| Background The Egyptian royal family was originally of Albanian (or more specifically,
Macedonian) descent. The founder of the dynasty was Mohammed Ali, a Macedonian tobacco
merchant who assumed power in Egypt in
1805 under the protective wing of the occupying French, led by Napoleon. See, William Stadiem,
Too Rich: The High Life and Tragic Death of
King Farouk, (Carroll &
Graf, 1991). See also, http://www.egy.com/historica/94-06-11.shtml.
Mohammed Ali’s descendents didn’t have the French to worry
about but, rather, the powerful Ottoman Empire. Fawzia’s grandfather, Ismail the Magnificent, refused to accept the
Sultanate’s chokehold on his country but he was too clever to fight the more powerful
Turks, at least not overtly. Instead, Ismail used a more circuitous, secretive method:
money. He cleverly bribed almost all the influential figures at the Ottoman court and,
thanks to their intervention with the Sultan, received several significant political
concessions. He was also given the title of “Khedive” which Webster’s
Dictionary defines as “a title used by the ruler of Egypt from 1867 until 1914 governing as a viceroy of the Sultan of Turkey.”
Khedive Ismail’s accomplishments were not limited to the
political. He was passionate about modernization and is attributed with building modern Egypt, from its infrastructure to the industrial
base to the famed Suez Canal. Three of
his sons and one of his grandsons reigned after him, until the 147-yr old dynasty –
and the monarchy itself – was overthrown in 1952.
Fawzia’s father, Fuad (or, alternatively, Fouad), was
Ismail’s twelfth and youngest son. Both his life and the future of Egypt were changed forever by the outbreak of WWI
and the subsequent destruction of Ottoman Empire. Like many countries in the region, Egypt was now under British influence. The country initially became a British
protectorate and then, for a brief time, a Sultanate. Unfortunately, that didn’t mean
that Egypt was independent, at least
not in reality. By now, “it was well understood that the country's nominal ruler
could only be a puppet of the overbearing colonialist power.” See, Fayza Hassan, “Sent Away,” Al-Ahram Weekly Online, (7- 13 February 2002, Issue No. 572) at http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2002/572/sc52_1.htm
During this period, Fuad was a penniless prince in search of a role.
The British transformed him into the Sultan of Egypt and then, its first King. Id.
The British chose Fuad because he seemed the most suitable for the job but a more cynical
interpretation is that he fit the criteria for governing one of Britain’s unofficial colonies. In heart, spirit, upbringing, values and
perception, Fuad was more European than Arab. In fact, he had grown up abroad, spoke no
Arabic whatsoever and completely despised the Arabs, including his own people. Id. It
wasn’t uncommon for him to refer to Arabs as “ces cr�tins,” and
other less polite epithets. Id. These things made him ideal to the British
who felt pliant, submissive and Europeanized rulers were less likely to rock the existing
political situation. They gave Fuad the position of Sultan and then, in 1923, the title of
King.
Fuad’s consort was an Egyptian commoner called Nazli. She had
been educated in Paris, spoke French
as fluently as Fouad, and was a Francophile to the tip of her elegant fingers. She was
initially reluctant to marry the Sultan and future King, but agreed to meet him after some
persuasion from her father, the Minister of Agriculture. She found him irresistible. They
were married in an intimate ceremony on May 24, 1919 and nine months later, she gave birth to a son, Farouk. Farouk was followed
by four daughters, all of whose names began with the Sultan’s lucky letter
“F.” One of these was Princess
Fawzia who was born on November 5, 1921,
two years before her father’s elevation to king.
Fawzia’s life was inextricably entwined with that of her
brother, Prince Farouk. In many ways,
understanding Farouk is the key to understanding Fawzia. His personality was the key not
only to his own fate, but also to that of Fawzia and his country. His decisions changed
her life but they also led to the end of the monarchy. For that reason, it’s worth
digressing a bit to explore his character and the politics of the region.
Farouk, Egypt’s Last
King
Prince Farouk ascended the Egyptian throne in 1936. The new King was
only sixteen and controlled in political matters by a triumvirate of councilors who
essentially acted as his regents. Farouk wouldn’t come into complete independence for
another few years, when he was 18. In the meantime, he decided to enjoy his new position
and the great wealth which came with it. Extravagant, self-indulgent and impulsive, the
teenage King led a very glamorous, lavish lifestyle. He would jet off to Europe for parties or wild shopping trips where he
would order numerous Rolls-Royces in one go, to add to the hundreds of cars he already
owned. He bought an enormous yacht in the blink of an eye, and ordered huge pieces of
jewelry from Van Cleef & Arpels. He owned thousands of acres of land, dozens of
palaces, and priceless antiques. He was famed as one of the world’s largest
collectors of paperweights, stamps and other objets d’arts.
