Egypt and Cromer: A Study in Anglo-Egyptian Relations by Afaf Lutfi Al-Sayyid

Review by: Arthur Goldschmidt, Jr.

International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Apr., 1970), pp. 182-184
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/162441 .
Accessed: 21/09/2013 10:04
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
International Journal of Middle East Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 213.181.226.218 on Sat, 21 Sep 2013 10:04:05 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I82

Reviews

to the published writings of Stanford Shaw, incorrect. The actual trend was for the
emdnet lands to turn into tax farms (iltizdms) and finally into virtual freehold (malikane).

All were forms of muqdta'ain the Ottomansense of the term. The statementthat the
Syrians did not become predominantin Egyptianjournalismuntil after I882 (p. 171)
is belied by the informationthe authorproceeds to give on Adib Ishaq and Salim alNaqqash.Shaykh'All Yusuf,whose importanceVatikiotistends to overrate,died in 1913
on p. I92 and in I9I4 on p. 193. Butros Ghali's assassinstated unequivocallythat his
motives were political, not religious. The Coptic Congress was held in March I9II
(p. I97); the Muslim rejoindersix weeks later was non-politicaland possibly inspired
by the Agency. Gorst's policies did little to reduce the religiouselement in Egyptians'
political thinking. Khedive 'Abbas' interest in the Arab Caliphatewas not so brief as
Vatikiotisthinks (p. 206). The Egyptian moderatesformed the Umma Party in September I907; it was al-Jarida that came into existence in March (p. 215). Cromer's
last report was published in April I907, beforehis departure(p. 216). Mustafa Kamil
never advocatedviolent mass political action, and it was the Khedive's penchant for
secrecythat delayedthe formationof the NationalistParty (p. 217). The telephonewas
first introducedinto Egypt in i88I (p. 221) and was used by the Britishin their military
operationsthe followingyear. It is unfortunatethat the four maps, severalof which are
so similar as to seem redundant,appearat the end. They should have been related to
materialin the text. An enlarged map of lower Egypt would have been helpful. The
bibliography is useful, especially for beginners; specialists should also mine the
footnotes.
A shorter, more compactlyorganizedbook, such as Collins and Tignor, Egypt and
the Sudan(I967), would providea better introductionto modernEgyptianhistory, but
Vatikiotishas much to offer to the committed student of the subject.
ARTHUR

GOLDSCHMIDT,

JR.

The PennsylvaniaState University

AFAFLUTFi AL-SAYYID, Egypt and Cromer: a Study in Anglo-Egyptian Relations. John
Murray, London, I968. Pp. xiv+236. 455.

Since the appearanceof the seminal work of Robinson and Gallagher,Africa and the
Victorians,in I96I, historianshave acceptedthe pivotal role of Britain'soccupationof
Egypt in I882 in the ensuing partition of Africa, just as they have long appreciated
Egypt's importanceas a pawn in late nineteenthcenturyEuropeandiplomacy.Of equal
importance,however,is the effectof the Britishoccupationon the Egyptiansthemselves.
To revive an old question, why was it that, despite the obvious material benefits of
Britishrule, so many Egyptianswantedonly to be rid of it? Now that the last vestiges of
Western power in Egypt have vanished, a new generationof historiansis re-examining
the achievementsand failuresof Britain'swatch on the Nile. For many years, Englishspeakingreadersbalancedthe self-confidentpanegyricsof Lords Milner, Cromer,and
Lloyd againstthe attacksof Wilfrid Blunt, Theodore Rothstein, and John Hobson. As
recently as I956 Sir Hamilton Gibb could write that 'the true and full history of the
British Occupationhas still to be written'. Of the ensuing spate of books and articleson
British rule in Egypt, none more effectively evokes the spirit of the age than Afaf
Lutfi al-Sayyid's Egypt and Cromer:a Study in Anglo-EgyptianRelations.
Dr Lutfi, niece of the late Egyptian liberal intellectual, Ahmad Lutfi al-Sayyid,
brings to her subject a wealth of personal insights and anecdotes which few nonEgyptians could hope to match. Yet she writes as a professionalhistorian, not as an
apologist for Egyptian nationalism. She is frank and impartialin apportioningboth

