A Quiet Revolution (5 page)

were at home with European thought.

Amin’s generation was probably the first generation of Arabs and Muslims to live the experience of biculturality—of double or divided consciousness. It was an experience that W. E. B. DuBois was just be- ginning to give voice to in America. In those same years Amin was strug- gling first to respond to European views of Islam and Muslims such as those set forth by the Duc D’Harcourt—views that he and other Euro- peanized Egyptians were now encountering for the first time—and sub- sequently coming to rethink his initial response to those views.

The very fact that Amin occupied this liminal, in-between space enabled him to import into Arabic thought and letters ideas that at the time were the commonplaces of European thought. Translating and im- porting these ideas, he intertwined them with another set of ideas, ideas in this case that were already under lively discussion in Muslim societies. This was the already well-developed argument that Muslim societies must “catch up” with Europe and emulate and import, in particular, Eu- ropean scientific and technological advances. It would thus be, above all, this fusion of European views on Islam and women in Islam with the

local desire to catch up with Europe that would give his book its force, causing it to provoke intense debate on its publication in
1899
.

Ideas about the importance of emulating the scientific advances and technological know-how of Europe, especially in their military applica- tions, first emerged as goals of major importance in Muslim societies fol- lowing Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt in
1799
. Subsequently, in
1801
, it would be only with the aid of a British force that the French were ousted from Egypt. The Napoleonic invasion, representing Europe’s first con- quest of Muslim lands forming part of the Ottoman Empire and mark- ing the beginning of Europe’s steadily growing imperial domination over those lands, remains to this day an iconic moment in Muslim and in par- ticular in Islamist narratives of history. The inability of the forces of the Ottoman Empire (of which Egypt was part) to repel the French vividly brought home to both Ottomans and local rulers how far the Ottoman Empire and the Islamic world had fallen behind Europe in military might. In the wake of these events, both Turkey and Egypt launched them- selves on the path of catching up with Europe. In Egypt, Muhammad Ali, an officer who rose to be commander in chief of the Ottoman force sent to Egypt to expel the French, was appointed governor of the coun- try. He quickly set about the task of importing European technologies and military and scientific know-how. He sent student missions to Eu- rope and established military and medical academies in Egypt, acade- mies that were often staffed by Europeans. He also founded translation schools with the object of spearheading a project of translating European

scientific knowledge and literature into Arabic.

Muhammad Ali, who became khedive of Egypt, pursued other changes, too, including agricultural reforms to increase productivity, and he established factories to produce textiles from locally grown cotton. The latter project did not prosper, however, as the British were deter- mined to stifle local competition for textiles produced in their own mills. Through a treaty with the Ottomans—who resented the advances made by Muhammad Ali—they succeeded in undermining Egypt’s nascent cotton industry.

Through the first half of the nineteenth century and beyond, Muhammad Ali and his successors continued to make advances by im-

porting European know-how. Rail lines, for example, constructed in the
1850
s, were an innovation that tremendously improved traveling condi- tions for, among others, the Westerners who were coming to Egypt in in- creasing numbers as tourists. In addition, Egypt was part of the Overland Route to India, the route taken by British officials and their families and others working in the service of the British Empire in India. Missionar- ies were also coming to Egypt and beginning to set up schools there.

All of this meant that Europeans and other Westerners—and their dress and ways—were increasingly becoming a familiar part of the Egyptian landscape. And as the decades passed, Egyptians too—students, the wealthy classes—were visiting Europe in rising numbers and be- coming acquainted with the West. And some of the wealthier Egyptians were adopting Western ways: following European clothing and furni- ture styles, and hiring European governesses to instruct their children.

A study of the Europeanization of dress and fashion that occurred in Turkey over the nineteenth century (an arduous task entailing close study of paintings and manuscript illustrations) observed that changes in Turkish dress and fashion through this period were directly related to the growing numbers of Europeans in the country, along with the grow- ing availability of European goods.
8

Such a study has yet to be undertaken in relation to Egypt. A letter written in the
1840
s by a traveler who had returned several times to the country over the preceding couple of decades captures a sense of the pal- pable and rapid and yet also intrinsically ephemeral changes that con-

temporaries felt themselves to be witnessing. Lamenting in his letter that Cairo was becoming altogether too Europeanized, the Orientalist Ed- ward W. Lane wrote that officials in Egypt were now abandoning native dress (“just as they had done in Istanbul”) and were taking to wearing European clothing. Lane (who himself always abandoned what he con- sidered uncomfortable Western dress the moment he arrived in Egypt in favor of the loose and comfortable robes of that country) found this change in local dress ridiculous. Now, he wrote, these officers were wear- ing “frock-coat, waistcoat, and trousers, the last as narrow as ours.” All of this was part of a trend, Lane went on to note, in which a “rapid march” toward the adoption of European ways in general had now be- come a “gallop.” People, especially the well-to-do, were even changing

the furniture of their houses. Divans were being bundled out of doors, re- placed by chairs and tables. Some people in Egypt, Lane further noted, were “very angry” at these changes, rightly (in his opinion) regarding them to be signs of deeper and more important changes that were now inexorably under way.
9

This passion for emulating European ways was given lively and os- tentatious expression in the plans and activities ordered by Khedive Is- mail for the lavish celebrations to mark the opening of the Suez Canal in
1869
. The preparations included the reconstruction and redesign of en-

tire areas of Cairo, where an opera house—the first such construction in Egypt—was to be built, and they included the widening of some of Cairo’s streets, which would now feature lampposts so that they would resemble the boulevards of Paris. European royalty were invited to at- tend, and Verdi was commissioned to compose the opera
Aida
in honor of the occasion.

