How were Moroccan and Tunisian monarchies organized under the French protectorate ? By studying the administrative structures and the rights of civil servants in these two countries, Antoine Perrier highlights often neglected dynamics of the colonial history of the Maghreb.
The colonial Maghreb monarchies are relatively little known both in the work of historians and in popular and media discourses. Research on French colonization in North Africa is generally concentrated much more on Algeria and particularly on the war of independence (1954-1962) which concluded the formal decolonization of the Maghreb. Antoine Perrier’s book is important in that he is interested in the French Empire in this region from an innovative angle: by studying what he calls states “ polycentric Resulting from the Tunisian and Moroccan states which within the framework of the French protectorate, and therefore under this colonial authority, consisted of local administrations (whether Tunisian or Moroccan) and supervised by French colonial administrators.
Antoine Perrier demonstrates the specificity of these regimes by analyzing their administrative structures. In the two protectorates, the Maghreb heads of state – the bey In Tunisia and the Sultan in Morocco – both heirs of long -standing dynasties appear apparently their country and their subjects in parallel with French residents. The Arabic language takes precedence in government communications. Entire administrations then try to act far from the control of colonial administrators. Simultaneously, French, Tunisian and Moroccan officials and servants are mobilizing individually and collectively to improve their respective working conditions. How did these heterogeneous sets contribute to the formation of states in North Africa in the XIXe And XXe century ? It is to this question that Antoine Perrier tries to answer. To do this, he compares Morocco and Tunisia by articulating political, social and legal history.
State or states ?
The subtitle of the book evokes “ the state “In the singular, but Perrier most often distinguishes” two forms of state (P. 96) which coexist in each of these two countries: a colonial state and a monarchy. In Tunisia as in Morocco, these two entities are then legally linked. During the colonial era, the Bey in Tunisia and the Sultan in Morocco embody the sovereignty of each country, but this “ legal fiction “(P. 81, p. 139, see also p. 96) conceals the power that France has granted itself through the founding treaties of the protectorates – to be abused in 1881 and then in Morocco in 1912. In the two countries, a high French diplomat, the general resident, acts as a chef de facto of the protectorate and directs new administrations superimposed on the preexisting monarchies.
The author demonstrates that beys and sultans are far from puppets (p. 138) manipulated by France. These sovereigns, but also the administrations they president, maintain their “ autonomy “(See among others p. 18, p. 103-104, p. 112, p. 127, p. 179) throughout the colonial period. France is based on these local administrations, which help “ govern colonized (P. 101), but the agents of these administrations often act by continuing their own interests.
The importance that Perrier grants “ autonomy Monarchies convincingly breaks with the historiographical tendency which has long exaggerated the grip of the colonial state over Maghreb societies. His work joins that of a new generation of historians who wondered about the place of colonization and colonial heritage in the modern and contemporary history of the Maghreb, in the continuity of Isabelle Grangaud and M’hamed Oualdi. Their approach sought to refocus the understanding of colonial dynamics around local archives rather than those produced by the French Empire in North Africa, without however neglecting the violence inherent in the colonial empire. Perrier also cites the work of Augustin Jomier and Charlotte Courreye, historians specialists in Islam in colonial Algeria who also use Arab sources from a colonized society.
Between history and comparison
Perrier offers a diachronic reading of the colonial era of Tunisia and Morocco structured in three parts, each divided into three chapters: 1) “ Cohabit “(1880- years 1920), 2)” Re-form “(1920s and 1940s), and 3)” Triumph (Years 1940-1956). These chronological cuts generalize the themes common to the two countries, but do not indicate, at first glance, the divergent complexities between the Tunisian and Moroccan cases. The word “ triumph Referring to decolonization takes for example a very different meaning in each of these two countries. By kissing both the Tunisian case and the Moroccan case, the book plan is sometimes difficult to follow, but the chapters succeed in lighting the reader.
In the first chapter on the Maghreb before French colonization, the author specifies that thanks to the reforms undertaken by the Beylical State during the XIXe century, the protectorate in Tunisia has consolidated around a state already more structured than in Morocco at the start of XXe century. From the start of its protectorate, Tunisia is organized around a “ Executive Bicéphaly “Composed of the Bey and the Prime Minister, while in Morocco” Makhzen is still organized around the figure of the sultan (P. 54). This administrative difference between the two countries then accentuated during the colonial era before strengthening at the time of decolonization. In Morocco, the monarchy “ triumph – She is still in place today. On the other hand, decolonization in Tunisia permanently ends the monarchy, dislodged by the Republic of the nationalist leader Habib Bourguiba. It is sort of “ triumph From another part of the State, that of the Prime Minister, a role held by Bourguiba himself in 1955 (p. 325).
