Scholars, Spice Traders, and Sultans: Arguing over the Alms-Tax in the Mamluk Era
In: Islamic Law and SocietySearch for other papers by Joel Blecher in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Amidst the politics of the Mamluk-era spice route, why did the standard-bearers of Islamic law routinely oppose the sultanate’s imposition of an alms-tax on merchandise (zakāt al-tijāra), despite the abundance of support for such a tax within the classical tradition of Islamic law? Rather than contending – as some modern scholars have – that prominent jurists developed loopholes that circumvented the original intent of the law to protect the wealthy and the ruling class, I argue that it was precisely the jurists’ careful defense of exemptions and exclusions that allowed them to define the essence of zakāt against forms of taxation they considered unlawful. By narrowing the scope of zakāt, jurists attempted to achieve a moral aim that went beyond the ritual purification of wealth: a limit on the sultanate’s otherwise arbitrary power to tax Muslims as it wished. In doing so, they alleviated some of the tax burden for spice merchants and camel herders alike.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1405 | 199 | 30 |
| Full Text Views | 145 | 7 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 249 | 18 | 2 |
Scholars, Spice Traders, and Sultans: Arguing over the Alms-Tax in the Mamluk Era
In: Islamic Law and SocietySearch for other papers by Joel Blecher in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Amidst the politics of the Mamluk-era spice route, why did the standard-bearers of Islamic law routinely oppose the sultanate’s imposition of an alms-tax on merchandise (zakāt al-tijāra), despite the abundance of support for such a tax within the classical tradition of Islamic law? Rather than contending – as some modern scholars have – that prominent jurists developed loopholes that circumvented the original intent of the law to protect the wealthy and the ruling class, I argue that it was precisely the jurists’ careful defense of exemptions and exclusions that allowed them to define the essence of zakāt against forms of taxation they considered unlawful. By narrowing the scope of zakāt, jurists attempted to achieve a moral aim that went beyond the ritual purification of wealth: a limit on the sultanate’s otherwise arbitrary power to tax Muslims as it wished. In doing so, they alleviated some of the tax burden for spice merchants and camel herders alike.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1405 | 199 | 30 |
| Full Text Views | 145 | 7 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 249 | 18 | 2 |