IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...
IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ... IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...
have written directly to the Minister of Complaints, or he might have written to some other Makhzan official either in his place of residence or in one of the capital cities. The precise channels through which complaints liked this one reached al-Misfīwī and thus were entered into the registers of the Ministry of Complaints are usually impossible to trace. Nonetheless, we can gather from this entry that at some point a scribe from the Ministry of Complaints wrote to al- Būmīdmānī concerning Isḥāq’s request. The letter recorded here was most likely al- Būmīdmānī’s reply to the initial letter about the debts. He responded that he would settle the matter when he returned from his participation in the sultan’s military campaign, at which point he would send the case to a sharī‘a court. Many entries preserve the sultan’s response to the official’s letter. These entries end with “our lord says,” followed by his opinion or command. Most of the time the sultan answered with a directive—perhaps most commonly that the case should be “settled” (yufāṣal, or simply al- faṣl). 105 Often the sultan asked for more information or requested documentation of the matter at hand. 106 The sultan sometimes responded “it is ordered,” acquiescing in the request of the author. 107 At other times, the sultan rejected the official’s request or claim—as in the case in which al-Tusūlī was commanded to settle the debts of Ḥayyim b. Ṭāṭā. 108 Al-Tusūlī pleaded that the case fell under the jurisdiction of another Makhzan official, but Mawlāy Ḥasan did not accept this excuse and ordered al-Tusūlī to investigate, since he had appointed al-Tusūlī as his representative. Finally, a number of entries have no answer whatsoever recorded; it is not clear 105 There are innumerable such cases: see, for instance, BH, K 181, p. 270, 12 Rabī‘ I 1310. 106 See in particular the discussion in the following chapter of the common response from the sultan that the matter had to be settled with “legal proof” (mūjib: on this word, see Sinaceur, Dictionnaire Colin, v. 8, 2028). 107 See, e.g., BH, K 174, p. 102, 18 Ramaḍān 1308. 108 BH, K 181, p. 110, 9 Rajab 1309. For another case in which the sultan refused to believe an official’s claim, see BH, K 181, p. 83, 25 Jumādā I 1309. 178
whether the sultan simply failed to respond to these letters, or if his response was never recorded. 109 The Ministry of Complaints was more than just an audience for hearing maẓālim; it also served as an administrative bureau for disseminating the sultan’s orders to lower functionaries scattered throughout Morocco. Fundamentally, its task was to facilitate the right of every subject to petition the sovereign directly. In this sense, the creation of the ministry did not signal a rupture in the functioning of the Moroccan state, but rather a modification in its organization. Yet given the lack of evidence regarding the period prior to the creation of the Ministry of Complaints, it is difficult to know the extent to which this institution changed the way individuals related to the state. It seems safe to surmise that centralizing the responses to petitions in a single ministry improved the efficiency with which the state responded to its subjects’ complaints, though it is not clear whether this increased efficiency encouraged more Moroccans to appeal to the Makhzan in the first place. We do know that individual Jews and Muslims petitioned the state for redress both before and after the period for which we have records from the Ministry of Complaints. * * * The next two chapters explore the role of the Makhzan as a forum to which Jews appealed when they could not resolve their legal disputes at the local level. Chapter Five examines individual petitions made by Jews to the state through the registers of the Ministry of Complaints. Chapter Six looks at collective petitions in which groups of Jews appealed to the 109 There were also instances in which the sultan’s response was abbreviated with the letters jīm shīn, which probably stand for “answer [and] explanation” (jawāb sharḥ). I am quite certain that jīm stands for “answer positively,” as it was quite common for the sultan to respond by saying “it should (or will) be answered positively, or granted” (yujāb). I am less certain about what shīn stands for: perhaps it means “explanation” as there are a number of entries which specify that the matter must be explained (tushraḥ): see, for instance, BH, K 157, p. 84, 18 Muḥarram 1306 (first and third entries). 179
- Page 137 and 138: Simultaneous Use of Jewish and Isla
- Page 139 and 140: evidence from the nineteenth centur
- Page 141 and 142: to sue other Jews in sharī‘a cou
- Page 143 and 144: But what about intra-Jewish lawsuit
- Page 145 and 146: ut for the most part this is a here
- Page 147 and 148: the sum of three duoros per month.
