11910
To be Religious and to be Political in Colonial Algeria:
The Ulama and the Nationalists, Two Approaches
WATANABE Shoko
The University of Tokyo

Introduction and Main Questions
In the Algerian nationalist movement, Islam was often considered tobe the core of national identity.1 Islam as a cultural identity was important not only in the Islamic reform movement of the Ulama (Islamicscholars), but also in nationalist political parties.2 However, while radical
nationalists considered their political struggle against colonialism to becompatible with their religious consciousness, the Ulama rejected politics and were ostensibly non-political.
The Association of Algerian Ulama was founded in 1931 as an association of Islamic intellectuals. This association always claimed that it was
1. Ricardo René Laremont, Islam and the Politics of Resistance in Algeria 1783–1992(Trenton: Africa World Press, 2000), 222.
2. I mean by cultural identity a cultural element of the individual or community which causes
a feeling of collectivity. This feeling might develop a political nationalist movement when
economical/political/social conditions are favorable. Transformation of traditional societies in the modern period and the emergence of new cultural identities as the basis ofnationalism were argued by Ernest Gellner, Benedict Anderson, and other sociologists.
In particular see Ernest Gellner, Nations and Nationalism (New York: Cornell University
Press, 1983). While Gellner treated Islam as a religion of exception because it cannot
be compatible with secularism, which is, according to him, the precondition of modern
nationalism, other authors claim that Islam just as other religions and traditions can be center of national identity in any nation-state, not always as a institutionalized judicial systembut as a cultural identity (memories, symbols, myths, values and traditions as sources ofnational identity). See Dale F. Eickelman and James Piscatori, Muslim Politics (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1996); Anthony D. Smith, Chosen Peoples: Sacred Sources of
National Identity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).

120

WATANABE Shoko

dealing only with religious affairs, and that it never intervenes in politicalmatters. Their main activity was the promotion of religious education,and the spreading of Islamic “reformist” ideas in society.3 In addition, thethird article of their constitution forbids the Association to be involvedin any political affairs.4
However, in spite of this reservation regarding political matters, onseveral occasions the Association of Ulama played a guiding role in theformation of national fronts among different nationalist groups. For
example, the first political congress of Muslims of 1936 was proposed
initially by Ibn Badis, president of the Association of Ulama.5 In 1944
the Ulama participated in a united front called “The Friends of the
Manifesto and of Liberty” (Les Amis du Manifeste et de la Liberté).6 In
1951 they organized a similar alliance between themselves and otherpolitical parties, called “The Algerian Front for Defense and Respectof Liberties” (Le Front algérien pour la Défense et le Respect des Libertés,
FDRL).7
The Ulama’s discourse seems contradictory. Why did the Ulama refuse
to be seen as political, while being effectively involved in political activities?
This is the main question of this study. Some historians say the Ulama
avoided being called a “political” group, because the French colonialadministration oppressed any “political” tendency among Muslims,
which it regarded as a dangerous opposition to the colonial order.8 But
such a pragmatic reason does not seem enough to explain the Ulama’s
active involvement in political alliances. In order to understand moreclearly the question, eliminating ambiguous terminology is important.
Given this, we must examine the meaning of being “political” and being
3. The main source of inspiration was the Salafīya movement of contemporary Egypt, forwhich Muhammad Abduh (1849–1905) and his succecsor Rashid Rida (1865–1935)
were considered as ideologues.
4. Mudīrīyat al-Wathā’iq li Wilāyat Qusant.īna, ed. Jam‘īyat al-‘ulamā’ al-muslimīn
al-Jazā’irīyīn: Nus.ūs. asāsīya wa wathā’iq min 1350 ilā 1363, 1931–1944, 2nd ed.
(Constantine: Mat.bū‘āt Mudīrīyat al-Wathā’iq li Wilāyat Qusant.īna, 1982), 4.
5. Ali Merad, Le Réformisme musulman en Algérie de 1925 à 1940 (The Hague: Mouton,1967), 185–91. See also Mahfoud Kaddache, Histoire du nationalisme algérien: Question
nationale et politique algérienne, 1919–1951 (Algiers: EDIF, 2000), 1: 391–418.
6. Kaddache, Histoire, 2: 617–24.
7. Kaddache, Histoire, 2: 803–6.
8. Merad, Le Réformisme musulman, 391–96.

