial minorities. This shows that the relationship was not one based on ongoing vested interests and that the entrepreneurs were not supported or protected by the British per se. This can be seen in the case of Kotsikas, who acquired funds from the British military to invest in an industry that was discouraged by the British administration. Another example among others is the conflict between the head of the Egyptian Jewish investors – Qattawi, Suare`s and de Menasce – who had a

92

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

considerable share in the Egyptian Cotton Mills Company and in Lord Cromer’s attitude toward the textile industry. Cromer insisted that the mills should pay an excise duty on their own products that was equivalent to the customs duty of eight per cent levied on imported clothing. This policy was one of the reasons leading to the liquidation of the Egyptian Cotton Mills Company.262

Conclusion In spite of these policies, the Egyptian industrial sector grew in the period 1883 – 97. The proportion of capital invested in industry grew rapidly during these decades. Capital invested grew by 18.3 per cent, from 7.2 per cent in 1883 to 25.5 per cent in 1897.263 These industries were connected to the processing of raw cotton for export, ginning and pressing, as well as other industries that were established in Egypt, by tradition, because of their comparative advantage. These include Turkish cigarettes, cottonseed and others involving the bulk transportation of commodities such as sugar, beer and cement.264 Growth in this period can be seen as typical and similar to what was happening elsewhere. In the case of Egypt, however and given the policies set on discouraging local industry and hindering development, it is significant that innovation – and efforts toward it – on the part of entrepreneurs in industrial development took place at all, that is, in the face of the emergence of conflicts of interests between entrepreneurs and the colonial British administration.265

CHAPTER 3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Entrepreneurs’ decisions create a dynamic that influences the economic process and economic growth. This is emphasized by different economic growth theories. The present work aims to explain the role of minority entrepreneurs in the Egyptian economy by applying the Schumpeterian growth theory in combination with the network theory. This analysis is undertaken through an evaluation of joint stock companies established in Egypt during the period 1885–1960.1 The collected data are based on the announcements of each company’s establishments published in the official Egyptian gazette, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya. A total of 850 announcements are available in the Egyptian archives;2 759 were newly established companies. The other 91 are excluded because they were either companies that changed their names and thus were not new, or they were registered in Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya despite being established after 1958 on Syrian territory during the Syrian– Egyptian unification (the United Arab Republic). As the focus of this study is solely enterprises in the Egyptian market, a market space limited by Egypt’s legal and geographical boundaries, these Syrian-established companies are outside the scope of the study. The lists of companies and the details of their classification are presented in the Appendix. In general terms, joint stock companies constitute a vital part of any private sector. Analyzing the structure of such companies at the time of their establishment provides a clear indication of their economic role. Furthermore, the contribution of Egyptian Jewish and Greek entrepreneurs can be uncovered through an analysis of the data. In this study, these data are then mapped onto a theoretical frame

94

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

comprising two components. First is the model of Joseph Alios Schumpeter (1883–1950) presented in his Theory of Economic Development (1911– 12). The main focus of Schumpeter’s Theory is entrepreneurship and innovation.3 The second theoretical component is network theory, used here to explain connections among minority members. Economic literature classifies Schumpeter’s approach as part of classical growth theory.4 Classifying the Schumpeterian approach as ‘classical’ does not mean that it has failed to influence subsequent theory. In fact, modern growth approaches depend on the Schumpeterian model, as did the neoclassical and post-Keynesian approaches before them.5

Network Theory Network theory considers contacts and relations between both individuals and groups, doing so by drawing lines between them. In this way it can demonstrate relationships and linkages that might not have been apparent from other theoretical perspectives. This enables an analysis of phenomena that a single disciplinary approach might not sufficiently explain. Network theory allows for the possibility of crossing theoretical and disciplinary borders. Researchers have observed that both religious and ethnic groups often perform specific economic roles, though not necessarily major ones.6 This is explained by their close ties and the shared religious or ethnic roots, or both, among members of these communities. Religious ceremonies and religious minorities’ social gatherings as well as the common languages, cultural practices and social codes of ethnic and religious minorities all serve as mechanisms that help in the pooling of social resources.7 These mechanisms are regulated by value systems that include moral attitudes and ethical codes shared by community members. ‘Value systems’ emerge supreme when it comes to considering commercial transactions. This is so for two reasons. First, they are a source of information on two levels: among the members of the community and between the community’s members and other communities that share the same value system but are in different geographical locations. It is the joint value systems that are the means of communication. Second, the mechanisms increase trust among individuals who know each other and share the same value systems. Trust reduces risk and thus decreases transaction costs.8 Generalized

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

95

morality in the form of value systems, as well as institutional arrangements within and among communities, guard against the threats of opportunism, free-riding and cheating. These threats increase risk, but shared value systems make dealings for ethnic and religious minority communities less risky as it is more likely that entrepreneurs are dealing with reputable individuals and using reliable sources of information.9 In Egypt, Greeks had a common religious and ethnic background with linguistic and cultural ties: the community was part of the Greek Orthodox Church.10 Despite being a minority with a common religious legacy, Jews in Egypt were not a homogeneous community, a consequence of different linguistic, ethnic and cultural backgrounds.11 A minority group such as the Greeks or Jews in Egypt operates within the frame of a value system. Members of the communities utilize this value system as a framework for conducting commercial and financial transactions in addition to making business decisions. It is important that the value system be enforced. In so doing the community is transformed into a network. The community’s value system, seen as natural by its members, is the central connecting element of this network. There lay its strength. The network guarantees access to reliable information before others outside the network are able to access it. Information in advance is invaluable for any market. The community also guaranteed loans and the repayment of debts; if a member did not pay back the loan, the whole community had to cover the payment and the reputation of the member and, in some cases, of the community, would be questioned. This view of minority communities as networks explains the economic activities of minorities in Egypt. However, such a view limits the explanation of the community’s commercial activities to one of a common value system. In other words, business networks are constrained to moral explanations by this very analysis. It provides no analysis of the leading economic role played by minority communities, nor does it explain joint economic activity between different minorities and Egyptians. To address these, this study proposes an extension of the network theory to account for wider economic goals and activities. This study argues that networks operate on two levels.

Level One The first level of the network is based on the common value system resulting from shared religious and ethnic affiliations. As a result,

96

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

information can be pooled and common linguistic and cultural backgrounds facilitate communication and decrease the time and cost of commercial activities. This in turn reduces risk and increases possibilities for maximizing profit. This network is not, however, a formula equating to the automatic connection of all members of an ethnic or religious community. Social status and education, for example, matter. From this emerge nuances to the connections among members of the networked community. Despite this, networks based on common value systems are an optimal arrangement for animating commercial systems and conditioning economic activities.

Level Two The second level of the network expands beyond the boundaries of the more narrowly defined religious and ethnic minority community. On this level the network includes another tier of connections: common cultural, material, moral and educational backgrounds, for example, as well as and most importantly, a shared vision of the future, especially a shared vision concerning investments. The ‘connective tissue’ here is common interest. On this level, religion and ethnicity fade and do not in and of themselves provide a point of entry to the network. The network’s second level certainly might include the first but this is not necessarily the case. A group of entrepreneurs, for example, who establish an enterprise and who have a common vision deriving from their shared vision concerning investments can include a smaller group with a shared ethnic or religious background within the whole group of investors.

Entrepreneurship The Schumpeterian model is one of the earliest economic applications of entrepreneurial theory. Schumpeter constructed an endogenous growth theory in which the entrepreneur is the source of all dynamic economic change. The Schumpeterian entrepreneur is a ‘creative rebel’, creating disequilibrium and playing a key role in economic development by breaking away from the routine path and innovating in doing so.12 Here the entrepreneur is conceived as someone who creates new industries and thereby precipitates major structural changes in the economy. Entrepreneurs innovate by creating new combinations.13 Schumpeter’s approach to entrepreneurship and innovation provides a systematic and

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

97

solid analysis of the data allowing a reliable interpretation of the phenomenon and is most suitable for the purpose of this study. Network theory is ancillary to entrepreneurship, the latter being the main approach of this analysis. The relationship between entrepreneurship and its ancillary, network theory, will be illustrated in the following. This relationship provides an explanation both for entrepreneurial behavior, on the one hand and for successful entrepreneurship, on the other.

Innovation Innovation lies at the core of the Schumpeterian approach. Entrepreneurs and their enterprises start with innovation; all other elements derive from it.14 Schumpeter’s concept of innovation comprises the following five types: (1) The introduction of a new good – that is, one with which consumers are not familiar yet – or of a new quality of a good. (2) The introduction of a new method of production – that is, one not yet tested by experience in the branch of manufacture concerned. This need by no means be founded upon a discovery scientifically new and can also exist in a new way of handling a commodity commercially. (3) The opening of a new market, that is a market into which the particular branch of the manufacture of the country in question has not previously entered, whether or not this market has existed before. (4) The conquest of a new source of supply of raw materials or half-manufactured good, again irrespective of whether this source already exists or whether it has first to be created. (5) The carrying out of the new organization of any industry, like the creation of a monopoly position or the breaking up of a monopoly position. Creating new organization, like creating a monopoly or bursting existing ones.15 Different scholars have expanded upon this innovative approach, among them Mark Casson, Andrew Godly and Franc ois Caron.16 Franc ois Caron observes that since Schumpeter wrote a ‘rich economic and historical literature has uncovered the complexity of the concept of innovation’. He notes:

98

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Analyzing the process of innovation can no longer be accomplished by constructing the innovating entrepreneur a` la Schumpeter or by singing the virtues of the great Chandlerian organization, now the market’s ideal substitute. A rich economic and historical literature has uncovered the complexity of the concept of innovation itself and of the processes characterizing its emergence and spread. Three statements about the role of innovation in entrepreneurship may be put forward: 1. An enterprise, which ceases innovating, is condemned to death. 2. A society in which there are no or very few creations of new firms is condemned to decline. 3. Inside the firm, innovation is a global process, encompassing both management and engineering.17 Caron proposes that we should now adopt also the following propositions: that an enterprise that ceases innovating is condemned to death; that a society in which few firms are created is condemned to decline; and that within the single firm innovation is a global process, encompassing both management and engineering.18 More generally, Caron suggests that we recognize innovation as consisting of four pillars: the awareness of changing needs; transforming these needs into products, not only for the end consumer but also in the form of new industries, infrastructure projects and services; pioneering, an aspect of innovation that is just as important as the innovation process itself as it is the one that produces value; and the accumulation of knowledge, as a result of continuously growing experience essential to innovation.19 In addition to these pillars, achieving innovation requires a number of secondary characteristics, with their fulfillment a key to entrepreneurial success.20

Making Judgments in Decision making Judgment is the entrepreneur’s ability to come to a sound, defensible decision in the absence of complete information. Information is the key word here. Its absence increases uncertainty, which in turn means greater risks resulting in higher costs. In practice, information is costly. Access to information reduces risk and costs. Interpretation of information is

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

99

important as well. Accurate interpretation leads to correct decisions. The ability to interpret accurately is influenced by an entrepreneur’s experience and know-how.21 There is a positive correlation between sound decision making and information. More and better information leads to better decision making. Access to information improves judgment and, thus, decision making. As noted above, networking provides access to information, often more reliable and before others in the market. Observing a minority group as a network shows that a network’s pooling of resources increases access to accurate information, on the one hand. On the other, the minority’s shared value system increases trust among members. Trust reduces risk, which is also important for entrepreneurial decision making. Lower risk is translated into lower costs, which guarantees higher profits and possibly better performance for the entrepreneur. The network’s fulfillment of this function can be seen in the illustration that follows. In this study of minority communities’ role in entrepreneurial activities, it is important to highlight that ‘soft skills’, expressed as know-how, accrued and developed over generations. In other words, new generations learned from the mistakes of previous generations. This particular way of acquiring know-how, together with formal education, is key. Although Casson argues that education does not have a role in entrepreneurial success,22 I argue that education was indeed an important asset. Statistical data show significant education at advanced levels among both Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks compared with

Figure 3.1

Information within the community’s entrepreneurial activities.

100

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

the majority of Egyptians.23 It was at its highest among the Jewish minority.24 In 1907, out of 38,635 Jews, 19,934 were literate. This is compared with 412,669 literate Muslims out of a total population of 10,269,445.25 The available statistics for the Greeks show a high education level, but do not allow a reliable comparison.26 These numbers changed in later years.27 In this case, education granted members of the Egyptian Jewish and Greek minorities a comparative advantage over potential competitors. Education improved language skills and linguistic interpretation, with which came a better aptitude for decision making. Furthermore, knowledge of foreign languages allowed Egyptian Jews and Greeks to have access to multiple sources of information and enabled them to interpret information coming in from other markets. What is more, networking with communities in other geographical areas enabled access to other markets. Networking and education offered favorable conditions for decision making compared with the majority.

Complexity of Decision making Another secondary characteristic of innovation is the complexity of decision making, understood as the involvement in decision making of major market actors other than the entrepreneur. Such major players include: other firms (whether as competitors, partners, or allied interested parties); policy makers such as government functionaries or members of the political elite; and customers.28 Entrepreneurs have to be aware of who the major players are in order to decide whom to act with or against and how to go about it. Complexity takes account of risk and requires sufficient information. Major players are external actors who influence the decision making and actions of entrepreneurs. Qualitative information obtained through networking can restrain complexity. The efficacy of the minority network at the first level is limited here. Going beyond it to the network’s second level, discussed above, is more effective. The high level of education of Egyptian Jews and Greeks guaranteed them employment in government and in private-sector companies. Furthermore, holding key positions in such companies and in government institutions was not uncommon for members of the Egyptian Jewish and Greek communities. The Jewish entrepreneur Aslan Qattawi, for example, headed the administrative council of the Suez Canal Company and served

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

101

at the National Bank as the representative of the Egyptian government. He was a policy maker, a role that allowed access to information concerning major players, in this case the Egyptian government. For others, networking among interested parties allowed for access to information about major players. Greek families that dominated the cotton trade are representative of this type of networking leading to access. The families had connections with Lancashire through their commercial activities.29 The customers of these cotton merchants were textile industrialists, major players indeed. In these examples, networks facilitated access to information about major players. The entrepreneurs’ knowledge of major players and their plans reduced the complexity of decision making and increased their chances of success.

Access to Finance Access to finance is crucial for launching an enterprise. Family capital is the classic source, acquired through inheritance, through working and saving, through incrementally expanding from very small-scale enterprises by consistently reinvesting profits, or through other means including gambling and other informal access to finance.30 Networking, with its higher trust between minority community members, acts as another source of finance in the form of loans.31 Networks among members of ethnic groups provide resources such as capital needed for a commercial undertaking.32 This is on the first level of networking. As Prista Ratanapruck points out, credibility, integrity, trustworthiness and reliability can be earned through social exchanges as well as monetary transactions. Ratanapruck observes that ‘the purpose for which religious and social events are organized and the ways in which the funds are managed and rotated as credit, generate different sizes of loans and various borrowing conditions’.33 In the Egyptian context, Jews had a leading role in the banking system, Greeks a lesser one. Here the first level of networking is apparent. Nevertheless, additional options presented themselves on the second level of networking. It was here where shared interest in a joint investment could help in mobilizing capital. Second-level networks encouraged cooperation both because they offered the prospect of reduced cost in collecting market information and because they spread risk out among several parties.34 A clear example for mobilizing capital through networks was the Egyptian Greek cotton

102

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

merchants and exporters who financed cotton growing with capital provided by Lancashire companies.35

The Entrepreneur’s Reputation An entrepreneur’s reputation is another secondary characteristic of innovation. His reputation is crucial in business. Widely trusted entrepreneurs have better access to resources than others. Poor or limited reputation constrains the acquisition of resources.36 Trust is key to reputation. Trust is the key word here. The function of networking mechanisms depends on trust, reputation and creditability. An entrepreneur can attain and maintain these among members of his minority community. Selection of Partners Long-term, sustained business partnerships require a great deal of trust. Choosing the right partner means having good knowledge of other people. This is important for maintaining the partnership and is also an important consideration in the event of the partnership’s dissolution. An appropriate choice of partners allows the partnership to be dissolved in an amicable fashion so that all parties involved retain their reputations. What marks a successful entrepreneur is a succession of partnerships rather than a single enduring one.37 Networking, trust and reputation within the minority community all facilitate finding suitable business partners.38 Here common value systems promote finding partners in the same community. This, though, does not exclude partnerships with those of shared interest or partnerships founded on personal relations and trust outside the minority community. Additional Entrepreneurial Strategies In addition to these five characteristics needed for successful entrepreneurship, we may also identify some further entrepreneurial strategies, related in essence to information and the ability to predict which opportunities have the potential for success. For example, the Schumpeterian entrepreneur needs to synthesize information about new inventions with information about trends in product demand and in the prices of raw materials, in order to determine whether an innovation is worthwhile.39 In this case, public sources of information are less helpful. Confidential information has higher value in the decision making

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

103

process. Such information is acquired through personal contacts. As a result, entrepreneurs need to cultivate contacts and networks that provide them with the necessary information. Since information spreads easily, entrepreneurs need to keep their information acquired from various sources – that is, their synthesis of all their information – secret until the opportunity arises to make use of it.40 Networking is, thus, an entrepreneurial strategy. Casson emphasizes that it is essential for successful entrepreneurs to have networks. The relationship between networking and entrepreneurship is clearly evident at this point. Once an entrepreneur has synthesized his information and has decided it is time to take advantage of an opportunity to innovate, there are several ways to do so. Not all of these potential ways of taking advantage of an opportunity are available to the entrepreneur in every case.41 An entrepreneur might, for example, try to acquire special legal privileges such as state charters, licenses or franchises, or to acquire a patent for a specific technology or technical process. An entrepreneur might also try to use his synthesized information to speculate and arbitrate. In practice though, speculation might not be an available option. It could demand that the entrepreneur acquire special legal privileges which are difficult to acquire, to enforce, or to maintain in practice. If an entrepreneur wants to turn a profit from speculation, the better option might well be to do so through deals involving resources. In such a case, the entrepreneur buys up resources – commodities, currency, land, or mining rights, for example – which come to light as under valued as a result of his information. He then sells these resources at a later time, at higher prices, once his information has become common, public knowledge. The focus here is on loyalty to the enterprise and the common interest that lies behind it and less to the ethnic or religious community. It involves a succession of trades over a long period of time. The most effective way to ensure loyalty is to bind suppliers and customers using long-term contacts. This requires trust, trust built upon a long-term relationship.42 In general, entrepreneurial strategies are evident in the activities of Egyptian Greeks and Jews. The ‘Capitulation system’ allowed Greeks, most of whom were holders of Greek citizenship, to acquire special legal privileges. Available statistics for Jews are contradictory.43 However, 10–22 per cent of Jews in Egypt held foreign citizenship and thus had access to legal privileges in a way similar to their Greek counterparts.44 Speculation was an important part of

104

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Egyptian Jewish and Greek economic activity, especially in the dealings of land companies. Loyalty among entrepreneurs can be encouraged through networking.

The Role of Institutions in Entrepreneurship Institutions, especially those that can lead to profitable entrepreneurial opportunities, do not define the nature of entrepreneurship in the same way as the characteristics described above. But they are often just as fundamental. The most attractive institutions for entrepreneurs seeking to mobilize capital are the classic ones of the liberal market economy, wherein they enshrine private property as freely alienable, grant freedom of movement and freedom of association with any business, guarantee the confidentiality of business information, protect creative work through patents and the like, provide access to impartial courts, maintain a stable currency and so on. If not in absolute terms, these features were generally provided in Egypt until the beginning of 1950s, thereby ensuring that Egypt provided an appropriate institutional context for entrepreneurial activities.

Other Forms of Networking Other forms of networking might not be related to entrepreneurship but are nevertheless crucial in strengthening community and network relationships. Marriage is one such form. In Egypt, marriage was a major means of strengthening relations inside a network or of gaining access to others. The boundaries between business partnership and marriage are vague.45 Networking through marriage was common among Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews. In each community, marriage-as-networking was not practiced in a mixed sense, particularly among the upper-class.46 In the upper-class, marriage was not exclusive to one’s community; it was also practiced between members of the same social class and among members of mutual interest groups.47

Interim Conclusion According to the Schumpeterian model, entrepreneurship is at the core of economic dynamism and growth. For Schumpeter, innovation,

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

105

conceived in the five points described above, is the main feature of successful entrepreneurship. A number of economic theorists have extended the Schumpeterian concept and added the four pillars of innovation: awareness of changing needs, the transformation of needs into products, pioneering and the accumulation of knowledge. Innovation can be achieved and entrepreneurial success gained when the secondary characteristics of entrepreneurship are combined: judgment in decision making, addressing complexity in decision making, accessing finance, maintaining good reputation and selecting partners. Other important features of entrepreneurship are strategies for exploiting opportunities and the institutional context for entrepreneurship. Mark Casson discusses networking in relation to the synthesis of information as an entrepreneurial strategy needed for undertaking new entrepreneurial activities. These conditions lead to successful entrepreneurship. This study argues that successful entrepreneurs are those who, in addition to having the aforementioned characteristics, make use of the network strategy in one of its two levels in every phase of their entrepreneurial behavior, not just at the major decision making phase. Networking facilitates access to reliable information and is based on trust compared with cases where such networking does not occur. Information that increases trust reduces risk, in turn reducing cost and increasing chances for higher profits. Information and trust provided by a good network are central to sound entrepreneurial decisions. The relationship between innovation, the core of entrepreneurship and networking is the key to entrepreneurial success.

Archives, Data, Entrepreneurship and Networking To understand what role Egyptian Greeks and Jews had in the Egyptian economy, the aspects of entrepreneurship and networking detailed above will be applied to the company data, collected in the Egyptian archives, for the companies established in the period 1885–1960. Data concerning the 759 companies are analyzed in order to answer the following questions: How many joint stock companies were established in Egypt with Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek contributions? How many of these companies were innovative, with innovation understood here as the basis of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship? How many of these entrepreneurs utilized networking in one of its two levels or both levels

106

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

together?48 How many of these companies combined both innovative entrepreneurship and networking? To answer these questions, the data are analyzed from the following perspectives: a general view, the perspective of innovative companies, the perspective of networks and finally the perspective of combined innovation and networking.

General View The combined number of newly established joint stock companies from 1885 to 1960 is 759. Charters founding 850 companies can be found in the archives. Of these companies, 91 are excluded on the grounds that they were pre-existing and were not newly established, as mentioned above. (These 91 joint stock companies had changes of name during the decades examined in this study or where established after 1958 on Syrian territory during the Syrian – Egyptian union, the United Arab Republic.) The number of newly established companies in each decade increases over the period, reaching its peak during the decades 1931– 40 and 1941–50. It decreases slightly in the period 1951– 60. These numbers reflect development in the Egyptian market. Active Egyptian investments and diversity among the newly established companies reflects a dynamic, prospering market. This was especially the case in the 1930s, when increased investments and the number of companies increase due to policies seeking to protect local industry.49 The Agreement of Montreux that abolished the Capitulations in 1937 and, later, the mixed courts in 1949 did not affect the pace of investments in the country as might be expected. The orthodox argument is that privileges resulting from the Capitulations led to Egyptian Greeks and Jews with foreign citizenship residing in and investing in Egypt. The number of newly established companies with Greek and Jewish contribution continued to increase after 1937, calling into question this orthodox argument. Figure 3.2 presents the gradual increase in the number of newly established companies in the period 1885– 1960. While Figure 3.2 demonstrates the general growth in the number of companies established in Egypt, Table 3.1 shows the number of companies established with the participation of Greek, Jewish, foreign and Egyptian capital. The data in this table also show overlapping identities among

Figure 3.2

1955

1950

1945

1940

1935

1930

1925

1920

1915

1910

1905

1900

1895

1890

1885

Increasing number of newly established companies, 1885 – 1960.

1960

108

JEWISH

Table 3.1

Gross number of companies established per decade

AND

Gross Data Year 1885 – 90 1891 – 1900 1901 – 10 1911 – 20 1921 – 30 1931 – 40 1941 – 50 1951 – 60 Total

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Excluded Data (N, N1, U) Valid Data

Number

Number

Number

12 40 87 60 104 123 201 223 850

0 1 0 0 0 0 28 62 91

12 39 87 60 104 123 173 161 759

Percentage 2 5 11 8 14 16 23 21 100

per per per per per per per per per

cent cent cent cent cent cent cent cent cent

Egyptian Jewish and Greek minorities. In the case of the Egyptian Jewish minority in particular, cultural (comprising linguistic and ethnic backgrounds), religious and ‘official’ (that is, based on documents) modes meant that many individuals had multiple identities. These people with multiple identities were a vital component of Egyptian society and its business elite. Entrepreneurs with multiple identities did not conform to the standardized statistical formulas; they could claim one aspect of their identity and ignore others. In other words, being a Jew in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Egypt entailed being an Egyptian or being Italian, French, British, Greek, Swiss, Austrian, Russian, or some other nationality. To a lesser extent, the same was true for Egyptian Greeks, who might have been born with a citizenship other than Greek. Bearing a European citizenship did not necessarily mean being European per se. These individuals were mainly Ottoman subjects who received citizenship as a means of ‘protection’, citizenship granted by states such as Britain, France, or Russia. This practice was common in the nineteenth century.50 Having another citizenship did not preclude being Egyptian in terms of culture and affiliation. The distinctiveness of these entrepreneurs with multiple identities is of great importance to this study. Below, their importance will be considered in terms of their religious or ethnic identities and their identities derived from multiple citizenship. Table 3.2 indicates a clear

12 39 87 60 104 123 173 161 759

3 14 30 16 38 64 73 24 26263

5 9 32 20 29 28 35 14 17264

1 1 10 5 10 15 16 2 6065

8 28 59 36 16 2 0 1 15066

4 10 27 23 84 111 137 65 46167

0 1 1 1 4 10 36 95 14868

Companies Companies Companies Exclusively including excluding with Jewish Companies Companies No. of Egyptian Egyptian Egyptian and Greek Companies with Jewish with Greek Established Participation Participation Participation Participation Participation Companies

All companies established in Egypt 1885 – 1960, overview

1885 –90 1891 –1900 1901 –10 1911 –20 1921 –30 1931 –40 1941 –50 1951 –60 Total (1885 – 1960)62

Decade

Table 3.2

110

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

positive correlation between the number of newly established companies and Jewish51 and Greek participation in these companies. From these data it is clear that Jewish participation exceeded that of Greeks. This positive correlation demonstrates the intensive participation of both minorities in establishing new joint stock companies and highlights their role in the Egyptian economy. Figure 3.3 shows this positive correlation clearly. The positive correlation observed in the data is not limited to companies established solely through the participation of members of the minority community; the correlation is also found in companies established through Jewish–Greek partnership and partnership between the minority communities and Egyptians. The correlation is not observed when one considers solely Egyptian, newly established companies. In this instance, the increase is in absolute terms. In the decade 1951–60 the total number of new companies decreases slightly, but the number of new Egyptian companies increases. A curve begins in the figure starting 1931. In this year, the number of companies established with Egyptian participation increases, a result of the rise of the ‘Egyptian national bourgeoisie’ and their heightened economic activity in the 1930s. The total number of new companies established with Jewish participation for the whole period is 262 companies, representing a 35 per cent share of the market.52 Greek participation occurs in 172 companies, a 23 per cent market share. The combined share of both minorities’ participation in the establishment of joint stock companies is 58 per cent (44 per cent plus 23 per cent minus 9 per cent, since the 9 per cent is to illustrate the companies where both Jews and Greeks participated in one company). An interesting phenomenon is the increase in the number of Arab investors53 in the 1940s and 1950s. The sharp decrease in the number of foreign investors and the gradual increase in the number of Arab investors is noticeable in the Egyptian market, indicating a shift in economic activity that reflect larger political developments taking place in Egypt and in the Middle East more generally in the 1930s and 1940s. The withdrawal of colonial powers and an accompanying awareness of local powers can be seen in this increase in Arab investors in these decades.

Innovative Companies Table 3.4 and Figure 3.4, show the data from the perspective of ‘innovative companies’. The table presents the total number of innovative companies

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Figure 3.3

No. of Companies per Year

800

1950

1945

1940

1935

1930

1925

1920

1914

1910

1905

1900

1895

1890

1885

Newly established companies and minority involvement.

1960

1955

Exclusively Egypans

Excluding Egypans

Including Egypans

With Jewish and Greek Parcipaon*

With Greek Parcipaon

With Jewish Parcipaon

Accumulave Number of New Established Companies 1885−1960

1885 –90 1891 –1900 1901 –10 1911 –20 1921 –30 1931 –40 1941 –50 1951 –60 Total

Decade

Table 3.3

12 39 87 60 104 123 173 161 759 5 100 per cent

Total No. of Established Companies 3 14 30 16 38 64 73 24 262 5 44 per cent

No. of Companies with Jewish Participation

Percentage of companies with Jewish and/or Greek participation

5 9 32 20 29 28 35 14 172 5 23 per cent

No. of Companies with Greek Participation

1 1 10 5 10 15 16 2 60 per cent69

Companies with Jewish and Greek Participation

1885 –90 1891 –1900 1901 –10 1911 –20 1921 –30 1931 –40 1941 –50 1951 –60 Total

Decade

Table 3.4

12 39 87 60 104 123 173 161 759

Total No. of Established Companies

5 27 36 21 33 44 35 28 229 5 100 per cent

Total No. of Innovative Companies 2 12 16 7 11 27 20 6 101 5 44 per cent

No. of Innovative Companies with Jewish Participation 3 7 13 5 7 11 11 6 63 5 28 per cent

No. of Innovative Companies with Greek Participation

1 1 4 3 2 8 7 1 2770

No. of Innovative Companies with joint Jewish & Greek Participation

Number and percentage of companies with Jewish and/or Greek participation of all innovative companies

Figure 3.4

Innovative companies with Greek and Jewish participation.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 – – – – – – – – 85 91 01 11 21 31 41 51 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Innovave Companies with Jewish Parcipaon Innovave Companies with Greek Parcipaon

Innovave Companies Total

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

115

in the studied period and the participation of Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greek in these companies. The gross number of innovative–pioneering companies, very much the first of their kind in the Egyptian market, newly established in the period 1865–1960, is 229.54 Out of these 229 innovative companies, 101 companies were with Jewish participation, presenting 44 per cent of the total innovative companies in the market. The Greek participation in innovative companies counted 63 companies, presenting 28 per cent of the total innovative companies in the market. The total number of innovative companies with Jewish and/ or Greek participation is 164 companies, or 72 per cent of the total number of innovative companies established in the market. This shows that both minorities together had the biggest share of innovation in the market.

Networking Examining the data from the perspective of the networks can be done by following the family names of entrepreneurs involved in establishing new companies through the data. The network starts with partnerships between two entrepreneurs. The two levels of networks can be discerned. In 93 companies, the first level of networking can be seen, representing 12.25 per cent of the total. This level of network is among Jews, Greeks and Egyptians but not among foreigners who invested in Egypt. A higher incidence can be seen at the second level of networking, Table 3.5

Networking Valid Cases

Level One

Level Two

Decade

Column Column Column No. Percentage No. Percentage No. Percentage

1885 – 90 1891 – 1900 1901 – 10 1911 – 20 1921 – 30 1931 – 40 1941 – 50 1951 – 60 Total

12 2 per cent 39 5 per cent 87 11 per cent 60 8 per cent 104 14 per cent 123 16 per cent 173 23 per cent 161 21 per cent 759 100 per cent

2 2 per cent 12 13 per cent 21 23 per cent 4 4 per cent 11 12 per cent 16 17 per cent 19 20 per cent 8 9 per cent 93 100 per cent

5 3 per cent 17 9 per cent 21 11 per cent 15 8 per cent 36 19 per cent 44 23 per cent 32 17 per cent 19 10 per cent 189 100 per cent

116

JEWISH

Figure 3.5

Networking at two levels.

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

where mutual investments foster shared interests that take precedence over ethnic or religious bonds. In total, 189 companies, or 25 per cent of the gross total, indicate a second level of networking at work. Both networking levels can be seen in about 37.25 per cent of the total. This high percentage indicates that networking was an important business strategy in the Egyptian market. The details concerning networks show whether or not networking was used by a group of entrepreneurs. Table 3.6 and Figure 3.6 show the details of networking on the first level. Figure 3.6 demonstrates that level-one networking was utilized generally as a strategy by entrepreneurs. Jewish entrepreneurs made great use of it, the highest level of a single entrepreneurial group. The overlap between Egyptian Jews included in the first column and the second column entitled ‘Level One Jews’, some of whom were also Egyptian, accounts for the total percentage equally more than 100 per cent. Egyptian Jewish entrepreneurs are counted in both (in Jewish and in Egyptians, as long as they were Egyptians). This also explains why Column One totals 54 per cent. Although level-one networking among Greeks is very small, there is no indication that Greeks did not build networks. Instead, these

Table 3.6

The structure of first-level networking Level One

Decade 1885 – 90 1891 – 1900 1901 – 10 1911 – 20 1921 – 30 1931 – 40 1941 – 50 1951 – 60 Total

Figure 3.6

Total No. Total Egyptians71 12 39 87 60 104 123 173 161 759

2 12 21 4 11 16 19 8 93

1 4 6 1 8 13 13 4 50

Others (not Egyptian, Jewish, Jewish Greek or Greek) 1 8 12 3 6 9 6 1 46

The structure of first-level networking.

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

– 4 8 1 3 3 6 4 29

118

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

networks were not necessary instrumental in establishing joint stock companies. Scholarship demonstrates that Greeks did indeed build networks but often elsewhere in the market such as small enterprises. In the case of other entrepreneurs, the last column also indicates that networking strategies were common among other groups: for example, Armenian, Syrian, British, Italian and French entrepreneurs. Networking on level two is, roughly, twice again that of networking at level one shown in the tables and figures above. This level shows networks between entrepreneurs regardless of their ethnic, religious, or citizenship identity. Mutual interests and a joint vision of investments is the common dominator at this level.

Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Networking From the perspective of combined innovation and networking, the data suggest the importance of the combination as crucial to success. Innovation, the crucial aspect of entrepreneurship and networking on its two levels can be seen in this section in the companies that fulfill both in their commercial pursuits. Table 3.7 shows the number of Jewish and Greek enterprises that fulfill both criteria. Out of the total number of newly established companies, 183 fulfill both criteria, representing about 24 per cent of the total. Egyptian Table 3.7

Innovation and networking

Total Decade

Companies with Jewish Participation

Companies with Greek Participation

No. As per cent No. As per cent No. As per cent

1885 – 90 5 3 per cent 1891 – 1900 24 13 per cent 1901 – 10 26 14 per cent 1911 – 20 16 9 per cent 1921 – 30 28 15 per cent 1931 – 40 36 20 per cent 1941 – 50 31 17 per cent 1951 – 60 17 9 per cent Total 183 100 per cent

2 12 14 7 10 24 18 6 93

40 per cent 50 per cent 54 per cent 44 per cent 36 per cent 67 per cent 58 per cent 35 per cent 51 per cent

3 6 10 4 7 8 9 6 53

60 per cent 25 per cent 38 per cent 25 per cent 25 per cent 22 per cent 29 per cent 35 per cent 29 per cent

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Figure 3.7

119

Innovation and networking.

Jewish and Egyptian Greek entrepreneurs comprise the lion’s share of these criteria, with their joint share of 80 per cent. The other 20 per cent is divided among all other entrepreneurs acting on the market. This special circumstance of fulfilling both criteria and dominating a quarter of the market explains the dominant role both groups had in the Egyptian economy. Companies with Egyptian Jewish or Egyptian Greek participation intensively utilized networking or were innovative. To present the result of both innovation and networking for all joint stock companies in the studied period, including companies with Egyptian participation, Figure 3.7 shows how both factors interacted. The companies with Egyptian participation (67 per cent) includes all who were Egyptian nationals, among them Jews and Greeks with Egyptian nationality. For this reason, the total exceeds 100 per cent.

120

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Innovation and Networking: A Success Story Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews achieved a position and took a role in the Egyptian economy out of proportion to their size. This success was gained through innovative entrepreneurship and the widespread use of networking as a business strategy. The data show this clearly. An example will clearly demonstrate the relationship of entrepreneurial innovation and networking leading to success. The Greek Theodoros Rallis, living with his three brothers in Talha, a Nile delta village near Mansura, was the first to use mechanical, steampowered cotton gins in Egypt, as mentioned above. His introduction of the technology took place in early 1850.55 How did the Greeks come to pioneer this industry and not others: Egyptians, Syrians, or Jews? The main merchants in the cotton trade were Greeks. These merchants employed Greek middlemen to run the business in the various towns and villages of the Nile delta and Upper Egypt, providing credit and buying peasants’ cotton. As merchants in the cotton trade, their use of the first-level networking is evident: Greek cotton exporters, Greek middlemen and Greek cotton merchants, such as Rallis, were part of this network. This network provided the Greeks, among them the Rallis brothers, with information and know-how concerning the cotton market and the needs of those involved in it. Exclusive and advanced information, compared with what was available to other market actors, led to better judgment in decision making. Having the needed firsthand information paved the way for the Rallis brothers to be aware of the changing needs of those in the cotton market. This awareness was the motivation for being an entrepreneur. Ginned cotton is lighter in weight, reduces transportation costs, is better in quality and is processed immediately upon arriving at the mills. Antonios Rallis, one of the brothers, was employed at the British company Platt Brothers. He provided information about the 20 secondhand cotton gins at Platt Brothers, cotton gins that had been used in England to process American cotton.56 There is no accurate information about how Rallis financed their investment. Taking into consideration, though, that they were connected to large Greek cotton exporters, it is not unlikely that they were financed by one of them. Or, on the second level of networking, their connection with the British company could easily have allowed them access to other resources in England. Close

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

121

connections with cotton exporters in Lancashire are evident.57 One or both levels of networking facilitated their access to financing. Following this chain of information and considering the Greeks as a network demonstrates that shared value systems, trust and common interests made it possible for the Rallis brothers to gain information. They were aware of the changing needs of market participants which they then turned into a new innovative enterprise. Networking, in this case, reduced uncertainty and reduced costs, compared with costs without a network. Theodoros Rallis is an example par excellence of the Schumpeterian entrepreneur who is a ‘creative rebel’, creating disequilibrium and playing a critical role in economic development by breaking away from the usual path of factory ginning and implementing innovation. When the cotton gins arrived in Talha, Theodoros Rallis had to adapt them in order to process long-staple Egyptian cotton. He also imported a cotton press, so he was able to send his customers in Alexandria cotton that had already been ginned and pressed into bales ready for shipping.58 This was an important technological innovation. Through it, the Rallis brothers were able not only to pack more cotton into a single cargo ship but also to gin the cotton so that the Lancashire textile mills did not have to engage in that tiresome business. In the following years, dozens of cotton ginning mills were established in the Nile delta, most of them by Greeks.59 In addition, the cotton seeds became a new raw material used in manufacturing new products such as edible oil and soap.60 By 1858, Theodoros Rallis became one of the wealthiest merchants in Alexandria. During the cotton boom he managed to increase his personal fortune and by 1871 he was elected president of the Greek Community in Alexandria. He stayed in this position until 1885, when he was forced to resign due to his anti-British attitudes.61 Theodoros Rallis demonstrates how networking and innovative entrepreneurship can guarantee a dominant market position and can lead to social and political power.

Conclusion Summarizing the data presented above, it is clear that Egyptian Jewish participation in establishing new companies in the period 1885– 1960 was about 34.5 per cent, with that of Egyptian Greeks at about

122

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

22.7 per cent. The central element of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship, innovation, was clearly evident in the Egyptian market. Innovative companies accounted for 30 per cent of the total number of companies in the Egyptian market, with Egyptian Jews participating in 44 per cent of the total number of innovative companies and Egyptian Greeks about 28 per cent. Networking on two levels was an entrepreneurial strategy clearly at work in the Egyptian market in the period considered here, with about 37.25 per cent of the companies demonstrating networking. The Egyptian Jews showed the highest rate of networking on level one, while for Egyptian Greeks networking on level one was limited. Both groups, however, showed intensive participation in networking on level two. The combination of networking as an entrepreneurial strategy and entrepreneurial innovation was the key to success and to dominance in the market. In the Egyptian market, this combination occurred in about 24 per cent of companies. Egyptian Jews participated in 51 per cent of the companies having this combination and Egyptian Greeks in 29 per cent. Both minority groups account for 80 per cent of the total. The economic role of Egyptian Greeks, a group who counted between 50,000 and 80,000 in 1947 and Egyptian Jews, numbering between 80,000 and 100,000 in a total population of 18,966,767 in 1947, was unarguably in excess of their number. This role was achieved through entrepreneurial behavior that clearly conformed to the Schumpeterian mold. This entrepreneurial behavior was supported by a minority community whose structure facilitated networking. This meant, in turn, that minority entrepreneurs did not have to establish networks. The networks existed before the entrepreneur undertook activity in the market. This provided minority entrepreneurs with a permanent comparative advantage. What is more, the Egyptian context, with its Capitulations and mixed courts and the classic liberal institutions in place under the British occupation and the Egyptian government of the 1930s, provided a setting that enabled entrepreneurial activity among minority communities and paved the way for their economic dominance.

CHAPTER 4 MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

In this chapter, the behavior and reaction of entrepreneurs, among them minority entrepreneurs, will be conceived through the framework presented in Chapter 3. Innovation and networking on both its levels is scrutinized in the following. A short introduction of the economic events in the beginning of the century is first necessary for understanding the interwar period.

The Beginning of the Century The last decade of the nineteenth century witnessed an increase in investments including foreign capital.1 The British colonial administration was interested in modernizing irrigation and transportation systems; in these domains, it did not block any investments. Table 3.1 shows that 40 joint stock companies were established in the decade 1891 – 1900, among them several railway and tram companies. An important milestone was the establishment of the Egyptian National Bank in 1898. In total, 19 per cent of the companies set up in this decade were established by non-Egyptians. The last decades of the nineteenth century evinced innovation and the use of networks among and between Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek entrepreneurs. Examples were the Metropolitan and Cairo–Hilwan Railway Company, founded with the participation of Suare`s and Qattawi,2 and the Qinna–Aswan Railway, set up with Qattawi, De Menasce and Suare`s.3 Both these infrastructure

124

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

projects were new and important for the development of Egypt’s transportation system. Egyptian Greeks were no less active in networking, establishing among others the Egyptian Credit Company,4 real estate companies and small-scale industrial firms.5 Networking and partnership were not limited to entrepreneurs of one ethnic or religious group; the companies’ charters demonstrated that although networking was more intensive between Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks, it did not exclude others. The Egyptian Oil and Soap Company, for example, was established in 1889 by Stati, Jacques Menasce, Yusuf Gohar, Shalom Tuini, August Demetrius and Eugene Burg. The founding document included no details of the partners’ citizenship; this detailed registration began later.6 The names, however, indicated Jewish, Greek and Egyptian partners. (The name Gohar could be either Jewish or Muslim.) Another example was the Zaqaziq Cotton Ginning Company, established in 1893. The partners were banks such as the Ottoman Bank, Cre´dit Lyonnais, the entrepreneur Sarsaq (Syrian), Salim Shadid, Suleiman Abaza Pacha and Victor Bakhus, the last three being Egyptians.7 Most of these companies represented an innovative element as they were the first of their kind in the country. The last decade of the nineteenth century had the highest rate of innovation in the period studied here. Out of 39 established companies, 27 were innovative, representing 69 per cent of the total number of companies (see Table 3.3). Both levels of networking were seen in the last two decades of the nineteenth century. Statistics show that 2 per cent of the companies were involved in level-one networking in the period 1885–90 and this involvement increased to reach 13 per cent of the companies in the years 1891– 1900. During the same periods, 3 per cent of the companies were involved in level-two networking that rose to 9 per cent (see Table 3.5). The prosperous boom at the beginning of the twentieth century precipitated a capital rush to Egypt, chiefly in the form of corporate investment. Figures doubled in the first decade compared with the previous one. Here there was remarkable participation in investments of Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks, to the score of 11 per cent and 19 per cent, respectively. This decade saw the highest rate of nonEgyptian participation in the period under review, with a total of 39 per cent (see Table 3.2). Level-one networking occurred among 23 per cent of entrepreneurs and level-two networking among 11 per cent.

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

125

In total, 36 out of 87 companies established in the first decade were innovative, representing 41 per cent of the total number. The levels of networking and the amount of innovation further reflected patterns of entrepreneurship. In Chapter 3, it was argued that innovation and networking are the essentials of entrepreneurship; this is reflected in the numbers from the first two decades of the twentieth century. Most of the companies were either innovative or involved in one or both networking levels.

Cotton and Innovation Cotton continued to be the main crop for Egyptian agriculture and trade, the primary commodity upon which exports depended. Differing somewhat from previous eras, at this stage of Egyptian history, cotton was not only an agricultural product; it became a political and economic molder. Price fluctuations affected landowners’ income;8 despite that, ongoing dependence on cotton reinforced the wealth and power of rural notables that had started to accrue during the last four decades of the nineteenth century.9 In addition to price fluctuations, other risks were related to cotton cultivation, mainly crop losses and the possibility of quality reduction of Egyptian hybrid cotton cultivars due to diseases and pests such as the cotton worm. However, continuous innovation and the introduction of new cotton types allowed producers to overcome these risks. Such innovations relied on a long tradition of alliance between landowners, Greek middlemen and Greek cotton exporters. Roughly, 17 cotton cultivars witnessed innovation under Greek auspices between 1850 and 1927.10 The innovation leading to the Sakel cultivar occurred through the work of John Sakelarides, with the support of the Greek cotton exporters, Choremi, Benaki & Co. They did so by distributing the cultivar’s seeds among their clients in the Delta at the beginning of the century. It was a marked improvement of cotton quality and increased the value of raw cotton and with it the landowners’ yields.11 This Greek innovation and alliance of Greek middlemen and exporters on the one hand and Egyptian landlords on the other was unfavorable to the British colonial administration and interests in Lancashire.12 Here again, cotton and the process of innovation became a component in the formation of a new emerging political power in the country. It is, furthermore, a reason for political resentments with the

126

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

colonial administration. In this case, Greeks had a particular role that was not shared by others. The notables’ power had an obvious influence on the Egyptian economy in the decades to follow. The action most clearly related to Egyptian notables, Egyptian Jews and foreigners was the liquidation of the daʾira saniyya lands. These comprised about half a million feddan owned by the Egyptian state and the royal family and located in Upper and Middle Egypt. The lands were used by Khedive Ismail to secure the loans of 1865 and 1870. The Daʾira Saniyya Commission was a special commission entrusted with administering these lands and transferring their profits to the state treasury. In 1898, a joint stock company was established, with the Egyptian Jew, Raphael Suare`s, among its founders, along with other French and Egyptians.13 Simon Rollo, also an Egyptian Jew, was one of the investors.14 The Daʾira Saniyya Company bought the land from the commission – from the state, that is – and sold it to different interested investors, mainly Egyptian notables. The sale of the al-daʾira saniyya lands augmented the economic power of a significant number of notables and consolidated the economic power of Egyptian Jewish families, in particular the Suare`s, Qattawi and Rollo. This power was also reflected in the business networks of these families.15 This exemplified the fact that business interests did not discriminate on ethnic or religious grounds. The number of companies established and the high rate of foreign capital participation in the years 1901– 10, shown in Table 3.2, further demonstrate this. The stock market crash in 1907, during which banking and real estate institutions collapsed as a result of excessive speculation, increased Egyptian awareness of the need for solid local capital in the face of foreign capital. This economic development had a clear political impact. Eric Davis has argued that the 1907 crash played a significant role in the rise of Egyptian nationalism. Asserting that the main struggle did not occur along the allegedly ideological differences between both Egyptian parties of that time – the National Party (al-hizb al-Watanı¯), with ˙ predominantly Turco –Circassian members and the People’s Party (hizb al-Umma), largely comprising native notables – Davis has stated instead that the fault line lay between the agrarian bourgeoisie, whom both parties represented and foreign capital.16 I agree to some extent with Davis’ argument, though I extend it and argue that while the struggle might have been expressed against foreign

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

127

capital, it was mainly against British colonial policies in the country. Different newspaper articles indicated a political awareness of foreign capital and its connection to British colonial policies.17 This awareness came about as a result of market restrictions following the crisis of 1907, leading to a growing sense of the need to strengthen local industry and financial institutions.18 The number of companies established during the period 1910 –20 decreased, mainly as a result of World War I. Nevertheless, foreign capital was represented in these companies; this remained the case until the 1930s. Defining ‘foreign’ and ‘local’ capital is crucial in this context; companies’ data and scrutiny of the historical context do not indicate that entrepreneurs in Egypt in the first decades of the twentieth century had organized themselves along the lines of indigenous and foreign. As Davis stated, ‘Harb and his colleagues probably never thought in those terms anyway’.19 The companies’ founding charters showed that members of entrepreneurial families had, in some cases, different legal statuses in terms of citizenship. Members of the Egyptian Jewish de Menacse family were among those establishing the Egyptian Union Bank: two of them were Egyptian citizens, the third Austrian.20 Such a state of affairs was not limited to Egyptian Jews. Syrian entrepreneurs were Ottoman subjects and their legal status was equal to Egyptians’ (not foreigners’) and several cases show that some of them held foreign citizenships.21 The converse was also the case, with Greeks holding Egyptian citizenship.22 The phenomenon of foreign passport holders doing business in the Ottoman Empire and Egypt was crucial due to the Capitulations explained in Chapter 1. In such cases, it was impossible to have a clear separation between Egyptian and foreign capital along citizenship lines. Added to that company charters and investors’ biographies did not need to indicate foreign citizenship, suggesting the differences between the official and lived experiences of these individuals. In using the terms ‘foreign’ and ‘local’ capital, I reference and agree with, the definition and usage of Robert Vitalis: Foreign capital [is used] to refer exclusively to investments originating outside Egypt’s borders by investors whose relevant horizons are not primarily the Egyptian market (e.g., Sir Ernest

128

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Cassel or the London-based directors of Imperial Chemical Industries). Local capital by contrast refers to investment originating inside Egypt by investors whose relevant horizons are primarily the Egyptian market. The conception of an exogenous capitalist monolith obscures even this elemental distinction in analyzing the locus of control in a particular economic sector.23

World War I The outbreak of war in 1914 had profound consequences for the Egyptian economy and society. Self-interested British colonial policy was sharpened, with a push to lower cotton prices despite increasing prices in the world market. This policy antagonized the notables and the emerging rural bourgeoisie. The disruption of trade between Egypt and Europe during the war years deprived Egypt of many goods such as textiles, soap, building materials and a wide variety of luxury goods.24 In the historiography, this disruption is normally regarded as a problem, but in fact it was the need to replace this trade and, thus, to innovate that established more stable national industry in the post-war period. British troops’ expenditure in Egypt increased capital and cash flow in the market, allowing higher consumption and with it increased demand for products. The flourishing industry covering market demands for critical commodities was limited to small-scale industries and trade and was not necessarily on the level of joint stock companies. It stimulated existing industries but did not cause new companies to be established. Only six joint stock companies were established in the years 1914– 18, the last one on August 21, 1916. Four of these six companies had Jewish or Greek participation;25 this again shows a willingness to take risk among Jewish and Greek entrepreneurs, distinguishing them from the majority of entrepreneurs. The war experience led to the foundation of the Committee on Commerce and Industry. This committee, established by the Egyptian government in 1916, comprised well-known Egyptian politicians and entrepreneurs, among them Ismail Sidqi, Talʿat Harb, Amin Yahya, the Belgian industrialist Henry Naus and the Egyptian Jewish entrepreneur Yusuf Asalan Qattawi.26 The committee was entrusted with the task of surveying Egypt’s manufacturing capacity and proposing ways to expand industrial output in order to produce the essential goods that were in short supply due to the war. Its report was the precursor of the

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

129

main milestone in the construction of the Egyptian national industry. One of its important conclusions was Egypt’s need for a national bank as a source of short-term credit, as well as a source of capital for manufacturing enterprises.27

Bank Misr, National Industry, Minorities and the ‘National Bourgeoisie’ The period 1908– 20 thus witnessed the emergence of notables’ power and wealth, a rising awareness of the need for local capital and the economic consequences – through limited imports – of World War I. These were the conditions that paved the way for the rise of Egyptian ‘national bourgeoisie’ and, with it, national industry. The term ‘national bourgeoisie’ is common in Egyptian historiography and is used to describe the new investments in Egyptian industry that emerged in the 1920s and 1930s. The term as used in the historiography assumes that this bourgeoisie were only Egyptians, both the investors and the capital. The work of Vitalis and the archival documents of Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya ˙ do not deny the emergence of a new industrial bourgeoisie that was both rooted in the agrarian bourgeoisie and was a continuation of it. The majority of them were Egyptians by nationality and others were Egyptian by culture but had other passports: the archive documents show clearly that the business partnership of foreign capital in Egyptian industries was common until the 1940s and even into the early years of the 1950s, as will be shown in the following chapters. So ‘national’ can be understood as investments that were in Egypt but not necessarily solely comprising Egyptian capital. The national industries transformed the agrarian notables into a bourgeoisie and the interdependency of the two became clear in the 1920s.28 The socio-economic trends before and after World War I led to the inevitable founding of a national bank; the direct catalyst for this was the 1919 Revolution. One of the most significant events in Egyptian economic history during the interwar period was the establishment of Bank Misr. The official opening was on May 7, 1920, at the Opera House in Cairo.29 The charter founding the joint stock company named Bank Misr was issued three weeks before, on April 13, 1920.30 Not only did the 1919 revolution hasten the opening of Bank Misr, but it also encouraged

130

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

the subsequent nationalist support for the bank, with Egyptian investors withdrawing their funds from other banks and opening accounts in Bank Misr. This was crucial in keeping the bank solvent during its critical first years in operation.31 The Bank was consistently referred to as ‘mashruʿ watany’, the ‘national project’.32 The founders’33 vision of the bank was of a national institution and a national source of industrial credit, as well as the center of a large holding company of Egyptian firms. This vision was not limited only to the provision of capital; it regarded Bank Misr as the first step in establishing national industry and a national economy, thereby releasing Egypt’s economy from foreign dominance.34 Bank Misr was a success and functioned as the motor-force creating the modern industrial sector in Egypt that emerged in the years to follow under the name of the Misr Group. By 1934, the Misr Group was an umbrella under which operated a number of companies.35 The bank is significant for two reasons. First, Bank Misr was the first bank established in Egypt by Egyptians and by Egyptian capital, differing from the numerous banks in Egypt at that time that were owned by foreigners or were branches of European or international banks. Being the first bank of its kind in Egypt was an innovation in its own right: Schumpeter’s definition of innovation includes setting up such a new organization. Bank Misr was certainly a new organization in the Egyptian market. The innovative character of the bank is even clearer when considering it in the light of the four pillars of innovation presented in Chapter 3.36 The first pillar of innovation, ‘the awareness of changing needs’,37 can be seen in the changes after 1907, the war situation and the challenges to the Egyptian market. The founders of the bank were aware of the need for such a bank in this context. The bank’s founding was, furthermore, the starting point for new industries, clearly demonstrating the second pillar of innovation: ‘transforming these needs into products, not only for the end consumer but also in the form of new industries, infrastructure projects and services’.38 The bank was, thus, ‘pioneering’, the third pillar. ‘This aspect of innovation is just as important as the innovation process itself. It is the one that makes it valuable’.39 This pioneering aspect, combined with the political situation in the country, guaranteed the bank exceptional support and an influx of customers. Finally, the fourth pillar of innovation states that the ‘accumulation of

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

131

knowledge, as a result of continuously growing experience is essential for innovation’,40 and it can be seen in the knowledge and experience available to the bank from among the members of the Committee on Commerce and Industry, Qattawi and Harb, as well as Sidqi’s experience with Egyptian companies, institutions and markets. In addition to innovation, Bank Misr enhanced networking. Entrepreneurs of different religious backgrounds used the bank’s network, doing so because of shared investment visions. This form of networking beyond the ethnic or religious groups – defined here as level-two networking – extended from Bank Misr to include the Misr Group companies, as described below. The second reason for the bank’s significance is the fact that it represented a turning point in Egyptian self-confidence concerning Egyptians’ ability to run their own economy and lay the foundations for national industry. Here, a new philosophy of combining national and economic interests emerged in Egypt. This new philosophy included national Egyptian elements, financial capital in particular, but did not exclude non-national elements of human capital and clients.41 This turning point was also expressed in the establishment of the Egyptian Federation of Industry (EFI) and the Agricultural Syndicate.42 The bank’s founders emphasized at different occasions that although the capital was Egyptian, the bank’s activities were not limited to those concerning Egypt and Egyptians; the bank was open to all clients, Egyptian or not.43 Two main social forces that accounted for the bank’s initial success were the same forces that later undermined its economic viability in the 1930s: the large landowning class and the Egyptian nationalist movement. Their support for the bank in the 1920s was not just an expression of personal ties with Talʿat Harb; it was also a part of an everincreasing awareness of their collective economic interests.44 Establishing Bank Misr took on a political dimension, since it was regarded as a form and later the symbol of resistance to British control in Egypt. Bank Misr helped the landowning class in investing beyond land and agriculture without abandoning it. Comparing the family names of big landholders and investors in different companies in the 1920s and 1930s demonstrates a high degree of overlap between the two groups.45 The landowning class went through a transformative process, becoming families or other communally linked investors with holdings that

132

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

spanned primary, secondary and tertiary economic sectors: that is, they were a combination of big landholders, bankers and manufacturers. They were tied together by bonds of mutual dependence, consensus and interests shared among themselves and with foreign investors and factions in government.46 A new class of national bourgeoisie emerged in the country. From an entrepreneurial perspective, networking here was a needed and vital entrepreneurial strategy. These networks did not, however, exclude rivalry and high competition among these groups.47

The Roots of Different Networks One name is mentioned in conversations of Bank Misr and the Misr Group in a way that no other name is. The name is that of founder and president Muhammad Talʿat Harb. There is a common Egyptian belief that Talʿat Harb Pasha was the mastermind behind the Egyptian national economy in the interwar years.48 Indeed, there is a famous square and street in downtown Cairo with his name today. Another man who does not feature in this Egyptian consciousness but who nonetheless worked alongside Harb was Yusuf Aslan Qattawi Pasha,49 the vice president of the bank. Qattawi Pasha was a famous Egyptian Jewish personality, deeply involved in Egyptian economic affairs and, later, the president of the Sephardic Jewish community in Cairo and a minister and member of the Egyptian senate.50 In its early days, Qasr al-Nil Street in Cairo was often colloquially referred to as Rue Cattaui (Qattawi). In fact, this section of Cairo boasted two Cattaui streets: Rue Cattaui and Rue Moise Cattaui Pasha (Abu Bakr Khayrat Street today). There were Cattaui streets in other parts of Cairo, as well: the Cattaui Street that ran from Midan Khazindar to Sharia Rouei and the Mussa Cattaui Bey Street in Abbassiya.51 Looking at the biographies of Talʿat Harb and Yusuf Qattawi gives an idea of the reasons for their relationships with each other and with the Egyptian economy. Talʿat Harb (1867–1941) was born in Qasr-alShawq, an area in the al-Jamaliya section of Cairo. He was from a Bedouin family that had settled in a village in Sharqiya province by the beginning of the nineteenth century. The Harbs were a well-respected family of small landowners. His father was employed in the government railroad administration. Talʿat’s background and the family’s experience in the village with the Turco – Circassian tax collector explains his strong identification with his Arab ancestry and his antipathy toward the Turco

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

133

Circassian elite.52 His educational experience and employment after graduation shaped his personality and his ideas about politics, colonialism and nationalism. It further shaped his understanding of economic dependency and independence. In 1886 Harb graduated with honors from the Khedival Law School, where he had studied foreign languages – his proficiency being in French – as well as jurisprudence. The French civil code was the basis of legal studies in Egypt. The Khedival Law School was highly politicized in the 1880s and 1890s; among his fellow students were future nationalists and his teachers included noted nationalists. Harb had a clear antipathy toward Great Britain and its policy in Egypt.53 Talʿat Harb’s professional career started with his employment as a translator at the legal section of al-Daʾira Saniyya in 1888, where he was soon promoted to head of the auditing department in 1889. In 1901, after the company al-Daʾira Saniyya was established and the resale of land undertaken, he became the director of the claims settlement office. It was here where he must have come into contact with Raphael Suare`s, one of the company’s founders. This was an influential post that gave him opportunities to establish many personal relationships with landowners and enabled him to have first-hand information about their problems with various banks. By that time Harb had himself acquired land and had taken a position in an important land reclamation company, attaining the necessary wealth and status to be counted among the upper-class, although certainly not one of its most prominent members. In 1905 he became managing director of the Kom Ombo Company, a post which brought him into contact again with a number of Jewish families: the Suare`s, Harari, Rollo, Mosseri and Qattawi. All these families were heavily involved in economic projects and investments, as well as in the al-Daʾira Saniyya Company. Yusuf Aslan Qattawi (1861–1942) was the grandson of the founder of the Qattawi dynasty, Yacub Qattawi (1800– 83). A well-known Jewish Egyptian family, the roots of the Qattawis can be traced back to Qatta, a village in the Giza district.54 By the time Yusuf was born, the family had a respectable history in coin minting, money lending, finance and banking. The family was counted among the most powerful business and landowning families in the country, members of the Egyptian upper-class known to have close relations with the royal family and the court and known, too, for remarkable philanthropic projects.55 Yusuf

134

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

studied engineering in France, returned to Egypt and worked at the public works ministry. He then left to study the sugar-refining industry in Moravia. Returning to Egypt, he became a director at the Egyptian Sugar Company and president of the Kom Ombo Company.56 It was around 1905– 06 when Qattawi and Harb met at the company. After that, it is clear that they influenced each other’s careers by having a common vision of economic development. One consequence of this common vision was the founding of Bank Misr. Harb’s post at Kom Ombo gave him opportunities to build relationships with many individuals involved in different projects at the same time that he consolidated his relationship with Qattawi. After their joint trip to Germany before World War I, Qattawi and Harb marveled at the efficiency of German workers and the German banking system. This was clear in the report both men presented to the Committee on Commerce and Industry in 1916, a committee both men sat on. The commission’s critical report, published in 1918, can be regarded as a road map for Egyptian industrialization.57 Harb and Qattawi called attention to the concepts of the ‘grossbank’ and the universal bank; Bank Misr was such a bank.58 Another institution that joined the two men together was the Executive Committee of the Egyptian Chamber of Commerce.59 Both these institutions promoted Egypt’s economic and industrial development and served as incubators for the doctrine of economic nationalism popularized by Talʿat Harb. Qattawi showed dissatisfaction toward the policy of Lord Cromer at the beginning of the century; Lord Cromer had refused tariff protection for the infant Egyptian cotton mills. Qattawi and other Egyptian Jews held shares in the Anglo– Egyptian Spinning and Weaving Company, a company whose failure was primarily the result of Cromer’s refusal to protect this industry and his insistence on a free-trade policy regardless of its efficacy for Egypt and its nascent industry.60 This experience with Cromer enhanced the idea of national industry both men shared. Both became members of the Egyptian senate, Harb in 1924 and Qattawi in 1927.61 Bank Misr was not the result of a new idea born only in 1920; Harb expressed his convictions concerning the necessity of a national bank in 1911 in a report titled ‘Egypt’s Economic Solution and the Project for an Egyptian or National Bank’.62 His cooperation in business with the Suare`s, Qattawi and other Egyptian Jewish families played a part in developing his banking and economic skills and he shared with some of

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

135

them, Qattawi in particular, the vision that led to the founding of Bank Misr and the Misr Group.63 Other events, such as the formation of the Egyptian Chamber of Commerce in 1913, the aforementioned Commission on Commerce and Industry in 1916 and the founding of the Federation of Egyptian Industries in 1922, led to the founding of Bank Misr and national industry. Although many of the latter’s members belonged to the minorities resident in Egypt, their participation showed that, for them, their official legal status was not a hindrance to membership in this Egyptian federation. The decision of the Council of Ministers in 1923 to revive an 1899 regulation stipulating that there should be at least one Egyptian on the board of every joint stock company was another reform that enhanced Egyptian involvement in joint stock companies.64

The Spirit of the 1920s and 1930s Changes in Egyptian policy and politics at the beginning of the 1920s were crucial for the country’s development in the decades to follow. The 1919 revolution; the emergence of the Wafd party and the new leadership headed by Saad Zaghlul; Egypt’s claims for independence; the political awareness of the masses and the emergence of Egyptian nationalism; and the unilateral British declaration of Egyptian independence in 1922:65 these political changes are not within the scope of the present study and, for this reason, they will not be discussed here.

New Investors The primary economic aspiration expressed during the revolution was the creation of local Egyptian capital; the manifestation of this was Bank Misr. The bank managed to attract local capital in the years to follow and a good number of new companies were established.66 From the beginning of the 1920s until the end of the 1940s, a local wave of investment spread throughout the country. This can be seen in the share of industry in the capitalization of joint stock companies operating in Egypt. It increased from 9 per cent in 1930 to 17 per cent on the eve of World War II.67 Among many examples were the companies related to Bank Misr, or starting with the name Misr, indicating their belonging to

136

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

the Misr Group. Among these companies were Misr Printing,68 Misr Paper,69 Misr Trade and Ginning,70 Studio Misr,71 Misr Transport,72 Misr Cotton,73 Misr Silk Weaving,74 Misr Fishing,75 Misr Flax,76 Simens Orient,77 Misr General Works,78 Misr Air Work,79 Misr General Insurance,80 Misr Maritime Navigation,81 Misr Leather Industry,82 Misr Tourism,83 Misr Tobacco Company,84 Misr Bayda Dyers,85 Misr Mines and Stones,86 Misr Oil Refining, Industry and Trade Company,87 Misr Pharmaceuticals,88 and Misr Nylon Factory.89 The founding dates of these companies’ reveals a systematic plan for establishing necessary companies, first raising the capital and then formally founding them. A consideration of the founding charters indicates the emergence of intensive investors’ networks during these years, with either the same person or members of the same family involved in the various companies. Misr Group is a clear example of this networking. Talat Harb remained one of the main investors in Misr Group. According to the evidence in al-Waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, he was a partner in 13 of the group’s companies90 in addition to Bank Misr. The names Yakin, Sultan, Suyufi,91 Shafiq, Shiraiʿy, Manzallawi, Qattawi, Chicurel, Mazlum, al-Lawzi, Tahir, Misiha, Abaza, Mahir and Wahbi appear repeatedly in the companies’ founding charters. The lion’s share of these appearances is taken by the Yakin family, with partnership in 15 companies,92 followed by the Sultans participating in 13.93 Some of the others were partners in at least three companies: Chicurel,94 Qattawi,95 al-Suyufi,96 and Shafiq.97 Another occurrence was the recruitment of famous public personalities to invest in the group’s companies, such as Huda Sharawi in Misr Cotton98 and Sidqi Pasha in Simens Orient.99 Here networking was clearly an entrepreneurial strategy adapted by Egyptian investors. These networks took advantage of second-level networking, beyond religious minority groups and expanding to a shared investment vision and interests that brought the partners together. In the Egyptian case in the 1920s, the awareness of a need for a national economy and national industry was another common denominator. This was, in fact, the philosophy of Harb, Qattawi and the founders of Bank Misr. Yusuf Aslan Qattawi identified himself as Egyptian of Jewish faith.100 For them, the main point was that the capital should be Egyptian, but Bank Misr employed any competent person regardless of nationality or religion so long as their employment served the interests of the bank.101 Several years later, Bank

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

137

Misr had joint investments with foreign capital.102 As emphasized earlier, the networking strategy was already a part of the investment system of Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek entrepreneurs for specific institutions intended to offset the bargaining power of, for example, Cre´dit Lyonnais.103 The Misr Group in the 1920s and 1930s demonstrates that Egyptian nationals followed variants of this same strategy by establishing and supporting Bank Misr, which resulted in a rapid and steady nationalization or ‘Egyptianization’ of possibilities for profit and accumulation. Innovation was the second strategy adapted by Egyptian entrepreneurs, before which time it had largely been limited to minority entrepreneurs. Innovation as a strategy for Egyptian entrepreneurs reached its highest rate in the period 1931– 40, with 45 innovative companies out of a total of 123.104 The Misr Group had the lion’s share of Egyptian innovation, with firms such as Studio Misr, Misr Silk, Misr Fishing, Misr Linen, Egypt Air Works, Misr Pharmaceuticals and Misr Nylon Factory.105 In this, Egyptian entrepreneurs shared the attitude that innovation was necessary for a growing and profitable economy. The 1930s witnessed an increase in innovative companies of 36 per cent, in line with the generally increasing number compared with the previous decades (see Table 3.3). The phenomenon of intensive networking was by no means limited to the Misr Group, with investors having other partnerships. Shafiq, Harb, al-Suyufi and Sultan were partners in the Egyptian Vegetables, Fruit and Flowers Company.106 The Qattawis continued investing beyond the Misr Group.107 More networks were active. Among others, there were those of the Yahiyas, where Amin Yahiya, Abd al-Fattah Yahiya and Ali Yahiya had a joint network in founding the Alexandria Insurance Company in partnership with the Alexandrian Jews, the Rollos and other investors, including Greeks;108 the Alexandria Shipping Company, also with Greeks;109 and the National Paper Company in partnership with Rollo, Agion and Badrwai.110 The Yahiya and the ʿAbbud networks became chief rivals of the Misr Group.111 In the 1940s, Ahmad ʿAbbud was regarded as the most powerful and successful businessman in the country. With his group of companies operating in construction, textiles, trade, fertilizer manufacturing, sugar processing, real estate, tourism, banking, transportation, shipping and insurance, he has been described as Egypt’s leading industrialist.112 Other investors of

138

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Syrian origin were active and made use of networks, investors such as Gabriel Maqsud and Nicola Dabbas. They had a network with Greeks and Italians in Alexandria, mainly in the construction sector.113 The era after the 1920s also brought new forms of investment. If before 1920 the majority of investors had been individuals, the years after had many partnerships between individuals and companies.114 The widely accepted description of Bank Misr as ‘mashruʿ watany’ and the equally widely accepted view of the Misr Group as a national project stems, in general terms, from the policies of the group aimed at employing more Muslims in the ranks of skilled labor and management than other firms.115 This policy arose as a reaction to changes in the labor market. Starting in the first decade of the twentieth century, Muslims had better access to education, allowing them to catch up with their Christian compatriots, Syrians and members of minority groups who had had the benefits of good education up until that point. The new investment spirit and the investment boom led to more investments in the country that were not limited to the Misr Group, however important the group was. In the three decades116 following 1920, 400 joint stock companies were established, exceeding all the other years in the period studied here, with the Misr Group involved in 26 companies. As with others, the Misr Group invested alongside foreign capital. All the companies provided new employment opportunities, whether white- or blue-collared, although not necessarily always in favor of workers and employers.117 Considering the Misr Group as a uniquely national firm to the exclusion of other companies is a misinterpretation of these companies’ genesis and development.

Entrepreneurs’ Behavior The data for the years 1920– 40 show a steady increase in the number of newly founded companies. For 1921– 30, 104 companies were founded, with 123 in the following decade. The participation of Egyptian Jewish entrepreneurs increased (64 out of 123 companies) in the 1930s, exceeding that of the 1920s (38 out of 104). Similarly, Egyptian Greeks maintained a constant increase. Of note in these two decades is the clear increase in the number of companies with Egyptian participation. This reflected the local capital investment, with 84 out of 104 companies in the 1920s and 111 out of 123 in the 1930s. ‘Egyptian’ here does not

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

139

exclude Egyptian Jews or any other bearing Egyptian citizenship. This increase correlates with a decrease in the number of companies financed exclusively with foreign capital, these latter comprising 14 out of 104 companies in the 1920s and two out of 123 in the 1930s (see Table 3.2). In general terms, these numbers considered in detail demonstrates the continuing activities of Egyptian Greek entrepreneurs. What is most remarkable is the fact that they were not involved in any Misr Group companies but were instead involved in other investments with Egyptians and foreigners. This represents a significant difference from Egyptian Jews. Egyptian Jews such as Yusuf Qattawi, Yusuf Chicurel and Hayim Darra118 had Egyptian citizenship, while other Egyptian Jews with foreign passports, such as Smuha and Ads,119 invested in the different Misr Group companies regardless of their citizenship. Other Jews with Egyptian and foreign passports continued to invest alongside Egyptians and foreigners.120 Another important Egyptian Jewish family that had continuous investments in different sectors of the Egyptian economy for decades are the Mousseris. The family’s name appears in the official archival documents in 1889.121 The Mousseris were involved in investments in 30 companies over a time period of 62 years, the last established in October 1951.122 Eighteen of these companies were innovative and none was in the Misr Group companies.123 There is no indication in the documents of al-Waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya of such an ˙ investment in Misr Group companies by Egyptian Greeks. This difference in the investment behavior of entrepreneurs raises the question why did Egyptian Jews participate in these companies but Egyptian Greeks did not? The answer can be seen on several levels.

