“Visiting a merchant in Fez who was a pious Muslim, [E. Michaux-Bellaire*] was present at a sordid and hypocritical scene in which the former**, whom he had found engaged in counting over his hoard and stowing it away in a strongbox, protested his inability to lend any ready money to another merchant who came to ask him for a loan. Eventually, he lent this man some sugar which he claimed to have in his possession but which in fact he sent someone out to buy, and which he put down to the borrower’s account at twice the price. The borrower had to pay back this alleged value (actually, at 100 per cent interest) in three month’s time – that is, he got the loan he asked for, but at a rate of 400 per cent annual interest. A deed was drawn up, with a house belonging to the borrower serving as security. Michaux-Bellaire heard what happened subsequently. The borrower proved unable to pay when the time came round; he was allowed a delay in return for a doubling of the amount owed; when he still could not pay, the creditor took possession of the house given as security and for which he had thus paid hardly a quarter of its price. It should be added that he had contributed to his debtor’s inability to pay by making him sell back at a low price the sugar he had obliged him to accept in lieu of cash. All this was accompanied by pious, moral formulas about the service he was rendering and the mutual aid that is proper between Muslims.”
(Source: Maxime Rodinson, Islam and Capitalism, Chapter 3)
* ‘L’Usure’, in Archives marocaines, 27, 1927
** Maxime’s book actually states ‘the latter’ but that appears to be a mistake.
No comments:
Post a Comment