Encyclopaedia Judaica
Jews in the
Ottoman Empire 09: Details of domestic policy
Status questions - poll tax - Jewish buildings - bribe
system - Jewish quarters - dress and hat regulations for
Muslims and non-Muslims
from: Ottoman Empire; In:
Encyclopaedia Judaica 1971, vol. 16
presented by Michael Palomino (2008)
<Even though the rulers were sympathetic toward
immigrants from Christian Europe, these settlers were
nonetheless subject to the regulations and not granted a
status similar to that of the Muslims. Some of these
immigrants were permitted certain exceptions to these rules,
but this was only transitory. Certain individuals,
physicians in particular, were granted dispensations such as
tax exemptions - by imperial firman - and were allowed to
ride horses and dress normally. Those who were employed by
European powers covered by capitulations agreements also
enjoyed privileges and were exempt from special dress.
Christian travelers rather than Jews in the empire or
immigrants between Muslims and non-Muslims, as Jews were
accustomed both within and without the empire to such
afflictions. In their legal status within the empire the
Jews were not essentially on a different footing from
Christians, except for the fact that veteran Jewish
inhabitants could not find support from the European powers
which saw that it was their duty to protect Christianity in
Muslim countries.
THE POLL TAX.
[Abuse of the exemptions of
the poll tax - military-service exemption tax for
non-Muslims 1856-1909 - problems with levies, fines and
charges - Bukhara case]
The jizya (also kharaj or jawali) was generally
collected from small income earners, the middle class, and
the wealthy at a ratio of 1:2:4. Agents, interpreters, or
other employees (col. 1540)
of European powers who worked at consulates or embassies
were completely, or substantially, relieved of paying the
poll tax under capitulations agreements. Due to the abuse of
this exemption by ambassadors, the power of foreign
representatives to employ clerks was severely curtailed.
Ordinances in 1855 and 1856 replaced the poll tax with a
military-service exemption tax for non-Muslims (bedel-i'askeri). It was
abolished in 1909, when non-Muslims were compelled to serve
in the military, after the revolution of the Young Turks.
No complaints were voiced about the existence of the poll
tax, but there were numerous ones over the manner of its
collection and the imposition of others not based on Muslim
religious legislation - one-time levies, fines, and charges.
A feature endemic in all Muslim countries, they caused
troubles for the entire population regardless of creed.
A clear reference to the poll tax was contained in the 1857
Tunisian constitution, and capitulations agreements between
Morocco and European states at the end of the 19th century
mention exemption from personal taxes. The jizya was also
collected in the emirate of Bukhara from the Jews and not
from the Russian Christians, and this and all other forms of
discrimination continued there after it came under Russian
rule as a protectorate.
RESTRICTIONS ON BUILDING NEW SYNAGOGUES.
[Jewish buildings for
worship built under Islam rule - repair permission
problems in Jerusalem]
In spite of the fact that non-Muslims were limited in their
use of buildings for religious worship to those constructed
prior to the Arab conquest, they found ways to circumvent
this restriction. Indeed, many hundreds of buildings for
worship were constructed in cities founded under Islam, e.g.
in *Kairouan, Baghdad, Cairo, and Fez; a letter which
describes the destruction of the Jewish community in
Kairouan indicates that there were large and lavishly built
edifices of religious worship in that city. It is to be
noted that the conditions were not always so favorable in
this respect. The traveler *Obadiah of Bertinoro states that
a Jew was prohibited "to rebuild his house and yard (in
Jerusalem) without permission, even if they were falling
down, and the permit was sometimes more costly than the
rebuilding itself" (A. Yaari: Letters from Palestine, 130).
This was the state of affairs in Jerusalem, which was then
ruled by the Mamluks. The Ottoman sultan Muhammad II, at
about the same time, allowed the use and repair of old
synagogues, even though he prohibited the construction of
new ones. About a generation or two later Jacob ibn
Habib described the situation in Turkey as follows:
"We are not permitted to obtain permanent quarters for a
synagogue, let alone build one; we are compelled to hide
underground, and our prayers must not be heard because of
the danger" (quoted by Joseph Caro: Beit Yosef to Tur, Orah
Hayyim, 154).
