MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563335395 · doi:10.1163/15685195-00234p03

Le rôle du kafīl (garant) dans la gouvernance locale selon les contrats d’affermage fiscal à Tripoli au XVIIe–XVIIIe siècle

2016· article· en· W2563335395 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Winter

Bibliographic record

VenueIslamic Law and Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceRevenueLawEconomyEconomic historyHistoryBusinessEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the legal institution of kafāla/kefalet (bondsmanship; surety) and its role in shaping local communal government in Syria in the Ottoman period. Drawing on the shar‘īya court registers of Tripoli (in addition to those of Sayda and Antioch as well as the Başbakanlık archives), it shows how iltizām tax-farming contracts in the 18th century increasingly required a pecuniary guarantee for their discharge to be posted by a third party, an act specific to Ḥanafī jurisprudence but not practised uniformly throughout the region. Whereas in some places the kafāla amounted to little more than a pledge of mutual accountability, or was imposed on a community against its will, it could also be used by foreign merchants or local notables to secure the rights to a given district’s commercial produce in advance. By “investing” in revenue collection concessions, the article concludes, both the southern Lebanese Shihābī emirs and the Maronite village population used the kafāla to acquire a direct financial and ultimately political stake in the rural hinterland of Tripoli, before dispensing once more with the idea of mutual or corporative responsibility once all of the province’s tax farms passed under complete Shihābī control in 1763. Cet article traite de l'institution juridique de kafāla / kefalet (cautionnement) et de son rôle dans la gouvernance communautaire locale en Syrie à l’époque ottomane. S'appuyant sur les registres de tribunal shar‘īya de Tripoli (en plus de ceux de Sayda et d'Antioche, ainsi que sur des documents d’archives Başbakanlık), il tâche à montrer comment les contrats de ferme fiscale iltizām du XVIIIe siècle exigèrent de plus en plus qu’une tierce personne se porte garant pour leur acquittement, un acte spécifique à l’école de jurisprudence ḥanafī mais pas appliqué de façon uniforme à travers la région. Alors que la kafāla ne constitua guère plus qu’une promesse de responsabilité collective dans certains cas, ou qu’elle fut imposée à une communauté particulière contre son gré dans d’autres, elle pouvait également servir à des marchands étrangers ou à des notables locaux pour s’assurer les droits sur la production agricole d’un certain district à l’avance. En « investissant » dans de contrats de perception d’impôt d’autrui, cet article propose en conclusion, les émirs Shihābī du Liban-Sud tout comme la population villageoise maronite ont pu utiliser la kafāla pour acquérir une participation financière directe ainsi qu’un droit de regard politique sur l’hinterland rural de Tripoli, avant d’abandonner de nouveau le principe de responsabilité mutuelle ou corporative une fois que toutes les fermes fiscales de la province furent passé sous le contrôle complet des Shihābī en 1763.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIslamic Law and SocietySame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207