This content downloaded from 213.181.226.218 on Sat, 21 Sep 2013 10:04:05 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews

I83

credit and blame among Englishmen and Egyptians. Her main thesis is that Lord
Cromer,Britain'sConsul-Generalin Cairoand virtual ruler of the country from I883
to 1907, prolongedthe dependenceof the Egyptianson foreign rule. Having successfully saved Egypt from bankruptcyand internationalcontrol, he came to view himself
as indispensable,deliberatelyunderminingkhedives, pashas, and any other Egyptians
who challenged his dominance. Especially significant, in my opinion, is Dr Lutfi's
chapter,'The Khedive and the Lord', in which she describesskillfullyand sympathetically the confrontationin 1893-94 of Egypt's legitimate but inexperiencedchief of
state, Khedive 'Abbas, against the wily old diplomat, old enough to be his father,
backed by the world's greatest armed power. She brings out clearly the anomalous
position of the Muhammad'All dynastyduringthe Britishoccupationof Egypt. King
Faruq had a similar confrontationwith another British diplomat rather like Cromer,
Lord Killearn,a half centurylater. A comparisonbetween 'Abbasand Faruqwould be
most revealing.
The reader can also learn much about the changes which British rule brought to
Egypt, as reflected in the evolution of the Egyptian nationalist movement from its
pre-Occupationbeginningsin the militarysecret society of 'Urabi and the pan-Islamic
teachings of Jamalal-Din al-Afghanito the secularnationalismof Mustafa Kamil and
the liberalismof Ahmad Lutfi al-Sayyid. Robert Tignor's Modernizationand British
ColonialRule in Egypt, 1882-19g4 (1967) is more thorough, but provides less insight
into either the British or the Egyptian mind. The casual reader,owing to Dr Lutfi's
engagingstyle, will scarcelybe awareof her prodigiouslabor in digesting great piles of
official documents and private papers in both English and Arabic.
Though I have also read many of the British officialdispatches and private correspondenceconcerningEgypt duringthis period,my own view of Cromerdivergessomewhatfromhers.The Proconsulwas acutelyconsciousof the limits on Britain'sfreedomof
action in Egypt, and often went to great lengths to soothe the sensibilitiesof the other
foreignpowers,the Khedive,and his ministers.He rode hardon the Britishofficials,but
he fully appreciatedthe folly of reiningin 'Abbaswhen he firstmountedthe throne. The
events leading to the crises of I893-4 were precipitated by the ineptitude of other
Britishofficialsduring Cromer'sabsenceand the instigationof the Anglophobesin the
Khedive's entourage. His alleged disregardfor native opinion is belied by his accessibility to Egyptians of all classes and his admirationfor those whom posterity has
recognized as truly outstanding, such as Muhammad 'Abduh and Sa'd Zaghlul.
Cromerconsideredthe Britishoccupationof Egypt necessaryto protect the reformsof
the governmentand preventa reversionto internationalcontrol; he did not believe that
the EgyptianslikedBritishrule. He did not see himself as indispensable;he gave cogent
argumentsfor his own retirementin I893, but Lord Rosebery could not and would
not replacehim.
There arealso some factualerrorswhich, however,do not detractfrom the qualityof
the author'swork.The Anglo-FrenchJointNote was deliveredin Januaryi882, not I881
(p. 14). The newspaperarticles supporting 'Abbas in the Ministerial Crisis began in
1892, not I893 (p. ioo). Deloncle's first name was Francois, not Etienne (p. 102).
Cromer was 51, not 60, in I893 (p. II4). Mustafa Kamil publicly broke with the
Khedive in 1904, not 1905 (p. 145). He first met 'Abbasin I893, not on advice given by
Nadim in 1895 (p. I56). Mme Juliette Adam was the editor of La nouvellerevue, not
Revue des deuxmondes(p. I57). Although founded in I900, al-Liwd' did not attain a
until after Dinshaway(p. I59). The Law School strike preceded
circulationof io0,00ooo
the climaxof the Taba Incident of I906, and the DinshawayIncident occurredin June,
not May, of that year (p. i66). WardaniassassinatedButros Ghali in 1910, not 1911

