There have been many works on Muhammad 'Abduh since the beginning of the present century. One group of studies, as those done by Adams and Safran, tried to clarify the role played by 'Abduh in the formation of a modern society in Egypt or in modernization of Egypt; another group, including the studies by Caspar and Kerr, attempted to elucidate "similarity" or connection between 'Abduh's reform idea and the Islamic reform ideas which made appearance in the earlier periods. In the present paper the writer would like to clarify, through an examination of a relationship between his idea and movement, what was achieved by 'Abduh. The "Salafiyya" as so termed by 'Abduh is a broad concept and is characterized by the fact that he added Ash'ari in the Salaf. By so doing 'Abduh no doubt wanted to place himself as a follower of Ash'ari. According to 'Abduh, Ash'ari was the first person who tried to settle the long-standing antagonism in the ideological history of Islam between the two extremes, the "abuse of reason" and the "disregard" of it, standing as he did in an "intermediate" position. Caspar and Kerr, on the other hand, held that 'Abduh was a Mu'tazilite and that his claim tobe a follower of Ash'ari, therefore, was aimed at concealing his being a Mu'tazilite. The writer has doubts about their views, because they drew such conclusions from their comparative studies of the Ash'arite in the 19th century and the Mu'tazilite in the 10th century. The writer, however, is of the view that we should study how was 'Abduh's Salafiyya related to his reform movement. As for 'Abduh's reform movement, the writer, having analyzed nine reports and draft laws written by 'Abduh, as well as activities of five committees in which he took part, was able to find out details of the reforms he was concerned with and also the persons connected with him. While many past studies on 'Abduh pointed out that the persons most closely connected with 'Abduh's reform movement were Lord Cromer and Khedive 'Abbas Hilmi, the writer's own finding is that those most closely connected with the 'Abduh's reform movement were Mustafa Riyad, 'Ali Mubarak, Husein Fakhri and Mustafa Fahmi and that nearly all members of the 'Abduh group were specialized in legal affairs. It was also made clear that the British policy toward Egypt at that time was aimed at establishing an efficient administrative organization, from which appears a clear image of 'Abduh as an administrative official who exerted himself to reform the Islamic institutions (the Azhar, the Shari 'a Court, the Waqf administration, etc.) by means of legislation, rather than the image of 'Abduh as a thinker. As an administrative official who found himself in the deep "gulf" between the British authorities or the Egyptian government, on the one hand, and the religious institutions of Islam, on the other, 'Abduh pushed forward with his movement for reforming Islam. His intention at that was to resolutely carry out reforms of the Islamic institutions and thereby to save them from direct intervention by the British authorities or the Egyptian government. The 19th century Egyptian situation, in which 'Abduh fought his way, may probably be best paralleled by the days of Ash 'ari. That is why 'Abduh looked to Ash'ari who had found a way to cope with the "Islamic crisis" in his days for a prototype of solution of the similar crisis ten hundred years later. Again that is why 'Abduh did add Ash'ari in the Salaf.

抄録全体を表示

叙事詩には、ふつう、ことばの上でもまた内容的にも繰り返しが多くみられる。ホメロス学者のミルマン・パリーは、なぜ同じことばで同じことを何度も繰り返す必要があるのか、を問題にした。ホメロスが後世の、あるいは現代作家と同じように、紙とペンを使って書いたのであれば、むしろ繰り返しを避けたのではないか。つまりホメロスは文字を使わずに、あのように長く、複雑な物語詩を作り上げたのである。繰り返し使われる詩句は、特定の意味を伝えると同時に、詩行の特定の部分を埋めるよう工夫されている。したがって詩人は、そのような定型句をモザイクのように巧みに組み合わせることによって、口頭で、しかも一定の速度で物語らなければならないという要求に答えたのである。パリーの研究によると、ホメロス作品はすべて定型句から成っているという。しかも意味と定型句の関係は、ほぼ一対一対応である。何世代にもわたって受け継がれ、練り上げられてきた定型句、いわば叙事詩のことばを、用いたからこそ、ホメロスは素晴らしい叙事詩を残すことができたのである。小論は、以上のようなパリーの口頭詩論にもとづいて、フェルドウスイーの『シャー・ナーメ』が口頭詩の技術をもって作られていることを明らかにするものである。イランの代表的叙事詩とされながらも、『シャー・ナーメ』は、著者自ら文字資料に言及しているため、これまで狭義のliteratureとして扱われ、叙事詩としての特徴は、特に問題にされることもなかった。それどころか、先に述べたような口頭で作られた叙事詩に特有の語句やテーマの繰り返しは、文学作品として規定されているため、欠点として指摘されている。そこで、小論はパリーの後継者、アルバート・B・ロードが挙げる、口頭詩であるか否かを決める三つの規準、(a)定型句が使われていること、(b)一詩行内で文が完結していること、(c)一行が定型句から成るように物語がテーマの組み合わせによって作られていること、にそって『シャー・ナーメ』がどのように作られているかを順次考察していく。この手続きを経て初めて『シャー・ナーメ』を理解することができると考えるからである。

