of fals).101 According to Maqrīzī, in the absence of a small monetary unit people had started to use barter in everyday transactions; the introduction of the copper fulūs was a great relief to them. Only the larger transactions were made in dirhams.102 But conditions worsened when Sultan Kitbughā and Ẓāhir Barqūq, aiming to exploit the people and swallow up their wealth, minted a copper fals in huge quantities, with a face value greater than its intrinsic value; the people were reluctant to accept it. So Kitbughā declared that the fulūs should be taken by weight and not by number. To begin with, one raṭl of fulūs was equal to two dirhams.103 Sultan Barqūq did not rely on his own country’s supply of copper but imported it from European countries. He set up mints in Cairo and Alexandria which produced a huge number of copper fulūs. Consequently the dirham disappeared and prices increased.104
During Nāṣir’s reign, a raṭl of fulūs varied from two to three dirhams. When a raṭl of fulūs reached three dirhams, those who had taken fulūs for goods at the lower rate suffered hardship and had to close their shops. Nāṣir, seeking to remedy this situation, issued a new fals weighing one dirham to be accepted at its face value. But the older, underweight fulūs still circulated. This dual system created further hardship, as fulūs with a face value of seven dirhams were worth two dirhams by weight.105 The situation only improved when, in 1358, Nāṣir’s grandson, Nāsir Ḥasan, cancelled all the existing fulūs and issued a new coin.106
At the beginning of the Mamluk era the dirham contained two-thirds of silver and one-third of copper.107 But in the course of time the proportions were reversed.
The exchange rate between dirham and dīnār always fluctuated. One dīnār was valued at 28.5 dirhams in the reign of Ẓāhir Baibars.108 In the early part of Nāṣir’s reign, one dīnār was equal to 25.5 dirhams. It fell to 17 dirhams when he increased war expenditure and a large number of dīnārs were put into circulation.109 Towards the end of his reign a decree was issued forbidding people to sell or buy gold. All were obliged to surrender their gold to the mint and take dirhams in return. Maqrīzī refers to this as an unprecedented act of injustice.110 The predictable outcome of this measure was to increase the price of gold. In 1336, Sultan Nāsir purchased a mamlūk for 200,000 dirhams, equal to 4,000 dīnārs.111 This was an exchange rate of one dīnār to fifty dirhams.
On the whole, the monetary system was very unstable during this period. The circulation of large numbers of copper fulūs and an increase in the amount of copper in the dirham resulted in a lack of confidence in the currency which led to its debasement and fuelled an acute inflationary spiral.112
(a) Taxation
The Mamluk Sultans had different sources of revenue. The tax on agricultural produce was divided into two categories:
(1) Tax on cultivated land excluding trees (kharāj al-zirā‘ah).
(2) Tax on orchards (kharāj al-basātīn).
According to Nuwairī’s description of it, the kharāj al-zirā‘ah was imposed both in kind and in cash. The tax payable in kind varied from one sixth to three ardāb per feddan. An additional tax, called ḥuqūq, was also levied on some cultivated land. Its amount fluctuated between two and four dirhams per feddan. Tax payable in cash also varied. Mostly the amount was 250 dirhams per feddan; sometimes it reached 1,000 dirhams per three feddans. These lands were mostly cultivated with flaw.113 The kharāj al-basātīn was payable in money and used to be paid in instalments at fixed times during the harvest of fruits.114 The tax on land fluctuated according to an increase or decrease in production.
There was also a tax known as marā‘ī applied to pasture land and livestock. According to Nuwairī, it was levied in either of two ways – as a fixed tax to be paid annually, often in instalments, or as a variable tax collected every year after the Nile flood had receded. The former was treated as hilālī tax, while the latter was considered as kharājī revenue. It was levied according to the number of grazing animals. This variable tax was subject to increase or decrease according to the size of the livestock.115
Contrary to the Egyptian system where the Nile and its canals were the source of irrigation, in Syria everything depended on rain. Moreover, while in Egypt all lands were cultivated every year, in Syria people used to divide them into two parts; they cultivated one and left the other fallow to regain its fertility. Only a small part of the Syrian land was irrigated by canals and wells. In this case the return was more than it was from land irrigated by rain, and so the tax on such land was also heavier. For example, while in general, land tax was one-fourth or one-third of the total product, in the case of land with irrigation facilities the tax was a half of the total produce. The tax rate varied from one-fourth to one-eight in the case of remote lands and lands without inhabitants, or those situated on the frontier near the enemy. Generally, Muslims had to pay ‘ushr (tithe) after payment of kharāj; but dhimmīs were exempted from ‘ushr.116 In some parts of Syria, the European type of fief was inherited from crusaders and the fief-holder had to pay a fixed amount in lieu of his fief.117
Apart from the land tax, industry, mines and fisheries also contributed to the treasuries of the Mamluk Sultans. The Egyptian sugar industry was an important source of revenue during the period under study. Sugar was exported to Asia and the Mediterranean countries until the end of the fourteenth century.118 The textile industry and shipbuilding were also important sources of revenue.
In mining, alum, ‘natron’ and emeralds were the main source of revenue. Alum helped Egypt to balance her payments without exhausting her store of gold.119 Natron had been mined in Egypt since ancient times and continued to be mined until the first half of the fifteenth century. Al-‘Umarī – a fourteenth-century historian – wrote that the ‘natrons’ exploited in the hundred feddan of Birkah al-natrūn in the Buhairiyah province yielded a revenue of about 100,000 dīnārs.120 Qalqashandī stated that, in his lifetime, the value of ‘natron’ had greatly increased so that the price of a qinṭār reached about 300 dirhams.121 Salt had also been taxed until, in 1310, Nāṣir abolished the tax. The burden of this tax on the inhabitants can be ascertained from the fact that after its abolition the price of an ardāb of salt fell from 10 to as little as 3 dirhams.122 Egypt possessed unique emerald mines at Aswan, the emeralds providing a considerable source of foreign exchange. There was a separate dīwān for its management, with many secretaries and office-bearers.123
The fishing industry was also taxed in two different ways: a permanent tax was collected in places where the fisheries were active throughout the year, such as Damietta, Burullus and Aswan; and taxes were also collected on temporary fishing activities. In Syria, the river ‘Āsī and the lake of Tabariah and other waters were sources of such revenue.124
Another important source of revenue was a tax on trade and transactions. Merchandise was purchased privately or by state monopolies managed by a matjar (trade house). In 1310, Nāṣir took over this matjar, so that its revenue went to the Sultan’s khāṣṣ.125 The revenue from the matjar was so huge that in 1327 Nāṣir ordered 1,000 dirhams to be paid monthly to the Qāḍī Muḥammad bin Jamā‘ah from the matjar.126 Zakāh was the main tax imposed on the merchandise of Muslim traders. From an examination of the history of that period, it appears that in imposition and collection of zakāh, the Sharī‘ah principles were almost totally neglected.127