The Political Level Considering Bank Misr as ‘mashruʿ watany’ affiliated it with the Wafd party. The bank – and later the Misr Group as well – and the Wafd had shared interests and both benefited from this affiliation. For the bank, the Wafd was a suitable platform for recruiting clients and investors. The Wafd could present the success of the bank’s national projects as tangible manifestations of national industry. That said, Harb and many others were not consistent supporters of the party and the relationship between the group and the party changed in the 1930s.124 The affiliation, however, influenced the behavior of investors: by not

140

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

investing in Misr Group companies, investors such as Greeks and Egyptians demonstrated that they did not share the political line of Zaghlul or did not agree with Talat Harb and his ambitions. In addition to Greeks who did not invest in the Misr Group, Egyptians such as Amin Yahya and his sons created an independent business group that was close to the Wafd and the Misr Group only at its inception. There was also ʿAbbud Pasha, who did not invest in any of the Misr Group companies at their founding; later in the 1930s, he distanced himself from the Wafd. Indeed, he was Harb’s main rival. The historical development of the Greek community in Egypt and its relationship to Greece affected the political behavior of Egyptian Greeks; they were focused on Greece.125 There was, generally speaking, little interest in Egyptian parties, though the diversity in the Egyptian Greek community produced a high degree of diversity in political awareness and activity. A second factor was differences in class among Egyptian Greeks. Greek workers were active in establishing workers’ unions and professional unions that including Egyptians,126 and through leftist political organizations they were later involved in the Egyptian struggle for independence, taking a major role in running the Suez Canal after 1956.127 The Alexandrian Greek upper-class merchants who were the primary holders of capital and thus the main investors, excluded themselves from Egyptian politics; they had no interest in affiliation with any political party. The first workers’ unions in Egypt were organized and led by Greeks.128 The following anecdote can be read as indicative of this notunproblematic relationship. Alexander Kitroeff has written about an apology on the part of the members of the Wafd party in 1919. The apology concerned a crowd containing some Egyptian intellectuals that had gone to confront Greeks gathered in front of their consulate in Cairo. The Greeks sought protection after several Greeks were killed in March of that year. On March 30, 1919, the Egyptian delegation expressed its sincere regret that Greeks were victims of the disorder, making a moving speech to the Greek crowd gathered before the consulate. The speech stressed the delegation’s fraternal feelings toward the Greeks. The Greek response was no less moving, declaring that ‘if this Greek blood which has been spilt will irrigate the tree of Egyptian freedom, we Greeks think it was worth it’.129 The events of 1919 and Zaghlul’s call

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

141

for independence did not necessarily find sympathy among the Egyptian Greek upper-class, although they were not necessarily all pro-British either. There were many matters causing tension between Greeks and the British colonial administration, among them the British opposition to new cotton cultivars innovated by Greeks, conflicts over the Capitulations and Britain’s reluctant response to the May 1921 riots in Alexandria.130 Greeks continued their investments but were reserved in investing in the Misr Group companies. The historical background of Egyptian Jews and their relationship to Egyptian politics was markedly different from that of the Egyptian Greeks.131 This is related to the Jewish roots and traditions on the banks of the Nile. Jews were represented in the different government councils and in the Egyptian senate, with some Egyptian Jews appointed as ministers in the 1920s. The close affiliation between the Egyptian Jewish upper-class and the royal family and court had a long tradition.132 Egyptian Jews were also members in the Wafd, the most well-known being the Alexandrian lawyers Felix Benzakein and Daud Hazzan. Another, Leon Castro, belonged to the narrow circle of Saad Zaghlul, while the lawyers Moise Dichy, Isidore Feldman and Zaki Orebi were active in the party. Yusuf Qattawi was, like Zaghlul, a member of the Legislative Assembly. He was not a member of the Wafd but sympathized with it, especially in the beginning. In the years following, Qattawi joint the Liberal – Constitutional party (in 1922) and the Ittihad (Union) party that was close to the royal house (in 1925). The Alexandrian Jewish businessman Joseph Eli de Picciotto organized a welcoming event in Alexandria for Saad Zaghlul on returning from his Seychelles deportation in 1923. The Association de la Jeunesse Juive Egyptienne declared its solidarity with the Wafd in the 1930s. The Jewish community, however, always announced its loyalty to the king and the fatherland but not to any political party.133 Egyptian Jews played a crucial role in establishing many leftist political movements up to the mid-1920s and were among their most active members, particularly in the 1940s.134 As such, Qattawi, Cicurel, Darra, Ads and Adda, among others, acted on the basis that there was no contradiction between their interests as Egyptian Jews – regardless of their document status – and their interests as investors in a mashruʿ watany or any other enterprises beyond the Misr Group.

142

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

The Networking Level Beyond the political level, another factor accounted for the difference in behavior of Egyptian Greek and Egyptian Jewish entrepreneurs: networks and their structure were a fundamental factor influencing entrepreneurs’ behavior. As discussed in Chapter 3, networking and innovation were crucial strategies for successful entrepreneurs. Considering the networking structures of Egyptian Greek and Egyptian Jewish entrepreneurs in detail further clarifies behavioral differences. The professional biography of Talat Harb reveals, in several instances, his vested interests with Egyptian Jews and his involvement in companies jointly established with them. The shared experiences, trust and investment vision were a common denominator among Harb and his companions; here the structure of networks included Harb. Another network was the Commission on Commerce and Industry, which included the Belgian industrialist Henry Naus, in addition to Qattawi, Sidqi and Harb. Later, the Federation of Egyptian Industrialists, with which Harb was affiliated, provided yet another networking connection. There was no such interconnection between Talat Harb and Egyptian Greeks. There were no Greeks participating in the Daʾira Saniyya Company, nor in Kom Ombo; nor did Harb have any experience with Greeks on the operating level of his networks. Despite the fact that Egyptian Greeks were active in the Egyptian economy and were key players in cotton cultivation, the cotton trade and industry – their activities thus being vital to Egypt and its economy – they were in different fields than was Harb. As a result, their network structure was also different. The Commission on Commerce and Industry did not include any Egyptian Greek members. Egyptian Greeks were not part of the intimate networks Harb had with his allies, those who carried the banner of the so-called national industrial project. Egyptian Greeks operated in a different domain. These different networks beyond the political provide answers concerning Egyptian Greeks’ non-involvement in the investments of Bank Misr and the Misr Group. These network structures lead to another level, one that appears marginal but is central, judging from the details of the network. This is the level of culture and language. Although the Egyptian Jewish upperclass, as with other upper-classes in the country, had become francophone and had close ties with French culture and education – of special interest among these were the Qattawi, Cicurel, Darra and many others, mainly

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

143

Sephardic Jews – this upper-class was also fluent in Arabic and possessed a deep knowledge of Egyptian culture. Indeed, they considered themselves a part of it. Photos and documents of Egyptian Jews reveal handwriting in Arabic, handwriting that indicates the work of an experienced hand and not one with only rudimentary knowledge of the language.135 Greeks, on the other hand, were not fluent in Arabic; this was especially the case with upper-class Alexandrian Greeks.136 Language and culture simplify communication within networks in comparison with communication in networks that do not rely on common linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Here it becomes clear that the boundaries of both networking levels have differing consequences. The first level, shared cultural backgrounds and language, gains importance while religion fades. The first level overlaps with the second networking level where shared visions of investments are the shared linkages supported by mutual cultural backgrounds and language. The nature of Egyptian Jews distinguished them from Egyptian Greeks in this respect. Jews could combine both these cultural aspects, meaning that Egyptian Jews could operate in a ‘Jewish’ network where being Jew was the common denominator among its members. Such networks were evident in the cooperation among Egyptian Jewish families. At the same time, Egyptian Jews could operate in ‘Egyptian’ networks where Egyptian culture and Arabic were the cultural common ground. Thus, Egyptian Jews, especially those with knowledge of Arabic and particularly Sephardic Jews, had the ability to operate on the second networking level – mutual investment vision – with elements of the first networking level – common cultural, linguistic and religious background – with the religious aspect being a nonstarter. Generally speaking, those involved in the investments discussed here and in the Wafd were secular, with business interests of a secular nature, as well. Some Egyptian Jews could operate with the same facility in other linguistic networks, be they francophone or Anglo-Saxon. The ability to move among different types and levels of networks and the fluidity of the boundaries of these networks for Egyptian Jews was one of the main advantages Egyptian Jewish entrepreneurs had compared with entrepreneurs of other minorities. These small details also determined modes of investment. Greek Catholic Syrians in Egypt had the same advantage as Egyptian Jews of being fluent in Arabic and moving easily between both levels of networking. Their influence on the

144

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

economy was also appreciable, though it did not reach the level of Egyptian Jews in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.137 Syrians gained an important role after the Egyptianization – ‘tamseer’ – policies after the passage of Law 138 in 1947. Another advantage Egyptian Jews had was the high degree of diversity within the Jewish community and its access to networks outside Egypt. These facilitated access to information about other markets and afforded knowledge about market demand and new technology. Networking on both levels increased in the 1920s and 1930s compared with the first decade of the twentieth century. Level-two networks gained importance in the 1920s and 1930s, but this level was marginal at the beginning of the century. It was level-one networking that was most significant in that period, especially from 1901 to 1910 (see Table 3.5). This shift between levels is critical; it shows a change in entrepreneurs’ networking behavior and their movement from limited networking within ethnic or religious communities to more expansive networking with other entrepreneurs who shared the same visions of investment. On the one hand, this explains the continuing success of minority entrepreneurs even when they were acting beyond their community. On the other hand, it explains the success of the other members in level-two networks. The relatively high degree of level-one networks in the 1930s was a result of the companies established exclusively by Egyptians (see Table 3.5). Egyptian Greek reluctance about investing in the Misr Group did not preclude them from actively participating in national industry. It did mean, however, that their participation was different. The number of companies established with Greek participation in the 1920s and 1930s is indicative. The nature and structure of their networks and the modes of networking among the different groups furthered their exclusion from the Misr Group companies.

Industry and Politics in the 1930s The affiliation between public, political personalities and industry took on a stronger character in the 1930s. The best-known personality here is Ismail Sidqi,138 who headed the Egyptian government from 1930 to 1933. Sidqi was the head of the Commission of Commerce and Industry in 1916 and had close relationships with Egypt’s industrialists. Former members of the Commission, renowned industrialists, were either

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

145

appointed to Sidqi’s cabinet or appointed as senators. Hafiz Afifi, Tawfiq Dus, Ali Maher and Abd al-Fattah Yahya were all members of the cabinet, while Yusuf Qattawi, Talat Harb, Ahmad ʿAbbud and Ismail Sirri were senators at the time. Sidqi’s government introduced the tariff system aimed at protecting the nascent Egyptian industry, in addition to protecting others involved in the Egyptian textile industry from Japanese competition.139 In 1929, the textile and sugar industries were released from duties on imported machines needed for the industries’ factories.140 This trend continued systematically under Sidqi’s reign and several government decrees were released to reduce and abandon tariffs.141 In this decade, a new influential group emerged: the industrialists gained political clout beside the landowners. An alliance between the agrarian and industrial wings of the Egyptian elite greatly affected the country’s economic policy. This resulted in the so-called marriage between ‘cotton and textile’.142 The Egyptian government’s interest in protecting and fulfilling the needs of industry was unquestioned. What is more, these pro-industry policies played a role in the increase in the number of companies established in the 1930s and 1940s, with 123 and 173 new companies, respectively, representing the highest number in the period under review here (Table 3.1). Neither of these decrees opposed the participation of foreign capital. Sidqi did not shy away from supporting foreign investment in Egypt, so long as it was partnered with Egyptian capital. The documents of al-Wwaqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya show a clear increase in Egyptian capital and a ˙ decrease in the number of companies capitalized exclusively with foreign capital (see Table 3.2).143 Rivalry between the different industrialist groups was permanently on the agenda of this decade, particularly between ʿAbbud Pasha and the Misr Group and their affiliates.144

The Anglo – Egyptian Treaty, Montreux and Minorities The precursor to abolishing the Capitulations and mixed courts was the Anglo–Egyptian treaty of August 1936.145 The negotiations for ending the Capitulations and the mixed courts was one part of a series of measures of the government aimed at supporting local industry. The Capitulations and the courts were regarded as discriminatory against Egyptian capital, giving foreigners preferential treatment, while partly preventing the government from implementing policies favoring industrialists. An additional reason was the Egyptian government’s need

146

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

to increase revenue to cover several ambitious projects: existing laws hindered the collection of tax from foreign subjects, their businesses and their estates.146 Ending the Capitulations was a significant step in the awakening of Egyptian national awareness about the Egyptian state and its role. The aim, then, for abolishing the Capitulations and mixed courts was not to get rid of foreigners, but rather to change their legal position and redistribute the benefits they received. Furthermore, ending these institutions would consolidate the state’s power. Foreigners were a potentially lucrative source of income for the Egyptian government. In fact, it was not until 1949 that a new tax regime came into effect, a fact that demonstrates how the reading of the Anglo– Egyptian treaty and Montreux later changed.147 With sound Egyptian preparations, the meeting in Montreux decided to end the Capitulations and mixed courts in 12 years’ time.148 There is no doubt that Montreux affected the role of foreign capital and foreigners in the country. It changed market conditions, resulting in a decrease in the number of foreign investments without Egyptian partnership, reaching 1 per cent of total newly founded companies in the decade 1931 – 40 (see Table 3.2). The rising trend in newly founded companies did continue, though, after Montreux.149 This might seem surprising; one would expect foreigners to decide to leave the country. The behavior of entrepreneurs, however, shows that the trend of joint investments between Egyptians and foreigners became more common from the 1930s compared with the 1920s, that is, before Montreux. This is an indication that entrepreneurs were aware of political and economic changes and that they reacted to them. Still, other entrepreneurs responded to changes in the market even before government did so. Montreux, in fact, did not cause major changes in the participation of Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks in establishing new companies. The participation of Egyptian Jews increased in the 1930s by 9 per cent over the previous decade, reaching 24 per cent, while Egyptian Greek participation decreased slightly by 1 per cent, to 16 per cent. The Egyptian Jewish participation continued to be active in the years following 1936–7 and was higher than that of Egyptian Greeks.150 Joint Egyptian Jewish– Egyptian Greek partnership increased significantly by 8 per cent, reaching 25 per cent. Exclusively Egyptian companies increased by 4 per cent to 7 per cent of the total number of companies.

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

147

It is important to consider the influence of treaties and laws in the shortas well as the mid- to long-term. In the following decade, 1941–50, both Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek participation increased by 4 per cent, to 28 per cent and 20 per cent, respectively, while exclusively Egyptian companies reached its highest level in the period under review, increasing by 17 per cent to reach 24 per cent. Significantly, there were no companies established that excluded Egyptian capital (see Table 3.2). These numbers show that, despite the treaty, the participation of Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek entrepreneurs continued to rise. In the beginning of the 1940s the investments in new companies decreased, evincing profound changes and the insecurity accompanying World War II. It was this later that caused the decrease rather than Montreux. These data undermined arguments asserting that Egyptian Jews and, to a lesser extent, Egyptian Greeks and other minorities were largely foreigners and the only reason they resided in Egypt was to enjoy the privileges granted them under the Capitulations. Abolishing the Capitulations certainly limited the activities of foreign investors who had previously invested in Egypt to take advantage of these benefits.151 The treaty and Montreux strengthened the position of Egyptian entrepreneurs in the market. What is most interesting is that despite the slight decrease in the absolute number of companies with Egyptian Jewish participation, their strength in the market did not diminish: they maintained the highest level of innovation in the market (see Table 3.3). This was not the case with companies founded with Egyptian Greek participation (see Table 3.4); here, innovation was present but not at as high a rate as in companies founded with Egyptian Jewish entrepreneurs.

Nationality Law and Minorities One of the political changes brought about in newly independent Egypt after 1922 was the ratification of a new constitution on April 19, 1923.152 This constitution marshaled Egypt into a new era of politics.153 The law that had the most lingering effect on minorities in Egypt and on Egyptian Jews in particular, was the law of Egyptian nationality. This law was not passed before 1929, a delay related to Egypt nominally being a part of the Ottoman Empire until the coming-into-force of the Treaty of Lausanne on July 24, 1923.154 Nationality Law 19 of February 1929155 affected the legal status of all foreigners and minorities in the country: Syrians, Armenians,156 Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews.

148

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Syrians, Armenians and Greeks Despite Syrians and Armenians being in a similar legal situation, both minorities primarily emigrated from areas formally a part of the Ottoman Empire. Interpretations of the Egyptian nationality law treated the two minorities differently. Section 3 of Article I stated: Ottoman subjects who had their permanent residence in Egypt on the date of November 5, 1914 and have maintained this residence until the promulgation of the present law are considered to have acquired the full rights of Egyptian nationality as of this date.157 Article 3 also enabled Ottoman subjects who came to Egypt after November 5, 1914 and who had made it their permanent residence, to apply for Egyptian nationality within a year of the promulgation of Law 19. Only Ottomans who had explicitly opted for Turkish citizenship or that of other territories separated from the Ottoman Empire after the Treaty of Lausanne were excluded.158 Syrians, Armenians, Greeks and Jews who arrived in Egypt from areas of the former empire before World War I broke out automatically became Egyptians unless they explicitly opted for other citizenships: Lebanese, Syrian, or Greek. Thomas Philipp has stated that acquiring Egyptian citizenship was rendered extremely easy for Syrians and former Ottoman subjects compared with becoming Syrian or Lebanese. He has also said that a large majority of Syrians in Egypt opted for Egyptian nationality. A clear indication of this fact can be seen in the statistics of the 1937 census, where 90 per cent of Syrians were holders of Egyptian nationality. The case of Egyptian Greeks was similar; there was a Greek state with numerous diasporic Greeks and Ottoman Greeks. It appears that procedures for obtaining Greek citizenship, even if not residing in Greece, were transparent and uncomplicated. This being the case, there was no need to interpret the nationality law. It was an individual decision for each Egyptian Greek to choose between Greek or Egyptian citizenship. This was quite different in the case of the Syrians; among Egyptian Greeks, 76 per cent obtained Greek citizenship and 17 per cent Egyptian,159 according to the 1937 census. The laws later allowed Egyptian Greeks to have both Egyptian and Greek citizenship.

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

149

Armenians had a similar legal situation, also being Ottoman subjects residing in Egypt, with the exception of 12 per cent of them who were Egyptian subjects residing in Egypt before 1890.160 Their situation, though, was quite different than that of the Syrians. Al-Imam has referred to the uncooperative policies of Egyptian authorities and the inexplicable obfuscation in approving Armenians’ applications for Egyptian citizenship in the year stipulated by the law. This complication of Armenians’ taking of Egyptian citizenship occurred despite repeated efforts by Armenian officials to intervene through high-ranking Egyptian officials. Many Armenians residing in Egypt had no clear legal status or failed to obtain Egyptian citizenship. Section 4 of Article VI of the law stated that an Egyptian is he who ‘was born in Egypt to a foreign father, who was also born in Egypt belonging to a “race” [in his country of origin] of an Arabic-speaking or Muslim majority’.161 Article VII stated that: Each foreigner born in Egypt and residing there until maturity is regarded as Egyptian so long as he dispenses with his original citizenship and decides to acquire Egyptian citizenship within a year of reaching maturity.162 Al-Imam has explained that different interpretations of the law arose from the fact that Egyptians considered Armenians to be foreigners from the very beginning (that is, not Muslim and not Arabic-speaking). What is more, there was a strong anti-communist faction within Egyptian officialdom that considered Armenians as more attached to Armenia than to the former Ottoman Empire, an interpretation that became especially problematic after Armenia joined the Soviet Union. The fear of communism and the influence of this anti-communist faction worked against the Armenians and questioned their loyalty to Egypt. This hindered the swift processing of their applications.163 The ‘loyalty to Egypt’ question affected the approval of individual claims for citizenship; doubts about loyalty and even ethnic stereotyping seemed to be enough to sway decisions. The same nationality law even arguably supported this. Section 3 of Article X stated that Egyptian citizenship can be revoked if ‘the person acted in a way that could harm the state’s integrity inside or outside the country, the governing system, or the social system of Egypt’.164

150

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

This section of the law could well have been interpreted in a preventive manner, so as to deny citizenship in cases where doubts existed about the applicant’s past or future activities harming the state’s integrity. Such broad interpretations of the law, the common prejudice toward Armenians and the ambiguity of ‘loyalty to the state’, with its relationship to ‘race’, as well as the political affiliations and class interests of Armenians: all these led to the legal status of Armenians in Egypt not being clear before 1961. Between 1929 and 1961, there were many different phases in the legal status of Armenians in Egypt and thousands of them were forced to leave the country. Only in 1961 were those remaining considered Egyptians.165

Egyptian Jews While the text of the law clarified the legal status of Syrians and Egyptian Greeks, it did provide an equally clear status for Armenians. Indeed, the law sparked a debate about Egyptian nationality at a time when Egyptians had a high degree of sensitivity about nationalism, with many distancing themselves from any British or other foreign elements. What is interesting is the lack of indications in the literature concerning extensive discussion about the legal status of Egyptian Jews at the end of the 1920s when the new law was declared, or in the 1930s when considerable discussion occurred on the subject of the Armenians. The consequences of the 1929 law and its application were only felt by Egyptian Jews two decades later. In the late 1940s, it became clear that the nationality question was more complex in the case of Egyptian Jews than in the case of any other minority. The debate about the nationality of Egyptian Jews and the size of the community is one of the main elements of the two narrative perspectives mentioned in Chapter 1 of this study. That debate was highly ideological and, as such, an examination of the numbers, their sources and their interpretation is essential to understanding the historical context. Arriving at this understanding requires a clear grasp of a combination of different factors, all of which affected how many Jews were Egyptian nationals, or not, despite conformity with the 1929 law. Considering these factors in isolation would lead to confusion; only by considering them together and in parallel can political and historical developments be properly understood, beginning with changes in Egyptian society before World War II. Other factors affecting these developments in the

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

151

years after will be discussed in the next chapter: the outbreak of World War II, the Palestine conflict and the promulgation of Company Law 138 in 1947.

Minorities after the Treaty of Montreux Although Egypt officially became independent from Great Britain in 1922, in actuality, Egypt’s independence was a two-fold process: first, from British control and then from formally being part of an empire. The formation of the nation state was influenced by these two experiences. Pre-World War II changes in Egyptian society Although officially a sovereign state from 1922, British control over the country was not entirely removed at that time. The new Egypt went through a process of gradual independence. The 1929 nationality law reflected this experience. There was a need for the new sovereign political entity – Egypt – to define its relation with other sovereign states. The rise of the sovereign state of Egypt was gradual, starting with the promulgation of the constitution of 1923 introducing a parliamentary system and implementing domestic political sovereignty. Economic sovereignty was achieved with the attainment of tariff freedom in 1930 and partial military sovereignty with the endorsement of the Anglo–Egyptian treaty in 1936. Sovereign authority over foreign minorities within its borders came about through the abolition of the Capitulations in the Convention of Montreux in 1937, which also set a date for the abolition of the mixed courts in 1949. Another element of the gradual process toward sovereignty for Egypt was the intellectual one, an experience known as ‘the liberal age’ of the 1920s. This age shaped politics in the decades to follow.166 Ahmad Lutfi al-Sayyid, Taha Husayn, Tawfiq al-Hakim and Husayn Haykal were among the famous intellectuals of the post-independence era. The Egyptian character, (al-shakhsiyya al-misriyya), Egyptian identity (aldhatiyya al-misriyya) and Egyptian national identity (al-qawmiyya almisriyya) were terms used to describe the Egyptian people during this liberal age. The main point of reference for the authentically Egyptian was the old, rich history stretching back to the Pharaonic forefathers, with the territorial imperative of the Nile valley acting as geographic boundaries.167 These Egyptian attitudes were also part of state education

152

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

in the 1920s. A textbook from the decade contained a clear formulation of the territorial nationalist conception: The nation [is] a group of people living in a specific locality whose individuals are bound by a single civilization, common interests and identical feelings.168 Agreeing or disagreeing with this definition is a moot point. The fact is that it was sufficiently broad to reflect the diversity of Egyptian society, including as it did people from different backgrounds: the Copts, Muslims with Turkish, Albanian and other backgrounds, Armenians, Syrian Christians and Jews. The textbook emphasized that race and language were not essential elements to this national identity.169 Gershoni has observed that: Their response [the Egyptian intellectuals] to the new challenge of the post-Ottoman age was Egyptianism. Egyptianism appeared to be the only paradigm with which Egyptian society could adapt itself to the conditions of a new historical era.170 People being educated with such a liberal attitude toward the diversity of their society facilitated easy acceptance of individuals and groups with different religious or cultural backgrounds as part of that society. What is most interesting is that religion was not part of the nationality debate. To the contrary, there was a ‘secular radicalism’.171 Also of interest was the basic premise of Egyptian nationalist intellectuals of the 1920s and 1930s that complete Egyptian authenticity demanded purifying Egypt from all foreign elements, in particular Arab elements. The entire Arab heritage was viewed as the product of the Arab nation and character, both different from those in Egypt.172 Egyptian nationalism had clear hostility against the British influence in the country, but not toward minorities in and of themselves. The following era, from the end of the 1930s to the beginning of the 1940s, was marked by the appearance of new and diverse elements in Egyptian politics and society alongside regional and international changes. The interplay of these internal and external developments precipitated a different pattern in Egyptian nationalism, bringing it some distance from an exclusively territorial Egyptian nationalism with

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

153

it giving way to tendencies toward Islamic and Arab-oriented nationalist thought and politics.173 These tendencies offer a partial explanation of change; the complementary explanation lay in wider changes in Egypt before World War II. The challenge to the ‘old’ elite – represented by notables, industrialists, royalists and the existing parties – by the emergence of a civil society mainly representative of the rising middle-classes of the socalled ‘effendiyya’, the rise of the working class and the emergence of an independent trade union movement.174 Meijer has elaborated a complex analysis that goes far beyond Egypt’s political thought, moving toward Arab nationalism or Islamism. Increased political awareness was not limited to Muslim or Coptic Egyptians. Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks were also aware of Egypt’s independence and the new political landscape. Both groups were politically active, even if it was in different ways and on different levels; their activity was mainly in leftist movements and workers’ unions175 and conformed to the Egyptian case.176 The Anglo– Egyptian treaty of 1936 and the Montreux agreements in 1937 strengthened state control over foreign residents in the country. In the following years, further steps were taken to Egyptianize society. Private schools attended by foreigners, minorities and the Egyptian upper-class were put under the control of the Ministry of Education. This affected minorities, especially those holding foreign citizenship. There are, however, no indications that these changes were in themselves sufficient reason to leave Egypt.

The Eve of World War II and Minorities During the 1930s, Egypt elaborated its cultural and political identity. Minorities – Syrians, Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks in particular – were not unaffected and they certainly did not detach themselves from this social process. The focus here is on Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks. The activities of Egyptian Jews in leftist movements and among workers was significant, as was their resistance to British colonial control on a wide scale during and after World War II.177 Additionally, Egyptian Jews continued to be active in the Wafd. Egyptian Greeks were no less active in the 1930s with their work in the struggle of Egyptian workers’ unions.178 Egyptian Jews participated in the emerging Egyptian civil society in the 1930s, going so far as to establish the youth organization,

154

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Association de la Jeunesse Juive Egyptienne – Jamʿiyyat al-shubba¯n al-yahu¯d al-misriyyı¯n – in 1935 with the slogan ‘Fatherland, Faith, ˙ Culture’, pleading for safeguarding the Egyptian (Arabic-speaking) Jewish heritage in Egypt. The Association was established after the closure, due to a lack of members, of the francophone Union Universelle de la Jeunesse Juive that had been established in the 1920s.179 Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks were, moreover, involved in the process of searching for and elaborating Egyptian identity in the 1930s. This was most clearly expressed through Arabic-language newspapers. First was the weekly Al-Shams, edited by the Egyptian Jew Saʿd Yaʿqu¯b Ma¯likı¯ and published in the period 1934– 48.180 Publishing poems and cultural and political articles, the newspaper considered itself as following in the footsteps of Yaʿqu¯b Sanu¯ʿ, the celebrated Egyptian Jewish artist and journalist.181 In addition, it was the platform of the youth organization, Jamʿiyyat al-shubba¯n al-yahu¯d al-misriyyı¯n. Al˙ Shams, like Jamʿiyyat al-shubba¯n, were clear proponents of Egyptian nationalism and the revival of Arabic among Egyptian Jews.182 Egyptian Jews, like other minorities and upper-class Egyptians, tended to become francophone at this time. Although most of Al-Shams readers were Jews, other Egyptians also read it.183 Jewish schools in Cairo had adapted the Egyptian curricula by 1930 and in Alexandria by 1937. With these curricula came Arabic as the primary language of instruction, before Arabic had even become the officially mandated teaching language of state schools. The policies of these schools reflected the same mentality as Al-Shams and the Jamʿiyya.184 On a cultural level, the participation of Egyptian Jews in poetry, music and the arts was no less frequent than other Egyptians. Consider the lawyer and poet Murad Farag (1866– 1956)185 and the important musician Dawud Husni, who made a seminal contribution to the development of modern Arabic music. There were many others who became stars of Egyptian cinema and music.186 Al-Shams was a critical voice directed at the rather conservative structures of the community’s council and appealed for increased youth participation and involvement in the community’s institutions.187 Siham Nassar considers Ma¯likı¯ and Al-Shams as Zionists, mainly because of the writings that were not against a Jewish homeland in Palestine.188 Here Ma¯likı¯, like the Alexandrian Maurice Fargoun, saw themselves as apostles of peace and mediators in the conflict. For them, this did not contradict their very idealistic Zionism, a Zionism that did

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

155

not necessarily correspond with the reality of the conflict.189 The Jamʿiyya and Al-Shams declared their aim to be the education of young Egyptian Jews with a consciousness about their Egyptian Jewish tradition, the Torah and Hebrew and to teach them to be at the same time loyal to their Egyptian homeland and fluent in Arabic.190 With this approach of Al-Shams, Ma¯likı¯ can be classified as culturally Zionist. The implicit ‘Dubnovism’ of diaspora nationalism can also be read in these lines. Second was the bilingual monthly newspaper ELIA News (in Arabic, Al-Yu¯na¯nı¯ al-Muttamasir), first published in June 1932 in Alexandria ˙ by the journalist, writer and publisher Angelos Dimitriou Kasigonis. Its mission, according to its banner, was to ‘strengthen the brotherhood that binds both people [Greek and Egyptian]’. Anthony Gorman has observed that Al-Yu¯na¯nı¯ al-Muttamasir was not a commercially ˙ profitable venture, but it did have a clear political mandate. A large number of Greek writers, journalists, lawyers and scholars contributed to the newspaper. It also had considerable, if more modest, contribution from Egyptian writers such as Mahmud Ibrahim, correspondent of the Wafdist Al-Balagh in Alexandria and Karim Bey Thabit, a prominent journalist and later confidant of King Faruq. Their articles were translated from the Arabic-language press. Other contributors – such as Niqula Hanna Ibrahim, who wrote a series on Greek –Egyptian relations and Muhammad Abdalla Zayn al-Din, a government employee – were active writers for the paper. It carried official statements of support, including letters from Andreas Michalopoulos, the Greek Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Alexandrian patriarch Meletios and Ali Mahir, a senior Egyptian politician. As the only bilingual Greek– Arabic newspaper, it attracted the attention of journalists; many of its articles were picked up and republished in the Arabic-language press. The paper aimed to strengthen Egyptian– Greek relations and reported on the relations between the two peoples, with considerable attention to the Egyptian – Greek commercial relations. It pushed its agenda by publishing translated poetry in both languages. In addition, it regularly had discussions of the Greek contribution to the Egyptian economy and criticism of the poor Arabic of Egyptian Greeks and how best to overcome this problem. Furthermore, it criticized the Egyptian Greek faction that preferred isolation over involvement in Egyptian society. While it did not primarily concern itself with the detailed reporting of political issues, it did devote considerable attention to such issues as the

156

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1936 Anglo– Egyptian treaty, the abolition of the Capitulations, an assassination attempt on Mustafa al-Nahas in December 1937 and the death of King Fuad in April 1936. Issue 77, published in Cairo in January 1940, was the last issue of Al-Yu¯na¯nı¯ al-Muttamasir. The war ˙ years and press censorship imposed by the British increased the pressure on the newspaper, ending a special chapter in the history of the Egyptian press.191 The diversity of Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks also revealed a wide range of reaction to changes in Egyptian society and politics before World War II. Despite the rise of Egyptian nationalism in the 1930s, the Anglo–Egyptian treaty and the agreements at Monteux, on the eve of World War II, Egyptian Jews and some Egyptian Greeks chose to act and, apparently, did not feel themselves as separate from Egyptian society. Their belonging to Egyptian society was not a topic for debate. Additional proof of this can be seen in their active investment in Egyptian national industry, seen in the tables in Chapter 3. The investments of Egyptian Jews in particular, exemplified by the opening of the ostentatiously modern Cicurel Department Stores in 1938, did not indicate any discussion of their position in Egypt. Innovation continued to be part of the companies newly founded with Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek participation. The death of King Fuad in 1936 changed the domestic political map of Egypt; national and Islamic movements such as Misr al-Fata, the young Muslim movement – ‘Jamʿiyyat al-shubba¯n al-muslimı¯n’ – and the Muslim Brothers gained more power in the political arena. The regional political situation also witnessed considerable change at the end of the 1930s, with resistance against British forces and increased number of Jewish settlements reaching their peak in the years 1938– 39. These developments influenced street-level politics in Egypt, giving rise to increased solidarity with Palestinian neighbors and introducing the geopolitical situation in Palestine to the domestic political scene. The conflict with the British mandate forces and with Jewish settlers in Palestine and its introduction to Egyptian internal politics was spearheaded mainly by nationalist and Islamic youth movements.192 The rise of Egyptian nationalism and Islamic movements was part of the new political configurations in the country, new forces that affected minorities but were not a threat to them. Egyptian Jews were not a target as such. The increasing complexity of their situation came to the

MINORITIES IN INTERWAR EGYPT

157

fore after World War II and with start of the Palestine War, as discussed in the next chapter. The end of the 1930s was marked by the crisis of Bank Misr and the Misr Group. This crisis had many causes, not least among them the close relations of the Bank to the Egyptian government. Government expenditure increased after the Anglo– Egyptian treaty since Egypt was obliged to pay defense costs. The second cause was the hurried expansion of the Misr Group through many newly founded companies in the mid1930s without gainful profits. A third cause was the political crisis that led to people withdrawing their deposits. All these causes foretold the end of Bank Misr in its first incarnation and the resignation of the bank’s founding father, Talat Harb.193 Vitalis has analyzed the conflicts among business groups in Egypt during the war and the demise of Talat Harb, describing it as a ‘war within “the War”’.194 World War II saw the re-entry of Great Britain as the main power in Egypt and revitalized Egypt’s strategic importance in the British political and military mind. The Egyptian economy witnessed a very low level of investment, a normal reaction of investors in wartime. Only 22 new companies were established between 1940 and 1944.195 The year 1942 proved to be a crucial year for Egyptian–British relations and for Egyptian Jews and Egyptian industrialists. The British expanded their control and, by February 1942, this led to the British threat to the Egyptian crown. King Faruq refused to appoint Mustafa al-Nahas as head of the Wafd to the Egyptian premiership. British tanks and troops surrounded the royal residence, Abdeen Palace and Faruq capitulated. This date marked a watershed in Anglo–Egyptian relations.196 1942 was also of critical importance for Egyptian Jews. It was in this year that the Jews of Arab countries, including Egyptian Jews, shifted in the focus of the Zionist movement. Particularly relevant is the shift in Ben-Gurion’s thinking, describing as he did in 1942 a plan to bring a million Arabic-speaking Jews to Palestine in response to the need to populate Palestine with as many Jews as possible in a limited time.197 This was the starting point for specific and systematic activities of Zionists in Egypt. In 1942, ʿAbbud Pasha became the most important name among Egyptian industrialists, his renaissance coming about through his pragmatic alliance with the Wafd in that year.198

CHAPTER 5 MINORITIES AND THE POST-WORLD WAR II ERA: THE 1952 COUP AND THE NATIONALIZATION OF THE EGYPTIAN PRIVATE SECTOR

Minorities in Egypt after World War II The period between 1945 and 1961 can be divided into two phases according to entrepreneurs’ behavior. The first phase is from 1945 to 1954, while the second starts in 1954 and lasts until the nationalization laws of 1961.1 The classic turning point is considered to be 1952, when on July 23 a coup by the Free Officers ended the reign of King Faruq and brought the Egyptian monarchy to an end. This is also known also as the 1952 Revolution. This date in Egyptian history has been subject to many interpretations, with many consequences ascribed to it. It is seen as influencing the country up to the present. From the perspective of entrepreneurs, June 1952 is indeed an important date. Although caution on the part of entrepreneurs is clearly manifest, with few companies being established in the second half of 1952, more confidence is shown in the years following. In 1953 and 1954, the number of newly established companies increased by more than 20 in each year.2 Profound changes began in 1954, as will be shown in the following. The year 1947 was a watershed for minority entrepreneurs, the year witnessing as it did the promulgation of

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

159

Company Law 138. For Egyptian Jews, the war in Palestine in 1948 was of critical importance.

Minorities and New Corporate Forms By the end of World War II, new forms of business emerged. These were mainly influenced by the changes in the market: the Misr Group was taken over and there was a gradual increase in state intervention in the economy.3 This was the beginning of the end for the free-trade era of the 1930s in Egypt and the transformation had been hastened by World War II. As a result of these changes, business oligarchs gained more power in the Egyptian market.4 An important aspect of the period after World War II was the view that Egyptian investors were the cause of the failure of British neocolonial projects in the country. Vitalis has presented a detailed and compelling analysis of this era in his work, When Capitalists Collide, demonstrating, on the one hand, the complexity of relationships and rivalries among business groups and their relation to the Egyptian government. On the other hand, he has made clear the cooperation among the Egyptian business elite, including minorities. British colonial powers and neo-colonial projects, classically criticized, were neither as powerful nor as dominating as has been assumed. The privileged political position of local Egyptian investors and their clearly divergent economic preferences effectively checked British neo-colonialism ambitions at least a decade before the wave of national anticapitalism ambitions swept these investors from Egyptian stage.5

1945– 54 The decade of the 1940s reveals a considerable increase in the number of newly established companies: an increase of 23 per cent, the highest in the period studied here. Between 1940 and 1944 and owing to the war, only 20 companies were established. Thus, the majority were established between 1945 and 1950. Egyptian Jewish entrepreneurs participated in 28 per cent of these companies and Egyptian Greek entrepreneurs did so in 20 per cent of the total companies (see Table 3.2). These data evince these minorities’ highest rates of participation in the whole period considered here, indicating that in the long run the

160

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

activities of the Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek minorities were not as much influenced by the abolition of the Capitulations in 1937 as assumed. Networking between Egyptian Greeks and Egyptians Jews also reached its highest level during this period, with 27 per cent of the companies showing the participation of both groups. The W2 – level two – networks also increased. Companies with Egyptian participation – that is, with partnerships among Egyptians and non-Egyptians – reached 30 per cent, again the highest rate of the period studied here (see Table 3.2). The post-war period is remarkable for the fact that not one company was established without Egyptian participation, meaning that foreign investment capital was not active without Egyptian partners. These data cast doubt on the meaning of the oft-used term, ‘national bourgeoisie’. Furthermore, the number of companies established by Egyptians alone increased significantly, from 7 per cent in the previous decade to 24 per cent in the 1940s. Its peak, however, was in the following decade, the 1950s, during which 64 per cent of companies were exclusively Egyptian-financed.6 The data for 1945 – 50 are consistent with Vitalis’ argument that Egyptian investors gained power and control over the market. This era reveals another new phenomenon among entrepreneurs. While having Syrian investors had not been unusual in the Egyptian market, new investors from neighboring countries began to be more heavily involved. In 1945 the first Saudi investor, Ibrahim Shaker, had a share in the Egypt Transport and Construction Company.7 In the same year, the Iraqi George Mansur and the Palestinian Shawkat Hammad invested alongside Egyptians, Egyptian Jews and Britons in the Frozen Food and Cooling Company.8 The North African Trade Company was, similarly, an investment of Egyptian investors and several members of the Palestinian Kittaneh family: the four members participating in this company were holders of Palestinian and Lebanese citizenship who lived in New York, Beirut and Tehran.9 The increased participation of Arab investors is represented in the names of the companies. In 1946, Syrians and Egyptians established the Arab Weaving Company. According to available documents, this was the first company bearing ‘Arab’ in its name, reflecting a new awareness in the region.10 The United Arab Company is another example of cooperation among Syrians, Saudi, Iraqi,

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

161

Lebanese and Palestinian investors alongside Egyptians in the establishment of a company that enhanced trade among the countries and aided in the construction of infrastructure.11 Other Saudi investors joined the market in 1947.12 The Arab Real Estate Company is a company with a political dimension. Established by Palestinian investors such as Shuman,13 Shanti,14 Tannus,15 and Husseini,16 along with Saudis, Iraqis, Syrians and Egyptians and with the cooperation of Bank Misr, the company aimed to restore lands in Palestine. This phenomenon of Arab investors was not common in the Egyptian market before World War II. Another company that shows – unusual given the current understandings of the cleavages that divide the region – level-two networking is the Egyptian Maritime Company, established in 1946 by several Egyptian investors, among them Egyptian Jews with Egyptian citizenship, such as Robert Khayat and Ezra Dejida and other Egyptian Jews with foreign citizenship, such as Maurice de Menace (Turkish), Leon Mizrahi (French), Jason Najjar (Italian), Jacques Gohar (British) and Carlo Suares (French), all of them in partnership with the Palestinian Shwakat Hammad.17 According to available documents, there is no other such partnership. There were other ‘Palestinians’, such as Moshe Mayer, a Jew from Tel Aviv with a Palestinian passport, who in 1946 was a partner in the General Chemical Industries Company with Syrian and Egyptian investors, among them members of the Egyptian Jewish family Darra.18 Yeshua Green19 and Adolf Marcus were other ‘Palestinian’ investors in Egyptian companies in 1947.20 Although the aforementioned partnerships represent only a tiny part of total investments, it is interesting to observe the diversity of post-World War II investments in Egypt. The Sawiris name, for example, is today one of the most influential business families in Egypt; it appeared for the first time in 1946 as initial investors in the al-Minya– Buhaira Bus Company.21 In the 1940s and 1950s many companies changed their names, much more than during the preceding decades. These changes had different reasons, but most occurred because their investment structures changed, the companies expanded their operations, or Company Law 138 of 1947 demanded it.

The Nationality Debate in the late 1940s After World War II, a reinvigorated debate about nationality also dominated the world of business and investment. Indeed, it was of

162

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

critical importance to entrepreneurs and investors after the promulgation of Company Law 138 of 1947.

Statistics and Sources: Egyptian Greeks The status of Egyptian Greeks had not changed much by the end of World War II compared with the period before the war. This continuity arose mainly from the fact that their legal citizenship status was clear; Egyptian Greeks were not linked to a colonial power as other foreigners in the country, principally the British and French. In addition, neither Greece nor Egyptian Greeks were involved in any political conflict with Egypt or with any other neighboring country. For these reasons, Egyptian Greeks were generally not part of the post-1947 nationality debate. The case of Egyptian Jews is a more complex one that demands elaboration.22 Statistics and Sources: Egyptian Jews According to official Egyptian statistics, Egyptian Jews numbered 63,550 in 1927, 62,953 in 1937 and 65,953 in 1947.23 Egyptian statistics after 1952 do not specify the religious identity of Egyptian citizens.24 Other sources and testimonies of Egyptian Jews assert that the figure was higher.25 Of concern here is not the number of Egyptian Jews but rather their legal status. It is noteworthy that debates concerning the number of Egyptian Jews and their status arose in the literature in the mid-1970s and early 1980s and not before. The debate centers on the fact that Egyptian Jews obtained Egyptian nationality only when their economic status was in danger; they were not interested in it before. This disinterest gives rise to a second argument: that the majority of Egyptian Jews were foreigners. Authors may not always have been aware of their line of argumentation and how it fit into the wider context of suspicion of minorities in general and of Jews in particular. The first argument was set out by Mahmud Abd al-Daher in his work Yahu¯d Misr, in which he asserted that the number of Egyptian Jews with ˙ Egyptian nationality out of the total number of Egyptian Jews was 49 per cent in 1897. At that time they were Ottoman subjects residing in Egypt as ‘locals’, ‘raʿiyya mahaliyya’.26 In the nineteenth century, in addition to Jews residing in Egypt, many Jewish immigrants arrived in Egypt from various Mediterranean countries, such as Italy, Greece, Corfu, elsewhere in North Africa and from Ottoman areas, such as Syria

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

163

and Iraq. The Jewish immigration to Egypt increased in the decades before World War I (1897– 1914). Here again most immigrants arrived from Ottoman provinces – Greece, Turkey and the Balkans – as well as from Yemen, Russia and Romania.27 Their numbers increased in 1917, at which time the annual total was 59,581, with 58.1 per cent classified as raʿiyya mahaliyya.28 This Jewish raʿiyya mahaliyya represented 49.1 per cent of Jews residing in Egypt in 1927, while in 1937 the number of Jews was 62,935, with 36 per cent being Egyptian nationals.29 For Syrians, Greeks and partly for Armenians, the crucial years for gaining Egyptian citizenship were 1929 and 1930, but for Egyptian Jews the important years were those after 1947. The Egyptian census of 1947 indicates that the number of Jews with Egyptian nationality was 50,831, or 77.5 per cent, with 47,667 Rabbinate Jews and 3,164 Karaites. Egyptian Jews with foreign nationalities numbered 14,808, representing 22.5 per cent of the total of Egyptian Jews. Of those with foreign nationalities, 14,486 were Rabbinates and 322 Karaites.30 Abd al-Daher stated that in 1947 only 22 per cent of the 65,639 Egyptian Jews were foreigners and 2,181 (3.3 per cent) were stateless.31 This suggests that about 75 per cent of Egyptian Jews were Egyptian; Abd al-Daher did not draw attention to this latter figure, mentioning only the foreigners and the stateless. He argued that the number of Egyptian Jews with Egyptian nationality increased between 1937 and 1947 as a result of the Anglo–Egyptian Treaty of April 19, 1936, the Montreux Treaty of 1937 that abolished Capitulations and mixed courts, the increased awareness of Egyptian nationalism and, finally, Company Law 138 of 1947.32 Abd al-Daher’s is one interpretation of the data; Nabil Syaid Ahmad in al-Yahu¯d fi Misr has a similar interpretation, referring as Abd al-Daher ˙ did, to the censuses of 1937 and 1947 and mentioning the problem of statelessness, brought upon themselves, for Egyptian Jews and finally explaining the statistical increase mainly by reference to Company Law 138.33 According to the data, these stateless Egyptian Jews were a minority of 3.3 per cent of the total. Apart from this law, considered in detail below, both Abd al-Daher and Nabil Syaid Ahmad affirmed that in 1947 about 75 per cent of Egyptian Jews were Egyptian nationals. They have both made reference to the factors that would have precipitated the emigration of Egyptian Jews with foreign nationalities from Egypt, factors that would not have

164

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

encouraged emigration on the part of Egyptian Jews with Egyptian nationality. Furthermore, foreigners among the Jews made efforts to become Egyptian citizens. Both authors have ignored, or at least have not properly considered the historical context of, Egypt’s Jews. Like other minorities, the country’s Jews made efforts to clear their juridical status in the 1930s and 1940s. Egyptian Jews, just as other minorities who were Ottoman subjects or foreigners (for example, Armenians and Syrians) did just that, following the instructions of the Nationality Law of 1929 in attempting to settle their juridical status. The arguments of both authors evince latent astonishment at the high number of Egyptian nationals among Egyptian Jews, while not paying due attention to the fact that by 1917, 58.1 per cent of Egyptian Jews were local subjects. In addition, the authors emphasized Law 138 of 1947 as a principal reason for this high percentage, keeping in mind that in 1947 most Jews applied for Egyptian citizenship. Yet the authors have not considered that while the law and the census are both dated 1947, the law’s proclamation differs from its implementation and its effects and the census was finalized in 1947 but conducted beforehand and published afterwards. Law 138 was promulgated on July 29, 1947 and published in Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya on August 4, 1947, entering into force on ˙ November 4, 1947.34 The Egyptian census of 1947 was published in 1954. The census data are considered to have concerned the population at midnight on March 26, 1947.35 The number of Egyptian Jews with Egyptian nationality, then, was a figure representing the population before the law’s promulgation. Anas Mustafa Kamel has referred to the increase in the number of Egyptian nationals among Egyptian Jews between 1917 and 1927, stating that the majority of them – 50.4 per cent – were foreign. His argument rests on the draft Nationality Law of 1926 and the final Law of 1929.36 The author has not made clear, however, how Egyptian Jews took advantage of a draft law. It must also be considered that the census of 1927 was conducted before the passing and implementation of the Nationality Law of 1929.37 The second argument – that the majority of Egyptian Jews were not Egyptian nationals – has been espoused by several authors, among them Siham Nassar. While Nassar has referred to the 1947 census and its data on the number of Egyptian Jews, she has not used these data when

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

165

examining Egyptian Jews’ juridical status. She has asserted that, out of 65,639, about 30,000 (45.7 per cent) had foreign passports, 5,000 (7.6 per cent) were Egyptian nationals and the rest (53.3 per cent) were stateless. She arrived at these summaries of the Jewish population in Egypt without referring to her source.38 Shimon Shamir has used similar figures.39 Shamir referred to Nassar’s work, as well as to other sources for the data such as the 1956 report of the World Jewish Congress and confidential documents of the Jewish Agency from 1947.40 Shamir additionally listed the data from different censuses which appear to confirm Abd al-Daher’s and Landau’s arguments. It is noteworthy that Shamir’s work considered more extensively the question of who had the right to obtain Egyptian nationality and who actually took it, arguing that only 5,000 Egyptian Jews were Egyptian nationals.41 The present study clearly considers the data in a different light. Although Nassar and Shamir have used the same statistics, their aims differ. Nassar asserted that given that only 5,000 of Egypt’s Jews were Egyptian nationals, they were clearly not interested in Egypt or in taking citizenship. Shamir sought to demonstrate, on the other hand, that Egypt was not interested in its Jews and that although they had the right to obtain citizenship, this was denied them by the Egyptian state. Considering the years of publication of Shamir’s sources (1947 and 1956), it is likely that Nassar used the same sources but failed, for some reason, to refer to them. This is clearly problematic, if only because both the Jewish Agency and the World Jewish Congress are politically and ideologically interested in proving that the Jews of the Arab countries were offered no place in them. It is furthermore problematic that Shamir and Nassar made use of the sources in making their arguments but did not examine the data or question, for example, the gap between the publication of the census of 1947 and the gathering of its statistics on Egyptian Jews with Egyptian nationality. For Nassar, it appears to have been an easy quotation that fit into the nationalist narrative she put forth. For Shamir, statistical evidence was used to answer a difficult demographic question, but with his numbers he stayed in line with the Zionist narrative that these people had no place to go but Israel. The census numbers are, indeed, very important, especially given the technical questions they raise and their misuse in several historians’ work. The debate on the juridical status becomes even more complex when considering the data in the light of Gudrun Kra¨mer’s analysis. Kra¨mer

166

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

has referred to different data than other authors, making use of census figures from 1917 and 1927, times when Egyptian Jews with Egyptian nationality were 22 per cent and 33 per cent, respectively. Kra¨mer was aware of other data; she assumed other authors did not distinguish between stateless and foreign. When counting foreigners and the stateless together, she has asserted, the result is not the sum mentioned by other authors.42 Furthermore, she has stated that from 1937, Egyptian Jews were not classified separately. Thus, it is not possible to determine the number holding any particular nationality.43 Without questioning the accuracy of Kra¨mer’s work, Kra¨mer seems most interested in bypassing ideological debate on the number of Egyptian nationals among Egyptian Jews. She has done so by not beginning her examination in 1937. Shamir mentions the number of Egyptian Jews who had the right to obtain Egyptian nationality as 5,000.44

Beyond Statistics This figure of 5,000 Egyptian Jews with Egyptian nationality is an underestimation that can only be explained as politically motivated. Putting the different figures to one side, several indicators demonstrate that the number was certainly higher. First, while various authors have used census figures from 1897 to 1937 in constructing their arguments, the census of 1947 is often either questioned indirectly or even ignored. This begs the question why have different authors relied on the earlier censuses but ignored the later one? It must be realized that each set of census data describes a different period in time to its date of publication: each census was conducted well before it was published. Thus, the situation might well have changed in the interim. Two further questions are, what criteria led to Jewish Egyptian nationals being classified as such and why did this classification later become irrelevant? The difference between 50,000 and 5,000 is not only a significant statistical deviation, but it also evinces a contradiction. Second, various authors base their arguments on a presumption that because these people were not necessarily of an Egyptian background, they would not be Egyptian citizens. This assumption is problematic indeed, even more so because it is not explicitly declared. On the one hand, this assumption ignores the fact that Egyptian society like any other society especially in the Middle East comprised people with many

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

167

different backgrounds (for example, Turkish, Greek, Caucasian, Syrian, Persian, North African, African and European). On the other hand, it fails to acknowledge that Egyptian Jews were themselves and perhaps peculiarly diverse, being from many different national backgrounds as well as being from a particular religious minority. So, were other former Ottoman subjects who applied for Egyptian citizenship after 1929 also denied citizenship? The situation of Syrians and Armenians mentioned above shows that it was easier to become Egyptian with a Muslim or Arab background. Was an Egyptian Jew considered an Arab in the 1920s and 1930s? There is no evidence in the literature that Egyptian Jews were denied citizenship in the early 1930s, but at the end of the decade, Egyptian Jews and members of other minorities faced some bureaucratic obstacles.45 By 1949, Egyptian Jews, as well as those who had worked for years at the religious court – as state servants – needed to prove their Egyptianness.46 Third, the Karaites are considered one of the main groups of autochthonous Jewry in Egypt, both having their roots in the Nile valley and having been largely unaffected by migration. They primarily spoke Arabic and dressed and had traditions that were similar to the Egyptian society they were part of. The 1947 census indicated there were 3,486 Kairites, while Kairite sources stated there were between 8,000 and 10,000.47 Thus, the number 5,000 for the year 1947 may well comprise only the Karaites. Fourth, all authors involved in the debate confirm the importance that Egyptian nationality had to a stable existence in Egypt.48 All former Ottoman subjects, regardless of their religion, needed to settle their juridical status no later than 1930. The assumed stateless Egyptian Jews gained nothing from this status; no benefits accrued from either Capitulations or the privileges of foreigners, even before 1937. Here the question must be raised as to why Egyptian Jews would not care to resolve the matter of their nationality status, as has been argued. Furthermore, what about all those who had ‘misused’ the 1929 law as Anas Kamel argues?49 And what of those who had responded to other calls, such as that of Rabbi Haim Nahum, the chief rabbi of Egypt in 1928, to take up Egyptian citizenship?50 So, assuming the number of Karaites to be the lowest stated figure, were there only another 1,500 Egyptian Jews with Egyptian nationality out of between 65,000 and 100,000? Shamir has put forward some seemingly plausible reasons for

168

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

the lack of interest among Egyptian Jews: for example, the high cost of naturalization and the lack of awareness among Egyptian Jews about the need to resolve one’s legal status once and for all.51 These arguments, especially that concerning the cost of naturalizing, may well describe the situation of poorer Egyptian Jews. Statistics show, however, the generally high level of education among Egyptian Jews, as well as the important role they – and especially wealthy Jewish families – played in the economy. It is, therefore, difficult to imagine that these educated people (among them thousands of Jewish physicians, merchants and civil servants) were not aware of the need to resolve their legal statuses. The actions taken by Egyptian Jews in applying for citizenship were diverse. In 1922, for example, the percentage of Ashkenazi Jews in Cairo obtaining Egyptian citizenship – that is, Ottomans residing in Egypt – was higher than that of the Sephardim,52 despite the Sephardic Jews having a longer tradition of inhabiting the Nile valley. This can be explained by the different experiences the Ashkenazim had compared with those of their Sephardic coreligionists. That is to say, the Ashkenazi had first been obliged to leave their countries outside the borders of the Ottoman Empire and had later come to settle within the Empire. As a result of their recent, lived experience of crossing borders and escaping pogroms, they had been well aware of the need for documents; the Sephardim had generally had different experiences of migration, if at all, within the Ottoman lands. The Jews who moved and traveled for centuries within the quite safe borders of the Empire had had no need to prove their belonging and legality. While this may not lead to a precise and conclusive figure for the number of Egyptian Jews with Egyptian citizenship, it does compel a re-assessment of the data many scholars have relied on in their arguments concerning the Egyptian Jews and their place in Egypt. Given the problems inherent in the existing data sets on the Jewish population in Egypt, the present study does not make use of an exact figure for the number of Egyptian Jewish nationals after 1947. The 1947 census counted 50,831 Egyptian Jews as Egyptian nationals. One explanation for this number is that it represents the number of Jews who considered themselves Egyptian. When conducting the census, individuals or community leaders were asked to make a declaration or official documents, such as the registry of births, were consulted. These Egyptian Jews were declared ‘nationals’ as they had

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

169

lived in Egypt for at least two generations, they spoke its languages and they were part of its history, its society and its culture (customs, religious observances, cuisine, etc.). From a juridical perspective, they had no other citizenship: they were Egyptians, had Ottoman backgrounds, or were born in Egypt after World War I and were not foreigners in accordance with the conditions of the Nationality Law of 1929. Yet considering themselves ‘Egyptians’ did not mean that all could prove it through documents. It is clear that not all of them sought officially to obtain Egyptian citizenship, a course of action that, in retrospect, might be considered a mistake. In the context of the 1930s it is important to ask who – be they Egyptian and Muslim, Copt, or otherwise – thought of going through official channels, with their bureaucratic and financial difficulties, in order to obtain documents proving one’s Egyptian citizenship for no immediate and necessary reason? Just as Egyptian Muslims and Copts did not bother getting documents proving their belonging to the country, Egyptian Jews likewise appear not to have thought it necessary. Company Law 138 of 1947 was one of the main reasons why Egyptian Jews needed documentary proof that they were Egyptian nationals.

Company Law 138 of 1947 Company Law 138 was promulgated on July 29, 1947 and published in Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya on November 4, 1947. This law has been used by various authors as evidence that Egyptian Jews declared themselves ‘Egyptian’ only when their jobs and their positions in the economy were questioned, not before. This law is the backbone of the so-called ‘Egyptianization’ process that started in Egypt at the end of the 1930s and intensified after World War II. Law 138 concerned joint stock companies, providing Egyptian nationals at different levels with a dominant share in such companies. It is considered one of the most important ‘tamsı¯r’ – meaning ˙ Egyptianization – laws. But this law had other aspects besides tamsı¯r; ˙ going through the law’s articles shows that it limited the interaction between governmental positions and positions in the management of companies as mentioned in Article I. Further, it imposed conditions on those seeking to take over a managerial position in a company after three years’ service in government.53 Article III restricted parallel membership

170

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

in the boards of directors of more than ten companies and as delegated member in more than two. A controlling share for Egyptians is maintained by the law’s insistence on a minimum of 40 per cent of the board of directors of joint stock companies being Egyptian, with the exception of companies that act outside the Egyptian market.54 The law also required that a minimum of 75 per cent of a company’s administrative staff be Egyptian and their salaries comprise 65 per cent of the company’s total expenditure on remuneration. Likewise, Egyptian workers had to account for 90 per cent of all working staff and their salaries 80 per cent of the total expenditure on wages.55 The law gave companies three years to comply with its statutes from the law’s entry into force. Law 138 went farther still. Article V allowed for the hiring of foreign technicians and experts if there were no available Egyptians: that is, Article III could be bypassed on the approval of and for a period of time determined by the Minister for Commerce and Industry. A minimum of 51 per cent of the company’s shares had to be owned by Egyptians, both when the company was founded and when it increased its capital.56 (This ownership percentage was modified to 49 per cent in August 1952.57) The share of each member of the board of directors had to be at least one-fiftieth of the total capital and the capital share of each shareholder could not exceed LE 1,000.58 Different financial sanctions were applied for different infractions of the law. Article XI was paramount. It gave civil servants in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry the legal status of court controllers59 in assessing violations of Law 138 and meting out punishment. Companies were obliged to provide access to all required documents.60 The Ministry of Commerce and Industry, the Ministry of Social Affairs, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Justice were assigned the task of ensuring the law’s implementation within three months of its publication in the official newspaper and the Minister of Commerce and Industry was to issue any decisions on implementation.61 A close examination of Law 138 shows that it aimed to guarantee Egyptian majority – and control – of ownership, management and staff. Egyptianization, however, was not its only aim. In the 1940s, most companies established in Egypt were so done by Egyptians.62 Considering the content of the law and the order of its articles further reveals legislative priorities. The law restrained the power of capitalists

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

171

described in the literature as ‘oligarchs’. The first three articles and Article X concern the role of businessmen (capitalists) and their relationships with governmental bodies and with companies, as well as the relationships between companies. It limited the maximum value of their shares and sought to neutralize their networks by restricting the number of boards of directors they could sit on while at the same time controlling the number of interactions between governmental duties and those of company management. Joint public and private duties (that is, in governmental bodies and in companies) was common in Egyptian business and government in the 1930s and 1940s. The other articles concerned Egyptianization. This article provided for penalties should the article be infringed, with individuals having a proportionally higher penalty than companies. Violating Article II (i.e., three years not passing between a governmental position and a position in a company) led to a fine of LE 200 – 500 for an individual, in addition to giving any remuneration to the Finance Ministry.63 Violating Article III (sitting on too many boards of directors) necessitated the loss of the position and the payment of all remuneration to the Finance Ministry. Violating Article IV (a board of directors being less than 40 per cent Egyptian) led to all the board’s decisions being rendered null and a maximum fine of LE 2,000 paid by the company. An individual also had to pay LE 200 – 500 and reimburse the company for any remuneration, with the company paying the LE 2,000 fine. Law 138 of 1947 was most clearly an attempt by the Egyptian state to interfere in the economy. It regulated and organized the internal structure of companies and made violations of the law a criminal offense. The law did not mention any rights held by employees or workers, nor did it regulate the relationship between state and companies beyond the percentage of Egyptian ownership and the percentage of Egyptians in the management and workforce. It did not indicate any particular economic policy for companies to pursue, in the wider sense of improving economic performance. Law 138 of 1947 was not solely a question of Egyptianization; it had a wider remit for reforming the Egyptian private sector. This latter aspect of the law has been marginalized in some examinations of Law 138. Harsh terminology, such as ‘crimes’ in case of not observing the law paragraphs, indicated the new relationship between legislator and company owner.

172

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

While the law brought changes to the shareholding structures of companies, it also demanded a bureaucratic apparatus be established in order effectively to enforce the law. The Companies Department at the Egyptian Ministry of Commerce and Industry, known as ‘maslahit ˙ ˙ al-sharika¯t’ (MS), was the official body where all companies were registered, data concerning their employees, workers and boards were kept and feedback concerning the members of the boards of directors was given. The documents of MS held in Dar al-Wathaʾiq, the Egyptian archive, are probably the only extant and detailed records of the companies. These holdings also demonstrate clearly the work done by the department. In addition to Article XI of Law 138, the Companies Department’s work was driven as well by another decision of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry in April 1948. This latter decision authorized civil servants of the different government ministries to follow up on the law’s implementation.64 Archival documents run from 1947 until the late 1950s and in some cases the early 1960s; these documents show that the MS became a powerful department. In time, it had a systematic mechanism for controlling companies and it did so with an inflexible bureaucratic accuracy that sought to implement and uphold Law 138. Upholding the law was not always or necessarily in accordance with any company’s needs. The combination of Law 138 of 1947 and the MS’s work was the first systematic verification of employees and workers in registered companies. To some extent, the MS took over the duties of the Ministry of the Interior in requesting workers and employees to prove their ‘Egyptianness’ and Egyptian nationality, especially in cases where names were not identified as Arabic or as typically Egyptian.65 In its daily activities, the MS consistently raised the question ‘who is Egyptian?’. This question was already in the public consciousness, but Law 138 transformed it by demanding that the question be answered and that the answer be proven with documents. Egyptians – especially those who were not Muslim or Christian Copts – had to prove their Egyptianness with papers.

Background of the Law While the law itself marked the beginning of the end of free trade in the Egyptian economy, it is generally regarded as the culmination of the longer process of Egyptianization that began in the 1930s. Floresca Karanasou has asserted that this process started as early as the first years

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

173

of the twentieth century, was followed by a series of measures after World War I and during the 1920s and finally intensified in the 1930s. The reasons for this intensification in the 1930s are interrelated. There was, first, increasing pressure in the labor market due to improvements in education, especially among clerical workers. It became much more important, even vital, to employ more Egyptians in the civil service and the private sector. Several measures were enacted, among them one instituting Arabic as the official language of banks and business in general in the second half of the 1930s.66 This was itself related to the rise of nationalist consciousness among Egyptians in the decade after independence. It was also made more pressing because of high unemployment among the young, foreign dominance in the private sector and several crises in government in the mid-1930s that radicalized students and afandiya while giving rise to increased skepticism about foreigners’ activities in the country.67 By the end of the 1930s politicians, Parliament and the civil service increased political control over companies and over foreigners’ residency in the country.68 In the realm of business, there were also efforts towards Egyptianization, such as the gradual increase in Egyptian shares in Cre´dit Foncier as well as ‘Abbud Pasha’s acquisition of the sugar company by the end of the 1930s.69 The assumption of control over Cre´dit Foncier and the acquisition of the sugar company can also be seen, however, as the result of competition between foreign and local industrialists on the one hand and that between rival Egyptian industrialist groups on the other. In other words, it could be less a matter of nationalist enterprise and more a simple matter of business. The year 1947 lay in the middle of a period of political instability in Egypt and in the region more generally. Between October 1944 and January 1950, no fewer than seven cabinets were proclaimed and dismissed. What is more, the period saw the assassination of several high-ranking Egyptian politicians: the two Saʾdist70 prime ministers, Ahmad Mahir on February 24, 1945 and Mahmud Fahmi al Nuqrashi on December 28, 1948 and the Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brothers, Hassan al-Banna, on February 12, 1949. The country was rocked by protests among workers and by the rise of anti-British nationalist sentiment, both of which led to the issuance of a law by the coalition government led by the Saʿdist party. In February 1946, Egypt saw great popular mobilization and strikes on a scale not seen since the 1919

174

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

revolution. These strikes called for the evacuation of British forces from the country and demanded greater job security. Both concerns were linked for many protesters and were effective in mobilizing the masses.71 Popular pressure increased after different governments failed to put forth solutions to the country’s economic problems. Rising unemployment after the end of World War II challenged all the governments of the period. It was the result of four factors. The first factor was the decline in economic performance in the post-war period compared with performance during the war. The war-time economy had generated many thousands of new jobs in industry and the lack of competition from imports, as well as the disproportionate demand caused primarily by the large numbers of Allied Forces in the country, had been a boon to local industry and had led to an increase in the industrial workforce and to a large-scale migration from the countryside.72 Second, the demobilization and departure of Allied troops significantly affected the country’s economic prospects. These troops had employed between 140,000 and 200,000 Egyptians during the war.73 Third, employment opportunities for graduates – or the lack thereof – emerged as a problem; the number of young Egyptians graduates was rising faster than the economy could absorb.74 The structure of the domestic economy shifted and changed. Table 3.2 shows that during this period there was an increase in the number of newly established joint stock companies: indeed, it was the highest increase in the period considered in this study.75 This increase in private sector companies established after 1945 arguably could not absorb the high number of new entrants into the labor force after World War II.76 It is important to bear in mind that the needs of companies and of industry do not necessarily correspond, in absolute terms, to the labor force or to the problems of unemployment, (This is known as the ‘mismatching’ of the labor market.). A final factor affecting unemployment was the time-lag between the war’s end and the loss of jobs that resulted from it and the new jobs created to absorb these unemployed in the medium- to long-term. In light of these developments, the Saʾdist government was under pressure to present solutions. While the solution found by the government appeared to work for the country and against foreigners and people with an unclear status in Egypt, it nonetheless deeply affected the Egyptian private sector. The private sector showed its unwillingness to

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

175

accommodate the first draft of the law through the EFI. An EFI committee recommended amendments to the government which were partly considered in the second draft of the law in 1946. Powerful Egyptian industrialists and landowners criticized the draft law. Debate in Parliament modified some of the law’s text and led to a stricter formulation of some aspects of the law.77 Foreigners, above all Greeks and the reputedly highly skilled Greek workers, were integrated into Egyptian industry, mainly as workers and employees of companies owned by Egyptian Greeks and others. These foreigners had no representatives in Parliament and no structural power, as the industrialists had, to lobby their case in debates on the draft law. Representatives of foreign states spoke for them in Cairo: the Greek diplomatic mission for the Egyptian Greeks, the British for Britons and Maltese and so on.78 Their efforts were not fruitful. On the contrary, the public intervention of foreign diplomatic missions might be the reason why this law became famous as an antiforeigners law and not an anti-private sector law. Regionally, 1947 was a momentous year: on November 29, 1947, the United Nations’ General Assembly approved the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states in Resolution 181. Several months later, an armed conflict began between the paramilitary Jewish and Zionist forces and military forces from neighboring Arab countries, including Egypt. This is known as the Palestine War. The British control of Palestine ended May 15, 1948 (yawm al-Nakba). At the end of the conflict, British forces had withdrawn, the Arab militaries had been defeated and the State of Israel had been declared on May 15, 1948. These events had led to the fleeing of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees. Popular sentiment in Egyptian and elsewhere in the region was affected and stoked by events in Palestine. After the Palestine War, public Egyptian Jewish activities clearly diminished: all Jewish community newspapers except Al-Kalim ceased publication, all public Jewish celebrations stopped and the royal court disavowed its intimate connections with the Egyptian Jewish elite.79 These changes and the increased skepticism toward Egyptian Jews after the Palestine War influenced the interpretation and the implementation of Law 138 of 1947.