To be Religious and to be Political in Colonial Algeria“religious” in Algeria, in the historical context of the colonial period. To
approach this question, I will analyze the discursive relation between
politics and religion, first in the case of the radical nationalists, then in
the case of the Ulama.
(1) The Nationalists’ Political Militancy as Religious Militancy
Generally speaking, Algerian radical nationalists tend to be regarded
as secular thinkers.9 In reality, however, they did not reject the religious
identity of the Algerian nation during their struggle against colonialism.
Let us take Messali Hadj, an anti-imperialist and eminent leader ofthe nationalist parties the ENA (1926–37), the PPA (1937–39) and the
MTLD (1946–54).10 He called for the sovereignty of Algeria and its parliament, to which all Algerians, whether Muslims or European settlers,
would have the right to vote regardless of race and religion. In saying so,
Messali described his people, the Algerian Muslims, as follows:
The Algerian Muslims are a people who have their mother tongue,
their religion, their glorious past, their thinkers, their heroes and theirIslamic traditions […] Not only is independence a natural fact that isanchored at the heart of every Algerian Muslim, but it’s a right recognized by France, when it declared at the landing at Sidi-Ferruche on 5
July 1830: “The practice of the Mahometan religion will remain free.
The liberty of all classes of the inhabitants, of their religion, their property, their commerce, their industry, will not be violated. Their women
will be respected… The chief general is on his honor to give his word
for it.” This treaty after all is an official act for preserving not only our
9. By the term “radical nationalists” I refer to the leaders and members of the following political organizations: North African Star (ENA, 1926–37), Algerian Popular Party (PPA,
1937–39), and Movement of Triumph of Democratic Liberty (MTLD, 1946–54). This
direction will finally lead to the armed resistance of the National Liberation Front (FLN),
founded in 1954. The categorizing is based on Kaddache, Histoire, 1: 10, which divided
components of the nationalist movement into (1) radicals and (2) reformists. He put the
Association of the Algerian Ulama as the religious wing of the reformist groups.
10. About Messali Hadj (1898–1974), see Benjamin Stora, Messali Hadj, 1898–1974 (Paris:
Harmattan, 1986).

121

122

WATANABE Shoko

religion, our lands, our industry, our commerce, but also a guarantee forour national dignity and our civil personality.11

Besides, among the members of the radical nationalist party MTLD
(formed in 1946) there were Arabic-speaking activists who believed thatbeing political was one of their religious duties, unlike some traditionalreligious leaders who declined any political activity and only practiced
spiritual meditation.12 In 1952, Mahmud Buzuzu, an MTLD activist,13
criticized this “phobia of the political.” He stated:
The spiritualist who is conscious of his engagement for his God should
not forget that he is at the same time linked to his homeland, his people,
and humanity […] In the spirit of Islam, political militancy, whether forthe defense or liberation of the homeland or for the reform of institutions, will necessarily be integrated into the vast movement of religious
militancy, consisting of liberation of the human beings from all restrictions which prevent them from realizing a superior life, that is to say, thelife of the representative of God on earth.14

For Buzuzu, every pious person devoted to God should feel responsible for his homeland and its people, and moreover, for all humanbeings.15 The gradual achievement of emancipation will pass throughGod, then the homeland, and finally humanity. For Buzuzu, there is nocontradiction between politics and religion. He interprets politics as the
11. Jacques Simon, ed. Messali Hadj par les texts (Paris: Bouchene, 2000), 38–39.
12. Among these Arabophones I cite for example, Mohammed Saïd Zahiri (1900–56) andZinaï Hadj Belkacem a. k. a. Cheikh el-Beidaoui (1903–69); both were activists of the
PPA-MTLD after excluded from the Association of the Ulama, as well as Chadli el-Mekki, a delegate of the PPA in Cairo in the 1940’s, and PPA-MTLD activist and historian
Mohammed Guenaneche (1915–2001).
13. Mahmud Buzuzu (1918–2007) was born in Bougie where he was brought up in a milieu
near the Islamic reform movement of the Association of the Ulama. After graduating fromthe Official Madrasa, he worked as official Arabic teacher (mudarrris) and was involved
actively in the Muslim Boy-Scout Movement. He published a political newspaper in
Arabic named al-Manār between 1951 and 1953, receiving subsidies from the MTLD.
14. Mahmoud Bouzouzou, “Religion et Politique,” La Voix des Jeunes, no. 2 (May 1952): 2.
15. Mahmoud Bouzouzou, “Nos principes”, in Le Groupe Emir Khaled de Belcourt, ed.
Mohamed Tayeb Illoul and Ali Aroua (Algiers: Dahlab, 1991), 53–65.

