The little document under examination today provides a glimpse into the administration of post-Ottoman Baghdad in the early days of British rule. Dated 29 July 1918, it contains a petition made at a time of great uncertainty. After Baghdad fell to the Anglo-Indian army in March 1917, the city's first months under the new rulers were dominated by debates over how the conquered areas should be run. Even as the war in the Ottoman realms continued up until the Armistice of Mudros at the end of October 1918, some sort of civil system needed to be implemented by the British in order to keep the city going; services needed running, and employees needed paying.
 |
| British troops in Baghdad, 1917. Imperial War Museum archives, ©IWM Q25308 |
This petition provides a small piece of evidence for the relationship between the old Ottoman and the new British bureaucracies. It is signed by one Zahrah Khanum bint Ahmad – possibly better rendered in a more Turkified Zehra Hanım – a resident of the Jadid Hasan Pasha mahalla, one of the most important neighbourhoods of late Ottoman Baghdad, near to the River Tigris around al-Rashid Street and al-Mutanabbi Street. This was a vibrant and developing part of the city, and one associated with political authority, situated near to the governor's quarters, al-qishla, with its dominant clock tower and streets with new-fangled electric lighting.
Zehra, we learn, was the widow of İsmail Hakkı Εfendi, who had held the rank of kaymakam. I'm still not entirely sure exactly which İsmail Hakkı this could be. There were a few floating around Iraq at that time, such as the İsmail Hakkı who served as kaymakam in various districts of the Basra province, including Kurna (al-Qurnah) and Sukuşşuyuh (Suq al-Shuyukh). Another possibility is the İsmail Hakkı from the 'Babanzade' clan, who was born in Baghdad in 1876 and who served as a deputy for that city in the Ottoman parliament after the 1908 Revolution, also writing for the pro-CUP newspaper Tanin. This İsmail Hakkı died in 1913 in Istanbul, and the question of his family and pensions appears in the correspondence of the Ottoman parliament in a series of documents spanning from 1914, such as this speaking about İsmail Hakkı's family (İsmail Hakkı Beyin ailesine), or specifically, as in this from December 1917, his wife (İsmail Hakkı Beyin zevcesine). Crucially, discussion was always in relation to 'the allocation of the pension in consideration of services to the nation' (Hidemat-ı Vataniyye tertibinden maaş tahsisine dair). He could be a fit, although there would have been a fair age difference of 33 years between our Zehra and that İsmail Hakkı. If any readers have any information on which İsmail Hakkı belongs to Zehra, please do get in touch! But in any event, Zehra's case is indicative of a number of widows of Ottoman officials relying, to varying degrees, on the pensions provided by the state for their own and their family's income.
 |
| Babanzade İsmail Hakkı, from an edition of Donanma of Eylül/Teşrin-i Evvel 1329 (September-November 1913) marking his death, via www.donanmatarihi.com |
The question that faced many of these women at the end of Empire was, what would happen to this pension in a post-Ottoman system? Just a short time after the British takeover, with Ottoman rule a very recent thing of the past, Zehra found herself needing to write to Baghdad's new masters on just this question. The petition is directed in Arabic to the chief financial official of Baghdad for salaries, of course still employing Ottoman-style honorifics (e.g. li-hudur 'ali-shan - to the high honourable presence of), and concerns – as petitions often do – the question of an increase in the amount given. Zehra Hanım had been receiving a pension of 45 rupees as İsmail Hakkı's widow by the Baghdadi authorities (khasastum lina ma'ash khamsa wa-arba'in rubiyya). However, as with many pensions, this may not have gone very far in general, and even less so given the instability of the times.
On a related side-note, it is worth noting that that the Indian rupee had replaced the Ottoman guruş almost entirely in Baghdad by this point; the Ottoman revenue stamp for this petition has been over-stamped with a rupee value. Working out how much 45 rupees in 1918 would be in real terms today is difficult. From some brief research, the sum was worth about £3 in 1918, which, if you play about on this excellent resource, could range from about £130 to £930 (US$190-US$1400) today depending on how you work it out. Of course, just what that might have got you in Baghdad at the time is a completely different story. One point of reference we have here is the revenue stamp used to submit this petition, which was for 8 annas, or half a rupee, equating to 8 pence, or between £1.40 and £10.20 (US$2-US$15) today. Another thing we don't know - although, as we will see, we do get a clue about - is Zehra Hanım's financial situation. This pension could have been a sole income or a supplement to other income streams, and if it was the sole income then the value would have been crucial. This speculation aside, one thing we do know about the value of this pension is that Zehra Hanım did not think it was enough for her needs.
Making her case to the ra'is, she complained, 'I am seventy-five years old and infirm, and my allocated pension is not sufficient for my subsistence.' ('umri khamsa wa-saba'in sana wa-ma'lula wa-ma'ash al-mukhasas lam yakfi i'ashati). Begging his mercy (istiham min marahimakum), she asked him to order a raise so that her allowance would be adequate to her needs (li-kifaya i'ashati), and to that end that her petition be passed to 'the great British state' (ila dawla al-fakhima al-Biritaniya).
This final statement gave a new connotation to the typical sort of ending to such a formal document, 'the matter is yours to command' (al-amr amrikum, which was also a formula found in some Ottoman documents as el-emr emrüküm). There were new masters in town calling the shots, and they perhaps saw no need to be particularly obliging to the widows of Ottoman officials. In the bottom corner of the petition is a short note written neatly in English, dated 30 September 1918, announcing a rejection of the petition's request, seemingly after enquiries had been made. On considering the level of the pension, the British official stationed at the finance department laconically concluded: 'Should suffice. Keeps four servants. Should practice domestic economy.'
It is unclear whether the judgement made was down to cultural differences (or hypocrisy, given the high level of domestic servitude in Britain), lack of funds, a disinclination to support the families of Ottoman employees, or a bit of all of three. Doubtless, Zehra Hanım would have been disappointed with this decision, but I wonder how differently she would have fared with such a request to an Ottoman administration. That there seems to have been correspondence with the Ottoman parliament, and presumably with Ottoman ministries too, means that she might have had a struggle on that front too. This, I suppose, is something that petitioners across the region must have wondered in such a transitional period. On the one hand, it may have been the case that the residents of Baghdad found that one military-bureaucratic regime had simply been replaced by another, with little difference in how they were dealt with. On the other, by the summer of 1918 it may well have seemed that some things were beginning to change under the new British administration, and many people connected with the old regime must have worried considerably for their financial security and future social position under the new, not least this widowed septuagenarian dismissed by the snide put-down of a foreign bureaucrat.
No comments:
Post a Comment