Minorities and Egyptianization Some companies intimately connected with or owned by foreign capital began the process of Egyptianization before the passage of Law 138 of

176

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1947. As Floreska Karanasou has shown in her work on the Suez Canal Company, that the company had increased the number of Egyptian workers (whose skills had improved to reach a level comparable with that of foreign workers) before 1947 in order to reduce its costs.80 Karanasou’s work has also drawn attention to the fact that increases in the number of Egyptian employees in order to fulfill the conditions of the law did not necessary affect corporate management structures, especially in companies managed abroad. This was even the case in situations where some foreigners held lower-ranking positions than Egyptians. Levels of education played a principal role, especially in the cases of the Copts and the so-called Mustamasirien:81 in these cases, their high levels of education afforded them better opportunities than others.82 The case studies demonstrate that the chances of foreigners, including Egyptian Greeks bearing Greek citizenship, to obtain positions in the middle and lower tiers of corporations decreased after 1947. Egyptianization at higher ranks took place but on a smaller scale.83 The law affected about 60,000 ‘non-Egyptian’ employees, according to the British Foreign Office.84 Joint stock companies affiliated with foreigners and foreign capital developed strategies to accommodate the law, mainly by increasing their employee ranks in order to fulfill the law’s conditions. Another strategy was to appoint directors and members to the companies’ boards of directors who had both business experience and Egyptian citizenship. Those who most often fulfilled these conditions were Syrians, especially from the 1940s when laws did not limit any one person’s membership on several boards. Data presented by Thomas Philipp has shown that Syrians had the lion’s share of positions, exceeding the number of Egyptian Jews on companies’ boards of directors.85 Egyptian directors who were appointed to such corporate positions after 1947 were selected, as in the past, based on their experience and their influence in Egyptian public life.86 The case of employees and workers not bearing foreign citizenship who were members of minorities in Egypt was more complex. This becomes clear in the MS documents. Documents of the MS in the Da¯r al-watha¯ʾiq concerning two companies particularly associated with Egyptian Jews demonstrate how efforts to conform to the law affected corporate affairs. Furthermore, correspondence of the companies with MS officials suggest how the question of nationality and especially the

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

177

nationality of Egyptian Jews, became much more important after 1947 than it had been in 1929. The two companies – the famous Cicurel Department Stores established in 1938 and the Cairo Weaving Factories Company established in 1936 – also evince differences in the way the two companies chose to deal with the problem.87

Cicurel Department Stores Small stores had existed since 1887, but it was not until February 1938 that members of the Cicurel family – both male and female and all Egyptian citizens – together with the French merchant Turiel and the French lawyer Peter France established the joint stock company bearing the family’s name.88 It became one of the most famous department stores in Egypt, with an excellent reputation in Egypt and beyond. In the 1920s and 1930s, Yusuf Cicurel was an active investor in a number of companies, including various Misr Group companies. Documents in the MS provide evidence of the Cicurel Department Stores’ affairs from October 1948 to August 1957. Generally speaking, the file concerning Cicurel (File No. 75) is a small one, comprising dated correspondence between the company and the MS, in addition to reports (muthakarra) of the MS about Cicurel for the attention of the Minister of Commerce and Industry. It is not clear why some documents are handwritten and others typed; if nothing else, this has little bearing on the importance of the particular documents. One possible explanation is that the MS systemized its work over time; reports from the years 1948 and 1949 are mostly handwritten. Typewriters were only available to MS employees in 1950 and after: as a result, most documents are typewritten from then on. The available correspondence began on October 28, 1948,89 though another document in the MS file referred to an earlier, missing letter dated March 13, 1948.90 The correspondence mainly concerned the number of employees and workers at the company and the status of its employers, workers and board members in relation to Law 138 of 1947. This issue was much discussed as there was a discrepancy between the company’s and the MS’s definition of ‘Egyptian’. Cicurel Department Stores had many Egyptian Jews among its 732-strong workforce and the company argued that its employees were ‘Egyptian’ so long as they fulfilled the conditions of the nationality law of 1929, inferring that Law 138 did not necessitate the acquisition of a nationality document, a

178

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

shaha¯dat al-jinsiyya.91 The letter expressed surprise on the part of the company concerning the interpretation of the law that stated only those with such a document were Egyptian, an interpretation that provided an exemption only for Muslims and Copts. The letter further requested a two-month extension in providing the roster of employees, stating that the delay was needed as it took this long for its employees to obtain the shaha¯dat al-jinsiyya.92 Cicurel Department Stores’ response to the MS’s interpretation of the law is representative of the general response of Egyptian Jews.93 The lists ultimately sent to the MS by the company comprised 32 employees and workers at Cicurel who needed to prove their status as Egyptians, a fact that demonstrates that most had registered themselves as Egyptians as they had known that they fulfilled the conditions of the nationality law of 1929. The documents provided some details of their backgrounds: one’s father was born in Egypt, another’s brother had received the nationality document, yet another had been Ottoman or Turkish with a father whose nationality was unknown.94 All this suggests how Egyptian Jews saw themselves and further supports the argument that the high number of Egyptian Jews in the 1947 census resulted from Egypt’s Jews self-descriptions as well as those of their institutions. The understanding of the law as obliging the possession of shaha¯dat al-jinsiyya arose in newspaper information described in a letter dated October 28, 1948, as having come to light in ‘recent months’. Recall that the law was promulgated in July 1947: it is important to consider how the political situation in the region, especially the Palestine War and the proclamation of Israel in May 1948, affected this interpretation of the law and the need for documents for all except Muslims and Copts. As it concerned Egyptian Jews, political events clearly influenced how the law was enforced. The reports sent by the MS to the Minister of Commerce and Industry are particularly telling, as are the responses to them. A report to the Minister written by a Mr Salah Izzat on November 5, 1948, emphasized the importance of big companies such as Cicurel in the Egyptian economy while at the same time questioning the Cicurel’s laxity in providing correct figures, arguing that the company had had enough time since its establishment to ensure it employed sufficient numbers of Egyptian staff. The letter also suggested that some intervention was necessary to demonstrate the state’s authority in compelling Egyptian

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

179

companies to abide by the law. The attitude of the report toward the company is clearly not benevolent, both implicitly and explicitly casting doubt as it did on the company.95 The notes accompanying this report, likely written by an advisor to the minister, had a friendlier tone that evinced some good will. There is a clear sense of surprise at the company’s determination of who was Egyptian. The note alluded to the fact that this determination had been agreed with certain authorities and that, in the short term at least, it was understandable that the company might have found it difficult to find Egyptians to fill posts in the company. There was nonetheless a clear desire to push the company to fulfill legal conditions as quickly as possible while taking a sober account of the delays of the authorities in the matter. These notes emphasized the need for fairness in applying the law, intimating that the report of Mr Salah Izzat had not met this standard of assuming a certain good will in regards to the company, especially given its importance to the national economy.96 MS informed Cicurel on December 5, 1948, asking it to fulfill its legal obligations as soon as possible and to send the required lists.97 The MS’s control over the company influenced its operations. After the debate about who was Egyptian, the MS instigated a new debate concerning the status of employees and workers in order to guarantee that the quotas demanded by the law were met. In its correspondence, the company declared its willingness to meet its legal duties but stated that the labor market did not allow it to meet its needs in accordance with the law. At the same time, the company provided the MS with many details about its activities in following the proper procedures in applying for shaha¯dat al-jinsiyya.98 The MS clearly took on more control and influence over the company from 1950. They started to inspect companies by sending officials on visits while also submitting detailed reports about companies’ staff, reports that outlined the fulfillment of legal obligations by the companies and their owners regarding workers, employees and board members. The MS was particularly diligent in investigating any person whose name appeared not to be Muslim or Copt: the MS demanded proof of Egyptian nationality, for example, of Antoin Joseph, Barzi Atnasyos, Shawqi Farid Banub and Polin (Pauline) Karim, all of whom were Copts.99 The MS indirectly cooperated with those officials who issued nationality documents. There was one bureau that issued the documents

180

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

and another that ascertained that documents had been issued by collecting materials that might prove or disprove the Egyptianness of companies’ employees. This arrangement remained in place for a number of years. Correspondence from 1952100 and 1954101 make it clear that the company continued to send proof of its staff’s status as Egyptians to the MS. It appears, however, that Cicurel was one company that was not treated particularly harshly, a fact noticeable by the tone of correspondence. In addition, documents from 1954 from Cicurel to the MS were stamped ‘muu¯sa¯ ʿalaiyh’, that is, ‘preferential’. The decision to ˙ mark Cicurel’s files with this stamp was most likely made by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, showing that not all Egyptian Jewish companies were rejected or persecuted or both. Reports appear again in 1956 from a sub-department of the MS, the general controlling department, or mura¯qabat al-taftı¯sh al-ʿa¯m. The concern in 1956 was to determine if the company was fulfilling its duties under Company Law 26 of 1954.102 A report about an investigatory visit on January 27, 1956, indicated that the Cicurel Department Stores fulfilled all legal requirements and made two additional notes: one concerning a member of the board of directors who was a member of two boards of directors and another concerning a request to re-examine staff lists. The second note was motivated by a desire to keep ‘an eye’ on the company, even though it had received positive reports up to that point.103 The treatment of Cicurel shows how the Companies Department, i.e., the MS, incrementally gained influence and authority in controlling companies. Cicurel was considered a national company owned by Egyptians. There was nonetheless ongoing regulation of the company’s staff and board members. Despite the friendly tone of correspondence and the preferential stamp placed on documents relating to the company in 1954, the relation between the MS and Cicurel was one of mutual skepticism. Of particular interest, as well, is the manner in which the company corresponded with the MS: its correspondence with the MS is consistently signed by different members of the family in Arabic, indicating that Egyptian Jews used Arabic when needed and in spite of their being francophone. Cicurel Department Stores – like many other Egyptian Jewish companies – had been sold by the family in 1956. Unfortunately, the archive documents do not contain any details. The stores were nationalized in 1961. The heirs of the Al-Jabiri family, the later owners of the famous

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

181

Cicurel Store, on 26 July Street, sued various ministries and departments in 2011 for selling the stores to Al-Faysal Bank in the frame of privatization, even though the family had a court’s judgment from 1975 proving their ownership of the store in 26 July Street.104 The second company examined here was treated significantly different from Cicurel.

Cairo Weaving Factories Company The Cairo Weaving Factories Company was established in Cairo (Shubra al-Khayma) in 1936 by three Belgians, five Egyptians, one British (Ads, an Egyptian Jew) and one Greek.105 It was an important industrial weaving firm in the country. The company’s folder at the MS is a substantial one (No. 37). The available documents are similar to those of Cicurel: correspondence between the MS and the company in addition to lists of employees and board members and internal documents of the MS and other official bodies. It seems that the MS was late in determining if the company met its obligations under Law 138 of 1947. The considerable correspondence between the company and the MS began in 1949 and 1950. The first report available in the archives of the MS concern an inspection conducted at the company on December 14, 1950. Written by Mahmud Marzuq, the report is similar to other reports; it related demands for proof that two Copts were Egyptians, as well as the discrepancy in the company’s definitions of ‘worker’ and ‘employee’ compared with those of the MS. Interestingly, the report referred to the clothing worn by those at the company as important in determining who was a worker and who an employee. The tone of the report was skeptical in comparison with the Cicurel reports. The report concluded that the company did not fulfill its legal obligations: it failed to meet its quota of Egyptian workers by 3.2 per cent and its income quota by 9.8 per cent. The notes accompanying the report requested that the manager be informed and invited to resolve the matter.106 The correspondence between the Weaving Factories and the MS appear tense from the beginning. The Weaving Factories sent a list of its employees on November 6, 1950; the handwritten notes by MS staff on this list questioned every name that is not immediately identifiable as Arab or Muslim.107 Here, the number of notes exceeded that in the Cicurel documents. A main point of contention was official rebuke for the absence of two foreign experts on the list of foreign staff. This detail altered the calculation of quota percentages, with the company accused

182

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

of not keeping proper records of its quotas. The company argued, however, that it had abided by Section V of Law 138 of 1947 and that the invitation of these two experts had been approved by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry.108 The tension between the company and the MS carried on into other reports of the MS: the first was a general report written by Tawfiq Abaza after an on-site inspection on November 7, 1951. Compared with the first report, this one was especially detailed about who were and were not workers and employees according to their duties and it provided details concerning their nationality status. New terminology was used in this report by referring to Jews as ‘Israeli’ and not as Jewish and Egyptian. In cases where they bore another citizenship, the report specified ‘Israeli’ or ‘French’, while others are described as ‘Mutamsir’, ‘Christian’, ‘Italian’, or ‘Greek’.109 This report made use of a different classification than that used in the reports on Cicurel. In the latter, the terms ‘Israeli’ and ‘Christian’ were not used. The Cicurel reports intimated whether individuals had the necessary nationality documents or if they had applied for them, but they did not classify anyone by religion. The term ‘Israeli’ was a common term describing the Jewish community in Egypt and was used as a synonym for Jewish. Some birth documents did contain the term ‘Israeli’. It seemed that the term was used as such by the company and was taken up by the MS. Succeeding years’ reports showed an ambiguity in regards to this term: its Egyptian context and its use to describe a citizen of the state of Israel. Another report in two parts submitted to the Minister of Commerce and Industry followed in November 1951. In this report, the company was roundly criticized for bypassing the law.110 The second part of the report accused the company for dismissing seven Egyptian workers in favor of Jews, not specifying if the Jews were foreigners or Egyptians. The notes to this report, written by a higher ranking official, are pointed out as well, asking that the company be informed that it must comply with its legal obligations immediately while also clearly and sharply criticizing the attitude and tone of the report and reminding its author to change this attitude and to keep fairness in applying the law in mind.111 These reports applied a different terminology than the reports about Cicurel and demonstrated a deep suspicion of the Weaving Factories. A letter dated on February 8, 1952, by Dr A. Levi,112 signed in Arabic, to the Minister of Commerce and Industry explained to the Minister that it was necessary to employ foreign experts who could carry

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

183

out the company’s business because such experts were not available in the Egyptian labor market. It further requested more flexibility in the application of regulations in order to avoid any interference in the company’s production.113 In May 1952, the workers of the Weaving Factories sent a handwritten complaint to the MS asking the latter to investigate the dismissal of Egyptian workers and to intervene in favor of Egyptian workers’ rights over those of Jews and foreigners.114 The notes of MS staff attached to this letter state that as the company had fulfilled its duties under the law, this complaint would not be investigated, especially given the importance of the company’s work. The company was asked to present the nationality documents of its staff.115 It seemed that complaints from workers and employers in the company were common. Indeed, another complaint was a printed pamphlet signed by Abd al-Aziz Mohammed Bayyumi, the representative of the trade union and bore the title ‘The Conspiracy of the Foreign Exploiters and Zionists, George and Henry Rabbat and Partners’. It spoke of the activities of the owners of the al-Buhaira Company in ignoring the rights of its workers.116 The reports of 1954 did not favor the company.117 In 1955, a confidential document from the Ministry of the Interior to the MS reported that the Cairo Weaving Factories Company was attempting to avoid its payment of tax and asked the MS to pursue the matter.118 The MS had been established to ensure the implementation of Law 138 of 1947; it was not the office responsible for tax collection. It is not clear why the Ministry of the Interior reported this to the MS. Another report dated April 17, 1955, accused the company of declaring false information about its workers and employees.119 Of interest is the case of a Maurice Baghdadi, who had registered himself as an Egyptian member of the company’s staff and had applied for nationality documents on December 21, 1947. He had not received an answer; the MS assured him that if a reply had not been received in six months after the date of application, the request had been denied. This further explains how Egyptian Jews who considered themselves Egyptians were unable to prove their status: either they received no answer to their request or authorities had not considered their cases within six months of their applications. Different reports on the company between 1949 and 1955 make clear that the attitude of some MS officials, especially those

184

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

writing reports and conducting investigatory visits, were hostile to the Egyptian Jewish element of the company, regardless of whether they were Egyptians or not. The greatest number of reports were filed in 1956. The first, dated January 22, 1956, was sent to the Minister of Commerce and Industry and related a complaint from the company’s workers written by a Mr Kassab.120 On January 26, 1956, another report asserted that the company was still not meeting its obligations under Law 138 of 1947, despite several warnings. Of particular note was the inferiority of Egyptian staff’s salaries in relation to those of others; they were inferior by 4 per cent. This situation demanded that legal proceedings be initiated, according to the same Mr Kassab.121 These two reports to the Minister followed a letter of complaint signed by the workers and employees of the Cairo Weaving Factories Company122 dated January 11, 1956 and addressed to President Jamal Abd al-Nasser, the head of the armed forces, Zakariyya Muhyi al-Din, the head of the military intelligence unit and the Minister of Commerce and Industry. The complaint cited violations by the company and its managers, accusing them of circumventing the law and declaring false information, submitting false prices and violating tax regulations.123 This letter was followed by another complaint also by the workers and employees of the company addressed to the head of the Companies Department, the Minister of Commerce and Industry, the head of the military intelligence unit and the military secretary of the Minister of the Interior. This complaint reported the falsification of the company’s documents by its Jewish owners. It further alleged that Jewish employees received high salaries without actually gainfully working for the company. Another complaint, dated February 6, 1956, was addressed to the head of armed forces and the Minister of the Interior Zakariyya Muhyi al-Din, the Minister of Commerce and Industry, the head of the Companies Department, the head of the anti-smuggling department at the Ministry of the Interior and the head of the industrial regulatory agency at the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. This complaint – unlike previous letters, this one specified that the signatories were Egyptians who worked for or were employed at the Cairo Weaving Factories Company – asserted that the company’s management was taking measures against Egyptian workers while trying to smuggle

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

185

money to Joseph Bisso, a former board member believed by the employees and workers to be on a blacklist for cooperating with Israel. The money had been diverted by way of Isaac Levi during Levi’s regular, annual visit to Paris. What the complaint did not mention was that Bisso, a Greek citizen, had been a co-founder of the company and was still listed as an active member of its board of directors.124 On February 26, 1956, the department that oversaw the company’s legal compliance sent a letter to the head of the Companies Department asking that all complaints about the company be fully investigated.125 What is of interest in these reports, especially those of 1956, is that not only were they directed to the Minister of Commerce and Industry as all previous reports had been, but they were also addressed to prominent figures ruling the country such as President Abd al-Nasser, the head of the armed forces and the head of the intelligence services. Without underestimating the intelligence of bureaucrats in Egypt, it has to be questioned why they chose to address their reports as they did: that is, each report to different addressees and to high ranking politicians. The Ministry of Commerce and Industry received all three, but that was not the case with the others who received the reports. Another question concerns the blacklist the company’s workers mentioned. Bisso was a co-founder of the company and he was also a Greek citizen. The management of the company were otherwise Jewish, but there is no indication that Bisso was as well. Why would he have been blacklisted while Isaac Levi, an Egyptian Jew with a French passport, was not similarly suspect? There is mention of a villa in Zamalek with a number of staff working there, yet there is no direct connection between this villa and the company’s operations. Why was the staff interested in this? The signatures on the reports were anonymous; they were typed rather than handwritten and did not include the names of workers or employees. All this indicates that the matter of the Cairo Weaving Factories Company’s obedience of the law had a certain political sensitivity at a critical time in Egypt just before the Suez crisis. It is not impossible that these reports concerning the company staff were not written by them. Rather, they were part of an effort politically to eliminate foreign corporate ownership in the country. Furthermore, the manner in which the company was treated demonstrates that while the Companies Department was responsible for following up on the implementation of the law, there were other branches of the state apparatus that had a role in regulating

186

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

companies. All this is to say that Law 138 of 1947 had taken an unequivocally political dimension. Reports about other companies such as Shamla Stores,126 Simon Azart Stores,127 and Ben Zion Stores128 – all of them owned by Egyptian Jews – suggest a similar manner on the part of the MS in dealing with these companies. The reports demonstrate a diligent attention to detail with the aim of ensuring an uncompromising implementation of the law. The MS’s method, however, vacillated between two extremes: the stern manner evident in its dealings with the Cairo Weaving Factories Company and the malleable manner seen in its regulation of the Cicurel Department Stores and the Egyptian Greek Socie´te´ Viticole et Vincole d’Egypte (SVVE). The SVVE was established as a joint stock company in 1936.129 The vineyards were first planted by The Egyptian Greek Nestor Gianaclis at the beginning of the twentieth century and rapidly gained in reputation. Gianaclis’ successor, Nicolas Pierrakos, established the joint stock company. By the end of the 1940s, the company was one of the largest foreign landholders in Egypt. There is no SVVE file at MS: unlike other companies, Law 138 of 1947 did not affect the SVVE. Nor was it nationalized during the wave of nationalization in 1960 and 1961. It was also left untouched by the agrarian reform, but it was sequestrated in 1968. Reasons for the company’s exceptional treatment are not documented. It could well be due to the unique nature of the project, as argued by the Pierrakos family, as well as the good relations between Nicolas Pierrakos, the owner and manager of SVVE and the Free Officers.130 Law 138 of 1947 greatly affected the lower and lower middle ranks of technicians, workers and employees belonging to the different minorities living in Egypt such as Greeks and Maltese. Egyptian Jews with no resolved juridical status had to fight to gain such a status: foreigners among them faced the same destiny as other foreigners in the country. In the late 1940s, migration was part of daily existence for Egypt’s foreign population.131 Evidence from the MS’s files demonstrates the official procedures pursued by the department and the progression in methods and official rationale at the department. The actions and responses concerning both Cicurel and the Cairo Weaving Factories Company were microcosms of policies concerning minorities in the country. While each case had important differences in the details of

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

187

its encounter with officialdom, such as the MS’s pursuit of legal implementation at Cicurel compared with that at the Cairo Weaving Factories Company, the general trend did not favor minorities. The system was set on Egyptianization and had no capacity to act otherwise or to envisage the future of the companies and of the country.

Egypt and its Minorities after 1952 The Free Officers coup or revolution on June 23, 1952, changed the political terrain of Egypt. Foreigners and minorities were the first to be given reassurance by the new leaders. The first two years under the new government brought few surprises. Beyond political changes, controversies between Nasser and Naguib and the defeat of democratic opposition in the country, the political situation was unremarkable. The years 1953 and 1954 were, however, crucial for the private sector and for minority entrepreneurs, a reality that became apparent after a period of about eight years.

New Economic Policies The economic policies toward foreigners and the powerful private sector, including Egypt’s minorities, that had begun with Companies Law 138 of 1947 continued in the following years. The coup/revolution of 1952 and the agrarian reform in particular, advanced the state’s movement along this path. Various laws and regulations issued after 1952 attempted to alter the iniquities of land and income distribution.132 The most prominent was Law 26 of 1954, known as the General Companies Law,133 and Law 156 of 1953, which limited foreign ownership in the country and regulated the flow of money and finance into the country from foreign companies and foreign individuals outside the country.134 Both laws had a decidedly market-regulatory character and sought to limit monopolies and foreign corporate control and evinced a tendency to increase the public sector at the expense of the private sector. Law 26 of 1954 concerned newly established companies rather than already existing ones.135 Both laws limited the scope of entrepreneurial and private sector activity in general and of foreign capital in particular. Neither law mentioned economic planning or socialism, but both Laws 156 of 1953 and 26 of 1954 are considered forerunners of the nationalization laws of the early 1960s. The duties of

188

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

the MS were expanded at the same time that the department was becoming more efficient and more deeply involved in the apparatus of the state, especially after the change of power in 1952. Although these laws did not mention any minorities in their texts, the first to witness changes under the new laws were minorities, whether as a part of the private sector, as foreigners – mainly Greeks, or as those who still had no clear nationality status.

The Nationalization of the Egyptian Economy, 1954–61 One important figure in the Nasserite state who influenced the shape of the country’s new economic system was Rashid al-Barrawi. A former economics professor at Cairo University, the head of the board of directors of the Industrial Bank and a member of the Permanent Council for the Development of National Production, a body that sought to create economic development policy for Egypt, Al-Barrawi was, at least in the early years, the intellectual and economic mind behind the 1952 coup/revolution.136 In his work Al-Falsafa al-iqtisa¯diyya lil-thawra, published in 1955, he expounded on his vision of Egypt’s economic system after 1952. This work was a continuation of his publications and studies related to socialism in the 1940s.137 Al-Barrawi examined the necessity of land reform138 and the various policies needed to develop the private sector and enhance investment, including foreign investment. He further considered economic development through industry and the need to decrease over-reliance on agriculture and agricultural industrialization. This was to be done through the establishment of an economic ‘think tank’, the Permanent Council for the Development of National Production, comprising 16 specialists in economics and investment as well as members of the different ministries in order to outline the country’s needs and coordinate the necessary policies for enhancing Egypt’s economic performance. The Council put forward a plan to initiate productive projects through cooperation with the private sector and to establish public sector companies for infrastructure development (e.g., electricity, land redevelopment projects and transportation).139 He realized the need for a legislative framework to foster investment as well as the positive role state regulation would play in preventing monopolies and corruption. Various laws, especially Laws 156 of 1953 and 26 of 1954, were seen by al-Barrawi as the main laws necessary for market

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

189

regulation and for the new start necessary for Egypt’s development. These laws revised and remedied the failures of previous laws. Law 156 regulated the power of foreign capital in its investments in Egypt.140 Law 26 of 1954 was most important in the realm of corporate activities, according to al-Barrawi, as among other things it limited relations between political bodies, political parties and companies by prohibiting companies from financing parties in order best to avoid corruption.141 These laws ended the era of free trade in the Egyptian private sector, when little government regulation had existed. Change had started at the end of the 1940s and the 1954 law brought yet more official scrutiny on the private sector. Chapter Six of al-Barrawi’s work is dedicated to the all-important cotton crop, its frailties and the need to diversify agricultural production to avoid dependence on cotton, bondage to price fluctuations and too heavy a share for the commodity in the balance of payments. The author proposed policies that would positively control cotton and other agricultural products.142 In all, the book presented economic policies for agricultural development, industrial development, the development of the energy sector (including electricity and oil production) and of transportation. The need for reliable infrastructure in transportation was justified for its benefits on overall economic performance and, by extension, the amelioration of social justice through increased incomes.143 In the last part of the book, al-Barrawi spoke of a ‘democratic economy’ in which people with limited capital could buy shares in joint stock companies. In such a way, the middle-classes would be able to invest. As someone educated at the London School of Economics,144 al-Barrawi used the British Labour party and its taxation policies as an example of policies that maintain social equilibrium while demonstrating the need for cooperation between the public (state) sector and the private sector to achieve economic prosperity. In insisting on the ‘mixed economy’ and on the partnership between the state and the private sector,145 al-Barrawi’s work was similar to that of another contemporary commentator on the Egyptian economy, Jamal Al-Din Said. Published in 1950, the latter’s work diagnosed the country’s economic ailments and suggested that new economic policies were needed to diversify the economy and improve economic performance. He did not, however, put forward any solutions or detailed plans as al-Barrawi did.146 These two works, particularly al-Barrawi’s, demonstrate an awareness of the need for new economic

190

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

policies for the country. In 1955, there were few indications of a radical socialist reform of the economy by transforming the private sector into a public one. Al-Barrawi advocated a mixed economy with elements both private and public. He praised the socialism of the British socialist party – concerned as it was with social justice, fair taxation policies and the regulation of relations between the state and the private sector – rather than socialism in its radical Soviet form. He realized the necessity of the private sector for the country’s economy and he introduced concepts such as ‘democratic economy’ and ‘mixed economy’ in putting forth his vision of the Egyptian economy. Al-Barrawi did not exclude foreign capital as such, realizing its importance for some projects. Instead he insisted on its regulation rather than its elimination. In general, he displayed no hostility toward foreigners and foreign capital or toward entrepreneurial minorities. This stands in contrast to developments after 1956 and 1957 and, later, in 1960 and 1961, when the private sector was abolished and foreign investments from the west prohibited. Abdel Malek has argued that the Polish economist Oskar Lange – an advocate of the state economy and promoter of public sector efficiency147 – had an important contribution in economic planning, especially during his visit to Cairo in 1954. He was ostensibly the mastermind behind the establishment of various planning bodies.148 This suggests that either the Nasserites or the Egyptian government shunned its own consultants of the Egyptian model put forth by al-Barrawi and took a more radical socialist path toward nationalization. This tendency was not recognizable in the first half of the 1950s.

New Power Alliances The number of newly established joint stock companies continued to rise after 1952.149 This fact indicates an active economy but does not necessarily demonstrate an increase in total investments. On the contrary, there was disinvestment in the late 1940s and early 1950s.150 Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek participation in establishing new companies manifestly decreased in comparison with the two previous decades, representing 9 per cent and 8 per cent, respectively, of the total in the first half of the decade.151 The government had begun to influence this matter after World War II and its influence continued to increase gradually, aiding the tendency toward more public sector companies.

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

191

Al-Barrawi’s theoretical observations are put into practice from 1954; the government’s participation in establishing companies and its economic intervention clearly increased. Companies such as the Sharikat al-taʿmı¯r wa-l-masa¯kin al-shaʿbiyya [Construction and Popular Housing Company]152 were partnerships between government bodies and private investors; in this specific case, a foreign investor was involved.153 Partnerships between the Egyptian public and private sectors, not excluding foreigners, became more common in the years 1955 and 1956: for example, Al-sharika al-misriyya al-ʿa¯mma li-mahamma¯t al˙ sikak al-hadı¯diyya-Sı¯ma¯f, a partnership with Belgian investors;154 ˙ 155 Sharikat Misr lil-tija¯ra al-kha¯rijiyya; and the first public sector bank ˙ Al-Jumhu¯riyya was established in partnership with a private bank.156 The partnership between private and public sectors indicated a new alliance between the traditional Egyptian industrial bourgeoisie and the Nasserites, an alliance that led to mutually beneficial prosperity for both groups of investors in the second half of the 1950s.157 While seemingly contradictory, prosperity resulted from the coalition of the government with the private sector on one hand and changes leaning toward socialism on the other. In 1957, the Permanent Council for the Development of National Production was succeeded by the Council of National Economic Planning, known as the Economic Agency, a governmental body that planned investment in the public sector and in the economy generally.158 The apparent contradiction can be resolved by considering three details of Egypt’s domestic situation at the time. First, the government did not trust, perhaps with good reason, the private sector to develop the economy and bring prosperity, at least to do so with the social justice the 1952 revolutionaries asserted it as one of their aims. Second, the ideological path of socialist economics pursued by Nasserites began to be institutionalized and was embedded in the 1956 constitution. While its institutionalization in the constitution was symbolic, the five-year plan that began in 1957–58 materially manifested the institutionalization of socialist economics.159 The discrepancy between the ideas of al-Barrawi and Lange started to become clear. Third, a new class slowly emerged keen to look out for its interests and to maintain its power. The increase in the public sector and the takeover of British and French companies in the aftermath of the Suez war required new managers. This new managerial class did not descend from the traditional industrial, commercial, or agrarian elites; nor were they

192

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

self-made entrepreneurs who had created their own businesses; nor did they acquire their new roles because of particular skills or talents they possessed. Indeed, they were not really corporate managers at all but rather civil servants with military backgrounds employed by the state in these positions because of their intimate connection with and loyalty to the new powers-that-be. They had attained important economic positions and enjoyed the privileges thereof. With the majority coming from military backgrounds, they realized that a strong, powerful public sector would secure them in their positions and would further aggrandize their interests and privileges. A strong private sector that relied on a deeply rooted and traditional agricultural and industrial bourgeoisie might challenge or even usurp their newly gained power.160 There is no doubt that this new class favored a strong public sector and nationalization (or socialization) of the economy as prescribed by Lange.

External Alliances The alliances and the movement toward a more socialist economy mentioned above were internal factors that influenced the economic path of Egypt in the 1950s. There were, however, external factors of a not entirely directly economic nature such as political crises and geopolitical changes in the region that also affected Egypt’s course toward more radical economic policies after 1952. The domestic crisis of 1954 that led to the defeat of democratic opposition and the initial establishment of hegemony under authoritarian modernism161 was of importance, as was the Nasser regime’s realignment in foreign affairs in 1955 away from the United States toward neutrality and anti-imperialism as seen in the rejection of the Baghdad Pact.162 The Israeli Lavon Affair, or Operation Susannah, increased the skepticism toward Egyptian Jews and their role in the country’s economy as well as suspicion about Egypt’s neighbor Israel and its ambitions.163 The disagreement with the World Bank, Great Britain and the United States over the financing of the High Dam also affected Egyptian politics and played no small part in the eventual Soviet role played in the dam’s construction.164 The nationalization of the Suez Canal clearly inaugurated the crisis in relations with Great Britain and France. This nationalization also had a heavily economic hue: considering the canal a source of national income akin to taxation or customs duties, the Egyptian government was in effect waiving this income and allowing it to be taken by a foreign private company and

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

193

remnant of the colonial era. The potential public revenue was needed by the state to undertake other critical projects. Taking this revenue would also demonstrate Egypt’s independence. Additionally, the strategic significance of the canal was undeniable at the time, as was the need to prove the sovereignty of the young Egyptian Republic. Jamal Abdel Nasser announced the nationalization of the Suez Canal on July 26, 1956. The reaction of the United Kingdom, France and Israel; the restraint of the United States; and the support of the Soviet Union changed the political map in the region.165 As a reaction to the Anglo– French– Israeli attack, Egypt seized all French and British assets in the country, acquiring a stake of about 12 per cent of Egypt’s GNP.166 Although the Egyptianization of foreign companies had begun before with Law 315 of 1955 and Ministerial Decision 10 in January 1956,167 the Suez war greatly advanced the cause of the Egyptianization of foreign capital. The increased power of the public sector and of the new class directing it guaranteed its continued pursuit. The political polarization in relation to the former imperial powers and the United States, as well as the pressure Egypt faced after the Suez war, made the country even more politically tense. This political tension resulted in the strengthening of nationalization tendencies. The nationalization of the canal was related, as well, to a pan-Arabism that mounted in the years after 1952 and was central to the Nasserites’ ideology. The reaction to the external challenges to Egypt’s sovereignty was the entrenchment of the authoritarian system, carried out primarily by the military. The national independence and economic and social reform announced by the Free Officers in 1952 could only be achieved by democratic means and through the mass mobilization of the people. This was fundamentally undermined by the implementation through authoritarian means of a planned economy and the adoption of a radical nationalist ideology. In the beginning and especially in the years up to 1959, the private sector benefited from the elimination of most foreign capital. The alliance between the private sector and the military was consolidated and secured.168 Foreign political events strengthened the military’s hegemony, not only in politics but also in national economic terms.169 The authoritarian system and its mechanisms, when combined with nationalism and economic socialism, was unable to accommodate society’s diversity, regardless of whether this diversity was expressed in

194

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

politics or in the structure of society. This inability to absorb social differences was an expression of the system’s need to institute definitions of people and their loyalties in absolute terms. In such a system individuals or groups with multiple identities and allegiances are not permissible. Egyptian Jews were the clearest example of such individuals in Egyptian society; other groups were similar but were less resolutely multiple in their identities. The relationship of the Egyptian state after 1952 with the Bedouins and Nubians, for example, demonstrate similar failures of the authoritarian system but will not be discussed here. The tide of events exposed a misunderstanding concerning the purpose of nationalization. Nationalizing the Suez Canal was different than nationalizing private sector companies. This difference was not recognized or has been ignored. Only the success of the canal’s nationalization and its political dimension have been considered. There was and has been no debate about the different meaning of nationalizing the canal as opposed to nationalizing joint stock companies or small- and medium-sized private companies. Its strategic location as a ‘natural’ line of defense along the eastern border, especially after 1948 and its importance in international shipping lanes gave the canal a unique political and economic sensitivity. Furthermore, the history of the canal’s construction and financing – the company’s relation to Egypt’s debts, the sale of the Egyptian shares of the company in the nineteenth century, the deprivation of political sovereignty that made the canal a symbol of imperial policies, the British military presence in the canal zone and policies in effect before 1956 – made it stand out from other nationalizations. What was more, the canal was a large and exceptional piece of national infrastructure that guaranteed a sizeable income for the state. All these factors seem to make a sound case for nationalizing the canal and securing it as part of national defense. This does not, however, imply that nationalization ought be an automatic process for all projects, companies and areas of the Egyptian economy. The automatic tendency toward nationalization after the success of the canal’s nationalization was the perilous path taken by Egyptians.

The Final Decade: Sunset The economic reforms described above as well as the domestic and foreign events affected Egypt’s private sector. As has been explained in previous chapters, minorities – among them, Egyptian Jews, Egyptian

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

195

Greeks, Armenians and Syrians – represented a considerable proportion of the private sector, as did other foreigners such as the British, French and Belgians. After World War II, laws such as Law 138 of 1947 and those following the July coup/revolution of 1952 shook the mutual trust between the Egyptian state and its minorities. Even before 1952, the national and religious tendencies in public and in government policies complicated the lives and livelihoods of minorities, at least compared with the prosperity they had been accustomed to in previous decades. This increasing complexity of life cannot be removed from wider political events, such as the Palestine War of 1947 and 1948. Egypt’s leaders lacked wisdom in acting in relation to Egypt’s Jews, at least some of whom were part of Egyptian culture and society and played a considerable role in the country’s economy and cultural life. Rather than absorbing them into national life in the wake of the Palestine conflict and, thus, considering them an important element of Egypt’s unique diversity, the state was agnostic and denigrating in turns. This was exemplified in the near impossible naturalization of Egyptian Jews after nationality Law 160 of 1950.170 It can further be seen in the official biased treatment of companies by MS. Already by the end of the 1940s, the number of emigrants among Egypt’s minorities showed a decided increase.171 Different Greek sources indicate that the Greek emigration from Egypt started in the 1930s and increased gradually after World War II, the main reason being high unemployment among community members.172 The increase in unemployment was a challenge for all social groups after World War II: Egyptians, minorities and foreigners alike needed to deal with its consequences. Company Law 138 of 1947 and the laws that followed it in the 1950s, the unsigned Treaty of Establishment (that should have followed the Capitulations that ended by 1949) and the disinterest of the Egyptian government in keeping its minorities all aggravated finding local solutions for Egyptian Greeks and other minorities in the country. Obtaining Egyptian citizenship became more difficult than at any time before.173 The Greek Chamber of Commerce started the so-called planned immigration programs to Australia, several African countries and Latin America. Greece was not a destination of Egyptian Greeks. The country lacked capacity at the end of the 1940s and was still dealing

196

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

with the refugees of 1922 and the Greek government did not view Egyptian Greek immigrants positively. Sophianos Chryssostomidis,174 has sharply criticized the position of the representatives of the Greek government in Egypt, who did not act to support the so-called ‘readjustment’ of Egyptian Greeks in the Nile valley. Furthermore, he has criticized the ‘historical leadership’ of Egyptian Greeks, saying that ‘instead of reacting in the essential capacity of Egyptian Hellenism, as a part of the Egyptian national element [. . .] it shifted the whole responsibility to Athens and was done with it’.175 He asserts that the law of 1957 that nationalized banks, insurance companies and dealerships had already affected the Egyptian Greek elite before complete nationalization in 1961. Despite increasing national sentiment among Egyptians, Egyptian Greeks did not give in to panic and instead showed a profound faith in the significance of their contribution to the country. The mass flight at the end of 1950s and the beginning of the 1960s was the result of decisions taken by members of a community under great pressure: pressures arising from the legal and political measures enacted in the spirit of tamsı¯r (Egyptianization), the inadequacy of information ˙ available to Egyptian Greeks, their misleading by Greek authorities (the state, the Church, the press and community leaders) and the repeated reassuring declarations by the Egyptian authorities.176 Those who preferred to stay and obtain the Egyptian citizenship did not have a favorable situation in the country, given that the assimilation of foreigners was certainly not a priority for the Egyptian state.177 Egyptian Greeks chose to immigrate to Australia, the Belgian Congo, Brazil, Canada and Cameroon; Greece was not the first option.178 There are no clear numbers that present all Egyptian Greeks migrants and their destinations, though sources clearly demonstrate that the dynamic of immigration increased over the course of the 1950s, became more coordinated and gained the support of the Greek Chamber of Commerce in Alexandria. By the mid-1960s, the majority of Egyptian Greeks had left Egypt.179 Today a very small community of some hundred Greeks still lives in Alexandria and Cairo, most of them holding Greek and Egyptian citizenships. Discontent concerning Egyptian Jews increased after 1947, with many incidents aimed at damaging Jewish property and supported by nationalist and Islamist slogans.180 The Palestine War brought about a gap between Egypt and its Jews; many were unable to differentiate and

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

197

assumed that Egypt’s Jews categorically supported Israel. At the time it was not difficult to make use of events in Palestine to mobilize popular sentiment and action against the country’s Jews. Those whom the Egyptian government saw as involved in Zionist activities were arrested, but were not badly treated, according to the Jewish community.181 Until the late 1940s, many Egyptian Jews of the upper and upper middle-class and even poorer Egyptian Jews who were not Zionists of conviction did not consider leaving the country. At the beginning of 1948, 16,000 Jews emigrated from Egypt to Israel, with another 6,000 going to France, Italy and the UK. This trend decreased with the return to power of al-Wafd in 1950.182 It increased again in 1951– 52. In the period from 1948 to 1954, the total number of those who immigrated to Israel – most of them had no other choice because they did not hold any foreign citizenship– was 15,872, or about 20– 25 per cent of Egyptian Jews.183 Others immigrated to different countries, mainly France, Italy, Brazil, Australia, Canada and the United States. The percentage of Ashkenazim who left Egypt up to 1954 was higher, but so too was the proportion of Ashkenazim in relation to Sephardim in the Egyptian Jewish population. According to Joel Beinin, many Ashkenazim among Egypt’s Jews were more likely to have connections outside Egypt and therefore found it easier to leave the country compared with Sephardim who were typically more rooted in Egypt and were more reluctant to leave. About 60 per cent of the Karaites – who are not included in the statistics of the World Jewish Congress – remained in Egypt until the end of the 1950s. It is important to note that, with the exception of adherents of Zionism, financially well-off families did not choose to immigrate to Israel; that was more likely the destiny of poorer Jews from Egypt.184 The period 1952–54 seems to have been one of relative stability for Egypt’s minorities despite the new political powers in the country. This was especially the case for Egypt’s Jews, as General Naguib insisted on keeping good relations with the Jewish community in the country.185 In time, the situation became more complex for Egyptian Jews. The Palestine War had already weakened their position in the country and the Lavon affair in 1954 cast yet more suspicion on them; the attitudes of Egyptians and of Egyptian officialdom worsened in their regards for the country’s Jews. The Suez war and Israel’s participation in the attack on Egypt increased this suspicion and damaged relations between Egyptians

198

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

and the state on the one hand and Egyptian Jews on the other. The new Egyptian authorities made Palestine an important plank of its political platform and its struggle against imperialism. Egyptian Jews who were compelled to leave the country, especially those with no clear nationality status – that is, those who were neither classified as Egyptians nor had foreign nationality and were considered stateless as well as those with Egyptian nationality who were deprived of their Egyptian citizenship – reported an unpleasant deterioration in their existence before emigration.186 Political activities among Egyptian Jews, among them mainly communists, often precipitated their forced emigration from Egypt if they were holders of foreign passports;187 others with Egyptian nationality were imprisoned in the Nasser era.188 Despite this worsening of their existence, there were still about 50,000 Egyptian Jews in the country on the eve of the Suez war in 1956,189 many working in the country and studying at Egyptian universities.190 After the Suez war, Egyptian Jews were pushed again to emigrate and their number in Egypt decreased to 50,000 in the two years following the war.191 Other sources refer to 30,000.192 The Egyptian authorities arrested many male Egyptian Jews during the Suez war; this increased the insecurity of the community.193 British and French subjects in the country were clearly isolated and forced to flee as a result of the Suez war. Their assets and property were seized and their residence in Egypt came permanently to an end. While Greeks were increasingly choosing to flee the country,194 they existed apart from other minorities as it was generally Greeks who ran the Suez Canal in the years after the canal’s nationalization in 1956.195 As Greece had not been an imperial power and had also not come into conflict with Egypt, there was less tension and suspicion in relation to Egyptian Greeks. The consolidation of the authoritarian system,196 the rising nationalism that was an important component of the ideology of the new Egyptian state, hostility to the former imperial powers and toward the western world more generally and the conflict with Israel: all these factors pushed to diminish social tolerance and to increase suspicion. The trend toward nationalization pushed matters in the direction of evergreater independence and in a narrow view taken at the time, between 1952 and 1961, minorities were seen as obstacles blocking this independence. In such a state of affairs, the chances of minorities’ continued presence in the country were dubious.

MINORITIES

AND THE POST-WORLD

WAR II ERA

199

Egyptian Jews, Egyptian Greeks, Syrians and Armenians might have survived all the political turbulence, if their economic status had not changed. Newly established joint stock companies with Egyptian Jewish and Egyptian Greek participation came into existence, even if in limited numbers, in the years from 1955 to 1960: there were three such companies with Egyptian Greek participation and six with Egyptian Jewish participation.197 The nationalization laws and the socialist tendencies of the Egyptian state deprived minorities of their sources of income and deprived them of the ability to make use of their special entrepreneurial skills. Law Nos 117, 118 and 119 of 1961198 followed Law 315 of 1955 and Ministerial Decision 10 of 1956 in transferring all foreign companies and foreign ownership into Egyptian hands: the last step of Egyptianization. Law Nos 117, 118 and 119 of 1961 made all companies state property, a policy that affected not only joint stock companies but all private sector business, with thousands of small- and medium-sized businesses not considered in the present study. In the first instance, these laws transformed the Egyptian economy by eliminating the private sector. With it, however, the economic existence of minorities had been dealt a fatal blow, as the Jewish, Greek, Armenian and Syrian communities had depended on the private sector for their livelihoods. Furthermore, nationalization transformed more than the economy, with education also being nationalized at the time.199 The nationalization process was, on the one hand, an expression of a completely new, ideological economic policy with influences from ideologues such as Oskar Lange and which sought complete authority over the private sector. The process was arguably, on the other hand, a response to the external pressure Egypt faced and demonstrated the perceived need to prove its third way, an independent path that was closer to the socialist economic model of the eastern bloc than to any other. Of significance, too, was the new class that emerged in the aftermath of the coup/revolution of 1952. Within a decade this class had consolidated its power and that power – and the livelihood of the class itself – came from its control over the economy. In 1954, persons with their official military position started to be mentioned as partners in new established companies, or members of the board of directors of companies.200 There would have been no control over the economy for this class, nor income to be gained from it, had it remained private and operated by entrepreneurs and the older class of entrepreneurial families.

200

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

The power and influence of this new class would have been challenged had the private sector remained. The quickest and surest way to guarantee its own existence was to make the whole country state owned. Egyptianizing and later nationalizing private companies did not necessarily serve the interests of the workers and employers of these companies, an assertion supported by documents of the MS. In 1960, workers of the Egyptian Company for Textile Industries in Alexandria sent a two-page letter of complaint concerning the neglect of their rights after the Egyptianization of the company. The letter further maintained that their wages had decreased since Egyptianization too. They went on to complain about the deleterious polices of the new management. The workers appealed to the Companies Department to ensure their rights were upheld and to adjudicate in order to return the company to the same level as before the changes.201 This example of the workers of the Egyptian Company for Textile Industries in Alexandria can be considered as an indication of the inexperience of the new managers, who most probably were members of the above mentioned new class. The reaction of the MS was curt, claiming that the grievances expressed in the letter were not part of the department’s remit. The letter should thus be filed but not followed up. 202 1961 brought an end to a long tradition of ethnic and religious diversity that had flourished in Egypt through several historical eras. Many of those who migrated to Egypt had done so for political, religious, or economic reasons and had been absorbed into society. Developments in the region and their domestic consequences in the late 1950s gave rise to the nationalization laws that not only deprived Egypt gradually of its minorities but also saw the erosion of a large part of its private sector. The buildings, factories, machines and lands of private companies were still in Egypt but the minds that had led to their productivity had vanished. Entrepreneurship was one of the main factors that had led to the success of the Egyptian private sector. Egypt’s minorities had been the principal entrepreneurs; their networks had supported their work and the building of the companies that had gained a special prominence in the market. Ending the private sector also ended the role of minorities and, with it, the unique diversity that had marked Egyptian society.

CONCLUSION

The histories of minorities’ positions in Egyptian society and their roles in the economy are fraught and have been the subject of much fractious debate. This tumultuous reconsideration of Egypt’s minorities has primarily arisen from the political, social, economic and intellectual shifts that occurred in Egypt in the years after 1952 and 1954. Significant in influencing these changes in the wake of ‘Egyptianism’ has been panArabism, which shifted Egyptian political and social awareness, raised questions concerning who is and is not ‘Arab’ and pushed ‘the Others’ of Egyptian society to confined margins. At the same time, the process of decolonization rejected all that was related to British colonialism and, in so doing, minorities were considered a politically undifferentiated remnant of the Empire with no necessary and organic position in Egyptian society. What is more, the condemnation of state, society and economy before 1952 – in which minorities played a natural role that was denounced too – has dominated the historiography since that watershed year, with little emphasis placed on critical historical analysis of the pre1952 era. This approach of dismissing what came before 1952 had the upper hand in historical and political analysis until the 1990s. During the 2000s a certain nostalgia and a rethinking of the pre-1952 era emerged. This is noticed through TV series, such as one about King Farouq and the Egyptian Jewish singer Laila Murad; and also through the different documentary films in 2007, 2013 and 2014; and books like the one of Abu al-Ghar and several novels about Egypt’s Jews. Finally, the economic path of the country since 1957, which reached its peak with the nationalization of the economy in 1960–61, did not favor the private

202

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

sector. It belittled the private sector and demonized the agrarian bourgeoisie to promote state-controlled socialism, contending that its agents were little more than greedy capitalists who had abused the people. Minorities, both local and foreign, whether they be Armenian, Greek, Italian, Jewish, Syrian, or otherwise, were very much involved in the private sector and, indeed, dominated a portion of it. In this new era in which the public sector was supreme, minorities were seen entirely as avaricious elements of the private sector. In an effort to readdress these conclusions about the minorities of modern Egypt, this work has analyzed their role in the Egyptian economy by examining archival documents as primary sources through the lenses of the growth theory of Joseph Schumpeter and network theory, focusing on the two largest minority communities in terms of their numbers and their economic influence, the Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews. In doing so, this thesis has revealed a vital chapter in the history of modern Egypt, seen in particular in the final two decades studied here. This chapter marks the beginning of the end of the era of a multi-ethnic and multireligious Egyptian society. This change in Egypt’s society and debates about its minorities have not been unique to Egypt. Indeed, when considering Egypt’s Jews this is especially true. The political structure of the Middle East after 1948 has seen wide debates about minorities in the region and in Israel in particular. The debate about the Egyptian Greeks and their role has not been in the center of political debate in Egypt as was the case of the Egyptian Jews; this is mainly because of the different political relationship between Egypt and Greece compared to the relation between Israel and Egypt. The nationalistic historical narratives, both the Egyptian and the Zionist ones, have had the upper hand. This study presents a more balanced perspective by considering archive documents, historical and literary works including those written since the mid-1990s, a consideration coupled with a critical examination of the period running from the end of the nineteenth century through to the middle of the twentieth century. In such a way, this study has shown that minorities as such and minority entrepreneurs and holders of investment capital among them, were not in and of themselves adherents of the British administration in Egypt. Conflicts of interest were not uncommon. The juxtaposition of both the Egyptian and Zionist nationalist perspectives has revealed paradoxes. Although both tend to move in

CONCLUSION

203

opposite directions in perceiving Egyptian Jewish history, they have similarities. First, both perceive the history of Egyptian Jewry through the lens of nationalism. Each interpretation serves its own purposes, but they both rely on a shared body of thought regarding that history. Second, they deliver an analysis that focuses only on developments within Egypt, neglecting or even ignoring developments occurring outside Egyptian geographical and intellectual space. Furthermore, both narratives support each other and agree in significant ways. Despite their opposing goals, both historical narratives are complementary. The Egyptian nationalist perspective argues that Jews had a good life in Egypt with equal rights; they abused their good fortune and turned their backs on Egypt at the first opportunity. This argument rejects the Jews as an organic component of Egyptian society and sees them as guests, with ‘authentic’ Egyptians as hosts. Such a reading finds agreement with the Zionist perspective; both believe that to be a Jew is to be fundamentally an outsider in every society except that of Israel. Analyzing the diversity of Egyptian Jewry as this study, however, shows that the issue was more complex than having a single religious and homeland identity. The second argument raised by Arab nationalists was that most Egyptian Jews were sympathetic to Zionism and willingly part of a project aiming at ‘global dominance’ beyond the establishment of Israel. This concurs with the Zionist claim that Egyptian Jews were attracted to Zionism and interested in migration to Israel. The discussion in Laskier’s work about Operation Passover and the circulation of misleading data on it demonstrates that the Zionist movement needed to prove that there were sufficient Zionists and potential immigrants. Laskier acknowledges his own doubts about the operation’s success. In sum, this makes clear that both arguments are based more on ideology than on solid evidence. Each side rewrites the history of Egyptian Jewry, forcing it into a frame that confirms a pre-existing narrative. Works outside nationalist ideologies, such as academic works, pieces of literature, the analysis of minorities’ entrepreneurs’ behavior and the tracing of religious and social traditions alongside a critical reading of historical events, have all shown that, to a large degree, Egyptian Jews as well as Egyptian Greeks were a fully integrated component of Egyptian society with a class structure reflecting that of wider society. The lack

204

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

of political conflict between Egypt and Greece has meant that the historiography on Egypt’s Greeks has been less nationalistic and bitterly divided as has that concerning Egypt’s Jews. It has thus been easier to see that Greeks in Egypt were also part and parcel of Egyptian society and shared its social structure too. Among other examples, the non-Jewish Egyptian upper-class was, as well as the Egyptian Jewish upper-class, partly francophone and moved within its own social and economic ambit. This was to some extent also the case of the Egyptian Greek upper-class. Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks were, like many nonJewish and non-Greek Egyptians, very much involved in leftist political organizations. Egyptian Greeks included a considerable number of the worker class in the country. Economically, the business strategies of entrepreneurs, their innovation and networking, were mainly a minority phenomenon, later adopted as business strategies by non-Jewish and non-Greek Egyptian entrepreneurs in the years following 1920 when business partnerships were not limited to minority entrepreneurs. Mutual business interests and mutual visions of investment had by then become the common denominator. The theoretical framework of this study has been the Schumpeterian growth theory. According to this model, entrepreneurship is at the core of economic dynamism and growth. For Schumpeter, innovation comprised five elements: new goods, new methods of production, the opening of new markets, the conquest of new sources of supply and the implementation of new industrial organization. These elements are the requisites for successful entrepreneurship. Mark Casson, Andrew Godly and Franc ois Caron have extended the Schumpeterian concept and added the four pillars of innovation: awareness of changing needs, the transformation of needs into products, pioneering and the accumulation of knowledge. Innovation can be achieved and entrepreneurial success gained when the secondary characteristics of entrepreneurship are combined: judgment in decision making, addressing complexity in decision making, accessing finance, maintaining a good reputation and selecting partners. Other important features of entrepreneurship are strategies used in exploiting opportunities and the institutional context for entrepreneurship. Mark Casson has discussed networking in relation to the synthesis of information as an entrepreneurial strategy needed for undertaking new entrepreneurial activities. These conditions lead to successful entrepreneurship.

CONCLUSION

205

This study has demonstrated that successful entrepreneurs are those who, in addition to having the aforementioned characteristics, make use of the network strategy in one of its two levels in every phase of their entrepreneurial behavior, not just at the major decision making phase. Networking facilitates access to reliable information and is based on trust compared with cases where such networking does not occur. Information that increases trust reduces risk, in turn reducing cost and increasing chances for higher profits. Information and trust provided by a good network are central to sound entrepreneurial decisions. The relationship between innovation, the core of entrepreneurship and networking is the key for entrepreneurial success. The analysis of data of about 759 joint stock companies chartered in the period 1885– 1960 has shown beyond doubt that Egyptian Jewish participation in founding new companies during this period was about 34.5 per cent and that of Egyptian Greeks was about 22.7 per cent. The central element of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship, innovation, was clearly present in the Egyptian market. Innovative companies accounted for 30 per cent of the total number of companies in the Egyptian market, with Egyptian Jews participating in 44 per cent of the total number of innovative companies and Egyptian Greeks about 28 per cent. Furthermore, networking on two levels was an entrepreneurial strategy clearly at work in the Egyptian market in the period considered here, with at least 37.25 per cent of the companies demonstrating networking. Egyptian Jews showed the highest rate of networking on level one, while for Egyptian Greeks, networking on level one was limited. Both groups, however, showed intensive participation in networking on level two. The combination of networking as an entrepreneurial strategy and entrepreneurial innovation was the key to success and dominance in the market. In the Egyptian market, this combination occurred in about 24 per cent of companies. Egyptian Jews participated in 51 per cent of the companies having this combination and Egyptian Greeks in 29 per cent. Both minority groups account for 80 per cent of the total. The economic role of Egyptian Greeks, a group who numbered between 50,000 and 80,000, and Egyptian Jews, of whom there were between 80,000 and 100,000, out of a total population of 18,966,767 in 1947, was unarguably out of proportion to their number. This role was achieved through entrepreneurial behavior that clearly conformed to the Schumpeterian mould. This entrepreneurial behavior was supported by

206

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

minority communities whose structures facilitated networking. This meant, in turn, that minority entrepreneurs did not have to establish networks. The networks existed before the entrepreneur undertook activity in the market. This provided minority entrepreneurs with a permanent comparative advantage. What is more, the Egyptian context – with its Capitulations, mixed courts and classic liberal institutions in place under the British occupation and the Egyptian governments of the 1930s – provided a setting that enabled entrepreneurial activity among minority communities and paved the way for their economic dominance. Other Egyptian entrepreneurs adopted these strategies of innovation and networking. Bank Misr, the first Egyptian Bank, was just such an innovation and one which gave rise to more than 20 companies under the Misr Group. The bank’s significance lay in the fact that it represented a turning point in Egyptian self-confidence concerning Egyptians’ ability to run their own economy and found a national industry. Here, a new philosophy of combining national and economic interests emerged in Egypt. This new philosophy included national Egyptian elements, financial capital in particular, but did not exclude non-national elements of human capital and clients. Multiple identities, having mixed ethnic and cultural backgrounds and holding different nationalities – even among the members of one family – was not unusual in the Egypt of the first half of the twentieth century. Nor was this experience limited to Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews. Thus, the fluidity across ethnic and cultural boundaries in matters commercial and economic is hardly surprising, a detail that has been ignored or negatively interpreted in different writings about minorities in Egypt. The term commonly used to describe these new Egyptian entrepreneurs of the 1920s and after, ‘national bourgeoisie’, is a misleading one. It implies that the new industries of the time were Egyptian in that they emerged out of a national understanding. They were industries in Egypt and were founded mainly with Egyptian capital but they did not exclude other capital. This latter detail is significant. In many cases, given the fluidity of citizenship mentioned above, it was impossible to clearly separate Egyptian from foreign capital. Archival documents have shown that the commercial involvement of foreign capital in Egyptian industries was common until the 1940s and even into the 1950s.

CONCLUSION

207

Entrepreneurs’ behavior over the period studied here varied. Egyptian Jews were more involved in partnerships with other Egyptians than Egyptian Greeks, a fact stemming from their different level of involvement in Egyptian politics and their different kinds of networking. During the 1930s, the rise of Egyptian nationalism and Islamic movements changed the country’s political landscape and new forces affected minorities considerably, even if these new forces did not threaten them. Nationality laws were issued in this context, though they did not necessarily pose a problem in that decade. It was later, in the late 1940s and as it concerns Egyptian Jews in the aftermath of the Palestine War in particular, that minorities’ situation became more complex. Many have argued that it is especially telling that many of Egypt’s Jews did not bother to get the correct documents to prove their Egyptianness. In the context of the 1930s, however, it is important to ask who – be they Egyptian and Muslim, Copt, or others – thought of going through official channels, with all their bureaucratic and financial difficulties, in order to obtain documents proving one’s Egyptian citizenship for no immediate and necessary reason? Just as Egyptian Muslims and Copts did not feel the need to get documents to prove they belonged to the country, Egyptian Jews likewise appear not to have thought it necessary. Between 1929 and 1947– 48, Egyptian nationality law did not change, but the internal and external political context did – and the attitude toward minorities along with it. These changed circumstances drastically altered Jews’ status in particular, leading to a near complete reversal of fortune. While according to the 1947 census about 75 per cent of Egypt’s Jews were Egyptian, 3.3 per cent were stateless and the rest foreigners, the implementation of policies related to Company Law 138, combined with the procrastination of Egyptian authorities, pushed many of that 75 per cent into statelessness. Company Law 138 of 1947 was the main reason why Egyptian Jews needed documentary proof of their status as Egyptian nationals, regardless of whether they had been rooted in the country for generations. This law was mainly directed at limiting the wide-ranging freedom enjoyed by the private sector in the 1930s and 1940s while at the same time trying to provide employment for young Egyptians by limiting the number of non-Egyptian employees and workers. The Palestine War and changes on the Egyptian political scene – especially the increased influence of nationalist and Islamist groups – meant that, in time, the issue of the

208

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Egyptian Jews took on a more political dimension. The Companies Department was established in order to oversee the Law’s implementation and the department and the law evolved to become the main mechanism of defining who was Egyptian. In such a way, Egyptian Jews and others were deprived of their Egyptian nationality. Company Law 138 also enhanced Egyptian Greek migration. Many unemployed Egyptian Greeks – especially after World War II – had little chance to be re-integrated in the Egyptian labor market. 1956 marked a general and fundamental turning point for Egypt’s minorities. Gradually, the year spelled the end for Egypt’s Jews politically and economically. The political consequences of the Suez war that followed the Operation Susannah (Lavon affair) in 1954 exacerbated the situation of Jews in the country. Egypt’s leaders showed little wisdom in their handling of Egypt’s Jews, at least some of whom were part of Egyptian culture and society and played a considerable role in the country’s economy and cultural life. Rather than absorbing them into national life in the wake of the Palestine conflict and, thus, considering them an important element of Egypt’s unique diversity, the state was agnostic and denigrating in turns. Although waves of migration of Egyptian Greeks and Egyptian Jews had started earlier, a silent expulsion resulted from the Suez war. Egyptian Greeks had a reprieve because of their important role in running the Suez Canal after its nationalization. Although the economic policy – foreshadowed after 1952 in the vision of Rashid al-Barrawi, a strong supporter of the so-called mixed economy – had social tendencies, it did not push initially for a state-owned economy. Although the nationalization of the canal did not imply at the time that nationalization ought be implemented automatically for all projects, companies and sectors of the Egyptian economy, it was nevertheless the starting point of nationalization. The automatic tendency toward nationalization after the success of the canal’s nationalization was the perilous path taken by Egyptian authorities. This occurred in parallel with the consolidation of the authoritarian system by limiting any possible democratic political, intellectual and media activities. The interests of the newly emerged class were coupled with its members’ newfound positions of economic importance and the privileges that went with them. The majority came from a military background and they realized that a strong, powerful public sector would secure them in their positions and would further

CONCLUSION

209

aggrandize their interests and privileges. A strong private sector that relied on a deeply rooted and traditional agricultural and industrial bourgeoisie might challenge or even usurp their newly gained power. The policies of the new rulers after 1952 were also a reaction to the old regime that was in many ways dysfunctional. There were millions of landless and poor peasants living in horrible poverty. The Pasha class was politically corrupt and the British still occupied the country (until 1956). This new class undoubtedly favored a strong public sector and the nationalization (or socialization) of the economy as prescribed by Oskar Lange, the economic mastermind and apologist for state socialism. The quickest and surest way for this new class to guarantee its own existence and standing was to make the whole country state-owned. This militarybased class consolidated its influence in Egypt and over its economy in the decades from the 1950s until quite recent times: the two presidents of Egypt to follow Nasser were from the military. Since the 1950s, the military has been deeply involved in economic projects and guaranteed its privileges as a result. The struggle for democracy in Egypt since January 25, 2011, has sought to restrict the power of the military class intimately intertwined in the ruling of the country, a class that is not yet ready to compromise any of the privileges it gained for itself since 1961. Law Nos. 117, 118 and 119 of 1961 followed Law No. 315 of 1955 and Ministerial Decision No. 10 of 1956 in transferring all foreign companies and foreign property into Egyptian hands: the last step of Egyptianization. These laws made all companies state property, a policy that affected not only joint stock companies but all private sector business, with thousands of small- and medium-sized businesses owned by Egyptians, Egyptian Greeks, Egyptian Jews and other minorities not considered in the present study. These laws eliminated the private sector and, with it, the country’s minorities. In eliminating the private sector, the entrepreneurial spirit that had been the locomotive of the economy since the late nineteenth century was also taken away: the individuals who had been the masterminds of economic growth – whether Egyptian Jews, Egyptian Greeks, or others including Egyptian Muslims and Copts – were pushed aside or expelled from the country. The companies’ buildings, machines and working staff continued without the inspiration and ingenuity that had previously driven them; they were doomed to fail, as the development of the Egyptian economy in the decades that followed 1961 shows.

210

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Egyptian Greeks, Egyptian Jews and a considerable number of educated, middle- and upper-class Egyptians and other minorities were compelled to leave the country. The irony of fate made many Egyptian Jews who had not left Egypt before 1961 because they were rooted to the place the ones who may well have suffered the biggest losses. While the majority of Egypt’s Jews who left in the late 1940s and the 1950s had the chance, however slim, to choose countries all over the world as their place of immigration, those who left after 1961 had no other choice but emigrating to Israel; it was the only country that was ready to accept them. Despite this, the Jewish community of Egyptian origin kept its political and cultural diversity even after leaving Egypt. Interviews, talks and meetings with both Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks show that what they share is their strong affiliation with the country, its food, its culture and its people, alongside a never ending nostalgia for their Egypt.

APPENDIX

1885 1886 1887 1887 1888 1888 1889 1889 1889 1889 1889 1890 1892 1892 1893 1893 1893 1894 1894 1894 1894

Year

Name

Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-misriyya (G) ˙ Sharikat al-Ramı¯ al-faransa¯wiyya al-misriyya2 (J, I, O, E) ˙ Egyptian Pressing Co. Ltd.3 (O) Sundu¯q al-ʾisku¯nt wal-iqtisa¯d4 (I, O) ˙ ˙ Alexandria Bonded Warehouse Co. Ltd.5 (O) Sharikat murabbı¯ al-naʿa¯m bil-Matariyya6 (G, O) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿumu¯miyya lil-kabs wal-takhzı¯n7 (G, GB, O) Sharikat maʿa¯mil al-zayt wal-sa¯bu¯n al-misriyya8 (G, J, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Sundu¯q al-misrı¯ li-tawfı¯r wa-taslı¯f al-nuqu¯d9 (G, O) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya al-tawfı¯qiyya lil-mila¯ha wal-injira¯da wal-tija¯ra10 (O, E) ˙ Sharika musa¯hima misriyya ʿan ʿaqa¯r ka¯ʾin bi-sha¯riʿ Sharı¯f bil-Iskandariyya11 (G, O) ˙ Sikkat hadı¯d fı¯lʿa¯sima wa-minha¯ ila¯ Hilwa¯n12 (J, I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat ʿumu¯m maʿa¯mil al-sukkar bil-wajh al-qiblı¯13 (J, I, O) Sharikat al-maka¯bis al-hurra al-misriyya14 (J) ˙ Sharika li-halı¯j al-qutn bil-Zaqa¯zı¯q15 (O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-a¯tha¯r al-misriyya16 (O) ˙ Sharikat maʿmal al-sukkar wa-takrı¯rihi bil-qutr al-misrı¯17 (J, I, O) ˙ ˙ Sharika musa¯hima lil-ʿaqa¯rat fı¯lIbra¯himiyya18 (G, I) Sharikat ʾaqta¯n Kafr al-Zayya¯t19 (O) Al-sharika al-faransa¯wiyya li-amla¯k al-Jazı¯ra bil-Qa¯hira20 ʿaraba¯t al-umnı¯bu¯s fı¯l-Iskandariyya21 (B)

1

Indu V Cons V Indu Cons Infr V

S2 N

W2

S S M S2

W2

V V V V V

Y

W2 Q W2 W1 Y

W2

S1

W1

W1

AND

V

W2 W2 M

V

K

JEWISH

Indu Indu Fina Trad Infr Infr Indu Indu Indu

Indu Fina Fina

Trad

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Classification of Companies Established 1885 –1960. See pp. xv – xvi for abbreviations used in this table.