To be Religious and to be Political in Colonial Algeria

noble objective of the human being, what he calls “the realization of thehighest good as defined by Plato and Aristotle, and religion pursues thisaim in a higher sense.”16(2) The Ulama’s Idea of being Non-PoliticalContrary to the nationalists, the Ulama insisted on a non-politicalstance, even while participating in political national fronts. Let’s examine
the case of the FDRL, a political alliance founded in 1951. This alliance gathered radical nationalists from (a) the MTLD, (b) the AlgerianCommunist Party, (c) the UDMA, a party of French-speaking elites, and(d) the Association of the Algerian Ulama. Unlike the MTLD and theCommunists who both espoused the political independence of Algeria,
the Ulama and the UDMA didn’t officially adopt the cause of politicalindependence. In spite of this, Bashir Ibrahimi and Larbi Tebessi, respectively the president and vice-president of the Association of the Algerian
Ulama, played a coordinating role for this alliance. Ibrahimi visited Parisin 1950 and then in 1951 accompanied this time by Tebessi so as to see
the political situation in Paris. They finally found that it would be useful for the Ulama to establish relations with the Communists and the
MTLD, in addition to the UDMA (who were previously close to the
Ulama), to make the best use of atmosphere for union between different
parties.17 Other than pragmatism, what were the internal motivations for
the Ulama to have taken the initiative in forming this alliance, in spiteof the ideological differences? Here we can cite two reasons. First was
the Ulama’s claim to save the freedom of the religious community fromcolonial interventions. And second was their will to maintain a position
above all other political tendencies.
In colonial Algeria, the Islamic religion represented a bond of unity
16. Bouzouzou, “Religion et Politique,” 2.
17. Rapport, 24 Novembre 1950, Dossier Cheikh Brahimi (Bachir), CAOM, SLNA,
93/4257; SLNA, “Renseignement : Union P.C.A.-U.D.M.A.-OULAMA,” n.d. [1950],
Dossier Cheikh Brahimi (Bachir), CAOM, SLNA, 93/4257; SLNA, “Renseignement:
Nouveau plan d’action politique de l’Association des Oulama,” n.p. [Constantine], 3 Mars
1951, CAOM, SLNA, 93/4312.

123

124

WATANABE Shokoamong the dominated people, because the colonial stratification systemessentially based itself on one’s religious status. While French citizenshipwas recognized for European settlers and Jews, those who had “Muslim
status” were classified in a lower category, in short, that of the dominated.18 Algerian Muslims were called “indigenous,” or after World War II“Muslim French.” Names were different, but the meaning was the same:
French subjects deprived of French civic rights.
Faced with this situation, the Ulama proclaimed solidarity among
all Algerian Muslims in the name of their religion. As representativeof the FDRL, vice-president of the Association of Ulama Larbi Tebessi
explained the reason why the Ulama were obliged to break away fromtheir tradition of being non-political. They participate in politics, hesaid, because it was colonial politics that first intervened in religion.19
By this he meant especially the colonial policies invented in order toplace all Islamic practice under state control: the French administrationin Algeria imposed control over religious, economic, political and social
institutions peculiar to Islam by confiscating religious properties, and by
nominating official Imams and Muftis as colonial agents. We can thus
understand the Ulama’s claim for union as a response to religious stratifications, as well as to colonial politics that imposed repressive measureson that religion.
As for the Ulama’s position among political parties, I already pointed out that the Ulama faced divergence in opinion, especially with theradical nationalist parties. On the one hand, the radical party MTLD
regarded the Ulama’s attitude on the question of independence as
too ambiguous.20 On the other hand, the Ulama believed that radical
nationalists of the MTLD were so dedicated to the party spirit that they
are unable to cease causing wasteful divisions and conflicts between
18. Patrick Weil, “Le Statut des musulmans en Algérie coloniale: Une nationalité française
dénaturée,” in La Justice en Algérie, 1830–1962, ed. Association française pour l’histoire dela justice (Paris : La Documentation Française, 2005), 95–109. Regarding the strange coexistence of the French mission civilisatrice and discriminative colonial policies; see Hannah
Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1951), 126–30.
19. “We [the Ulama] are now ready to participate in the political revivals. Because it waspolitics that intruded religion.” “Mu’tamar jam‘īyat al-‘ulamā’,” al-Manār (Algeria), no. 9(October 1951): 2–3.
20. Kaddache, Histoire, 2: 735.

