The Roots of Political Islam in 19th Century Egypt

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have one primary suggestion for revision and that is about the conceptual meaning of "political Islam." What makes a view or a practice "political Islam" such that everyone from Tahtawi to Jawish to Banna are part of it? What is not political Islam? Is it a single tradition or phenomenon or is Islam politicized in a variety of ways at different times by different actors? 

Author Response

Thank you so much for taking the time to review my article! Yes, you are right. It benefits the article to present a clear definition of political Islam. I am not arguing however that political Islam was born with the French Campaign. My argument is that what came to be known as political Islam had been in a two century formation process that shaped its structures, ideas, practices, etc. The confrontation with the West, the emergence of a centralized state, the formation of a national army and economy, the intellectual analysis of the West in Tahtawi and his cultural translation of the West into a tradition of Islam, and so on and so forth, all of this left their marks on what was born in 1928 as MBG. However, you are right. I need to present a clear definition of political Islam since I mentioned that at the final stage we had three forms of political Islam, and that the MBG is the continuation of only one of them: Jāwīš and Kāmil.

Thank you!

Reviewer 2 Report

This article makes a significant contribution in the study of political Islam. Its uncovering of a particular genealogy for Muslim Brotherhood will be of great interest to many. It could improve in at least two respects. In presentation, its language needs thorough review and editing. The presentation could also facilitated with the help of one or two tables of the main characters and their connections in different periods. For anyone not used to the numerous figures mentioned covering nearly half a century, it would be impossible to keep track of all the necessary information. In terms of substance, the article could benefit from a conclusion that summarizes its findings and entertains further research and questioning. For instance, if Hasan al-Banna's movement comes out of Jawish's vision and activism so directly, the writings of Banna and the MB leaders can be fruitfully explored to detect the presence of Jawish and Mustafa Kamil. Were these referenced? Or is this a problem to be explored in future?

Apart from this, there are numerous minor errors. E.g. l. 186 mentions Napoleon's activity in 1897 (rather than 1797). On l. 558: Only the second part is justified by al-Nawawi--not the equality, at least according to how M Imara quotes Nawawi (and given Nawawi's traditional dhimmma-based jurisprudence). This comes across as misleading. Errors at l. 660, 677, 787, and throughout. The claims at l. 790, 829, 896 should be referenced. The term nationalism (e.g. at l. 986) should be defined, as it seems to mean something other than territorial nationalism.

Author Response

Thank you so much for taking the time to review my article!

1. Language: Okay, I will go through it again to review it and edit it.
2. Table of the main characters: I don't mind adding this table. I am only concerned that it will make the long article longer, but it is a good idea, and will help the reader.
3. Conclusion: Okay, I will add a conclusion. I can't however reference al-Banna's works in the works of Jāwīš. This would be extra 60 pages. Your suggestion is good: mentioning that this is something to be studied and presented in future research.
4. 1898: Yes, this is a typo. I meant 1798.
5. Nawawi: Of course this is not how al-Nawawi thought of it. I am not presenting Nawawi, however. I am presenting how Nawawi was "used" and recycled in new discourses. You can argue that it was misleading, but it is Tahtawi who is misleading. Adding a discussion on Nawawi, and everytime I think the modern reading of the tradition deviated from the traditional meaning will make me add at least 60 more pages and they won't be relevant to this topic. By the way, we can do this about everything, Jihad for instance, or maslahah... Traditional concepts when they are used in modern discourses they change their meanings.
6. Nationalism: Like political Islam, nationalism too was in a formation process where it took its final shape only gradually. This is why nationalism in Tahtawi is certainly, and expectedly, different than nationalism in, say, Mustafa Kamil. I will add a standard definition, however, so the reader understand how the process is going.

Thanks a million for reading my long article and providing good advice!

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an excellent article. The author outlines clearly the objectives and describes (A) how his view on the roots of political Islam in 19th century Egypt goes beyond the state-of-the-art, and (B) the extent to which the article is original, ambitious and promises relevant outputs. It is highly innovative and realistic, and it is expected to advance this research field substantially.

Sadly, I have identified a serious problem in this work, which has to do primarily with the way it has been structured. First, there is no conclusion. I understand perfectly where does the research end up, but we need a section in the end that (A) summarises what the study has been about, (B) identifies questions arising from this study that could be addressed in another research and (C) explains how this study could influence other researchers. Second, there is too much - albeit outstanding - historical information here. After reading a few paragraphs I become entirely lost within this ocean of (undeniable useful) information. One way to sort this out is to use signposting sentences at the end of each section, explaining what the next section will be and how the historical information (that will take place on the next section) will contribute to the main objective of this study, to identify the roots of political Islam in 19th century Egypt.