212 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1897 1897 1897 1897 1898 1898 1898

1895 1895 1895 1895 1896 1896 1896 1896 1896 1897 1897 1897

Year

22

Name

Maʿmil al-thalj bil-Iskandariyya (G, I) Sikkat hadı¯d Qinna¯ Aswa¯n23 (J, AH, I, O, E) ˙ Makha¯zin wa-mustawdaʿa¯t Mina al-Basal24 (G) ˙ Sharikat sabk al-maʿa¯din bil-qutr al-misrı¯25 (G, I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharika musa¯hima al-sikak al-hadı¯diyya fı¯l-wajh al-bahrı¯26 (GB) ˙ 27 Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-misriyya (J, AH, I, E) ˙ Sharikat al-sibakh al-ʿumu¯miyya al-misriyya28 (J, GB, O) ˙ 29 Sharikat al-rayy al-misriyya (J, I, E) ˙ Sharikat maʿmal al-zuja¯j bil-qutr al-misrı¯30 (AH, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Maʿmal al-waraq al-misrı¯31 (J, AH, I, E) ˙ Sharikat al-sikak al-hadı¯diyya al-zira¯ʿiyya al-misriyya32 (GB) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-sikak al-hadı¯diyya al-iqtisa¯diyya bi-sharq al-diyya¯r ˙ ˙ 33 al-misriyya (J, AH, I) ˙ Sharikat al-musa¯hima al-zira¯ʿiyya wa -l-sina¯ʿiyya bil-diyya¯r al-misriyya34 (J, AH, I) ˙ ˙ Maʿmal hila¯ja bil-Mahalla al-Kubra¯35 (O) ˙ Sharikat musa¯hamat ara¯dı¯ al-mudun wal-dawa¯hı¯ bil-qutr al-misrı¯36 (J, AH, I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat musa¯hamat al-su¯da¯ al-tabı¯ʿiyya al-misriyya37 (Z, O) ˙38 ˙ Sharikat al-qita¯ra¯t al-mustaʿjala (GB) ˙ Sharikat ʿaraba¯t al-ʾumnı¯bu¯s bi-al-Qa¯hira39 (J, I) Sharikat maʿmal sa¯bu¯n al-qabba¯rı¯40 (G, I) ˙

Continued

S

V

Q W2

S S2 R W2

S W2 S S2

W2

W2 S

V V V V V

V V V V

Infr V Indu Cons Indu V Infr Infr V Indu

Indu Infr Trad Indu Infr Cons Indu Infr Indu Indu Infr Infr

W1

M

W1

M

M Q

Q

M

Q W2 Q

W2

M

M

Q

Q

W1

W1

W1

R

W1

W1

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 213

Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-tija¯riyya al-ha¯lla mahal al-khawa¯ja Fru¯jar wa-shuraka¯h41 (GB) Al-bank al-sina¯ʿı¯ al-misrı¯42 (G, GB, B, I) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-tiya¯tra¯t bil-Qa¯hira43 (J, B, AH, I, O) Al-sharika al-inklı¯ziyya al-amrı¯kiyya li-wa¯bu¯ra¯t al-Nı¯l wal-lu¯kanda¯t44 (GB, B, A, AH) Sharikat al-dukha¯n al-misriyya45 (GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat jalb al-bitru¯l46 (G, B, AH, I, E) Sharikat al-makhbaz al-sina¯ʿı¯ al-sihhı¯ bi-Misr47 (G, GB, B) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat dukha¯n wa-saja¯yir Ma¯tu¯siya¯n48 (A) Sharikat lukanda¯t Ju¯rj Ninjufitsh al-misriyya49 (G, AH) ˙ Sharikat al-ʿaqa¯ra¯t al-misriyya50 (J, B, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-sikru¯tah al-ahliyya al-misriyya51 (G, J, GB, AH, Z, O) ˙ Sharikat amla¯k daʿirat Dra¯nı¯t Basha¯52 (G) Sharikat ihtika¯r al-tunba¯k53 (G, O) ˙ Sharikat musa¯hama¯t Misr lil- kahraba¯ʾ54 (G, GB, AH, O) ˙ Sharikat Qinna¯55 (GB, O) Sharikat atya¯n Warda¯n56 (GB, E) Sharikat saja¯yir Salu¯nikı¯57 (G, J, I, O) Sharikat musa¯hama¯t wadı¯ Ku¯m Umbu¯58 (J, GB, I, E) Sharikat saja¯yir Kilyu¯batra¯59 (J)

Name

V V V V

Indu Indu Indu Indu Infr Cons Indu Cons Trad Infr Ming Cons Indu Indu Indu

W2

Q

Y

W2 S W1 V

Q M

Q

V V V

W2 W2 W2 W1 W2 S W2

W2 S W2

R

W1

W2

C1

W2

AND

V

V V V

Fina Infr Infr

Trad

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

JEWISH

1899 1899 1899 1899 1899 1900 1900 1901 1902 1902 1903 1903 1904 1904 1904

1899 1899 1899

1898

Year

Continued

214 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1904 1904 1904 1904 1904 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905 1905

Year 60

Name

Sharikat qana¯l al-munazzala wal-mila¯ha (GB, A, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-misriyya61 (G, GB) ˙ Sharikat istiksha¯f wa-hafr al-a¯ba¯r al-irtiwa¯ziyya62 (GB, AH, Z, O, E) ˙ 63 Sharikat al-tabrı¯d al-misriyya (J, A, E) ˙ Sharikat harth ara¯dı¯ tirʿat al-Ibra¯himiyya64 (O) ˙ Sharikat shira¯ʾ al-ara¯dı¯ al-misriyya65 (J, A, AH, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat ara¯dı¯ al-Shaykh Fadl66 (J, GB, AH, I, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-mahaliyya li-maba¯nı¯ al-Iskandariyya67 (GB, O) ˙ Sharikat al-Daʾira al-Saniyya al-misriyya68 (J, GB, I, O) ˙ Sharikat fana¯diq al-wajh al-qiblı¯69 (GB, O) Sharikat al-fana¯diq al-muftakhara bil-qutr al-misrı¯70 (J, AH) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-aʿma¯l al-misriyya71 (J, AH, I, O) ˙ 72 Sharikat tarqiyyat al-maba¯nı¯ al-misriyya (G, GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-wa¯bu¯ra¯t fil-Nı¯l73 (J, GB, AH, I, O) Sharikat al-mila¯ha bil-dilta¯ wal-wajh al-qiblı¯74 (G, GB) ˙ Al-sharika al-suhamiyya li-istina¯ʿ al-saja¯yir al-misriyya75 (AH, I) ˙˙ ˙ Sharikat al-ara¯dı¯ al-gharbiyya76 (GB, B, I, E) ˙ 77 Al-ittiha¯d al-ʿaqa¯rı¯ al-misrı¯ (G, J, GB, O) ˙ ˙ Sharikat ara¯dı¯ al-bina¯ʾ al-misriyya78 (G, GB, I, O) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-injlı¯ziyya al-misriyya li-tajziʾat al-ara¯dı¯79 (GB, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-fana¯diq wal-masa¯kin al-wataniyya80 (GB, O) ˙

Continued

Infr Infr Infr Trad Cons Cons Cons Cons Cons Infr Infr Cons Cons Infr Infr Indu Cons Cons Cons Cons Infr V

V V

V V

Y

S B1 W1 W2

Q

M W1

C1

S R M

Q

S

W2 S

W2

M

W1

R

M

R

H

R

W1

W2

W1

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 215

W2 W1 W2 Y W2 W2 W1 W2 W2 Y S

V V V

V V V

V V V

W2

Q W2

V V

V

S W1

V V

K1 Q Q

R

M

W2 M

W1

W1

W1

AND

Cons Indu Infr Infr Trad Infr Infr Cons Trad Indu Infr Jour Infr Indu Infr

Insu Indu Cons Indu Infr

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

JEWISH

1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906 1906

Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-wiqa¯ya min al-harı¯q (G, J, AH, I) ˙ ˙ Sharikat maʿa¯mil aruz al-Iskandariyya wal-Rashı¯d82 (J, GB, AH, I, O) Sharikat al-mashru¯ʿa¯t al-ʿaqa¯riyya wal-aʿma¯l83 (GB, AH, O) Sharikat amal wa bayʿ al-ahja¯r al-sina¯ʿiyya lil-maba¯nı¯84 (G, J, GB, A, AH, Z, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat sikak al-hadı¯d al-kahraba¯ʾiyya bil-Qa¯hira wa wa¯ha¯t ˙ ˙ ʿAin Shams85 (GB, B, A, O, E) Sharikat ara¯dı¯ al-Qa¯hira wa- dawahı¯ha¯86 (B) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-nashr al-iʿla¯na¯t87 (AH, O) ˙ Sharikat al-autu¯mu¯bı¯l al-misriyya lil-naql88 (G, GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-haya¯h bi- Hilwa¯n89 (J, GB, I, O) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-iqtisa¯d al-akhawiyya90 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-bawa¯khir al-nı¯liyya al-mustaʿjalla91 (G, GB, B, O) Sharikat Akaizu¯r au¯tı¯l92 (GB, B, O) Sharikat ara¯dı¯ al-binaa¯ʾ fı¯ dawa¯hı¯ al-Qa¯hira93 (G, GB, B, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat makha¯zin al-autu¯mubı¯l al-misriyya94 (GB, B) ˙ Sharikat al-ahja¯r al-sina¯ʿiyya95 (G, GB) ˙ ˙ Sharikat ida¯rat ʿaraba¯t al-autu¯mubı¯l al-ʿumu¯miyya96 (GB, B, O) Sharikat al-nashr al-misriyya97 (G, AH, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-naql98 (G, J, GB, I) Al-sharika al-misriyya al-swı¯sriyya lil-aʿma¯l al-hadidiyya99 (G, J, AH, Z) ˙ ˙ Sharikat tawlı¯d al-nu¯r wal-quwwa¯ al-kahraba¯ʾiyya100 (J, AH, Z, I, O)

1905 1906 1906 1906 1906

81

Name

Year

Continued

216 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1906 1906 1906 1906 1907 1907 1907 1907 1907 1907 1907 1907 1907 1907 1907 1908 1908 1908 1908

1906

Year

Name

Al-sharika al-misriyya li-aʿma¯l al-kutal wa-ardiyyat ˙ ˙ al-maba¯nı¯ bil-asmant101 (J, GB, AH, Z, I, O) Al-sharika al-ma¯liyya li-ara¯dı¯ madı¯nat al-Qa¯hira102 (J, B, AH, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Ba¯la¯s autı¯l al-misriyya103 (GB, AH, I, O) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-maka¯bis al-alma¯niyya104 (O) ˙ Sharikat tawlı¯d al-kahraba¯ʾ wa-sunʿ al-thalj105 (Z, O) ˙ Sharikat tasdı¯r al-bı¯ra wa-darb al-aruz106 (Z, I, O) ˙ Sharikat al-masa¯kin al-iqtisa¯diyya al-misriyya107 (I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-aʿma¯l al-handasiyya al-sihiyya108 (J, AH, I, O) ˙ ˙ 109 Sharikat ara¯dı¯ al-Su¯da¯n al-tija¯riyya (G, GB, AH) ˙ 110 Bank al-ittiha¯d al-misrı¯ (J, AH, I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat amla¯k al-Qa¯hira111 (GB, B, AH) Sharikat ara¯dı¯ al-qabba¯rı¯112 (G, GB, Z, I, O) ˙ Sharikat al-muqa¯wala¯t fil-mudun wal-qura¯113 (G, J, Z, I, O) Sharikat al-aʿma¯l al-handasiyya bil-Iskandariyya114 (G, GB) Sharikat hada’iq al-qubba115 (B, O) ˙ Sharikat takhzı¯n zayt al-bitru¯l116 (J, GB) Sharikat tawrı¯d haja¯t al-ʿumma¯l117 (G, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-musa¯hama al-ʿaqa¯riyya li- ara¯dı¯ al-Jı¯za wal-Rawda118 (G, O) ˙ Sharikat al-hamma¯ma¯t al-kabı¯ra119 (G, J, AH, I, O) ˙ 120 Krı¯dı¯ Lu¯ka¯l (G, O, E)

Continued

Cons Infr Trad Indu Indu Cons Cons Cons Fina Cons Cons Cons Cons Infr Trad Trad Cons Infr Fina V

V V

V V

V

V

Indu V

Q

W2

Y

S2

Y W1

Q

Q

Q

W2 Y S W2 M

Y R

R

W1

W1

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 217

1908 1908 1908 1908 1909 1909 1909 1909 1909 1910 1910 1910 1910 1910 1910 1910 1910 1911 1911 1911 1911

Year

121

Name

Al-bank al-tija¯rı¯ al-misrı¯ (O, E) ˙ Bank al-khasm al-misrı¯122 (I) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-sina¯ʿa wal-maba¯nı¯123 (G, J, I, O) ˙ ˙ Maʿamil al-jibs bi-jihat al-balah124 (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Sidı¯ Sa¯lim al-misriyya125 (G, GB, Z, I, O) ˙ 126 Sharikat al-siba¯kh al-misriyya (GB, Z, E) ˙ Jinira¯l land Kriyishin ku¯mba¯nı¯127 (G, GB, B, E) Sharikat al-tu¯b al-sina¯ʿı¯ al-misriyya128 (G, J, AH, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat rayy al-wajh al-qiblı¯129 (O) Sharikat al-tu¯b al-ramlı¯ bil-Qa¯hira130 (J, GB, AH, Z, I) Sharikat al-taʿa¯wun al-ma¯lı¯ al-tija¯riyya131 (B, O, E) Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya li-mida¯n mahatat Misr132 (G, AH, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima li-rayy Bilı¯na¯133 (G, GB, AH, I, O) Sharikat al-ittiha¯d al-tija¯riyya al-sina¯ʿiyya al-misriyya134 (J, I, O) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-zuja¯j wal-mira¯ya¯t al-misriyya135 (G, AH, O) ˙ Sharikat al-makha¯zin al-handasiyya al-misriyya136 (J, GB, Z) ˙ Sharikat ara¯dı¯ madı¯nat al-Iskandariyya137 (GB, Z) ˙ Sharikat al-tabrı¯d al-nı¯liyya138 (GB, O) Sharikat al-mustawdaʿa¯t al-tija¯riyya139 (G, AH, I) Sharikat al-thalj al-injlı¯ziyya al-misriyya140 (GB, AH, O) ˙ Sharikat aswa¯q al-maʾku¯la¯t al-markaziyya al-misriyya141 (G, J, AH, I) ˙

Continued

Fina Fina Cons Indu Cons Indu Cons Indu Infr Indu Fina Infr Infr Trad Indu Trad Cons Trad Trad Indu Trad V V

Q

S

M W1

W2

W1

Q

W2 R

W1

AND

S

JEWISH

V V

V V

Y

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

218 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Al-sharika al-misriyya li-ʿana¯bir al-sayya¯ra¯t wa- ahwa¯d al-siba¯ha (GB, B, AH, Z, O) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya lil-wajh al-bahrı¯143 (G, J, GB, AH, I, O) ˙ 144 Al-sharika al-musa¯hima li-ʿaqa¯rat madinat al-Qa¯hira (J, GB, AH, I, O) Sharikat al-mashru¯ʿa¯t wa-l-aʿma¯l al-baladiyya145 (G, O, E) Sharikat al-mawa¯sı¯r wal-aʿmida al-masnu¯ʿa min al-asmant al-musallah146 (AH, Z, O) ˙ Sharikat al-ahdhiyya al-misriyya147 (Z, E) ˙ ˙ 148 Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-zira¯ʿiyya al-su¯da¯niyya (G, O) Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya bil-Qa¯hira149 (G, B, A, AH, O) Sharikat maʿamil al-halı¯j al-misriyya150 (AH, O) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima lil-aʿma¯l al-zira¯ʿiyya151 (AH, O) Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya li-Ifrı¯qı¯a¯ al-shama¯liyya152 (I, E) Sharikat Kodak bi-Misr153 (GB, A, O) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-markaziyya bil-Qa¯hira154 (B, O) Al-sharika al-misriyya li-istikhra¯j al-fu¯sfa¯t wal-ʾittija¯r bihi155 (I, O) ˙ Sharikat al-muqa¯wala¯t wa-istithma¯r al-atya¯n al-zira¯ʿiyya wa-ara¯dı¯ al-bina¯ʾ156 (G, GB) ˙ Sharikat al-dilta¯ al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-zira¯ʿiyya157 (J, GB, AH, I, E) 158 Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-aʿma¯l al-zira¯ʿiyya (G, O) ˙ Sharikat makha¯zin al-Qabba¯rı¯159 (GB, Z) Sharikat ara¯dı¯ Ku¯m Ashu¯160 (GB) ˙ Sharikat al-hila¯ja al-ahliyya al-misriyya161 (GB, Z, O) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mashru¯ʿa¯t al-ʿaqa¯riyya li-ara¯dı¯ al-zira¯ʿa wal-bina¯ʾ162 (Z, O, E) ˙

1911 1911 1911 1911 1911 1912 1912 1912 1912 1912 1912 1912 1912 1912 1913 1913 1913 1913 1913 1913 1913

142

Name

Year

Continued

Infr Cons Cons Infr Indu Indu Cons Cons Indu Trad Cons Indu Cons Ming Cons Cons Infr Trad Cons Indu Cons Y

V

S

W2 W2

Y

W2 Q Q B1

V V

V

V

V

Q

M R

R

W1 W1

W1

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 219

163

Al-sharika al-musa¯hima li-makha¯zin al-adwiyya al-misriyya (AH, I, E) ˙ Sharikat tasdı¯r al-qutn164 (AH, O) ˙ ˙ Sharikat taslı¯f nuqu¯d li-aʿma¯l al-tija¯ra165 (J, GB, O) Sharikat al-amla¯k dhat al-iyra¯d al-misriyya166 (J, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat tawtı¯d al-mara¯fiq al-ʿaqa¯riyya bi- Misr167 (G, GB, I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-amla¯k al-tha¯bita al-misriyya168 (G, I, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-injlı¯ziyya al-iyta¯liyya169 (G, GB, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-hila¯ja170 (I, E) ˙ Sharikat al-aqta¯n al-muttahida bil-Iskandariyya171 (I, O) ˙ ˙ Sharikat sina¯ʿat al-maʿa¯din172 (I, O, E) Sharikat al-aʿma¯l al-handasiyya bi-Bur Saʿı¯d173 (GB) Sharikat al-tija¯ra fi al-maha¯sı¯l al-misriyya174 (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-tija¯ra fi al-aqta¯n al-misriyya wal-su¯da¯niyya175 (J, I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-aqa¯lı¯m al-tija¯riyya al-misriyya176 (G, GB) ˙ Sharikat tasdı¯r al-aqta¯n al-misriyya177 (G, GB, Z, O) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-tilighra¯fiyya al-ita¯liyya al-sharqiyya178 (GB, I, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-mika¯nikiyya lil-hira¯tha wal-zira¯ʿa179 (GB, I, E) Sharikat al-asma¯k wal-maha¯sı¯l al-zira¯ʿiyya180 (GB, I) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-miya¯h al-maʿdiniyya wal-ʾanbitha wal-mashru¯ba¯t al-ru¯hiyya181 (G, J, GB, O) Bank Misr182 (J, E) ˙

Name

Q

W2 W2 W2 W2

V V V V V

W1

C

W2

V

V

V

W2

T

AND

Fina

Trad Trad Fina Cons Cons Cons Trad Indu Trad Indu Cons Trad Trad Trad Trad Infr Indu Trad Indu

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

JEWISH

1920

1914 1914 1914 1915 1915 1916 1919 1919 1919 1919 1919 1919 1919 1919 1919 1920 1920 1920 1920

Year

Continued

220 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1920 1921 1921 1921 1921 1921 1921

Year

Name 183

Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-sina¯ʿiyya al-misriyya (G, I) ˙ ˙ Sharikat ashgha¯l al-hada¯ʾid wal-handasa al-barita¯niyya184 (J, GB, Z) ˙ Al-ittiha¯d al-taʿawunı¯ li-jamʿiyyat al-muwazzafı¯n bil-Qa¯hira185 (G, J, GB, O, E) ˙ ˙˙ 186 Al-tawrı¯d wal-tasdı¯r al-su¯da¯niyya (J, GB, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat aqta¯n al-Nı¯l187 (GB, I) ˙ Sharikat al-halj wal-mustawdaʿa¯t al-misriyya188 (G, GB) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-iʿtima¯da¯t wal-tija¯ra189 (J, I, O, E) Sharikat al-malbu¯sa¯t wal-lawa¯zima¯t al-misriyya190 (J, GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-tasdı¯r al-sharqiyya191 (G, J, I, O, E) ˙ 192 Sharikat al-maba¯nı¯ al-tija¯riyya (GB, I) Al-sharika al-sharqiyya193 (G, GB, I) Sharikat al-Bahr al-Mutawasit lil tija¯ra al-ʿa¯mma, al-qutr al-misrı¯194 (GB, I) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-aqta¯n al-misriyya195 (G, E) ˙ ˙ 196 Sharikat al-aʿma¯l al-handasiyya bi-l-Mansu¯ra (GB, O) ˙ Sharikat mana¯jim al-Bahr al-Ahmar197 (J, GB, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-liha¯m al-kahraba¯ʾı¯ al-barita¯niyya bi-Misr198 (J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima lil-mashru¯ʿa¯t al-muttahida199 (G) ˙ 200 Sharikat masnu¯ʿa¯t Birilli al-misriyya (I) ˙ Dhi land ayjensı¯ awf I¯jı¯bt201 (GB) 202 Sharikat al-kitta¯n al-nı¯liyya (G, GB, I, O, E) Al-sharika al-musa¯hima lil-dukha¯n wal-saja¯ʾir (Ba¯ba¯tiu¯lu¯ju¯)203 (G)

Continued

Cons Infr Trad Trad Trad Indu Trad Trad Trad Cons Cons Trad Trad Infr Ming Indu Cons Indu Cons Indu Indu V

C A

V

S1 W1

W1

Q

W2 M W2 W2

V V V V

W2

W2

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 221

1921 1922 1922 1922 1922 1922 1922 1922 1923 1923 1923 1923 1923 1923 1923 1923 1923 1923 1923 1923 1924

Year

Name

Bank Ru¯ma¯ li-Misr wal-sharq205 (J, AH, Z, I, E) ˙ Sharikat aqta¯n al-dilta¯ al-misriyya206 (G, GB) ˙ ˙ Sina¯ʿat al-tabrı¯d207 (Z, I, O) Sharikat al-al-ʿaqa¯ra¯t al-sharqiyya al-musa¯hima208 (G, J, E) Sharikat al-bawa¯khir al-misriyya209 (G, GB, I, O) ˙ Matbaʿat Misr210 (J, E) ˙ Sharikat al-mila¯ha al-ahliyya al-misriyya211 (G, GB, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-zuyu¯t al-misriyya (Ajulı¯n)212 (G, J, Z, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-jiʿa (al-bı¯ra) al-musa¯hima Barmu¯tı¯ wal-Ahra¯m213 (G, GB, Z) Al-sharika al-musa¯hima li-tasdı¯r al-qutn bil-Iskandariyya214 (G, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat tasdı¯r al-aqta¯n al-nı¯liyya215 (GB) ˙ ˙ Maʿa¯mil al-halj wal-zayt al-muttahida216 (J, GB, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharika musa¯hima li-tanzı¯f wa-kabs al-qutn217 (J, I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Iskandariyya al-tija¯riyya218 (GB, I, O, E) Al-sharika al-musa¯hima lil-muqa¯wala¯t (Ru¯la¯n) wa-shuraka¯ʾihi sa¯biqan219 (B) Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya lil-mafru¯sha¯t (Krı¯jir)220 (O) ˙ Al-sharika al-muttahida al-misriyya lil-naql fi al-Nı¯l221 (GB, I) ˙ ˙ Sharikat mahsu¯la¯t al-ghila¯l222 (GB, O) ˙˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-misriyya lil-aqta¯n al-saʿı¯diyya wal-buhayriyya223 (I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mata¯hin bil-silindara¯t al-misriyya224 (GB, E) ˙ ˙

204

Continued

Fina Trad Indu Cons Infr Indu V Infr Indu Indu Trad Trad Indu Indu Trad Cons Indu V Infr Trad Trad Indu V W2 S

W1

C

W2

AND

MG T

JEWISH

A

M

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

222 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1924 1924 1924 1924 1924 1924 1924 1925 1925 1925 1925 1925 1925 1925 1925 1925 1925 1926 1926 1926 1926

Year 225

Name

R1 C W2

W1

W2 W2

MG T MG T

W2 W2

W1

MG T W2 S2

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Fina Al-bank al-tija¯rı¯ al-ita¯lı¯ lil-qutr al-misrı¯ (I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-ina¯ra wa-tawlı¯d al-hara¯ra wal-quwwa al-muharika226 (O, E) Infr ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat mantu¯ja¯t al-ismant al-madghu¯t227 (G, I, E) Indu V ˙ ˙ 228 Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-musa¯hima bil-Iskandariyya (G, I, E) Cons Al-sharika al-su¯da¯niyya li-tasdı¯r al-qutn229 (J, GB, O, E) Trad ˙ ˙ Sharikat taftı¯sh A¯tiyya230 (GB, E) Trad Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya li-tija¯rat wa-halı¯j al-qutn231 (E) Indu ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-ida¯ra al-ʿaqa¯riyya232 (I, O, E) Cons V Sharikat maka¯bis al-Iskandariyya233 (G, E) Indu Maba¯nı¯ al-tiraz al-hadı¯th234 (I, E) Cons V ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima lil-saha¯fa al-misriyya235 (E) Jour ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr lil-tiya¯tru¯ wal-sı¯nima¯236 (E) Cine V ˙ 237 Sharikat Misr lil-naql wal-mila¯ha (E) Infr V ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr al-handasiyya238 (J, GB, I, E) Cons ˙ Dilta, sharika zira¯ʿiyya wal-maba¯nı¯ al-misriyya239 (I, O, E) Cons ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-naql bil-sayya¯ra¯t240 (G, J, GB, Z, I, O, E) Infr ˙ Al-sharika al-hindiyya al-misriyya241 (AH, Z, I, E) Trad V ˙ Sharikat aqta¯n Misr242 (GB, E) Trad ˙ ˙ Sharikat Bu¯la¯q al-ʿaqa¯riyya243 (J, GB, B, I, E) Cons Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-iqtisa¯diyya244 (J, O, E) Trad ˙ Trad V Makha¯zin a¯dwiyyat Misr al-muttahida245 (J, GB, O, E) ˙ ˙

Continued

APPENDIX 223

1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1926 1927 1927 1927 1927 1927 1927 1927

Year 246

Name

Sharikat ashgha¯l al-asfalt al-misriyya (G, J, GB, O, E) ˙ Maba¯nı¯ al-tira¯z al-hadı¯th247 (G, I, E) ˙ Al-rawa¯ʾih248 (GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat makha¯zin tabrı¯da¯t al-Nı¯l wal-thalj249 (GB, E) Masnaʿ qutn al-hidru¯fı¯l250 (G, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Jı¯stnir ru¯ta¯rı¯ sı¯klu¯ stı¯l251 (J, GB, I, E) Sharikat Kafr al-Zayyat al-tija¯riyya252 (G, E) Al-sharika al-zira¯ʿiyya bi- Misr253 (GB, O, E) ˙ Sharika musa¯hima li-ʿima¯rat al-bu¯rsa bil-Qa¯hira254 ˙ Sharikat Misr al-tija¯riyya wal-ma¯liyya al-musa¯hima255 (J, GB, A, I, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-qutniyya Maʿrad256 (J, GB, Z, O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-Kuntwa¯r al-misrı¯ lil-aqta¯n257 (J, GB, I, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-baljı¯kiyya al-misriyya258 (G, J, B, O, E) ˙ Sharikat tilighra¯f Marku¯nı¯ al-la¯silkiyya al-misriyya259 (GB, E) ˙ Sharikat ismant Bu¯rtland-Turra al-musa¯hima al-misriyya260 (B, Z, E) ˙ 261 ˙ Sharikat al-Gharbiyya lil-hila¯ja (G, J, GB, E) ˙ Sharika musa¯hima mu¯tu¯r al-sharq al-adna¯ al-ʿumu¯miyya262 (GB, O, E) Sharikat al-rukha¯m al-ita¯liyya al-misriyya263 (I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mila¯ha al-misriyya dı¯ Du¯dı¯kanı¯z264 (G, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr li-ghazl wa-nası¯j al-qutn265 (J, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr li- nası¯j al-harı¯r266 (J, E) ˙ ˙

Continued

Infr Cons Indu Indu Indu Trad Indu Trad Cons Fina Trad Trad Trad Infr Indu Indu Trad Ming Infr Indu Indu W2 W2

V V

V

V V

V R W2 W2 S1 C Q

W2 R

MG T Q C MG T

W2

W2

W2 W2

AND

V

W2

V

W2

JEWISH

S2

R1

V

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

224 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1927 1927 1927 1928 1928 1928 1928 1928 1928 1928 1928 1928 1928 1928 1928 1929 1929 1929 1929 1929 1929

Year

267

Name

Sharikat Misr li-masa¯yid al-asma¯k (J, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr lil-kitta¯n268 (J, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-ʿa¯mma269 (J, GB, I, E) Sharikat Sı¯mı¯ns uriyint al-musa¯hima270 (Z, O, E) Al-sharika al-musa¯hima lil-tabʿ wal-nashr271 (G, GB, E) Sharikat Fiya¯t al-musa¯hima lil-sharq272 (J, I, O, E) Sharikat hila¯jat al-qutn wal-tasdı¯r al-misriyya273 (G, GB, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat Iskandariyya lil-taʾmı¯n274 (G, J, GB, AH, Z, I, O, E) Sharikat mustawdaʿa¯t al-fahm al-alma¯niyya275 (AH, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima li-mana¯jim al-manghanı¯z bi-Jabal Ahmar276 (G, GB, A, E) ˙ Al-masrif al-misrı¯ lil-wa¯rida¯t wal-sa¯dira¯t277 (G, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ 278 Al-sharika al-ma¯liyya (A, Z, O, E) Sharikat al-naql wal-tasdı¯r wal-taʾmı¯n Faru¯s279 (J, GB, AH, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-wa¯rida¯t al-firinsiyya280 (J, GB, O, E) Sharikat al-jara¯ʾid al-musawarra al-misriyya281 (A, Z, E) ˙ ˙ Al-bank al-baljı¯kı¯ wal-duwalı¯ bi-Misr282 (B) 283˙ Sharikat ismant Bu¯rtla¯nd-Hilwa¯n (GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-dawara¯n bil-bilya al-musa¯hima al-misriyya s.k.f.284 (O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-ʿaqa¯riyya li-taftı¯sh al-Suyu¯f285 (J, GB, AH, I, O, E) 286 Sharikat al-kibrı¯t al-misriyya (I, O, E) Sharikat al-kahraba¯ʾ al-misriyya287 (B)

Continued

Indu Indu Cons Indu Indu Indu Indu Insu Trad Ming Fina Trad Trad Trad Jour Fina Indu Trad Cons Indu Infr W2 R W2 W2

R S W2

V

V V

V

V

W2

V

W2

W2

C C

V V

M R

W2

MG MG

W2 W1

T

T T

W2 W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 225

R

S1

Insu Indu V

R W2

Q W1

MG W2 W2

V V

M

W2

M

Q

V

V

Infr Indu Trad Indu V Cons V

Indu Cons Trad Trad Trad Trad Ming Infr Infr Trad Trad Indu

W2

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

1931 1931

Name

Ju¯zı¯ fı¯lm (J, I, O, E) Sharikat ara¯dı¯ al-Daqhaliyya289 (J, I, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-injlı¯ziyya ku¯ntininta¯l lil-aqtan290 (J, GB, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ma¯liyya al-sina¯ʿiyya al-misriyya291 (G, J, O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya lil-maha¯rı¯th292 (J, I, E) ˙ ˙ Mahal al-malaka al-saghı¯ra, hara¯ʾir Shatı¯lyu¯n Mu¯lı¯, Ru¯sı¯l- Barı¯s- Liyu¯n293 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat mana¯jim dhahab Uhaymar294 (G, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-mila¯ha al-misriyya295 (G, AH, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-aʿma¯l al-kubra¯ al-misriyya296 (B, Z, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-a¯syawiyya wal-ifrı¯qiyya, Astra¯297 (G, J, O, E) Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya li-mahala¯t Hwajimya¯n sa¯biqan298 (A, O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya al-muttahida li-maʿa¯mil wa- makha¯zin ˙ ˙ al-thalj wal-tabrı¯d299 (GB, AH, O, E) Al-sharika al-misriyya li-insha¯ʾ al-turuq300 (GB, Z, I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-taʿdı¯n al-misriyya301 (GB, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-ta¯j bil-qutr al-misrı¯302 (G, J, GB, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya lil-ahdhiyya Ba¯ta¯303 (O) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-mawa¯sı¯r wal-aʿmida wal-masnu¯ʿa¯t min ˙ ˙ al-ismant al-musallah304 (J, Z, I, O, E) ˙ Al-sharq, sharika musa¯hima misriyya lil-taʾmı¯n ʿala¯ al-haya¯t305 (G, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-atriba al-maʿdiniyya al-misriyya306 (G, J, GB, B, O, E) ˙

288

JEWISH

1930 1930 1930 1930 1931

1929 1929 1929 1929 1929 1929 1929 1930 1930 1930 1930 1930

Year

Continued

226 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1932 1933 1933 1933

1931 1931 1931 1931 1931 1931 1931 1931 1932 1932 1932 1932 1932 1932 1932 1932

Year

307

Name

Bank al-taslı¯f al-zira¯ʿı¯ al-misrı¯ (G, J, GB, B, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-tawa¯hı¯n wal-makha¯zin al-misriyya308 (J, A, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-alba¯n al-misriyya309 (A, I, O, E) ˙ 310 Sharikat al-iʿtima¯d al-iskandarı¯ (J, I, O, E) Sharikat makha¯zin iyda¯ʿ al-aqta¯n311 (O) ˙ Sharikat rukha¯m Brı¯lla¯ al-misriyya312 (GB, A, AH, I, E) ˙ Al-makha¯zin al-misriyya niza¯m iyda¯ʿ313 (GB, B, Z, I) ˙ Sharikat al-sinimatu¯ghra¯fa¯t al-misriyya314 (G, GB, E) ˙ Sharikat al-bitru¯l al-misriyya Sh.B.M.315 (J, GB, B, I, E) ˙ 316 Sharikat al-bitru¯l al-wataniyya (G, GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Fu¯rd Mu¯tu¯r (Misr)317 (GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Misr lil-tayara¯n318 (GB, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat bawa¯khir al-Iskandariyya wa-Misr319 (O, E) ˙ Sharikat umnı¯bu¯s al-Fayyu¯m320 (E) 321 Sharikat sayya¯ra¯t utu¯bu¯s al-Iskandariyya (AH, I, E) Al-sharika al-ahliyya al-misriyya lil-sı¯ku¯rita¯h (Sharika lil-taʾmı¯n ˙ ʿala¯ al-haya¯t)322 (G, J, GB, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat bayʿ al-masnu¯ʿa¯t al-misriyya323 (E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-tasrı¯f al-khudrawa¯t wal-fa¯kiha wal-azha¯r324 (G, J, B, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya Sta¯r al-sharqiyya325 (A, E) ˙ 326 Ku¯ntwa¯r imda¯d al-al-ʿaqa¯ra¯t (J, O, E)

Continued

V V

V V V V

V

V

Trad Trad V Trad V Cons

Fina Indu Indu Trad Trad Indu Trad Indu Ming Ming Indu Infr Infr Infr Infr Indu

T

A1 B W2 MG Y W1 W2 S1

Y

W2

W2

Q

T F

W2 W2

R

W1

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 227

1933 1933 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1934 1935 1935 1935 1935

Year

327

Name

Al-sharika al-misriyya al-ma¯liyya (J, GB, I, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima li-mahala¯t d.m.sh Bru¯ks sa¯biqan328 (GB, E) ˙ Sharikat Misr li-ʿumu¯m al-taʾmı¯na¯t329 (J, GB, E) ˙ Sharikat Misr lil-mila¯ha al-bahriyya330 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-diba¯ghat wa- sina¯ʿat al-julu¯d331 (J, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Zama¯lik al-ʿaqa¯riyya332 (B, I, E) Al-sharika al-musa¯hima (Anu¯nı¯m)li-mahala¯t Ja¯nsı¯n bil-qutr al-misrı¯333 (J, B, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-waraq al-ahliyya334 (J, GB, I, O, E) Saja¯yir Nastu¯r Jana¯klı¯s335 (G, E) ˙ Sharikat sina¯ʿat al-tihn bil-Iskandariyya336 (J, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-sina¯ʿat al-mansu¯ja¯t337 (G, J, GB, Z, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-ara¯dı¯ wal-maba¯nı¯338 (J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-faransiyya al-misriyya lil-taslı¯f339 (J, I, O, E) ˙ Al-sina¯ʿa¯t al-kima¯wiyya al-imbara¯tu¯riyya (Misr) sharika musa¯hima340 (J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr lil-siya¯ha sharika musa¯hima misriyya341 (GB, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-aqta¯n al-tija¯riyya342 (GB, I, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya al-ma¯liyya al-ʿaqa¯riyya343 (J, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-nası¯j wal-hiya¯ka al-misriyya sharika musa¯hima misriyya344 (J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat sina¯ʿat al-infitkta¯ al-misriyya345 (GB, I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat ahdhiyyat Makan sharika musa¯hima misriyya346 (G, I, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al- misriyya lil-asmida wal-mawa¯d al-kı¯ma¯wiyya347 (J, B, I, O, E) ˙

Continued

Fina Trad Insu Infr Indu Cons Trad Indu Indu Indu Indu Cons Fina Indu Infr Trad Cons Indu Indu Indu Indu Q W2 MG T

R W2 W2

V V

V V V

Q

S1

W2

W2

W2 H

M

R

H

AND

V

W2 R

C

M

JEWISH

V

MG T MG T T W2

R

C C C

W2 Q

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

228 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1936 1936 1937

1936 1936 1936

1935 1935 1935 1935 1935 1935 1935 1936 1936 1936 1936 1936 1936

Year

348

Name

Sharikat sara¯yir Flibs Wa¯kma¯n (J, GB, I, O, E) Sharikat al-ghaza¯l al-musa¯hima al-l-wa¯rida¯t wal-tija¯ra349 (J, O, E) Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-ida¯ʾa bi-ashiʿa¯t al-niyu¯n350 (J, A, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Na¯dı¯ siba¯q al-Iskandariyya sharika musa¯hima misriyya351 (G, J, GB, B, A, Z, I, E) ˙ Sharikat sayya¯ra¯t u¯tubı¯s al-Qa¯hira352 (AH, I, E) 353 Al-sharika al-misriyya li-sina¯ʿat al-khurdawa¯t (G, J, GB, Z, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Nı¯l lil-halı¯j sharika musa¯hima misriyya354 (GB, Z, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Mahal mu¯bı¯lya¯t B. Bu¯ntı¯mı¯ru¯lı¯ sharika musa¯hima misriyya355 (J, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Masnaʿ al-ha¯sila¯t al-kı¯mya¯ʾiyya sharika musa¯hima misriyya356 (Z, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ 357 Masnaʿ al-nası¯j (al-Qa¯hira) (G, J, GB, B, E) ˙ Sharikat halı¯j al-wajh al-qiblı¯ sharika musa¯hima misriyya358 (J, GB, I, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musa¯hima lil-al-ʿaqa¯ra¯t al-muttahida359 (J, I, E) ˙ Sharikat al-kuru¯m wal-kuhu¯l al-misriyya sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya360 (G, J, B, O, E) ˙ Masa¯niʿ al-nuha¯s al-misriyya sharika musa¯hima misriyya361 (G, J, GB, Z, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat aqta¯n Khu¯raymı¯ Bina¯kı¯362 (G, GB, E) ˙ Bank Su¯a¯ris (Awla¯d a¯. Su¯a¯ris wa-shuraka¯ʾihim sa¯biqan) sharika musa¯hima misriyya363 (J, I, E) ˙ Dhı¯ Saymu¯n Arzit Stu¯rz sharika musa¯hima misriyya364 (J, AH, I, O, E) ˙ Ka¯rı¯ı¯r I¯jibt sharika musa¯hima misriyya365 (GB, E) ˙ 366 Sharikat Ka¯lı¯fu¯rnya¯ Tiksa¯s lil-bitru¯l (GB, O, E)

Continued

S1 W2 S

Indu V Indu Fina Trad Trad V Ming

Q

R

W2

S1

W2 W2

Indu V Trad Indu V V Infr Indu V Indu Indu V Indu V Indu Indu Cons Indu

W2

Q

W2

W1

W2

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 229

1937 1937 1937 1937

1937 1937 1937 1937

AP

R

S2 W2

W2

W2 W2

W1

W2

W1

W1

Y

AP

MG T R

Q W2

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

1937 1937

367

Infr V Sharikat khutu¯t al-barı¯d al-firʿau¯niyya sharika musa¯hima misriyya (J, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-sina¯ʿa¯t al-kı¯ma¯wiyya sharika musa¯hima misriyya368 (J, I, E) Indu ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Nı¯l lil-zuyu¯t369 (G, O, E) Indu Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-ʿumu¯miyya bi-Misr, sharika musa¯hima Cons ˙ misriyya370 (J, GB, B, I, O, E) ˙ Dhı¯ ista¯nda¯rt uyl kumba¯nı¯ awf I¯jibt sharika musa¯hima371 (GB, O, E) Indu Sharikat Misr lil-dukha¯n wal-saja¯yir372 (E) Indu ˙ Sharikat al-muqa¯wala¯t al-ahliyya al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima Trad ˙ misriyya373 (J, GB, I, E) ˙ Infr V Sharikat utu¯bı¯s al-sharqiyya wal-daqhaliyya374 (E) Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya lil-maha¯rı¯th wal-handasa, mundaman Trad V ˙ ˙ ˙ ilayha¯ Mu¯sı¯rı¯ wa-Ku¯rı¯yı¯l wa- shuraka¯ʾihim375 (J, I, E) ˙ Sharikat Tiksa¯s al-misriyya lil-bitru¯l376 (GB, E) Ming ˙ Sharikat Kalı¯fu¯rnya¯ al-misriyya lil-bitru¯l377 (GB, O, E) Ming ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-ghazl wa-nası¯j al-su¯f378 (O, E) Indu V ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-bulgha¯riyya al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima Trad V ˙ misriyya379 ( O, E) ˙ Trad V Sharikat Shı¯fı¯ld lil-sabk (Misr) sharika musa¯hima380 (J, GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-sharq al-adna¯ al-ma¯liyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya381 (O, E) Trad ˙ Sharikat ara¯dı¯ Kafr al-Zayya¯t382 (G, GB, I, E) Cons ˙ Biltu¯rs, sharika musa¯hima misriyya383 (J, AH, O, E) Infr ˙

Name

JEWISH

1937 1937 1937

1937 1937 1937 1937

Year

Continued

230 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1938 1938

1938 1938 1938 1938 1938

1938 1938

1938

1938 1938 1938

1937 1938

Year

384

Name

Sina¯ʿat nası¯j al-alya¯f (J, GB, I, E) Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-mashru¯ʿa¯t al-masrifiyya-wal-tija¯riyya ˙ wal-ʿaqa¯riyya385 (J, GB, I, O, E) Sharikat al-harı¯r al-faransiyya al-misriyya386 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ Mahalla¯t Shı¯ku¯rı¯l al-kubra¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya387 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-ashgha¯l wal-maba¯nı¯ al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima ˙ 388 misriyya (J, GB, I, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-istighla¯l al-mana¯jim wal-maha¯jir, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya389 (G, I, E) ˙ 390 Sharikat al-maba¯nı¯ al-misriyya al-musa¯hima (I¯jı¯bku¯) (I, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya al-ma¯liyya lil-tija¯ra wal-sina¯ʿa (sı¯fı¯na¯), sharika ˙ 391 ˙ musa¯hima misriyya (G, J, A, I, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-tawzı¯f al-amwa¯l wal-taslı¯f392 (J, GB, I, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya wal-sina¯ʿiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya393 (J, O, E) ˙ 394 ˙ Sharikat naql al-Iskandariyya (G, GB, O, E) 395 Sharikat Minshlu¯d lil-zuyu¯t wal-diha¯n bil-qutr al-misrı¯ (J, GB, B, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Tu¯khı¯ lil-khurdawa¯t waluʿab al-awla¯d, sharika musa¯hima 396 misriyya (E) ˙ Sharikat Misr li-aʿma¯l al-asmant al-musallah397 (Z, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-taʿdı¯n al-injlı¯ziyya al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima ˙ 398 misriyya (GB, I, O, E) ˙

Continued

Indu Ming

Trad Trad Infr Indu V Indu

Cons Trad

S1 W2

W2 C

Indu Trad V Cons Ming V

R W1

Indu V Trad

W1

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 231

Trad Infr Infr Indu V Trad Trad Tarde Indu Indu Cons

Indu Indu Ming Indu Infr

Cons Infr Indu V Ming V A1

R M

W1 W2

W2

W2

MG T MG T

W2 R

W2

W1 W1

MG W2

K2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

1939 1939 1939 1939 1939 1939 1939 1939 1939 1940

Name

Sharikat muqa¯wala¯t M. Ku¯kı¯nu¯s (G, GB, B, I, O, E) Sharikat al-sayya¯ra¯t al-muttahida400 (GB, E) ˙ Al-masbagha al-faransiyya al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya401 (Z, I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mana¯jim wal-bahth al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya402 (G, J, GB, E) ˙ Sharikat saba¯ghı¯ al-bayʿa¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya403 (J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-siba¯gha al-misriyya404 (Z, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr lil-mana¯jim wal-maha¯jir405 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr li-sina¯ʿat wa-tija¯rat al-zuyu¯t406 (E) ˙ ˙ Tawkı¯l Albirt Mu¯sa¯ sharikat al-shahn wal-tafrı¯gh, sharika musa¯hima ˙ misriyya407 (GB, I, E) ˙ La¯vu¯vı¯ya¯l, sharika musa¯hima misriyya408 (J, GB, Z, O, E) ˙ Sharikat utu¯bı¯s al-Saʿı¯d409 (E) Al-mı¯na¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya410 (E) ˙ Masnaʿ al-jawa¯rib wal-trı¯ku¯ al-misriyya (al-Nı¯l), sharika musa¯hima misriyya411 (I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat aqta¯n Bintu¯ wa-shuraka¯h, sharika musa¯hima misriyya412 (I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-sina¯ʿa wal-tija¯ra al-misriyya, Sı¯ku¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya413 (A, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-ahliyya lil-tija¯ra wal-sina¯ʿa al-tija¯riyya414 (G, B, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Iskandariyya lil-taʾmı¯n ʿala¯ al-haya¯t415 (J, GB, AH, Z, I, E) ˙ Mata¯hin al-Mahmu¯diyya416 (G, J, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mashru¯ʿa¯t wal-maba¯nı¯ al-misriyya417 (GB, I, O, E) ˙

399

JEWISH

1938 1938 1938 1938 1938

1938 1938 1938 1938

Year

Continued

232 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1941 1941 1941 1941 1941 1942 1942

1941

1941

1940 1940 1940

1940 1940

1940 1940

Year 418

Name

Al-majalla¯t al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya432 (E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-amrı¯kiyya al-sharqiyya lil-tija¯ra wal-mila¯ha433 (GB, O, E) ˙

431

430

429

Sharikat Misr lil-mustahdara¯t al-tibbiyya (J, E) ˙˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-sina¯ʿat wa- tija¯rat al-mansu¯ja¯t al-qutniyya ˙ ˙ ˙ (Laku¯tu¯nı¯r), sharika musa¯hima misriyya419 (G, J, O, E) ˙420 Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya wal-ma¯liyya (J, O, E) Al-masnaʿ al-misrı¯ lil-mansu¯ja¯t (Ka¯bu¯), sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya421 (J, AH, Z, E) ˙ Al-mahala¯t al-sina¯ʿiyya lil-harı¯r wal-qutn422 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-muntaja¯t al-nashawiyy423 (J, E) ˙ Sharikat midrab al-aruz wa-mathina al-ghila¯l al-misriyya (Muhammad ˙˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Bı¯k Hassan al-Sha¯mı¯ sa¯biqan), sharika musa¯hima misriyya424 (E) ˙ ˙ Masnaʿ al-mansu¯ja¯t al-misriyya (Ma¯tiksa¯), sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya425 (G, J, GB, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-maʾku¯la¯t al-mahfu¯za, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ ˙ misriyya426 (GB, I, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-sina¯ʿiyya li-khuyu¯t al-ghazl wal-mansu¯ja¯t427 (J, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ 428

Continued

V

W2 N N N N W2

Indu V

Jour Trad

W2

Indu V

R

Indu

W2

A2

W2

MG W2 W2

M W2

V

Indu V Indu V Indu

Trad Indu

Trad Trad

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 233

434

(G, J, GB, E)

V

Indu Jour Indu V Trad Indu Trad Infr Cons Trad V Infr Infr

Trad Indu V Trad

Indu V Indu V

Trad

D

W2

W1

C W2

N C W1 W1 N

A N W2 W2

H

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

Sharikat Misr wal-Su¯da¯n al-tija¯riyya439 (J, E) ˙ Sharikat al-nasha¯dir wal-mawa¯d al-kı¯ma¯wiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya440 (E) ˙ Sharikat Misr li-sayya¯ra¯t, Muhammad Sa¯lim sa¯biqan441 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr wal-Su¯da¯n al-tija¯riyya442 ˙ Al-muntaja¯t al-ghidha¯ʾiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya443 (J, GB, I, E) ˙ Al-ka¯tib al-Misrı¯444 (J, E) ˙ Sharikat al-bla¯stı¯k al-ahliyya445 (G, E) Sharikat al-Iskandariyya wal-Khartu¯m al-tija¯riyya446 (J, E) ˙ sina¯ʿat al-bla¯stı¯k wal-kahraba¯ʾ, sharika musa¯hima misriyya447 (J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-mawa¯d al-ghidha¯ʾiyya448 (G, E) Sharikat utu¯bı¯s Maha¯ssin449 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-Nı¯l lil-ashgha¯l450 (E) Sharika musa¯hima ittiha¯d tujja¯r al-mansu¯ja¯t451 (J, A, O, E) ˙ Sa¯hil (naql bahrı¯)452 (G, GB, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr lil-naql wal-muqa¯wala¯t, sharika musa¯hima misriyya453 (O, E) ˙ ˙

Sharikat al-ju¯t al-misriyya436 (J, GB, B, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-taghlı¯f al-iqtisa¯dı¯, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya437 (J, GB, E) ˙ 438

Al-sharika al-misriyya li-sina¯ʿat wa-tasdı¯r al-mahfu¯za¯t ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ 435

Name

JEWISH

1943 1944 1944 1944 1944 1944 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945

1942 1942 1942 1942

Year

Continued

234 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945 1945

1945 1945 1945

1945 1945 1945 1945

1945 1945

Year

Name 454

471

Masnaʿ zuja¯j al-Iskandariyya lil-zuja¯j wal-sı¯nı¯, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya459 (J, I, E) ˙ 460 Al-sharika al-sina¯ʿiyya lil-Sharq al-Awsat (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mila¯ha al-ʿa¯mma461 (G, J, GB, AH, E) ˙ Sharikat al-adwiyya wal-tija¯ra lil-Sharq al-Adna¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya462 (J, E) ˙ Sharikat shama¯l Ifriqya¯ al-tija¯riyya463 (GB, O, E) Sharikat al-qutn al-ahlı¯464 (O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ahliyya li-tawlı¯d al-kahraba¯ʾ, sharika musa¯hima misriyya465 (G, E) ˙ Sharikat Lystirn lil-kahraba¯ʾ, sharika musa¯hima misriyya466 (GB, A, E) ˙ 467 Al-sharika al-sharqiyya lil-iyda¯ʿ (O, E) Sharikat makha¯zin al-tabrı¯d al-muttahida468 (O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Fayyu¯m Banı¯ Suwayf lil-naql469 (E) Al-Ahra¯m, sharika musa¯hima misriyya470 (GB, E)

Sharikat al-qaba¯rı¯ lil-bitru¯l, sharika musa¯hima misriyya (G, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿumu¯miyya lil-handasa wal-tabrı¯da¯t (Jı¯rku¯), sharika musa¯hima 455 misriyya (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-maʾku¯la¯t al-muthallaja wal-tabrı¯da¯t456 (J, GB, O, E) Al-midrab al-misrı¯ lil-aruz, sharika musa¯hima misriyya457 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ 458

Continued

Infr Jour

Trad Trad Infr Infr Trad V

Indu Infr V Trad

Indu V

Indu V Indu

Ming Trad

Y N

N

P

M

W1

W1

W1

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 235

1945 1945 1945 1945 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946

Year

472

Name

Sharikat al-naql-wal-handasa480 (J, B, E) Bank al-istı¯ra¯d wal-tasdı¯r al-misrı¯481 (J, GB, Z, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Farghalı¯-lil-aqta¯n wal-aʿmal al-ma¯liyya482 (GB, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-zira¯ʿiyya li-istighla¯l al-ara¯dı¯ (Farma¯j)483 (J, B, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿumumiyya lil-sina¯ʿa¯t al-kı¯myaʾiyya (Sı¯k)484 (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Iskandariyya li-tija¯rat al-aqta¯n485 (G, Z, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Sharq lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j486 (O, E) Sharikat Misr lil-harı¯r al-sina¯ʿı¯487 (J, GB, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-bahriyya al-misriyya488 (J, GB, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Mahala¯t Shamla¯ al-kubra¯489 (J, O, E) ˙ sina¯ʿat kitta¯n al-Sharq490 (J, GB, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-zuyu¯t lil-maʾku¯la¯t al-mahfuza wal-aghdhiyya491 (J, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-taba¯dul al-tija¯rı¯492 (E)

Trad Fina Trad Infr Indu Trad Indu Indu V Infr V Trad Indu Indu Trad

P

MG W2 S M W1 R C

W1

N N

N W1

Y

W2

P

W2

W2

AND

479

Infr V Indu

Indu Infr Indu

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

JEWISH

Sharikat u¯tu¯bı¯s al-Minya¯ wal-Buhayra476 (G, E) ˙ Masa¯niʿ Isla¯m Ba¯sha¯477 (E) ˙ 478

475

Al-aswa¯f (I, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ahliyya lil-siya¯ha-Karnak473 (O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-nasha¯ al-ahliyya474 (E)

Continued

236 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1946 1946

1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946

1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946

Year

Name 493

V

Infr Indu Indu Indu V Indu

Ubı¯rj Misr, sharika musa¯hima misriyya505 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-jaʿfariyya lil-sina¯ʿa wal-zira¯ʿa506 (J, O, E) ˙ Bı¯rat al-Nı¯l, sharika musa¯hima misriyya507 (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Misr li-ʿalaf al-haywa¯na¯t508 (G, Z, O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-tajfı¯f al-khudrawa¯t, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya509 (G, B, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ahliyya lil-khadama¯t al-jawiyya510 (E) Mahala¯t Ba¯mku¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya511 (GB, B, O, E) ˙ ˙

Infr Trad

Cine V Indu V

Indu

Trad Indu Cine Infr Trad Indu Indu

W1

M W2

N M W2 N

A1

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Sharikat stu¯diyu¯ al-Ahra¯m502 (G, J, GB, I, O, E) Al-sharika al-misriyya li-sinaʿat al-Sı¯zil503 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ 504

Al-sharika al-ʿumu¯miyya lil-istithma¯r al-ma¯lı¯ wal-sina¯ʿı¯ (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Fayyu¯m lil-nası¯j494 (E) 495 Al-sharika al-sharqiyya lil-sinima¯ (J, E) Al-fana¯diq al-jadı¯da¯ bi-Misr496 (G, J, E) ˙ Sharikat al-takhzı¯n wal-mila¯ha al-tija¯riyya al-muttahida497 (G, J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Zaqa¯yiq lil-aqta¯n wal-zuyu¯t498 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-injlı¯ziyya al-misriyya lil-sa¯bu¯n wal-muntaja¯t ˙ ˙ al-ghidha¯ʾiyya499 (J, GB, O, E) Sharikat al-sina¯ʿa¯t al-muttahida, sharika musa¯hima misriyya500 (J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ 501

Continued

APPENDIX 237

Indu Infr Indu

Trad V Trad V Trad Cons Cons Indu Trad V Cons

Cons Indu Trad Cons

Cons Fina Indu

N AP

W2

M

AP W2

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1946

512

Sharikat ara¯dı¯ Hilwa¯n, sharika musa¯hima misriyya (J, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-iddikha¯r, sharika musa¯hima misriyya lil-tawfı¯r513 (G, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-taʾmı¯na¯t al-tija¯riyya al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima ˙ misriyya514 (G, J, I, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-maba¯nı¯ al-hadı¯tha (al-Shams)515 (O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿarabiyya lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j516 (O, E) Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-tija¯ra al-dakhiliyya wal-kharijiyya517 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-tawrı¯da¯t al-miʿma¯riyya wal-handasiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya, ˙ al-mundamij fı¯ha¯ Nı¯qu¯la¯ Diya¯b wa- awla¯dahu518 (E) Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-akhsha¯b wal-mahamma¯t (Sibı¯m)519 (G, GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat tija¯rat al-khayya¯tı¯n al-afrankı¯ bi-Misr520 (A, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Bahrand lil-tija¯ra521 (J, GB, Z, E) Sharikat Banı¯ Maza¯r li-ara¯dı¯ al-bina¯ʾ wal-zira¯ʿa522 (J, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-munshaʾa¯t wal-handasa523 (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Tawı¯l lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j524 (J, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat handasat al- tabrı¯d wa-takyı¯f al-hawa¯ʾ-Misr (Ku¯ldı¯r)525 (J, GB, I, E) ˙ Sharikat Isla¯m Ba¯sha¯ al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-zira¯ʿiyya526 (E) 527 (E) Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-asmida wal-sina¯ʿa¯t al-kı¯ma¯wiyya528 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Lutu¯s lil-mila¯ha al-bahriyya529 (O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat sina¯ʿat nası¯j al-Iskandariyya530 (J, I, E) ˙

Name

JEWISH

1946 1946 1946 1946

1946 1946 1946

Year

Continued

238 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1946 1946 1946 1946 1946 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947

Year

531

Name

Sharikat al-Sharı¯f lil-qutn wal-tija¯ra (GB, AH, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-kitta¯n wal-mansu¯ja¯t al-misriyya532 (G, J, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-ara¯dı¯ al-bina¯ʾ (hada¯ʾiq al-Ahra¯m)533 (J, GB, Z, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Ittiha¯d sina¯ʿa¯t al-mansuja¯t al-mumta¯za534 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Sharq al-Awsat lil-tija¯ra wal-aqta¯n535 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-taqaddum al-kahraba¯ʾı¯ bi-Misr536 (G, J, GB, O, E) ˙ 537 Sharikat sayya¯ra¯t al-turuq al-sahra¯wiyya (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mala¯bis wal-mansu¯ja¯t (Ru¯lnı¯)538 (G, O, E) Sharikat al-muba¯dala¯t al-tija¯riyya-Hamma¯d539 (O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-muqa¯wala¯t al-ʿumu¯miyya (al-Sharq)540 (G, J, I, E) 541 Sharikat al-taqqadum al-sina¯ʿı¯ wal-zira¯ʿı¯ (G, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-qutn wal-tija¯ra542 (J, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat ma¯kina¯t al-nası¯j ikhwa¯n Bla¯t al-sharq543 (GB, E) 544 Da¯r al-Hila¯l (E) Da¯r al-ikhwa¯n lil-tiba¯ʿa545 (E) ˙ Da¯r al-ikhwa¯n lil-saha¯fa546 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-naql al-misriyya547 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riya iks-imbu¯rt548 (J, E) Sharikat al-ittiha¯d al-ʿarabı¯549 (O, E) ˙ Sharikat tanmiyya lil-sina¯ʿa¯t al-kima¯wiyya550 (B, I, E) ˙ Sharikat masa¯niʿ al-Shu¯rbajı¯ lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j wal-triku¯551 (O, E) ˙

Continued

Indu Indu Cons Indu Trad Indu V Infr V Indu Trad Cons Trad Trad Trad V Jour Jour Jour Infr Trad Trad Indu Indu Y

W2

W2 W1

W2

D

P

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 239

Al-sharika al-misriyya li-tija¯rat al-aswa¯f al-fa¯khira wal-mansu¯ja¯t˙ ˙ Wa¯tku¯569 (G, GB, E) Al-sharika al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-ʿarabiyya570 (O, E)

Al-sharika al-sina¯ʿiyya al-mushtaraka559 (G, J, B, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat maka¯bis al-aqta¯n al-misriyya560 (G, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat mada¯rib al-aruz al-misriyya al-hadı¯tha561 (G, J, O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ 562 Mahala¯t awla¯d Yaʿqu¯b Kuhinka¯ (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Abu¯ Zaʿbal wa Kafr al-Zayya¯t lil-asmida wal-mawa¯d al-kı¯ma¯wiyya A¯.K.F.A¯.K563 (G, GB, AH, E) Sharikat al-Iskandariyya lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j564 (J, GB, I, E) Sharikat mana¯jı¯m al-wajh al-qiblı¯565 (GB, Z, E) Basa¯tı¯n Misr wa kuru¯miha¯566 (G, J, GB, A, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Suways lil-mila¯ha al-bahriyya567 (O, E) ˙ ˙ 568

Con

Indu V

Indu Ming Indu V Infr

Trad Indu Indu V Trad Indu

Indu Trad Indu Ming V

Trad

P

D N

H

S2

W2

W2 N

N

Y

W2 W2

D

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

1947

(J, O, E)

Sharikat al-Raml lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j554 (E) Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-tija¯ra al-duwaliyya, Iysı¯t555 (G, E) ˙ Za¯ma¯, sharikat al-Zama¯lik li-sina¯ʿat al-aghdhiyya al-naqiyya556 (E) ˙ Sharikat Marsa¯ Matru¯h lil-milh wal-bu¯ta¯s557 (J, O, E) ˙ ˙ 558

Sharikat al-tija¯ra fi maha¯sı¯l al-Sharq al-Adna¯ ˙ 553

552

Name

JEWISH

1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947

1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947 1947

Year

Continued

240 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1947 1947 1947 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1948 1949 1949 1949

Year

Indu Indu Trad Trad Infr Trad Infr Cons Indu Trad Trad Trad Indu V Indu V

W2 W2

Y N

L

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Sharikat al-Qa¯hira lil-nasj wa-sina¯ʿat al-shı¯la¯n wal-trı¯ku¯578 (O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Iskandariyya li-ismant Bu¯rtla¯nd579 (GB, O, E) Al-misriyya, al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-ma¯liyya580 (O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-imbara¯tu¯riyya, H. Wı¯l wa-shuraka¯h sabiqan581 (J, GB, E) ˙ Sharikat sayya¯ra¯t al-wajh al-bahri582 (E) ˙ Sharikat Ba¯sı¯l Ba¯sha lil-akhsha¯b (da¯ʾirat Asʿad Ba¯sı¯l Ba¯sha¯ sa¯biqan)583 (O, E) Aash lil-tija¯ra wa al-muwa¯ʿala¯t584 (E) Sharikat al-sina¯ʿa¯t al-hadı¯tha lil-maba¯nı¯585 (A, I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Ka¯rfar lil-aqta¯n (Ka¯rfar ikhwa¯n wa- shuraka¯hum sabiqan)586 (G, J, GB, E) ˙ 587 Sharikat Jı¯fart al-Sharq (B, E) Al-sharika al-misriyya li-nashr al-tija¯ra wal-sina¯ʿa588 (J, GB, I, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-sina¯ʿiyya fı¯ ma bayn al-qa¯ra¯t589 (E) ˙ 590 Sharikat al-asmida al-ʿudwiyya (O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-wataniyya al-misriyya li-taʿbiʾat al-zuja¯ja¯t591 (J, B, I, E) ˙ ˙

Name Jour Insu Infr Indu Infr Indu

571

Sharikat al-tawzı¯ʿ al-misriyya (E) ˙ Sharikat al-Nı¯l lil-taʾmı¯n572 (G, J, GB, O, E) Al-sharika al-misriyya li-aʿma¯l al-naql wal-mila¯ha573 (GB, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-magha¯zil al-dhahabiyya lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j574 (O, E) Sharikat al-Mahalla al-jadı¯da lil-sinima wal-tarfı¯h575 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-muttahida lil-ghayl wal-nası¯j576 (O, E) ˙ 577

Continued

APPENDIX 241

592

Indu Cons Indu Cons Ming Trad

Sharikat al-Ahra¯m al-sina¯ʿiyya al-tija¯riyya604 (GB, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Misr al-jadı¯da al-ʿaqa¯riyya605 (B, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Bu¯rslı¯ lil-tija¯ra wal-sina¯ʿa606 (E) ˙ ˙ 607

Sharikat al-dilta¯ al-handasiyya608 (J, GB, E) Al-sharika al-ahliyya al-misriyya lil-bitru¯l609 (A, E) ˙ Sharikat Sintru¯ku¯misyu¯n al-sharq lil- tija¯ra610 (G, O, E)

611

Indu Indu

Trad

Sharikat Misr al-ʿulya¯ lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j601 (E) ˙ Sharikat Asyu¯t li-taʿbiʾat al-zuja¯ja¯t602 (O, E) ˙ 603

600

Sharikat al-Iskandariyya li-tija¯rat al-akhsha¯b, sa¯biqan Alfrı¯du¯ Sta¯tı¯ wa- Jyu¯na¯nı¯599 (GB, I, E)

Infr Indu V Trad Ming

N

N R1

N

N

N N N

Q

H

B

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

598

597

Al-khutu¯t al-misriyya lil-tayara¯n al-duwalı¯, Saʿida (I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-taqtı¯r al-misriyya593 (J, GB, B, AH, Z, I, O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Biba¯wı¯li-tija¯rat al-aqta¯n594 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-milh wal-taʿdı¯n al-ahliyya595 (E) ˙ 596

Name

JEWISH

1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1950 1950 1950

1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949 1949

Year

Continued

242 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1951 1951 1951 1951 1951 1951 1951

Year

Name 612

Trad Trad Indu Trad Indu V Trad Trad Indu Trad Trad Indu V Trad V Trad Infr

Sharikat al-azya¯ʾ al-hadı¯tha, binza¯yu¯n, sharika musa¯hima misriyya627 (J, I, O, E) ˙ Sharikat masa¯niʿ al-dilta¯ lil-sulb, sharika musa¯hima misriyya628 (J, GB, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ 629 Al-sharika al-misriyya li-wiqa¯yat al-mazru¯ʿa¯t (E) ˙ 630

Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya wal-sina¯ʿiyya lil-akhsha¯b wal-bina¯ʾ, Fa¯ba¯s631 (O, E) Sharikat al-sharq lil-naql al-mı¯ka¯nı¯kı¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya632 (E) ˙

Indu V Trad Fina

N W1

R1

N

W1

N N

W2

W2

W1

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Al-sharika al-bahriyya al-tija¯riyya al-misriyya617 (G, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-abha¯th al-tija¯ra al-kha¯rijiyya wal-siya¯ha, Aftru¯618 (J, I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Iskandariyya al-wataniyya li-taʿbiʾat al-zuja¯ja¯t619 (J, B, Z, E) ˙620 Malla¯ha¯t Bu¯r Saʿı¯d al-misriyya (GB, O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-sina¯ʿiyya al-tija¯riyya li-mawa¯d al-bina¯ʾ (al-Nisr)621 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-wa¯dı¯ lil-maʿa¯dı¯n wal-masu¯gha¯t622 (J, E) ˙ Sharikat Iskandariyya al-tija¯riyya lil-mansu¯ja¯t623 (E) Al-sharika al-ahliyya lil-mansu¯ja¯t, Mimfı¯s624 (J, GB, A, I, O, E) Sharikat al-tawrı¯da¯t al-sina¯ʿiyya wal-mı¯ka¯nı¯kiyya, Timsku¯625 (GB, A, E) ˙ 626

616

Al-sharika al-misriyya al-handasiyya lil-tayara¯n (G, J, GB, A, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mashru¯ʿa¯t al-handasiyya wal-tija¯riyya613 (E) 614 Al-bank al-misrı¯ al-ʿarabı¯ (E) ˙ 615

Continued

APPENDIX 243

1952 1952 1952 1953 1953

Trad Indu Trad Ming Cons

M R1

W1 W2

AND

Insu Cons Cons Trad Trad Fina Trad Ming

Cons Trad V Indu Trad Cons

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

JEWISH

1951 1952 1952 1952 1952 1952 1952 1952

Al-sharika al-musa¯hima al-misriyya lil-muqa¯wala¯t (E) ˙ Sharikat iʿla¯na¯t al-Sharq al-Awsat634 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Wa¯dı¯ lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j (al-taqlı¯ sa¯biqan)635 (E) Sharikat al-aswa¯q al-tija¯riyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya636 (J, GB, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-masa¯kin al-iqtisa¯diyya, Ha¯ybku¯, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya637 (J, B, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-taʾmı¯nat al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya638 (G, J, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-muqa¯wala¯t al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya639 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mashru¯ʿa¯t al-sina¯ʿiyya wal-handasiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya640 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Ifrı¯qya¯ al-tija¯riyya al-mutahidda641 (J, E) ˙ Sharikat Safı¯r lil-tija¯ra, sharika musa¯hima misriyya642 (I, E) ˙ Bank al-Qa¯hira, sharika musa¯hima misriyya643 (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat naql al-waqu¯d, sharika musa¯hima misriyya644 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-istighla¯l malla¯ha¯t Bu¯r Saʿı¯d, sharika ˙ ˙ 645 musa¯hima misriyya (G, GB, I, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-sharqiyya lil-tija¯ra wal-aqta¯n, sharika musa¯hima misriyya646 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat masa¯niʿ al-zuyu¯t wal-sa¯bu¯n, sharika musa¯hima misriyya647 (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-sayya¯ra¯t, Afku¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya648 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat mana¯jim Ra¯s Malab, sharika musa¯hima misriyya649 (GB, B, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-muqa¯wala¯t lil-mana¯fiʿ al-ʿa¯mma, Ayju¯ba¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya650 (I, E) ˙

1951 1951 1951 1951 1951

633

Name

Year

Continued

244 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1953 1953

1953 1953 1953

1953

1953 1953

1953

1953

1953 1953 1953 1953 1953

Year

Name 651

665

Sharikat masa¯niʿ al-sa¯bu¯n wal-mawa¯d al-ghidha¯ʾiyya Kahla¯, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ ˙ misriyya659 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-sina¯ʿat al-asla¯k wal-kabila¯t wa tamlı¯kh ˙ ˙ al-maʿa¯din, sharika musa¯hima misriyya660 (J, E) Sharikat al-jazı¯ra al-tija¯riyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya661 (J, GB, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-dukha¯n wal-saja¯yir, sharika musa¯hima misriyya662 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat sina¯ʿat al-muntaja¯t al-maʿdaniyya, sharika musa¯hima ˙ 663 misriyya (G, GB, B, E) 664˙

Sharikat al-Iskandariyya lil-zuyu¯t wal-sa¯bu¯n, sharika musa¯hima ˙ misriyya655 (G, O, E) ˙ Sharikat Misr al-ahliyya li-ʿasr al-zuyu¯t wal-tabrı¯da¯t, sharika musa¯hima ˙ ˙ misriyya656 (E) Sharikat dı¯zil lil-handasa al-mı¯ka¯nı¯kiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya657 (J, AH, O, E) 658˙

Sharikat al-Iskandariyya lil-taghlı¯f al-sina¯ʿı¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya (J, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Zaqa¯zı¯q al-ʿaqa¯riyya al-zira¯ʿiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya652 (E) ˙ 653 Sharikat al-Hila¯l lil-du¯bara, sharika musa¯hima misriyya (J, E) ˙ 654

Continued

W2

Trad Indu Indu V

N N

W2

N

W2

W2 N

Indu V

Indu

Trad

Indu

Indu

Indu V Cons Indu V

H

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 245

1953 1953

Sharikat Anjlı¯l al-tija¯riyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya674 (GB, B, I, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿumu¯miyya li-hafr al-a¯ba¯r wa-aʿma¯l al-miya¯h, sharika ˙ musa¯hima misriyya675 (O, E) ˙ 1953 Al-mahalla¯t al-ʿumu¯miyya lil-mu¯sı¯qa¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya676 (A, E) ˙ ˙ 1954* Al-sharika al-zira¯ʿiyya lil-Sharq al-Awsat, Misr- al-Su¯da¯n, sharika ˙ ˙ musa¯hima misriyya677 (E) 1954 678 1954 Al-sharika al-misriyya al-tija¯riyya lil-hadı¯d wal-maʿa¯din, sharika ˙ ˙ musa¯hima misriyya679 (J, E) 1954 680

Sharikat al-qatha¯ʾif al-nafa¯tha dha¯t al-tayara¯n al-sarı¯ʿ-Sı¯rna¯, sharika ˙ musa¯hima misriyya670 (G, J, A, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-inshaʾa¯t wal-quwa¯ al-kahraba¯ʾiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya671 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-Buhı¯ra lil-aqta¯n wal-aʿma¯l al-ma¯liyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya672 (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ 673

Trad

Trad Trad

Trad Infr

Cons Trad

V

N

N R1

W1

W2

N

N W2

W2

Indu

Indu V

N W2

Indu

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

1953 1953

Name

Al-munshaʾa¯t al-maʿdaniyya al-misriyya, Ijı¯mı¯t, sharika musa¯hima ˙ misriyya667 (G, A, E) ˙ Al-wirash al-sina¯ʿiyya al-mı¯ka¯nı¯kiyya al-ʿumu¯miyya, sharika musa¯hima ˙ misriyya668 (J, I, E) ˙ 669

666

JEWISH

1953 1953

1953

1953 1953

Year

Continued

246 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1954 1954 1954 1954 1954 1954 1954 1954 1954

1954 1954 1954 1954

1954

1954 1954 1954 1954

Year

681

(G, E)

Name

Trad Infr Indu Ming Fina Indu Indu

Sharikat Tanta¯ lil-kitta¯n wal-zuyu¯t, sharika musa¯hima misriyya697 (GB, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat saba¯ghı¯ Ba¯ku¯s698 (J, I, E) ˙

Trad Indu Trad Indu

Cons V

Infr Trad

Indu

H

N

N C S1

G1

G1

W1

S1 N

W2

W2

W1

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Al-sharika al-tija¯riyya al-aqa¯riyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya691 (J, E) Sharikat Thı¯lu¯s lil-naql wal-takhzı¯n, sharika musa¯hima misriyya692 (G, E) ˙ Sharikat muntaja¯t al-nisha¯ʾ, sharika musa¯hima misriyya693 (J, I, O, E) ˙ 694 Sharikat malla¯ha¯t Rashı¯d, sharika musa¯hima misriyya (I, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-tawfı¯r al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya695 (G, E) ˙ 696

Al-sharika al-hadı¯tha lil-utu¯bı¯s, sharika musa¯hima misriyya683 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat Misr wal-Su¯da¯n lil-khurdawa¯t walaʿib al-atfa¯l, sharika musa¯hima ˙ 684 ˙ misriyya (E) ˙ Sharikat al-taʿmı¯r wal-masa¯kin al-shaʿbiyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya685 (G, GB, Z, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-iqtisa¯d al-shaʿbı¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya686 (O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-hadı¯d wal-sulb al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima misriyya687 (O, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat Wa¯dı¯ al-Nı¯l lil-tija¯ra wal-sina¯ʿa, sharika musa¯hima misriyya688 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-kabila¯t al-kahraba¯ʾiyya al-misriyya, sharika musa¯hima ˙ 689 misriyya (AH, O, E) 690˙

Sharikat al-taʿbiʾa al-misriyya, Abu¯t ˙ 682

Continued

APPENDIX 247

699

717

716

Sharikat al-Luyid al-misrı¯ lil-Bahr al-Abyad al-Mutawasit L.M.712 (G, I, E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-ghazl al-rafı¯ʿ713 (J, I, E) Al-sharika al-misriyya al-ʿa¯mma li-mahamma¯t al-sikak ˙ al-hadı¯diyya-Sı¯ma¯f714 (B, E) ˙ 715

711

Infr V Indu V Infr

Ming Cons V Indu Indu Indu V Infr

Trad Cine

Indu Indu V

N N N

N N S2 W2 G1

Y W2

W1

N

S1

W2

W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

AND

Al-sharika al-la¯mma lil-milh al-misrı¯704 (O, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-handasiyya lil-sina¯ʿa¯t wal-muqa¯wala¯t al-ʿumumiyya705 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-sina¯ʿa¯t al-khashabiyya706 (O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Nı¯l lil-qumsa¯n wal-mala¯bis707 (J, O, E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma li-muntaja¯t al-khazaf al-sı¯nı¯708 (GB, E) ˙ Sharikat Misr lil fana¯diq709 (GB, O, E) ˙ 710

703

Sharikat al-Buhı¯ra lil-aruz wal-zuyu¯t, sharika musa¯hima misriyya (E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-takrı¯r al-bitru¯l wa-tija¯ratihi, sharika musa¯hima ˙ misriyya700 (G, GB, B, Z, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-bayt al-misrı¯, sharika musa¯hima misriyya701 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-Nı¯l lil-sinima¯702 (E)

Name

JEWISH

1955 1955 1955

1954 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955

1954 1954

Year

Continued

248 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956

1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956 1956

Year

718

(E)

Name

Trad Infr Ming

Sharikat khutu¯t al-Qa¯hira736 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-mana¯jim al-muttahida737 (GB, E) ˙

Jour V Fina V Indu Indu Indu Indu Indu Indu Infr Cons V

Infr

Trad

N N G1 N

W2

G1 G1

G1 G1

N W1 G1

G1 N

D

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Sharikat Adfı¯na¯ li-tasdı¯r wa-tasnı¯ʿ al-muntaja¯t al-zira¯ʿiyya734 (I, E) ˙ ˙ 735

733

Sharikat anba¯ʾ al-Sharq al-Awsat, sharika musa¯hima misriyya722 (E) ˙ ˙ Bank al-jumhu¯riyya723 (E) 724 Sharikat maha¯lij Banı¯-Maza¯r al-kubra¯ (E) ˙ Sharikat al-sina¯ʿa¯t al-kı¯mya¯ʾiyya al-misriyya, Kı¯ma¯725 (E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma li-muntaja¯t al-kharasa¯na726 (O, E) Sharikat magha¯zil al-su¯f al-misriyya, Fı¯la¯na¯727 (J, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-qawmiyya li-inta¯j al-ismant728 (E) Sharikat Misr lil-alba¯n wal-aghdhiyya729 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya al-musa¯hima li-tanmiyyat al-munshaʾa¯t al-siya¯hiyya730 (I, E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-musahima al-misriyya lil-taʿmı¯r wal-insha¯ʾa¯t al-siya¯hiyya ˙ 731 ˙ fı¯l Muntaza wal-Muqatam (G, I) ˙ 732

721

Sharikat umnı¯bu¯s al-Daqhaliyya720 (E)

Sharikat Misr lil-tija¯ra al-kha¯rijiyya ˙ 719

Continued

APPENDIX 249

1956 1956 1956 1956 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957

Year

Indu Trad Indu Indu V Fina Insu Fina Trad Indu Ming V Ming V

Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-aghdhiyya747 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿarabiyya li-tija¯rat al-akhsha¯b748 (O, E) Egyptian Weavers Factories Company749 (O, E) Sharikat al-Nasr li-sina¯ʿat al-aqla¯m wa-muntaja¯t al-jra¯fı¯t, Nasr750 (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Bank al-Iskandariyya751 (E) Al-sharika al-muttahida lil-taʾmı¯n752 (E) ˙ Bank al-ittihad al-tija¯rı¯753 (E) ˙ 754

Sharikat Atlas lil-ashgha¯l al-ʿa¯mma wa-mawa¯d al-bina¯ʾ755 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-adwiyya756 (E) Sharikat Safa¯ja lil-fu¯sfa¯t757 (E) Sharikat Sı¯na¯ʾ lil-manghanı¯z758 (E)

G1 G1 G1

N

AND

G1 G1 G1

JEWISH

N G1

G1

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5 Indu Trad Trad Indu Trad Infr Indu Infr

738

Name

Sharikat al-sukkar wal-taqtı¯r al-misriyya (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-radiyu¯ al-tija¯riyya wal-handasiyya lil-kha¯rij wal-sharq, Fu¯rnı¯ku¯739 (J, E) Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-tija¯ra al-da¯khiliyya740 (E) Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma li-muntaja¯t al-ju¯t741 (G, GB, E) Sharikat al-sayya¯ra¯t al-ahliyya742 (J, E) Al-maʿa¯hid al-qawmiyya lil-tarbiyya wal-taʿlı¯m743 (E) Sharikat al-sina¯ʿa¯t al-misriyya lil-zayt wal-sa¯bu¯n744 (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat utu¯bı¯s al-fuʾa¯diyya al-musa¯hima al-misriyya745 (E) ˙ 746

Continued

250 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1957 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958

Year 759

Name

779

778

777

776

Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-tharwa al-maʿdaniyya (E) Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-tawkı¯la¯t al-kha¯rijiyya760 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-ghaza¯t al-sina¯ʿiyya761 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-iʿa¯dat al-taʾmı¯n762 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-alamint763 (E) Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-bitru¯l764 (E) Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-mila¯ha al-bahriyya765 (E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-muntaja¯t al-rima¯l al-sawda¯ʾ, Ramla766 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-sharqiyya lil-bitru¯l fı¯ Misr767 (B, I, E) ˙ Bu¯lı¯din u¯riyint lil-bata¯riyya¯t768 (O, E) ˙ Sharikat masa¯niʿ al-Nasr lil-nası¯j wa al-trı¯ku¯769 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-kahraba¯ʾ wal-muqa¯wala¯t al-ʿumu¯miyya770 (O, E) Sharikat al-Muqatam lil-mila¯ha771 (E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma lil-sina¯ʿa¯t al-daqı¯qa772 (O, E) ˙ Sharikat suyu¯f lil-nası¯j wal-tajhı¯z773 (A, O, E) Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma li-sina¯ʿat al-waraq, Ra¯ka¯774 (E) ˙ 775

Continued

Infr Indu Indu Indu

Ming Trad Ming V Insu Indu Ming Infr Indu V Ming Indu V Indu

N N N U U

W2

G1 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1

G1

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 251

1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1958 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959

Year

Name

800

799

798

Sharikat Sharikat Sharikat

794

793

792

791

Dimya¯t lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j al-rafı¯ʿ795 (E) ˙ A¯ma¯ lil-sina¯ʿa¯t al-kı¯ma¯wiyya wal-adwiyya796 (A, E) ˙ al-zuyu¯t al-mustakhlasa wa-muntaja¯tiha¯797 (E) ˙

Indu Indu Indu N N N

N N N N N N

N

N

N N

AND

790

Indu Indu

Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma li-sina¯ʿat al-ya¯ya¯t, Ya¯y787 (E) ˙ Sharikat masa¯niʿ al-fara¯mil al-misriyya788 (E) ˙ ˙ 789

Indu

Indu

Indu

(E)

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Sharikat al-bu¯ya¯t wal-sina¯ʿa¯t al-kı¯mya¯wiyya785 (E) ˙ 786

780

JEWISH

784

Sharikat Zyiftı¯ wa-Mı¯t Ghamr lil-ghazl al-rafı¯ʿ783 (E)

782

Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma li-inta¯j lawa¯zim al-kard wa-sina¯ʿat al-kisa¯ʾ, Kard ˙ 781

Continued

252 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1960 1960 1960

Year

Name

821

Sharikat Misr li-sina¯ʿat al-kı¯ma¯wiyya¯t818 (E) ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya li-sina¯ʿat awra¯q al-taʿbiʾa, Kra¯ft819 (E) ˙ ˙ 820

Indu Indu

Indu Infr Indu

Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma li-inta¯j al-hara¯riyya¯t wal-fukha¯r813 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿa¯mma li-istisla¯h al-aradı¯814 (E) ˙ 815˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Qa¯hira lil-aqta¯n (E) ˙ 816

817

Indu Infr Indu

Indu

Cons

B U U

U N

G1

N

N1 N N1

U U

N

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Sharikat al-Nasr li-darb wa-tija¯rat al-aruz809 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat sayya¯ra¯t al-Iskandariyya wal-Buhayra lil-naql810 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-Mahmu¯diyya lil-ghayl wal-nası¯j al-rafı¯ʿ811 (E) ˙ 812

808

807

Sharikat al-tabrı¯da¯t al-sarı¯ʿa wal-tasdı¯r, Dı¯frks805 (E) ˙ 806

804

803

Sharikat Ramsı¯s al-ʿaqa¯riyya802 (E)

801

Continued

APPENDIX 253

1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960

Year

Name 822

Indu Infr Indu

Sharikat Shubra¯ al-Khayma lil-siba¯gha wal-tajhı¯z839 (E) ˙ 840

Sharikat al-tayara¯n al- ʿarabiyya al-muttahida841 (O, E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Nasr li-sina¯ʿat lib al-waraq min al-masa¯s842 (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙

U N G1

AND

G1 N N

N G1 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1

G1 U

JEWISH

838

Ming Indu V Indu Indu Indu Indu Indu V Trad Indu Indu Indu V

Sharikat al-Nasr lil-fu¯sfa¯t826 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-Nasr li-sina¯ʿat al-sayya¯ra¯t827 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Nasr li-siba¯ghat wa-tajhı¯z al-aqmisha828 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Nasr lil-alba¯n wal-muntaja¯t al-ghidha¯ʾiyya829 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-Nasr lil-ghazl al-rafı¯ʿ bi-Tanta¯830 (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Sharikat al-Nasr li-tajfı¯f al-muntaja¯t al-zira¯ʿiyya bi-Suha¯j831 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿarabiyya li-sina¯ʿat al-sajja¯d al-mı¯ka¯nı¯kı¯832 (E) ˙ Sharikat al-tawkı¯la¯t al-ʿarabiyya al-handasiyya, Arı¯na¯j833 (E) Sharikat al-Mansura li-sina¯ʿat al-khashab al-jı¯bı¯ walil-qishra wal-ra¯tinja¯t834 (E) ˙ ˙ Sharikat masa¯niʿ al-shams lil-zuja¯j wal-balu¯r835 (A, E) ˙ Sharikat al-Nasr li-sina¯ʿat ajhizat al-tilifizyu¯n836 (E) ˙ ˙ 837

Infr Indu

(E)

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

Sharikat Bı¯ba¯ li-tija¯rat wa-halj al-aqta¯n824 (E) ˙ ˙ 825

Al-sharika al -ʿa¯mma lil-abha¯th wal-miya¯h al-jawfiyya ˙ 823

Continued

254 GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960

Year

843

Name

Sharikat sina¯ʿat al-akhsha¯b, Mu¯jna¯ (E) ˙ Sharikat al-Nasr lil-ghazl wal-nası¯j li-Bu¯r Saʿı¯d, Bu¯rtiks844 (E) ˙ Al-sharika al-misriyya lil-tija¯ra wa-halj al-aqta¯n845 (E) ˙ ˙ ˙ Al-sharika al-ʿarabiyya li-sina¯ʿat al-bu¯jı¯ha¯t846 (E) ˙ 847 Sharikat dı¯zil Shubra¯ al-sina¯ʿiyya (J, O, E) ˙ Sharikat al-aʿla¯f al-muttahida848 (E) ˙

Continued

Indu Indu Indu Indu Indu Indu V W2

Type Inv. Nt.1 Nt.2 Nt.3 Nt.4 Nt.5

APPENDIX 255

NOTES

Introduction 1. Also known as Cavafis, Cavafy, ‘Returning from Greece’, in Jane Pinchin, Alexandria Still: Forster, Durrell, and Cavafy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1977, p. 52. 2. Murad Faraj, Dı¯wa¯n Mura¯d [Murad’s Poetry], Murad Faraj, al-Matba‘ah alRahma¯nı¯yah, Cairo 1937, vol. 3, p. 161; also see, Khalid Fahmy, ‘Preface’, in Joel Beinin, Shata¯t al-yahu¯d al-misriyyin, [The Dispersion of Egyptian Jews], ˙ Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, Cairo, 2007, p. 24. 3. Robert Ilbert, Ilios Yannakakis and Jacques Hassoun, ‘A certain sense of citizenship’, in Robert Ilbert, Ilios Yannakakis and Jacques Hassoun (eds.), Alexandria, 1860– 1960: The brief life of a cosmopolitan community, Heracules, Alexandria, 1997, pp. 18– 34, p. 28. 4. Joseph Schumpeter, Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung; Eine Untersuchung u¨ber Unternehmergewinn, Kapital, Kredit, Zins und den Konjunkturzyklus, Duncker und Humblot, Berlin, 1997, pp. 100– 1. 5. Yousef Cassis and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds.), Entrepreneurship in Theory and History, Palgrave Macmillan, New York 2005, p. 5.