抄録全体を表示

Immediately after the conquest of Byzantine Constantinople by the Ottomans in 1453, the city began to be developed as the Ottoman capital, Istanbul. In order to discover the remaking process of Istanbul as an Islamic city, the documents concerning vakif (pious endowment) by Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror have great importance, because his construction of some pious or charitable institutions (e.g. mosques, medreses and hospitals) and a number of markets were undertaken within the framework of the vakif system, which contributed remarkably to the reorganization of Istanbul. Therefore the study of vakfives (endowment deeds) and other account registers concerning his vakif should provide valuable information on the details of this process. It should be also noted that these documents contain valuable information about the topography of the city of that period, since vakif of Sultan Mehmed covered almost all the districts of walled Istanbul and Galata. In spite of their obvious significance, usage of these documents as historical sources has been quite limited up till now. One of the reasons for this condition must be the insufficiency of the textual critique of the documents, which appear in several manuscripts some of which show great differences. Since none of the vakfiye manuscripts has ever been investigated in detail, much less compared with each other, the relationship between these manuscripts has not been exactly explained, even though they have been used by many scholars without comprehending their real character. In this paper, I will attempt to compare these documents in detail and show how and when each vakfiye was compiled. This fundamental work should better enable them to be utilized as historical source materials. At present nine original or copied vakfiyes of Sultan Mehmed concerning with walled Istanbul and Galata are known in the archives in Turkey. These are; 1: Topukapi Sarayi Muzesi Kutuphanesi Hazine No.1808 (published by T. Oz in 1935) 2: Turk ve Islam Eserleri Muzesi No.2202-666 (published by O. Ergin in 1945) 3: Basbakanlik Osmanli Arsivi Ali Emiri Tasnifi Fatih No.63 4: Basbakanlik Osmanli Arsivi Ali Emiri Tasnifi Fatih No.71 5: Tapu ve Kadastro Genel Mudurlugu Yeni No.2199 6: Topukapi Sarayi Muzesi Arsivi E.7744-4 (published by T. Oz in 1935) 7: Turk ve Islam Eserleri Muzesi No.2182-646 8: Tapu ve Kadastro Genel Mudurlugu Yeni No.2166 9: Vakiflar Genel Mudurlugu Anadolu Defteri, Fatih Vakfiyesi (published by Vakiflar Umum Mudurlugu in 1938) As a result of the analysis of these vakfiyes and other registers of the vakif. the following points become clear. (1) The first assignment of Sultan Mehmed's vakif to the Ayasofya Mosque was made around 1456. It can be known that there were two groups of property assigned to that vakif. One group includes shops and kerbansarays, the construction of which began in 1456 according to Kritoboulos' chronicle. The other includes mukata'a (rent) of the houses which remained from the Byzantine period and were inhabited by immigrants into Istanbul. Examination of the vakif documents of Sultan Mehmed makes it clear that the assignment of the mukata'a of those houses to vakif is closely related to the survey of the city buildings carried out by Cubbe Ali in 1455 or 56. Although Dursun Bey and Asikpasazade wrote that the levy of mukata'a was given up immediately after the survey, vakfive No.2 and the register of 1489/90 show that a part of mukata'a remained in the vakif property. It should be noted, however, that the vakfiye made at the time of this assignment has not yet been found. (2) In 1463, construction of a new institutional complex called Fatih Imareti was begun. The complex contained a mosque, eight medreses, eight small medreses, a hospital and a traveler's hostel. Up to 1472-3, during the service of Grand Vezir Mahmud Pasa, only the great mosque (Fatih Cami'i) and the eight