One window of choice for me as a reviewer is to accept the article after minor revisions. But it seems  that the article would require a bit more work than just correcting typos; perhaps not major surgery but some important modifications must be made. Thus, I have to consider publication after major revisions (moderate revisions, perhaps). Upon addressing these problems I believe the article would be of publishable quality. 

Author Response

Thank you so much for your review!

1. Conclusion: Okay, I will add a conclusion. I will attend to the three points that you want them included in the conclusion.
2. Signposting: Okay, I will do this as I review the article for language mistakes.
3. Important modifications: You did not mention what modifications you want them made.

Thanks again for taking the time to read a long article and write your review!

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The new version of the article is much better than the previous. The autho(r) has(ve) added a Conclusion, which was missing before. I am confident to reccomend this article for publication after making some minor changes. There are some sentences that lack citation. For example: 'Napoleon participated in and sponsored Islamic festivals and did his best to favor Muslim scholars. Even politically, he announced that France is an ally of the Ottoman Caliph' (p.4); 'Al-Dīwān, however, was significant, but not because it introduced the Egyptians to the ideas of freedom, justice and democracy. It was important because it introduced them to a new technique of governing' (p.5); 'Finally, by threatening and fighting the Ottomans, he forced them to reach an agreement with him, recognizing the hereditary rule of his family and clearer borders to his country' (p.6); 'To fulfill these political and economic objectives, Ali realized the need to import the new European technologies and techniques, whether in governmental administration, medicine, schooling, industry, weaponry, etc' (ibid); 'The politico-military function was seen as a professional operation that can be, or even better be run by non-locals. Ali, an ethnic Albanian, did not speak Arabic, and his wars were typically against other Arabs and Muslims, whether in Arabia, the Levant or Sudan. The aim of these wars was not to protect any assumed borders but to expand them' (p.8). Similar sentences, that refer to historical facts but do not point to a source, exist in the whole manuscript. The author(s) must provide evidence confirming the validity of all these claims. After that I could consider the paper for publication. 

Another comment I would like to make is that after p.16 for some reason I do not understand all sentences appear in italics. If the editors agree to publish the article they have to consider the text format. 

Author Response

Thank you for your review! Here is my response:

1. "'Napoleon participated in and sponsored Islamic festivals and did his best to favor Muslim scholars. Even politically, he announced that France is an ally of the Ottoman Caliph'" I added the source.
   

   Juan Cole, Napoleon’s Egypt: Invading the Middle East (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2007), 127.

2. "'Al-Dīwān, however, was significant, but not because it introduced the Egyptians to the ideas of freedom, justice and democracy. It was important because it introduced them to a new technique of governing' (p.5)" This sentence is based on the paragraph that it finishes. "This argument too is flawed for two reasons. First, al-Dīwān was not, as Sami Hanna, among others, argued the first “parliament” in Egypt, for its announced function was merely consultative, and practical function was indeed administrative. It was neither elected nor legislative. Certainly, it would be difficult to reconcile the idea of laïcité with a council one third of it is made of the ʿulamāʾ. Second, three years prior to the invasion, a popular movement of resistance had succeeded in enforcing the mamluk leaders to sign a legal document that “defined, although vaguely, the ruler-ruled relationships.”[1] Interestingly, this movement was led by the same handful ʿulamāʾ, whom Napoleon appointed in a nine-member cabinet to be responsible for security, supplies and health.[2]

    

   [1] Sami A. Hanna, “The Egyptian Mind and the Idea of Democracy,” ibid., 238.

   [2] Sami A. Hanna, “The Egyptian Mind and the Idea of Democracy,” ibid., 241.

3. "'Finally, by threatening and fighting the Ottomans, he forced them to reach an agreement with him, recognizing the hereditary rule of his family and clearer borders to his country' (p.6)" I added the reference that was already mentioned a few lines earlier. "Arthur Goldschmidt, Jr., Modern Egypt, ibid., 23-26."
4. "'To fulfill these political and economic objectives, Ali realized the need to import the new European technologies and techniques, whether in governmental administration, medicine, schooling, industry, weaponry, etc' " I added the same reference "Arthur Goldschmidt, Jr., Modern Egypt, ibid., 21-22"
5. "'The politico-military function was seen as a professional operation that can be, or even better be run by non-locals. Ali, an ethnic Albanian, did not speak Arabic, and his wars were typically against other Arabs and Muslims, whether in Arabia, the Levant or Sudan. The aim of these wars was not to protect any assumed borders but to expand them' (p.8). " This part is already referenced. "Khaled Fahmy, “The Nation and Its Deserters: Conscription in Mehmed Ali’s Egypt,” International Review of Social History, vol. 43, no. 3 (1998): 421-436."

Thank you again for carefully reviewing my lengthy work!