Chapter 1 Setting the Stage 1. Maurice Mizrahi, ‘The Role of Jews in Economic Development’, in; Shimon Shamir (ed.), The Jews of Egypt. A Mediterranean Society in Modern Times, Westview Press, London, 1987, pp. 85– 93, p. 85ff. See also Salih Ramadan, alhaya¯t al-ʾijtima¯ʿiyya fı¯ Misr fı¯ ʿahd Ismaʿil [The Social Life in Egypt in the Era of ˙ Ismail], Munshaʾat al-Maʿarif, Alexandria, 1977, p. 288; Gudrun Kra¨mer, Minderheit, Millet, Nation? Die Juden in A¨gypten 1914 – 1952, Otto Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden, 1982, pp. 22– 3; Abd al-Azim Ramadan, Sira¯ʿ ˙ al-tabaqa¯t fı¯ Misr 1837– 1952 [The Class Struggle in Egypt 1837– 1952], ˙ ˙

258

2.

3. 4. 5.

6.

7.

8. 9.

NOTES

TO PAGES

8 –10

al-Muʾassasa al-ʿArabiı¯yya, Beirut, 1978, p. 43; Marius Deeb, ‘The Socioeconomic Role of the Local Foreign Minorities in Modern Egypt, 1805– 1961’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 9, no. 1, (January 1978, pp. 11 –22, p. 11ff); Yorgos Kourvetaris, ‘The Greeks of Asia Minor and Egypt as middleman economic minorities during the late nineteenth and twentieth Centuries’, Ethnic Groups, vol. 7, no. 2, 1988, pp. 86 – 111, p. 99ff; Alexander Kitroeff, The Greeks in Egypt, 1919– 1937, Ethnicity and Class, Ithaka Press, London, 1989, pp. 85– 8; Jacob Landau, Jews in Nineteenth – Century Egypt, University Press, New York, 1969, p. 14; and, Floresca Karanasou, ‘The Greeks in Egypt: from Mohamed Ali to Nasser, 1805 –1961’, in Richard Clogg (ed.), The Greek Diaspora in the Twentieth Century, Macmillan Press, Oxford, 1999, pp. 24 –57, p. 28ff. Anas Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya al-yahu¯diyya fı¯ Misr, [Jewish Capitalism in Egypt], ˙ Mı¯rı¯t, Cairo 1999. Also, see Gudrun Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle der Juden in der a¨gyptischen Wirtschaft, 1914– 1961’, in Alexander Scho¨lch (ed.), Die a¨gyptische Gesellschaft im 20. Jahrhundert, Deutsches Orient Institut, Hamburg 1992, pp. 148 – 70. Deeb, ‘The Socioeconomic’, pp. 12, 16ff. Roger Owen, Cotton and the Egyptian Economy, 1820 2 1914: A Study in Trade and Development, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1969, p. 87ff. See Nabil Sayid Ahmad, Al-nasha¯t al-iqtisa¯dı¯ lil-aja¯nib wa atharuhu fil-mujtamaʿ ˙ ˙ al-misrı¯ min 1922– 1952, [The Economic Activity of Foreigners and its Effect ˙ on Egyptian Society, 1922– 1952], al-Hayʾa al-Misriya-ʿA¯mma lil-Kita¯b, ˙ Cairo, 1982, pp. 115ff, 126; A. Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya, p. 47; Sayid Ashmawyi, Al-yu¯una¯niyu¯n fı¯ Misr 1805– 1956 [The Greeks in Egypt 1805– 1956], Ein for ˙ Human and Social Studies, Cairo, 1997. See Ronald Robinson, ‘Non-European Foundations of European Imperialism: Sketch for a Theory of Collaboration’, in Roger Owen and Bob Sutcliffe (eds.), Studies in the Theory of Imperialism, Longman, London, 1972, pp. 117 – 42; and, ‘The Excentric Idea of Imperialism, with or without Empire’, in Wolfgang J. Mommsen and Juergen Osterhammel (eds.), Imperialism and After: Continuities and Discontinuities, Allen & Unwin, London, 1986, pp. 267 – 89. Also see John Gallagher and Ronald Robinson, ‘The Imperialism of Free Trade’, in The Economic History Review, no. 6, (1953), pp. 1 – 15; and, Ronald Robinson and John Gallagher, Africa and the Victorians: The Official Mind of Imperialism, Macmillan, London, 1961. See Jonathan Tuner and Edna Bonacich, ‘Towards a Composite Theory of Middleman Minorities’, Ethnicity, no. 7, (1980), pp. 144 – 58, p. 150; Edna Bonacich, ‘A Theory of Middleman Minorities’, American Sociological Review, vol. 38, (October 1973), pp. 583– 94; Kourvetaris, ‘The Greeks’, pp. 852111. Pat Thane, ‘Financers and the British State: the Case of Sir Ernest Cassel’, Business History, vol. 28, no. 1, (1986), pp. 80–99, p. 86. See A. Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya; and, Nabil Sayid Ahmad, Al-yahu¯d fi Misr ma¯ ˙ bayn qiya¯m dawlat Israʾı¯l wal ʿudwa¯n al-thula¯thı¯ [Jews in Egypt, between the

NOTES

10.

11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

16.

TO PAGES

10 –13

259

proclamation of Israel and the Suez war], al-Hayʾa al-Misriya al-ʿA¯mma lil˙ Kita¯b, Cairo, 1991. Siham Nassar, Al-yahu¯ud al-misriyu¯yun bayn al-misriya wa al ˙ ˙ suhyu¯uniyya [Egyptian Jews between Egyptianizsm and Zionism], Al-ʿAarabı¯, ˙ Cairo, 1980; Nabil Sayed Ahmad, Al-yahu¯d fi Misr ma bayn qiya¯m dawlat Israʾı¯l ˙ wa al ʿudwa¯n al-thula¯thı¯ [Jews in Egypt, between the proclamation of Israel and the Suez war], Al-hayʾa al-misriya al-ʿa¯mma li-l kita¯b, Cairo, 1991; Ahmad Abu ˙ Kaf, Al-yahu¯d wa al haraka al-suhyu¯uniya fi Misr [The Jews and the Zionist ˙ ˙ ˙ movement in Egypt], Da¯r al-Hila¯l, Cairo, 1969. See also Shamir, The Jews of Egypt and, Michael Laskier, The Jews of Egypt, 1920– 1970: In the Midst of Zionism, Anti-Semitism and the Middle East, New York University Press, New York, 1992. Mark Casson and Andrew Godley, ‘Entrepreneurship and Historical Explanation’, in Yousef Cassis and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds.), Entrepreneurship in Theory and History, Palgrave Macmillan, New York 2005, pp. 25–60, p. 32. Athanaese G. Politis, L’Helle´nisme et l’Egypte moderne, vol. I, Alcan, Paris, 1929; vol. II, Alcan, Paris, 1930. Alexander Kitroeff, The Greeks in Egypt, 1919– 1937: Ethnicity and Class, Ithaka, London, 1989, pp. vi, 25ff, 50ff. Glavanis,’ Aspects’, p. v – ix; Kitroeff, The Greeks; Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’, pp. 24 – 57. Anthony Gorman, ‘Egypt’s Forgotten Communists: The Postwar Greek Left’, Journal of Modern Greek Studies, vol. 20, no. 1, May 2002, pp. 1 – 27. The best account of the Egyptian perspective on Egyptian Greeks in Arabic is Sayyid Ashmawi’s Al-yu¯na¯niyu¯n fı¯ Misr, 1805– 1956 (Greeks in Egypt, 1805– ˙ 1956), published in 1997. This popular-historical work describes, in brief, a century and a half of Greek history in Egypt. The essential social place of Greeks in early twentieth century Egypt is illustrated in the characters in celebrated Egyptian novels such as Al-Bayda¯ʾ (The White One), published by Yusif Idris in ˙ 1970 (Da¯r al-ʿAwda, Beirut, 1979; also see Ashmawy, Al-yu¯na¯niyu¯n, p. 106ff) and Tuyu¯r al-ʿanbar (Birds of Amber), Ibrahim Abdel Meguid’s novel published ˙ in 2000 (Da¯r al-Hila¯l, Cairo). Egyptian Greeks occupy an important place in Abdel Meguid’s memoirs, Ghiwa¯yat al-Iskandariyya: taʾamula¯t wa ʾafka¯r (Alexandria Seducer: Reflections and Ideas), published in 2005 (Maktabat alUsra, Cairo). In addition there are the Greek characters in Naguib Mahfouz’s Miramar, which appeared in 1967 (Maktabat Misr, Cairo). Egyptian awareness ˙ of the Greek presence in Egyptian history, and the nostalgia surrounding it, is clearly visible in the ‘Zizinya’ TV series, written by the famous novelist Usama Anwar Ukasha (1941 – 2010). Broadcast in the 1990s, the series bore the name of one of the most famous Greeks of Alexandria and was a success in Egypt and the Arab world. Ali Ibrahim Abdu and Khayriyya Qasimiyya, Yahu¯d al-bila¯d al-ʿarabῑyya [The Jews of Arab Countries], Markaz al-Abha¯th al-Filistiniyya, Beirut 1971; ˙ ˙˙ and, Yacoub Khoury, Al-yahu¯d fi al-bulda¯n al-ʿarabῑyya [The Jews in Arab Countries], Da¯r al-Naha¯r lil-Nnashr, Beirut, 1970.

260

NOTES

TO PAGES

13 –16

17. Most of these books have been written and published in English, French, or Hebrew. They include: Joel Beinin, The Dispersion of Egyptian Jewry: Culture, Politics, and the Formation of a Modern Diaspora, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1998, pp. 52– 9: Ibid. Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 52 – 9; Andre Aciman, Out of Egypt: A Memoir, Farrar Straus Giroux, New York, 2004; Ronit Matalon, The One Facing Us, Metropolitan Books, New York, 1998. For a non-Jewish Egyptian account of the Egyptian Jewish experience see Waguih Ghali, Beer in the Snooker Club, Knopf, New York, 1964. He committed suicide in 1968. See Diana Athill, After a Funeral, Ticknor & Fields, New York, 1986 and also Ihsan Abd al-Quddus, La¯ tatriku¯nı¯ huna¯ wahdı¯ [Don’t leave me ˙ alone here], Ru¯z al-Yu¯sif, Cairo, 1979. Also see Rashad al-Shami, Al-shakhsiyya al-yahu¯diyya fı¯ adab Ihsa¯n Abd al-Quddu¯s [The Jewish Personality in ˙ the Literature of Ihsan Abd al-Quddus], Da¯r al-Hila¯l, Cairo, 1992, pp. 9ff and 98ff. 18. Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya, pp. 178– 80. 19. Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, p. 8. Also see Ahmad, Al-yahu¯d, p. 24; and, A. Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya, p. 178ff. 20. The most prominent works here are by Siham Nassar (1979), Nabeel Sayyed Ahmad (1991), and Anas Mustafa Kamel (1981/1999). Other works about Egyptian and Egypt’s Jews are: Ahmad Abu Kaf, Al-yahu¯d al-misriyyu¯n fı¯ al-fikr ˙ wal-waqiʿ al-misry [The Egyptian Jews, in the Egyptian Thought and Reality], ˙ paper presented at the first Conference of Egyptian Political Thought, Faculty of Economic and Political Siences, Cairo University, Cairo, 1982; Saida Husni, Al-yahu¯d fı¯ Misr, min 1882– 1948 [The Jews in Egypt, 1882–1948], al-Hayʾa ˙ al-Misriyya al-ʾAmma lil-Kita¯b, Cairo, 1993; Mahmud Abd-Dahir, Yahu¯d Misr, ˙ ˙ dirasa fı¯ al-mawqif al-siya¯sı¯ 1897– 1948 [Egypt’s Jews: A Study in the Political Position, 1897– 1948], Markaz al-Dira¯sa¯t al-Sharqiyya, Cairo University, Cairo, 2000; Zubeida Ata, Al- yahu¯d fı¯ al-ʿa¯lam al-ʿarabı¯ [The Jews in the Arab World], Ein for Human and Social Studies, Cairo, 2003; Mohamed Abu al-Ghar, Yahu¯d Misr, min al-izdiha¯r ila¯ al-shata¯t [The Jews of Egypt from ˙ Prosperity to the Diaspora], Da¯r al-Hila¯l, Cairo, 2004; and, Suleiman alHakim, Yahu¯d wa lakin misriyyu¯n [Jews but Egyptians], Da¯r al-Jumhu¯riyya lil˙ Sahafa, Cairo, 2008. ˙ ˙ 21. Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya. 22. Ibid., p. 71. 23. Ibid., pp. 42 – 3. 24. Ibid., pp. 139ff, 62. 25. Ibid., p. 176ff. 26. Ibid., pp. 57, 61 and 66– 7; and, Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 249. 27. Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya, pp. 49, 93– 9 and 106– 15, among others. 28. Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, pp. 45– 84. 29. Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, pp. 36ff, 44ff. 30. Laskier, The Jews, pp. 18ff. For a differentiated perspective, see Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 358.

NOTES

TO PAGES

16 –19

261

31. Ibid., p. 52. 32. Ibid., p. 67. The supporters of the New Zionist Organization, a group that opposed the Zionist movement, published this newspaper. 33. Ibid., p. 55ff. 34. Ibid., p. 63ff. 35. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 34. 36. Some marginal references suggest that the Zionist movement had problems in recruiting members. See Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, p. 22. 37. See the interpretation of the author about the friendship between Egyptian politicians and members of the Jewish community and the ‘strange’ structure of Egyptian Jewry: Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, pp. 22, 35. 38. Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, p. 77ff. 39. Sayyid Qutb later became one of the chief ideologues of the Muslim Brotherhood. 40. Israel Gershoni, ‘Egyptian Liberalism in an Age of “Crisis of Orientation”: Al-Risala Reaction to Fascism and Nazism, 1933– 9’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 31, no. 4, (Nov. 1999), pp. 551 –76, p. 555. 41. Mohammad Dakrub, ‘Taha Hussein fı¯ al-Ka¯tib al-Misri: hal khadam al˙ ˙ ˙ suhyu¯niyya min du¯n an yadrı¯?’ [Taha Hussein in Al-katib Al-misri: Did He ˙ Serve Zionism Without Knowing?] Majjalat al-dira¯sa¯t al-filistiniyya [Journal of ˙ Palestine Studies], nos. 74/75, (Spring/Summer 2008), pp. 62 – 77. 42. Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, p. 77. 43. The author argues that the Jewish newspapers in Egypt supported Jewish industrial production in Palestine through advertisements and the targeting of the Jewish communities in Egypt and other Arab countries as main consumers. The author does not provide any sources for these advertisements. 44. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 400. 45. Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, pp. 29– 30. 46. Abu Kaf, Al-yahu¯d. 47. Ibid., pp. 173ff. 48. Waguih Ghali, Beer in the Snooker Club, Knopf, New York, 1964. He committed suicide in 1968. See Diana Athill, After a Funeral, Ticknor & Fields, New York, 1986. 49. Ahmad, Al-yahu¯d. 50. See, denying the rumor of Jewish exodus; Ibid., pp. 94 ff. 51. Ibid., p. 44ff. 52. Ibid., p. 52ff. 53. Khoury, Al-yahu¯d. 54. Ibid., pp. 11 – 7. 55. Ibid., pp. 19 – 32. 56. Abdu and Qasimiyya, Yahu¯d. 57. In 1904, the Egyptian author Shaheen Makarious published a book titled The History of the Israelites. This is how the Jewish community was termed in the first half of the twentieth century in Egypt, where he mainly reviewed the

262

58. 59.

60. 61.

62.

63.

64.

65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70.

71. 72.

73. 74.

NOTES

TO PAGES

19 –25

history of Egyptian Jewish families. Makarius Shaheen, Ta¯rı¯kh al-Isra¯ʾı¯liyyin [The History of the Israelites], al-Muqtataf, Cairo, 1904. ˙ Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 369. Ahmad Amin, Qa¯mu¯s al-ʿa¯da¯t wal-taqa¯lı¯d al-misriyya [Dictionary of Egyptian ˙ Manners and Traditions], Matbaʿat Lajnat al-Taʾlı¯f wal-Tarjamah wal-Nashr, ˙ Cairo, 1953, p. 420. Gershoni, ‘Egyptian’, p. 555. Muhamad Abdallah Inan, ‘Al-haraka al-wataniyya al-ishtira¯kiyya al-alma¯niyya, ˙ ˙ al-barna¯mij al-da¯khilı¯ fı¯ tawr al-tanfı¯dh’ [The German National Socialist Movement, the Realization of the Internal Program], in Al-Risala, January 15, 1934, pp. 11 –5. Muhamad Abdallah Inan, ‘Harakat al-shaba¯b, khawa¯suha¯ wa atharuha¯ fı¯ bina¯ʾ ˙ ˙ Auru¯ba¯ al-jadı¯da’ [The Youth Movements, their Critieria and Role in Building the new Europe], Al-Risala, October 1, 1934, pp. 1609 –16. Bahith Diblumasi Kabier, ‘Rı¯h al-taʿʿasub al-jinsı¯ tahubu ʿala¯ Auru¯ba¯’ ˙ ˙ [The Winds of Racism Blow in Europe], Al-Risala, January 27, 1936, pp. 126 – 8. Gershoni, Israel and Nordbruch, Go¨tz; Sympathie und Schrecken Begenungen mit Faschismus und Nationalsozialismus in A¨gypten 1922– 1937. Claus Schwartz Verlag, Berlin 2011. Rashid Rida, ‘Al-yahu¯d fi Faransa wa Misr’ [Jews in France and Egypt], ˙ Al-Manar, Cairo, 1898, pp. 53– 5. Rida, ‘Al-yahu¯d’, p. 53. Ibid., p. 54. Ibid., p. 55. Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 1, 241ff. Rashed al-Barawi, alAl-falsafa al-iqtisa¯diyya lil-thawra, min al-na¯hiyatain al˙ ˙ nazariyya wal-ʿamaliyya [The Economic Philosophy of the Revolution, from the ˙ Theoretical and Practical Perspectives], Maktabat al-Nahdah al-Misrı¯yya, ˙ ˙ Cairo, 1955. Note that the official term used in Egypt is ‘revolution,’ while others consider it a coup d’e´tat. Historians of critical analysis towards nationalistic thoughts use the term ‘coup,’ see Anouar Abdel-Malik, A¨gypten: Milita¨rgesellschaft, das Armeeregime, die Linke und der Soziale Wandel unter Nasser, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1971, p. 12. Due to the awareness that the coup d’e´tat had a revolutionary aspect in a social sense, in this work I will use both terms, ‘coup’ and ‘revolution.’ The dhimmi are Ahl al-Dhimma, the adherents of Christianity and Judaism under Islamic rule. Shimon Shamir, ‘The Evolution of the Egyptian Nationality Laws and their Application on the Jews in the Monarchy period’, in Shamir (ed.), The Jews, pp. 33 – 67. See Chapter 4 of this work. Sadiq al-Azm, Al-naqd al-dha¯tı¯ baʿd al-hazı¯ma [Self Criticism After the Defeat], Da¯r al-Talı¯ʿa, Beirut, 1968. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

26 –29

263

75. Siegfried Landshut, Jewish Communities in the Muslim Countries of the Middle East; A Survey for the American– Jewish Committee and the Anglo – Jewish Association, Hyperion Press, Westport, 1976, p. 29. 76. Ibid., p. 29. 77. American Jewish Congress, Commission on International Affairs and on Israel, ‘The Black Record: Nasser’s Persecution of Egyptian Jewry’, American Jewish Congress, New York, 1957. 78. American Jewish Congress, The Black, p. 20. For more details about the Zionist doctrine and the conflict, see Yehuda Shenhav’s discussion about the World Organization of Jews from Arab Countries (WOJAK) in his book, Arab Jews, A Postcolonial Reading of Nationalism, Religion and Ethnicity, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2006, p. 142ff; and, Malka Hillel Shulewitz, The Forgotten Millions: The Modern Jewish Exodus from Arab Lands, Cassell, London, 1999. Although the central concern of the aforementioned books is not the Jews of Egypt, they provide a clear idea about the relationship between Zionism, the Zionist doctrine and the Jews of Arab countries. For critiscisim of this discourse see Ella Shohat, ‘Rupture and Return, Zionist Discourse and the Study of Arab Jews’, Social Text 75, vol. 21, no. 2, 2003, pp. 49 – 74, and Avraham Shama and Mark Iris, Immigration Without Integration: Third World Jews in Israel, Schenkman, Cambridge, 1977. 79. Rahel Maccabi, Mitzraim sheli [My Egypt], Tel Aviv, Sifriat ha-Poʿalim, 1968; Landau, Jews in Nineteenth. 80. See Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 214–15 and p. 55ff. Also Diborha Starr, Remembering Cosmopolitan Egypt: Literature, Culture, and Empire, Routledge, London, 2009, pp. 27ff. 81. Laskier, The Jews, p. 101. 82. Ibid., p. 75ff. 83. Shenhav, The Arab Jews. Here I use the term ‘Arab Jews,’ not excluding that proportion of Jews living in Arab countries, among them the Jews of Egypt who were not necessarily Arabs. The term here reflects geographical and cultural spheres. 84. Lital Levy, ‘Historicizing the Concept of Arab Jews in the Mashriq’, in, The Jewish Quarterly Review, vol. 98, no. 4, (Fall 2008), pp. 452 – 69. 85. Levy, p. 457. 86. Behar, p. 748. Moshe Behar, ‘What’s in a name? Socio-terminological formation and the case of “Arabized-Jews”’, Social Identities, Vol. 15, No. 6, Nov. 2009, pp. 747 – 71. See also, Moshe Behar, Mizrahim, ‘Abstracted: Action, Reflection, and the Academization of the Mizrahi Cause’, Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2, (Winter 2008), pp. 89– 100. 87. Authors who proclaimed this idea were, among others, Satiʿ al-Husari (1879 – 1968), Shakib Arsalan (1869 – 1946), Mohammad Izzat Darwaza (1887– 1984), Zaki al-Arsuzi (1900– 68), Anton Saʿada (1904 – 49), Costantin Zureiq (1909 – 2000) and Michiel ʿAflaq (1910 – 89). See, Hazem Saghiya, Qaumiyyu¯ al-mashriq al-ʿarabı¯, min Dra¯yfu¯s ila¯ Gharu¯dı¯ [The Nationalists of the Arab Orient, from Drayfus to Gharudi], Riya¯d al-Rayyis lil-Kutub wal-Nashr, Beirut, 2000.

264

NOTES

TO PAGES

29 –35

88. I refuse the usage of the term ‘race’ here, it signals according to the arguments of the fathers of the Arab race ideology, an ideology that asserts that the Arabs belong to a discrete race. 89. Levy, ‘Historicizing’, p. 457. 90. Sasson Somekh, Bagdad Yesterday, The making of an Arab Jew, Ibis (ed.), Jerusalem, 2007. 91. The success of the Alliance schools in Egypt was not such as in Iraq and North Africa; they had strong competition with other French and English schools. 92. Shenhav, The Arab Jews, pp. 30– 3; and, Omar Kamil, Arabische Juden in Israel, Geschichte und Ideologie von Ben Gurion bis Ovadia Yosef, Ergon, Wu¨rzburg, 2006, pp. 160– 63. Also see, Shohat, ‘Rupture’ and Shama and Iris, Immigration. 93. Ibid., p. 139. 94. O. Kamil, Arabische Juden, p. 165. 95. Shenhav, The Arab Jews, p. 43; and Hayyim Cohen, ‘The Anti-Jewish Farhod in Bagdad’, in Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 3, no. 1, 1966, pp. 2 – 17, also Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 17. Also see, Bernard Lewis, The Jews of Islam, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984. 96. Theodor Herzl, Wenn Ihr wollt ist es kein Ma¨rchen, Altneuland/Der Judenstaat, Julius Schoeps (publisher), Ju¨discher Verlag, Ko¨nigstein, 1978. 97. O. Kamil, Arabische Juden, p. 165. 98. Ben-Gurion, (1954), in O. Kamil, Arabische Juden, p. 165. 99. O. Kamil, Arabische Juden, p. 167; and, Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 23. 100. Shenhav, The Arab Jews, p. 46ff; and, O. Kamil, Arabische Juden, p. 167ff. 101. O. Kamil, Arabische Juden, p. 169. 102. John Bunzl, Juden im Orient, Ju¨dische Gemeinschaften in der Islamischen Welt und Orientalische Juden in Israel, Junius, Wien, 1989, p. 90. 103. O. Kamil, Arabische Juden, p. 168. 104. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 121. 105. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 353. 106. Ibid., pp. 53, 351ff. 107. Ibid.; the English translation is: Gudrun Kra¨mer, The Jews in Modern Egypt, 1914– 1952, University of Washington Press, Seattle, 1989. 108. Jacques Hassoun, Histoirie des Juifs du Nil, Minerve, Paris, 1990. First published as Juifs du Nil, Sycomore, Paris, 1981. The contributors are, among others, Joseph Millis-Modrzjoyski, Gudrun Kra¨mer, Alfred Morabya, Iglal Errera, Yvette Chammas, and Charl Nuwawi; the last four of them are Jews who were born, and spent part of their lives, in Egypt. 109. See Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 269. 110. Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh yahu¯d al-Nı¯l, [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile], Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, Cairo, 2007. Darwish was also an Egyptian Jew and a major figure of the Egyptian left. He did not leave Egypt but remained active in Egyptian political life until his last days. In his introduction,

NOTES

111.

112. 113. 114. 115.

116. 117.

118. 119. 120.

121. 122. 123.

124. 125. 126. 127.

128. 129.

TO PAGES

35 –38

265

Darwish provides the reader with information about the Jews of Egypt and questions why this history has been forgotten. Jacques Hassoun, Ahda¯th al-haya¯ht al-yawmiyya [The Daily Life] in Jacques ˙ ˙ Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh yahu¯d al-Nı¯l [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile], Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, Cairo, 2007, pp. 132–208, p. 176. Hassoun, ‘Ahda¯th’, p. 168. ˙ Ibid., p. 167. Ibid. Hassoun, ‘Firʿ hayy lil – yahu¯diyya al-misriyya, al-qarra¯ʾiyya’ [A Lively Branch ˙ ˙ of Egyptian Jewry, The Karaites], in Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh, pp. 119 – 29, p. 120. Hassoun, ‘Ahda¯th’, p. 149. ˙ Ibid., p. 178. In 1938 the Italian Consul in Cairo created fictive military troops on paper, going so far as to engage and pay some unemployed young men from the Jewish quarter to hold a show during the visit of Marshal Badogleo to Egypt, they were registered in the Italian documents. The Marshal intended to send them to Ethiopia to support the Italian troops there. They did not go to Ethiopia, and were considered as heroes refusing the fascist military service and were granted Italian passports after 1945. See Hassoun, ‘Ahda¯th’, pp. 135– 7. ˙ Darwish, ‘Preface’, p. 16. Abu Kaff, Al-yahu¯d, pp. 174– 5; and, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 348. Alfred Morabya and Gudrun Kra¨mer, ‘Fı¯ muwa¯jahat al-hadatha, al-yahu¯d fı¯ al˙ qarnayin al-tasiʿ ʿashar wa al-ʿishrı¯n’ [Facing Modernity, The Jews in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries], in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh yahu¯d al-Nı¯l [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile], Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, Cairo, 2007, pp. 79 – 107, pp. 87– 9. Iglal Errera, ‘Nisf al-qarn’ [Mid Century] in Jaques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh ˙ yahu¯d al-Nı¯l, pp. 109– 17, p. 110ff. Mohamed Abu al-Ghar, Yahu¯d Misr, min al-izdiha¯r ila¯ al-shata¯t [The Jews of ˙ Egypt from Prosperity to the Diaspora], Da¯r al-Hila¯l, Cairo 2004. Didar Fawzy-Rossanu, Rasa¯ʾil ila¯ ahibba¯ʾı¯, Missr [Letters to my Beloved, ˙ ˙˙ Egypt], Da¯r al-ʿA¯alam al-Tha¯lith, Cairo, 2006. It was translated from French; Me´moires d’une militante communiste (1942 – 90), du Caire a` Alger, Paris et Gene`ve; Lettres aux miens, Harmattan, Paris, 1997. Shihata Haroun, Yahu¯dı¯ fı¯l-Qa¯hira [A Jew in Cairo], Da¯r al-Thaqa¯fa, Cairo, 1985. Andre Aciman, Out of Egypt: A Memoir, Farrar Straus Giroux, New York, 2004. Lagnado, The Man. Lucette Lagnado, Al-rajul dhu¯ al-badla al-bayda¯ʾ al-sharkskı¯in waqa¯ʾiʿ khuru¯j usra yahu¯diyya min Misr [The Man in the White Sharkskin Suit; A Jewish ˙ Family’s Exodus from Egypt], Da¯r al-ʿTana¯nı¯, Cairo, 2010. ˙ Lucette Lagnado, The Arrogant Years, Ecco, New York 2011 Dammond and Raby, The Lost.

266

NOTES

TO PAGES

38 – 41

130. Naggar, Sipping. 131. Joyce Zonana, Dream Homes; From Cairo to Katrina: an An Exile’s Journey, Feminist Press at the City University of New York, New York, 2008. 132. Cohen, Odette. 133. Lucienne Carasso, Growing up Jewish in Alexandria, The Story of a Sephardic Family’s Exodus from Egypt, CreateSpace, 2014. 134. Alain Bigio, The Journey: From Ismaeleya to Higieno´polis - The story of an Egyptian Jew. Published under the title ‘A Travessia De Ismaeleya a Higieno´polis, A Historia de um Juden Egipcio contemporaneo’ in Brazilian Portuguese in 2012 and translated into English by Daniela Katzenstein Hart in 2014. Published by the author 2014. 135. Richard Smouha, Cristina Pallini, Marie-Cicile Bruwer, The Smouha City Venture: Alexandria 1923– 1958, CreateSpace, 2014. 136. Juliana Maio, City of the Sun, Greenleaf Book Group Press, Austin, 2014. 137. Mutaz Fatiha, A¯khir yahu¯d al-Iskandariyya [The Last Alexandrian Jews ], Da¯r Uktub lil-Nashr wal-Ttawzı¯ʿ, Cairo, 2010. 138. Kamal Rahim, Ayya¯m al-shata¯t [Days of Dispersion], Sphinx lil-Fann wal-Adab, Cairo, 2008. 139. Kamal Rahim, Qulu¯b Munhaka [Exhausted Hearts], Sphinx lil-Adab, Cairo, 2004. 140. Kamal Rahim, ʾahla¯m al-ʿawda [Dreams of Return], Sphinx lil-Fann ˙ wal-Adab, Cairo, 2011. 141. Kamal Rahim, Sarah Enany, Days in the Diaspora, American University in Cairo Press, Cairo and New York 2012. 142. Kamal Rahim, Sarah Enany, Diary of a Muslim Jew, American University in Cairo Press, Cairo and New York 2014. 143. Fatima Al-Oreid, sifr al-tirha¯l. [Book of Excudus], Da¯r al-tana¯nı¯ lil-nashr, ˙ ˙ Cairo 2013. 144. Rasha Adli, al-Washm [The Tatoo], Da¯r Nahdat Misr lil-Nashr, Cairo, 2014. ˙ ˙ 145. Abu Kaf, Al-yahu¯d, p. 173ff. 146. Shlomo Avineri, The Making of Modern Zionism: The Intellectual Origins of the Jewish State, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London, 1981, p. 13. For more on the emergence of Zionism, see Walter Laqueur, A History of Zionism, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1972; David Vital, The Origins of Zionism, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1975; Arthur Hertzberg, The Zionist idea: A Historical Analysis and Reader, Atheneum, New York, 1969; and, Evyatar Freisel, ‘Zionism and Jewish Nationalism: An Inquiry into an Ideological Relationship’, in Journal of Israeli History, vol. 25, no. 2 (2006), pp. 285 – 312. 147. Avineri, The Making, p. 221. 148. Ibid., p. 187ff. 149. Avineri, The Making, pp. 112– 4. Also see Adam Shatz, Prophets Outcast, A Century of Dissident Jewish Writings about Zionism and Israel, Nation Books, New York, 2004, p. 31.

NOTES 150. 151. 152. 153.

154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159.

160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171.

172. 173.

TO PAGES

42 –46

267

Shatz, Prophets Outcast, pp. 31– 4; and, Avineri, The Making, p. 121ff. Ibid., pp. 31 – 4. On Martin Buber, see Ibid., pp. 55– 9. Ibid., p. 31. Marcos Silber, ‘The Metamorphosis of Pre-Dubnovian Autonomism into Diapsora Jewish Nationalism’, in Minna Rozen (ed.), Homelands and Diasporas, Greeks, Jews and their Migrations, I.B.Tauris, London, 2008, pp. 235 –55. Also see Sophie Dubnov-Erlich, The Life and Works of S.M. Dubnov, Diaspora Nationalism and Jewish History, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1991; Shimon Dubnov, Die Grundlage des Nationaljudentums, Ju¨discher Verlag, Berlin, 1905; Shimon Dunbov, Nationalism and History,: Essays on Old and New Judaism, The Jewish Publication Socitey of America, Philadelphia, 1958; and, David Weinberg, Between Tradition and Modernity, Haim Zhitlowski, Shimon Dubnov, Ahad Ha-Am, and the Shaping of Modern Jewish Identity, Holmes & Meier, New York, 1996. Silber, ‘The Metamorphosis’, pp. 241, 243. The concept emerged in the Austrian, and later the Russian, Empire. The text thus refers to imperial loyalty, see Ibid., p. 244. Ibid., p. 253. Ibid., p. 253. Ibid., p. 235. Omar Kamil has argued that adherents of political Zionism established hegemony and were dominant during the entire era before establishing the state and in the first decades after Israel’s founding. This hegemony influenced relations with non-European Jews, see Kamil, Arabische Juden, pp. 85 – 145. Avineri, The Making, pp. 187– 97. Kamil, Arabische Juden, p. 127ff. Stillman, The Jews, p. 68; and Landau, Jews in, p. 115. Stillman, The Jews, p. 42ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 371. Ibid., p. 353. Ibid., pp. 355 – 7. On Zionist activities in Egypt, see Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 121ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 357– 8. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 379. Also see the Interview with Jacques Hassoun in Beinin, The Dispersion, Appendix, p. 269ff. Stillman, The Jews, p. 91ff; and, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 364 ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 363. See, Neville J. Mandel, The Arabs and Zionism before World War I, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1976; Gershon Shafir, Land, Labour and the Origins of the Israeli – Palestinian Conflict, 1882–1914, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1996; and, Rashid Khalidi, Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness, Columbia University Press, New York, 1997. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 369. Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 39– 44.

268

NOTES

TO PAGES

47 –49

174. Ruth Kimche, ‘in Introduction into the Hebrew’ Section by Levana Zamir, in Ada Aharoni, Aime´e Israel-Pelletier, and Levana Zamir (eds.), History and Culture of the Jews of Egypt in Modern Times, Kenes Havakot, Tel Aviv, 2008, p. 40ff. The book is of three sections, English, French, and Hebrew; with Kimche writing the introduction to the Hebrew section. Introductions are summarizations of each section. 175. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 121– 41. 176. Irmgard Schrand, Jews in Egypt Communists and Citizens, LIT Verlag, Mu¨nster, 2004. 177. Abu al-Ghar, Yahu¯d, p. 164, See also Haroun, Yahudı¯, and Tariq al-Bishry, Al-haraka al-siya¯siyya fı¯ Misr –1953 [The Political Movement in Egypt, ˙ ˙ 1945– 1953], Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, Cairo, 2002, p. 502. 178. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 66.

Chapter 2

Minorities and the Economy

1. Charles Issawi, ‘The Transformation of the Economic Position of the Millets in the Nineteenth Century’, in Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis (eds.), Christian and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of Plural Society, vol. I, Holmes & Meier, New York, 1982, pp. 261–85, p. 26. See also Geoffrey Jones and R. Daniel Wadhwani, ‘Entrepreneurial Theory and the History of Globalization’, Business and Economic History On-Line, vol. 5, 2007, http://www. thebhc.org/publications/BEonline/2007/jonsenandwadhawani.pdf. pp. 1–26, p. 15. Ina Baghdiantz McCabe, Gelina Harlaftis, and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou, Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History, Berg, New York, 2005; Takashi Oishi, ‘Indian Muslim Merchants in Mozambique and South Africa: Intra-regional Networks In Strategic Association with State Institutions, 1870s–1930s’, Journal of the Economic History of the Orient (JESHO), vol. 50, nos. 2–3, (2007), pp. 287–324; and, Abner Cohen, ‘Cultural Strategies in the Organization of Trading Diaspora’, in Claude Meillassoux (ed.), The Development of Indigenous Trade and Markets in West Africa, Oxford University Press, London, 1971, pp. 266–81, p. 267. Also see, Elise Brezis and Peter Temin (ed.), Elites Minorities and Economic Growth, Elsevier, New York, 1999. 2. Prista Ratanapruk, ‘Kinship and Religious Practices as Institutionalization of Trade Networks: Manangi Trade Communities in South and Southeast Asia’, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, vol. 50, nos. 2 – 3 (2007), pp. 325 –46. 3. Chiara Betta, ‘The Trade Diaspora of Baghdadi Jews: From India to China’s Treaty Ports, 1842– 1937’, in McCabe (ed.), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks, pp. 269 –87. 4. Jonathan Israel, ‘Diasporas Jewish and non-Jewish and the World Maritime Empires’, in McCabe (ed.), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks, pp. 3 – 27; and, Solomon D. Goitein, ‘New Light on the Beginnings of the Karim Merchants’, Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient, vol. 1 (April 1958),

NOTES

5.

6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

12. 13.

14.

15. 16.

TO PAGES

49 –51

269

pp. 175 – 84. See also Avner Greif, ‘Reputation and Coalitions in Medieval Trade: Evidence on the Maghribi Traders’, The Journal of Economic History, vol. 1, no. 4, (1989), pp. 857– 82. Germano Maifreda, ‘Networks and Economic Behavior of the Milanese Jews in the Nineteenth century’, European Yearbook of Business History, vol. 1, 1998, pp. 93 – 118; Huibert Schijf, ‘Jewish Bankers, 1850 – 1914: Internationalization along Ethnic Lines’, in McCabe (ed.), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks, pp. 191 – 217; and, Andrew Godly, Jewish Immigrant Entrepreneurship in New York and London, 1880 – 1914: Enterprise and Culture, Palgrave, New York, 2001. Issawi, ‘Transformation’, p. 263ff. See also Ina McCabe, ‘Global Trading Ambitions in Diaspora: The Armenian and their Eurasian Silk Trade, 1530– 1750’, in McCabe, et. al., Diaspora, pp. 27– 51; Roderic Davison, ‘The Millets as Agents of change in the Nineteenth-Century Ottoman Empire’, in Benjamin and Lewis (eds.), Christian and Jews, pp. 319 – 37; and, Sushil Chaudhury, ‘Trading Networks in a Traditional Diaspora: Armenians in India, c. 1600– 1800’, in McCabe, et. al., Diaspora, pp. 51– 73. Traian Stoianovich, ‘The Conquering Balkan Orthodox Merchant’, The Journal of Economic History, vol. 20, no. 2, (1960), pp. 234– 313. Issawi, ‘Transformation’, p. 263. Also see Philipp, The Syrians in Egypt, 1725– 1975, Steiner-Verlag-Wiesbaden, Stuttgart, 1985. Issawi, ‘Transformation’, pp. 262– 63. Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 12. Gelina Harlafis, ‘Mapping the Greek Maritime Diaspora from the early Eighteenth to the Late Twentieth Centuries’, in McCabe et. al., Diaspora, pp. 147 –71, p. 147ff. Kourvetaris, ‘The Greeks’; and, Ioanna Minoglou, ‘Toward a Typology of Greek–Diaspora Entrepreneurship’, in McCabe, et. al., Diaspora, pp. 173–89. Issawi, ‘Transformation’, p. 262; and, Aryeh Shmuelevitz, The Jews of the Ottoman Empire in Late Fifteenth and the Sixteenth Century, Brill, Leiden, 1984, p. 128ff; and, Philipp, The Syrians, p. 4ff. Friedrich Heckmann, ‘Towards the Development of a Typology of Minorities’, in Charles Fried (ed.), Minorities: Community and Identity, Springer, Berlin, 1983, pp. 9– 24, p. 9ff; G.E. Simpson, and J.M. Yinger, Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination, Harper & Row, New York, 1965, pp. 8– 14; Hartfiel und Hillmann (ed.), Wo¨rterbuch der Soziologie, Kro¨ner, Stuttgart, 1972, pp. 499–500; Serge Moscovici and Gabriel Mugny, Perspectives on Minority Influence, Cambridge University Press, London, 1985; and, Gabriel Mugny and Stamos Papastamou, The Power of Minorities, Academic Press, London, 1982. Wilhelm Bernsdorf, Wo¨rterbuch der Soziologie, Enke, Stuttgart, 1969, p. 701. This is the definition of the United Nation Sub-Commission on Prevention and Protection of Minorities (1952), Simpson and Yinger, Racial and Cultural Minorities, p. 10.

270

NOTES

TO PAGES

52 –56

17. Serge Moscovici, ‘Innovation and Minority Influence’, in Moscovici and Mugny (eds.), Perspectives, pp. 9– 49, p. 15. 18. Heckmann, ‘Towards the Development’, p. 11ff, p. 21. 19. Moscovici, ‘Innovation’, p. 27. 20. Francesco Capotorti, ‘Study on the Rights of Persons Belonging to Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities’, Special Rapporteur of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, United Nations, New York, 1979, p. 5. 21. Davison, ‘The Millets’, p. 320. 22. Banjamin Braude, ‘Foundation Myths of the Millet System’, in Braude and Lewis (eds.), Christian and Jews, pp. 69– 89, p. 73. 23. Braude and Lewis, ‘Introduction’, in Braude and Lewis (eds.), Christian and Jews, pp. 1– 24, pp. 12– 6. 24. Davison, ‘The Millets’, p. 320; and, Braude, ‘ Foundation Myths’, pp. 69 – 89. 25. C.E. Bosworth, ‘The Concept of Dhimmi in Early Islam’, in Braude and Lewis (eds.), Christian and Jews, pp. 37– 65. 26. Braude, ‘Foundation Myths’, pp. 70, 72ff. 27. Ibid., p. 72ff. 28. Julie Bouchain, Die Juden in Syrien: Aufstieg und Niedergang der Familie Farhi von 1740– 1995, Mu¨nster Lit, Mu¨nster, 1996, p. 1. 29. Philipp, The Syrians, p. 3ff. 30. Sephardic Jews are the Jews of Spain and the Mediterranean with different religious traditions than the central and Eastern European Ashkenazi Jews. 31. Nancy Reynolds, ‘Interview with Aron Rodrigue, Differences and Tolerance in the Ottoman Empire’, Stanford Humanities Review, vol. 5, no. 1, Fall 1995, pp. 1 – 3. 32. Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’, p. 50; G. Pelissi du Rausas, Le Re´gime des Capitulation dans l’Empire Ottomane, 2 vols, A. Rousseau, Paris, 1910; and, Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, p. 12ff. 33. Georgiades Arnakis, ‘The Greek Church of Constantinople and the Ottoman Empire’, The Journal of Modern History, vol. 24, no. 3 (1952), pp. 235–50, p. 240. 34. Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’, p. 50; and, Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, p. 12ff. 35. Issawi, ‘Transformation’, pp. 273–274. See also Maya Jasanoff, ‘Cosmopolitan, A Tale of Identity from Ottoman Alexandria’, Common Knowledge, vol. 11, no. 3 (2005), pp. 393– 410; and, Glavanis, ‘Aspects’ pp. 127 – 8, p. 143. 36. Issawi, ‘Transformation’, p. 273ff. 37. This was the case with Greek merchants and Greek citizenship, see Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 350ff. 38. Capotorti, ‘Study on the Rights’, pp. 1 – 5. 39. Issawi, ‘Transformation’, p. 261ff. Here Issawi uses the term millet where the author refers to the beginning of the nineteenth century. Later, starting from (p. 274ff), the author refers to the second half of the nineteenth century and uses the term ‘minority’.

NOTES

TO PAGES

57 –60

271

40. Aron Rodrigue, ‘From Millet to Minority: Turkish Jewry’, in Pierre Birnbaum and Ira Katznelson (eds.), Paths of Emancipation: Jews, States and Citizenship, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1995, pp. 238– 61, p. 241. 41. Community with a capital ‘C’ refers to the institution, that is, the council. See Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. vi. Here ‘al-majlis al-milli’ includes a religious aspect, but it was by that time based on a secular concept. 42. Mark Epstein, ‘The Leadership of the Ottoman Jews in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’, in Braude and Lewis (eds.), Christian and Jews, pp. 101 – 115, p. 101. Also see Rodrigue, ‘From Millet’, p. 243. 43. Kinotis: Is a secular, communitarian structure regulated by electoral procedures and independent of the Orthodox Church, see Katerina Trimi and Ilios Yannakakis, ‘The Greeks; The Parikia of Alexandria’, in Robert Ilbert, Ilios Yannakakis, and Jacques Hassoun, Alexandria, 1860– 1960: The Brief Life of a Cosmopolitan Community, Harpocrates, Alexandria, 1997, pp. 65 – 72. 44. Trimi and Yannakakis, ‘The Greeks’, p. 66. 45. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, pp. 355– 6. 46. Greece became a Capitulary power, like other European states. 47. Rodrigue, ‘From Millet’, p. 242ff. 48. Kemal Karpat, ‘Millet and Nationality: The Roots of Incongruity of Nation and State in the Post Ottoman Era’, in Braude and Lewis (eds.), Christian and Jews, pp. 141 –69, p. 162ff. 49. Trimi and Yannakakis, ‘The Greeks’, p. 68. 50. Robert Ilbert, ‘A Certain Sense of Citizenship’, in Ilbert, Yannakakis, and Hassoun, Alexandria 1860 – 1960, pp. 18– 34, p. 24ff. 51. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 130ff. Also see, Landau, Jews in Nineteenth, p. 52. 52. Philipp, The Syrians, pp. 35ff, 75ff and 132ff. 53. There were other Armenian communities, the Armenian Catholics and Armenian Protestants. 54. Mohammad al-Imam, Al-arman fı¯ Misr 1896– 1961 [Armenians in Egypt, ˙ 1896– 1961], Da¯r Nu¯bar lil-tibaʿa, Cairo, 2003, p. 271. ˙ 55. Mohammad al-Imam, Al-arman fı¯ Misr, al-qarn al-ta¯siʿ ʿashar [Armenians ˙ in Egypt, the nineteenth century], Da¯r Nu¯bar lil-tibaʿa, Cairo, 1995, ˙ p. 319ff. 56. There are some data about the Catholic Armenians in Egypt that states there were 945 in 1885. There are no reliable data about the Orthodox Armenians in Egypt. See al-Imam, Al-arman fı¯ Misr, pp. 62– 3. ˙ 57. Rodrigue, ‘From Millet’, pp. 242ff, 258– 9. 58. Deeb, ‘The Socioeconomic’, p. 11. 59. Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 148. 60. Kitroeff, The Greeks, pp. 2, 7 and 11ff. 61. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianization’, p. 25. 62. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 21. 63. Ibid., p. 34ff.

272

NOTES

TO PAGES

61 – 64

64. Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 148. 65. Robert Tingor, ‘The Economic Activities of Foreigners in Egypt, 1920– 1950: From Millet to Haute Bourgeoisie’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol. 22, no. 3 (1980), pp. 416– 49, p. 416ff. 66. Tignor, ‘Economic Activities’, p. 416ff. 67. Philipp, The Syrians, p. 30ff. 68. Beinin, The Dispersion. 69. Al-Imam, Al-arman, 1896– 1961, p. 238. 70. Roger Owen, Cotton and the Egyptian Economy, 1820– 1914, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1969, p. 320. 71. Eric Davis, Challenging Colonialism: Bank Misr and Egyptian Industrialization, 1920– 1941, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1983, p. 92. 72. Ashmawy, Al-yu¯na¯niyu¯n. 73. The term ‘ta¯ʾifa’ is also used also for guilds. ˙ 74. Husni, Al-yahu¯d, p. 6ff. 75. Ata, Al-yahu¯d. 76. Evelyn Baring (Earl of Cromer), Modern Egypt, Macmillan Co., New York, 1908, pp. 245– 46. 77. Reynolds, ‘Interview’, pp. 1 – 3. 78. Deeb, ‘The Socioeconomic’, p. 11. 79. For more information see, Vivian Ibrahim, The Copts of Egypt: challenges of modernization and identity, Tauris Academic Studies, New York, 2011. 80. Population Census of Egypt 1947, General Tables. Republic of Egypt, Ministry of Finance and Economy, Statistical Department, Cairo, 1954. 81. Al Kita¯b al ʾihsa¯ʾ al-sanawı¯, 1952– 1993 [Statistical Year Book, 1952– 1993], The Central Bureau of Statistics, Egyptian Arab Republic, 1994. 82. Deeb, ‘The Socioeconomic’, p. 16. 83. Note that there is a discrepancy in the numbers of minorities, with different data stating different figures. As a result, Greeks, Armenians, and Jews are listed twice, and the British figures include Maltese. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 2. Sources: Al-Imam, Al-arman, 1896 –1961, p. 241, Al-Imam; al-Arman, 1896– 1961, p. 241; Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 26, fn. 1; and, Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 20. Also see Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, pp. 34, 63; Al-Imam, Alarman, 1896– 1961, p. 241; Population Census of Egypt 1947, pp. 2 – 3. For 1927: see Table 2.1, in Population Census of Egypt 1947, General Tables, Republic of Egypt, Ministry of Finance and Economy, Statistical Department, Cairo,1954. For the years 1937 see: ‘Table 1, Summary of the Census Results for 1947 and 1937, A. Population by Religion, Age Group, Civil Status and Nationality’, in Population Census of Egypt 1947, pp. 2 –3. 84. The definition of Jews was not easy, since some of them were foreigners and others were Ottoman subjects. The situation became even more complex after the Egyptian Citizenship Law of 1929. More details are found in the following in the chapters to follow. For these reasons these numbers are not understood in an absolute sense.

NOTES 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91.

92. 93. 94. 95. 96.

97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102.

103. 104.

105.

106. 107.

TO PAGES

64 –69

273

Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 13. Al-Imam, al-Arman, 1896– 1961, p. 241. Ibid., p. 242ff. Joseph Meleze-Modrzejewski, ‘Jews of Egypt in Ancient Centuries’, in Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh, pp. 25– 50, p. 25ff. Politis, L’Helle´nisme, vol. I, p. 74. On dhimmis in Egypt, see Michael Winter, Egyptian Society under Ottoman Rule, 1517– 1798, Routledge, London, 1992, pp. 199– 222. Alfred Morabia, ‘Yahu¯d Misr fı¯ zil al-ı¯slam, min al-fath al-ʿarabı¯ ila¯ hamlat ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Bu¯na¯bart’ [Jews of Egypt under Islam from the Arab Conquest To Bonaparte], in Hassoun, Ta¯rı¯kh, pp. 51– 78, p. 59ff. Morabia, ‘Yahu¯d Misr’, pp. 57, 62ff. ˙ Ibid., pp. 72ff. Ibid. Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 11. The old Arabic expression describing the Greeks is ‘Ru¯m,’ it comes from the word ‘Romans’ and is used in the religious context, when mentioning the Greek Orthodox Church. The term ‘Yu¯nani,’ which means ‘Greek’ is used later. For this the term ‘Ru¯m’ is still found in literature. Arnakis, ‘The Greek Church’, p. 238. Ibid., p. 242. Winter, ‘Egyptian society’, p. 203; and Philipp, The Syrians, p. 27. The Greek Catholics are a Christian religious minority who migrated from Syria to Egypt in the eighteenth century after a schism in the Orthodox Church in Syria. Philipp, The Syrians, pp. 25ff, 33. Barbara Kellner-Heinkele, ‘Der arabische Osten unter osmanischer Herrschaft 1517– 1800’, in Ulrich Haarmann (ed.), Geschichte der Arabischen Welt, C. H. Beck, Mu¨nchen, 1987, pp. 323–64, p. 326ff; and, Gabriel Bear, A History of Landownership in Modern Egypt, 1800– 1950, Oxford University Press, London, 1962, p. 2ff. Cuno, The Pasha’s, pp. 30ff. ʿAbd al-Rahman Al-Jabarti, Ta¯rı¯kh al-Jabarti,ʿajaʾib al-Atha¯r fil-Tara¯jim wal-Akhba¯r [History of Egypt], vol. II, Da¯r al-Tiba¯ʿah, Cairo, 1902, pp. 388ff, ˙ 394 and 403. Khaled Fahmy, ‘The Era of Muhammad ʿAli Pasha, 1805– 1848’, in M. W. Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt Modern Egypt: From 1517 to the End of the Twentieth Century, vol. II, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998, pp. 139 – 79, p. 142ff. Also see Alexander Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische Osten im neunzehnten Jahrhundert, 1800–1914’, in Haarmann, Geschichte, pp. 365 – 417, pp. 365ff, 368ff. Fahmy, ‘The Era’, p. 140ff. Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha’s Men: Mehmed Ali, his Army and the Making of Modern Egypt, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1997. Preserving the historical context, Fahmy uses the Ottoman pronunciation of the name.

274 108. 109. 110. 111.

112. 113. 114. 115.

116.

117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122.

123.

124. 125. 126. 127. 128.

NOTES

TO PAGES

69 –72

Fahmy, ‘The Era’, p. 140ff. Cuno, The Pasha’s, p. 49. Fahmy, All the Pasha’s, p. 10. Jumel cotton was the first long-staple hybrid plant to be cultivated successfully in Egypt. A French textile engineer, Louis Alexis Jumel, sometime between 1817 and 1819 accomplished this in his Cairo garden. Later, other cotton cultivars were derived from Jumel, including Ashmouni. See Owen, Cotton, p. 28. Fahmy, All the Pasha’s, p. 11. Ibid., p. 11ff. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianization’, pp. 25ff. See also Politis, L’Helle´nisme, vol. I, p. 182ff. Richard Clogg, ‘Aspects of the Movement for Greek Independence’, in Richard Clogg (ed.), The Struggle for Greek Independence, Macmillan, London, 1973, pp. 1 –40, p. 10. Behind Mohammad Ali’s involvement in the Greek war lies a great degree of complexity. See Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, pp. 98– 102. For details about the 3,000 Greek slaves, see Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, pp. 102–4. Helen Rivlin, The Agricultural Policy of Muhammad Ali in Egypt, Harvard University Press, Cambridge 1961, p. 62. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 136. Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’, pp. 25– 6. Also see K. Trimi and I. Yannakakis, ‘The Greeks’, p. 66. Kitroeff, The Greeks, pp. 14– 7. Charles Issawi, ‘Egypt Since 1800: A Study in Lopsided Development’, Journal of Economic History, vol. 21, no. 1 (1961), pp. 1 –25, p. 24. Afaf Al-Sayyid Marsot, Egypt in the Reign of Muhammad Ali, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1984, pp. 164ff, 172ff; and, Fahmy, All the Pasha’s, p. 12ff. The works of Khaled Fahmy are comprehensive and offer detailed analyses of the Pasha and his period of rule. Fahmy’s work criticizes the nationalist narrative and portrays the Pasha in his historical context. Some of Rivlin’s critiques meet with Fahmy’s analysis. See, Fahmy, All the Pasha’s men, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1997; Fahmy, ‘The Era of Muhammad ʾAli Pasha, 1805– 1848’, in MW Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt Modern Egypt: From 1517 to the End of the Twentieth Century, vol. II, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998, pp. 139–179; and, Fahmy, Mehmed Ali: From Ottoman Governor to the Ruler of Egypt, Oneworld, Oxford, 2009. Fahmy, All the Pasha’s, p. 25ff. Ibid., pp. 10 – 2. Jacques Hassoun, ‘The Jews: A Community of Contrasts’, in Ilbert, Yannakakis and Hassoun, Alexandria 1860– 1960, pp. 36 – 52, p. 38. Morabia, ‘Yahu¯d Misr’, p. 77. ˙ Landau, Jews in Nineteenth, pp. 9 – 10.

NOTES 129. 130. 131. 132.

133.

134. 135.

136. 137. 138. 139. 140. 141. 142. 143.

144. 145. 146. 147. 148. 149. 150. 151. 152.

153. 154. 155.

TO PAGES

72 –75

275

Shahin, Ta¯rı¯kh, pp. 212–8. Landau, Jews in Nineteenth, p. 10. Fahmy, All the Pasha’s, p. 3. In 1847, his son Ibrahim took over the daily affairs of government while the Pasha was alive but ill. Ibrahim died on September 12, 1848, before his father’s death on August 2, 1849. See Fahmy, Mehmed Ali, pp. 110 – 1. Ahmad Abd-al-Rahim Mustafa, ‘The Breakdown of the Monopoly System in Egypt after 1840’, in Peter Holt (ed.), Political and Social Change in Modern Egypt, O.U.P., London, 1968, pp. 291–307, p. 305. Fahmy, All the Pasha’s, p. 13; and, Owen, Cotton, p. 65ff. The ferman issued by the Ottoman sultan on June 8, 1867, promoted Ismail from governor to khedive [viceroy]. Included was the gaining by Egypt of partial autonomy from the Ottoman Empire. Sources assert that Ismail received this ferman after paying huge sums to Istanbul. See Abd al-Rahman Al-Rafiʿi, ʿasr ʾIsmaʿı¯l [Ismail’s Era], Madbu¯lı¯, Cairo, 1987, ˙ pp. 79 – 83. Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische’, p. 391; and, Arthur Goldschmidt, Modern Egypt: The Formation of a Nation-State, Westview Press, Boulder, 1988, p. 27. Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische’, p. 391ff. Bear, A History, p. 8; and Cuno, The Pasha’s, p. 202; and, Issawi, ‘Egypt since 1800’, p. 25. Owen, Cotton, p. 89. Ibid., p. 89ff. Landau, Jews in Nineteenth, p. 6. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, pp. 14, 357ff. As mentioned above, not all Greeks were Europeans at that time. As a result, it is not necessarily accurate to assume that the figure of 90,000 for Europeans include the Greeks. Owen, Cotton, p. 113. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 156. Landau, Jews in Nineteenth, p. 4. Beinin considers this number to be underestimated, saying that the number of Jews was 75,000 – 80,000 in 1948, see Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 2. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 26 fn 1; and, Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 20. Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, pp. 34, 63. Landau, Jews in Nineteenth, p. 6. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 26. Joseph Meleze-Modrzejewski, ‘Yahu¯d Misr fı¯ al-ʿahu¯d Mi-qadı¯ma’ [Jews of ˙ Egypt in Ancient Centuries], in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh yahu¯d al-Nı¯l, [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile], Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, Cairo, 2007, pp. 25 – 50. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 34– 7; and Hassoun, ‘Ahda¯th’, pp. 148ff. ˙ Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 39– 44. Also see Hassan, Firqat, p. 28ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 55– 65.

276 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163.

164. 165.

166. 167. 168. 169. 170. 171.

172. 173. 174. 175. 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188.

NOTES

TO PAGES

75 –79

Meleze-Modrzejewski, ‘Yahu¯d Misr’, p. 43. ˙ Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 37– 43. Shahin, Ta¯rı¯kh, pp. 195ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 44– 54. Meleze-Modrzejewski, ‘Yahu¯d Misr’, pp. 43ff. None of the records indicate ˙ that Hebrew was a language used in Egypt. See Shahin, Ta¯rı¯kh, p. 211. Philipp, The Syrians, p. 156. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 133. Davis, Challenging, p. 95. This includes an interview with Rene´ Qattawi, the son of Yousef Qattawi, in Paris in 1975. Anas Mustafa Kamel states that the family had Syrian origins, though he provides no evidence to confirm this statement. See A. Kamel, Al-ra’sma¯liyya, pp. 44– 5, p. 84. Morabia, ‘Yahu¯d Misr’, pp. 74ff. ˙ Different data are available. The discrepancy in the data is a result of changing Egyptian nationality laws, see Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, pp. 43, 49. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 79; Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, p. 13 and, Kamel, Alraʾsma¯liyya, p. 84. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 79. Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, p. 43 Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 91. Kitroeff, The Greeks, pp. 11– 3. Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 14. Ibid., pp. 11 – 3, Kitroeff differentiates in his data between those belonging to the Greek race and Greek citizens, the numbers in 1927 can also be either 99,793 or 76,264. The number is probably higher, similar to the unofficial numbers of the previous years. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, p. 11. Deeb, ‘The Socioeconomic’, p. 15; and, Baring, Modern Egypt, p. 251. Kitoreff, The Greeks, p. 7ff; and, Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, p. 27. Ibid., p. 76. Ibid., p. 31. Bear, The History, p. 35; and, Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 80. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 77. Owen, Cotton, p. 69. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, pp. 160– 1. Ibid., p. 161. Ibid., pp. 146– 7. Ibid., p. 163ff. Ibid., p. 177. Owen, Cotton, p. 221. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 148. Relli Shechter, Smoking, Culture and Economy in the Middle East; The Egyptian Tobacco Market, 1850– 2000, I.B.Tauris, London, 2006, p. 38ff.

NOTES

TO PAGES

79 –83

277

189. Darwish, ‘Preface’, p. 15ff. Also see Kitroeff, The Greeks, pp. 29, 189, and 191; and, Ramadan, Al-haya¯t, p. 290ff. 190. Landau, Jews in Nineteenth, pp. 10– 1. 191. Ibid., p. 11. 192. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 151– 2. 193. Shahin, Ta¯rı¯kh, pp. 223–4. 194. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 84; and, Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 153. 195. Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische’, p. 392. 196. Yahya Mahmud, Al-dayn al-ʿa¯mm wa ʾatharuhu fi tatawur al-ʾiqtisad al-misrı¯ ˙ ˙ ˙ 1876– 1843 [The Public Debt and its Effect on the Development of the Egyptian Economy, 1876– 1943], al-Hayʾa al-Misriyya al-ʿAmma lil-Kita¯b, ˙ Cairo, 1998, pp. 18ff, 23– 9 18ff. 197. Mahmud, Al-dayn al-ʿa¯mm, p. 40ff. 198. Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische’, p. 394. Also see Mahmud, Al-dayn al-ʿa¯mm, pp. 31–3, 65–8. 199. Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische’, p. 394. 200. Ibid., p. 394ff. 201. Nathan Brown, ‘The Precarious Life and Slow Death of the Mixed Courts of Egypt’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 25, no. 1 (1993), pp. 33 – 52, p. 34ff. 202. An example is the role of the mixed courts in selling pawned lands. See Alexander Scho¨lch, A¨gypten den A¨gyptern! Die politische und gesellschaftliche Krise der Jahre 1878– 1882, i. Br., Zu¨rich, 1977, p. 78. 203. Bear, The History, p. 34. 204. Scho¨lch, Der arabische, p. 395; and, Scho¨lch, A¨gypten, pp. 193 – 5. 205. Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische’, p. 400. 206. Ibid., p. 400ff; and, Juan R.I. Cole, Colonialism and Revolution in the Middle East: Social and Cultural Origins of Egypt’s ʿUrabi Movement, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1993. 207. Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische’, pp. 396– 402. 208. Scho¨lch, A¨gypten, p. 225. 209. P.J. Vatikiotis, The History of Modern Egypt, From Mohammed Ali To Mubarak, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London 1991, p. 158. 210. Glavanis, ‘Aspects ‘, pp. 108– 22. 211. For more on the prosperous culture and the role of the Syrians, see; Philipp, The Syrians, pp. 96– 100. 212. Scho¨lch, ‘Der arabische’, p. 403. 213. Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 154. 214. Owen, Cotton, p. 106. 215. Ibid., p. 110ff. 216. John Marlowe, A History of Modern Egypt and Anglo – Egyptian Relations, 1800 – 1965, Archon Books, Hamden, 1965; Robert Tignor, Modernization and British Colonial Rule in Egypt, 1882 – 1914, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1966; Afaf Al-Sayyid, Egypt and Cromer, A Study in Anglo –

278

217. 218. 219. 220.

221. 222. 223. 224. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230.

231. 232. 233. 234. 235. 236. 237. 238. 239. 240. 241. 242. 243. 244. 245. 246. 247. 248. 249. 250. 251. 252.

NOTES

TO PAGES

83 – 90

Egyptian Relations, Murray, London, 1968; and John Marlowe, Cromer in Egypt, Praeger Publishers, New York, 1970; and Samir Radwan, Capital Formation in Egyptian Industry & and Agriculture, 1882 – 1967, Ithaca Press, London, 1974. Owen, Cotton, p. 183. Ibid., pp. 95 – 140. Ibid., pp. 141– 79. The Hicks expedition was a military expedition sent to Sudan, on behalf of the Egyptian army, the latter having been disbanded by the Khedive after the ʿUrabi movement, see Al-Sayyid, Egypt and Cromer, p. 39ff. Cromer, Modern Egypt, vol. II, p. 326. Al-Sayyid, Egypt and Cromer, pp. 57– 58; and, Owen, Cotton, p. 189. Ibid., p. 65; and, Owen, Cotton, pp. 192ff, 202ff. Ibid., p. 2. Ibid., pp. 62 – 5. Cromer, Modern Egypt, vol. I, p. 343, and vol. II, p. 249. Ibid., p. 250. Ibid., p. 251. Ibid., p. 252. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 76. Glavanis’ work was written in 1979, and his arguments are very much the product of the time. The availability of the documents later at Dar al-Wathaʾiq changed this situation. Ibid., p. 73. Ibid., p. 144. Al-Sayyid, Egypt and Cromer, p. 42. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, pp. 115ff. Ibid., p. 161. Ibid., p. 162. Ibid., p. 158. Ibid., p. 144. Ibid., pp. 170– 4. Ibid., pp. 174– 6. Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 151ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 142. Ibid., p. 84ff. Ibid., p. 86ff. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 12, 1890. ˙ Ibid., July 10, 1895. Ibid., decree, 92/1897. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 88. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 256. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree, 48/1892. ˙ Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 87. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 45.

NOTES 253. 254. 255. 256. 257. 258. 259. 260. 261. 262. 263. 264. 265.

