Governing property, making the modern state - PSI424

Notes to chapter 12
6 DLS.AT.Yoklama, Ağustos 1300AM
[August 1884] recopied 1329AM, p. 79,
nos 668–9. See also Table 10.1.
7 DLS.AT.Zabt 1323–34, September
1908, p. 139, nos 252–5.
8 ANR, Kufr ‘Awan, M45 for Hasan,
M53 for Hisna and M78 for Tamam.
9 DLS.CR Kufr ‘Awan, Court Case
7/96, decision 9 May 1939 with reference
to article 1817 of the Mecelle. As for
how much land Hasan held by 1939, the
following appears from the tapu registers.
Of the 6q which he had received from his
father, he sold 1½q in 1935 to Khalil al-‘Id
al-Ahmad, leaving him with 4½ (DLS.
AT.Dabt 1934–onwards, August 1935,
p. 60, nos 1–4). And in January 1936 (ibid.
p. 92, nos 18–21) he is registered as selling
another 1½q to his son Mahmud. There is
a problem here since logically the transfer
was to his son Muhammad, not to Mahmud
in whose name his remaining 3q were
to be registered in 1939. Unfortunately
we did not ascertain whom Muhammad
married and hence cannot see where the
1½q may have gone; Muhammad himself
has no land registered in his name in the
1939 cadastre.
10 DLS.CR Kufr ‘Awan, ibid.
11 DLS.CR Kufr ‘Awan, jadwal aliddi‘a’at
dated 16 March 1939 (with later
corrections from reports – taqarir – and
court cases and additions from jadwal
al-huquq), no. 104.
12 DLS.AT.Yoklama, August 1884,
p. 84, no. 781. It appears that Qasim
had co-farmed with the owner of the
land, ‘Abdullah al-Husain (ibid. 602,
780), perhaps acquiring ownership of
the three trees by his labour. There is not
necessarily any discrepancy between the
record, which does not record individual
plot ownership for Qasim, and Husna’s
account whereby she comes to own both
the trees and the land on which they stand.
The land in question lies close by the
original village site. The general report on
the land registration of Kufr ‘Awan (DLS.
CR, Kufr ‘Awan, Report to the Director
284
of Lands and Survey, dated 8 July 1940,
item 4) notes that ‘the area exempted
from registration in the village block
(haud al-balad) comprises the village site,
agricultural lands and olive trees. These
lands and trees were not made subject to
cadastral registration because their owners
did not wish registration to take place.
Hence the fiscal distribution of these lands
and trees was evaluated and included in
the schedules of evaluation for the purpose
of tax imposition.’ The area of the village
block registered in the cadastre was only
about one-quarter of the block. In other
words, since the land of the village site
was not registered, the area on which
the three trees stood could have become
the property of the trees’ owner without
it appearing so in the registers. Land
registration outside the village block had
been compulsory in 1939–40.
13 DLS.AT.Yoklama, August 1884,
p. 79, nos 658–9. In 1910 (ANR Kufr
‘Awan) M46 comprised the following
persons in the order they appear in the
register: Husna’s HF (husband’s father),
H, HB, HZ, HM, self and D (aged 3
months).
14 DLS.AT.Yoklama, August 1884,
nos 640–1, and ANR Kufr ‘Awan, M84.
15 DLS.AT.Yoklama, ibid. 642–3.
16 Ibid. 636–7.
17 See note 57 and Figure 12.5 for
‘Uthman al-Shihab.
18 According to the report in ACR.
CC (untitled) 1918–22, entry 44/60 dated
30 May 1920 charging ‘Isa al-‘Ali (who
had fled and was not under arrest at the
time of the report) with the murder of one
man and wounding of his brother, Ahmad
Khalifa would have been a few years older
than 5–6, about 9–10 if the age given in
the household census is taken as base.
19 The age difference was four years in
the household census, where ages of young
people may have been slightly underestimated.
In ACR.SC.MR sijill 7, no. 6016,
5 September 1929, the ages are given as 20
for the groom and 28 for the bride and a