From the
sixteenth to the twentieth centuries, the course of Iraqi
history was affected by the continuing conflicts between the
Safavid Empire in Iran and the Ottoman Turks. The Safavids,
who were the first to declare Shia Islam the official
religion of Iran, sought to control Iraq both because of the
Shia holy places at An Najaf and Karbala and because
Baghdad, the seat of the old Abbasid Empire, had great
symbolic value. The Ottomans, fearing that Shia Islam would
spread to Anatolia (Asia Minor), sought to maintain Iraq as
a Sunni-controlled buffer state. In 1509 the Safavids, led
by Ismail Shah (1502-24), conquered Iraq, thereby initiating
a series of protracted battles with the Ottomans. In 1514
Sultan Selim the Grim attacked Ismail's forces and in 1535
the Ottomans, led by Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent
(1520-66), conquered Baghdad from the Safavids. The Safavids
reconquered Baghdad in 1623 under the leadership of Shah
Abbas (1587-1629), but they were expelled in 1638 after a
series of brilliant military maneuvers by the dynamic
Ottoman sultan, Murad IV. The major
impact of the Safavid-Ottoman conflict on Iraqi history was
the deepening of the Shia-Sunni rift. Both the Ottomans and
the Safavids used Sunni and Shia Islam respectively to
mobilize domestic support. Thus, Iraq's Sunni population
suffered immeasurably during the brief Safavid reign
(1623-38), while Iraq's Shias were excluded from power
altogether during the longer period of Ottoman supremacy
(1638-1916). During the Ottoman period, the Sunnis gained
the administrative experience that would allow them to
monopolize political power in the twentieth century. The
Sunnis were able to take advantage of new economic and
educational opportunities while the Shias, frozen out of the
political process, remained politically impotent and
economically depressed. The Shia-Sunni rift continued as an
important element of Iraqi social structure in the
1980s. By the
seventeenth century, the frequent conflicts with the
Safavids had sapped the strength of the Ottoman Empire and
had weakened its control over its provinces. In Iraq, tribal
authority once again dominated; the history of
nineteenth-century Iraq is a chronicle of tribal migrations
and of conflict. The nomadic population swelled with the
influx of beduins from Najd, in the Arabian Peninsula.
Beduin raids on settled areas became impossible to curb. In
the interior, the large and powerful Muntafiq tribal
confederation took shape under the leadership of the Sunni
Saadun family of Mecca. In the desert southwest, the
Shammar--one of the biggest tribal confederations of the
Arabian Peninsula--entered the Syrian desert and clashed
with the Anayzah confederation. On the lower Tigris near Al
Amarah, a new tribal confederation, the Bani Lam, took root.
In the north, the Kurdish Baban Dynasty emerged and
organized Kurdish resistance. The resistance made it
impossible for the Ottomans to maintain even nominal
suzerainty over Iraqi Kurdistan (land of the Kurds). Between
1625 and 1668, and from 1694 to 1701, local shaykhs ruled Al
Basrah and the marshlands, home of the Madan (Marsh Arabs).
The powerful shaykhs basically ignored the Ottoman governor
of Baghdad. The cycle
of tribal warfare and of deteriorating urban life that began
in the thirteenth century with the Mongol invasions was
temporarily reversed with the reemergence of the Mamluks. In
the early eighteenth century, the Mamluks began asserting
authority apart from the Ottomans. Extending their rule
first over Basra, the Mamluks eventually controlled the
Tigris and Euphrates river valleys from the Persian Gulf to
the foothills of Kurdistan. For the most part, the Mamluks
were able administrators, and their rule was marked by
political stability and by economic revival. The greatest of
the Mamluk leaders, Suleyman the II (1780-1802), made great
strides in imposing the rule of law. The last Mamluk leader,
Daud (1816-31), initiated important modernization programs
that included clearing canals, establishing industries,
training a 20,000-man army, and starting a printing
press. The
Mamluk period ended in 1831, when a severe flood and plague
devastated Baghdad, enabling the Ottoman sultan, Mahmud II,
to reassert Ottoman sovereignty over Iraq. Ottoman rule was
unstable; Baghdad, for example, had more than ten governors
between 1831 and 1869. In 1869, however, the Ottomans
regained authority when the reform-minded Midhat Pasha was
appointed governor of Baghdad. Midhat immediately set out to
modernize Iraq on the Western model. The primary objectives
of Midhat's reforms, called the tanzimat, were to
reorganize the army, to create codes of criminal and
commercial law, to secularize the school system, and to
improve provincial administration. He created provincial
representative assemblies to assist the governor, and he set
up elected municipal councils in the major cities. Staffed
largely by Iraqi notables with no strong ties to the masses,
the new offices nonetheless helped a group of Iraqis gain
administrative experience. By
establishing government agencies in the cities and by
attempting to settle the tribes, Midhat altered the
tribal-urban balance of power, which since the thirteenth
century had been largely in favor of the tribes. The most
important element of Midhat's plan to extend Ottoman
authority into the countryside was the 1858 TAPU land law
(named after the initials of the government office issuing
it). The new land reform replaced the feudal system of land
holdings and tax farms with legally sanctioned property
rights. It was designed both to induce tribal shaykhs to
settle and to give them a stake in the existing political
order. In practice, the TAPU laws enabled the tribal shaykhs
to become large landowners; tribesmen, fearing that the new
law was an attempt to collect taxes more effectively or to
impose conscription, registered community-owned tribal lands
in their shaykhs' names or sold them outright to urban
speculators. As a result, tribal shaykhs gradually were
transformed into profit-seeking landlords while their
tribesmen were relegated to the role of impoverished
sharecroppers. Midhat
also attempted to replace Iraq's clerically run Islamic
school system with a more secular educational system. The
new, secular schools provided a channel of upward social
mobility to children of all classes, and they led slowly to
the growth of an Iraqi intelligentsia. They also introduced
students for the first time to Western languages and
disciplines. The
introduction of Western disciplines in the schools
accompanied a greater Western political and economic
presence in Iraq. The British had established a consulate at
Baghdad in 1802, and a French consulate followed shortly
thereafter. European interest in modernizing Iraq to
facilitate Western commercial interests coincided with the
Ottoman reforms. Steamboats appeared on the rivers in 1836,
the telegraph was introduced in 1861, and the Suez Canal was
opened in 1869, providing Iraq with greater access to
European markets. The landowning tribal shaykhs began to
export cash crops to the capitalist markets of the
West. In 1908 a
new ruling clique, the Young Turks, took power in Istanbul.