To be Religious and to be Political in Colonial Algeria

Muslims.21 During a local conflict between the Ulama and the MTLD in
1952 in Tebessa, Larbi Tebessi stated: “The Ulama take part in a religious
association which aims for the education of the youth and the union of
all Muslims. The responsibility for the conflict in question is attributed
only to the MTLD.” He also added: “The realization of a sustainable
union of Muslims will be possible only by a procedure for the dissolution of political parties.”22 In 1947 Ibrahimi had already said that “theAssociation of Ulama is above all the parties” and “its principle is higher
than principles of all [the parties].”23 In the course of the symbolic competition with political parties, the Ulama as a religious (not political)
organization, singled themselves out by claiming that they were working
not for the interest of an individual party, but in the name of the Algerian
Muslim community.24 Therefore, we can observe that the Ulama’s motivation for coordinating a political alliance among various groups was toconserve this position of superiority over other political parties.
21. In criticizing the weakness of political parties in the Mashriq (East Arab countries),
Ibrahimi, the president of the Association of Algerian Ulama, wrote the following in
1947: “We see them say that presence of many parties in an Umma [community] indicates that the Umma is awake, conscious, and ready to get its truth surely. But we see inthe multiplied parties only the weakening, negation of the union, encouragement of the
opponent and taking advantage of each other. The Koran refers to ‘parties’ in plural almost
only in the case of conflict and defeat. For example, ‘But the sects [al-ah.zāb] differ among
themselves’ [19:37] or ‘But there will be put to flight even a host of confederates [alah.zāb]’ [38:10]. On the other hand, the Koran refers to ‘party’ in singular almost onlyin the case of goodness and prosperity: Truly it is the Party of God [h.izb Allah] thatwill achieve Felicity [58:22]. The God’s Party in the Algerian Umma is the Associationof Ulama. Indeed is the Association prosperous.” See Bashir Irahimi, “Jam‘īyat al-‘ulamā’a‘māl-hā wa mawāqif-hā (3),” al-Bas.ā’ir, new ser., no. 4 (29 August 1947).
22. Report from an agent of the Police of General Information in the southern frontier zone
in Tebessa to the Principal Commissioner in Constantine. See “Activité du MTLD-PPA”,
Tébessa, 10 Novembre 1952, CAOM, SLNA, 93/4157.
23. Ibrahimi, “Jam‘īyat al-‘ulamā’ a‘māl-hā wa mawāqif-hā (3)”; Italics added.
24. The Ulama, when they published official documents representing the opinion of the association, used the formula “in the name of the Algerian Muslim Umma (community of
believers).” For example, the Ulama’s petition in 1950 in favor of the separation of church
and the state was submitted “in the name of the Algerian Muslim Umma”. See Jam‘īyat
al-‘Ulamā’ al-Muslimīn al-Jazā’irīyīn, Mudhakkira fī qad.īyat fas.l al-dīn ‘an al-h.ukūma
qaddama-hā majlis idāra al-jam‘īya bi ism al-umma al-Jazā’irīya al-muslima ilā al-majlis
al-Jazā’irī (Algiers: Jules Carbonel, n.d. [1950]).