According to the author, another factor explains “ The life and death of the monarchies “In the two countries and is linked to the land contributions of pious foundations called” habous “In Morocco and” waqf In Tunisia. These foundations, managed by autonomous administrations, constituted independent financial sources for the monarchies. In Morocco, the wealth of foundations increased through many urban properties, which was a major asset for the Sultan. In Tunisia, however, these same foundations were plunged into financial difficulties. Their achievements being mainly located outside of urban centers, they were eroded by rural colonization. Consequently, the nominal beys or sovereigns of Tunisia did not have the same resources as the Moroccan sultans.
Two key arguments stand out from these themes. The first is that colonialism was built on the administrative heritage of the Maghreb of XIXe century, and that the two countries already followed different trajectories at that time. The other size teaching is that large state structures such as pious foundations administrations were much more decisive than “ providential men – Bourguiba in Tunisia or the Sultan Mohammed V in Morocco, for example. This reading of history by great men still influences the historiography of North Africa to XXe century. These two aspects of analysis combine to offer a portrait rich in the divergent fate of the monarchies of the two countries.
Archives and essential sources
A major asset of the book is the depth of research both archival and secondary, especially in Arabic language sources. The author highlights the importance of these documents, without however attributing them a “ truth “Which would contrast with the” lie Colonial data (p. 39). If the consultation of these documents in Arabes is “ essential (P. 338), it is above all because entire administrative sections of the two monarchies used this language mainly in their documentation as well as in their external correspondences.
The author’s observations on the functioning of languages within administrations strengthen his arguments on “ autonomy Of the two monarchies with regard to colonial power. Local administrators used a language – the Arabic – that a large number of French officials could neither understand nor translate. Perrier offers a useful analysis of the limits of the translation of Arabic to French that civil servants often (but not always) made on the sidelines of documents written in Arabic language, aspect dear to historians who sometimes tend to rely on these translations rather than on the original texts. In a context where “ Translation offices are systematically overwhelmed in the two protectorates (P. 272, see also p. 143), the result is limited bilingual documentation.
To complete this immersion in the Maghreb primary sources, the author is studying impressively the work of North Africa historians, a field of research which has become more and more Arabic -speaking in recent decades. If historians of colonial North Africa today still neglect primary sources in Arabs, the forgetting of secondary Arabic -speaking works is even more common. Maghreb monarchies recognizes the richness of these works: “ As much as sources are the work in Arabic and French of Moroccan historians who expand our questions (P. 16). The work of Tunisian historians is also mentioned, even if the bibliography does not include the important books of some Tunisian historians on the Zaytūna-university mosque, however essential to the argument of Perrier.
History seen from above or from below ?
Maghreb monarchies is a complex book that calls on several methodologies and objects of study, going from the legal history of large state institutions to the social history of the most modest servants. Legal history by the “ high »Allows to analyze decisions of the Council of State, an actor little known to historians of the colonial Maghreb. In theory, this jurisdiction guaranteed from the French administrative order should not have extended its skills to protectorates which legally were foreign countries. However, from the 1920s, the Council of State began to intervene. In a fascinating chapter, the author explains how the Council of State tries to normalize the legal status of protectorates.
To this analysis by “ top », Perrier combines a excavated study of the demands of French officials, Moroccan executives, and Tunisian advisers. The case of a group of employees in Tunisia is thus at the origin of the first intervention of the Council of State in the protectorate (p. 87, p. 139-141). Presenting these servants and civil servants of states as the main subjects of the book proposes a stimulating perspective which makes it possible to think together of French, Tunisian, and Moroccan actors (see for example p. 81-82, p. 88-90 and p. 101), without however forgetting the inequalities which separate them in a context of colonial domination and racism. These social stories appear to be the most innovative aspect of the book. In the end, the concrete defense of these rights by those who work within States (p. 29) proved to be more decisive than the speeches of jurists, who most often nourish “ Legal fictions ».
The complexity of the book does not detract from its importance. Colonial Maghreb historians will not be able to neglect the arguments or the methodologies of Perrier. This work will also open up new analysis tracks to better understand what a protectorate was XIXe and at XXe century.