TO PAGES

90 – 96

279

Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 87; and, Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 124. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 6, 1889. ˙ Al-Sayyid, Egypt and Cromer, p. 138, and, Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 248. Gabriel Bear, Egyptian Guilds in Modern Times, Israel Oriental Society, Jerusalem, 1964, p. 137; and, Issawi, ‘Egypt since 1800’, p. 37. Radwan, Capital Formation, p. 173ff. Roger Owen, ‘Lord Cromer and the Development of Egyptian Industry, 1883– 1907’, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 2, no. 4 (1966), pp. 282 – 301. Owen, Cotton, pp. 284– 93. Radwan, Capital Formation, pp. 240– 1. Al-Sayyid, Egypt and Cromer, p. 138. Owen, Cotton, p. 303. Arthur Crouchley, The Economic Development of Modern Egypt, Longmans, London, 1938, p. 105. Radwan, Capital Formation, p. 169. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 247.

Chapter 3 Theoretical Framework 1. Documents in the Archives are available beginning in 1885, which explains the present study beginning with that year. 2. These documents are available as PDFs at the digital archive ‘Tashrı¯ʿa¯t,’ accessible through the library of the American University of Cairo. 3. Schumpeter, see his main works; Theorie, Zur Soziologie, Business Cycles, Capitalism Socialism, Aufsa¨tze zur Wirtschaftstheorie, and Aufsa¨tze zur Soziologie. Also see, Gabler, Wirtschafts Lexikon, Gabler, Wiesbaden, 2000, p. 2734; and, Richard Swedberg, Joseph A. Schumpeter, Eine Biographie, Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart, 1994. 4. Others do not see Schumpeter belonging strictly to a specific school of thought. See, Cassis and Pepelasis Minoglou (eds.), Entrepreneurship, p. 5. 5. Gabler, Wirtschafts, pp. 3402–4. 6. Ratanapruk, ‘Kinship’. Also see, Oishi, ‘Indian Muslim’; Maifreda, ‘Networks’, Roger Burt, ‘Freemasonry and Business Networking during the Victorian Period’ in Economic History Review, vol. 55, no. 4, 2003, pp. 657–88. 7. Ratanapruk, ‘Kinship’, pp. 341. 8. Robin Pearson, ‘Business Networking in the Industrial Revolution’, in Economic History Review, vol. 54, no. 4, 2001, pp. 657 –79, p. 657. 9. Pearson, ‘Business’, p. 657. 10. Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 3ff. 11. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 115; and, Pearson, ‘Business’, p. 657. 12. Cassis and Minoglou, Entrepreneurship, p. 5. The term ‘innovation’ is not used in Schumpeter’s writings since it was not a common term in his time. 13. Mark Casson and Andrew Godley, ‘Entrepreneurship and Historical Explanation’, in Cassis and Minoglou (eds.), Entrepreneurship, pp. 25 – 60, p. 27.

280

NOTES

TO PAGES

97 –101

14. Schumpeter’s concept of innovation comprises the following five types: (1) the introduction of a new good – that is, one with which consumers are not familiar yet – or of a new quality of a good; (2) the introduction of a new method of production – that is, one not yet tested by experience in the branch of manufacture concerned. This need by no means be founded upon a discovery scientifically new, and can also exist in a new way of handling a commodity commercially; (3) the opening of a new market, that is a market into which the particular branch of the manufacture of the country in question has not previously entered, whether or not this market has existed before; (4) the conquest of a new source of supply of raw materials or halfmanufactured good, again irrespective of whether this source already exists or whether it has first to be created; (5) the carrying out of the new organization of any industry, like the creation of a monopoly position or the breaking up of a monopoly position. Creating new organization, like creating a monopoly or bursting existing ones. Joseph Schumpeter, The Theory of Economic Development; an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interests and the business cycle, translated by Redvers Opie, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2004, (first published 1934), p. 66. 15. Joseph Schumpeter, The Theory of Economic Development; an inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interests and the business cycle, translated by Redvers Opie, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2004, (first published 1934), p. 66. 16. Cassis and Pepelasis Minoglou, Entrepreneurship. Also see, Gunner Eliason, and Christoph Green, Micro Foundations of Economic Growth: A Schumpeterian Perspective, University of Michigan Press, Michigan, 2001. 17. Caron, ‘Innovation’, in Cassis and Pepelasis Minoglou (eds.), Entrepreneurship, pp. 111 –126, p. 111. 18. Ibid. 19. Ibid., p. 111 – 5. 20. Casson and Godley, ‘Entrepreneurship’, p. 29ff. 21. Ibid., pp. 28 – 30. 22. Ibid., p. 33. 23. Regarding the Greek community, see Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’ pp. 37, 43 – 6. 24. Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 155. Also see, Joel Beinin, ‘The Jewish Business Elite in Twentieth-Century Egypt: Pillars of the National Economy or Compradors?’, Bulletin of the Royal Institute for Inter – Faith Sudies, vol. 1, no. 2, 1999, pp. 113– 38. 25. Landau, Jews in Nineteenth, p. 71. 26. On education, see Owen, Cotton, p. 312. On education and the French language, see Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 67, 69– 70. For data on pupil’s distribution by religion, see Philipp, The Syrians, p. 156. 27. Philipp, The Syrians, p. 156. 28. Casson and Godley, ‘Entrepreneurship’, p. 31. 29. Owen, Cotton, p. 222. 30. Casson and Godley, ‘Entrepreneurship’, p. 37.

NOTES

TO PAGES

101 –108

281

31. Ratanapruck, ‘Kinship’, p. 340. 32. Howard Aldrich, and Roger Waldinger, ‘Ethnicity and Entrepreneurship’, in Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 16, 1990, pp. 111– 35, p. 126 ff. 33. Ratanapruck, ‘Kinship’, p. 339– 40. 34. Pearson, ‘Business’, pp. 660– 1. 35. Owen, Cotton, p. 222. 36. Casson and Godley, ‘Entrepreneurship’, p. 38. 37. Ibid., p. 40. 38. Ibid. 39. Ibid. 40. Ibid., p. 41ff. 41. Ibid., p. 42ff. 42. Ibid., pp. 41 – 3. 43. Different data are available. This statistical asymmetry is related to the different Egyptian nationality laws. See Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, p. 43; Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 79; Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, p. 13; and, Kamel, Alra’sma¯liyya, p. 84. 44. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 79. 45. Pearson, ‘Business’, p. 664; and, Ratanapruck, ‘Kinship’, p. 332ff. 46. Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’, p. 37; and, Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 154. 47. Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 160. 48. Note on the data presented in the Appendix: The tables of the companies show level-one networking (W1) and level-two networking (W2). W2 has many nuances. A clear level two networking mentioned above occurred when several members of each different group participated in establishing a company. Only such instances were taken into consideration. A ‘lower’ intensity of W2 is also available, though these were not included in the data. For this reason it might appear that W2 is higher than suggested by the data. 49. Robert Vitalis, When Capitalists Collide: Business Conflict and the End of Empire in Egypt, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1995, p. 64ff. See also, Davis, Challenging, pp. 134ff. Safaʾ Shakir, Isma¯ʿı¯l Sidqı¯, al-wa¯qiʿiyya al-siya¯siyya fı¯ ˙ muwa¯jahit al-haraka al-wataniyya [Isamil Sidqi, Political Realism in Facing ˙ ˙ the National Movement], Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, Cairo, 2005, pp. 33ff; and, Malak Badrawi, Ismaʿil Sidqi (1875 –1950): Pragmatism and Vision in TwentiethCentury Egypt, Curzon, Richmond, 1996, pp. 94– 5. 50. Examples are: Syrian names with Greek and British nationalities, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya April 23, 1904; Albert Ismalum and Emil Nayef are Syrians with ˙ Austrian and Swiss nationalities, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 11, 1906; July ˙ 14, 1906, and July 25, 1906. De Menasce, an Egyptian Jewish family, with Jacques De Menasce being Austrian while the De Menasces were Egyptian nationals, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 30, 1907.Sarsaq, Syrian with ˙ Russian nationality, al-Qabari Land Company, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March ˙ 30, 1907. Mansur Najib Shakur and Habib Ghanem are Syrians with Belgian

282

51.

52. 53.

54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59.

NOTES

TO PAGES

108 –121

and French nationalities, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 08, 1907. Sidnawi, ˙ Gharra, Ghanim, Humsi, Habib, Nahhas, and Tharifa are Syrians with Egyptian nationality, and Habib Ghanem is Syrian with French nationality, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, June 27, 1908. Adda, an Egyptian Jewish family, ˙ with Ibrahim Adda being a Greek national while Yusuf Ibrahim Adda and Frenand Climant Adda were Egyptian nationals, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July ˙ 19, 1920. Constantine Ikos, Greek with Egyptian nationality, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ almisriyya, April 2, 1923. Salim Rabbat, an Egyptian Jew with Egyptian ˙ nationality, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 1, 1926; and a member of the ˙ same family, Rabbat, Salim G. Rabbat, was a French national, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ almisriyya, February 15, 1926. Sarsaq here is Portuguese, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al˙ misriyya, November 25, 1926. George Qusha, Syrian with Swiss nationality, ˙ with other partners such as Taqla, Augustin, Edgimian, Karnasan and Raji either Syrians or Armenians with Egyptian nationality, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ almisriyya, November 15, 1928. Humsi here is Italian representing a British ˙ company, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, November 05, 1931. The owners of the ˙ company just listed are the Humsi family; all Egyptian nationals except for Habib Humsi, who is French, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, August 15, 1932. Here ˙ Sarsaq, is Spanish, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, October 10, 1932. Maurice De ˙ Menasce is Turkish and Albert De Menasce is Egyptian, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ almisriyya, December 15, 1940. Agion was an Egyptian Jew and Egyptian ˙ national although the family was known to be Italian nationals, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 30, 1941. Four members of the Palestinian Kittaneh ˙ family holding Lebanese and Palestinian nationalities living in New York, Beirut and Tehran and investing in Egypt, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September ˙ 17, 1945. Examples, taken from the data, are Sarsaq registered as Syrian and Zizinya as French. Jews are counted here regardless of citizenship. Their participation is evident from their given names or surnames on the decree of founding charters. In this way, the multiple identities of Jews become clear: Jews with Egyptian citizenship are also counted as Egyptians. See also n. 635, p. 175. Their share referred to here in terms of number and not volume of capital, value, or turnover. Arab investors include Arab ‘foreigners’, that is, Arab citizens who are not Egyptians. This is not central to the study, but it is an indication of how business investments were generally undertaken at the time with businessmen investing in other countries. These 229 companies present 30 per cent of the market, meaning that 30 per cent of the companies were innovative. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 160ff. Ibid., p. 160. Owen, Cotton, p. 222. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 161. Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’, p. 28.

NOTES

TO PAGES

121 –125

283

60. Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’, p. 28; and, Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 161. 61. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 161ff. 62. Horizontally added totals result in almost twice as many companies than those added in the accumulative column. This results from the fact that many companies fall into more than one category. (e.g., being Jewish and Egyptian, or Greek with Egyptian citizenship). 63. This includes all Jews whether they were Egyptians or not. 64. This includes all Greeks with Greek, Egyptian or other citizenship. 65. This includes companies where Jews and Greeks had a partnership. 66. This includes those who had foreign passports. 67. These are partnerships between Egyptians and non-Egyptians. 68. This includes all Egyptians no matter which religion they had, meaning also Greeks and Jews who had Egyptian citizenship. 69. This includes companies where Jews and Greeks had a partnership. They are therefore counted twice in the two preceding columns and should be deducted from the total sum of Greek and Jewish companies. 70. This includes companies where Jews and Greeks had a partnership. They are therefore counted twice in the two preceding columns and should be deducted from the total sum of Greek and Jewish companies. 71. ‘Egyptian’ here also includes Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks if they declared themselves as Egyptian citizens in the companies’ founding charters.

Chapter 4 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

Minorities in Interwar Egypt

Crouchley, The Economic, pp. 178– 9. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 12, 1890. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 10, 1895. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 49, 1889. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, November 11, 1889, January 3, 1894; December 9, ˙ 1895, and, November 22, 1899. According to the archival documents of Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, the detailed ˙ registration of citizenship started in 1906. In that year some documents indicated where the person lived, as in previous years, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ March 17, 1906. A document dating from March 28, 1906, is likely the first to indicate detailed citizenship information, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 28, ˙ 1906. This can be an awareness indicator of foreign capital. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 23/1893. ˙ Crouchley, The Economic, pp. 164ff, 171. Also see Tignor, Modernization, p. 225ff. Davis, Challenging, p. 28ff. Politis, L’Helle´nisme, vol. II, pp. 145– 159. Also see Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, pp. 80 – 6. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 82ff. See Owen, Cotton, p. 222. Glavanis, ‘Aspects’, p. 84.

284

NOTES

TO PAGES

126 –130

13. Shahin, Ta¯rı¯kh, pp. b– d. 14. Ibid., p. 239. 15. Davis, Challenging, Table 3.2, p. 58; Table 3.3, p. 60; and, Table 3.4, p. 63 ff. Also see, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 86– 8. 16. Davis, Challenging, pp. 44– 51. 17. See the articles of Ahmad Lutfi al-Sayyid in Al-jarı¯da, the newspaper of the People’s Party: in Davis, Challenging, pp. 50– 2. 18. Davis, Challenging, pp. 69– 76. 19. Ibid., p. 199. 20. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 30, 1907, Egyptian Union Bank. ˙ 21. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 25, 1906, Akaziour Hotel Company: Syrian ˙ names and holders of Spanish and British passports. Also see: al-Qabbani Land Company, with Sarsaq being Syrian with Russian passport, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 30, 1907. The Egyptian Trade Bank, Syrians with Egyptian ˙ passports, and Habib Ghanem, Syrian with a French passport, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, June 27, 1908; and, Commercial Financial Cooperation Company, ˙ with the Syrian Alfred Awad holding a Belgian passport and French Muslim Abd al-Mouti Al-Mughrabi, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, February 9, 1910. ˙ 22. Egyptian Shipping Company, De Decocnaes, Elias Samboniyaris, Michael Camboris, and Jean Frangolis are most probably Greek, while Elli Cangllanis and J. Bandalidis are declared to be Egyptians, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, August ˙ 22, 1927. 23. Vitalis, When Capitalists, p. 13. 24. Davis, Challenging, p. 76. 25. See Appendix, Company Tables, 1911 –19. 26. Muhammad Talʿat Harb, Majmu¯ʿat khutab Muhammad Talʿat Harb bek [The ˙ ˙ ˙ Speeches of Muhammad Talʿat Harb], Matbaʿit Misr, Cairo, 1927, pp. 13 – 44; ˙ ˙ and, Joel Beinin, ‘Egypt: Society and Eeconomy, 1923– 1952’, in M.W. Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, vol. II, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998, pp. 309– 333, p. 323. Also see Davis, Challenging, p. 96. 27. Davis, Challenging, p. 76. See Shakir, Isma¯ʿı¯l Sidqı¯, pp. 20 – 21. ˙ 28. In the literature there is some discussion about how best to define this bourgeoisie. See, Magda Baraka, The Egyptian Upper Class between Revolutions, 1919– 1952, Ithaca Press, Reading, 1998; and, Robert Tignor, State, Private Enterprise and Economic Change in Egypt, 1918– 1952, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984. Also see Marius Deeb, ‘Bank Misr and the Emergence of the Local Bourgeoisie in Egypt’, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 12, no. 3, 1976, pp. 69– 86, and Robert Tignor, ‘The Egyptian Revolution 1919: New Directions in the Egyptian Economy’, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 12, no. 3, 1976, pp. 41 – 69. 29. Davis, Challenging, p. 3ff. 30. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 13, 1920. ˙ 31. Beinin, ‘Egypt’, p. 326. 32. Vitalis, When Capitalists, p. 112.

NOTES

TO PAGES

130 –134

285

33. The founders were: Ahmad Yakin, Yusuf Aslan Qattawi, Mohammad Talat Harb, Abd-al-Azim Al-Masri, Abd-al-Hamid Al-Suyufi, Fuad Sultan, Iskandar Masiha, and Abbas Basyuni al-Khatib, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ April 13, 1920. 34. Harb, Majmu¯ʿat, pp. 52–7, 109. 35. Davis, Challenging, pp. 134– 6. 36. Caron, ‘Innovation’, pp. 111– 26, p. 111ff. 37. Ibid., p. 113. 38. Ibid., p. 114. 39. Ibid., p. 114. 40. Ibid., p. 115. 41. Harb, Majmu¯ʿat, p. 53. 42. Beinin, ‘Egypt’, p. 310. 43. Harb, Majmu¯ʿat, p. 57. 44. Davis, Challenging, p. 108. 45. The family names – Abaza, al-Manzalawi, al-Basil, Badrawi, Dus, Mazlum, Yaghin (Yakin), Wisa, Sarsaq, Sultan, Sharawi, Sabri, ʿAbbud, Ashur, alShuraiy, al-Misri – are repeated in various corporate establishment charters. See, Asim Disuqi, Kiba¯r mulla¯k al-ʾara¯dı¯ az-zira¯ʿiyya wa dawruhum fı¯l-mujtamaʿ al-misry (1914 –1952) [The big landlords and their role in the Egyptian ˙ society (1914 – 1952)], Da¯r al-Thaqa¯fah al-Jadı¯dah, Cairo, 1975, p. 29 – 31. See also, Baraka, The Egyptian, pp. 28, 32ff, 39. 46. Vitalis, When Capitalists, pp. 4 – 5. 47. Ibid., p. 153ff. (Examples were Abbud, Sidqi, and Abd al Wahhab and their rivalry with Talʿat Harb and the Misr Group). 48. Davis, Challenging, p. 80. 49. The name is written in French as Cattaui. 50. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 46. 51. Samir Raafat, ‘Dynasty: The House of Yacoub Cattaui’, in Egyptian Mail, April 2, 1994 (http://www.egy.com/judaica/94 –04– 02.shtml). 52. Davis, Challenging, p. 80ff. 53. Ibid., p. 87ff. 54. Ibid., p. 95 (interview with Rene´ Qattawi, the son of Yusuf Qattawi, in Paris, 1975). 55. For more details about the Qattawis, see Shahin, Ta¯rı¯kh, p. 223ff. Also see Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 84ff; and, Beinin, ‘The Jewish’, pp. 113 – 38. 56. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 45. 57. Vitalis, When Capitalists, p. 42ff; and, Beinin, ‘Egypt’, p. 323ff. 58. Harb, Majmu¯ʿat, pp. 13–44. 59. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 45. 60. Owen, Cotton, p. 303. 61. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 46; and, Harb, Majmu¯ʿat, p. 84.

286

NOTES

TO PAGES

134 –136

62. Talʿat Harb, ʿila¯j Misr al-iqtisa¯dı¯ wa mashru¯ʿ bank al-misriyı¯n aw bank al-umma ˙ ˙ [‘Egypt’s Economic Solution and the Project for an Egyptian or National Bank’], Al-jarı¯da Press, Cairo, 1911. 63. ‘Saʿa maʿ Talʿat Baik Harb’ [‘An hour with Talʿat Bek Harb’], Al-Hilal, vol. 7, no. 36, May 1928, pp. 778– 81. (Unknown Author). 64. Baraka, The Egyptian, p. 32. 65. The Egyptian independence granted by Britain had a formal character and was limited by four conditions: the security of imperial communications, the defense of Egypt against foreign aggression, the protection of foreign interests and minorities, and the continued British administration of the Sudan. The king became head of the Egyptian state, replacing the sultan (the ruler of Egypt had the title of sultan, the title was changed into king in 1922), a change made by means of a decision of the colonial administration. See Selma Botman, ‘The Liberal Age, 1923– 1952’, in M.W. Daly (ed.), The Cambridge, pp. 25 – 308. Also see Helmut Mejcher, ‘Der arabische Osten im zwanzigsten Jahrhundert 1914 –1985’, in Harmann (ed.), Geschichte, pp. 432 – 497, pp. 460 – 468; Israel Gershoni and James Jankowski, Egypt, Islam and the Arabs: The Search for Egyptian Nationhood, 1900– 1930, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986, p. 40ff.; M.W. Daly, ‘The British Occupation’, in Daly (ed.), The Cambridge, pp. 239– 251, p. 250; Ehud Toledano, ‘Social and Economic Change in the “Long” Nineteenth Century’, in Daly (ed.), The Cambridge, pp. 252– 284; and, Reinhard Schulze, Die Rebellion der a¨gyptischen Fallahin 1919, zum Konflikt der agrarisch – orientalischen Gesellschaft und dem kolonialen Staat in A¨gypten 1820–1919, Baalbek, Berlin, 1981. 66. Davis, Challenging, p. 108ff. 67. Tignor, State, p. 60. 68. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 18, 1922. ˙ 69. Davis, Challenging, p. 145. 70. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, November 6, 1924. ˙ 71. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 27, 1925. ˙ 72. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 3, 1925. ˙ 73. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 19, 1927. ˙ 74. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 22, 1927. ˙ 75. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 26, 1927. ˙ 76. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 29, 1927. ˙ 77. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 19, 1928, shared with German capital. ˙ 78. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 14, 1930, shared with Belgian and French capital ˙ for infrastructure and railway building. 79. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 26, 1932. ˙ 80. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 25, 1934. ˙ 81. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 25, 1934. ˙ 82. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 29, 1934. ˙ 83. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, December 3, 1934. ˙ 84. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 29, 1937. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

136 –137

287

85. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 12, 1938, shared with British capital, ˙ textile industry. 86. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, November 28, 1938. ˙ 87. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, December 1, 1938. ˙ 88. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 15, 1940. ˙ 89. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 13, 1946. ˙ 90. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 18, 1922, September 3, 1925, September ˙ 19, 1927, September 22, 1927, September 26, 1927, September 29, 1927, January 19, 1928, January 25, 1934, January 25, 1934, January 29, 1934, April 29, 1937, November 28, 1938, and December 1, 1938. 91. The family writes the name El Sioufy. 92. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 18, 1922, November 6, 1924, July 27, ˙ 1925, September 3, 1925, September 19, 1927, September 22, 1927, September 26, 1927, September 29, 1927, May 26, 1932, January 25, 1934, January 25, 1934, January 29, 1934, December 3, 1934, April 29, 1937, November 28, 1938, and December 1, 1938. 93. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 18, 1922, November 6, 1924, September 3, ˙ 1925, September 19, 1927, September 22, 1927, September 26, 1927, September 29, 1927, May 26, 1932, January 25, 1934, January 25, 1934, December 3, 1934, April 29, 1937, November 28, 1938, and December 1, 1938. 94. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 19, 1927; September 22, 1927; September ˙ 26, 1927, and September 29, 1927. 95. In addition to being one of the founders of Bank Misr, Qattawi was also a partner in other Misr Group companies. See Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September ˙ 19, 1927, and September 22, 1927. 96. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 18, 1922; November 6, 1924, and July 27, ˙ 1925. 97. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 18, 1922; November 6, 1924, and July 27, ˙ 1925. 98. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 19, 1927. ˙ 99. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 19, 1928. ˙ 100. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 45. 101. Hrab, Majmu¯ʿat, pp. 49, 53. 102. Simens Orient, shared with German capital, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January ˙ 19, 1928; Misr General Works, shared with Belgian and French capital for infrastructure and railway construction, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 14, ˙ 1930; and, Misr Bayda Dyers, a textile firm shared with British capital, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 12, 1938. Also see Vitalis, When Capitalists, ˙ pp. 44 – 9; and, Beinin, ‘Egypt’, p. 326ff. 103. Vitalis, When Capitalists, p. 17. 104. The number of innovative companies with Egyptian entrepreneurs were as follows: nine in 1885– 1900, nine in 1901– 10, 10 in 1911– 20, 31 in

288

105.

106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114.

115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123.

NOTES

TO PAGES

137 –139

1921– 30, 45 in 1931– 40, 35 in 1941– 50, and 24 in 1951– 59. See Appendix. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 27, 1925, September 19, 1927, September 22, ˙ 1927, September 26, 1927, September 29, 1927, May 26, 1932, and April 15, 1940. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 23, 1933. ˙ Egyptian Grapes and Alcohol Company, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 18, 1936. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, August 2, 1928. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 7, 1930. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, June 21, 1934. For other companies, see Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ ˙ al-misriyya, May 29, 1926. ˙ For an extended discussion of this, see Beinin, ‘Egypt’, p. 325ff; and, Vitalis, When Capitalists, pp. 29– 60ff. Vitalis, When Capitalists, p. 49ff. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, August 10, 1922; June 30, 1924; March 23, 1925, and ˙ February 12, 1926. Some examples are: Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 13, 1920; October 29, 1923; ˙ July 7, 1927; March 7, 1929; August 6, 1931, and October 12, 1931. The Misr Group also used this business strategy. Beinin, ‘Egypt’, p. 325. This includes the years from 1940 to 1950, because the Misr Nylon Factory, a Misr Group project, was established in 1946. Beinin, ‘Egypt’, pp. 327– 328. Misr Pharmaceuticals, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 15, 1940. ˙ Smuha and Ads, both British citizens, were partners in Bayda Dyers Company, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 12, 1938. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, October 4, 1934. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 06, 1889; Egyptian Oil and Soap Factories. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, October 08, 1951; Trade Markets Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 06,1889, Egyptian Oil and Soap Factories; August 17,1892, Egyptian Free Pressing Company; July 10, 1895, Qinna Aswan Railways; decree 57/1896, Egyptian Real Estate Company; July 18, 1896, Egyptian Irrigation Company; decree 92/1897, The Economic Railway Company in Eastern Egypt; decree 107/1897, The Agricultural and Industrial Company in Egypt; decree 187/1897, Cities Land and Suburbs Company in Egypt; June 30, 1900, Egyptian National Insurance Company; March 08, 1905, Sheikh Fadl Land Company; April 29, 1905, Luxury Hotels in Egypt Company; May 27, 1905, Nile Vapors Company; November 25, 1905, Egyptian Fire Protection Company; July, 14, 1906, Light and Electrical Power Company; January 17, 1910, Cairo Sand Bricks Company; May 13, 1911, Sea Side Real Estate Company; May 03, 1920, British Steel and Engineering Company; May 25, 1922, Egypt and Orient Roma Bank Company; October 22, 1928, Faros – Transport, Export, and Insurance Company; May 27, 1929, Gozi Film; September 30, 1929, Egyptian Tractors Company; September 14,

NOTES

124. 125. 126. 127. 128.

129. 130. 131.

132. 133. 134. 135. 136.

137.

138. 139. 140.

TO PAGES

139 –145

289

1932, Egyptian Financial Company; October 15, 1934, Egyptian Land and Real Estate Company; December 04, 1939, Mahmudiyya Mills Company; December 05, 1940, Industrial Silk and Cotton Stores Company; July 23, 1945, General Engineering & Cooling Company; May 13, 1946, Egyptian Shipping Company; June 24, 1946, Al-Ahram Studious; July 04, 1946, Nile Beer Company; August 01, 1946, Bani Mazar Land Construction and Agriculture Company; and, October 08, 1951, Trade Markets Company. More on the Mousseri family, see, Beinin, ‘The Jewish’ pp. 113 – 138, p. 130ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 40, 42, 60, 84, 89– 92, 103, 124, 133, 144, 147, 166, 170 – 175, 183, 185ff, 189, 192f, 205, 235, and, 310; and, Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, pp. 148 – 170. Botman, ‘The Liberal’, pp. 285– 308, pp. 286– 9. Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 47ff. Schulze, Die Rebellion, p. 141. See Gorman, ‘Egypt’s Forgotten’, pp. 1 – 27. Anthony Gorman, ‘Foreign Workers in Egypt, 1882– 1914: Subaltern or Labour Elite?’, in Stephanie Cronon (ed.), Subalterns and Social Protest: History from Below in the Middle East and North Africa, Routledge, London, 2008, pp. 237 –59, pp. 242–3, 248; and, Schulze, Die Rebellion, p. 141ff. Kitroeff, The Greeks, pp. 43– 4. Ibid., pp. 39 – 47. Robert Tigonor, ‘Egyptian Jewry, Communal Tension and Zionism’, in Amnon Cohen and Gabriel Bear (eds.), Egypt and Palestine, A Millennium of Association (868 – 1948), St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1984, pp. 332 – 47, p. 332ff. Morabia and Kra¨mer, ‘Fı¯ muwa¯jahat’, p. 88ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 257– 8. Fawzy-Rossanu, Rasa¯ʾil. Also see, I Schrand, Jews in Egypt. Ada Aharoni, Aime´e Israel-Pelletier, Levana Zamir (eds.), History and Culture of the Jews of Egypt in Modern Times, Kenes Havakot, Tel Aviv, 2008, pp. 201ff. The situation was different for the Greek middle and working classes and for Greeks living in the rural areas who might not have been fluent in reading and writing Arabic, but who had a good knowledge of Egyptian Arabic, the socalled ‘ʿamiyya’ with their distinctive accent and ability to communicate with the surrounding society. Thomas Philipp, ‘Jews and Arab Christians: Their Changing Position in Politics and Economy in Eighteenth-Century Syria and Egypt’, in Cohen and Bear (eds.), Egypt, pp. 150– 66. See Ismail Sidqi, Mudhakara¯tı¯ [Memoirs], Cairo, Da¯r al-Hila¯l, 1950. Also see ˙ Badrawi, Ismaʿil Sidqi (1875 – 1950), p. 58ff. See Beinin, ‘Egypt’, p. 324ff; Baraka, The Egyptian, pp. 33 –5; and, Shakir, Isma¯ʿı¯l Sidqı¯, p. 33ff. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, February 7, 1929 and July 1, 1929. ˙

290

NOTES TO PAGES 145 –149

141. Shakir, Isma¯ʿı¯l Sidqı¯, p. 33ff; and, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, Decree no. 7, 1930, ˙ ˙ March 3, 1930, and November 13, 1930. 142. Tignor, State, pp. 109– 11. 143. Shakir, Isma¯ʿı¯l Sidqı¯, p. 46ff. ˙ 144. Vitalis, When Capitalists, p. 99ff. 145. The treaty was signed in Montreux and was celebrated in Egypt, especially by the Wafd, since it formally brought an end to 54 years of British occupation. The treaty’s terms limited Egypt’s sovereignty; a twenty-year military alliance allowed Great Britain to impose martial law in the case of an international emergency. This alliance provided the stationing of up to 10,000 British soldiers and 400 Royal Air Force pilots in the Suez Canal zone. The agreement had a clear influence on the British – Egyptian relations during World War II. See Laila Morsy, ‘The Military Clauses of the Anglo– Egyptian Treaty of Friendship and Alliance, 1936’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 16, no. 1, 1984, pp. 67– 97; and, Charles D. Smith, ‘4 February 1942: Its Causes and its Influence on Egyptian Politics and on the Future of Anglo – Egyptian Relations 1937– 1945’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 10, no. 4, 1979, pp. 453– 79. 146. Brown, ‘The Precarious’, pp. 33– 52, pp. 44– 5. 147. A. Kamel’s interpretation is that Montreux limited the imperial Jewish influence in Egypt’s economy. See, A. Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya, pp. 163 – 5. 148. For more details see Brown, ‘The Precarious’, pp. 47 – 9. 149. The number of new companies per each year are: 1934: 17; 1935: 11; 1936: 11; 1937: 19; and, 1938: 23. See Appendix. 150. See Appendix, for the years 1937– 40. 151. See A. Kamel, Al-raʾsma¯liyya, p. 115ff; Husni, Al-yahu¯d, pp. 36 – 37; and, Ahmad, Al-yahu¯d, p. 90ff. 152. Georg Kampffmeyer, Die a¨gyptische Verfassung vom 19. April 1923. Arabisch und franzo¨sischer Text mit einer Einfu¨hrung in die Verfassungsgeschichte A¨gyptens, Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universita¨t Berlin, Seminar fu¨r Orientalische Sprachen, Berlin, 1924. 153. Botman, ‘The Liberal’, pp. 285– 308; and, Gershoni and Jankowski, Egypt, p. 81ff. 154. Philipp, ‘Jews’, p. 144ff. 155. Published in Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 10, 1929. ˙ 156. Al-Imam, al-Arman, pp. 252– 268. 157. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 10, 1929. For an English translation, see ˙ Philipp, The Syrians, p. 145. 158. Philipp, The Syrians, p. 145. 159. Kitroeff, The Greeks, p. 11ff. See also Philipp, The Syrians, p. 146, where he states that 5 per cent of Greeks had British citizenship, 2.5 per cent Italian, and 0.5 per cent Turkish. 160. Al-Imam, al-Arman, 1896– 1961, p. 253. 161. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 10, 1929. ˙

NOTES 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168.

169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174.

175. 176. 177. 178. 179. 180.

181.

182. 183. 184. 185.

186.

TO PAGES

149 –154

291

Ibid. Al-Imam, al-Arman, 1896– 1961, pp. 256– 60. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, March 10, 1929. ˙ Al-Imam, al-Arman, 1896– 1961, pp. 261– 8. Gershoni and Jankowski, Egypt, pp. 40ff, 55ff, 77ff, and 96ff. Ibid., pp. 97 – 104. Ibid., p. 137, quoted from Al-Marʿashli, Tawfiq, Al-tarbiyya al-wataniyya ˙ [The National Education], second edition, Matbaʿat Misr, Cairo, 1929, pp. 22, ˙ ˙ 49ff, 301. Ibid., p. 137. Ibid., p. 272. Ibid., p. 273. Ibid., pp. 97 – 104. Ibid., pp. 273 – 4. Roel Meijer, The Quest for Modernity, Secular Liberal and Left-Wing Political Thought in Egypt, 1945– 1958, RoutledgeCurzon, New York, 2002, p. 21ff. Schrand, Jews in Egypt, p. 74ff. Gorman, ‘Egypt’s Forgotten’, p. 6. Schrand, Jews in Egypt, pp. 93ff, 97– 9. Gorman, ‘Egypt’s Forgotten’. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 195. Reuven Snir, ‘Jewishness, Arabness and Egyptianness: The Participation of Egyptian Jews in the Arabic Press and Journalism during the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries’, Australian Journal of Jewish Studies, vol. 20, 2006, pp. 199 –238, p. 212ff. Also see Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 68. Shmul Moreh, ‘Yaʿqu¯b Sanu¯ʿ: His Religious Identity and Work in the Theater and Journalism, According to the Family Archive’, in Shamir (ed.), The Jews, pp. 111 –129. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 68. Snir, ‘Jewishness’, p. 213. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 68ff. Sasson Somekh, ‘Participation of Egyptian Jews in Modern Arabic Culture, and the Case of Mura¯d Farag’, in Shamir (ed.), The Jews, pp. 130 – 9, p. 135ff. Also see Abu al-Ghar, Yahu¯d Misr, p. 47ff; and, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, ˙ p. 61ff. Virginia Danielson, The Voice of Egypt: Umm Kulthum, Arabic Songs and Egyptian Society in the Twentieth Century, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1997, p. 124ff, and, Ziad Fahmy, ‘Media Capitalism: Colloquial Mass Culture and Nationalism in Egypt, 1908– 1918’, in, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 42, 2010, pp. 83– 103, p. 88ff. See also, Ali Jihad Racy, Music Making in the Arab world; the Culture and Artistry of Tarab, Cambridge ˙ University Press, Cambridge, 2003. Zaki Murad and his children, Layla and Munir Murad, are yet another example, among others.

292 187. 188. 189. 190.

191. 192. 193. 194. 195. 196. 197. 198.

NOTES

TO PAGES

154 –161

Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 211. Nassar, Al-yahu¯d, p. 98ff; and, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 332, 407, and 417. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 66; and, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 332ff. The program of Al-Shams, September 14, 1934, and statutes of the Jamʿiyyat al-Shubba¯n al-Yahu¯d al-Misriyyı¯n, October 17, 1935, and October 31, 1935, ˙ see Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 330, and 375. Anthony Gorman, ‘Egiptiotis Ellin’, Ta Nea tou ELIA’, no. 58, summer 2001, pp. 13 – 8, [Unpublished translation, ‘ELIA News’ May 1, 2004, pp. 1 – 4]. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 279ff. Kra¨mer mentioned paramilitary youth movements. Davis, Challenging, pp. 135– 68. Vitalis, When Capitalists, pp. 104, and 111ff. See Appendix. Smith, ‘4 February 1942’, p. 453ff. Kamil, Arabische, pp. 160– 3; and, Shenhav, The Arab, pp. 30 – 3. Vitalis, When Capitalists, p. 105ff.

Chapter 5 Minorities and the post-World War II Era: The 1952 Coup and the Nationalization of the Egyptian Private Sector 1. Laws nos. 117,118, and 119, all published in Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, June 20, ˙ 1961. 2. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, August 25, September 11, October 30, and December ˙ 22, 1952. See also see the Appendix. 3. Vitalis, When Capitalists, p. 104 ff. 4. Ibid., pp. 112 ff, 144 ff. 5. Ibid., pp. 136, 148ff. 6. See Table 3.2 and Appendix. 7. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 19, 1945. ˙ 8. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 26, 1945. ˙ 9. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 1, 1945. ˙ 10. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 22, 1945. ˙ 11. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 28, 1947. ˙ 12. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 8, 1947. ˙ 13. This was and is a family from Jerusalem, important in the founding and management of the Arab Bank up to the present. 14. This is a well-known Palestinian merchant family from the Nablus area. 15. This is a Palestinian Christian merchant family from Lod. 16. This is a family of Palestinian notables from Jerusalem. 17. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 13, 1946. ˙ 18. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 18, 1946. ˙ 19. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 23, 1947. ˙ 20. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 15, 1947. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

161 –163

293

21. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 24, 1946. ˙ 22. Population Census of Egypt 1947, General Tables, Republic of Egypt, Ministry of Finance and Economy, Statistical Department, Cairo, 1954, pp. 65 – 67. The census defined ‘foreigners’ as those born abroad, the title of this section being ‘Egyptian and Foreign Population (Born Abroad) of Each Governorate and Province by Birthplace.’ This appears to suggest that foreign populations born in Egypt are considered Egyptian. The section before, entitled ‘Egyptian and Foreign Population (Local Born) of Each Governorate and Province by Birthplace’, did not indicate the origin of the subjects, see Census 1947, pp. 62 – 63. 23. For 1927, see Table 2:1. For the years 1937 and 1947, see ‘Table 1, Summary of the Census Results for 1947 and 1937, A. “Population by Religion, Age Group, Civil Status and Nationality”, in: Population Census of Egypt 1947, General Tables, Republic of Egypt, Ministry of Finance and Economy, Statistical Department, Cairo, 1954, pp. 2 – 3. 24. See, Al-jiha¯z al-markazı¯ lil-taʿbiʾa al-amma wal-ihsa¯ʾ, al-kita¯b al-ihsaʾı¯ ˙˙ ˙˙ al-sanawı¯ 1952– 1994 [The Statistical Yearbook 1952– 1994], Cairo, Central Agency, 1994. 25. Shamir, ‘The Evolution’ pp. 33–67, p. 34; and, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 26. 26. Mahmud Abd al-Daher, Yahu¯d Misr, dira¯sa fı¯ al-mawqif al-siyası¯ 1897–1948, ˙ [Jews of Egypt, a Study of their Political Position], Cairo University, Cairo, 2000, p. 28. In 1897, 12,507 out of 25,200 Egyptian Jews were local subjects; see Table 3, p. 186. The data come from Jacob Landau, Teldot yahudi Mitzrayı¯m bikotfah haʿutimanyit 1715–1914 (Hebrew) [The History of Egyptian Jews in the Ottoman Era, 1715–1914], Misgav Yerushalaim, Jerusalem, 1988. 27. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 29. 28. Abd al-Daher, Yahu¯d, p. 28; and, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 27. 29. Abd al-Daher, Yahu¯d, p. 28. It is significant that the term ‘raʿiyya mahaliyya’ ˙ was, for the most part, used when Egypt was an Ottoman province. After World War I, with independence and the promulgation of its own nationality laws, the terms ‘Egyptian national’ or ‘Egyptian’ were more common and replaced the increasingly less common ‘raʿiyya mahaliyya’. 30. ‘Table XLII: Religion and Sect (Egyptians and Foreigners) by Sex and Age Group’, Population Census of Egypt, 1947, pp. 440–1. 31. Abd al-Daher, Yahu¯d, pp. 19, p. 19, 31, and Table no. 4, p. 187. Notice the category ‘stateless’ is not mentioned in the Egyptian Census 1947, see Table XLII, pp. 440 –1. 32. Abd al-Daher, Yahu¯d, pp. 28– 29. The author referred to the data, specifically to the percentage of Egyptian nationals among Egyptian Jews, in the tables on page 52 of Jacob Landau’s The History of Egyptian Jews in the Ottoman Era, 1517– 1914. Landau, for his part, took the statistics for the work of Hayyim Cohen, The Jews of the Middle East, Israel Universities Press, Jerusalem, 1973. On page 49, Cohen mentioned that in the year 1947, about 20 per cent of Egyptian Jews were foreign nationals, about two-thirds were stateless, and

294

33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49.

50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64.

NOTES

TO PAGES

163 –172

only 15 per cent were Egyptian nationals. There is no footnote referring to the source of these data. In later pages he examined the details of the Egyptian Jewish population, referring to the censuses of 1907, 1917, 1937, 1947, and 1960, see pages 70 and 186. Although Abd al-Daher did not refer to the Egyptian census in this table, he compared it with the data in previous tables: see Abd al-Daher, Yahu¯d, pp. 183– 4. Ahmad, Al-yahu¯d, p. 54ff. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, August 4, 1947. ˙ See Introduction, Population Census of Egypt 1947. The Nationality Law of 1926 was a draft that was not approved. A.Kamel, Al-raʾsmaliyya, p. 165. Nassar, al-Yahu¯d, 1980, p. 13. Nassar did not refer to the source for her assertion concerning the legal status of Egyptian Jews. Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, p. 34. Ibid., p. 63. Ibid., pp. 34, 51. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 78. Ibid., p. 79. Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, p. 48ff. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 38. Ibid., p. 42. See Table XLII, Population Census of Egypt 1947, pp. 440 – 1; and, Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 57. Kamel, Al-raʾsmaliyya, pp. 164–165; Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, p. 53ff; and, Abd al-Daher, Yahu¯d, p. 28. Anas Kamel has argued that the 1929 law had been ‘misused’ by Jews in become Egyptians, A. Kamel, Al-raʾsmaliyya, p. 165. See also Abd al-Daher, Yahu¯d, pp. 27– 8. Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, p. 54, see also Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 406. Shamir, ‘The Evolution’, p. 55ff. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 79. Article II of law no. 138/1947, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 29, 1947. ˙ Article IV, of law no. 138/1947, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 29, 1947. ˙ Article V, of law no. 138/1947, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 29, 1947. ˙ Article VI, of law no. 138/1947, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 29, 1947. ˙ Decree 120, 1952, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 8, 1952. ˙ Article X, of law no. 138/1947, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 29, 1947. ˙ Al-dabtiyya al-qada¯ʾiyya. ˙ ˙ The word ‘criminal’ is used in the law’s text; see Article XI of law no. 138/1947. Article XII, of law no. 138/1947, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 29, 1947. ˙ See Appendix. Article II, of law no. 138/1947. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 08, 1948. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

172 –178

295

65. See, for example, Maslahit al-Sharikat, file no. 137 concerning the Cicurel ˙ ˙ Department Stores. 66. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, pp. 23– 4, 26ff. 67. Ibid., p. 25ff. 68. Ibid., pp. 33ff, 50. 69. Ibid., p. 39. 70. The Saʿdı¯ party was established by Ibrahim Abd al-Hadi after a schism in the Wafd party 1938. One of its most prominent figures was Ahmad Mahir. The party’s name referred to Saʿd Zaghlul. 71. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, pp. 56– 71. 72. The increase in production was mainly in existing factories and on the level of small- and medium-sized workshops and factories. The data indicates a very low level of investments in joint stock companies, see Appendix. 73. Tignor, State, p. 178ff. 74. Ibid., p. 225. 75. This corresponds to the analysis of Tignor, State, pp. 192 – 4. 76. See Appendix. 77. Karanasou, ‘Egsptianisation’, pp. 77– 83. 78. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 401ff; and, Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, p. 83ff. 79. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 79– 80. 80. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’: Cre´dit Foncier Egyptien, pp. 128 – 42; Filature Nationale d’Egypte, pp. 143– 60; Socie´te´ Ge´ne´rale des Sucreries et de la Raffinerie d’Egypte, pp. 161– 86; Eastern Company, pp. 187 –212; Socie´te´ Viticole et Vinicole d’Egypte, pp. 213– 31; Cairo Electric Railways and Heliopolis Oases Company, pp. 232– 55; The Egyptian Hotels Ltd., pp. 256 – 69; Samʾan and Silim Sidnawi & Company, Ltd, pp. 270 – 85; and, The Suez Canal Compnay, pp. 286–319. See also Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 402ff; and Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’ p. 166ff; and, Charles Issawi, Egypt in Revolution, An Economic Analysis, Oxford University Press, London, 1963, p. 88ff. 81. A term used to describe people who became Egyptian despite possibly not having Egyptian origins, such as the Syrians. 82. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, pp. 322– 25. 83. Ibid., p. 329 ff. 84. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 403– 4; p. 403, fn: FO 371/62990, March 21, 1947. 85. Philipp, The Syrians, pp. 135– 40. 86. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, p. 322ff. 87. Cicurel, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, February 21, 1938; Cairo Weaving, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ ˙ al-misriyya, April 20, 1936. ˙ 88. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, February 21, 1938, all headings of the company’s ˙ letters stationery paper indicate ‘since 1887.’ 89. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/105. ˙ ˙ 90. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/133. ˙ ˙ 91. Staff number, Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 127. The number of Egyptian Jews ˙ ˙ among the staff is unclear, the documents state a figure of 337 with unclear or

296

92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99.

100. 101. 102. 103. 104.

105. 106. 107. 108. 109.

110. 111. 112.

113. 114. 115. 116.

NOTES

TO PAGES

178 –183

doubtful status that needed further clarification. One can thus assume that the majority of this figure were Egyptian Jews, see Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/127 ˙ ˙ and 128. The letter is three pages long. Of particular interest is the second page, Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 103, 104, and 105. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 134– 7 and 105. Also argued by others. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/170, 171, and 172. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/100 – 2. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 125– 6, see Side Notes. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 133. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 134– 7. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/53 – 4. Another document from the MS required the ˙ ˙ transmission of nationality proof for Antoine Joseph and Pauline Karim to the MS as the latter might have been a foreigner, Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75, not ˙ ˙ numbered but following 54. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 200, 188, and 187. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 141– 2. ˙ ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 16, 1954. ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 75/ 82– 83A and 83B. ˙ ˙ Al-shuru¯q newspaper, online issue, October 1, 2011, retrieved October 3, 2011, www.shorouknews.com, (03.10.2011, 07:45). http://www.shorouknews.com/ news/view.aspx?cdate¼01102011&id¼621c328b – 9646 – 4f4d – 84bc – f39bf3d0409d. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 20, 1936. ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/pp. 219– 22. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/pp. 195– 8. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/p. 159. The request for both foreign experts is dated ˙ ˙ August 07, 1951: see 37/p. 258. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/pp. 277– 81. This description was also used in the ˙ ˙ company’s lists submitted to the MS. There, the factory manager was Arman Israel Moiz. His name indicated that he was a Jew, but that he held Greek citizenship. As such he was listed as Greek, see Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/p. 196. ˙ ˙ Both parts of this letter were written on November 12, 1951 and signed by Mansur, see Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/pp. 182– 3. ˙ ˙ See the notes at the bottom of the page, Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/pp. 182–3. ˙ ˙ A. Levi was the former president of the EFI and at the time of writing the letter was the General Secretary of the Economic Council and on the board of directors of an important factory on Qailubiyya. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/pp. 291– 2. ˙ ˙ Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/p. 43. ˙ ˙ Ibid., 37/pp. 47– 9. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 99/p. 56. It is not clear which trade union is acting here, ˙ ˙ though this is representative of the complaints faced by other companies from their workers.

NOTES

TO PAGES

183 –190

297

117. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/pp. 102– 3. ˙ ˙ 118. Ibid., 37/p. 137. 119. Ibid., 37/pp. 118 – 20, also see Report June 05, 1955, Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/ ˙ ˙ pp. 133 –4. 120. Ibid., 37/p. 142. 121. Ibid., 37/p. 143. 122. This signature was in general terms and did not name any workers or employees directly. 123. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/p. 146. ˙ ˙ 124. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 20, 1936. Also see Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/ ˙ ˙ ˙ pp. 252 –3. 125. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 37/p. 150. ˙ ˙ 126. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 73. ˙ ˙ 127. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 77. ˙ ˙ 128. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 72. ˙ ˙ 129. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 18, 1936. ˙ 130. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, pp. 213– 31. 131. Ibid., p. 338ff. 132. Rashed al-Barrawi, Al-falsafa al-iqtisa¯diyya lil-thawra, min al-nahiyataiyn ˙ al-nadhariyya wa al-ʿamaliyya [The Economic Philosophy of the Revolution, The Theoretical and Practical Aspects] Maktabit al-Nahda al-Misriyya, Cairo ˙ 1955, p. 11ff. 133. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 16, 1954. ˙ 134. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, April 2, 1953. ˙ 135. See articles 7 and 10 of law no. 26/1954, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 16, ˙ 1954. 136. For more on al-Barrawi’s intellectual role, see Meijer, The Quest, pp. 66 – 90. On the council, see pp. 178– 9. 137. Meijer, The Quest, p. 69. 138. Al-Barrawi, Al-falsafa, p. 32ff. 139. Ibid., pp. 48 – 52. 140. Ibid., p. 57ff. 141. Ibid., p. 61 ff. 142. Ibid., pp. 68 – 85. 143. Ibid., pp. 87 – 155. 144. Meijer, The Quest, pp. 68– 9. 145. Al-Barrawi, Al-falsafa, pp. 156– 68. 146. Jamal al-Din Said, Iqtisa¯diyyat Misr [Egypt’s Economies], Lajnat al-Baya¯n ˙ ˙ al-ʿArabı¯, Cairo, 1950, p. 52ff. The work mainly concerns Egypt’s economic history since Mohammad Ali. In the last part of the work he mentions the need for diversity and a change in economic policies. The author was a member of the British Royal Economic Society. 147. Oskar Lange and Fred Taylor, On the Economic Theory of Socialism, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1938. Also see, Oskar Lange and Antoni Banasin´ski, Theory of

298

148.

149. 150. 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158.

159. 160. 161.

162. 163. 164. 165.

166.

167. 168. 169. 170. 171.

NOTES

TO PAGES

190 –195

Reproduction and Accumulation, Pergamon Press, New York, 1969; and, Oskar Lange, Entwicklungstendenzen der modernen Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: eine sozialistische Analyse, Europa Verlag, Vienna, 1964, pp. 68ff, and 180ff. Anouar Abdel Malek, A¨gypten: Milita¨rgesellschaft, Das Armeeregime, die Linke und der Soziale Wandel unter Nasser, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1971, p. 159. See table and graphic 3:2. Meijer, The Quest, p. 181. See Table 3:2. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, June 10, 1954. ˙ British, French, Swiss, Turkish, and Greek investors, see Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ June, 10, 1954. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, November 14, 1955, with Belgian partnership. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 2, 1956. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, February 27, 1956. Also see the Appendix 1956, these ˙ companies are marked with ‘G’. Abdel Malek, A¨gyptens, p. 162ff; and, Meijer, The Quest, p. 181ff. Martin Robbe, Aufbruch am Nil, Politik und Ideologie in der a¨gyptischen Befreiungsbewegung unter Gamal Abdel Nasser, Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, Berlin, 1976, p. 140ff. Meijer, The Quest, p. 184ff. Also see Robbe, Aufbruch, p. 167ff. Abdel Malek has examined elements of this new class, see A¨gypten, pp. 14 and 20ff. This concept of authoritarian modernism is examined by Roel Meijer, see The Quest, pp. 208– 240. On the conflict between Nasser and Naguib, see Robbe, Aufbruch, p. 125ff. Gail Meyer, Egypt and the United States, The Formative Years, Associated University Press, London, 1980, p. 44ff. Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 94ff and, 99ff. Also see Kamel, Al-raʾsmaliyya, p. 229ff. Meyer, Egypt, pp. 130– 46. Robbe, Aufbruch, pp. 133–40. Also see Mohammed Heikal, Das Kairo – Dossier, Aus den Geheimpapieren des Gamal Abdel Nasser, Verlag Fritz Molden, Vienna, 1972, p. 123 ff. Meijer, The Quest, p. 178ff. Also see the different companies that were sequestrated [taht al-hira¯sa] Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, November 8 – 19, 1956; ˙ ˙ ˙ and, Robbe, Aufbruch, p. 140ff. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, January 19, 1956. ˙ Abdel Malek, A¨gyptens, pp. 162ff, 166ff. ¨ Abdel Malek, Agyptens, p. 28. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 18, 1950. ˙ Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, pp. 338 ff, 345 ff.

NOTES

TO PAGES

195 –198

299

172. Angelos Ntalachanis, ‘The Emigration of Greeks from Egypt during the early Post-War Years’, in Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2, 2009, pp. 35 – 44, pp. 36– 37. 173. Ntalachanis, ‘The Emigration’, p. 37. 174. Sophianos Chysostomides was born in Cairo where he worked as a journalist. After moving to Greece, he worked in several left-wing newspapers, most notably at the Avghi where he became political editor and then director. He also taught at the University of Athens. 175. Sophianos Chryssostomidis, ‘The Left, Nasser, and the Exodus of the Greeks from Egypt’, in Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2, 2009, pp. 155 – 9, p. 156. 176. Nikos Sederis, ‘The Greek Settlers’ Flight from Egypt: The Psychological Aspect’, in Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2, 2009, pp. 145 – 51. 177. Ntalachanis, ‘The Emigration’, p. 37. 178. Karanasou, ‘Egyptianisation’, p. 344. 179. Ntalachanis, ‘The Emigration’, pp. 38ff, See also Panagiotis Koromvokis and Achilleas Rakinas, ‘The Decline of the Greek Presence in Egypt: An Archival Documentation’, in Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2, 2009, pp. 137 – 44; Harry Tzalas, ‘Literary Alexandria and Nostalgic Alexandrian Literature’, in Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2, 2009, pp. 169 – 74; and, Angelos Ntalachanis, ‘Leaving Egypt: Greeks and their Strategies, 1937– 1967’, unpublished PhD thesis, European University Institute, 2011. 180. Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 408ff. 181. Ibid., p. 415. 182. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 70ff. See also Kra¨mer, Minderheit, pp. 425 – 8. 183. Kra¨mer has referred to the Israeli Census of Population and Housing 1961, Publication no. 22 (Jerusalem, 1964), Table 8, p. 24, and Census of Population and Housing 1972, Series no. 10 (Jerusalem, 1976), Table 25, p. 306, see Kra¨mer, Minderheit, p. 426. 184. Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 70– 1, 181ff. Also see Morabya and Kra¨mer, ‘Fı¯ muwa¯jahat’, p. 97ff. 185. Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 78 and 88. 186. Dammond and Raby, The Lost World. 187. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 142ff. Also see Gilles Perrault, A Man Apart: The Life of Henri Curiel, Zed Books, London, 1987. 188. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 152; and Schrand, Jews, pp. 44 – 5. 189. Beinin, The Dispersion, pp. 70– 1. 190. Victor Nahmiyas, Al-rajul al-ladhı¯ wulida marratayn, qisat yahu¯dı¯ misrı¯ ha¯jar ˙ ˙ ila¯ Isra¯ʾı¯l [The Twice Born Man, The Story of an Egyptian Jew who Migrated to Israel], Da¯r al-Maʿa¯rif, Jerusalem, 2004. 191. Beinin, The Dispersion, p. 71. 192. Kra¨mer, ‘Die Rolle’, p. 169. 193. Morabya and Kra¨mer, ‘Fı¯ muwa¯jahat’, p. 97ff. 194. Karanasou, ‘The Greeks’ pp. 24–57, esp. p. 41ff.

300

NOTES

TO PAGES

198 –213

195. Ashmawy, Al-yu¯na¯niyyu¯n, p. 163ff. 196. Meijer, The Quest, pp. 173ff and 208ff. 197. On companies with Greek participation, see Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, October ˙ 17, 1955, April 19, 1956, and November 1, 1956. For Egyptian Jewish participation, see Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, May 12, 1955, November 3, 1955, ˙ April 5, 1956, August 30, 1956, January 21, 1957, and December 19, 1960. 198. All three laws for nationalizing companies in Egypt and limiting individual ownership in a company to LE 10,000 were issued on the same day; see Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, July 20, 1961. ˙ 199. Philipp, The Syrians, p. 155ff. 200. Major Omar Tantawi Abdelwahhab, see Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, September 13, ˙ 1954. 201. The complaint was signed on January 8, 1960 and the stamp of the Companies Department was affixed on February 4, 1960, see Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 30/106. ˙ ˙ 202. Maslahit al-sharika¯t, 30/107, February 29, 1960. ˙ ˙

Appendix 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.05.1885, Egyptian Trade Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.03.1886, Rami French Egyptian Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.01.1887, Egyptian Pressing Company. Ltd. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.01.1887, Egyptian Savings and Economic Fund. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.05.1888, Alexandria Bonded Warehouse Company. ˙ Ltd. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.07.1888, Ostrich Farm Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.01.1889, Public Presseing and Storage Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.03.1889, Egyptian Oil and Soap Factories. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 49/1889, Egyptian Loan Fund. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.04.1889, The Egyptian Tawfiqiyya Maritim ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.11.1889, Sherif Pasha Real Estate Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.04.1890, Metropolitan and Cairo–Hilwa¯n Railway ˙ ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 48/1892, Upper Egypt Sugar Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.08.1892, Egyptian Free Pressing Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 23/1893, Zaqaziq Cotton Ginning Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.03.1893, Egyptian Archeology Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.07.1893, Sugar Refinery Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.01.1894, Ibrahimiyya Real Estate Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.06.1894, Kafr al-Zayyat Cotton Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.11.1894, The French Company for Al-Jazira Real ˙ Eastates in Cairo Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.07.1894, Alexandria Omnibus Cars. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.03.1895, Alexandria Ica Factories. ˙

NOTES TO PAGES 213 –214 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45.

46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51.

301

Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.07.1895, Qinna Aswan Railways. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.07.1895, Warehouses of Al-Basal Harbor. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.12.1895, Metal Company in Egypt. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 37/1896, Sea Side Railways Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 57/ 1896, Egyptian Real Estate Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.05.1896, The Egyptian Slurry Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.07.1896, Egyptian Irrigation Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.08.1896, Egyptian Glass Factories Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 24/1897, Egyptian Paper Factory. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 54/1897, Egyptian Agricultural Railway ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 92/1897, The Economic Railway Company in ˙ Eastern Egypt. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 107/1897, The Agricultural and Industrial ˙ Company in Egypt. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 159/1897, The Ginning Factories in Mahalla ˙ al-Kubra. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 187/1897, Cities Land and Suburbs Company ˙ in Egypt. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 188/1897, The Egyptian Sudan Natural ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.01.1898, Express Railway Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.06.1898, Cairo Omnibus Cars Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.09.1898, Al-Qabbari Soap Factories Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.12.1898, Trade Company, replacing Khawaga Fujar ˙ and Partners. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 57/ 1899, Egyptian Industrial Bank. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.05.1899, Cairo Theater Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.05.1899, The Anglo – American Company for Nile ˙ Vapors and Hotels. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.07.1899, Egyptian Cigarette Company, the ˙ first established stock company for cigarette production. This does not mean that there was no cigarette production on another level, nonetheless Greeks and Armenians were the leaders of this manufactory, at least a decade before establishing the stock company. See Relli Shechter, Smoking, Culture, and Economy in the Middle East, The Egyptian Tobacco Market 1850– 2000, I.B.Tauris, New York, 2006, p. 36ff and Athanase Politis, L’Helle´nisme et l’Egypte moderne, vol. II, Alcan, Paris, 1930, p. 338. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.07.1899, Oil Flow Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.11.1899, Industrial Baking Company in Egypt. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.12.1899, Matusian Cigarette Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.02.1899, Jurji Ninjufitsh Hotels Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.06.1900, Egyptian Real Estate Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.06.1900, Egyptian National Insurance Company. ˙

302 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87.

NOTES

TO PAGES

214 –216

Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.09.1901, Dranit Pasha Property Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.05.1902, Tobacco Monopoly Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.09.1902, Egyptian Electrical Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.08.1903, Qinna Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.03.1903, Wardan Land Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.01.1904, Salonika Cigarettes Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.04.1904, Com Obmo Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.04.1904, Cleopetra Cigaretts ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.04.1904, Munazala Canal Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.04.1904, the names are Syrian, nationalities are ˙ Greek and British. Egyptian Real Estate and Trade Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.05.1904, Excavation and Drilling of Wells ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.07.1904, Egyptian Cooling Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.09.1904, Ibrahimiyya Land Restoration Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.01.1905, Egyptian Land Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.03.1905, Sheikh Fadl Land Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.03.1905, Local Alexandria Building Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.04.1905, Egyptian Dayira Saniyya Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.04.1905, East Side Hotel Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.04.1905, Luxury Hotels in Egypt Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.05.1905, Egyptian Land and Agriculture Workings ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.05.1905, Egyptian Buildings Modernization Co. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.05.1905, Nile Vapors Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.05.1905, Delta and Upper Egypt Shipping ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.06.1905, Egyptian Cigarette production Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.06.1905, Al Gharbiya Land Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.06.1905, Egyptian Real Estate Union Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.06.1905, Egyptian Land Construction Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.11.1905, Anglo–Egyptian Company for Land ˙ Partition Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.11.1905, National Hotel and Habitat Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.11.1905, Egyptian Fire Protection Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.01.1906, Alexandria & Rashid Rice Mills Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.02.1906, Real Estate Projects and Business ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.02.1906, Nubar Pasha, Factory and Trade of ˙ Building Bricks Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.02.1906, Nubar Pasha, Cairo-Ain Shams Electrical ˙ Railway Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.03.1906, Cairo and Suburbs Land Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.03.1906, Egyptian Advertisement Company. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

216 –217

303

88. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.03.1906, Egyptian Automobile and Transport ˙ Company. 89. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.04.1906, Hilwan Life Company. ˙ 90. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.04.1906, first only Egyptians, also an innovation. ˙ Brotherhood Economic Co. 91. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.04.1906, Nile Express Ship Company. ˙ 92. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.04.1906 Syrian names with Spanish, British and ˙ other passports, Akaziour Hotel Company. 93. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.05.1906, Cairo Suburbs Land Building Company. ˙ 94. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.05.1906, The Automobile Warehouse Company. ˙ 95. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.05.1906, Industrial Stone Company. ˙ 96. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.05.1906, Administration of Public Automobile ˙ Company. 97. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.05.1906, Egyptian Publishing Company. ˙ 98. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.03.1906, Transport Company. ˙ 99. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.07.1906, The Egyptian Swiss Steel Company. ˙ 100. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.07.1906, Light and Electrical Power Company. ˙ 101. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.07.1906, Egyptian concrete plates production ˙ Company. 102. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.07.1906, Cairo Land Company. ˙ 103. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.07.1906, Egyptian Palace Hotel Company. ˙ 104. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.07.1906, Egyptian Company. for German Press ˙ machines 105. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.09.1906, Electricity Power and Ice production ˙ Company. 106. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.01.1907, Beer and Rice Mill Company. ˙ 107. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.01.1907, Egyptian Economic Habitation Company. ˙ 108. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.03.1907, Egyptian Sanitary Engineering Company. ˙ 109. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.03.1907, Sudan Commercial Land Company. ˙ 110. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.03.1907, two of the De Menasces have Egyptian ˙ passports, Egyptian Union Bank. 111. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.03.1907, Cairo Property Company. ˙ 112. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.03.1907, Here Sarsaq – Syrian with Russian ˙ passport, Al-Qabari Land Company. 113. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.04.1907, City and Village Real Estate Company. ˙ 114. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.05.1907, Alexandria Engineering Works Company. ˙ 115. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.05.1907, Mansur Najib Shakur and Habib Ghanem ˙ might be Syrian with Belgian and French passports, Al-Qubba Gardens Company. 116. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.06.1907, Oil Storage Company. ˙ 117. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.03.1908, Workers Equipment Supply Company. ˙ 118. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.04.1908, Giezah & Rawda Real Estate Stock ˙ Corporation Company. 119. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.06.1908, Grand Baths Company. ˙

304

NOTES

TO PAGES

217 –219

120. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.06.1908, Greek and Egyptians. Credit Local. ˙ 121. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.06.1908, Syrians with Egyptian passport and Habib ˙ Ghanem French. Egyptian Trade Bank. 122. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.07.1908, nationalities are not mentioned, names ˙ indicate that they might be Italians. Egyptian Discount Bank. 123. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.07.1908, Egyptian Building Construction ˙ Company. 124. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.12.1908, Balah Area Gypsum Factory. ˙ 125. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.02.1909, Egyptian Sidi Salem Company. ˙ 126. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.03.1909, Egyptian Natural Fertelize Company. ˙ 127. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.04.1909, General Land Creation Company. ˙ 128. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.12.1909, Greek, Jew, Egyptian, Egyptian Bricks ˙ Company. 129. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.12.1909, East Side Irrigation Company. ˙ 130. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.01.1910, Cairo Sand Bricks Company. ˙ 131. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.02.1910, Alfred Awad is maybe Syrian with Belgian ˙ Passport and Abdelmouti Almoughrabi (Muslim) is French, but all speak Arabic and live in Egypt, might be considered as first level of networking, Commercial Fina Cooperation Company. 132. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.02.1910, Misr Station Real Estate Company. ˙ 133. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.05.1910, Belina Irrigation Company. ˙ 134. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.07.1910, Egyptian Union for Trade and Industry ˙ Company. 135. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.07.1910, Egyptian Glass and Mirror Company. ˙ 136. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.08.1910, Engineering Warehouse Company. ˙ 137. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.08.1910, Alexandria Land Company. ˙ 138. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.02.1911, The Nile Cold Storage Company. ˙ 139. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.02.1911, Warehouse and Trade Company. ˙ 140. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.03.1911, Egyptian British Ice Company. ˙ 141. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.03.1911, Central Food Markets Company. ˙ 142. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.04.1911, Egyptian Cars Parking and Swimming ˙ Pools Company. 143. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.05.1911, Sea Side Real Estate Company. ˙ 144. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.05.1911, Cairo Real Estate Company. ˙ 145. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.08.1911, Project and Municipality Works ˙ Company. 146. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.09.1911, Concrete Columns and Tube Company. ˙ 147. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.03.1912, Egyptian Shoe Company. ˙ 148. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.04.1912, Sudan Real Estate Agro Company. ˙ 149. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.05.1912, Cairo Real Estate Company. ˙ 150. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.05.1912, Egyptian Ginning Factory. ˙ 151. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.06.1912, one partner is Norwegian, Agricultural ˙ Business Company. 152. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.06.1912, North African Real Estate Company. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

219 –221

305

153. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.09.1912, KODAK Egypt. ˙ 154. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.11.1912, La Central Immubiliere de Caire. ˙ 155. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.12.1912, Egyptian Phosphate Mines and Trade ˙ Company. 156. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.01.1913, Agriculture and Construction Land ˙ Company. 157. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.02.1913, Delta Construction and Agriculture ˙ Company. 158. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.06.1913, Egyptian Company. for Industrial Works. ˙ 159. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.07.1913, Qabari Warehouse Company. ˙ 160. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.09.1913, Kum Ashu Land Company. ˙ 161. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.10.1913, Egyptian Ahli Domestic Ginning ˙ Company. 162. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.10.1913, Agriculture and Land Construction ˙ Company. 163. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.04.1914, Egyptian Medical Warehouse Company. ˙ 164. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.05.1914, Cotton Export Company. ˙ 165. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.10.1914, Trade Credit Company. ˙ 166. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.03.1915, Egyptian Property Company. ˙ 167. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.09.1915, Consolidated Land Interests Egypt. ˙ 168. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.08.1916, Egyptian Fixed Property Company. ˙ 169. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.01.1919, British Italian Trade Company. ˙ 170. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.01.1919, The Ginning Company. ˙ 171. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.06.1919, Alexandria United Cotton Company. ˙ 172. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.07.1919, Metal Working Company. ˙ 173. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.08.1919, Port Said Engineering Company. ˙ 174. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.08.1919, Egyptian Crop Trade Company. ˙ 175. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.09.1919, Egyptian & Sudanese Cotton Trade ˙ Company. 176. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.09.1919, Egyptian Regional Trade Company. ˙ 177. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.10.1919, Egyptian Cotton Export Company. ˙ 178. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.01.1920, Italian Orient Telegraph Company. ˙ 179. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.01.1920, Mechanical Company for Plowing and ˙ Agriculture. 180. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.02.1920, Fish and Agricultural Crops Company. ˙ 181. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.04.1920, Mineral Water, Wine and Alcoholic ˙ Drinks Company. 182. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.04.1920 Bank Misr: First company with pure ˙ Egyptian Capital, W2 because there is a common background being Egyptians; business interest is the common base of the partners. 183. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.04.1920, Egyptian Real Estate Industrial Company. ˙ 184. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.05.1920, British Steel and Engineering Company. ˙ 185. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.05.1920, Companies and Individuals, Cooperative ˙ Employers Union Company.

306

NOTES

TO PAGES

221 – 222

186. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.05.1920, first of its kind for export from Sudan, ˙ Sudanese Import Export Company. 187. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.05.1920, Nile Cotton Company. ˙ 188. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.06.1920, Egyptian Ginning and Storage Company. ˙ 189. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.07.1920, Trade Company. ˙ 190. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.07.1920, Cicurel, The Clothing and Equipment ˙ Company of Egypt. 191. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.07.1920, Adda, Egyptian and Greek citizenship, ˙ Orient Export Company. 192. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.08.1920, Commercial Buildings Company. ˙ 193. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.08.1920, Orient Company. ˙ 194. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.08.1920, Mediterranean General Trade Company ˙ (Egypt). 195. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.08.1920, Egyptian Cotton Company. ˙ 196. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.09.1920, Engineering Works in Mansura Company. ˙ 197. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.12.1920, Red Sea Mines Company. ˙ 198. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.01.1921, British Electrical Welding in Egypt ˙ Company. 199. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.02.1921, Corporation for United Projects Company. ˙ 200. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.06.1921, Egyptian Brilli Manufacturers Company. ˙ 201. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, decree 82, 13.06.1921, The Land Agency of Egypt ˙ Company. 202. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.06.1921, Nile Linen Company. ˙ 203. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.07.1921, Smoke and Cigarette Company, ˙ Paptiologio. 204. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.12.1921, there is insufficient information about the ˙ company, its establisher and name. 205. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.05.1922, Egypt and Orient Roma Bank Company. ˙ 206. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.06.1922, Egyptian Delta Cotton Company. ˙ 207. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.06.1922, Cooling Manufacturing Company. ˙ 208. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.08.1922, Ibrahim Adda had Greek citizenship, ˙ Eastern Real Estate Company. 209. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.09.1922, Egyptian Ships Company. ˙ 210. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.09.1922, Egyptian capital, Misr Printing House. ˙ 211. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.10.1922, Egyptian National Shipping Company. ˙ 212. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.01.1923, Adda, Greek citizenship, Ajoulin, Egyptian ˙ Oil Company. 213. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.02.1923, Bomunti and Pyramids Beer Company. ˙ 214. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.04.1923, all Greek names, one of them with ˙ Egyptian citizenship, Cotton Export Company in Alexandria. 215. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.04.1923, The Nile Cotton Export Company. ˙ 216. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.04.1923, United Ginning and Oil Factories. ˙ 217. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.05.1923, Cotton Cleaning and Pressing Company. ˙ 218. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.06.1923, Alexandria Trade Company. ˙

NOTES TO PAGES 222 –224

307

219. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.06.1923, Rollain Contractors Company. ˙ 220. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.06.1923, Kreger, Egyptian Furniture Company. ˙ 221. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.08.1923, companies and individuals, Egyptian ˙ United Nile Shipping Company. 222. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.09.1923, Crops Company. ˙ 223. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.10.1923, Egyptian Trade for Upper Egypt and ˙ Delta Cotton Company. 224. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.04.1924, Mills with Egyptian Cylinders Company. ˙ 225. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.05.1924, Italian Trade Bank in Egypt. ˙ 226. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.05.1924, Egyptian Lighting and Energy ˙ Company. 227. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.06.1924, Pressed Cement Products Company. ˙ 228. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.06.1924, Alexandria Real Estate Company. ˙ 229. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.07.1924, Sudanese Cotton Export Company. ˙ 230. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.07.1924, Atiyya Agro Company. ˙ 231. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.11.1924, MG, TH, The Egyptian Company (Misr) ˙ for Trade and Cotton Ginning. 232. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.02.1925, Real Estate Management Company. ˙ 233. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.03.1925, Sarsaq is Syrian, written here as ˙ Alexandria Pressing Company. 234. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.03.1925, Modern Buildings Company. ˙ 235. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.04.1925, Egyptian Press Company. ˙ 236. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.07.1925, (Misr) Cinema and Theatre Company. ˙ 237. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.09.1925, MG: Bank Misr, Misr Cotton Ginning and ˙ Trade, Egyptian Paper Company, Misr Publishing House, individuals among the TH, (Misr) Transport and Shipping Company. 238. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.09.1925, Egyptian Engineering Company. ˙ 239. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.10.1925, Delta, Agro and Building Company. ˙ 240. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.11.1925, Egyptian Automobile Transport Company. ˙ 241. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.12.1925, Egyptian Indian Company. ˙ 242. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.01.1926, Egyptian Cottons Company. ˙ 243. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.01.1926, Salim Rabat, one of the Italian citizens, is ˙ Syrian or Egyptian, Bulaq Real Estate Company. 244. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.01.1926, Cicurel, Trade Economic Company. ˙ 245. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.02.1926, the United Drugs Stores of Egypt ˙ Company. 246. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.02.1926, here J. Rabat is French, Asphalt Works ˙ Company. 247. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.04.1926, Modern Style Buildings Company. ˙ 248. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.05.1926, The Scents Company. ˙ 249. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.05.1926, Nile Cooling and Ice Storage Company. ˙ 250. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.05.1926, Hydrophilic Cotton Factory. ˙ 251. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.06.1926, sellers of a specific kind of rotating textile ˙ machine, Gestoter Rotary Syclo Steel Company.

