Culture is not merely a collection of texts, writings, memories, narratives, drawings, compositions, systems, prose, or tales. Culture is a vision for society, economy, politics, governance, and administration. It embodies the spirit and conscience of the people, their deep-seated temperament, identity, passion for life, approach to it, and their vigor in its stream, enduring both ease and hardship.
Culture in this sense is a concern for the collective individuals who share a single society at a single time. It is not only the business of those with the titles and badges of intellectuals; it encompasses everyone. Culture is a social, economic, spiritual, and political structure that envelops individuals regardless of their fate or the distance between their positions. To put it briefly, it is the collective people of a nation that produce its culture, in solidarity, generation after generation. Culture gradually changes to the extent a new vision prevails over an older, once-dominant view.
The Power of Money and Authority
A revolution is not merely uprisings, surges, or moments of public rage that erupt and then subside in defeat or victory. A revolution is the natural, persistent endeavor of individuals and the collective towards improving their livelihood. Livelihood matters revolve around an individual's share of two forces: the power of money and authority. Whether or not people realize it, they instinctively strive toward wealth and power just as intensely as they instinctively shun poverty and weakness.
Ibn Khaldun, on page 150 of his 'Muqaddimah', asserts, "Man is by nature destined to Exercise command in virtue of the vicegerency with which he was endowed at his creation. When the ruler is overpowered and prevented from achieving his noble objects, he becomes lazy, even in taking proper nourishment for himself." He continues, "Cultivation of the earth only occurs because of the strength of hope, since it is activated by the vitality in life forces."
In this sense, a revolution is a structural movement that encompasses society as society encompasses individuals with their ambitions, contradictions, desires, conflicts, and the forcefulness of their struggle—whether instinctual or rational—toward the twin goals of wealth and authority.
A revolution, therefore, is an unceasing struggle throughout time, from which have emerged the transformations of wealth and power, often slipping from the control of once-dominant classes to newly emerging ones. The wheel keeps turning as long as the clock hands move through the darkness of night or the light of day.
Culture and revolution, vision and change, the collective struggle for sources of wealth and seats of power are human nature, applicable to all humankind. It is the direction of human motion, whether motivated by animal instinct or rational intention. Thus, it encapsulates both the general history of humankind and its particularities.
The totally subdued human, secure in their share of defeat, and resigned to the will of their conquerors and oppressors, is described by Ibn Khaldun as one "reduced to slavery, becomes a burden on others. His social organization crumbles, and his efforts and pursuits vanish. He becomes incapable of defense due to the broken resistance within him, hence vanquished by every dominator, just as he becomes prey for every predator," and he adds, "When man is defeated in his affairs and becomes a tool in the hands of others, his survival is short, thereafter he disappears – that is, becomes extinct – as if he never existed."
The System of Commitment
Recognizing such vision, Ibn Khaldun (1332 – 1406 CE), despite the six centuries since his demise, remains an integral part of contemporary world culture. This was understood by the founder of contemporary Egyptian culture, Abd al-Rahman al-Jabarti (1753 – 1825 CE), who described Ibn Khaldun's introduction as "a turbulent sea of knowledge, laden with the precious jewels of spoken and understood wisdom."
Similarly, as Barrington Moore Jr. (1913 – 2005 CE) traced the origins of Western capitalist society back to the 14th century in his book "The Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy," it is essential to shed light on Egypt's historical experience to comprehend contemporary Egyptian society.
The seeds of modernity in Egyptian society preceded the modernity associated with Muhammad Ali Pasha; that is, the modernity that came with European colonization. Egyptian modernity began from within, from internal developments, driven by their pursuit of the twin goals of wealth and then power. This was due to the gradual weakening of the ruling Ottoman authority, with its supreme sovereignty since the second half of the 17th century, notably in 1658 CE. This date marks the establishment of the 'iltizam' (commitment) system, which was at the core of the struggle for wealth and power in Egypt.
Previously, the Ottoman authority was strong enough to possess an efficient bureaucracy for tax collection in a predominantly agricultural economy. But as this bureaucracy decayed and became lax with the gradual weakening at the center of power in Istanbul, the 'iltizam' system was devised. It involved auctions for the taxation rights of several villages. The highest bidder would pay the required financial obligations of the villages in advance, then collect the dues from the leaseholders, retaining the difference between what was paid and collected.
Then came the 'wusya' system, where the 'multazim' (commitment holder) would own a tenth or half a tenth of the lands under their control, exempt from taxes and engaging the peasants in 'sukhra' – forced labor without compensation.