It never seemed to be enough for him. “As he got older, the king began pilfering objects and
artifacts while on state visits abroad, including a ceremonial sword from the Shah of Iran
and a priceless pocket watch from Winston Churchill. Common people were also often the
victims of the kleptomaniacal monarch, and by mingling with commoners Farouk soon became a
highly-skilled pickpocket. His well-known panache for thievery soon earned him the
nickname ‘The Thief of Cairo.’ This excess would be one of the leading sparks
that triggered the 1952 military coup.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farouk
The story involving the Shah’s sword is quite shocking. The
tale reportedly unfolds as follows: the Shah's father, Reza Shah Pahlavi, had died in Johannesburg in 1944. His body was flown to Egypt en route to Iran. During the stop over in Egypt, King Farouk asked to be left
alone with the coffin for few moments. When the coffin arrived in Tehran, it was discovered that jewel-embedded sword
belonging to Reza Shah was missing. It had been in the coffin in Johannesburg, and the coffin had never been left unattended with the exception of that
brief interval with King Farouk. It seemed obvious to all what had happened.
|
The King also had political ambitions. While most people know General
(and President) Nasser was a
passionate proponent of Pan-Arabism, it could be argued that the real pioneer of Arab
nationalism in Egypt was none other than King Farouk. He dreamed of a restored Arab
Caliphate – with himself as the first incumbent. He sought to unify Arabs and even
held a conference of Arab nations in the 1940s to start that process. Unfortunately, the King’s controlling interest was
his own hedonistic pleasure. He was easily distracted from regional politics and domestic
governance. In fact, one might argue that Farouk’s political aspirations existed only
in his head, a sort of delusional wish to be bigger than he actually was or was capable of
being. The simple fact is that he was a man with a short attention span for anything other
than food, expensive toys, or corporeal, fleshy pleasures. Soon, Farouk gained notoriety
as a dissolute, corrupt and – according to some – unusually degenerate wastrel.
It didn’t help that one of the first things
he’d done as King was to sign a treaty granting Britain continued domination over the
country and, in particular, rights to the Suez Canal. It definitely did not help that, at the time, Egypt was
in the throes of a fiercely nationalistic, anti-colonial movement. Unfortunately for Farouk, his reign occurred during a turbulent time in Egyptian and Middle East history which was marked by the
creation of the Arab League, the first Arab-Israeli conflict, and heated nationalist
opposition to the British. William Stadiem,
Too Rich: The High Life and Tragic Death of
King Farouk, (Carroll &
Graf, 1991).
Still, the ultimate blame lies on King Farouk himself. If he’d
exerted himself, he might have been the nationalistic political leader that Egypt desperately needed and wanted. But Farouk was
a materialistic womanizer and corpulent spendthrift who was too weak to act on his
intellectual goals, and too undisciplined to control his gargantuan appetites.
Two Different Monarchies, Two Different Courts
King Farouk’s political dreams – as well as his perception
of himself as political powerbroker – received a considerable boost from another
monarch’s dynastic aspirations. Reza Shah had ascended the Persian throne after a
British-backed coup toppled the long-standing Qajar monarchy. Concerned about succession
and the future of his new dynasty, he sought a suitable bride for his oldest son, the
Crown Prince Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. The ideal candidate would have a royal lineage and
pedigree which would enhance the position of the upstart Pahlavi monarchy, as well as
political connections which would help Iran’s power in the region. See,
H.I.H. Princess Ashraf Pahlavi, Faces in a Mirror: Memoirs from Exile, (Prentice
Hall, 1980).
His eye fell on Fawzia, a princess of the blood and the favorite
sister of a King. But not just any king; it was Egypt’s King. Thanks to the efforts of Fawzia’s father, the Egyptian
Royal Family was no longer bankrupt but wealthy beyond belief. Furthermore, Egypt itself was one of the most powerful nations
in the region, matched only by Iran
or, as it was known then, Persia. Historically, relations between the countries were
competitive and politically charged:
Egypt and Iran [had] been competing centres of civilization and military power from ancient
times. Both were conquered by Arab/Muslim armies from the Arabian
peninsula in the mid-7th century and subsequently incorporated
into the universal Islamic empire. In the medieval and early modern period they
represented rival centres of Islamic learning and cultural tradition, as well as competing
poles of regional dynastic power.