308

NOTES

TO PAGES

224 –225

252. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.09.1926, Kafr Al-Zayyat Trade Company. ˙ 253. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.11.1926, Sarsaq here has Portuguese citizenship, ˙ Agriculture Company, Egypt. 254. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.11.1926, Bourse Building Company. ˙ 255. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.12.1926, Armenian, Jewish, Syrian, Italian, ˙ Egyptian Finance and Trade Company. 256. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.12.1926, Rollo– Marad is the name of a cotton type ˙ that was introduced, The Cotton Maʿrad Company. 257. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.12.1926, Egyptian Cotton Company. ˙ 258. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.12.1926, Belgian – Egyptian Company. ˙ 259. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.12.1926, Marconi Telegraph and Wireless Company. ˙ 260. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya 07.07.1927, companies and individuals, Egyptian ˙ Portland-Turra Cement Company. 261. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.08.1927, Rollo, Greek – Jewish network, Gharbiyya ˙ Ginning Company. 262. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.08.1927, Danish and US investors, the first to ˙ manufacture motors, Far East Motor Company. 263. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.08.1927, Italian – Egyptian Marble Company. ˙ 264. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.08.1927, Egyptian Shipping Company. (De Decocnaes.) ˙ 265. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.09.1927, TH, Bank Misr, Cicurel and ‘Huda ˙ Sharrawi’, Misr Cotton Textile Company. 266. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.09.1927, TH, Bank Misr, Cicurel and Qattawi, Misr ˙ Silk Company. 267. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.09.1927, TH, Bank Misr, Cicurel, Misr Fishing ˙ Company. 268. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.09.1927, TH, Bank Misr, Cicurel, Misr Linen ˙ Company. 269. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.10.1927, General Real Estate Company. ˙ 270. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.01.1928, TH, Bank Misr, Simens Orient Company. ˙ 271. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.01.1928, Printing and Publishing Company. ˙ 272. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.07.1928, also with German capital of Hugo ˙ Lindeman and the Deutsche Orient Bank, FIAT Orient Company. 273. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.07.1928, Cotton Ginning and Export Company. ˙ 274. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.08.1928, Alexandria Insurance Company. ˙ 275. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.09.1928, Deutsche Kohlen Depot Company. ˙ 276. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.09.1928, Manganese Mines in Jabal Ahmar ˙ Company. 277. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.10.1928, Egypt Import-Export Bank. ˙ 278. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.10.1928, Norwegian Lady, The Financial Company. ˙ 279. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.10.1928, Faros-Transport, Export and Insurance ˙ Company. 280. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.11.1928, French – Egyptian Imports Company. ˙ 281. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.11.1928, Syrian origin, Swiss citizenship, Egyptian ˙ Newspapers Company.

NOTES

TO PAGES

225 –227

309

282. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.02.1929, no Egyptian capital or members, Belgian ˙ and International Bank in Egypt. 283. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.03.1929, companies and individuals, Portland – ˙ Hilwan Cement Company. 284. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.04.1929, Swedish capital, seems to be a specific ˙ motor type, Bilya Rotating Company. 285. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.04.1929, Suyuf Real Estate Company. ˙ 286. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.05.1929, Swedish capital, Egyptian Match Company. ˙ 287. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.05.1929, Belgian capital, Egyptian Electricity ˙ Company. 288. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.05.1929, Gozi Film. ˙ 289. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.06.1929, Daqhaliya Land Company. ˙ 290. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.07.1929, English Continental Cotton Company. ˙ 291. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.07.1929, Egyptian Finance and Industrial ˙ Company. 292. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.09.1929, Egyptian Tractors Company. ˙ 293. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.12.1929, Little Queen Stores Company. ˙ 294. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.12.1929, Ahmer Gold Mines Company. ˙ 295. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.04.1930, Alexandria Shipping Company. ˙ 296. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.04.1930, a group of Belgian companies and Bank ˙ Misr for railway construction, Egyptian Grand Works Company. 297. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.05.1930, Asian African Trade Company, ASTRA. ˙ 298. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.05.1930, Formal Huwgemian Stores Company. ˙ 299. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.07.1930, Ice Factory and Cold Stores Company. ˙ 300. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.08.1930, Egyptian Road Construction Company. ˙ 301. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.10.1930, Egyptian Metal Company. ˙ 302. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.10.1930, Crown Egypt Company. ˙ 303. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.12.1930, Bata Shoes in Egypt Company. ˙ 304. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.06.1931, Egyptian Concrete Pipes and Columns ˙ Company. 305. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.06.1931, Al Sharq Egyptian Life Insurance ˙ Company. 306. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.06.1931, Egyptian Mineral Soil Company. ˙ 307. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.08.1931, here the partnership is among ˙ international banks, Egyptian banks, the Egyptian government and business groups, the first partnership of this kind for establishing a company, Egyptian Agriculture Credit Bank. 308. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.08.1931, Egyptian Mills and Storage Company. ˙ 309. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.08.1931, first Iranian investor, Egyptian Dairy ˙ Company. 310. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.10.1931, here the partnership is between Egyptian ˙ companies and persons, individuals, Alexandria Credit Company. 311. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.10.1931, German investors, companies and ˙ individuals, Alexandria Cotton Storage Company.

310

NOTES

TO PAGES

227 –228

312. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.11.1931, Egyptian Perla Marble Company. ˙ 313. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.11.1931, British company represented by Syrian ˙ businessman Homsy holding Italian citizenship and living in Egypt, Egyptian Storage Company. 314. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.12.1931, Egyptian Cinematography Company. ˙ 315. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.03.1932, Egyptian Petrol Company. ˙ 316. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.03.1932, National Petrol Company. ˙ 317. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.05.1932, Ford Motors Egypt Company. ˙ 318. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.05.1932, Bank Misr, TH, MG and British investors, ˙ Egypt Air. 319. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.08.1932, the owners are the Homsy family, one of ˙ them held French citizenship and the others were Egyptian, Alexandria and Egypt Ships Company. 320. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.09.1932, Fayyoum Omnibus Company. ˙ 321. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.09.1932, Alexandria Autobus Company. ˙ 322. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.10.1932, Sarsaq, Spanish citizenship, Egyptian Life ˙ Insurance Company. 323. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.10.1932, Trade of Egyptian Products Company. ˙ 324. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.01.1933, Com Ombo, TH and other company, ˙ Egyptian Vegetables, Fruits and Flowers Marketing Company. 325. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.03.1933, Egyptian Orient Star Company. ˙ 326. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.06.1932, Contractors Suppliers Company. ˙ 327. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.09.1932, also with Mazloum Pacha, Egyptian ˙ Financial Company. 328. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.11.1933, Formal Prox Company. ˙ 329. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.01.1934, MG, TH, Cicurel, Misr General Insurance ˙ Company. 330. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.01.1934, BM, TH, MG, Cicurel and Syrian ˙ investors with French citizenship, Misr Shipping Company. 331. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.01.1934, TH, Cicurel, Egyptian Leather Industry ˙ Company. 332. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.03.1934, Zamalek Real Estate Company. ˙ 333. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.04.1934, Genasene Stores in Egypt Company. ˙ 334. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.06.1934, National Paper Company. ˙ 335. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.07.1934, Nestor Jenkalis Cigarettes Company. ˙ 336. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.08.1934, Alexandria Mills Company. ˙ 337. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.09.1934, Salvago, Mouseri and British and ˙ Egyptian, Egyptian Textile Company. 338. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.10.1934, Egyptian Land and Real Estate Company. ˙ 339. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.10.1934, French Egyptian Credit Company. ˙ 340. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.10.1934, Egyptian Imperial Chemical Industry ˙ Company. 341. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.11.1934, Misr Tourism Company. ˙ 342. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.12.1934, Commercial Cotton Company. ˙

NOTES TO PAGES 228 –230

311

343. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.12.1934, Egyptian Finance and Real Estate ˙ Company. 344. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.01.1935, Egyptian Weaving Company. ˙ 345. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.01.1935, Egyptian Inficta Productions. ˙ 346. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.02.1935, Macan Shoes Company. ˙ 347. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.04.1935, Fertilizer and Chemical Industry Company. ˙ 348. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.05.1935, Philps Wakman Beds Company. ˙ 349. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.05.1935, Gazal Import Company. ˙ 350. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.07.1935, The Egyptian Neon Lights Company. ˙ 351. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.07.1935, Alexandria Race Club Company. ˙ 352. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.08.1935, Cairo Autobus Company. ˙ 353. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.09.1935, Stationary Production Company. ˙ 354. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.11.1935, Nile Ginning Company. ˙ 355. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.02.1936, Bontimirolly Furniture Store ˙ 356. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.03.1936, Chemical Industies Company. ˙ 357. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.04.1936, Cairo Weaving Factories Company. ˙ 358. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.04.1936, Upper Egypt Ginning Company. ˙ 359. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.05.1936, United Constructions Company. ˙ 360. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.05.1936, Egyptian Grapes and Alcohol Company. ˙ 361. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.05.1936, Egyptian Copper Factories ˙ 362. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.08.1936, Choreimi-Benaci Cotton Company. ˙ 363. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.09.1936, Suare`s Bank, formally A. Suare`s Sons and ˙ Partners Bank. 364. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.10.1936, The Simon Azert Stores Company, the ˙ English name is written in Arabic letters. 365. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.12.1936, Career Egypt. ˙ 366. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.01.1937, California Texas Oil Company. ˙ 367. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.02.1937, Abboud Pasha and Qattawi, all Egyptian ˙ capital, Pharaoh Post Lines Company. 368. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.04. 1937, Egyptian Chemical Industries Company. ˙ 369. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.04.1937, Nile Oils Company. ˙ 370. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.04.1937, Rollo, Mouseri, Naus Bey and Abbud ˙ Pacha, Public Real Estate Company. 371. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.04.1937, The Standard Oil Company of Egypt. ˙ 372. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.04.1937, Egypt Cigarette Company. ˙ 373. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.05.1937, Egyptian Constructions Company. ˙ 374. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.06.1937, Sharqiyya & Daqhaliyya Autobus ˙ Company. 375. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.11.1937, Egyptian Tractor and Engineering ˙ Company. 376. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.11.1937, Sidqi Pacha, Dencen Wallas and Oskar ˙ Tajer, Texas Egyptian Oil Company. 377. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.11.1937, Sidqi Pacha, Dencen Wallas and Oskar ˙ Tajer, California Egyptian Oil Company.

312 378. 379. 380. 381. 382. 383. 384. 385. 386. 387. 388. 389. 390. 391. 392. 393. 394. 395. 396. 397. 398. 399. 400. 401. 402. 403. 404. 405. 406. 407. 408. 409.

NOTES

TO PAGES

230 –232

Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.11.1937, Egyptian Wool Weaving Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.11.1937, Egyptian –Bulgarian Trade Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.11.1937, Shifeld Egypt Casting Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.11.1937, Far East Finance Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.12.1937, Sarsaq was Egyptian, Zarbini was Italian ˙ and Greek, Kafr Alzayyat Land Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.12.1937, Bel Tours Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.12.1937, Fiber weaving Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.01.1938, all Jews (first level network), General ˙ Trade, Real Estate and Finance Business Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.01.1938, Egyptian –French Silk Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.02.1938, Cicurel Department Stores Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.02.1938, Egyptian Working and Buildings ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.02.1938, Egyptian Company for Mines and Stone ˙ Mines Utilization. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.02.1938, Individuals and Companies, Egyptian – ˙ Italian Bank, Egyptian Buildings Companz, EGYCO. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.03.1938, Egyptian Finance Company for Trade and ˙ Industry, Sevina. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.03.1938, Egyptian Credit and Finance Business ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.03.1938, Trade and Industrial Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.03.1938, Alexandria Transport Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.03.1938, Menshlod for Oil and Paint Colors ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.04.1938, Tukhi Stationery and Toys Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.07.1938, Portland cement company and other ˙ companies and individuals, Egyptian Company for Concrete. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.08.1938, Anglo – Egyptian Mining Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.08.1938, Kokinos Constructions Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.08.1938, United Bus Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.08.1938, French – Egyptian Dye Works Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.09.1938, Egyptian Mines and Excavation ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.09.1938, MG and British, Bayda Dyers Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.11.1938, Egyptian Coloring Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.11.1938, Misr Mines and Stones Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.12.1938, Misr Oil Industry and Trade. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.12.1938, Albert Mousa Transport Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.01.1939, a partnership between 8 companies, La ˙ Viovial Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.08.1939, only Egyptian, Upper Egypt Autobus ˙ Company.

NOTES 410. 411. 412. 413. 414. 415. 416. 417. 418. 419. 420. 421. 422. 423. 424. 425. 426. 427. 428. 429. 430. 431. 432. 433. 434. 435. 436. 437. 438. 439.

TO PAGES

232 –234

313

Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.09.1939, only Egyptian, Mina/Port Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.09.1939, Nile Trico and Socks Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.10.1939, Pento & Partners Cotton Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.10.1939, SICO, Egyptian Industry and Trade ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.11.1939, National Trade and Industry Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.11.1939, Alexandria Life Insurance Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.12. 1939, Mahmudiyya Mills Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.01.1940, Egyptian Projects and Buildings ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.04.1940, Misr Medical Utilities and Supply Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.05.1940, La Cottoniere Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.11.1940, Khodouri, Iraqi Jew, Trade and Finance ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.11.1940, Egyptian weaving factory, CABO. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.12.1940, de Menasce here Turkish and Egyptian, ˙ Industrial Silk and Cotton Stores Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.12.1940, Flour Products Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.12.1940, Rice Mills Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.01.1941, Agion here Egyptian, in other cases ˙ Italian, Egyptian Weaving Factory, Matexa. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.02.1941, Egyptian Conserved Food Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.04.1941, Egyptian Yarn Company. ˙ Name change: Pharaonic Post Co, to Khedevi Post Co, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 02.06.1941. Law No. 40 to support Bank Misr, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.07.1941. ˙ ˙ Name change: Egyptian Cotton Weaving Company to Egyptian Weaving Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.09.1941. ˙ Name change: Sevena Co. to Egyptian Company for Finance, Trade and Industry, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.11.1941. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.01.1942, Egyptian Magazine Company. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.01.1942, US – Orient Trade and Shipping ˙ Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.06.1942, Egyptian Conserves Export Company. ˙ Name change: Misr General Insurances to Misr Insurance, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ ˙ ˙ 02.11.1942. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.11.1942, companies and individuals, also Sidnaui, ˙ Jout Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.11.1942, Egyptian Packaging Company. ˙ Name change: Public Real Estate Company in Egypt, Est. 1937 to Real Estate Company in Egypt, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.07.1943. ˙ Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.04.1944, Companies and Individuals, Cicurel, ˙ Egypt & Sudan Trade Company.

314

NOTES

TO PAGES

234 –235

440. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.04.1944, Ammoniac & Chemical Products ˙ Company. 441. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.07.1944, Companies and Individuals, Egypt ˙ Automobile Company. 442. Name change: Egyptian Magazine Company to Egyptian Journalism Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.11.1944. ˙ 443. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.12.1944, Nutrition Production Company. ˙ 444. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.02.1945, Al-Katib al Misry. ˙ ˙ 445. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.03.1945, National Plastic Company. ˙ 446. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.03.1945, Alexandria – Khartoum Trade Company. ˙ 447. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.04.1945, Egyptian Plastics and Electrical ˙ Industries. 448. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.04.1945, General Company for Nutrition. ˙ 449. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.05.1945, Mahasen Autobus Company. ˙ 450. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.05.1945, Nile Works Company. ˙ 451. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.06.1945, union of different textile merchants to ˙ proceed export and import of textiles, Weaving Traders Union Company. 452. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.07.1945, Shore Company, Maritime Shipping. ˙ 453. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.07.1945, Saudi investor, Egyptian Transport and ˙ Construction Company. 454. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.07.1945, Qabari Petrol Company. ˙ 455. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.07.1945, de Menasce here Turkish, General ˙ Engineering & Cooling Company. 456. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.07.1945, Palestinian and Iraqi, Frozen Foods and ˙ Cooling Company. 457. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.08.1945, Egyptian Rice Mills Company. ˙ 458. Name change: Central Food & Markets Company, Est. 1911 to Egyptian Astra and Markets Company. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.08.1945. ˙ 459. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.08.1945, Alexandria Glass & Porcelain Factory ˙ Company. 460. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.08.1945, French and Lebanese, Middle East ˙ Industry Company. 461. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.09.1945, Egyptian General Maritime Shipping ˙ Company. 462. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.09.1945, Far East Drugs and Trade Company. ˙ 463. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.09.1945, 4 members of Kittanah family, holders of ˙ Palestinian and Lebanese citizenship, living in NY, Beirut and Tehran, North Africa Trade Company. 464. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.09.1945, National Cotton Company. ˙ 465. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.09.1945, National Electricity Company. ˙ 466. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.09.1945, Eastern Electricity Company. ˙ 467. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.09.1945, Hariri, holder of Turkish citizenship, ˙ Orient Storage Company. 468. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.10.1945, United Cooling and Storage Company. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

235 –237

315

469. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.10.1945, Fayoum-Bani Suweif Transport Company. ˙ 470. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.10.1945, despite Egyptian and British citizenship, ˙ all establishers are of Syrian origin, Al Ahram Company. 471. Name change: Misr Station Real Estate Company, Est. 1910 to Real Estate Company for Agriculture and Buildings, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.10.1945. ˙ 472. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.11.1945, Wools Company. ˙ 473. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.11.1945, Homsy family, here holders of Syrian ˙ citizenship, Karnak National Tourism Company. 474. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.11.1945, National Starch Company. ˙ 475. Name change: Industrial Garn and Weaving Company, Est. 1941 to Sebahi for Industrial Garn and Weaving Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.11.1945. ˙ 476. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.01.1946, the first mention of Sawires, Almenya & ˙ Buheira Autobus Company. 477. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.01.1946, Islam Pasha Factories. ˙ 478. Name change: Anglo– Italian Trade Company, Est. 1938 to Intra Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.02.1946. ˙ 479. Name change: Egyptian Plastic and Electrical Industry to Egyptian Plastic and Electrical Industry & Shaferman Brothers, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 18.02.1946. 480. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.02.1946, Transport & Engineering Company. ˙ 481. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.03.1946, Egyptian Import-Export Bank. ˙ 482. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.04.1946, 3 of the main establishers are from the ˙ same family, all Egyptian establishers are on the board of directors of other companies, Farghali Cottons and Finance Company. 483. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.04.1946, Agricultural and Land Construction ˙ Company. 484. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.04.1946, Moshe Mayer was an investor from Tel ˙ Aviv, Zalkha from Iraq, General Chemical Industries CIC. 485. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.04.1946, Alexandria Cotton Trade Company. ˙ 486. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.05.1946, Orient weaving Company. ˙ 487. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.05.1946, MG, US, Misr Artificial Silk Factory ˙ Company. 488. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.05.1946, Hammad Palestinian Businessman, ˙ Mizrahi, Suare`s, de Menasce Jewish, Egyptian Shipping Company. 489. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.05.1946, Chamla Grand Stores Company. ˙ 490. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.05.1946, Rollo, Cicurel and Sidnawi, Orient Linen ˙ Factory Company. 491. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.05.1946, Nutrition Oil and Food Company. ˙ 492. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.05.1946, Trade Exchange Company. ˙ 493. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.05.1946, Zalkha, General Company for Financial ˙ and Industrial Investments. 494. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.05.1946, Fayyum Weaving Company. ˙ 495. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.05.1946, Eastern Cinema Company. ˙ 496. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.06.1946, New Hotels in Egypt Company. ˙

316

NOTES

TO PAGES

237 –238

497. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.06.1946, United Shipping and Storage Company. ˙ 498. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.06.1946, Zaqaziq Cotton & Oil Company. ˙ 499. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.06.1946, South African, Anglo – Egyptian ˙ Company for Soap and Nutritious. 500. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.06.1946, United Industries Company. ˙ 501. Name change: Finance Cooperation and Trade Company, Est. 1910 to Financial Solidarity and Trade Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.06.1946. ˙ 502. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.06.1946, Turkish and Albanian, Ads, de Menasce, ˙ Al-Ahram Studious. 503. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.06.1946, Egyptian Rope Production Company. ˙ 504. Name change: Karnak National Company for Tourism, Est. 1945 to Karnak National Company for Transport and Tourism, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 27.06.1946. 505. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.07.1946, Oberj Egypt Company. ˙ 506. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.07.1946, Jafaria Agro-Industrial Company. ˙ 507. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.07.1946, de Menasce here Egyptian, Nile Beer ˙ Company. 508. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.07.1946, Egyptian Animal Food Factory Company. ˙ 509. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.07.1946, Egyptian Factory for Drying Vegetables ˙ Company. 510. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.07.1946, National Aircraft Service Company. ˙ 511. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.07.1946, Pamco Stores Company. ˙ 512. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.07.1946, Hilwan Land Company. ˙ 513. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al misriyya, 15.07.1946, Egyptian Savings Company. ˙ 514. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.07.1946, Egyptian Trade Insurance Company. ˙ 515. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.07.1946, Shams, Egyptian Company for Modern ˙ Buildings. 516. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.07.1946, the first time the name Arab appears in a ˙ company’s name; the partners are mainly Syrians and Egyptians, Arab Weaving Company. 517. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.07.1946, Egyptian Internal & External Trade ˙ Company. 518. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.07.1946, Engineering Supplies Company. ˙ 519. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.07.1946, Egyptian Wood Company. ˙ 520. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.07.1946, (Franji) European Taylors Traders ˙ Company. 521. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.07.1946, Beharnad Trade Company. ˙ 522. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.08.1946, de Menasce here Egyptian, Bani Mazar ˙ Land Construction and Agriculture Company. 523. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.08.1946, Norwegian investors, Egyptian Construc˙ tion & Engineering Company. 524. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.08.1946, Taweel Weaving Company. ˙ 525. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.08.1946, Cold Air Egypt Company. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

238 –240

317

526. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.08.1946, Islam Pasha Agro-Constructions Com˙ pany. 527. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.08.1946, part of the data are missing. ˙ 528. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.09.1946, Abbud Pasha, Egyptian Fertilizer & ˙ Chem. Industries Company. 529. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.09.1946, Lotus Maritime Shipping Company. ˙ 530. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.10.1946, Alexandria Weaving Company. ˙ 531. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.11.1946, Al-Sharif Cotton & Trade Company. ˙ 532. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.11.1946, Adda, Egyptian Linen and Weaving ˙ Company. 533. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.11.1946, Ahram Gardens Company. ˙ 534. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.12.1946, United Excellent Weavings Company. ˙ 535. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.12.1946, Middle East Cotton and Trade Company. ˙ 536. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.01.1947, Yeshua Green from Palestine, Electrical ˙ Advancement in Egypt Company. 537. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.01.1947, Desert Roads Automobile Company. ˙ 538. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.01.1947, Textile Rolni Company. ˙ 539. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.01.1947, Trade Exchange Company. ˙ 540. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.02.1947, Orient General Contractions Company. ˙ 541. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.02.1947, Agro-Industrial Development Company. ˙ 542. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.02.1947, Egyptian Cotton and Trade Company. ˙ 543. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.02.1947, Orient-Blat Bros. Weaving Machines ˙ Company. 544. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.03.1947, Dar Al-Hilal Publishing Company. ˙ 545. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.03.1947, Dar Al Ikhwan Journalistic Company. ˙ 546. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.04.1947 Hassan Al Banna was an establishing ˙ member, Dar Al-Ikhwan Publishing Company. 547. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.04.1947, Egyptian Transport Company. ˙ 548. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.04.1947, Commercial Ex-Import Company. ˙ 549. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.04.1947, Syrian, Saudi, Iraqi, Lebanese, Palesti˙ nian. A trade Company in the countries of the Arab League, United Arab Company. 550. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.05.1947, Chemical Industry Development ˙ Company. 551. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.05.1947, Shorbagy Weaving and Trico Factories ˙ Company. 552. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.05.1945, Adolf Marcus, Palestinian, Far East Crops ˙ Trade Company. 553. Name change: British – American Nile Vapors and Hotels Company, Est. 1899 to Anglo – American Nile Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.05.1947 ˙ 554. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.05.1947, Raml Weaving Company. ˙ 555. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.05.1947, Egyptian Company for International ˙ Trade ECIT. 556. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.06.1947, ZAMA Nutrition Company. ˙

318

NOTES

TO PAGES

240 –241

557. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.06.1947, Marsa Matruh Salt & Potassium ˙ Company. 558. Name change: Egyptian Rice Mill, Est. 1945 to Egyptian Rice Mills, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.06.1947. ˙ 559. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.06.1947, Joint Industrial Company. ˙ 560. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.06.1947, Cotton Pressing Company. ˙ 561. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.06.1947, Modern Egyptian Rice Mills Company. ˙ 562. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.06.1947, Jacob Cohenca Sons Stores Company. ˙ 563. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.06.1047, Abu Zabal & Kafr al Zayat Fertilizers & ˙ Chemicals Company. 564. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.07.1947, Alexandria Weaving Company. ˙ 565. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.07.1947, Upper Egypt Mines Company. ˙ 566. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.07.1947, Misr Garden Company. ˙ 567. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.08.1947, Saudi– Egyptian Co, Suez Maritime ˙ Shipping Company. 568. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.08.1947, Company Law No. 138. ˙ 569. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.08.1947, Egyptian Company for Wool and Textile ˙ Trade. 570. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.09.1947, Palestinian Saudi, Iraqi Egypt, Syrian: ˙ Shuman, Shanti, Tanous, Husseini, Bank Misr, to restore land in Palestine, Arab Real Estate Company. 571. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.09.1947, Egyptian Distribution Company. ˙ 572. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.09.1947, Nile Insurance Company. ˙ 573. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.10.1947, Egyptian Maritime Shipping Company. ˙ 574. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.06.1948, Golden Weaving Company. ˙ 575. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.06.1948, New Mahalla Cinema Company. ˙ 576. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.07.1948, Syrian, Turks and Lebanese, United ˙ Weaving Company. 577. Name change: Belat Bros Weaving Machines Orient Company, Est. 1945 to Belat Bros Weaving Machines, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.07.1948. ˙ 578. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.07.1948, Syrian, Cairo Weaving & Tricot Company. ˙ 579. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.07.1948, Alexandria Portland Cement Company. ˙ 580. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.07.1948, Egyptian Trade and Finance Company. ˙ 581. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.09.1948, Empire Trade Company. ˙ 582. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.10.1948, Paul Lefshter is also establishing member, ˙ no mentioning of his citizenship, Sea Side Automobiles Company. 583. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.11.1948, Basil Pasha Woods Company. ˙ 584. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.11.1948, Ash Transports Company. ˙ 585. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.11.1948, Modern Industrial Buildings Company. ˙ 586. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.11.1948, Carfer Cottons Company. ˙ 587. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.11.1948, Jifert Orient Company. ˙ 588. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.12.1948, Egyptian Trade and Industry Company. ˙ 589. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.01.1949, Intercontinental Trade & Industry ˙ Company.

NOTES

TO PAGES

241 – 243

319

590. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.02.1949, Organic Fertilizer Company. ˙ 591. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.03.1949, National Egyptian Bottle Filling ˙ Company. 592. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.03.1949, after Egypt Air, Egyptian International ˙ Airlines (SAIDA). 593. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.04.1949, Rene Qattawi and Ralf Harrari, Abboud ˙ Pasha, Egyptian Distillation Company. 594. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.04.1949, Babawi Cotton Trade Company. ˙ 595. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.05.1949, National Salt and Mining Company. ˙ 596. Name change: Egyptian Company for Wool and Weavings (WATCO), Est. 1947 to Wool and Weavings Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya ˙ 05.05.1949. 597. Name change: Shifeld Metal in Egypt, Est. 1937, to Metal Pressing (Misr) Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.05.1949. ˙ 598. Name change: Securta Insurances, Est. 1900 to National Egyptian Insurance Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.06.1949. ˙ 599. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.06.1949, Alexandria Wood Trade Company. ˙ 600. Name change: Sharqiyya– Daqhaliyya Bus Company, Est. 1943 to Orient Omnibus Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.06.1949. ˙ 601. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.06.1949, Upper Egypt Weaving Company. ˙ 602. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.07.1949, Asyut Bottle Filling Company. ˙ 603. Name change: Alexandria Transport Company, Est. 1938 to Egyptian Electrical and Mechanical Industry Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 20.10.1949. 604. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.10.1949, Al-Ahram Industry & Trade Company. ˙ 605. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.10.1949, Heliopolis Real Estate Company. ˙ 606. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.10.1949, Boursli Industry & Trade Company. ˙ 607. Name change: Egyptian Printing and Publishing Company, Est. 1927 to Egyptian Advertising Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.10.1949. ˙ 608. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.11.1949, Dalta Engineering Company. ˙ 609. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.01.1950, National Egyptian Petrol Company. ˙ 610. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.02.1950, Centro Commission Orient Trade ˙ Company. 611. Name change: Orient Real Estate Bank, Est. 1931 to Orient Bank. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.02.1950. ˙ 612. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.03.1950, Egyptian Air Engineering Company. ˙ 613. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.04.1950, Engineering and Trade Projects ˙ Company. 614. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.07.1950, Egyptian –Arab Bank. ˙ 615. Name change: National Cotton Company, Est. 1945 to National Cotton and Trade Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.07.1950. ˙ 616. Name change: Egyptian Saving Company, Est. 1946 to Egyptian Savings and Insurances Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.07.1950. ˙ 617. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.07.1950, Egyptian Maritime Trade Company. ˙

320

NOTES

TO PAGES

243 –245

618. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.07.1950, AFTRO, Tourism & Trade Company. ˙ 619. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.08.1950, Alexandria National Bottle Fillings ˙ Company. 620. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.08.1950, Egyptian Port Said Salt Mines Company. ˙ 621. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.10.1950, Industrial & Trade Company for Building ˙ Materials (Al-Nisr). 622. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.10.1950, all the same family, all J and all Egyptian/ ˙ Karaite Jews, Al-Wadi Metal Works Company. 623. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.10.1950, Alexandria Weavings Trade Company. ˙ 624. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.10.1950, National Weaving Company, MEMPHIS. ˙ 625. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.11.1950, Industrial & Mechanical Imports ˙ Companz, TIMSCO. 626. Name change: Egyptian Internal and External Trade Company, Est. 1946 to Fertilizer and Chemical Imports Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.02.1951. ˙ 627. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.05.1950, Modern Fashion Company, Ben Zion. ˙ 628. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.05.1951, Delta Steel Factories Company. Al-jarı¯da ˙ al-rasmiyya 629. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.06.1951, Egyptian Agricultural Protections ˙ Company. 630. Name change: Misr Airwork, Est. 1933 to Mirair. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 26.06.1951 631. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.06.1951, same family members, Wood and ˙ Constructions Trade and Industry Company, FABAS. 632. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.08.1951, Orient Mechanical Transport Company. ˙ 633. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.08.1951, Egyptian Constructions Company. ˙ 634. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.08.1951, Middle East Advertising Company. ˙ 635. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.10.1951, Wadi Weaving Company. ˙ 636. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.10.1951, Trade Markets Company. ˙ 637. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.11.1951, Egyptian Economic Housing Company. ˙ 638. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.12.1951, Egyptian Insurance Company. ˙ 639. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.03.1952, Egyptian Constructions Company. ˙ 640. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.03.1952, Industrial & Engineering Projects ˙ Company. 641. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.03.1952, Africa United Trade Company. ˙ 642. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.05.1952, Safir Trade Company. ˙ 643. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.05.1952, Cairo Bank Company. ˙ 644. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.05.1952, Fuel Transport Company. ˙ 645. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.08.1952, Egyptian Salt Port Said Company. ˙ 646. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.09.1952, Eastern Trade & Cotton Company. ˙ 647. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.10.1952, Oil and Soap Factory Company. ˙ 648. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.12.1952, Egyptian Car Company. ˙ 649. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.01.1953, Ras Malab Mines Company. ˙ 650. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.02.1953, IJUBA, Public Utilities Company. ˙ 651. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.03.1953, Alexandria Packaging Company. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

245 –246

321

652. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.03.1953, Zaqaziq Agro-Real Estate Company. ˙ 653. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.04.1953, Al Hilal Row Company. ˙ 654. Name change: the Trade & Engineering for Egypt and Middle East Company, Est. 1946 to Trade & Engineering for Egypt and Middle East Company, SEMSI. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.05.1953. ˙ 655. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.05.1953, Alexandria Oil & Soap Company. ˙ 656. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.05.1953, National Egyptian Oil Pressing and ˙ Cooling Company. 657. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.06.1953, Diesel Mechanical Engineering Company. ˙ 658. Name change: Port Said Egyptian Salt Mines Company to Egyptian Salt Mines Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 04.06.1953. ˙ 659. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.06.1953, family business, all are Kahla family ˙ members except for one, Kahla Soap and Nutrition Factories Company. 660. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.07.1953, Egyptian Cable Company. ˙ 661. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.07.1953, Al-Jazeera Trade Company. ˙ 662. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.07.1953, Egyptian Cigarettes Company. ˙ 663. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.08.1953, Metal Production and Industrial Company. ˙ 664. Name change: Anglo –Egyptian Soap and Nutrition Company, Est. 1946 to International Productions Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.08.1953. ˙ 665. Name change: Pomonty Pyramids Beer Company, Est. 1922 to Pyramids Beer Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.08.1953. ˙ 666. Name change: Rolli Weaving & Cloths Company, Est. 1947 to Rivoli Presents House Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.08.1953. ˙ 667. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.08.1953, Egyptian Metal Company, EGYMET. ˙ 668. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.09.1953, General Industrial Mechanical Work ˙ Shops Company. 669. Name change: Misr Tourism Company, Est. 1934 to Misr Tourism and Shipping Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.09.1953. ˙ 670. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.09.1953, building of aeroplanes: Matusian, ˙ Sidnawi, and white Russian partner, Serna Aircrafts Company. 671. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.11.1953, Constructions and Electrical Power Company. ˙ 672. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.11.1953, Buhaira Cotton Company. ˙ 673. Name change: Egyptian Advertising and Publishing Company, Est. 1906 to Eastern Advertising Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.11.1953. ˙ 674. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.11.1953, Anglil Trade Company. ˙ 675. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.12.1953, General Well Digging and Water Works ˙ Company. The year 1954 marks a turning point: the types of companies change and the names of them also; popular housing, popular economics and companies in partnership with the Egyptian government appear. The aspect of foreign investment is still there. 676. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.12.1953, Store of Music Instruments, maybe first of ˙ its kind in company form, General Music Stores Company.

322

NOTES TO PAGES 246 –248

677. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.01.1954, Middle East Agriculture Company, ˙ Egypt – Sudan. 678. Name change: Cotton Trade Company, Est. 1934 to Fendrel Cotton Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.01.1954. ˙ 679. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.03.1954, Egyptian Steel & Metal Trade Company. ˙ 680. Name change: Sherif Cotton & Trade Company, Est. 1946 to Giza Cotton & Trade Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.03.1954. ˙ 681. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.04.1954, all except for one are G, Egyptian Filling ˙ Company, ABUT. 682. Name change: Sudanese Export-Import Company, Est. 1920 to Sudanese Imports & Exports Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.03.1954. ˙ 683. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.05.1954, Modern Autobus Company. ˙ 684. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.05.1954, 6 out of 9 are Toukhi family, Egypt – ˙ Sudan Toys & Stationary Stores Company. 685. This company is a partnership between the Egyptian Government, Egyptian companies (Banks and Insurers) and British, Swiss, French, Turkish and G companies, apparently the first of its kind in this style. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 10.06.1954, Constructions and Popular Housing Company. 686. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.06.1954, Popular Economic Company. ˙ 687. This company is a partnership between the Egyptian government, Egyptian companies and a German company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.06.1954, ˙ Egyptian Steel Company. 688. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.06.1954, Nile Valley Trade and Industry Company. ˙ 689. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.07.1954, Egyptian Electrical Cable Company. ˙ 690. Name change: Arab Real Estate Company, Est. 1947 to Arab Real Estate Bank, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.07.1954. ˙ 691. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.08.1954, Cicurel and other Egyptian Jews, Trade & ˙ Real Estate Company. 692. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.08.1954, Thilos Transport & Storage Company. ˙ 693. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.09.1954, Flour Products Company. ˙ 694. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.09.1954, here for the first time a member of the ˙ military is partner in the company, Major Omar Tantawi Abdelwahhab, Rashid Salt Mines Company. 695. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.09.1954, Egyptian Savings Company. ˙ 696. Name change: Egyptian Cotton Ginning Company, Est. 1924 to Misr Cotton Ginning Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.10.1954. ˙ 697. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.11.1954, Tanta Linen & Oil Company. ˙ 698. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.11.1954, Bacos Coloring Company. ˙ 699. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 06.12.1954, Buhaira Rice and Oil Company. ˙ 700. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.12.1954, Egyptian Petroleum Refinery Company. ˙ 701. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.12.1954, Egyptian House Company. ˙ 702. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.02.1955, Nile Cinema Company. ˙ 703. Name change: Al-Jazeera Trade Company, Est. 1953 to Al-Jazeera Insurance Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.02.1955. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

248 –249

323

704. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.03.1955, General Company for Egyptian Salt. ˙ 705. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 24.03.1955, Othman Ahmad Othman, Al-muqawelun ˙ Al-arab, the biggest construction company in Egypt (built the High Dam), General Engineering and Industrial Constructions Company. 706. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.05.1955, Wood Production Company. ˙ 707. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.05.1955, Nile Shirts and Clothes Company. ˙ 708. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.06.1955, General Porcelain Company. ˙ 709. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.06.1955, Egypt Hotels Company. ˙ 710. Name change: Misr Shipping and Tourism Company, Est. 1953 to Misr Tourism Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.08.1955. ˙ 711. Name change: Jacob Cohenka Sons Company, Est. 1947 to Central Electric Company, Centerellec. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.09.1955. ˙ 712. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.10.1955, Sarsaq here Egyptian, oil shipping, ˙ Egyptian Mediterranean Loyed Company. 713. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.11.1955, Fine Weavings Company. ˙ 714. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.11.1955, partnership between a governmental body ˙ and companies, Public Egyptian Railway Services Company. 715. Name change: Trade Exchange (Hammad) Company, Est. 1947 to Trade Exchange Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.12.1955. ˙ 716. Name change: National Tourism and Transport-Karnak Company, Est. 1945 to Transport and Tourism-Karnak Company, Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.12.1955. ˙ 717. Name change: Carlifonia – Texas Petrol Company, Est. 1937 to Caltax (Egypt) Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 29.12.1955 ˙ 718. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 02.01.1956, Ministry of Religious Affairs is a partner ˙ besides Bank Misr and individuals, Misr External Trade Company. 719. Name change: Alexandria & Rashid Rice Factories Company, Est. 1905 to Alexandria & Rashid Rice Mills Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.01.1956. ˙ 720. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.01.1956, Daqhaliya Omnibus Company. ˙ 721. Name change: General Company for Finance and Industrial Investments, Est. 1946 to Cogiblafin Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya,13.02.1956. ˙ 722. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.02.1956, Middle East News Company. ˙ 723. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 20.02.1956, Middle East News Company. ˙ 724. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.02.1956, private only, Bani Mazar Grand Ginning ˙ Factories Company. 725. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.03.1956, Ministry of Religious Affairs and other ˙ governmental institutions, private sector institutions like Bank Misr, no individuals. Public sector chemical industry, Egyptian Chemical Industries Company, CIMA. 726. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 22.03.1956, German, private and public sector ˙ partnership, Public Company for Concrete Productions. 727. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.04.1956, public and private partners, Wool weaving ˙ Company. 728. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 05.04.1956, public and private partners, National ˙ Cement Company.

324

NOTES

TO PAGES

249 –250

729. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.04.1956, individuals, private sector and a ministry, ˙ Mirs Dairy and Nutrition Company. 730. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.04.1956, Italian Investments, Egyptian Company. ˙ for Developing Touristic Sights. 731. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 19.04.1956, Greeks and Italians, no Egyptians, ˙ Egyptian Tourism Construction in Muntazah and Muqattam Company. 732. Name change: Merchants and Manufacturers Insurance Company Ltd., registered in Egypt 1952 to British Merchants Insurance Company Ltd., Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.04.1956. ˙ 733. Dissolving the General Egyptian Sugar Refinery Company and the Egyptian Distillation Company. Establishing the Sugar and Distillation Company, by Law No. 196, 1956. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.05.1956. ˙ 734. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.05.1956, individuals – Saudi & Egyptian, private ˙ company. American and a ministry, Advina, Agro Export Company. 735. Name change: Chemical Trade & Industry Company, Est. 1946 to Chemical Trade & Industry Company, CENTRA, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.06.1956. ˙ 736. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.07.1956, Cairo Lines Company. ˙ 737. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.07.1956, United Mines Company. ˙ 738. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.08.1956, Egyptian Sugar and Distillation Company. ˙ 739. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.08.1956, Radio Orient Trade & Engineering ˙ Company, FORTICO. 740. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 08.10.1956, Public Internal Trade Company. ˙ 741. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.11.1956, private individuals and companies, Row ˙ and Weaving Company. 742. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.01.1957, National Cars Company. ˙ 743. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.01.1957, National Education Institution Company. ˙ 744. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.01.1957, Egyptian Soap and Oil Industries Company. ˙ 745. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 11.02.1957, Fuadia Autobus Company. ˙ 746. Name change: Egyptian Distribution Company, Est. 1947 to Republic Distribution Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.02.1957. ˙ 747. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.02.1957, government institutions, private ˙ companies and individuals, Egyptian Nutrition Company. 748. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.03.1057, Arab Wood Trade Company. ˙ 749. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 18.04.1957. ˙ 750. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.04.1957, NASR Pencil and Graphite Factory ˙ Company. 751. The establisher is the Board of Directors of the Economic Institution. No individuals and no private sectors partnership. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 06.05.1957, Bank of Alexandria. 752. The establisher is the Board of Directors of the Economic Institution. No individuals and no private sectors partnership. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 06.05.1957, United Insurance Company. 753. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.05.1957, United Trade Bank. ˙

NOTES

TO PAGES

250 –251

325

754. Name change: North Autobus Company, Est. 1945 to North Transport Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.05.1957. ˙ 755. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 03.06.1957, Atlas Building Materials and Construc˙ tion Company. 756. The establisher is the Board of Directors of the Economic Institution. No individuals and no private sector partnerships. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 03.06.1957, Public Medicine Company. 757. The establisher is the Board of Directors of the Economic Institution. No individuals and no private sector partnerships. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 17.06.1957, Safaga Phosphate Company. 758. The establisher is the Board of Directors of the Economic Institution. No individuals and no private sector partnerships. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 17.06.1957, Sinai Magnesium Company. 759. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 01.08.1957, Ministry of Industry, Public Mining ˙ Company. 760. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 15.08.1957, Egyptian Company for Foreign Trade ˙ Agencies. 761. The establisher is the Board of Directors of the Economic Institution. Alwaqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.09.1957, Industrial Gas Company. ˙ 762. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.09.1957, private and public sector, Egyptian Re˙ Insurance Company. 763. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.09.1957, the establisher is the Board of Directors of ˙ the Economic Institution, Public Aluminum Company. 764. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.09.1957, the establisher is the Board of Directors of ˙ the Economic Institution, Public Petrol Company. 765. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 12.09.1957, the establisher is the Board of Directors of ˙ the Economic Institution, Maritime Shipping Company. 766. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.09.1957, individuals and public sector, Egyptian ˙ Black Sand Production Company, Ramla. 767. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 16.09.1957, Eastern Petrol Company in Egypt. ˙ 768. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.09.1957, Swedish, Poliden Orient Batteries ˙ Company. 769. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 26.09.1957, Nasr Weaving & Tricot Factories ˙ Company. 770. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 30.09.1957, Simens, General Electric and Contractors ˙ Company. 771. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 09.01.1958, Muqattam Maritime Shipping Company. ˙ 772. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 13.01.1958, Kuweiti investors, General Company for ˙ Small Metal Productions. 773. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.02.1958, Suyouf Weaving and Textile Company. ˙ 774. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.03.1958, Public Paper Production Company, Raka. ˙ 775. Name change: al-Gharbiyya Land Company, Est. 1900 to al-Gharbiyya Real Estate Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.07.1958. ˙

326

NOTES

TO PAGES

251 – 252

776. Name change: Belgian– Egyptian Company, Est. 1926 to al-Nahda Trade Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.07.1958. ˙ 777. Name change: Sabaghi Al-Baida Company, Est. 1938 to Misr Sabaghi AlBaida Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 10.07.1958. ˙ 778. Company in Syria, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 21.07.1958. ˙ 779. Company in Syria, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 31.07.1958. ˙ 780. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 07.08.1958, General Company for Weaving and Cloths ˙ Utilities. 781. Name change: Financial Solidarity Company, Est. 1910 to Financial Solidarity Bank, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.08.1958. ˙ 782. Name change and situation: British Hotel Company to continue as an Egyptian company with the name Sheppard and Egypt Hotels Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.08.1958. ˙ 783. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 23.08.1958, Zifti & Miet Ghamr Weaving Company. ˙ 784. Name change: Republic Destribution Company, Est. 1947 (name changed once in 1957) to United Distribution Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 25.08.1958. ˙ 785. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 28.08.1958, Varnish and Chemical Industries Company. ˙ 786. Name change: Industrial Cotton and Silk Stores Company, Est. 1940 to ISCO, Industrial Cotton and Silk Stores Company, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, ˙ 28.08.1958. 787. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.10.1958, General Company for Metal Productions ˙ and Spirals. 788. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 27.10.1958, Egyptian Breaks Company. ˙ 789. Name change: Trade & Real Estate Company, Est. 1945 to Trade and Real Estate Company, COMIM, al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 17.11.1958. ˙ 790. In 1959 the name of Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya changed to be Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya ˙ and will be quoted as such. Name change: Petrol Storage Company. Est.1907 to Egyptian Flammable Material Storage Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 22.01.1959. 791. Name change: Egyptian Tractors and Engineering Company, Est. 1929 to Tractors and Engineering Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 29.01.1959. 792. Name change: French – Egyptian Dye Works Company, Est. 1938 to Egyptian Dye Works and Textile Transformation Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 29.01.1959. 793. Name change: Salim & Saman Sidnawi & Partners Company, British company to continue as a company of the United Arab Republic under the name Salim & Samaan Sidnawi Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 09.02.1959. 794. Name change: Fine Weavings Company, Est. 1955 to Nile Fine Weavings Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 05.03.1959. 795. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 09.03.1959, Damietta Fine Weavings Company. 796. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 06.04.1959, Ama for Drugs and Chemicals Company. 797. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 23.04.1959, Oil Processing and Products Company. 798. Name change: Far East Trade and Medicine Company, Est. 1945 to Dar AlDawaa Company, an Egyptian company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 27.04.1959.

NOTES

TO PAGES

252 –254

327

799. Wales British Company, to continue work in Egypt as an Egyptian company with the name Wales Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 30.04.1959. 800. Name change: FIAT Company to an Egyptian company with the name FIAT Orient Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 30.04.1959. 801. Handing over the business of Alyanyon Insurances in Egypt to the United Insurance Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 07.05.1959. 802. Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya, 14.05.1959, Ramsis Real Estate Company. ˙ 803. Companies in Syria, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 16.05.1959. 804. Companies in Syria, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 12.07.1959. 805. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 13.07.1959, Freezing and Export Company, Defrex. 806. Handing over the business of Birl Insurances in Egypt to Cairo Insurance Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 16.07.1959. 807. Name change: Com Ombo Sugar Company, Est. 1904 to Com Ombo Sugar Company, a company of the United Arab Republic, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 10.08.1959. 808. Handing over the business of La National Insurance in Egypt to the Eastern Insurance Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 20.08.1959. 809. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 24.08.1959, Nasr Rice Mills & Trade Company. 810. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 27.08.1959, Alexandria & Buhaira Cars & Transport Company. 811. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 31.08.1959, Mahmudiyya Fine Weavings Company. 812. Handing over the business of Brodential Insurance Company in Egypt to Republic Insurance Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 03.09.1959. 813. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 03.09.1958, Public Company for Ceramic Productions. 814. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 10.09.1959, the establisher is the Board of Directors of the Economic Institution, Public Company for Land Reconstruction. 815. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 21.09.1959, Cairo Cotton Company. 816. Company in Syria, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 04.10.1959. 817. Port Said Salt Company and the Egyptian Salt Company merge to be the Mediterranean Salt Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 16.11.1959. 818. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 07.12.1959, Misr Company for Chemical Industries. 819. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 03.03.1960, Ahmad ʿAbbud Pasha, is among the establishers, Egyptian Packaging Paper Company. 820. Company in Syria, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 12.03.1960. 821. Company in Syria, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 14.03.1960. 822. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 05.04.1960. The establisher is the Board of Directors of the Economic Institution, General Water and Water Research Company. 823. Company in Syria, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 28.05.1960. 824. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 30.05.1960, Biba Cotton Ginning Company. 825. Handing over the business of the French Phonics Insurers in Egypt to Saving Insurance Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 22.06.1960. 826. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 20.06.1960, the establisher is the general authority of the five years industrial program, Al-Nasr Phosphate Company.

328

NOTES

TO PAGES

254 –255

827. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 22.06.1960, the establisher is the general authority of the five years industrial program, Al-Nasr Cars Factory Company. 828. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 23.06.1960, the establisher is the general authority of the five years industrial program, Al-Nasr Dye Works and Textile Transformation Company. 829. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 23.06.1960, the establisher is the general authority of the five years industrial program, Al-Nasr Diary and Nutrition Products Company. 830. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 27.06.1960, the establisher is the general authority of the five years industrial program, Al-Nasr Fine Weavings in Tanta Company. 831. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 27.06.1960, the establisher is the general authority of the five years industrial program, Al-Nasr for Agro-Products in Suhag Company. 832. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 30.06.1960, Arab Mechanical Carpet Industry Company. 833. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 04.07.1960, Arab Engineering Trade Agencies Company, Arinaj. 834. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 07.07.1960, Mansoura Wood Factory Company. 835. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 11.07.1960, Al-Shams Glass Factory Company. 836. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 21.07.1960, the establisher is the general authority of the five years industrial program, al-Nasr Television Factory Company. 837. Name change: Egyptian Weavers Company to Arab Weaving Industries Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 11.08.1960. 838. Name change: Middle East Industrial Company to Middle East Paper Company, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 15.08.1960. 839. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 05.09.1960, Shubra Al-Khayma Dye Works Company. 840. Company in Syria, al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 07.09.1960. 841. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 24.09.1960, merge between Egypt Air and Syrian Airlines, United Arab Airlines Company. 842. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 22.10.1960, the establisher is the general authority of the five years industrial program, Al-Nasr Paper Factory Company. 843. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 23.10.1960, Wood Productions Company, Mujna. 844. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 31.10.1960, Al-Nasr Port Said Weavings Factory Company, Portex. 845. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 15.12.1960, Egyptian Cotton Trade & Ginning Company. 846. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 15.12.1960, Arab Spark Plugs Production Company. 847. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 19.12.1960, Shubra Diesel Industrial Company. 848. Al-jarı¯da al-rasmiyya, 26.12.1960, United Fodder Company.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Archive documents: Da¯r al Watha¯ʾiq, Egyptian National Archive/Cairo: Al-waqa¯ʾiʿ al-misriyya 1885– 1960. ˙ Files of Maslahit al-sharika¯t: ˙ ˙ Central Zionist Archives/Jerusalem.

Literature: Abd al-Quddus, Ihsan, La¯ tatriku¯nı¯ huna¯ wahdı¯ [Don’t Leave Me Alone Here] (Cairo, ˙ Ru¯z al-Yu¯sif, 1979). Abd al-Dahir, Mahmud, Yahu¯d Misr, dirasa fı¯ al-mawqif al-siya¯sı¯ 1897– 1948 ˙ [Egypt’s Jews: A Study in the Political Position, 1897– 1948] (Cairo, Markaz alDira¯sa¯t al-Sharqiyya, Cairo University, 2000). Abdel Maguid, Ibrahim, Ghiwa¯yat al-Iskandariyya: taʾamula¯t wa ʾafka¯r [Alexandria Seduce: Reflections and Ideas] (Cairo, Maktabat al-Usra, 2005). ———, Tuyu¯r al-ʿanbar [Birds of Amber] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Hila¯l, 2000). ˙ Abdel Malek, Anouar, A¨gypten: Milita¨rgesellschaft, Das Armeeregime, die Linke und der Soziale Wandel unter Nasser (Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp, 1971). Abdu, Ali Ibrahim, Qasimiyya, Khayriyya, Yahu¯d al-bila¯d al-ʿarabῑyya [The Jews of Arab Countries] (Beirut, Markaz al-Abha¯th al-Filistiniyya, 1971). ˙ ˙ Abu al-Ghar, Mohamed, Yahu¯d Misr, min al-izdiha ¯ r ila¯ ˙al-shata ¯ t [The Jews of Egypt ˙ from Prosperity to the Diaspora] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Hila¯l, 2004). Abu Kaf, Ahmad and Ahmad Ghuneim, Al-yahu¯d wal-haraka al-suhyu¯niya fi Misr ˙ ˙ [The Jews and the Zionist Movement in Egypt] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Hila ¯ l, 1969).˙ Abu Kaf, Ahmad, ‘Al-yahu¯d al-misriyyu¯n fı¯ al-fikr wal-waqiʿ al-misry’ [The ˙ and Reality], paper presented at˙ the first Egyptian Jews, in Egyptian Thought Conference of Egyptian Political Thought, Faculty of Economic and Political Sciences, Cairo University, Cairo, 1982. Aciman, Andre, Out of Egypt: A Memoir (New York, Farrar Straus Giroux, 2004).

330

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Aharoni, Ada, Aime´e Israel-Pelletier and Levana Zamir, (eds), History and Culture of the Jews of Egypt in Modern Times (Tel Aviv, Kenes Havakot, 2008). Ahmad, Nabil Sayid, Al-nasha¯t al-iqtisa¯dı¯ lil-aja¯nib wa atharuhu fı¯l-mujtamaʿ al-misrı¯ ˙ ˙ Activity of Foreigners and its Effect ˙on min 1922– 1952 [The Economic Egyptian Society, 1922– 1952] (Cairo, al-Hayʾa al-Misriyya al-ʿA¯mma lil˙ Kita¯b, 1982). ———, Al-haya¯t al-iqtisa¯diyya wal-ijtima¯ʿiyya lil-yahu¯d fı¯ Misr 1947–1956 [The ˙ and Social ˙Life of Jews in Egypt, 1947–1956] (Cairo, ˙ Economic Madbu¯lı¯, 1991). ———, Al-yahu¯d fi Misr ma bayn qiya¯m dawlat Israʾı¯l wal-ʿudwa¯n al-thula¯thı¯ ˙ [Jews in Egypt, between the Proclamation of Israel and the Suez War] (Cairo, Al-Hayʾa al-Misriyya al-ʿA¯mma lil-Kita¯b, 1991). ˙ ¯kh Misr fı¯ ʿahd al-khidiw ʾIsmaʿı¯l Ba¯sha¯ min sanat 1863 ʾila Al-Ayyubi, Elias, Tarı sanat 1879 [The History˙of Egypt in the Reign of Khedive Ismail Pasha, 1863– 1879] (Cairo, Madbu¯lı¯, 1996). Al-Shami, Rashad, Al-shakhsiyya al-yahu¯diyya fı¯ adab Ihsa¯n Abd al-Quddu¯s [The ˙ Jewish Personality in the Literature of Ihsan Abd al-Quddus] (Cairo, Da¯r alHila¯l, 1992). Al-Azm, Sadiq Jalal, Al-naqd al-dha¯tı¯ baʿd al-hazı¯ma [Self Criticism After the Defeat] (Beirut, Da¯r al-Talı¯ʿa, 1968). ˙ Al-Barawi, Rashed, Al-falsafa al-iqtisa¯diyya lil thawra, min al-na¯hiyatain al˙ ˙ nazariyya wa al-ʿamaliyya [The Economic Philosophy of the Revolution, from the˙ Theoretical and Practical Perspectives] (Cairo, Maktabat al-Nahdah al˙ Misrı¯yya, 1955). ˙ Al-Bishry, Tariq, Al-haraka al-siya¯siyya fı¯ Misr, 1945– 1953 [The Political ˙ 1945– 1953] (Cairo, Da¯˙r al-Shuruq, 2002). Movement in Egypt, ¯ Al-Hakim, Suleiman, Yahu¯d wa lakin misriyyu¯n [Jews but Egyptians] (Cairo, Da¯r ˙ al-Jumhu¯riyya lil-Sahafa, 2008). ˙ ˙ Ta¯rikh al-Jabarti,ʿajaʾib al-a¯tha¯r fil-tara¯jim wal-akhba¯r Al-Jabarti, Abd al-Rahman, [History of Egypt], vol. II (Cairo, Da¯r al-Tiba¯ʿah, 1902). Al-jiha¯z al-markazı¯ lil-taʿbiʾa al-amma wa al-ihs˙a¯ʾ, Al-kita¯b al-ihsaʾı¯ al-sanawı¯ 1952– ˙ ˙ Agency, 1994). ˙ ˙ (Cairo, Central 1994 [The Statistical Yearbook, 1952–1994] Al-Misiri, Abd al-Wahhab, Al-aqaliyya¯t al-yahu¯diyya bayn al-tija¯ra wal-ʾiddilaʾ alqawmı¯ [Jewish Minorities between Trade and National Pretending] (Cairo, Maʿhad al-Buhu¯th wal-Dira¯sa¯t al-ʿarabiyya, 1975). ˙ Al-Rafiʿi, Abd al-Rahman, ʿAsr Ismaʿı¯l [Ismail’s Era] (Cairo, Maktabat Madbu¯lı¯, 1987). Al-Sayyid, Afaf, Egypt and ˙Cromer, A Study in Anglo – Egyptian Relations (London, Murray, 1968). Al-Imam, Mohammad, Al-arman fı¯ Misr 1896– 1961 [Armenians in Egypt, 1896– 1961] (Cairo, Da¯r Nu¯bar lil-tibaʿa,˙ 2003). ˙ ———, Al-arman fı¯ Misr, al-qarn al-ta¯siʿ ʿashar [Armenians in Egypt, the ˙ nineteenth century] (Cairo, Da¯r Nu¯bar lil-tibaʿa, 1995). ˙ Al-Sayyid Marsot, Afaf, Egypt in the Reign of Muhammad Ali (New York, Cambridge University Press, 1984). Amer, Abd al-Salam, Al-raʾsmaliyya al-sina¯ʿiyya fı¯ Misr, min al-tamsı¯r ila¯ al-taʾmı¯m, ˙ ˙ 1957– 1961 [Capitalism in Egypt˙ from Egyptianization to Nationalization] ¯ (Cairo, al-Hayʾa al-Misriyya al-ʿAmma lil-Kita¯b, 1993). American Jewish Congress,˙ Commission on International Affairs and on Israel, The Black Record: Nasser’s Persecution of Egyptian Jewry (New York, American Jewish Congress, 1957).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

331

Amin, Ahmad, Qa¯mu¯s al-ʿa¯da¯t wal-taqa¯lı¯d al-misriyya [Dictionary of Egyptian ˙ al-Taʾlı¯f wal-Tarjamah walHabits and Traditions] (Cairo, Matbaʿat Lajnat ˙ Nashr, 1953). Antoncic, Bostjan and Robert Hisrich, ‘Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross-cultural validation’, Journal of Business Venturing 16 (2001), pp. 495 – 527. Arnakis, Georgiades, ‘The Greek Church of Constantinople and the Ottoman Empire’, The Journal of Modern History, vol. 24, no. 3 (1952), pp. 235 – 50. Ashmawy, Sayid, Al-yu¯na¯niyu¯n fı¯ Misr 1805– 1956 [The Greeks in Egypt, 1805– ˙ Social Studies, 1997). 1956] (Cairo, Ein for Human and Ata, Zubeida, Al-yahu¯d fı¯ al-ʿa¯lam al-ʿarabı¯ [The Jews in the Arab World] (Cairo, Ein for Human and Social Studies, 2003). Athill, Diana, After a Funeral (New York, Ticknor & Fields, 1986). Avineri, Shlomo, The Making of Modern Zionism, The Intellectual Origins of the Jewish State (London, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1981). Badrawi, Malak, Ismaʿil Sidqi (1875 – 1950), Pragmatism and Vision in Twentieth Century Egypt (Richmond, Curzon, 1996). Bahith Diblumasi, Kabier, ‘Rı¯h al-taʿasub al-jinsı¯ tahubu ʿala¯ Auru¯ba’ [The Winds ˙ Al-Risala ˙ of Racism Blow in Europe], (January 27, 1936), pp. 126 – 8. Baraka, Magda, The Egyptian Upper Class between Revolutions, 1919– 1952 (Reading, Ithaca Press, 1998). Baring, Evelyn (Earl of Cromer), Modern Egypt (New York, Macmillan, 1908). Bear, Gabriel, Egyptian Guilds in Modern Times (Jerusalem, Israel Oriental Society, 1964). ———, A History of Landownership in Modern Egypt, 1800– 1950 (London, Oxford University Press, 1962). ———, Studies in the Social History of Modern Egypt (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1969). Beinin, Joel, The Dispersion of Egyptian Jewry: Culture, Politics, and the Formation of a Modern Diaspora (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1998). ———, ‘Egypt: Society and Economy, 1923– 1952’, in M.W. Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, vol. II (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 309 – 33. ———, ‘The Jewish business elite in twentieth-century Egypt: Pillars of the national economy or compradors’, Bulletin of the Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies, vol. 1, no. 2 (1999), pp. 113– 38. ———, Shata¯t al-yahu¯d al-misriyyin [The Dispersion of Egyptian Jews] (Cairo, Da¯r ˙ al-Shuru¯q, 2007). Bernsdorf, Wilhelm, Wo¨rterbuch der Soziologie (Stuttgart, Enke, 1969). Betta, Chiara, ‘The Trade Diaspora of Baghdadi Jews: From India to China’s Treaty Ports, 1842 –1937’, in McCabe Harlaftis, Gelina and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou, (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (New York, Berg, 2005), pp. 269– 87. Biale, David, (ed.), Cultures of the Jews, A New History (New York, Schockenn Books, 2002). Bigio, Alain, The Journey: From Ismaeleya to Higieno´polis – The Story of an Egyptian Jew, translated into English by Daniela Katzenstein Hart in 2014. Published by the Author (Sao Paulo, 2014). Birnbaum, Pierre and Ira Katznelson, (eds), Paths of Emancipation: Jews, States, and Citizenship (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1995).

332

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Bonacich, Edna, ’A theory of middleman minorities’, American Sociological Review, vol. 38 (October 1973), pp. 583– 94. Borovaya, Olga, ‘Jews of three colors: The path to modernity in the Ladino Press at the turn of the twentieth century’, Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, Society, vol. 15 n.s., no. 1 (2008), pp. 110– 30. Bosworth, C.E., ‘The Concept of Dhimmi in Early Islam’, in B. Braude and B. Lewis (eds), Christian and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of Plural Society, vol. I (New York, Holmes & Meier, 1982), pp. 37– 65. Botman, Selma, ‘The Liberal Age, 1923– 1952’, in M.W. Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, vol. II, (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 258 – 308. Bouchain, Julie, Die Juden in Syrien: Aufstieg und Niedergang der Familie Farhi von 1740– 1995 (Mu¨nster, Mu¨nster Lit, 1996). Braude, Benjamin and Bernard Lewis, (eds), Christian and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of Plural Society, vol. I (New York, Holmes & Meier, 1982). Brezis, Elis and Peter Temin, Elites, Minorities, and Economic Growth (New York, Elsevier, 1999). Brown, Nathan, ‘The precarious life and slow death of the mixed courts of Egypt’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 25, no. 1 (1993), pp. 33 – 52. Bunzl, John, Juden im Orient, Ju¨dische Gemeinschaften in der islamischen Welt und orientalische Juden in Israel (Wien, Junius, 1989). Burt, Roger, ‘Freemasonry and Business Networking during the Victorian Period’, Economic History Review, vol. 55, no. 4 (2003), pp. 657 – 88. Capotorti, Francesco, ‘Study on the rights of persons belonging to ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities’, Special Rapporteur of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities (New York, United Nations, 1979). Caron, Francios, ‘Innovation’, in Yousef Cassis and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou, (eds), Entrepreneurship in Theory and History (New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), pp. 111 – 26. Cassis, Yousef and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou, (eds), Entrepreneurship in Theory and History (New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005). Casson, Mark and Godley, Andrew, ‘Entrepreneurship and historical explanation’, in Yousef Cassis and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Entrepreneurship in Theory and History (New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), pp. 25 – 60. The Central Bureau of Statistics, Kita¯b al ʾihsa¯ʾı¯ al-sanawı¯, 1952– 1993 [Statistical Year Book, 1952– 1993] (Cairo, Egyptian Arab Republic, 1994). Chaudhury, Sushil, ‘Trading networks in a traditional diaspora: Armenians in India, c. 1600– 1800’, McCabe Harlaftis, Gelina and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (New York, Berg, 2005), pp. 51 – 73. Chrysostomidis, Sophianos, ‘The Left, Nasser, and the Exodus of the Greeks from Egypt’, Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2 (2009), pp. 155 – 9. Clogg, Richard, (ed.), The Greek Diaspora in the Twentieth Century (Oxford, Macmillan Press, 1999). ———, The Struggle for Greek Independence (London, 1973). Cobas, Jose A., ‘On the study of ethnic enterprise: Unresolved issues’, Sociological Perspectives, vol. 30, no. 4 (October 1987), pp. 467–72.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

333

Cohen, Abner, ‘Cultural strategies in the organization of trading diaspora’, in Claude Meillassoux (ed.), The Development of Indigenous Trade and Markets in West Africa (London, Oxford University Press, 1971), pp. 266– 81. Cohen, Amnon and Gabriel Baer, Egypt and Palestine, A Millennium of Association (868– 1948) (New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1984). Cohen, Hayyim, ‘The Anti-Jewish Farhod in Bagdad’, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 3, no. 1 (1966), pp. 2 – 17. ———, The Jews of the Middle East (Jerusalem, Israel Universities Press, 1973). Cohen, Mark and Abraham Udovitch, Jews Among Arabs, Contacts, and Boundaries (Princeton, The Darwin Press, 1989). Cohen, Youssef, Odette (Bloomington, iUniverse, 2010). Cole, Juan R.I., Colonialism and Revolution in the Middle East: Social and Cultural Origins of Egypt’s ʿUrabi Movement (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1993). Collins, Jeffry G., The Egyptian Elite under Cromer, 1882–1907 (Berlin, Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1984). Crouchley, Arthur, The Economic Development of Modern Egypt (London, Longmans Green, 1938). Cuno, Kenneth, The Pasha’s Peasants: Land, Society and Economy in Lower Egypt, 1740– 1858 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1992). Dakrub, Mohammad, ‘Taha Hussein fı¯ al-Ka¯tib al-Misri: hal khadam al-suhyu¯niyza ˙ ˙ Zionism min du¯n an yadrı¯?’˙ [Taha˙ Hussein in al-Katib al-Misri: Did he Serve without Knowing?], Majjalat al-dira¯sa¯t al-filistiniyya [Journal of Palestine Studies], no. 74/75 (Spring/Summer 2008), pp. ˙62– 77. Daly, M.W., ‘The British Occupation’, in M.W. Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, vol. II (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 239 – 251. Daly, M.W., (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt: Modern Egypt from 1517 to the End of the Twentieth Century, vol. II (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998). Dammond, Liliane and Yvette Raby, The Lost World of The Egyptian Jew: First-Person Account from Egypt’s Jewish Community In the Twentieth Century (Bloomington, iUniverse, Inc., 2007). Danielson, Virginia, The Voice of Egypt: Umm Kulthum, Arabic Songs and Egyptian Society in the Twentieth Century (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1997). Darwish, Yusif, ‘Preface’, in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh Yahu¯d al-Nı¯l [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007), pp. 10 – 18. Davis, Eric, Challenging Colonialism: Bank Misr and Egyptian Industrialization, 1920– 1941 (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1983). Davison, Roderic, ‘The Millets as Agents of Change in the Nineteenth-Century Ottoman Empire’, in Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis, (eds), Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of Plural Society, vol. I (New York, Holmes & Meier, 1982), pp. 319– 37. Deeb, Marius, ‘Bank Misr and the emergence of the local bourgeoisie in Egypt’, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 12, no. 3 (1976), pp. 69– 86. ———, ‘The socioeconomic role of the local foreign minorities in modern Egypt, 1805– 1961’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 9, no. 1 (January 1978), pp. 11 – 22. Deshen, Shlomo and Walter Zenner, (eds), Jews among Muslims, Comminities in the Precolonial Middle East (New York, New York University Press, 1996).

334

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Disuqi, Asim, Kiba¯r mulla¯k al-ʾara¯dı¯ az-zira¯ʿiyya wa dauruhum fı¯l-mujtamaʿ al-misry (1914– 1952) [The Big Landlords and their Role in Egyptian Society (1914˙ – 1952] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Thaqa¯fah al-Jadı¯dah, 1975). Dodwell, Henry, The Founder of Modern Egypt: A Study of Muhammad ‘Ali (New York, Cambridge University Press, 1967). Du Rausas, G. Pelissi, Le Re´gime des Capitulations dans l’Empire Ottomane, 2 vols (Paris, A. Rousseau, 1910). Eliason, Gunner and Christoph Green, Micro Foundations of Economic Growth: A Schumpeterian Perspective (Michigan, University of Michigan Press, 2001). Epstein, Mark, ‘The Leadership of the Ottoman Jews in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries’, in Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis (eds), Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of Plural Society, vol. I (New York, Holmes & Meier, 1982), pp. 101– 15. Errera, Iglal, ‘Nisf al-qarn’ [Mid Century], in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh Yahu¯d ˙ of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, al-Nı¯l [History 2007), pp. 109 – 17. Fahmy, Khaled, All the Pasha’s Men: Mehmed Ali, his Army and the Making of Modern Egypt (New York, Cambridge University Press, 1997). ———, ‘The Era of Muhammad ʿAli Pasha, 1805– 1848’, in M.W. Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, vol. II (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 139 – 79. ———, ‘Preface’, in Joel Beinin, Shata¯t al-yahu¯d al-misriyyin, [The Dispersion of Egyptian Jews] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007), pp. 2˙– 24. ———, Mehmed Ali: From Ottoman Governor to Ruler of Egypt (Oxford, Oneworld, 2009). Fahmy, Ziad, ‘Media capitalism: Colloquial mass culture and nationalism in Egypt, 1908– 1918’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 42 (2010), pp. 83 – 103. Fatiha, Mutaz, Akhir yahu¯d al-Iskandariyya [The Last Alexandrian Jews] (Cairo, Da¯r Uktub lil-Nashr wal-Tawzı¯ʿ, 2009). Faraj, Murad, Dı¯wa¯n Mura¯d [Murad’s Poetry] (Cairo, al-Matbaʿah al-Rahma¯nı¯yah, ˙ 1929). Fawzy-Rossanu, Didar, Me´moires d’une militante communiste (1942– 1990): du Caire a` Alger, Paris et Gene`ve. Lettres aux miens (Paris, Harmattan, 1997). ———, Rasa¯ʾil ila¯ ahibba¯ʾı¯, Misr [Letters to my Beloved, Egypt] (Cairo, Da¯r alʿA¯lam al-Tha¯lith,˙ 2006). ˙ Freisel, Evyatar, ‘Zionism and Jewish nationalism: An inquiry into an ideological relationship’, Journal of Israeli History, vol. 25, no. 2 (2006), pp. 285 – 312. Fried, Charles, (ed.), Minorities: Community and Identity (Berlin, Springer, 1983). Wirtschafts Lexikon (Wiesbaden, Gabler, 2000). Gallagher, John and Ronald Robinson, ‘The imperialism of free trade’, The Economic History Review, no. 6 (1953), pp. 1 – 15. Green, Patricia Gene and John Sibly Butler, ‘The minority community as natural business incubator’, Journal of Business Research, vol. 36 (1996), pp. 51 –8. Gershoni, Israel, ‘Egyptian liberalism in an age of “Crisis of Orientation”: AlRisalala’s reaction to fascism and nazism, 1933– 1939’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 31, no. 4 (1999), pp. 551– 76. Gershoni, Israel and James Jankowski, Egypt, Islam, and the Arabs: The Search for Egyptian Nationhood, 1900– 1930 (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1986).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

335

Ghali, Waguih, Beer in the Snooker Club (New York, Knopf, 1964). Glavanis, Pandelis, Aspects of the Economic and Social History of the Greek Community in Alexandria during the Nineteenth Century. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Hull (1989). Godly, Andrew, Jewish Immigrant Entrepreneurship in New York and London, 1880– 1914: Enterprise and Culture (New York, Palgrave, 2001). Goitein, Solomon D., ‘New light on the beginnings of the Karim merchants’, Journal of Economic and Social History of the Orient (JESHO), vol. 1 (April 1958), pp. 175 – 84. ———, Jews and Arabs: A Concise History of their Social and Cultural Relations (Dover, Mineola, 2005). Gondicas, Dimitri and Charles Issawi, Ottoman Greeks in the Age of Nationalism: Politics, Economy, and Society in the Nineteenth Century (Princeton, The Darwin Press, 1999). Gorman, Anthony, ‘“Egiptiotis Ellin”, Ta Nea tou ELIA’, no. 58, Summer 2001, pp. 13 – 18 [Unpublished translation, ELIA News, May 1, 2004, pp. 1 – 4]. ———, ‘Egypt’s forgotten communists: The Postwar Greek left’, Journal of Modern Greek Studies, vol. 20, no. 1 (2002), pp. 1 – 27. ———, Historians, State, and Politics in Twentieth Century Egypt: Contesting the Nation (London, RoutledgeCurzon, 2003). ———, ‘Foreign Workers in Egypt, 1882– 1914: Subaltern or Labour Elite?’, in Stephanie Cronon (ed.), Subalterns and Social Protest: History from Below in the Middle East and North Africa (London, Routledge, 2008), pp. 237 – 59. Greif, Avner, ‘Reputation and coalitions in medieval trade: Evidence on the Maghribi Traders’, The Journal of Economic History, vol. 1, no. 4 (1989), pp. 857 – 82. Haarmann, Ulrich, (ed.), Geschichte der arabischen Welt (Mu¨nchen, Beck, 1987). Hadari, Ze’ev Venia, Second Exodus: The Full Story of Jewish Illegal Immigration to Palestine, 1945 –1948 (London, Vallentine Mitchell, 1991). Hansen, Bent and Karim Nashashibi, Egypt (New York, Columbia University Press, 1975). Harb, Mohammad Talʿat, Majmuat Khutab Muhammad Talʿat Harb Bek [The Speeches of Muhammad Talʿat Harb] (Cairo, Matbaʿat Misr, 1927). ˙ aw bank ˙ al-ʾumma [Egypt’s ———, Ilaj misral-iqtisa¯dı¯ wa mashru¯ʿ bank al-misrı¯yin Economic Solution and the Project for an Egyptian or National Bank] (Cairo, Al-jarı¯da Press, 1911). Haridi, Farghali, Al-raʾsmaliyya al-ajnabiyya fı¯ Misr, 1937 – 1957 [Foreign Capitalism in Egypt, 1937– 1957], vol. I (Cairo,˙ al-Hayʾa al-Misriyya al˙ ʿA¯mma lil- Kita¯b, 2002). ———, Al-Raʾsmaliyya al-ʾajnabiyya fı¯ Misr, 1937– 1957 [Foreign Capitalism in ˙ Egypt, 1937 –1957], vol. II (Cairo, al-Hayʾa al-Misriyya al-ʿA¯mma lil-Kita¯b, ˙ 2003). Harlafis, Gelina, ‘Mapping the Greek Maritime Diaspora from the early Eighteenth to the Late Twentieth Centuries’, in McCabe Harlaftis, Gelina, and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (New York, Berg, 2005), pp. 147– 71. Haroun, Shihata, Yahu¯dı¯ fı¯ al-Qa¯hira [A Jew in Cairo] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Thaqa¯fa, 1985). Hartfiel, Gu¨nter and Karl-Heinz Hillmann, (eds), Wo¨rterbuch der Soziologie (Stuttgart, Kro¨ner, 1972).