[1854:
32 synagogues and 7 mosques in Safed - suspicion of bribe]
These regulations were used by zealous officials and
fanatical muftis and qadis to frustrate the Jews in their
efforts to worship, but in spite of this, many synagogues
were also built during Ottoman rule due to both tolerance
and greed on the part of the authorities. In 1854 a
complaint was lodged with the sultan concerning the large
number of synagogues in Safed; he issued the following
decree:
"Dhual-qa'ada, 992. Given to the person who brought the
petition. Order to the Beglerbeg (and) the qadi of Damascus:
The qadi of Safed sent a letter to My Threshold of Felicity
and reported that in the Town of Safed there are only seven
sacred mosques. And the Jews (who) in olden times had three
synagogues (kanisa)
have now 32 synagogues, and they have made their building
very high. And they have bought much real estate and
constituted it as pious foundations (waqf) for their
synagogues. (Thereby) they have given much annoyance to the
Muslims.
I have therefore ordered that you shall personally
investigate the said matter and report ... Are the
above-mentioned synagogues ancient synagogues which have
remained since the Inspired Conquest, or newly established
synagogues? If they are new, how (and) when were they
established?" (U. Heyd: Ottoman Documents on Palestine,
1552-1615 (1960), 169).
As the results of the inquiry and the action taken are
unknown, the matter may possibly have been taken care of by
a bribe. This state of affairs continued there until the
middle of the 19th century, and every major or minor repair
demanded the appropriate bribe for the official who had to
rule on the necessity of the action.
[Synagogues in Jerusalem]
The condition of synagogues in Jerusalem was poor; change
only came during the rule of Muhammad Ali. His son *Ibrahim
Pasha allowed two important synagogues in the Old City of
Jerusalem to be both enlarged and repaired.
[Bribe tradition in the
Ottoman Empire]
Since the situation of bribes continued to get worse, the
Turkish (col. 1541)
authorities were unable to overlook such a cause of
corruption, and in about 1841 a berat
of the hakham bashis [[imperial
warrant / authorization of the chief rabbis]] was issued which stated that the reading of the
Scroll of the Law (during services) in the house of the hakham and in other
houses was in accord with Jewish religious practice;
consequently it was allowed that veils be hung and
candelabra be placed in houses where the services took
place. Thus, synagogues and their property gained immunity
and could not be confiscated or held in security for debts.
As Jews were careful in most other Muslim countries in
building their places of worship so that they were not
readily noticeable - and as they lived in special quarters -
there is no record of trouble from the authorities. In
addition, there was little likelihood the feelings of
Muslims would be hurt.
[Synagogues in North Africa
under Ottoman rule]
Refugees in North Africa seem to have encountered little
difficulty in erecting their synagogues. Nonetheless,
D'Arvieux, who was the French consul in Algiers in 1674 and
1675, says that the Jews of that city had to pay large sums
to the Ottoman authorities in order to erect additional
places of worship. Furthermore, the Shabbatean movement
which had spread to Morocco a few years previously brought
on persecutions and the closure of synagogues in a number of
towns. Minyanim
[[religious service]] in Marrakesh were restricted to
private homes.
[Persecution of the Jews in
North Africa: pogroms - humiliating Jewish quarters locked
at night]
At times savage attacks were made upon synagogues by incited
mobs of Muslims or troops in mutiny. Various sources relate
that Scrolls of the Law were desecrated, religious articles
stolen, furniture burned, and buildings destroyed.
Nevertheless, these happenings were not connected with the
regulations of the Covenant of Omar, as they were in fact
violations of them. This being the case, when the troubles
passed, Muslim authorities were known at times to subsidize
the repairs. When persecutions took place in Fez in 1790-92,
a qadi requested of Moulay Suleiman that a mosque which had
been built in the Jewish quarter be destroyed; the sultan
ordered that this be done.
Jewish areas of residence in oriental towns only became
Jewish quarters in a negative sense after a wall around the
area had been built and the gates were locked at night.
After this occurred, the Muslims of the madina,
the (Muslin) city, would not settle in the Jewish quarter,
while refusing to allow the Jews to live outside it. Even
though it was asserted that the walls of the quarter were to
protect the Jews from incursions on the part of the mobs,
the experience was a humiliating one for the Jews, for even
in the absence of a physical wall separating them from the
city, there was a "wall of contempt".