This system, over time, allowed Egyptians, who were neither part of the dual ruling class of the Turks or the Mamluks, to compete for 'iltizam' contracts. This became a broad channel for the social mobility of Egyptians in their pursuit of wealth and power.
As the roots of European modernity can be traced back to the emergence of cities and the formation of a commercial, industrial, artisanal, and professional class distinct from the noble feudal landowners and peasants, Egypt was also undergoing a transformation. By the end of the 17th century and throughout the 18th century, a new urban Egyptian class was emerging, a third class, distinct from the Turks and Mamluks, but benefiting from the weakening of the Ottoman authority, as well as from the divisions and conflicts among the local ruling elite of the Mamluks' factions. Egyptians spent the second half of the 17th century and the entire 18th century without a strong, repressive central authority.
Open Channels for Wealth
In this political climate, without the grip of central authority, Egyptians found accessible paths to wealth and power, whether through competing for lands of commitment or monopolizing the Red Sea trade. A wealthy, influential urban Egyptian class emerged – this is the genuine root of the culture and revolution – having a vision for reality, then pursuing one's share of wealth and power.
This class, whether in Cairo, provincial cities, or the countryside, comprised scholars and merchants. The scholars didn’t derive their strength solely from jurisprudence, religious studies, or the grandeur of Islamic law and the veneration of Al-Azhar Mosque. Primarily, their prestige stemmed from their social and economic position as an independent force in society, relying on their means rather than receiving salaries from the sultans or their sustenance from the Mamluks.
The scholars of the 18th century weren't beset by poverty and distress like the intellectuals of the modern state. They were either under the wing of rulers, living comfortably and securing against their wrath, or facing poverty, hunger, oppression, and abuse. The 18th-century scholars, apart from their jurisprudential roles, academic positions, and religious standing, were also holders of commitments, investors, and owners of vast, profitable estates; seeds of a promising capitalist class.
According to Dr. Abdul Azim Ramadan (1925 – 2007) in his book "The Colonial Invasion of the Arab World and Resistance Movements" (p. 46), “The scholars entered the system of commitment since its implementation. Before the French campaign, there were 307 Azharite scholars holding commitments." He mentions that Sheikh Abdullah al-Sharqawi (1737 – 1812), Sheikh of Al-Azhar Mosque, was a holder of commitments, as was the historian Sheikh Abd al-Rahman al-Jabarti.
This urban class, with its financial, commercial character and its political aspirations, in a climate where the weakened state’s authority created gaps, was, and continues to be, redefining culture and revolution. Culture represents a quest for justice, freedom, equality, and the preservation of rights and duties, while revolution stands as a defense of Egyptians' rights to their country's wealth and the levers of command and control.
An Extraordinary Historical Moment
From the moment this class's seeds were formed, it experienced periods of ascension when central authority weakened, then regressed when power tightened its grip, seizing both wealth and governance. This class flourished in the latter half of the 18th century, then weakened under the rule of Muhammad Ali Pasha, only to breathe again with the beginning of the unraveling of his economic grip.
It prospered under the weakened Khedivate, benefited from British favoritism to counter the influence of Turkish and Circassian origins, just as it had benefited from Napoleon Bonaparte's support as a counter-weight to the Mamluks. The class found respite during the 1990s and the first decade of the 21st century, but its prospects for growth were stifled in the decade from 2013 to 2023.
In a historical moment that seemed like destiny, this class appeared as if on cue, congregating in the squares in January and February 2011 to redefine culture and revolution in four words: Bread, Freedom, Social Justice, and Human Dignity.
These four concepts were first known to modern Egyptians in the summer of 1795 CE – seven years after the French Revolution and three years before the French invasion of Egypt.
On page 387 of the second volume of Al-Jabarti's "Marvels of Biographies and News", when chronicling the year 1209 AH / 1795 CE, he comments on an event distinct from the authorities' tyranny. Murad Bey (1750 – 1801), who settled in Giza, increased his construction, and seized most of Giza’s land – some through cheap transactions, some through force, and some through exchanges.
Then, as he discusses the Egyptian revolution of that year – which Abdul Azim Ramadan has likened to the Magna Carta – historian Dr. Emad Eddin Abu Ghazi correlates it with the July 23, 1952 revolution based on both occurring in July and having a significant impact on modern Egyptian history.
Abd al-Rahman al-Jabarti, through his historical work, laid the foundation for a culture of confrontation on two fronts: domestic tyranny and foreign invasion.