As long as Egypt
and Iran were governed by monarchies,
their relations in the 20th century could be described as relatively cordial. For a long
period they shared a common interest of struggle to throw off the yoke of colonial
interference and domination from Great Britain.
Dr. William Millward, “Egypt and Iran: Regional Rivals at Diplomatic Odds,”
Canadian Security Intelligence Service Publication (Commentary No. 22, May 1992).
|
William Shawcross, The Shah’s Last Ride: The Fate of an Ally,
(Simon & Schuster 1988), at 58.
Her slim, elegant figure was shown off to advantage by
the latest in sophisticated French fashion, and her cosmopolitan attitude was mixed with a
keen sense of fun and a passion for living. Yet, paradoxically, she could also be
extremely reserved. Those attributes, when combined with her air of regal aloofness, made
her an irresistible challenge to men.
Reza Shah looked no further and the negotiations began.
King Farouk was overjoyed by the prospect of having the Crown Prince (and future Shah) as
his brother-in-law. The marriage promised him the opportunity to expand his influence and
role in Middle Eastern affairs, and he wasted no time pushing his 17-year old sister into
the Prince’s arms.
Unfortunately for Fawzia and her future happiness, the
two capitals and royal courts could not have been more different. Fawzia’s future
sister-in-law, Princess Ashraf Pahlavi, knew both cities (and courts) very well, and her
eyewitness accounts illustrate the enormous gulf separating the two. Quite simply, one
court glittered with the height of European sophistication, while the other was a
comfortable, somewhat middle class atmosphere, in a provincial backwater. Princess Ashraf,
supra, at 16-17, 56-57.
The Egyptian Royal Family lived in Abdin Palace which was Eastern in style on the outside, but thoroughly European on the
inside. Savonnerie carpets, oversized Persian rugs, antique tapestries and remarkable
examples of inlaid ivory worked framed a magnificent array of European antiques and objets
d’arts. Id. In contrast, the Pahlavis –
under Reza Shah (if not under his son) – “lived comfortably but simply, probably
no better than a prosperous European family of the haute
bourgeoisie.” Id. at 56.
The respective courts paralleled their monarch’s
lifestyle. In Cairo, “the
Egyptian court evoked the glitter and splendor of the oriental fairy tales, with perhaps a
soup�on of Versailles. Poets, artists, musicians, intellectuals and aristocrats mingled at lavish
balls and soirees, and witty repartee – in English, Turkish, Italian, Arabic, and
French – was raised almost to an art form.” Id. at
56-57. Princess Ashraf, who was hardly an unsophisticated peasant girl herself, was
amazed. Even the women were dressed and made up like their European counterparts. Cairo’s royal court was truly Paris in the Middle East.
Just as the Egyptian court glittered, so too did Cairo which, by Middle Eastern standards, was a
very advanced metropolis. As Princess Ashraf explains, in those days, Cairo was
like an enchanted city, beautiful, mysterious and
exquisitely alive. Against the other capitals of the Middle East, which were just trying to rouse themselves from the darkness of the past, Cairo was like a sparkling jewel: a cosmopolitan
city rich with ancient tradition, yet bursting with the intellectual and creative impulses
of the twentieth century.
Id. at 56.
In contrast, Tehran was “not a very inspiring sight.” Id.
at 17. In those days, the capital was provincial and rough, both in terms of architectural
layout and cultural attractions. As Princess Ashraf explains, entertainment was limited to
the traditional oriental bazaars, “which looked exactly as they must have centuries
ago; a few shops which stocked imported goods; a few segregated cinemas, where women sat
in one section, the men in another, watching old American movies…; and the Muslim
theater, which was devoted to dramatizing the life and death of the martyrs of [Persian]
religion.” Id. at 17-18. This was the sum total of Tehran’s cultural life, as well as
its tourist attractions.
The city itself was even worse. Many of the houses were hovels made
of mud or brick. The streets, which were unpaved and unappealing even in daylight, were
taken over by bands of wandering bandits and cutthroats after dark. People did not dare
take leisurely strolls through the streets. They were more likely to be found in the
teahouses or opium dens. Id.
This then was the world which Princess Fawzia was entering. It was a
far cry from her life in Cairo and its
Europeanized royal court. Next week, we’ll examine Fawzia’s life in Iran, the circumstances which led to the first
royal divorce in the history of Middle Eastern monarchies, and what happened to her when
the Egyptian monarchy was overthrown. Until next week…
-
Click here for
Part II |