125

126

WATANABE Shoko(3) Religion as Autonomous Sphere within a Society
As we observed above, there was also a basic difference between the
Ulama and the nationalists with respect to the understanding of religion.
The nationalists considered religion as the individual identity of every
Muslim—even if this individual identity is also supposed to become
communal and even universal in the final stage, as Buzuzu stated. Thus
there is no need for nationalists to call for a privileged religious class,such as the Ulama.
On the other hand, the Ulama understood religion not only as individual faith but also as a collective identity, for which they themselvesplay a symbolic role. Even if the Algerian Ulama have derived its legitimacy from the idea that represent the welfare of the religious community(al-Umma in Arabic),25 what happened here should have been much
more complex.
That is, the Ulama’s refusal to involve themselves in any “political”
affairs meant that the Algerian Ulama supposed an autonomous religious
sphere, which functions independently from a political sphere.
Talal Asad states that the word “‘almānī (secular)” is a very new word
in Arabic, having been introduced only in the latter part of the 19th century.26 This is because, he observes, the notion of the “secular” itself isvery modern: formations of the “secular” corresponded to those of the“religious”, which should be strictly separated from the “secular” sphereof society, making this principal of separation a premise of the modern
nation-state.27 Every Arab or Muslim region witnessed the process of“modernization”, the most prominent evidence of which was the formation of the “secular” republic in Turkey (1923) and the abolishment ofCaliphate in Istanbul (1924).28
25. See the article of Mubarak el-Mili claiming that the Association of Algerian Ulama
was an Association of the Algerian Umma, because it was more adequate than thecolonial government to realize good for the Algerian Umma. See el-Mili, “Jam‘īyatal-‘ulamā’ bayna al-umma wa al-h.ukūma,” al-Bas.ā’ir, no. 92 (24 December 1937): 1–2.
26. Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity (Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 2003), 206.
27. Asad, Formations, 191, 200–1.
28. The Question of the Caliphate caused the most vigorous discussion among the Ulama
in the world. See for example, Ali Abd al-Raziq’s very polemic al-Islām wa us.ūl al-h.ukm

To be Religious and to be Political in Colonial Algeria

On the latter question, Ibn Badis wrote in 1938:
For Muslims, just like for other peoples [umam], there are two dimensions [nāh.iyatān]; a politico-governmental dimension and a moral-social
dimension. The politico-governmental dimension belongs to affairs of
independent nations [umam], thus this doesn’t concern us today. As forthe moral-social dimension, it involves all nations whether independentof not. That is because this dimension concerns the dogma, the ethics, and the behaviors of the life of a Muslim, wherever on the earth,in whatever nation he lives, to whatever authority he obeys. From an
Islamic viewpoint, this purely human [moral-social] dimension would
not exist without the first [politico-governmental] dimension, andwithout this [politico-governmental] dimension, there would not be
the moral-social dimension. This is due to the need for the preservationor organization of the good of Muslims in particular but more generallyof all humanity. […][Although Muslims do not have any infallible religious authority corresponding to the Roman Pope for the Catholics], we have in contrast
the Group of Muslims [jamā‘at al-muslimīn].29 Meaning the people ofknowledge and wisdom, they take care of Muslims’ welfare from thereligious and moral dimensions. These people decide after mutual consultations what would be good and right. All Islamic nations [al-umam
al-islāmīya] should make efforts to form such a group themselves, keeping separate from the political and from any intervention of governments,
whether it is an Islamic government or not.30

We can see how the Algerian Ulama recognized the differentiation
between the political and spiritual dimensions of the lives of Muslims(1925), and also Rashid Rida’s articles published under the title of “al-Ah.kām al-shar‘īya
al-muta‘alliqa bi al-khlāfa al-Islāmīya” in al-Manār magazine between 1922 and 1923.
29. Rashid Rida, one of the most influential Islamic ideologues among the contemporariesof the Algerian Ulama, identified the word “al-jamā‘a” to “the people of command” (ulūal-amr) and “the people who untie and tie” (ahl al-h.all wa al-‘aqd). The latter word refers
especially to the Ulama. See Rashid Rida, “al-Ah.kām al-shar‘īya al-muta‘alliqa bi al-khlāfaal-Islāmīya,”al-Manār 23, no. 10, (1922), and following articles.
30. Abdelhamid ibn Badis, “al-Khlāfa am jamā‘at al-muslimīn,” al-Shihāb 14, no. 2 (May1938); Italics added.

127

128

WATANABE Shokoand how they defined the role of the Ulama within this secularized (andin the Algerian case, colonized) nation.31
Conclusion
To begin with the second question of this study, What was the meaningof being “political” and “religious” for the Ulama and for the nationalists?,
we saw that being religious meant above all individual faith in God. Thisfaith required a process of emancipation, which they called religious militancy, and which should pass though political struggle. Contrary to this,the Ulama understood religion also as a collective identity of the religious community [al-Umma], while they criticized the notion of being
political as an expression of the party spirit.
To go back to our original question, Why did the Ulama refuse to
be seen as political, while they were effectively involved in political activities?, we saw that the Ulama’s refusal to be political derived from theirclaim to stand above all political parties. Behind this self-definitionof the Ulama, I pointed out the perception of religion as independent,
autonomous sphere within a modern society. As Asad stated, the conceptual and social distinction between the “secular” and the “religious” washistorically very new, and it was contemporaneous with the rise of thenation-state, of public education, of the substitution of positive laws for
Islamic Sharīa, and other developments. The Algerian Ulama’s position
toward the “religious” and the “political” should be clearly understoodonly by considering this crucial moment of history.