But Ismail’s extravagance and debts would soon set in motion a train of events that would lead to the landing of British forces in Egypt and, thereafter, to the beginning of the British Occupation of Egypt in
1882
. When Ismail proved unable to repay his debts to European banks, British and French financial controllers were appointed to oversee their repay- ment. When Ismail failed to comply with their recommendations, the British arranged to have him deposed in favor of his son Tewfik. In
1881
, unhappy with Tewfik’s rule and his compliance with the European Pow- ers, a group of Egyptian officers rebelled, demanding change and a con- stitution that would limit the ruler’s autocratic powers. Tewfik appealed to the European Powers for assistance against the rebellion. The French refused. The British, however, bombarded Alexandria and landed their troops in the country. Thus began their Occupation of Egypt, which would endure until
1954
.

The British appointed Evelyn Baring, later Lord Cromer, as their consul general and agent in Egypt. Cromer was a member of the power- ful Baring banking family (rivals of the Rothschilds) to whom Ismail had owed large debts. He had first come to Egypt as the British controller overseeing Ismail’s debt repayments. Following the British Occupation, Cromer would return to Egypt in
1883
, now as Britain’s consul general,

a post he would retain for twenty-four years. Despite his innocuous- sounding title, Cromer in fact would rule the country essentially as its “uncrowned king” throughout his tenure. Nevertheless, the khedive would be the country’s nominal ruler.

The system of rule the British established in Egypt would come to be known as the Veiled Protectorate. Under this system, as Afaf Lutfi al- Sayyid Marsot explains it, “the British in Egypt were to be the real rulers, but were not to be responsible to anyone but the British government. They were to rule from behind a façade of Egyptian ministers who had little authority, and were rubber stamps for the British manipulators.”
10
During his first decade in Egypt, Cromer would work to restore Egypt’s finances. But he would also take a strong stand against ending the Occupation within a short period, which the British had initially promised to do. Cromer maintained that Egyptians were incapable of

self-government without European assistance.
11

These positions were naturally resented by many in Egypt. In ad- dition, Cromer, as well as his advisor on education, Douglas Dunlop, would provoke intense resentment with their inflexibility and biases on education. Even Egyptians who favored working with the British ad- ministration toward eventual independence were critical of Cromer’s re- fusal to invest the country’s resources in improving education—even though, as Cromer himself admitted, there was strong demand for edu- cational opportunities for their children, girls as well as boys.
12
Prior to British rule, free education had begun to be available at some govern- ment primary schools. But the British administration not only refused to expand education in response to demand, it even cut back on free edu-

cation. By the time Cromer left Egypt in
1907
, free education in govern-

ment primary schools, he would proudly note, had been “practically abolished.”
13

Also fueling popular resentment against the British were the prac- tices of racial bias and discrimination that they introduced into the coun- try. There were bitter complaints, for example, about the administration’s practice of passing over qualified Egyptian applicants for government posts in favor of novices freshly arrived from Britain.
14

In
1906
an incident occurred between villagers and British soldiers

in the delta village of Dinshawai, and the outcome would be a court case

that contemporary Egyptians and their allies in Britain would see as epit- omizing British racism and injustice. The situation was a complicated one, involving British soldiers out pigeon-shooting and accidentally wounding several villagers, following which the soldiers were chased and beaten by some villagers. One of the soldiers, ordered by his officer to run back to camp for help, died that evening of sunstroke and a blow to the head. The verdict following the trial included the execution by hanging of four villagers for intentional murder, penal servitude for life for two men, including the husband of a woman who had been wounded by British gunfire, and the public flogging of eight men. The hangings and floggings were to be carried out in front of the villagers. The pronouncement of the verdict plunged the country into a mood of gloom and outrage.
15
In the aftermath of this event Cromer resigned on grounds of health.

Soon after leaving the country Cromer published his book
Modern Egypt
. In it Cromer (who had earlier served in India as secretary to Lord Northbrook, viceroy to India and Cromer’s cousin) freely expressed his views about race and his beliefs regarding the inferiority of the “dark- skinned Eastern as compared to the fair-skinned Western.” In addition, Cromer made clear his strong belief in the inferiority of Islam to Chris- tianity and of Muslims to Christians.
16
Such views were not of course unique. Rather, as Cromer’s biographer Roger Owen observes, Cromer’s views on these matters “were probably held by the vast majority of Eu- ropeans and North Americans at this time.”
17
Cromer’s book quickly became a success, selling very well in England and America. Owen spec- ulates that among the chief reasons for its success was that it “reflected the spirit of the age: a pride not only in empire but also in the manage- ment of subject races.”
18

Similarly, Cromer repeated in his book the typical views of the day about Islam’s “degradation” of women as exemplified in the practice of veiling. While Christianity “elevated” women, Cromer wrote, Islam “de- graded” them, a fact that was evidenced, he declared, by “radical” dif- ferences, among them particularly the fact that “the face of the Moslem woman is veiled when she appears in public. She lives a life of seclusion.” In contrast, “the face of the European woman is exposed to view in pub- lic. The only restraints placed on her movement are those dictated by her own sense of propriety.”
19

Cromer, it should be made clear, was most emphatically not a sup- porter of the movement for women’s rights—in fact, he was its formi- dable opponent, serving for a time as the president of the Society Opposed to Women’s Suffrage. In a speech against votes for women, for example, Cromer asked whether it was acceptable for an imperial nation to “dethrone woman from that position of gentle yet commanding in- fluence she now occupies... and substitute in her place the unsexed woman voting at the polling booth?” This “battle of the sexes” must be staunchly resisted, Cromer wrote, for it would sow “discord and confu- sion in every family in the country.” Men needed to be “manly” and women “womanly.” Any “endeavour to invert the natural role of the sexes,” Cromer argued, would be disastrous for England and Empire.
20
In relation to Muslim women, however, Cromer firmly maintained