336

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Hary, Benjamin, Translating Religion: Linguistic Analysis of Judeo –Arabic Sacred Texts from Egypt (Leiden, Brill, 2009). Hassan, Jaʿfar Hadi, Firqat al-qarra¯ʾiyı¯n al-yahu¯d [The Karraite Jews] (Beirut, Muʾassasat al-Fajr, 1989). Hassoun, Jacques, ‘Ahda¯th al-haya¯ht al-yawmiyya [Daily Life]’, in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh Yahu˙¯ d al-Nı¯l˙[History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007), pp. 132– 208. ———, ‘Firʿ hayy lil-yahu¯diyya al-misriyya, al-qarra¯ʾiyya’, in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), ˙ ¯ d al-Nı¯l [History of ˙the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Ta¯rı¯kh Yahu Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007), pp. 119– 29. ———, Histoire des Juifs du Nil (Paris, Minerve, 1990). ———, ‘The Jews: A Community of Contrasts’, in Robert Ilbert, Ilios Yannakakis, and Jacques Hassoun (eds), Alexandria, 1860 –1960: The Brief Life of a Cosmopolitan Community (Alexandria, Harpocrates, 1997), pp. 36 – 52. ———, (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh yahu¯d al-Nı¯l [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007). Heckmann, Friedrich, ‘Towards the Development of a Typology of Minorities’, in Charles Fried (ed.), Minorities: Community and Identity (Berlin, Springer, 1983), pp. 9 – 24. Heikal, Mohammed, Das Kairo-Dossier, Aus den Geheimpapieren des Gamal Abdel Nasser (Vienna, Verlag Fritz Molden, 1972). Hertzberg, Arthur, The Zionist Idea: A Historical Analysis and Reader (New York, Atheneum, 1969). Herzl, Theodor, Wenn Ihr wollt ist es kein Ma¨rchen, Altneuland/Der Judenstaat (Ko¨nigstein, Julius Schoeps, Ju¨discher Verlag, 1978). Heyworth-Dunne, J., An Introduction to The History of Education in Modern Egypt (London, Cass, 1968). Hillel Shulewitz, Malka, The Forgotten Millions: The Modern Jewish Exodus from Arab Lands (London, Cassell, 1999). Holt, Peter, Political and Social Change in Modern Egypt: Historical Studies from the Ottoman Conquest to the United Arab Republic (London, Oxford University Press, 1968). Holt, Peter M., (ed.), Political and Social Change in Modern Egypt (London, Oxford University Press, 1968). Hottinger, Arnold, Bonaparte in A¨gypten, aus der Chronik des Adbarrahman Al Gabarti (1745– 1829) (Zu¨rich, Artemins Verlag, 1983). Howard, Aldrich and Roger Waldinger, ‘Ethnicity and entrepreneurship’, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 16 (1990), pp. 111–35. Hoyle, Mark S.W., ‘The Mixed Courts of Egypt: An Anniversary Assessment’, Arab Law Quarterly, vol. 1, no. 1 (1985), pp. 60–8. Husni, Saida, Al- yahu¯d fı¯ Misr, min 1882– 1948 [The Jews in Egypt, 1882– 1948] ˙ al-ʾAmma lil-Kita¯b, 1993). (Cairo, Al-Hayʾa al-Misriyya ˙ Ibrahim, Vivian, The Copts of Egypt: challenges of modernization and identity (New York, Tauris Academic Studies, 2011). Idris, Yusif, Al-Bayda¯ʾ [The White] (Beirut, Da¯r al-ʿAwda, 1979). Ilbert, Robert, Ilios Yannakakis and Jacques Hassoun, (eds), Alexandria, 1860–1960: The Brief Life of a Cosmopolitan Community (Alexandria, Harpocrates, 1997). Inan, Muhamad Abdallah, ‘Al-haraka al-wataniya al-ishtira¯kiyya al-alma¯niyya, al˙ al-tanfidh’ ˙ [The German ˙ barna¯mij al-da¯khilı¯ fı¯ tawr National Socialist

BIBLIOGRAPHY

337

Movement: The realization of the internal program], Al-Risala (January 15, 1934), pp. 11 – 5. ———, ‘Harakat al-shaba¯b, khawa¯suha¯ wa atharuha¯ fı¯ bina¯’ Auru¯ba al-jadı¯da’ [The ˙ and their role in building the new Europe], Youth˙ Movements, their critieria, Al-Risala (October 1, 1934), pp. 1609– 12. Issawi, Charles, ‘Egypt since 1800: A study in lopsided development’, Journal of Economic History, vol. 21, no. 1 (1961), pp. 1 – 25. ———, Egypt in Revolution: An Economic Analysis (London, Oxford University Press, 1963). ———, ‘The Transformation of the Economic Position of the Millets in the Nineteenth Century’, in Benjamin Braude and Bernard Lewis, (eds), Christian and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of Plural Society, vol. I (New York, Holmes & Meier, 1982), pp. 261– 85. Israel, Jonathan, ‘Diasporas Jewish and non-Jewish and the World Maritime Empires’, in McCabe Harlaftis, Gelina and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (New York, Berg, 2005), pp. 3 – 27. Jasanoff, Maya, ‘Cosmopolitan: A tale of identity from Ottoman Alexandria’, Common Knowledge, vol. 11, no. 3 (2005), pp. 393– 410. Jones, Geoffrey and R. Daniel Wadhwani, ‘Entrepreneurial Theory and the History of Globalization’, Business and Economic History On-Line, vol. 5 (2007), pp. 1–26, ,http://www.thebhc.org/publications/BEonline/2007/jonsenandwadhawani. pdf.. Kalkas, Barbara, Aborted Economic and Social Development in Egypt: New Leaders in an old System. Unpublished PhD thesis (Illinois University, 1979). Kamal, Umayma, ‘A call to get Cicurel back’ in, Al-Shuru¯q Newspaper, online issue, October 1, 2011. (October 03, 2011, 07:45) ,http://www.shorouknews.com/ news/view.aspx?cdate¼01102011&id¼621c328b-9646 – 4f4d-84bc-f39bf3d 0409d.. Kamel, Anas Mustafa, Al-raʾsma¯liyya al-yahu¯diyya fı¯ Misr [Jewish Capitalism in ˙ Egypt] (Cairo, Mı¯rı¯t, 1999). Kamil, Omar, Arabische Juden in Israel, Geschichte und Ideologie von ben Gurion bis Ovadia Yosef (Wu¨rzburg, Ergon, 2006). Kampffmeyer, Georg, Die A¨gyptische Verfassung vom 19. April 1923, Arabisch und franzo¨sischer Text mit einer Einfu¨hrung in die Verfassungsgeschichte A¨gyptens, Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universita¨t Berlin. Seminar fu¨r Orientalische Sprachen (Berlin, 1924). Karanasou, Floresca, Egyptianisation: The 1947 Company Law and the Foreign Communities in Egypt. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Oxford (1992). ———, ‘The Greeks in Egypt: from Mohamed Ali to Nasser, 1805– 1961’, in Richard Clogg (ed.), The Greek Diaspora in the Twentieth Century (Oxford, Macmillan Press, 1999), pp. 24– 57. Kemal Karpat, ‘Millet and Nationality: The Roots of Incongruity of Nation and State in the Post Ottoman Era’, in Braude and Lewis, (eds), Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Empire: The Functioning of Plural Society, vol. I (New York, Holmes & Meier, 1982), pp. 141– 69. Kellner-Heinkele, Barbara, ‘Der arabische Osten unter osmanischer Herrschaft 1517–1800’, in Ulrich Haarmann (ed.), Geschichte der Arabischen Welt (Mu¨nchen, C.H. Beck, 1987), pp. 323–64.

338

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Khalidi, Rashid, Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern National Consciousness (New York, Columbia University Press, 1997). Khoury, Yacoub, Al-yahu¯d fi al-bulda¯n al-ʿarabῑyya [The Jews in Arab Countries] (Beirut, Da¯r al-Naha¯r lil-Nashr, 1970). Kitroeff, Alexander, The Greeks in Egypt, 1919– 1937: Ethnicity and Class (London, Ithaka Press, 1989). Koromvokis, Panagiotis and Achilleas Rakinas,’ The decline of the greek presence in Egypt: An archival documentation’, in Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2 (2009), pp. 137– 44. Kourvetaris, Yorgos A., ‘The Greeks of Asia Minor and Egypt as middleman economic minorities during the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries’, Ethnic Groups, vol. 7, no. 2 (1988), pp. 85– 111. Kra¨mer, Gudrun, Minderheit, Millet, Nation? Die Juden in A¨gypten 1914– 1952 (Wiesbaden, Otto Harrassowitz, 1982). ———, The Jews in Modern Egypt, 1914– 1952 (Seattle, University of Washington Press, 1989). ———, ‘Die Rolle der Juden in der A¨gyptischen Wirtschaft, 1914– 1961’, in Alexander Scho¨lch (ed.), Die a¨gyptische Gesellschaft im 20. Jahrhundert (Hamburg, Deutsches Orient Institut, 1992), pp. 148– 70. Kupferschmidt, Uri M., Henri Naus Bey: Retrieving the Biography of a Belgian Industrialist in Egypt (Brussels, Koninklijke Academie voor Overzeese Wetenscappen, 1999). Lagnado, Lucette, Al-rajul dhu¯ al-badla al-bayda¯ʾ al-sharkskı¯n waqa¯ʾiʿ khuru¯j usra yahu¯diyya min Misr [The Man in the White Sharkskin Suit: A Jewish Family’s ˙ (Cairo, Da¯r al-ʿana¯nı¯, 2010). Exodus from Egypt] ———, The Man In The White Sharkskin Suit (New York, HarperCollins, 2007). Landau, Jacob, Jews in Nineteenth-Century Egypt (New York, New York University Press, 1969). ———, Teldot yahudi Mitzrayı¯m bikotfah haʿutimanyit 1715– 1914 [The History of Egyptian Jews in the Ottoman Era, 1715 – 1914] (Jerusalem, Misgav Yerushalaim, 1988). Landes, David, ‘French entrepreneurship and industrial growth in the nineteenth century’, The Journal of Economic History, vol. 9, no. 1 (1949), pp. 45 – 61. Landshut, Siegfried, Jewish Communities in the Muslim Countries of the Middle East: A Survey for the American – Jewish Committee and the Anglo –Jewish Association (Westport, Hyperion Press, 1976). Lange, Oskar, Entwicklungstendenzen der modernen Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, eine sozialistische Analyse (Vienna, Europa Verlag, 1964). Lange, Oskar and Antoni Banasin´ski, Theory of Reproduction and Accumulation (New York, Pergamon Press, 1969). Lange, Oskar and Fred Taylor, On the Economic Theory of Socialism (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1938). Laqueur, Walter, A History of Zionism (New York, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972). Laskier, Michael, The Jews of Egypt, 1920– 1970: In the Midst of Zionism, AntiSemitism, and the Middle East (New York, New York University Press, 1992). Levy, Lital, ‘Historicizing the concept of Arab Jews in the Mashriq’, The Jewish Quarterly Review, vol. 98, no. 4 (2008), pp. 452– 69. Lewis, Bernard, The Jews of Islam (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1984).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

339

Lipparini, Andrea and Maurizio Sobrero, ‘The glue and the pieces: Entrepreneurship and innovation in small-firm networks’, Journal of Business Venturing, no. 9 (1994), pp. 125 – 40. Maccabi, Rahel, Mitzraim sheli [My Egypt] (Tel Aviv, Sifriat ha-Poʿalim, 1968). Mahfuz, Nagib, Mirama¯r [Miramar] (Cairo, Maktabat Misr, 1967). ˙ ʾiqtisad al-misrı¯ 1876– Mahmud, Yahya, Al-dayn al-ʿa¯mm wa ʾatharuhu fi tatawur al˙ ˙ of the˙ Egyptian 1943 [The Public Debt and its Effect on the Development Economy, 1876–1943] (Cairo, al-Hayʾa al-Misriyya al-ʿA¯mma lil-Kita¯b, 1998). ˙ Maifreda, Germano, ‘Networks and economic behaviour of the Milanese Jews in the nineteenth century’, European Yearbook of Business History, vol. 1 (1998), pp. 93 – 118. Makarius, Shaheen, Ta¯rı¯kh al-Isra¯ʾı¯liyı¯n [The History of the Israelites] (Cairo, alMuqtataf, 1904). ˙ Mandel, Neville J., The Arabs and Zionism before World War I (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1976). Marbo, Robert and Samir Radwan, The Industrialization of Egypt, 1939– 1973: Policy and Performance (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1976). Morabya, Alfred and Gudrun Kra¨mer, ‘Fı¯ muwa¯jahat al-hadatha, al-yahu¯d fı¯ ˙ The Jews in the al-qarnayin al-tasiʿ ʿashar wa al-ʿishrı¯n’ [Facing Modernity, Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries] (in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh yahu¯d al-Nı¯l [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007), pp. 79 – 107. Marlowe, John, A History of Modern Egypt and Anglo – Egyptian Relations, 1800– 1965 (Hamden, Archon Books, 1965). ———, Cromer in Egypt (New York, Praeger Publishers, 1970). Matalon, Ronit, The One Facing Us (New York, Metropolitan Books, 1998). McCabe Harlaftis, Gelina and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (New York, Berg, 2005). Meijer, Roel, The Quest for Modernity: Secular Liberal and Left-Wing Political Thought in Egypt, 1945– 1958 (New York, RoutledgeCurzon, 2002). Meillassoux, Claude (ed.), The Development of Indigenous Trade and Markets in West Africa (London, Oxford University Press, 1971). Mejcher, Helmut, ‘Der arabische Osten im zwanzigsten Jahrhundert 1914– 1985’, in Ulrich Haarmann (ed.), Geschichte der arabischen Welt (Mu¨nchen, Beck, 1987), pp. 432 – 97. Meleze-Modrzejewski, Joseph, ‘Yahu¯d Misr fı¯ al-ʿusu¯r al-qadı¯ma’ [Jews of Egypt in ˙ Ancient Centuries] (in Jacques Hassoun, Ta¯rı¯˙kh yahu¯d al-Nı¯l [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007), pp. 25 –50. Meyer, Gail, Egypt and the United States, The Formative Years (London, Associated University Press, 1980). Mizrahi, Maurice, ‘The Role of Jews in Economic Development’, in Shimon Shamir (ed.), The Jews of Egypt. A Mediterranean Society in Modern Times (London, Westview Press, 1987), pp. 85– 93. Morabia, Alfred, ‘Yahu¯d Misr fı¯ zil al-ı¯slam, min al-fath al-ʿarabı¯ ila¯ hamlat ˙ ˙ Bu¯nabart’ [Jews of Egypt ˙under˙ Islami from the Arab Conquest To Bonaparte] (in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh yahu¯d al –Nı¯l [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007), pp. 51–78. Morabia, Alfred and Gudrun Kra¨mer, ‘Fı¯ muwa¯jahat al-hadatha, al-yahu¯d fı¯ ˙ The Jews in the al-qarnayin al-tasiʿ ʿashar wal-ʿishrin’ [Facing Modernity:

340

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries] (in Jacques Hassoun (ed.), Ta¯rı¯kh Yahu¯d al-Nı¯l [History of the Jews on the Banks of the Nile] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2007), pp. 79 – 107. Moreh, Shmul, ‘Yaʿqu¯b Sanu¯ʿ: His Religious Identity and Work in the Theater and Journalism, According to the Family Archive’, in Shimon Shamir (ed.), The Jews of Egypt: A Mediterranean Society in Modern Times (London, Westview Press, 1987), pp. 111 – 29. Morsy, Laila, ‘The Military Clauses of the Anglo –Egyptian Treaty of Friendship and Alliance, 1936’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 16, no. 1 (1984), pp. 67 – 97. Moscovici, Serge and Gabriel Mugny, Perspectives on Minority Influence (London, Cambridge University Press, 1985). Mugny, Gabriel and Stamos Papastamou, The Power of Minorities (London, Academic Press, 1982). Mustafa, Ahmad Abd-al-Rahim, ‘The Breakdown of the Monopoly System in Egypt after 1840’, in P.M. Holt (ed.), Political and Social Change in Modern Egypt (London, Oxford University Press, 1968), pp. 291– 307. Naggar, Jane, Sipping from the Nile: My Exodus from Egypt (New York, Stony Creek Press, 2008). Nahmiyas, Victor, Al-rajul al-ladhı¯ wulida marratayn, qisat yahu¯dı¯ misrı¯ ha¯jar ila¯ ˙ Jew who ˙migrated to Isra¯ʾı¯l [The Twice Born Man, The Story of a Egyptian Israel] (Jerusalem, Da¯r al-Maʿa¯rif, 2004). Nassar, Siham, Al-yahu¯d al-misriu¯un bayn al-Misriyya wal suhyu¯niyya [Egyptian Jews ˙ Al-ʿarabı¯˙, 1980). between Egyptianism and˙ Zionism] (Cairo, Ntalachanis, Angelos, Leaving Egypt: Greeks and their Strategies, 1937– 1967. Unpublished PhD thesis, European University Institute (2011). ———, ‘The Emigration of Greeks from Egypt during the early Post-War Years’, Journal of Helenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2 (2009), pp. 35 – 44. Maio, Juliana, City of the Sun (Austin, Greenleaf Book Group Press, 2014). Mommsen, Wolfgang J. and Juergen Osterhammel, (eds), Imperialism and After: Continuities and Discontinuities (London, Allen & Unwin, 1986). Oishi, Takashi, ‘Indian Muslim merchants in Mozambique and South Africa: Intraregional networks in strategic association with state institutions, 1870s – 1930s’, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, vol. 50, nos. 2 –3 (2007), pp. 287– 324. Owen, Roger, Cotton and the Egyptian Economy, 1820– 1914: A Study in Trade and Development (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1969). ———, ‘Lord Cromer and the development of Egyptian industry, 1883– 1907’, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 2, no. 4 (1966), pp. 282– 301. ———, Lord Cromer, Victorian Imperialist, Edwardian Proconsul (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004). ———, State, Power, and Politics in the Making of the modern Middle East (London, Routledge, 2004). Owen, Roger and Bob Sutcliffe, (eds), Studies in the Theory of Imperialism (London, Longman, 1972). Owen, Roger and Martin Bunton, New Perspectives on Property and Land in the Middle East (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2000). Owen, Roger and Sevket Pamuk, A History of Middle East Economies in the Twentieth Century (London, I.B.Tauris, 1998).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

341

Pearson, Robin and David Richardson, ‘Business networking in the industrial revolution’, Economic History Review, vol. 54, no. 4 (2001), pp. 657 – 79. Perrault, Gilles, A Man Apart: The Life of Henri Curiel (London, Zed Books, 1987). Philipp, Thomas, ‘Jews and Arab Christians: Their Changing Position in Politics and Economy in Eighteenth-Century Syria and Egypt’, in Amnon Cohen and Gabriel Baer, (eds), Egypt and Palestine, A Millennium of Association (1868 – 1948) (New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1984), pp. 150– 66. ———, The Syrians in Egypt, 1725 –1975 (Stuttgart, Steiner-Verlag-Wiesbaden, 1985). Philipp, Thomas and Moshe Perlmann, ʿAbd al-Rahman al-Jabati’s History of Egypt: ʿja¯ʾib al-Atha¯r fil-Tara¯jim wal-Akhba¯r, vol. II (Stuttgart, Franz Steiner, 1994). Pinchin, Jane and Alexandria, Still: Forster, Durrell, and Cavafy (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1977). Politis, Athanase, L’Helle´nisme et l’Egypte moderne, vol. I (Paris, Alcan, 1929). ———, L’Helle´nisme et l’Egypte moderne, vol. II (Paris, Alcan, 1930). Raafat, Samir, ‘Dynasty: The House of Yacoub Cattaui’, Egyptian Mail, April 2, 1994, ,www.egy.com/judaica/940402.shtml.. Racy, Ali Jihad, Music Making in the Arab world: The Culture and Artistry of Tarab ˙ (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2003). Radwan, Samir, Capital Formation in Egyptian Industry and Agriculture, 1882– 1967 (London, Ithaca Press, 1974). Rahim, Kamal, Ayya¯m al-shata¯t [Days of Dispersion] (Cairo, Sphinx lil-Fann walAdab, 2008). ———, Qulu¯b munhaka [Exhauseted Hearts] (Cairo, Sphinx lil-Fann wal-Adab, 2004). Ramadan, Abd al-Azim, Sira¯ʿ al-tabaqa¯t fı¯ Misr 1837– 1952 [The Class Struggle in Egypt, 1837– 1952]˙ (Beirut,˙ al-Muʾassasa˙ al-ʿArabiyya, 1978). Ramadan, Salih, Al-haya¯t al-ʾijtima¯ʿiyya fı¯ Misr fı¯ ʿahd Ismaʿil [Social Life in Egypt in ˙ al-Maʿarif, 1977). the Era of Ismail] (Alexandria, Munshaʾat Ratanapruk, Prista, ‘Kinship and religious practices as institutionalization of trade networks: Manangi trade communities in South and Southeast Asia’, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, vol. 50, nos. 2 – 3 (2007), pp. 325 – 46. Raymond, Andre´, Al-hirafiyu¯n wa al-tujja¯r fı¯ al-Qa¯hira fı¯ al-qarn al-tha¯min ʿashar [Artisans and Merchants of Cairo in the Eighteenth Century] vol. II (Cairo, al-majlis al-ʾaʿla¯ lil-thaqa¯fa, 2005). Reid, Donald M., ‘Syrian Christians: the rags-to-riches story and free enterprise’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 1, no. 4 (1970), pp. 358 – 67. ———, ‘The rise of professions and professional organization in modern Egypt’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol. 16, no. 1 (1974), pp. 24 – 57. Reynolds, Nancy, ‘Interview with Aron Rodrigue, differences and tolerance in the Ottoman Empire’, Stanford Humanities Review, vol. 5, no. 1 (Klett-Cotta, Fall, 1995), pp. 1 – 3. Richard, Swedberg, Joseph A. Schumpeter, Eine Biographie (Stuttgart, 1994). Rida, Rashid, ‘Al-yahu¯d fi Faransa wa Misr’ [Jews in France and Egypt] (Cairo, Al˙ Manar, 1898), pp. 53– 5. Rivlin, Helen, The Agricultural Policy of Muhammad Ali in Egypt (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1961).

342

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Robbe, Martin, Aufbruch am Nil, Politik und Ideologie in der a¨gyptischen Befreiungsbewegung unter Gamal Abdel Nasser (Berlin, Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, 1976). Robinson, Ronald and John Gallagher, Africa and the Victorians: The Official Mind of Imperialism (London, Macmillan, 1961). Robinson, Ronald, ‘Non-European foundations of European Imperialism: Sketch for a theory of collaboration’, in Roger Owen and Bob Sutcliffe (eds), Studies in the Theory of Imperialism (London, Longman, 1972), pp. 117 – 42. ———, ‘The Excentric Idea of Imperialism, with or without Empire’, in Wolfgang J. Mommsen and Juergen Osterhammel (eds), Imperialism and After: Continuities and Discontinuities (London, Allen & Unwin, 1986), pp. 267 – 89. Rodrigue, Aron, ‘From Millet to Minority: Turkish Jewry’, in Pierre Birnbaum and Ira Katznelson (eds), Paths of Emancipation: Jews, States and Citizenship (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1995), pp. 238– 61. Rosenbaum, Gabriel, ‘The Arabic Dialect of Jews in Modern Egypt’, Nashra, no. 25 (2002) The Israeli Academic Center in Cairo, pp. 35 – 46. Roth, Cecil, A Short History of the Jewish People (London, East and West Library, 1948). Rozen, Minna, (ed.), Homelands and Diasporas: Greeks, Jews and their Migrations (London, I.B.Tauris, 2008). ‘Saʿa maʿ Talʿat Baik Harb’ [‘An hour with Talʿat Bek Harb’], Al-Hila¯l, vol. 7, no. 36 (May 1928), pp. 778– 81. Saghiya, Hazem, Qaumiyyu¯ al-mashriq al-ʿarabı¯, min Dra¯yfu¯s ila¯ Gharu¯dı¯ [The Nationalists of the Arab Orient, from Drayfus to Gharudi] (Beirut, Riya¯d al-Rayyis lil-Kutub wal-Nashr, 2000). Said, Jamal Al-Din, Iqtisa¯diyyat Misr [Egypt’s Economies] (Cairo, Lajnat al-Baya¯n ˙ al-ʿArabı¯, 1950). ˙ Schijf, Huibert, ‘Jewish Bankers, 1850–1914: Internationalization along Ethnic Lines’, in McCabe Harlaftis, Gelina and Ioanna Pepelasis Minoglou, (eds), Diaspora Entrepreneurial Networks: Four Centuries of History (New York, Berg, 2005), pp. 191 – 217. Schumpeter, Joseph, The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interests, and the Business Cycle, translated by Redvers Opie (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2004, first published 1934). Schumpeter, Joseph, Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung: Eine Untersuchung u¨ber Unternehmergewinn, Kapital, Kredit, Zins und den Konjunkturzyklus (Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 1997). Scho¨lch, Alexander, A¨gypten den A¨gyptern! Die politische und gesellschaftliche Krise der Jahre 1878– 1882, i. (Br., Zu¨rich, Atlantis Verlag, 1972). ———, ‘Der arabische Osten im neunzehnten Jahrhundert, 1800– 1914’ in Ulrich Haarmann (ed.), Geschichte der arabischen Welt (Mu¨nchen, Beck, 1987), pp. 365 – 431. ———, (ed.), Die a¨gyptische Gesellschaft im 20. Jahrhundert (Hamburg, Deutsches Orient Institut, 1992). Schrand, Irmgard, Jews in Egypt Communists and Citizens (Mu¨nster, LIT Verlag, 2004). Schulze, Reinhard, Die Rebellion der a¨gyptischen Fallahin 1919, zum Konflikt der agrarisch-orientalischen Gesellschaft und dem kolonialen Staat in A¨gypten 1820–1919 (Berlin, Baalbek, 1981).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

343

Sederis, Nikos, ‘The Greek settlers’ flight from Egypt: The psychological aspect’, Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2 (2009), pp. 145 – 51. Shafir, Gershon, Land, Labour and the Origins of the Israleli – Palestinian Conflict, 1882– 1914 (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1996). Shakir, Safaʾ, Isma¯ʿı¯l Sidqı¯, al-wa¯qiʿiyya al-siya¯siyya fı¯ muwa¯jahit al-haraka al˙ wataniyya [Isamil˙ Sidqi, Political Realism in Facing the National Movement] ˙ (Cairo, Da¯r al-Shuru¯q, 2005). Shama, Avraham and Mark Iris, Immigration Without Integration: Third World Jews in Israel (Cambridge, Schenkman, 1977). Shamir, Shimon, (ed.), The Jews of Egypt: A Mediterranean Society in Modern Times (London, Westview Press, 1987). Shammas, Maurice, ‘Shakhsiyyat yahu¯diyya fı¯ ʿa¯lam al-fikr wal-iqtisa¯d anjabatha¯ ˙ Misr fı¯ al-qarn al-ʿishrı¯n’ [Jewish Personalities in Economic and Thought ˙ brought in Egypt in the Twentieth Century], Nashra, no. 10 (1988) The Israeli Academic Center in Cairo, pp. 31–4. Shatz, Adam, Prophets Outcast: A Century of Dissident Jewish Writings about Zionism and Israel (New York, Nation Books, 2004). Shechter, Relli, Smoking, Culture, and Economy in the Middle East: The Egyptian Tobacco Market, 1850– 2000 (London, I.B.Tauris, 2006). Shenhav, Yehuda, Arab Jews: A Postcolonial Reading of Nationalism, Religion, and Ethnicity (Stanford, Stanford University Press, 2006). Shmuelevitz, Aryeh, The Jews of the Ottoman Empire in Late Fifteenth and the Sixteenth Century (Leiden, Brill, 1984). Shohat, Ella, ‘Rupture and return: Zionist discourse and the study of Arab Jews’, Social Text, vol. 21, no. 2 (2003), pp. 49– 74. Sidqi, Ismail, Mudhakara¯tı¯ [Memoirs] (Cairo, Da¯r al-Hila¯l, 1950). ˙ Silber, Marcos, ‘The Metamorphosis of Pre-Dubnovian Autonomism into Diapsora Jewish Nationalism’, in Minna Rozen (ed.), Homelands and Diasporas: Greeks, Jews and their Migrations (London, I.B.Tauris, 2008), pp. 235 – 55. Simon, Reeva, Michael Laskier and Sara Reguer, (eds), The Jews of the Middle East and North Africa in Modern Times (New York, Columbia University Press, 2003). Simpson, G.E. and J.M. Yinger, Racial and Cultural Minorities: An Analysis of Prejudice and Discrimination (New York, Harper & Row, 1965). Smith, Charles, ‘4 February 1942: Its causes and its influence on Egyptian politics and on the future of Anglo– Egyptian relations, 1937– 1945’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 10, no. 4 (1979), pp. 453 – 79. Snir, Reuven, ‘Jewishness, Arabness and Egyptianess: The participation of Egyptian Jews in the Arabic Press and journalism during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries’, Australian Journal of Jewish Studies, vol. 20 (2006), pp. 199 – 238. Somekh, Sasson, Bagdad Yesterday: The Making of an Arab Jew (Jerusalem, Ibis Ed., 2007). ———, ‘Participation of Egyptian Jews in Modern Arabic Culture, and the Case of Mura¯d Farag’, in Shimon Shamir (ed.), The Jews of Egypt: A Mediterranean Society in Modern Times (London, Westview Press, 1987), pp. 130 – 9. Statistical Department, Population Census of Egypt 1947 (Cairo, Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Egypt, 1954). Stearns, Timothy and Gerald Hills, ‘Entrepreneurship and new firm development: A definitional introduction’, Journal of Business Research, vol. 36 (1996), pp. 1–4.

344

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Stillman, Norman, The Jews of Arab Lands in Modern Times (New York, The Jewish Publication Society, 1999). Stoianovich, Traian, ‘The conquering Balkan Orthodox merchant’, The Journal of Economic History, vol. 20, no. 2 (1960), pp. 234– 313. Stone, Russell A., ‘Religious ethics and the spirit of capitalism in Tunisia’, International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol. 5, no. 3 (1974), pp. 260 – 73. Taragan, Hana, ‘The “Gate of Heaven” (Sha’ar Hashamayim) Synagogue in Cairo 1898– 1905: On the Contextualization of Jewish Communal Architecture’, Journal of Jewish Identities, vol. 2, no. 1 (2009), pp. 31 – 53. Thane, Pat, ‘Financers and the British State: the case of Sir Ernest Cassel’, Business History, vol. 28, no. 1 (1986), pp. 80– 99. Tignor, Robert, ‘The economic activities of foreigners in Egypt, 1920– 1950: From Millet to Haute Bourgeoisie’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, vol. 22, no. 3 (1980), pp. 416– 49. ———, ‘Egyptian Jewry, Communal Tension, and Zionism’, in Amnon Cohen and Gabriel Baer, (eds), Egypt and Palestine, A Millennium of Association (868– 1948 (New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1984), pp. 332– 47. ———, ‘The Egyptian Revolution 1919: New directions in the Egyptian economy’, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 12, no. 3 (1976), pp. 41– 69. ———, Modernization and British Colonial Rule in Egypt, 1882– 1914 (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1966). ———, State, Private Enterprise, and Economic Change in Egypt, 1918– 1952 (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1984). Toledano, Ehud, ‘Social and economic change in the “Long Nineteenth Century”, in M.W. Daly (ed.), The Cambridge History of Egypt, vol. II (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998), pp. 239– 51. Tsirkas, Stratis, Drifting Cities (Athens, Kedros, 1995). Tuner, Jonathan and Edna Bonacich, ‘Towards a composite theory of middleman minorities’, Ethnicity, no. 7 (1980), pp. 144– 58. Tzalas, Harry, ‘Literary Alexandria and Nostalgic Alexandrian Literature’, Journal of Hellenic Diaspora, vol. 35, no. 2 (2009), pp. 169– 74. Vatikiotis, P.J., The History of Modern Egypt, From Mohammed Ali To Mubarak (London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1991). Vital, David, The Origins of Zionism (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1975). Vitalis, Robert, When Capitalists Collide: Business Conflict and the End of Empire in Egypt (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1995). Winter, Micheal, Egyptian Society under Ottoman Rule, 1517– 1798 (London, Routledge, 1992). Yousef, Tarik, ‘Egypt’s growth performance under economic liberalism: A reassessment with new GDP estimates, 1886 –1945’, Review of Income and Wealth, vol. 48, no. 4 (2002), pp. 516– 79. Zenner, Walter, ‘Middleman minorities in the Syrian mosaic: Trade, conflict, and image management’, Sociological Perspectives, vol. 30, no. 4 (1987), pp. 400 – 21. Zenner, Walter, A Global Community: The Jews from Aleppo, Syria (Detroit, Wayne State University Press, 2000). Zimmer, Catherine and Howard Aldrich, ‘Resource mobilization through ethnic networks: Kinship and friendship ties of shopkeepers in England’, Sociological Perspectives, vol. 30, no. 4 (1987), pp. 422– 45.

INDEX

ʿAbbud Pasha, Ahmad, 137, 157, 173 Abd al-Daher, Mahmud, 162, 163, 165 Abu al-Ghar, Mohamed, 36, 37 agriculture al-Barrawi, Rashid, 188 cotton production, 73, 125 Egypt, 71 Egyptian Greeks, 77 nationalization, 202 reforms, 187 revenues, 80 Al-Ahra¯m Al-Iqtisa¯dı¯ (The Economic Ahram), 14 Al-Katib al-Misri, 17 Al-Manar, 21 Al-Risala, 17, 20 Al-Shams, 16, 154, 155 Al-waqa¯’iʿ al-misriyya ˙ Company Law 138 (1947), 164, 169– 87 foreign investment, 145 Harb, Muhammad Talʿat, 136 National Bourgeoisie, 129 primary sources, 5, 11, 93 Al-Yu¯na¯nı¯ al-Muttamasir, 155– 6 ˙ Ali Pasha al-Masʿud ibn Agha, 14, 56, 69 – 71 alliances, 190– 2

analysis data, 105– 19, 205 Egyptian Jews, 37 history, 203 innovation, 96 – 7 joint stock companies, 93 minorities, 4 network theory, 94 Anglo – Egyptian Treaty (1936), 145–7, 151– 7, 163 anti-Semitism, 21 – 2, 26, 27, 31 Arabic countries, 30 heritage, 152 identity, 30 investors, 160– 1 Jews, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34 language, 31, 142– 3, 154 nationalism, 13, 29, 30, 203 policy, 23 Arab – Israeli conflict, 11, 13 – 14, 18 Arab – Jewish confrontation, 47 Arab-speaking region, 16 Armenians Ali Pasha al-Masʿud ibn Agha, 72 in Egypt, 59 Egyptian citizenship, 163, 167 legal status, 147, 148–51 in the Ottoman Empire, 149

346

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

private sector, 194– 5 statistics, 64 – 5 status, 61 – 2 army, 69, 82 Ashkenazi Jews Egyptian citizenship, 168 Egyptian Jews, 75 migration, 74, 197 Zionism, 31 – 2, 33, 36, 45 ʿAshmawy, Sayid, 8, 61 Association Against Zionism, 36 Association de la Jeunesse Juive Egyptienne see Jamʿiyyat al-shubba¯n al-yahu¯d al-misriyyı¯n ˙ Aswan Dam, 88 Ata, Zubeida, 61 attitudes, 85 – 6, 207 authoritarianism, 193– 4, 198, 199, 208 Averoff, George, 2, 58 Avineri, Shlomo, 40 – 1 al-Azm, Sadiq, 25 Company Law 138 (1947), 172– 5 Bank Misr Arab investors, 161 crisis, 157 Egyptian Greeks, 142 formation, 129– 31 Harb, Muhammad Talʿat, 134– 5 innovation, 206 investment, 135, 136– 7 minorities, 129–35 networking, 132 Wafd Party, 139 banking sector, 79, 87 – 8, 101, 134–5, 191 bankruptcy, 81, 86 al-Banna, Hassan, 173 Baring, Evelyn British occupation (1882– 1922), 84 Egyptian Greeks, 85 Egyptian Jews, 89– 90 entrepreneurs, 90 – 2

financial policies, 90 – 1 Qattawi Pasha, Yusuf Aslan, 134 taxation, 91 textile industry, 91 – 2 al-Barrawi, Rashid, 190– 1 Begin, Menachem, 23 Beinin, Joel, 36 – 7, 47, 61, 197 Ben-Gurion, David, 31 –2, 43, 157 Bonaparte, Napoleon, 68, 72 British occupation (1882 – 1922) control, 151 cotton production, 125 economic development, 86– 7 Egypt, 14 Egyptian Greeks, 84 – 7, 141 Egyptian Jews, 87 – 90 general strikes, 174 Harb, Muhammad Talʿat, 133 investment, 123, 159 minorities, 206 resistance, 85, 153, 156 stock market crash (1907), 127 World War I, 128 Buber, Martin, 41, 42 business, 55 – 6, 173, 204 Cairo Weaving Factories Company, 181–7 capital investment, 127, 129, 135, 138 Capitulations abolition, 106, 151, 163 Al-Yu¯na¯nı¯ al-Muttamasir, 156 ˙ citizenship laws, 127 Deeb, Marius, 8 defined, 55 Egypt, 52 – 63 Egyptian Greeks, 141 Egyptian Jews, 14, 76 ended, 145– 6 entrepreneurial strategies, 103 influence, 159– 60 minorities, 11, 206 Montreux Convention (1937), 146

INDEX Caron, Franc
ois, 97 – 8, 204 Cassel, Sir Ernest, 10 Casson, Mark, 99, 103, 105, 204 Cavafy, Constantine P., 1, 78 census 1917, 166 1927, 164, 166 1947, 164, 168– 9 Cicurel Department Stores, 177– 81 citizenship, 163, 166 citizenship laws Egypt, 24 entrepreneurial strategies, 103 identity, 108 interpretation, 150 legal status, 127 millet, 56 minorities, 195 Ottoman Empire, 58 civil servants, 191– 2 civil society, 153– 4 colonial power, 9 –10 colonialism, 3, 8, 9, 11 Committee on Commerce and Industry, 128– 9, 131, 134, 142 communism, 35 – 6, 47, 149 communities Egyptian Greeks, 86 Egyptian Jews, 34, 75, 76, 87 entrepreneurs, 122 entrepreneurship, 99 finance, 101 history, 65 – 72 influence, 58 information, 99f3.1 leadership, 57 – 8 network theory, 94, 95 networking, 104 religious leadership, 59 status, 62 terminology, 60 – 3 transformations, 74 – 7 Companies Department see maslahit ˙ ˙ al-sharika¯t

347

Company Law, 138 (1947) Al-waqa¯ʾiʿal-misriyya, 164 background, 172– 5 Cairo Weaving Factories Company, 181– 7 Cicurel Department Stores, 177– 81 Companies Department (Egypt), 208 Egypt, 169– 87 Egyptian citizenship, 163 Egyptian Jews, 207 Egyptianization, 175– 6 minorities, 195 nationality debate, 162 new companies, 158–9 politics, 185– 6 constitution, 24, 147, 151, 191 context, 16, 17, 30, 61 Suez Canal, control of, 84 cotton al-Barrawi, Rashid, 189 British occupation (1882 – 1922), 86 – 7 economic development, 83 Egypt, 69 Egyptian Greeks, 77 Egyptian Jews, 72 – 83 expansion, 80 – 1 finance, 101– 2 innovation, 125– 9 intensification, 73 trade, 78– 9, 87 Council of National Economic Planning see Economic Agency critical perspectives, 34 – 9 Cromer, Lord see Baring, Evelyn cultural Zionism, 41, 155 culture, 29, 47, 83, 142, 143 Curiel, Henri, 35 Daʾira Saniyya Commission, 126, 133 Daʾira Saniyya Company, 126, 133, 142 Da¯r al-Watha¯ʾiq, 5, 176 data analysis, 205

348

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Company Law 138 (1947), 172 Egyptian Jews, 76, 164– 5 entrepreneurship, 105– 19 innovation, 118 joint stock companies, 138 lack of, 63 Davis, Eric, 126– 7 decision making, 98 –9, 100– 1, 102– 3, 120, 204 Deeb, Marius, 8, 60, 61, 64 developments, 25 –6, 28, 65 dhimmi, 24, 52– 63, 68 diasporas, 5, 7, 27, 42, 70, 148 nationalism, 42 – 3, 45, 48 discourse, 16, 22 diversity authoritarianism, 193– 4 Egypt, 202 Egyptian Greeks, 9, 11 –12, 77 Egyptian Jews, 76, 144, 156, 167, 203, 210 Egyptian society, 38, 152, 166– 7 ended, 200 joint stock companies, 106 minorities, 83 politics, 140 populations, 65 Dual Control, 80 – 3 Dubnov, Simon, 42, 46 economic activities, 8, 9 consequences, 129 control, 14, 171 migration, 50 nationalism, 134 policies, 187–8, 189, 190, 208– 9 power, 7 sovereignty, 151 status, 199 success, 10 transactions, 94 – 5 Economic Agency, 191 economic development

Ali Pasha al-Masʿud ibn Agha, 71 al-Barrawi, Rashid, 188 British occupation (1882 – 1922), 86 – 7 cotton production, 83 Egypt, 7, 9, 69, 81 Egyptian Chamber of Commerce, 134 Egyptian Greeks, 77 – 80, 120 entrepreneurs, 93 entrepreneurship, 96, 104– 5 growth, 92 joint stock companies, 110 minorities, 49 nationalization, 188– 94 state control, 159 stock market crash (1907), 126 economics, 14 economy, 3, 4, 7, 188– 94 education Egypt, 151– 2 Egyptian Jews, 168 entrepreneurship, 99 Jamʿiyyat al-shubba¯n al-yahu¯d al-misriyyı¯n, 155 ˙ Jewish societies, 30 – 1 labor market, 173 languages, 154 levels, 176 Muslims, 138 National Socialists (Germany), 20 nationalization, 199 state control, 153 Egyptian Federation of Industries (EFI), 15, 131, 142, 174– 5 Egyptian Gazette, 3, 5, 93 Egyptian Greeks Ali Pasha al-Masʿud ibn Agha, 70 banking sector, 79, 101 Baring, Evelyn, 85 British occupation (1882 – 1922), 84 – 7 Chryssostomidis, Sophianos, 196 communities, 57 – 8

INDEX cotton production, 73, 125– 6 data, 64 diversity, 156 economic development, 77 – 80, 120 economic policies, 188 education, 99 –100 Egyptian citizenship, 163 Egyptian identity, 154 Egyptian Jews, 160 emigration, 195– 6 employment, 176 entrepreneurial strategies, 103 entrepreneurs, 119, 138 history, 65 – 72 independence, 153 innovation, 113t3.4, 114f3.4, 122, 123 integration, 204 joint stock companies, 93, 112t3.3, 190 languages, 143 legal status, 58, 127, 147, 148– 51 literacy rates, 100 literature, 11 – 13 migration, 76 – 7, 198, 208, 210 millet, 60 minorities, 3 Misr Group, 139 multiple identities, 108 National Bourgeoisie, 129 national industry, 144 networking, 118, 137, 142 new companies, 159 Ottoman Empire, 67 participation, 146– 7, 155, 205 partnerships, 207 politics, 140 power, 126 private sector, 194– 5 resistance, 153 role, 9 statistics, 162– 6 status, 61, 175, 202 Suez Canal, 12

349

value systems, 95 Viceroy (British), 83 – 92 Egyptian investors, 159 Egyptian– Israeli Peace Treaties, 19 Egyptian Jews Ali Pasha al-Masʿud ibn Agha, 72 Arab identity, 30 banking sector, 79 – 80, 101 British occupation (1882 – 1922), 87 – 90 Cairo Weaving Factories Company, 183– 4 companies, 109t3.2, 110 Company Law 138 (1947), 186 cotton production, 79 – 80 critical perspectives, 34 – 9 Daʾira Saniyya Company, 126 data, 64 diversity, 144, 156, 167 economic development, 7, 120 economic role, 205 education, 99 – 100 Egyptian citizenship, 166 Egyptian cotton, 72 – 83 Egyptian Greeks, 160 Egyptian identity, 154 Egyptianness, 23 – 5 entrepreneurial strategies, 103 entrepreneurs, 116, 119, 138 expulsion, 10 Hassoun, Jacques, 34 –5 historical analysis, 25 historical context, 164 history, 19, 39, 65 – 72 identity, 37 independence, 153 industry, 90 innovation, 113t3.4, 114f3.4, 122, 123 integration, 204 interest, 24 Israel, 34, 175, 192 joint stock companies, 93, 112t3.3, 190

350

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

leadership, 58 – 9 legal status, 24, 127, 147, 150– 1, 168 literacy rates, 100 literature, 13 – 39 loyalty, 36 migration, 73, 210 Misr Group, 139 multiple identities, 108, 194 nationalism, 28 nationality law, 207 Nationality Law 160 (1950), 195 networking, 137, 142 new companies, 159 numbers, 162 Palestine War (1948), 23 participation, 146– 7, 205 partnerships, 207 perceptions, 24, 25, 37 persecution, 196– 7 political structure, 3 politics, 141 private sector, 194– 5 religious activities, 35 resistance, 153 Sephardic Jews, 44 – 5 shaha¯dat al-jinsiyya (nationality document), 178 status, 45 – 6, 62 stories, 38 – 9 Syrians, 176 terminology, 60 transformations, 74 – 6 treatment, 44 United States of America, 38 value systems, 95 Viceroy (British), 83 – 92 Yishuv, 46 – 7 Zionism, 27, 40 – 8, 157, 202– 3 Zionist doctrine, 26 Egyptian National Archive, 5 Egyptian National Bank, 123, 129 Egyptian Oil and Soap Company, 124 Egyptian society

Diaspora nationalism, 156 diversity, 37, 152, 166– 7 Egyptian Jews, 35 – 6, 75 minorities, 201 World War I, 128– 9 Egyptian Sugar Company, 134, 173 Egyptian Syrians, 127 Egyptianism, 152 Egyptianization, 175– 87 Egyptianization policies Company Law 138 (1947), 169, 171, 172 Egyptian Greeks, 196 foreign companies, 193, 209 minorities, 187 nationalization, 199 Syrians, 144 Egyptianness, 23 – 5 ELIA News, 155 emancipation, 57, 59 – 60 employees, 179, 182, 186, 200 employment, 100, 176 entrepreneurs Bank Misr, 131 Baring, Evelyn, 90 – 2 behavior, 138– 57, 207 Company Law 138 (1947), 171 economic development, 93 Egypt, 2 – 3, 147 expelled, 209 Free Officer’s Revolt, 187 innovation, 5, 119, 137 joint investment, 146 loyalty, 103 minorities, 10 – 11, 199, 204 multiple identities, 108 nationalization, 200 networking, 115– 18, 123, 132, 136, 142– 4, 205– 6 networks, 103 partnerships, 124 post-World War II, 158 reputation, 102 strategies, 102– 4, 116

INDEX

351

entrepreneurship communities, 99f3.1 data, 105– 19 growth theory, 94, 204 innovation, 118– 19 institutions, 104 network theory, 96 – 104 private sector, 200 Schumpeter, Joseph, 122 Errera, Iglal, 36 ethnicity diversity, 65 Egyptian Greeks, 12 minorities, 8 multiple identities, 206 nationality, 55 Ottoman Empire, 9, 49 –50 Europe, 68, 69, 72 –4, 80, 81 European Jews, 31, 32, 34, 40, 44, 46 Europeans, 21, 82, 85 Executive Committee, 134 expulsion, 10, 11

Egypt, 123 entrepreneurship, 206 joint stock companies, 138 Law 156 (1953), 189 Montreux Convention (1937), 147 new companies, 160 private sector, 193 reforms, 188 role, 146 Sidqi, Ismail, 145 foreign policy, 23 foreign residents, 153 foreign trade, 70 foreigners, 26, 64, 66t2.1, 175, 176, 187–8 formation companies, 109t3.2 joint stock companies, 127, 128, 145 new companies, 107f3.2, 108t3.1 France, 21 –2, 31, 71, 193 Free Officer’s Revolt, 24, 158, 187 Fuad I, king of Egypt, 156

Faisal, king of Syria and Iraq, 30 Al-Falsafa al-iqtisa¯diyya lil-thawra, 188 Farag, Mura¯d (1867 – 1956), 1 – 2, 154 Fargoun, Maurice, 48, 154–5 Faruq I, king of Egypt, 157, 158 Federation of Egyptian Industrialists, 142 finance access, 101– 2 Egyptian Greeks, 77, 79 Egyptian Jews, 72, 80, 87 entrepreneurship, 204 foreign investment, 192 Law 156 (1953), 187 Law 26 (1954), 189 new companies, 160 financial policies, 90 – 1 foreign capital, 127– 8, 138 foreign investment, 127 al-Barrawi, Rashid, 190 crisis, 192

General Companies Law 26 (1954), 187 general strikes, 173– 4 Gershoni, Israel, 152 Ghuneim, Ahmad, 40 Glavanis, Pandelis, 12 Godley, Andrew, 99, 204 Gorman, Anthony, 12 Great Britain, 71, 82, 83 – 92, 157, 193 Greek Catholic Syrians, 143– 4 Greek Chamber of Commerce, 195– 6 Greeks, 50, 77t2.3 growth theory, 4, 93, 96, 204 Guinness, Walter Edward, 18 HADETU (Democratic Movement for National Liberation), 35 Harb, Muhammad Talʿat Pasha, 132–3, 136, 142, 157 Haroun, Shehata, 18, 36, 40 Hassoun, Jacques, 40

352

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Herzl, Theodor, 31, 41, 42 Hussein, Taha, 29, 30, 48 identity, 37, 108, 153, 154 ideology, 29, 30, 40, 47 al-Imam, Mohammad, 61, 64 – 5, 149 import-export trade, 79, 87 independence, 69, 140, 151, 153, 193 industry, 90, 91, 92, 144– 5 influence Baring, Evelyn, 84 Capitulations, 159– 60 communities, 58 France, 31 industrialists, 145 maslahit al-sharika¯t (MS), 180 ˙ ˙ Peace Treaty (1978), 27 treaties, 147 information communities, 99f3.1 complexity, 100 entrepreneurs, 98, 102 languages, 100 networking, 105, 120, 205 Qattawi, Aslan, 101 infrastructure Ali Pasha al-Masʿud ibn Agha, 71 Arab investors, 161 developments, 188 Egypt, 69 Egyptian Jews, 87 investment, 123– 4 Suez Canal, 80, 194 innovation Bank Misr, 130– 1, 206 Caron, Franc
ois, 97 – 8 complexity, 100 cotton production, 125– 9 Egypt, 124–5 Egyptian Greeks, 113t3.4, 122 Egyptian Jews, 113t3.4 entrepreneurial theory, 97 – 8 entrepreneurs, 5, 96, 123, 137 entrepreneurship, 104– 5

growth theory, 94 joint stock companies, 110– 13, 114f3.4, 115, 147 minorities, 204 networking, 118t3.7, 119f3.7 new companies, 156 reputation, 102 success, 120– 1 types, 97 integration, 12, 43, 45 – 6, 83, 203– 4 internal politics, 22 – 3 interpretation, 25, 98 – 9, 150, 203 investment Bank Misr, 131– 2 British occupation (1882 – 1922), 159 Cicurel, Yusuf, 177 cotton production, 83 Economic Agency, 191 economic development, 188 Egypt, 8, 90, 106, 123, 126 Egyptian Jews, 88, 156 finance, 101 foreign investment, 124– 5, 127 forms, 138 growth, 92 infrastructure, 123– 4 joint stock companies, 110 Misr Group, 139–40 modernization, 83 network theory, 96 new investors, 135– 8 reduced, 157 Israel Arab policy, 23 attacks on Egypt, 197– 8 Egypt, 192, 198 Egyptian Jews, 40, 197, 210 foundation, 34 immigration, 197 Jews, 202 legitimacy, 23 migration, 32 Palestine War (1948), 175

INDEX

353

Palestinian refugees, 19 proclamation of a state, 25 Suez Canal, 193 Israelite Association Against Zionism, 47

partnerships, 124 regulations, 135 Socie´te´ Viticole et Vinicole d’Egypte (SVVE), 186 judgments, 98 –100

Jamʿiyyat al-shubba¯n al-muslimı¯n see Misr al-Fata Jamʿiyyat al-shubba¯n al-yahu¯d al-misriyyı¯n, 141, 154 ˙ Jerusalem, 23 Jewish Agency, 32, 43, 165 Jews banks, 14 culture, 41 diasporas, 27 economic minorities, 49 Egypt, 74t2.2 finance, 15 Germany, 20 history, 24 minorities, 33 Ottoman Empire, 50– 1, 67 perceptions, 25 refugees, 67 societies, 30 – 1 joint stock companies Bank Misr, 129– 30 al-Barrawi, Rashid, 189 Cicurel Department Stores, 177 citizenship laws, 127 Company Law 138 (1947), 169 data, 105– 6 Egypt, 93 Egyptian Jews, 112t3.3 established, 138 foreign investment, 176, 199 formation, 106, 127, 128, 145, 174 innovation, 110– 13, 114f3.4, 115 investment, 123, 135 minorities, 110, 111f3.3 nationalization, 209 networking, 115t3.5 new companies, 107f3.2, 190

Kamel, Anas Mustafa Egyptian Jews, 23, 164 historical analysis, 25 minorities, 8 research, 24 Zionism, 40 Karaites, 75, 167, 197 Karanasou, Floresca, 12, 60, 172–3, 176 Kasigonis, Angelos Dimitriou, 155 Khoury, Yacoub, 19 Kitroeff, Alexander, 60, 61, 64, 77, 140–1 Kom Ombo Company, 133, 134, 142 Kook, Rabbi Abraham, 43 Kra¨mer, Gudrun, 165– 6 labor market, 138, 173, 174, 179 land ownership Bank Misr, 131 Egypt, 73 Harb, Muhammad Talʿat, 132– 3 industry, 91 Pasha, Khedive Ismail, 126 Qattawi family, 133 reforms, 188 Landau, Jacob, 79, 165 Lange, Oskar, 199, 209 languages, 75, 100, 142, 154, 155, 173 Laskier, Michael, 34, 203 Law 156 (1953), 187, 188– 9 Law 26 (1954), 188– 9 leadership, 57 – 9 legal status citizenship laws, 127 communities, 60 Egyptian Greeks, 58 Egyptian Jews, 24, 76, 150– 1, 162, 168

354

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

Ministry of Commerce and Industry (Egypt), 170 minorities, 63, 135, 146, 147, 148– 51, 207 literature, 11 – 12, 13 – 39 loyalty Armenians, 149 citizenship laws, 150 Diaspora nationalism, 42 Egyptian Jews, 36, 45 entrepreneurs, 103, 104 managers, 192 Ma¯likı¯, Saʿd Yaʿqu¯b, 154 cultural Zionism, 155 maslahit al-sharika¯t (MS) ˙ ˙ bias, 195 Cairo Weaving Factories Company, 181– 7 Cicurel Department Stores, 177– 8 Company Law 138 (1947), 172, 187, 208 expansion, 187–8 influence, 180 nationalization, 200 primary sources, 5, 176 working methods, 186 Middle East, 3, 10, 29, 202 migration destinations, 37 Egypt, 70, 73 – 4, 83 Egyptian Greeks, 196 Egyptian Jews, 15, 18, 19, 162– 3, 197– 8, 203 emigration, 186 internal migration, 50, 174 Israel, 32 Jews, 76 minorities, 7, 210 Zionism, 34 millet, 52 – 63, 67 Ministry of Commerce and Industry (Egypt), 3 – 4, 170, 172, 180, 182– 3

Ministry of Finance, 170 Ministry of the Interior, 172, 183 Ministry of Justice, 170 Ministry of Social Affairs, 170 minorities Ali Pasha al-Maʿud ibn Agha, 71 – 2 analysis, 4 Anglo–Egyptian Treaty (1936), 145– 7, 151– 7 Arab countries, 30 Bank Misr, 129– 35 British occupation (1882 – 1922), 84 – 5 Company Law 138 (1947), 186– 7, 195 data, 64 defined, 51, 60 Diaspora nationalism, 42 diversity, 83, 167 economic development, 49 economic success, 10 – 11 education, 153 Egypt, 3, 51, 52 – 63, 66t2.1, 187– 200 Egyptian Greeks, 208 Egyptian Jews, 24 Egyptianization, 175– 87 emigration, 195 employment, 176 entrepreneurs, 91, 93, 122 expulsion, 10 history, 7, 201 innovation, 115 integration, 203– 4 joint stock companies, 110, 111f3.3 legal status, 135 migration, 198– 9, 210 nationality law, 147 network theory, 4 – 5, 94 – 6 networking, 205– 6 networks, 99, 100 perceptions, 10 politics, 207 populations, 74

INDEX post-World War II, 158– 69 private sector, 194– 5, 202 privileges, 10 role, 7, 8 –11, 51 stability, 197 statistics, 63 – 5 status, 61, 62, 63, 164 terminology, 56, 163 trade, 49 – 50 World War II, 153– 7 Misr al-Fata, 153– 4, 155, 156 Misr Group Cicurel, Yusuf, 177 crisis, 157 Egyptian Greeks, 142 Harb, Muhammad Talʿat Pasha, 132 innovation, 137, 206 investment, 135– 6, 139 local investment, 137 politics, 139– 44 taken over, 159 Mixed Courts, 80 – 3, 145, 151, 163, 206 mixed economy, 189, 190 modernization, 73, 83, 123 Montifiore, Sir Moses Haim, 14 Montreux Convention (1937), 146, 151– 7 Moscovici, Serge, 52 Moyne, Lord see Guinness, Walter Edward multiple identities, 194, 206 Muslim Brothers, 16 – 17, 156 Muslims, 36, 138 Naguib, Muhammad, President of Egypt, 187, 197 Nahum, Rabbi Haim, 45 narratives, 13, 28 –34 Nassar, Siham, 25, 40, 164– 5 Nasser, Gamal Abdel, President of Egypt, 26, 188– 94 National Bourgeoisie, 129– 35, 206

355

national industry, 128, 129–35, 139, 144 nationalism Al-Shams, 154 Arab heritage, 152–3 Arab Jew, 33 Arabic language, 173 Bank Misr, 131 citizenship laws, 150 Egyptian Greeks, 11 Egyptian Jews, 13, 28, 36, 163, 202– 3 minorities, 198 politics, 156 spiritual, 42 stock market crash (1907), 126– 7 Zionism, 40 – 1 nationality diversity, 65 Egyptian Jews, 147, 162, 176– 7 ethnicity, 55 importance, 167 minorities, 208 nationality debate, 152, 161– 9 Nationality Law 160 (1950), 195 Nationality Law (1929) classification, 182 Egyptian Jews, 150, 169 minorities, 147, 148, 164, 207 politics, 178 nationalization Egypt, 24 Egyptian economy, 5 – 6, 188– 94 Jewish finance, 15 Law 156 (1953), 187 private sector, 201– 2 purpose, 194 Suez Canal, 12, 192– 3 network theory entrepreneurship, 96 – 104 information, 99 minorities, 10 – 11, 93, 94 – 6, 202 Schumpeter, Joseph, 4 – 5

356

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

networking Bank Misr, 131 Egyptian Greeks, 120 Egyptian Jews and Egyptian Greeks, 160 entrepreneurs, 115– 18, 122, 142–4, 205– 6 entrepreneurship, 104, 118– 19 finance, 101 first level, 117f3.6, 117t3.6 Harb, Muhammad Talʿat, 134 importance, 144 innovation, 118t3.7, 119f3.7, 123 joint stock companies, 115t3.5 levels, 116f3.5 minorities, 204 success, 120– 1 networks, 103, 125, 136, 143– 4, 171 new companies Company Law 138 (1947), 158– 9 established, 159 foreign investment, 146, 199 formation, 108t3.1, 109t3.2, 157, 158 joint stock companies, 107f3.2, 190 Law 156 (1953), 187 politics, 145 new investors, 135– 8 newspapers, 16, 21 – 2, 154 al-Nuqrashi, Mahmud Fahmi, Prime Minister of Egypt, 173 occupation of Egypt, 83 – 92 Operation Passover, 28, 34, 203 Operation Susannah (Lavon Affair, 1954), 23, 192, 197, 208 Ottoman Empire Arab nationalism, 29 Armenians, 149 Capitulations, 55 citizenship laws, 58, 127 dhimmi, 24 Egypt, 69, 71 Egyptian Greeks, 12 Egyptian Jews, 162–3

Jews, 67, 68 millet, 52 – 4 minorities, 9, 59 – 60 nationality law, 148 religious leadership, 67 – 8 taxation, 55 –6 trade, 49– 50 Owen, Roger, 8, 61, 83, 90 – 1 Palestine, 31, 36, 156, 157, 175, 198 Palestine War (1948), 22 – 3, 159, 175, 195, 196– 7, 207 participation, 8, 138, 144, 154, 159, 205 partnerships Arab investors, 161 Egyptian Jews, 207 entrepreneurs, 115, 124 entrepreneurship, 204 joint stock companies, 110 networks, 102 public sector companies, 190 Pasha, Abbas Hilmi I, 72, 86 Pasha, Khedive Ismail disempowered, 81 – 2 Egypt, 73, 83 Egyptian Jews, 14 land ownership, 126 Suez Canal, 80 Pasha, Saʿid, 72 – 3, 80 peace, 23, 48 Peace Treaty (1978), 27 perceptions Egyptian Greeks, 12 Egyptian Jews, 24, 27, 37 history, 10 Jews, 25 minorities, 59 Permanent Council for the Development of National Production, 188, 191 persecution, 20, 34, 73, 196– 7 perspectives, 25 – 6, 28, 39, 62

INDEX Philipp, Thomas, 61, 148, 176 policy Arab Jews, 32 British occupation (1882–1922), 128 cotton production, 189 Egypt, 23, 135 Israel, 23 Misr Group, 138 Sidqi, Ismail, 145 politicization, 24, 34 politics Al-Yu¯na¯nı¯ al-Muttamasir, 155 ˙ Bank Misr, 131 British occupation (1882–1922), 127 Cairo Weaving Factories Company, 185– 6 circumstances, 13 climate, 27 context, 19 cotton production, 125– 6 crisis, 82, 192 economics, 14 events, 23 Egypt, 46, 135, 156 Egyptian Greeks, 141 Egyptian Jews, 35– 6, 47, 141, 198, 207– 8 Free Officer’s Revolt, 187 independence, 153 industry, 144– 5 instability, 173 landscape, 16 – 17 Middle East, 10, 202 minorities, 204 Misr Group, 139– 44 nationality law, 178 public sector companies, 193 regional, 192 structure, 3, 5, 10, 12, 29 Suez Canal, 194 terminology, 31 Zionism, 33, 41 – 44 populations, 65, 73 – 4 post-World War II, 158– 69

357

power alliances, 190– 2 balance of power, 68 Baring, Evelyn, 84 Egyptian Greeks, 126 leadership, 59, 199 state, 146 prejudices, 62, 150 private sector abolished, 190 economic reforms, 194– 5 Egypt, 174– 5 eliminated, 199 entrepreneurship, 200 foreign investment, 193 nationalization, 201– 2, 209 privileges, 8, 9, 10 public sector companies, 190, 193 Qattawi family, 76, 80, 89, 123, 137 Qattawi Pasha, Yusuf Aslan, 100– 1, 132, 134– 5, 136, 141 racism, 20, 21 – 2 reforms, 171, 187, 188 regulation, 188, 190 relationships, 5, 7 religious activities, 35 religious leadership, 58, 59, 67 – 8 reputation, 102, 204 research, 3, 7 resistance, 85, 153, 156, 188 Resolution 237 (14 June, 1967), 19 restrictions, 169– 70 revolution (1952), 24 risk, 95, 99, 100, 105, 125, 205 Rodrigue, Aron, 60, 62 –3 role Company Law 138 (1947), 171 economic minorities, 49 – 50 Egyptian Greeks, 122, 126, 205 Egyptian Jews, 122 entrepreneurs, 4, 119 foreign investment, 146

358

JEWISH

AND

GREEK COMMUNITIES IN EGYPT

joint stock companies, 93 minorities, 3, 7, 8 –11, 51, 202 Qattawi, Aslan, 101 Zionism, 27 Rossano-Fawzi, Dido (1920 –2011), 36, 37 Sadat, Anwat, President of Egypt, 23 Said, Jamal al-Din, 189– 90 scholarship Baring, Evelyn, 85 Egyptian– Israeli Peace Treaties, 19 Egyptian Jews, 19 history, 13 innovation, 97 networking, 118 Qattawi, Sambari, 76 terminology, 29, 60 – 3 Schumpeter, Joseph entrepreneurial theory, 96, 97 – 8 entrepreneurship, 122 growth theory, 93, 202, 204 information, 102 innovation, 104– 5, 130 Sephardic Jews communities, 76 Egyptian citizenship, 168 Egyptian Jews, 14, 44 –5, 75, 87 languages, 142– 3 migration, 74, 197 Qattawi Pasha, Yusuf Aslan, 132 Zionism, 36 shaha¯dat al-jinsiyya (nationality document), 178, 179 Shamir, Shimon, 165, 167– 8 Shenhav, Yehuda, 31 – 2 Sidqi, Ismail, 144– 5 social capital, 51, 94 social mobility, 10– 11, 50 – 1 socialist economics, 191 Socie´te´ Viticole et Vinicole d’Egypte (SVVE), 186 society, 2 –3, 4, 9 sources, 63 – 4

sovereignty, 151, 193, 194 state control Cicurel Department Stores, 179 Company Law 138 (1947), 171 economic development, 159 economic policies, 188 state intervention Cicurel Department Stores, 178– 9 economic development, 159 statistics, 63 – 5, 162– 6 status communities, 62 dhimmi, 54 economic status, 199 Egyptian Greeks, 9, 12, 72 Egyptian Jews, 24, 25, 72, 76, 164, 198 Egyptians, 82 employees, 179, 182–3 minorities, 8, 11, 59, 61, 63, 195 Ottoman Empire, 64 value systems, 96 stock market crash (1907), 126 strategies, 102– 4, 116, 122, 132, 136, 204 Suez Canal control, 84 Egypt, 80 – 3 Egyptian Greeks, 140 nationalization, 12, 192– 3, 194 Suez War, 197– 8 Suez Canal Company, 100–1, 176 Syria, 30, 59 Syrians Egyptian citizenship, 163, 167 investment, 160 joint stock companies, 176 legal status, 147, 148–51 networks, 144 private sector, 194– 5 tariffs, 145, 151 taxation Anglo – Egyptian Treaty (1936), 146

INDEX Baring, Evelyn, 91 al-Barrawi, Rashid, 189 Cairo Weaving Factories Company, 183 Egypt, 80 Egyptian Greeks, 77– 8 Ottoman Empire, 55– 6 Taymur, Mahmud Al-Katib al-Misri, 17 technology, 78, 121 terminology Arab Jew, 29, 30 Company Law 138 (1947), 171 components, 31 defined, 51 millet, 52 minorities, 56, 163 National Bourgeoisie, 206 nationality status, 182 scholarship, 60 –3 theories, 8 – 11 trade Ali Pasha al-Masʿud ibn Agha, 71 cotton production, 125 economic minorities, 49 –50 Egyptian Greeks, 70, 77, 86 Egyptian Jews, 72 Greeks, 50 Ottoman Empire, 56 transformations, 74 – 7 treaties, 55, 147 trust, 99, 101, 102, 103, 205 unemployment, 173, 174, 195 United Nations, 51 United Nations General Assembly, 175 United Nations Security Council, 19

359

United States of America, 38, 193 ʿUrabi movement, 80 – 3 value systems, 94, 99, 102 Viceroy (British), 83 –92 violence, 26, 32 Vitalis, Robert, 127–8, 129, 157, 160 Wafd Party, 36, 139, 141, 153, 197 World War I, 24, 128–9 World War II, 5, 153– 7 Yahu¯d Misr (2000), 162 ˙ Yishuv, 43, 44, 46 – 7 Zionism Al-Katib al-Misri, 17 appeal, 47 –8 Ashkenazi Jews, 36 awareness, 33 changes, 40 conceptions, 44 discourse, 16 doctrine, 26 Egyptian Jews, 16, 27, 40 – 8, 157, 197, 202– 3 factions, 18 Fargoun, Maurice, 154– 5 global dominance, 33 history, 41 Laskier, Mchael, 28 Middle East, 29 migration, 34 narratives, 13, 28 – 34 politics, 33 Shenhav, Yehuda, 31 –2 support, 45 territorial Zionism, 41

Image 1 Nicholas Parachimonas (right), engineer of several cotton varieties. Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET.

Image 2 Ginning Factory. Christos Angelis (left), an expert of the Egyptian government on the classification and export of cotton (1950s). Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET.

Image 3 Cigarette Factory Angelos Chelmis, Cairo (around 1910). Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET.

Image 4 George Moraites Pharmacy, Alexandria (around 1910). Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET.

Image 5 The bakery of Konstantinos Stergidis and Michael Tefos, Menouf (1916). Hellenic Literary and Historical Archive – National Bank Cultural Foundation ELIA-MIET.

Image 6 New London House; a store of clothes, men’s underwear, ties, shoes, shirts and sports goods located in the Suare`s Square (Midan Mustafa Kamil since 1940) was established by Jacques Abraham Arie (the father of Albert Arie) who immigrated from Istanbul and settled in Cairo after WWI. The store was burned on 26 January 1952 and reopened a few months later. This, and the following image, is from the re-opening in spring 1952. Private collection, Albert Arie.

Image 7 New London House; Albert (right) and Jacques Arie (sitting). Private collection, Albert Arie.

Image 8 Haggada Book, Passover Prayers, according to the Sephardic tradition, in Arabic (unknown year). Private collection, Nada Shalaby.

Image 9

The Jewish Quarter, Cairo (1947). Private collection, Albert Arie.

Image 10 Young widower Bechora Behar (1886 –1974) photographed with her children Malka-Nehama (1904 – 1992) and Moshe (1906 – 2002), Cairo (around 1925). All rights reserved to Dr Moshe Behar, University of Manchester.

Image 11 Cohen Brothers, Jewish store in Al-Moski, Cairo (around 1942). Vintage Egypt Personal Blog.

Image 12 Ms Mathilde Goldenberg (after marriage Mathilde Arie), mother of Albert Arie (1916). Private collection, Albert Arie.