This dissertation offers a new interpretation of the middle decades of nineteenth-century Egypt, which were decisive in forming Egyptian modernity. This period is usually understood as merely the precursor to the direct colonial rule that followed. Instead, this dissertation argues that the reigns of Sa‘īd (1854-1863) and Ismā‘īl (1863-1879) were defined by Egypt’s unique legal status. During this period, Egypt was neither a sovereign state, nor directly ruled by the Ottoman Empire, nor annexable to any other empire. This peculiar legal status led to the emergence of Egypt as an object of “the universal.” This term is taken from the unusual name of the “Universal Company” that was created to build and operate the Suez Canal. The term denoted a new commercial domain, external to Europe and shaped by, yet equidistant from, the continent’s competing empires.The attempts to develop European capital outside the existing empires necessitated the construction of a new legal and political order. Taking the construction of the Canal as a vantage point through which to explore the consolidation of this new order, the dissertation focuses on three aspects. First, I show how both Ottoman-Islamic and European precedents contributed to the formation of the universal. I outline social and legal changes, spanning the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, that allowed the extension of the European company-form to the Ottoman world in the nineteenth century; trace the rise of Egypt as a pivotal link of imperial communications in the first half of the nineteenth century; and investigate the implications of the political tensions between the Ottoman Sultan and his viceroy in Egypt in the 1830s. Second, I explore the consolidation of the universal legal domain in Egypt. I argue that the inter-imperial dispute over the construction of the Suez Canal led to the emergence of the company as the object of the universal, and that, in the following decades, the company’s directors catalyzed the entrenchment of a “universal” commercial domain in Egypt in the period between 1868 and 1876. Finally, I explore the implications of the universality of Egypt on the rise of modern government. I focus on the legal transformations, including the formation of the Mixed Courts, that foreshadowed the establishment of modern courts; changes in the command of labor that gave rise to Egyptianness as a collective identity; and the indebtedness of the government that precipitated the emergence of an independent (non-Ottoman) state apparatus with compromised sovereignty.

Loin de la scène politique, Abbas II en exil, Nubar en retraite, chacun enregistre ses Mémoires pour offrir à la postérité leur précieux témoignage, en français non seulement sur leur vie publique mais aussi sur l’Égypte des vice-rois et sur les faits de leurs temps. Nubar, ce pacha d’origine arménienne qui a servi tous les vice-rois de l’Égypte depuis Mohamed Ali jusqu’à Abbas II, insiste dans ses Mémoires sur les projets qu’il a le plus défendus et les défis qu’il a relevés au fil des années : la réforme de la justice, la défense des droits du fellah, son refus du projet du canal de Suez, ainsi que son opposition aux caprices de Saïd et surtout à ceux d’Ismaïl qui ont conduit progressivement l’Égypte à la faillite.Abbas II se défend dans ses Mémoires devant l’Histoire et surtout contre les accusations de son rival Cromer, le consul général britannique, publiées dans Modern Egypt et dans Abbas II. Le Khédive met en avant la lutte nationaliste qu’il a menée aux niveaux politique, éducatif, culturel, entre autres, afin de faire face à l’occupation anglaise. Il explique l’évolution de sa relation avec les généraux britanniques de la politique de rupture sous Cromer à celle de l’entente qui a commencé en 1907 après l’incident de Denchaway (1906).Cette forme d’écriture de soi se distingue de ses formes voisines (le journal, l’autobiographie, le récit de voyage) par son identité mixte (historique, juridique, politique et esthétique). Cela explique la variété des stratégies suivies par le pacha et le Khédive dans leurs Mémoires : stratégie de dénégation, de disqualification de l’adversaire, de l’interprétation, de prudence, etc. Nous étudions ces deux textes en insistant sur le côté littéraire des Mémoires, qui est d’habitude marginalisé au profit de leur dimension historique.Les Mémoires constituent une arme de l’homme politique qui lui permettent de bénéficier d’une grande liberté grâce à leur identité mixte. Le mémorialiste homme de pouvoir multiplie les stratégies d’écriture pour prouver sa crédibilité. Il se défend et fait de son ouvrage un monument capable de traverser les siècles aussi bien par sa valeur historique qu’esthétique. Malgré le débat sur la subjectivité du mémorialiste et sa relation avec l’écriture de l’Histoire, la valeur historique des Mémoires est indéniable. Au terme de notre travail, nous revendiquons l’insertion des Mémoires dans l’enseignement : un moyen parmi d’autres pour tirer ce patrimoine précieux de l’oubli et lui octroyer la place qu’il mérite dans la mémoire collective. / Away from the political scene, Abbas II in exile, Nubar retired, each one has written his Memoirs to offer to the posterity their precious testimony in french, not only about their public life but also about Egypt’s vice-kings and about their time.Nubar, this pacha of armenian origin, and who served all the vice-kings of Egypt since Mohamed Ali to Abbas II, insists in his Memoirs on the projects which he defended the most and his won challenges over the years: the justice reform, the defense of the fellah’s rights, the rejection of the canal of Suez project, his opposition to the whims of Saïd and especially those of Ismaïl which have led Egypt to the bankruptcy.Abbas II defends himself in front of the history, especially against his rival’s charges: Cromer, the general British consul published in Modern Egypt and in Abbas II. The Khedive highlighted his nationalist struggle that he led in several fields: political, educational, cultural fields in order to face the British occupation. He explains the evolution of his relation with the British generals from the discord policy under Cromer leadership to the agreement that began in 1907 after the Denchaway incident (1906).This form of personnal writing differs from its related forms (the diaries, the autobiography, the travel novels) by its mixed identity (historical, legal, political and aesthetic). This explains the variety of the strategies followed by the pacha and the Khedive in their memoirs: strategie of denial, of disqualification of the opponent, of the interpretation, of the caution, etc. We study these texts focussing on the lirerary side which is usually marginalized in the benefit of their historical side.The Memoirs are weapons of the politician which give him free style due to their hybrid identity. The political memoirist multiplies his writing strategies to prove his credibility. He defends himself and makes his book a monument able to cross the centuries by both historical and aesthetic value. Despite the debate about the subjectivity of the memoirist and its relationship with writing the history, the historical value of Memoirs is undeniable. At the end of our study, we reclam to insert the Memoirs in the education programs: a way among others to save this precious heritage from oblivion and give it its rightful place in the collective memory.