- Page 149 and 150: only in Jewish law. This happened i
- Page 151 and 152: in the millāḥ of Marrakesh on Ap
- Page 153 and 154: aware of Jewish law and sometimes t
- Page 155 and 156: of a rabbi to determine the proper
- Page 157 and 158: ‘Aṭṭār, in order to find out
- Page 159 and 160: Muslims’ jurisdictional boundary
- Page 161 and 162: that they had successfully done so.
- Page 163 and 164: the Moroccan legal system more broa
- Page 165 and 166: translated as the territories under
- Page 167 and 168: elatively scant work on the legal h
- Page 169 and 170: law, even if they did not consisten
- Page 171 and 172: abrupt end after his death, as the
- Page 173 and 174: put it, “in all medieval Muslim s
- Page 175 and 176: about its image in the eyes of fore
- Page 177 and 178: an injustice or an act of oppressio
- Page 179 and 180: In designing its new army, the Makh
- Page 181 and 182: The Ministry itself, although in co
- Page 183 and 184: Minister of Complaints, a man about
- Page 185 and 186: It is not entirely clear whether th
- Page 187: initial letters. 102 The convention
- Page 191 and 192: Chapter Five: Appeals to the Minist
- Page 193 and 194: Jews and the Ministry of Complaints
- Page 195 and 196: The nature of these sources prevent
- Page 197 and 198: Causes for Complaint Most of the ap
- Page 199 and 200: products (such as barley). 23 This,
- Page 201 and 202: appears numerous times). 29 While t
- Page 203 and 204: matter what their religious backgro
- Page 205 and 206: when amounts are specified they ten
- Page 207 and 208: cases which were ultimately settled
- Page 209 and 210: Jews who had been robbed. 62 The su
- Page 211 and 212: from July 28, 1892, a group of Jews
- Page 213 and 214: nature of sharī‘a courts. 83 In
- Page 215 and 216: legal proof of his claim. 91 It is
- Page 217 and 218: the Jewish victims were compensated
- Page 219 and 220: central government could only do so
- Page 221 and 222: and Muslim was responsible for arra
- Page 223 and 224: sometimes the Makhzan officials’
- Page 225 and 226: A more formidable obstacle to settl
- Page 227 and 228: The Jewish creditor, however, reque
- Page 229 and 230: The practice of exaggerating the va
- Page 231 and 232: official accused a Jew of falsifyin
- Page 233 and 234: esolve disputes with their Jewish d
- Page 235 and 236: property. 178 In this case, the Mak
- Page 237 and 238: Chapter Six: Collective Appeals to
whether the sultan simply failed to respond to these letters, or if his response was never<br />
recorded. 109<br />
The Ministry of Complaints was more than just an audience for hearing maẓālim; it also<br />
served as an administrative bureau for disseminating the sultan’s orders to lower functionaries<br />
scattered throughout Morocco. Fundamentally, its task was to facilitate the right of every subject<br />
to petition the sovereign directly. In this sense, the creation of the ministry did not signal a<br />
rupture in the functioning of the Moroccan state, but rather a modification in its organization.<br />
Yet given the lack of evidence regarding the period prior to the creation of the Ministry of<br />
Complaints, it is difficult to know the extent to which this institution changed the way<br />
individuals related to the state. It seems safe to surmise that centralizing the responses to<br />
petitions in a single ministry improved the efficiency with which the state responded to its<br />
subjects’ complaints, though it is not clear whether this increased efficiency encouraged more<br />
Moroccans to appeal to the Makhzan in the first place. We do know that individual Jews and<br />
Muslims petitioned the state for redress both before and after the period for which we have<br />
records from the Ministry of Complaints.<br />
* * *<br />
The next two chapters explore the role of the Makhzan as a forum to which Jews<br />
appealed when they could not resolve their legal disputes at the local level. Chapter Five<br />
examines individual petitions made by Jews to the state through the registers of the Ministry of<br />
Complaints. Chapter Six looks at collective petitions in which groups of Jews appealed to the<br />
109<br />
There were also instances in which the sultan’s response was abbreviated with the letters jīm shīn, which<br />
probably stand for “answer [and] explanation” (jawāb sharḥ). I am quite certain that jīm stands for “answer<br />
positively,” as it was quite common for the sultan to respond by saying “it should (or will) be answered positively,<br />
or granted” (yujāb). I am less certain about what shīn stands for: perhaps it means “explanation” as there are a<br />
number of entries which specify that the matter must be explained (tushraḥ): see, for instance, BH, K 157, p. 84, 18<br />
Muḥarram 1306 (first and third entries).<br />
179
Change language