31. We can observe the same kind of reaction from the Ulama in India in the 1950’s.
Commenting on the Ulama’s defense for Islamic education, which is independent from thesecular one, Qasim Zaman argues that reflects “a recognition by the ‘ulama themselves ofgreater differentiation within society, with religion occupying a distinct, inviolable, autonomous sphere. […]Yet the recognition of this functional differentiation does not derive fromany commitment to the idea of secularization itself, but is intended rather to serve as ameans of resisting or limiting the encroachments of the modern state.” Muhammad Qasim
Zaman, The Ulama in Contemporary Islam (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007),84.

To be Religious and to be Political in Colonial Algeria
Archival sources
CAOM: Centre des Archives d’Outre Mer (Aix-en-Provence, France)
SLNA: Fonds des Services de Liaison Nord-Africaines
Bibliography
Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1951.
Asad, Talal. Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity. Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 2003.
Bouzouzou, Mahmoud. “Religion et Politique.” La Voix des Jeunes, no. 2 (May 1952): 1–2.
—. “Nos principes.” In Le Groupe Emir Khaled de Belcourt, edited by Mohamed Tayeb
Illoul and Ali Aroua, 53–65. Algiers: Dahlab, 1991.
Eickelman, Dale F. and James Piscatori. Muslim Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1996.
Gellner, Ernest. Nations and Nationalism. New York: Cornell University Press, 1983.
Ibn Badis, Abdelhamid. “al-Khlāfa am jamā‘at al-muslimīn.” al-Shihāb 14, no. 2 (May 1938):
61–63.
Ibrahimi, Bashir. “Jam‘īyat al-‘ulamā’ a‘māl-hā wa mawāqif-hā (3).” al-Bas.ā’ir, new ser., no.4
(August 29, 1947): 1-2.
Jam‘īyat al-‘Ulamā’ al-Muslimīn al-Jazā’irīyīn. Mudhakkira fī qad.īyat fas.l al-dīn ‘an al-h.ukụma
qaddama-hā majlis idāra al-jam‘īya bi ism al-umma al-Jazā’irīya al-muslima ilā al-majlis
al-Jazā’irī. Algiers: Jules Carbonel, n.d. [1950].
Kaddache, Mahfoud. Histoire du nationalisme algérien: Question nationale et politique algérienne, 1919–1951. 2vols. Algiers: EDIF, 2000.
Laremont, Ricardo René. Islam and the Politics of Resistance in Algeria 1783–1992. Trenton:
Africa World Press, 2000.
Merad, Ali. Le Réformisme musulman en Algérie de 1925 à 1940. The Hague: Mouton, 1967.
el-Mili, Mubarak. “Jam‘īyat al-‘ulamā’ bayna al-umma wa al-h.ukụma.” al-Bas.ā’ir, no. 92(December 24, 1937) : 1–2.
Mudīrīyat al-Wathā’iq li Wilāyat Qusant.īna, ed. Jam‘īyat al-‘ulamā’ al-muslimīn al-Jazā’irīyīn:Nus.ụs. asāsīya wa wathā’iq min 1350 ilā 1363, 1931–1944. 2nd ed. Constantine: Mat.bụ‘āt
Mudīrīyat al-Wathā’iq li Wilāyat Qusant.īna, 1982.
Rida, Rashid. “al-Ah.kām al-shar‘īya al-muta‘alliqa bi al-khlāfa al-Islāmīya.” al-Manār 23, no. 10(1922): 729–752.
Qasim Zaman, Muhammad. The Ulama in Contemporary Islam. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2007.
Simon, Jacques, ed. Messali Hadj par les texts. Paris: Bouchene, 2000.
Smith, Anthony D. Chosen Peoples: Sacred Sources of National Identity. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2003.
Stora, Benjamin. Messali Hadj, 1898–1974. Paris: Harmattan, 1986.
Weil, Patrick. Le Statut des musulmans en Algérie coloniale: Une nationalité française dénaturée.
In La Justice en Algérie, 1830–1962, edited by Association française pour l’histoire de lajustice, 95–109. Paris : La Documentation Française, 2005.

129