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

抄録全体を表示

This article will examine the Sulayman al-Nabulusi government (29/10/1956-10/4/1957) as an achievement of the national liberation movement of the Jordanian and Palestinian peoples in Jordan. The national movement in Jordan (al-haraka al-wataniya fi al-urdunn) led by the National Socialist Party (NSP, al-hizb al-watani al-ishtiraki) whose secretary-general was Sulayman al-Nabulusi, had been struggling against the military presence of Great Britain in Jordan. We will analyze the developments of the national movement in Jordan as the response to the drastic changes caused by the inflow of many Palestinian refugees to the East Bank of Jordan and the incorporation of the central Palestine (the West Bank of Jordan) into the Kingdom after the 1948 war. It is noted that NSP, composed of Jordanians and Palestinians, cooperated with the National Front and the Ba'th party in the parliamental strategy and then formed the coalition government with them, although diverse from one another in the political goals. Some observers wrongly criticize that the al-Nabulusi government was communist-oriented and tried to plot against the monarch. But the fact was that they internally tried the experiment of more political freedom in the public life while they externally pursued the political and military alliance with the 'liberated countries' such as Egypt and Syria and the Eastern Bloc. Other observers emphasize that the weak nature of NSP as the national bourgeois party had led to the failure of the experiment. But we must remember that the international circumstances did not allow them to complete this experiment. Because King Husayn had decided to choose U.S.A. as patron instead of Great Britain through accepting the Eisenhaur Doctorine. King Husayn used the rhetoric of "the threat of Communism" in his biography in the same context as the U.S. government, in order to charge the al-Nabulusi government for permitting communist activities in Jordan and to justify himself to accept American aids against the waves of the demonstrations which supported the nationalist government In conclusion, the experiment of the al-Nabulusi government fell victim to the American interests in the Middle East because Jordan was and continues to be strategically important, however poor and small, as a buffer-state in the region.

抄録全体を表示

Among few socio-economic studies of Palestine. Prof. Itagaki has once presumed that "Jewish" monopolies had formed in Palestine in the mid-1930s. This paper is an attempt to examine his presumption from the viewpoint of (Finance Capital). First, I traced the banking situation in Palestine in the mid-1930s. At the end of March 1936, 66% of total deposit and 45% of total loan (advances and bills discounted) were shared by six(6) foreign banks. The rest of percentage were shared by local banks and credit co-operative societies, the number of which was 169. Four out of those six foreign banks were called as "Big Four". The biggest was the Barclays Bank (D.C.O.) which acted as the government's bank and had 12 branches/agencies in Palestine. Then the Anglo-Palestine Bank which had 11 branches, the Ottoman Bank with 5 branches, the Banco di Roma with 4 branches followed. While foreign banks had advantages of receiving the deposits at low rate of interest and investing them to foreign guilt-edged securities, local banks received mainly time deposits at high rate of interest and lent them to the local customers. In consequence of the mass immigration from Germany, although the number of local banks rapidly increased from the beginning of 1930's, after the panic of 1935, a new banking regulation strengthened the consolidation of those small banks. It meant progress in the concentration of capital in banking business. Secondly, I analysed the interrelation of credit institutions in Palestine. The foreign banks seemed to have little connection with local credit institutions. However, the Anglo-Palestine Bank was an exception, and besides, an American investment company. Palestine Economic Corporation, had invested to many local credit institutions. I assume there existed two finance groups among local credit institutions. One was the (A.P.B.) group. Their nucleus was the Anglo-Palestine Bank which was a subsidiary of the Jewish Colonial Trust financed by the Lloyds' Bank and had close ties with Zionist Organization. The other was the (P.E.C.) group. An affiliate of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee, Palestine Economic Corpotaion, was their nucleus. Thirdly, I made an analysis of the relation between those two groups and four large local industrial enterprises. Those enterprises were the so-called "Jewish" monopolies consisting of Palestine Electric Corporation, Jerusalem Electric & Public Service Corporation, Portland Cement Company "Nesher" Ltd., and Palestine Potash Limited. In the way of the interlocking directorate of six members, the relation between P.E.C. and Palestine Potash Limited was very close. On the other hand, the facts that the main banker of Jerusalem Electric & Public Service Corporation was the Ottoman Bank, and that of Portland Cement Company "Nesher" Ltd. was the Barclays Bank, Ltd. may indicate their close connections with foreign banks. As for Palestine Electric Corporation, besides the Barclays Bank (D.C.O.), the A. P. B. had been nominated as its main banker. Moreover, the interlocking directorate of one number was between the corporation and the A. P. B. Although the nucleus of those two local finance groups were incorporated abroad, they had very close ties with two out of four local big industrial enterprises. In this respect, I may conclude the local finance capital in Palestine was formed in the mid-1930s.