[Jewish quarters in the
Middle East overcrowded and in precarious condition]
Middle Eastern Jewish quarters are frequently mentioned in
the writings of European travelers from the 16th century on,
laying stress on the conditions of overcrowding and poor
sanitation, dirt-filled narrow streets, and indifferent
state of health of the inhabitants. Nevertheless, it should
be realized that these sources were often not sufficiently
objective in their presentations. Even though the special
dress of non-Muslims in the East (ghiyar) is
described in detail by these European tourists, Jewish
sources were more concerned to determine deviations from the
regulations and whether they existed due to tolerance on the
part of the authorities or to a lax enforcement of the law.
[Ottoman dress regulations
for the Jews: headwear, clothing, and badges for Muslims
and non-Muslims - the regulations are not strictly
followed]
Difference in dress was the most common and at the same time
striking phenomenon. In Algiers the refugees from Spain wore
the capos or caperon, as
distinguished from the veteran inhabitants who wore the cap
(shashiyya).
As there were no Christians in the region at the time and
the Muslims wore no European clothes, the capos was also a sign
of the Jewishness of the wearer.
The chief rabbi of Constantinople prohibited the wearing of
the caperon, which
was the cloak of the Sephardi hakhamim [[sg. hakham, wise men]], in the
late 15th century. D'Arvieux gave the following description
of the clothing of the Jew in Algiers:
"the residents wore a bournous over a black shirt of
light-weight fabric and covered their heads with a black
woolen shashiyya [[woolen cap]];
those from other Muslim countries wore a turban of different
shape, ending in a tassel descending upon the shoulders; all
wore sandals without stockings. Livornese (from Leghorn) and
Alexandrian Jews wore hats and clothes like the Italians or
Spaniards, whose customs they even preserved" (L. D'Arvieux:
Memoirs du ... envoyé extraord (Paris, 1735), vol. 5, 288).
A number of orders, which are in the archives in
Constantinople, were issued by the qadi of the capital
between 1568 and 1837 to the official in charge (muhtasib) of
non-Muslims concerning the headwear and clothes of Jews and
Christians; in one particular instance such an order, which
was issued to the chief rabbi, is extant. These particular
orders stressed the headwear, as did similar clothing
regulations in Persia in the 17th and 18th centuries. The
headwear of the non-Muslim came to be such an established
(col. 1542)
characteristic that if it was replaced by the turban of the
Turks, it was considered as evidence of a change of religion
on the part of the wearer. Jews in the East generally had to
wear dark apparel, and light or colored dress was only
allowed on the Sabbath and the festivals, and then only
within their own quarters. Particular stringency existed
concerning the prohibition of the wearing of green (green
headwear was a sign of descent from the Prophet Muhammad)
and purple.
Nevertheless, there is evidence that the above-mentioned
Ottoman decrees were not strictly enforced, as 18th-century
sources mention that many Constantinople Jews wore green
turbans and the same kind of shoes as the Turks. There seems
to have been some doubt on the part of the Jews as to the
halakhic permissibility of this kind of dress, and a
discussion of the problem is preserved in rabbinic
literature. In that the strict proscription of wearing green
and purple clothes, which was issued in Morocco by Moulay
Yazid in 1790-92 (revoked by his successor Moulay Suleiman),
seemed to be unenforced, it can be said that the prohibitive
decrees were not strictly acted upon in the Maghreb either.
The ghiyar
[[badges]] continued to be mentioned in official Ottoman
sources until almost the middle of the 19th century.
In 1837 a decree was issued stating that Jews and Christians
permitted to wear the tarbush [[Turkish hat]] had to use
special marks on it so that it could be distinguishable from
that of Muslims.The berat
[[imperial warrant / authorization]] which was issued to the
first hakham bashi
[[chief rabbi]] of Jerusalem in 1841 states that his
official emissaries are held to be exempt from the ghiyar [[distinctive apparel and footwear regulation]] so that they might travel without being molested.
In addition, they were allowed to carry arms to defend
themselves if they were attacked.> (col. 1543)
