So the hyperinflation in Egypt was invented?
Aside from how ridiculous the whole story sounds, historian Warren C. Schultz,
who specializes in Mamluk monetary history and has written the relevant chapter in the Cambridge History of Egypt, has actually written an essay titled "Mansa Musa's Gold in Mamluk Cairo: A Reappraisal of a World Civilizations Anecdote" (you can find it in Google Books). He says:
Yet as far as I have been able to determine, only one Mamluk source [this is al-Umari, whose propagandistic nature I've already mentioned] mentions that Mansa Musa's gold was the cause of long-term drop in value of gold as alluded to in the italicized [textbook] section above..... Of greater significance, I believe, is the observation that when this [textbook] account of long-lasting devaluation is carefully compared to the wider selection of the available Mamluk sources, a different picture emerges. Far from being a unique cause of a drop in the value of gold, a review of exchange-rates provided for Mamluk Cairo reveals the Mansa Musa episode was but one of many short-term fluctuations recorded for the first half of the fourteenth century.
Schultz's review of the sources shows that:
- This supposed "hyperinflation" caused by Mansa Musa was temporary fall in the exchange rate of silver coins to gold coins from 25:1 to 20:1, beginning in AH 724 (AD 1324).
- Under normal circumstances, the exchange rate of silver to gold in Mamluk Cairo was between 20:1 and 25:1. It's questionable whether this was a meaningful "inflation" at all.
- Some Mamluk sources don't even credit Mansa Musa for this "inflation." Al-Maqrizi suggests that this was due to "the selling of massive quantities of [gold] jewelry by Mamluk amirs."
- In Ah 699 (AD 1300), the exchange rate fell from 25.5:1 to 17:1, far more than the 1324 fall. This was because the Mongols sacked Damascus that year, causing panic in Egypt. This was the kind of inflation that Mamluk Egypt was perennially subject to depending on how well the sultan was doing, and you can see that the 724 inflation, far from being a "hyperinflation," can't hold a candle to the 1300 inflation.
Now, allow me to soapbox a little. (YMMV.) Why is
mansa Musa so famous, and why are the ridiculous claims one Egyptian historian (not even an eyewitness!) makes about his
hajj taken at face value? As @
Big Smoke says, why is it that "its mentioned in every High School history textbook"?
In my opinion, the first reason is that al-Umari was translated into a European language (French) before almost any other Mamluk historian. This meant that when the educational establishment finally came to the realization that, yeah, maybe history isn't solely reserved to white men after all, Umari's propaganda about
mansa Musa was available for those who cannot read fourteenth-century Arabic, that is, most of us.
The thing is that
the American educational establishment has no real interest in discussing Africa in proper world historical context. They do not care whether their students have a proper understanding of Africa's contribution to the Atlantic world system or not. They do not care whether students understand why so much of Africa is the way it is today.
All they care is that they can have a
token black empire to show to students, to tell them "Black people had some cool shit too. Oh, one king brought so much gold to Egypt, he caused hyperinflation! Now, let's go back to Europe...", to tell the rest of the country "Africa is being represented in our history education system."
The historical realities of the token black empire are not important. The global context of the token black empire is not important. What is important is that the token black empire has something ridiculously impressive about it (so they can claim that "the historical significance of Africa is being covered" or some such) and is simple to go over, with little modern relevance.
Coupled with the French translation of al-Umari, Mali thus becomes the perfect token black empire. It's practically ancient (well, medieval, but you get my gist); it has no political relevance to today unlike, say, the Fulani jihads or slave-trading kingdoms like Benin; the al-Umari account makes for a short, simple story that, regardless of historical veracity, looks impressive.
And once Mali has been established as the token black empire (and let's just add Ghana and Songhay, since it'll be a bit weird to just introduce Mali out of nowhere—but end it with Songhay, we can't possibly cover the eighteenth-century
jihad movements! Oh, and maybe add Great Zimbabwe or the Swahili too, just to show it's everywhere in Africa and not just the west),
there is no need to discuss Africa in wider context.
Here's an illustration. I just googled "World history textbook" on Google Books. Let me check how many times Mali is mentioned, compared to a few states whose social complexity was comparable to Mali (1800s Kumasi was as big as 1300s Timbuktu) and which are much more directly relevant to American history:
Asante,
Benin,
Dahomey. Let's also check for one Sahelian state whose current influence is much greater than Mali's:
Sokoto.
- World History: Societies of the Past: "Mali" has 5 results. The rest none.
- The Essential World History: "Mali" has 5 results. Asante comes up only in the captions of two small pictures: one about the yam ceremony, the other about how Africans were humiliated by Europeans. The rest none.
- World History: Journeys from Past to Present: "Mali" has 5 results. Asante is mentioned in one(!) paragraph, which is entirely about how it was suspicious of Europeans. The Yoruba kingdom of Oyo is discussed in the next paragraph. Excuse me, Oyo isn't actually discussed, the paragraph is entirely about how Oyo dealt with Europeans. Dahomey comes up once as an example of "the oral traditions of West and Central Africa." Sokoto is skipped over. Still, this is decent as textbooks go.
- Cengage Advantage Books: World History: "Mali" has 5 results. Oyo, Benin, and Asante are actually discussed on their own terms. Sokoto is ignored. By far the best nonetheless.
- Cracking the AP World History Exam 2017: "Mali" has 5 results. Asante is mentioned once(!) as a "native African empire," along with such non-empires as the Xhosa. Benin is mentioned once, but mistakenly called an "early sub-Saharan African culture" despite the fact that the kingdom of Benin still exists and its king has a degree from the University of Wales. Sokoto ignored.
My point is, the historical development of Africa doesn't matter to many of these textbooks. Otherwise it makes very little sense to end the history of the Sahel at Songhay, when Sokoto and the Fulani
jihads were the culmination of Islamic West Africa's historical development.
It matters only that they have
something about Africa to point to when people complain, hence Mali the token black empire.