抄録全体を表示

Four documents presented in this article are preserved in the Basbakanlik Osmanli Arsivi (BOA) in Istanbul. The classification and numbers of the documents are: (1): Hatt-i Humayun Tasnifi, No.56129 (2): ditto ,No.56206 (3): ditto ,No.56118 (4): ditto ,No.56210 According to the catalog kept in the reading room of BOA, the date of the four documents is 1204 A.H., imperial decrees (hatt-i humayun) written in the upper spaces of the documents (1)(3) are ascribed to Sultan Selim III, and as to kind of the documents, (1)(3) are telhis, (2) is pusula, (4) is takrir. We consider (1)(2)(3) to be written by a sadrazam, (4) was written by a Naksbendi seyh, named Seyyid Yahya. The documents are concerned with an Uzbek named Dost Muhammed Bahadir. He was originally from Kokand in Central Asia, and in the service of the ruler of Kokand, namely Narbuta Beg. He won fame for his activity in some battle fields, and had made pilgrimage to Mecca. Dost Muhammed again intended to make pilgrimage to Mecca, and departed from Kokand for Istanbul in Ramazan 1202 A.H.(1788 A.D.). But he gave up the idea of going on to Mecca after arriving in Istanbul, and wished to participate in an Ottoman war against infidels. He made petition to the Ottoman government for granting horses, guns, swords and traveling expenses to him and his four comrades. Seyyid Yahya who was a Naksbendi seyh of an Uzbek tekke (zaviye) near Sokollu Mehmed Pasa mosque at Sultanahmed district in Istanbul (BOA, Cevdet Tasnifi, Evkaf No.16241), wrote about the career of Dost Muhammed in a petition to the Ottoman sultan, probably Selim III. The Ottoman sultan instructed a pasa to send Dost Muhammed and his comrades to the battle field, giving them traveling expenses. Thus the four Ottoman documents not only relate the personal history of Dost Muhammed, but also show a function of an Uzbek tekke in Istanbul. The outline of the documents, Japanese translation, modern Turkish transcription and the Ottoman text are presented in this article.

抄録全体を表示

Thanks to the vast number of the documents of the Ottoman Empire, there are many studies in the social and economic history of the Ottoman Empire. But at the same time, there are also some problems in the trends of studies. Suraiya Faroqhi is one of the first-rate scholars who try to make a new type of study to overcome some problematic aspects of existing studies in the field. Therefore, by examining her studies, we can understand the general trends of the field and its problems. In 1930's. studies in the social and economic history of the Ottoman Empire began at first on the subject of the timar system. Especially Omer Lutfi Barkan successfully showed the importance of this kind of study, and gave great influences to the scholars all around the world. Now individual researches go down even to the smallest detail. Local history is in full bloom and specialization of research subjects is speeding up. So there is a danger to lose a sense of balance, and be isolated from others. And what is worse, as for the total picture of the Ottoman Empire, many scholars blindly adopted the theory invented in the West. According to this theory, the Ottoman Empire enjoyed her golden age until the end of the 16th century and after this fell into a period of decline. But this is clearly a one-sided view of the history. It puts too strong an emphasis on the external factors like the change of the world trade system and the influx of Spanish silver to the Ottoman Empire. Criticizing this tendency, some scholars began to make a new type of study based on detailed researches of the internal factors, such as the domestic economic system and the social structure. Today two major theoretical frameworks in the world historical studies, i.e. Immanuel Wallerstein's "Modern World-System" theory and that of the Annales school, are giving great impacts on a new generation of historians who seek a new total picture of the Ottoman Empire. Faroqhi is considered to belong to the Annales school. She tries to apply Fernand Braudel's theory to her studies. And using many documents, she makes detailed researches on various subjects like socio-religious aspects of Islam and rural and urban societies. In this way she tries to draw a more realistic picture of the Ottoman Empire. The 16th and 17th centuries are her specialized period. She chose them because, according to the old Western view, the Ottoman social system underwent a period of stagnation after the end of the 16th century. She criticizes this view by showing evidences of internal developments in these centuries. Towns and Townsmen of Ottoman Anatolia is a book with this intention in mind. The book is divided into three parts as the subtitle shows. Part One dealing with the trade among towns consists of four chapters; commercial constructions, overland trade, maritime trade and port towns. In Part Two, three crafts are studied in three chapters; textile, leather and metal crafts. Part Three is concerned with food production in four chapters; relationships of towns with their agricultural hinterlands, meat supply, land problems of townsmen and internal migrations. Finally she concludes that towns were still developing even in these days in contrast to the Western view. Though stimulating, this book is not free from problems. As she herself says, she investigated only in the western and central Anatolia and dealt with only a few aspects of urban life. And it seems that she attempts to unite into one volume two themes rather independent to each other; a monographic study of towns on one hand and a theorization of historical urban development on the other. The reviewer doesn't think she is necessarily successful in this regard. This book is the first attempts to show a hypothesis of the activeness of the Ottoman society and economy in consideration of the internal factors in these centuries. In spite of her weakness, Faroqhi

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

抄録全体を表示