The Young Turks aimed at making the Ottoman Empire a unified
nation-state based on Western models. They stressed secular
politics and patriotism over the pan-Islamic ideology
preached by Sultan Abd al Hamid. They reintroduced the 1876
constitution (this Ottoman constitution set forth the rights
of the ruler and the ruled, but it derived from the ruler
and has been called as at best an "attenuated autocracy,"),
held elections throughout the empire, and reopened
parliament. Although the Iraqi delegates represented only
the well- established families of Baghdad, their
parliamentary experience in Istanbul proved to be an
important introduction to self- government. Most
important to the history of Iraq, the Young Turks
aggressively pursued a "Turkification" policy that alienated
the nascent Iraqi intelligentsia and set in motion a
fledgling Arab nationalist movement. Encouraged by the Young
Turks' Revolution of 1908, nationalists in Iraq stepped up
their political activity. Iraqi nationalists met in Cairo
with the Ottoman Decentralization Party, and some Iraqis
joined the Young Arab Society, which moved to Beirut in
1913. Because of its greater exposure to Westerners who
encouraged the nationalists, Basra became the center from
which Iraqi nationalists began to demand a measure of
autonomy. After nearly 400 years under Ottoman rule, Iraq
was ill-prepared to form a nation-state. The Ottomans had
failed to control Iraq's rebellious tribal domains, and even
in the cities their authority was tenuous. The Ottomans'
inability to provide security led to the growth of
autonomous, self- contained communities. As a result, Iraq
entered the twentieth century beset by a complex web of
social conflicts that seriously impeded the process of
building a modern state. The
oldest and most deeply ingrained conflict was the
competition between the tribes and the cities for control
over the food-producing flatlands of the Tigris and the
Euphrates rivers. The centralization policies of the Sublime
Porte (Ottoman government), especially in the nineteenth
century, constituted a direct threat to the nomadic
structure and the fierce fighting spirit of the tribes. In
addition to tribal-urban conflicts, the tribes fought among
themselves, and there was a fairly rigid hierarchy between
the most powerful tribes, the so-called "people of the
camel," and the weaker tribes that included the "people of
the sheep," marshdwellers, and peasants. The cities also
were sharply divided, both according to occupation and along
religious lines. The various guilds resided in distinct,
autonomous areas, and Shia and Sunni Muslims rarely
intermingled. The territory that eventually became the state
of Iraq was beset, furthermore, by regional differences in
orientation; Mosul in the north had historically looked to
Syria and to Turkey, whereas Baghdad and the Shia holy
cities had maintained close ties with Iran and with the
people of the western and southwestern deserts. Although
Ottoman weakness had allowed Iraq's self-contained
communities to grow stronger, the modernization initiated by
the Sublime Porte tended to break down traditional
autonomous groupings and to create a new social order.
Beginning with the tanzimat reforms in 1869, Iraq's
for the most part subsistence economy slowly was transformed
into a market economy based on money and tied to the world
capitalist market. Social status traditionally had been
determined by noble lineage, by fighting prowess, and by
knowledge of religion. With the advent of capitalism, social
status increasingly was determined by property ownership and
by the accumulation of wealth. Most disruptive in this
regard was the TAPU land reform of 1858. Concomitantly,
Western social and economic penetration increased; for
example, Iraq's traditional crafts and craftsmen gradually
were displaced by mass-produced British machine-made
textiles. The final
Ottoman legacy in Iraq is related to the policies of the
Young Turks and to the creation of a small but vocal Iraqi
intelligentsia. Faced with the rapidly encroaching West, the
Young Turks attempted to centralize the empire by imposing
upon it the Turkish language and culture and by clamping
down on newly won political freedoms. These Turkification
policies alienated many of the Ottoman-trained
intelligentsia who had originally aligned themselves with
the Young Turks in the hope of obtaining greater Arab
autonomy. Despite its relatively small size, the nascent
Iraqi intelligentsia formed several secret nationalist
societies. The most important of these societies was Al Ahd
(the Covenant), whose membership was drawn almost entirely
from Iraqi officers in the Ottoman army. Membership in Al
Ahd spread rapidly in Baghdad and in Mosul, growing to 4,000
by the outbreak of World War I. Despite the existence of Al
Ahd and of other, smaller, nationalist societies, Iraqi
nationalism was still mainly the concern of educated Arabs
from the upper and the middle classes. Mongol
Invasion
<<< Contents
>>> World
War I
Library of Congress Country Study
Library of Congress Country Study
This document is in the public domain. You may copy, download, print and distribute this work as you see fit.Every effort has been made to present this text accurately and cleanly, but no guarantees are made against errors. Neither Melissa Snell nor About.com may be held liable for any problems you experience with the text version or with any electronic form of the document.
More at the Medieval History Site
New posts to the Medieval History forums:
Site
Map
FAQs
Quizzes
Reviews
Daily
Features
More about the Knightly Newsletter

