IN THE COURTS OF THE NATIONS - DataSpace - Princeton ...

widespread.” This letter expressed the Makhzan’s frustration at some Jews’ attempts to
challenge the social order through the intervention of foreigners. It also captured the fear that if
the Makhzan acceded to foreigners’ demands, the rule of law would break down.
It is not clear which version of the Ntifa story to believe; did al-Ntīfī savagely beat Jacob
Dahan to death? Or did he administer a punishment that was acceptable according to the
standards of the day? Either way, two points emerge which counter the narrative of Jews being
saved from the oppressive Makhzan by foreign intervention. Firstly, the Makhzan felt that al-
Ntīfī was within his rights to punish Dahan for having transgressed Islamic law. Although the
Makhzan took responsibility for Dahan’s death (by paying his heirs an indemnity), it nonetheless
felt that Dahan had merited punishment. Secondly, and most importantly for our purposes, the
Jews of Demnat were themselves divided. One group, spearheaded by Dahan’s son, argued that
al-Ntīfī had murdered Dahan, while another group upheld al-Ntīfī’s version of events. This
second group even went so far as to lobby the Makhzan, through their connections to the Jewish
community in Fez, to retain al-Ntīfī in his post. To them, al-Ntīfī was an excellent governor,
“skilled in affairs and of good conduct.” These competing narratives demonstrate that, far from
uniformly perceiving themselves as victims of the Makhzan, Jews often disagreed about who the
culprit was in a given case.
A New Language of Equality
The Makhzan reacted to foreigners’ intervention on behalf of Jews in a number of ways.
At times, Makhzan officials attempted to justify themselves to foreigners by arguing that they
360