This content downloaded from 213.181.226.218 on Sat, 21 Sep 2013 10:04:05 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

184 Reviews
(p. I73). Except for Juliette Adam, I have found no evidence that Campbell-Bannerman
ever received Mustafa Kamil (p. 174), who died on Io, not 1, February I908 (p. I83).
The Khedive, not Gorst, chose Butros as Prime Minister in I908 (p. I99). Britain
declared the Protectorate in I9I4, not 19I5 (p. 204).
ARTHUR

GOLDSCHMIDT,

JR.

The Pennsylvania State University

'Unsuri, Wdmiq-o-Adhrd, ed. Maulawi Mohammad Shafi, University of the Panjab
Press, Lahore, 1967. Pp. iii + o (English text), xix + 276 (Persian and Urdu text);
37 plates and facsimiles.
This book, nicely printed on reasonable paper and with clear manuscript facsimiles,
has been published through the munificence of the Shah of Iran, who has given funds
to the University of the Panjab at Lahore for encouraging research into Persian literature and, in particular, for publishing newly edited Persian texts. In these days when,
for financial reasons, the printing of texts in Islamic languages has almost come to a
stop in the West, it is good that the Orient should now assume the task of editing and
publishing its own classics. The present volume is also the last work of the great
Arabic and Persian scholar, Professor M. Shafi (I883-I963), for long President of the
Oriental College at the University of Lahore, and then, after his retirement, Chairman
of the editorial board of the Urdu Encyclopaedia of Islam. The manuscript of the book
under review was left completed by Professor Shafi, but the lengthy critical and literary
historical sections preceding the actual restored text of 'Unsuri's poem were largely in
Urdu. To ensure the work's dissemination to a larger orientalist public, these sections
have been translated into Persian, and there is also a brief English introduction on the
history of the poem.
The structure of the book is thus complex, and the actual pagination system is positively surrealistic; hence to facilitate use of the book, a short analysis of the essential
constituents will perhaps be useful. At the English end, we have a Foreword and then
Shafi's Introduction on 'Unsuri's poem. At the Arabic script end, we have an Urdu
Foreword and then, in Persian, a memoir of Shafi, a bibliography of his works, and a
long critical introduction on the Wamiq and 'Adhra' theme and its utilizers in Islamic
literature. There then follows an Urdu version of this last, with the citation of Persian
verses somewhat cut down. We then come at last to 'Unsuri's actual text: Shafi's
restoration of the surviving fragments of the poem; a supplement giving scattered
verses of 'Unsuri's poem which can be found in other Persian works; and photographic
facsimiles, on 23 plates, of the original text of 'Unsuri discovered by Shafi. Finally,
there are full indices to both the critical introduction and the text of 'Unsuri.
Shafi had been for some time interested in the mathnawl version, in the mutaqdrib
metre, of the story of Wamiq and 'Adhra' made by the great Ghaznavid poet, who was
said to have been designated laureate or Amir al-Shu'ard' at Sultan Mahmud's court.
In 1953 he presented a communication on it at the Twenty-Third International Congress of Orientalists held at Cambridge (see the Proceedings, ed. D. Sinor, London
I954, pp. i6o-i). The story of the two lovers Wamiq and 'Adhra' seems to have been
known in Pahlavi; a copy of it is said to have been presented to 'Abdallah b. Tahir when
he was governor of Khurasan, but he ordered it to be destroyed, in company with all
other non-Islamic Persian and Zoroastrian works in his dominions (see Bosworth, 'The
Tahirids and Persian literature', Iran, vol. 7, I969, pp. 103-4). According to Ibn alNadim's Fihrist, an Arabic version of Wdmiq and 'Adhrd was first composed by the
famous translator for al-Ma'muin and fervent Shu'uibi, Sahl b. Harfun. Two centuries

This content downloaded from 213.181.226.218 on Sat, 21 Sep 2013 10:04:05 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions