Get help now

Polemics on Veiling Egyptian Women in the Twentieth Century

  • Pages 19
  • Words 4713
  • Views 147
  • Can’t find relevant credible information

    Let our experts help you

    Get help now

    “.. so much energy has been expended by Muslim men

    and then Muslim women to remove the veil and by

    others to affirm or restore it ..” (Ahmed 167).

    This paper explores these efforts in two specific stages: the first and the last

    thirds of the twentieth century. Through an analysis of some of the various

    arguments on the veil, I will try to induce some general characteristics of the

    debate on the issue and on women during these two specific periods of time.

    The starting point will be Kasim Amin’s “Tahrir el Mara’a” (Liberation of

    Woman) and the counter argument of Talat Harb’s “Tarbiet el Mara’a wal

    Hijab”, (Educating Women and the Veil). The debate between those two

    protagonists which has become a “prototype” of the debate on the veil

    throughout the century (Ahmed P. 164). Malak Hefni Nassif’s and Hoda

    Sha’arawi’s attitudes towards the veil represent an interesting insight to two

    different interpretations of the hijab issue by feminist activists that prevail

    throughout the century. The whole synthesis of this early debate is then put

    in juxtaposition to the debate later in the century as represented by the

    avalanche of literature on the topic in the seventies, the views of some

    famous sheikhs like Mohammed Metwally el Shaarawi and others, and the

    heated debate initiated by the Minister of Education’s decree of 1994 to

    prevent school administrations from imposing the hijab on girls as part of the

    Kasim Amin’s Tahrir El-Mara’a (Published 1899)

    It may not be an exaggeration to say that Amin’s “Tahrir al-Mara’a” was one

    of the most controversial book in Egypt’s modern history. It has ignited a

    strong debate and prompted more than thirty reaction articles and books

    either to defy or assert his argument against the veil (Ahmed P. 164).

    The ideas of the book were not totally new, they echoed the writings of some

    writers like Mariam al-Nahhas (1856-1888), Zaynab Fawwaz (1860-1914),

    Aisha al-Taymuriah (1840-1902), and Murqus Fahmi’s (a Coptic lawyer)

    four act play “Al Mar’ah fi al-Sharq” or (The Woman in the East) (Badran P.

    19). Yet, Amin’s book double-scored for coming from a Muslim judge and

    for his overt proposal to unveiling women’s faces. His words were not the

    only challenge to the existing notions of the hijab, it was his caliber as a

    Moslim judge that has vocalized his call to unveil women and gave his book

    After an introduction loaded with emotional phrases on the degradation of the

    Egyptian woman and an exaltation of the European woman, the book is

    divided into four sections: “Educating women”, “Women’s veil”, “The

    woman and the nation”, and “Marriage and divorce”.

    Amin starts his argument calling for the “Hijab Shara’ei” stating that the

    Hijab in its form then (covering the face, the hair and the whole body) was

    not mandated by the Shari’aa. He further adds that he was not calling for the

    “extreme” of the West which “makes the woman liable to seduction” (Amin

    P. 65). The argument against the veil is in two sections: The religious section

    which is mainly text interpretation and some Hadith that prompt women to

    cover the hair and the whole body except for the hands and the face; and the

    “social” (practical / everyday life) perspective. The later section includes

    “social” ideas such as the inconvenience for women with their faces covered

    to dwell in business, to testify in courts or to get engaged (as the groom

    should see her face first). Furthermore, he argues that unveiling would make

    women watch their behaviors as they could be recognized and hence their

    reputation would be at stake if they did any wrong. Still, from the practical

    “social” point of view, the flimsy bourqo’ (face cover) used was more

    tempting as it makes the viewer curious to see what was intended to be

    hidden. He further argues that, if women are imprisoned in the hareem (part

    of the house where women are secluded), then even if they did not commit

    any shameful act, it would not be due to any virtue in them, but to the fact

    that they did not have the freedom to do otherwise.

    Amin accuses the veil of being a barrier to women’s development and

    education (P. 85), arguing that it deprived her from interacting with the

    society and learning how to live. He illustrates by comparing the ignorant

    peasant with the elite urban lady who can speak French and plays the piano,

    and concludes that the ignorat peasant would be more capable of coping with

    the difficulties of life than the elite urbanite due to the seclusion of the latter.

    In his introduction, Talat Harb states that the main purpose of writing his

    book was to defy Amin’s argument against the veil. Harb was called “father

    of Egypt’s economic independence” and has established the first national

    bank in Egypt in 1920. So when someone in his caliber – though it was early

    in his career – writes a book, his prestigious position would place heavier

    In the introduction, he states that the majority of those who read Amin’s

    book have denounced its ideas, and then declares the now common notion

    that liberating women is a Western imperialist conspiracy. He ends the

    introduction with a note that Kasim Amin would not have such hideous goals

    in mind, that he wrote his “notorious” book out of a mixture of good will and

    misjudgment. Yet at the very end of the introduction, Harb implicitly accuses

    Amin of plagiarism saying that the ideas of his book were published earlier in

    The book is divided into two main sections: “The woman and her role in the

    society” and “What moral qualities should the woman have”. In the first

    section he states that “women are inferior to men in perception and senses”,

    that she has a different “calling” in life than the man (she for the private

    sphere, he for the public sphere), and that she should not do men’s job. He

    ends this section with the results he perceived out of liberating women in

    Europe (immorality, drunkenness, casual relations..). Then he devotes the

    biggest section of the book defending the veil (from page 60 to page 105)

    concluding that the current veil is not good enough and that women are

    wrongly doing their best to show their beauty from behind the veil.

    He starts his argument against unveiling with a compelling statement on the

    importance of morality, fidelity and modesty. Then he moves on saying that

    Hijab is the best assurance for these wonderful qualities, defying Amin’s

    religious argument with a different interpretation of the same text the former

    had used (same text used by Ashmawi and Tantawi later in the century). At

    the end, he puts a logical question: What is better for women to veil or to be

    immodest? The question answers itself.

    Harb uses the holy text as one source for convincing the reader, he had many

    other sources such as a “scientific” research done in Europeby a German

    scientist that proved that the German women betray their husbands seven

    times in average, the Belgium six times, the British five times … (Harb P.

    63). So, if unveiling is to emulate the West, here is the corruption and

    deficiencies resulting from the absence of veil. Harb uses the same (social)

    practical argument used by Amin yet with different anecdotes, for example

    he says that mingling with the other sex will make the woman compare her

    husband to a stranger with possible unfavorable conclusions on the first.

    Harb laments that the society was much better before the migration of

    foreigners attaching their existence with the introduction of legalized

    prostitution and the call for unveiling women (Harb P. 97).

    Nassif was the daughter of a follower of Mohammed Abdou and one of the

    early female teachers for five years before she got married to a tribe leader in

    Fayoum. After marriage, she realized that she was a second wife, the

    discovery was distressful to her, and she seems to have experienced chronic

    depression as expressed in her words to May Zeiada (El-Gabri P. 11). Nassif

    used to send articles to newspapers advocating women’s rights specifically

    against polygamy – reflecting her personal experience. In 1911 she sent a

    petition to the people’s assembly (was read by a man, as she was not allowed

    as a woman to speak in public). The petition included ten recommendations

    asking for more education for women, access to mosques, having women

    enter the fields of medicine and education, full participation in public life, and

    legal protection for women in marriage and divorce. All recommendations

    were rejected, yet at least that was a feminist voice heard in the People’s

    Assembly (although through a mediator).

    Nassif’s position on the unveiling was firm opposition. She does not base her

    argument on text interpretation as did Amin or Harb. She follows the “social”

    practical line introduced by Amin arguing that although religion did not

    mandate the woman to veil, nor that the veil was the proof of modesty, she

    refuses unveiling on the basis of the immaturity of the society and the

    immorality of some men. She believed that the major interest of the women

    who unveil was to follow the fashions and not to seek education as Amin had

    Sha’arawi comes from an upper-class Egyptian-Circasian family. She was

    forced to marry her cousin at the age of nine while he was nearly the age of

    her father. At the age of thirteen, she left her husband because of his return

    to his first wife. In her early twenties, she accepted to return back to him,

    after he promised not to return to his first wife again. Sha’arawi liked to

    stress the Western influence on her character and that she had “created”

    herself by reading French books and socializing with French women like

    Eugénie Le Brun (Ahmed P. 178). Early in 1909, Sha`arawi with the support

    of Princess Ayn al-Haya Ahmed, approached the Cairo University with a

    proposal to hold a lecture for female audience at the University hall to be

    given by her friend Margret Clément. The topic was a comparison between

    the European and the Egyptian woman including a discussion on the veil.

    King Fou’ad (then Rector of the University) agreed. The lecture was a

    success and was followed by others. Nassif was one the speakers invited

    In 1920, Sh’arawi was elected president of the Wafdist Women’s Central

    Committee (WWCC) and in 1923, she and other WWCC members created

    an independent feminist group called The Egyptian Feminist Union (EFU)

    after receiving an invitation from the International Alliance of Women for

    Suffrage and Equal rights (IAW) to attend its conference in Rome where they

    made their first public declaration of their program. The EFU philanthropic

    activities included a dispensary for poor mothers and children, a center for

    instruction in domestic arts, a handicrafts workshop, and a daycare center for

    the children of working mothers. In 1925 the EFU founded L’Egyptienne ,

    the first explicitly feminist journal in Egypt (Badran P. 102). L’Egyptienne

    was in Frenche, later in 1937, they issued al-Misriah in Arabic. These two

    papers formed a channel for the EFU agenda which mainly included family

    While Badran argues that unveiling was never part of the formal agenda of

    the EFU (P. 23), Sha’arawi was one of the first women to declare her

    denunciation of the veil and to take it off in a theatrical dramatic act in 1923

    upon her return from the (IAW) conference in Rome.

    Both Sha’arawi and Nassif represent what Laila Ahmed terms as “two

    divergent voices” (Ahmed P. 174) within the feminist voices on the veil:

    Sha’arawi was a voice connected with the western culture through readings

    and friends and consequently advocating Western ideas; Nassif was a voice

    representing indigenous ideas, influenced by Mohammed Abdou rather than

    western writers, wrote in Arabic rather than in French, and raised issues that

    are totally indigenous such as access to mosques.

    The issue of the veil was not resolved with the unveiling of most urban

    women during the middle decades of the century. The issue is back on the

    foreground as of the seventies. One basic difference is the definition of hijab

    (the veil): early in the century it meant covering the face and keeping women

    in the house. Later in the century, hijab meant covering the hair and the

    whole body, only showing the hands and face, and not necessarily limiting

    women to the private sphere. The new hijab has become, as Macloed puts it,

    a symbolic resolution of women’s dilemma of having to work, and feeling

    guilty about it. (Macloed P. 120) The earlier version of the hijab is now

    called “Nikab” and is adding a new dimension to the controversy on the veil:

    a veiled women like Nabila Hassan, the reporter of Akher Sa’a (an Egyptian

    magazine) investigating the world of Monakabat treats it as a mysterious alien

    world (Akher Sa’a 8/12/92). Preachers and sheikhs, specially on audio tapes,

    consider it as a double score for a woman to be monakaba though not

    mandated. Opposition Islamic groups found a golden opportunity to attack

    the government for not allowing monakabat to university compasses.

    In the seventies, Egypt witnessed what was described as a revival of

    indigenous Islamic values. Some of the reasons given for that include: the

    defeat of 1967, the collapse of Nasser’s Arab nationalist dream, the waste of

    the Yemeni War (1962-67), the failure of Nasser’s socialist contract, Sadat’s

    insecurity vis-à-vis the leftists and encouragement of the Islamic current

    declaring the new label of “Dawlet el Ilm wal Iman” (The State of Science

    and Faith), the petro-dollar coming with its agenda, the economic crisis and

    the rising inflation rate, and the sense of corruption caused by the open door

    policy “Infitah” which enlarged the gap between the rich and the poor. All the

    above made people seriously consider returning to religion, the only solid

    ground available after all these changes and disillusions.

    As women are the bearers of culture, an avalanche of books was published

    outlining what is to be expected from a true Muslim woman. Hijab was the

    hottest issue, it is a tangible aspect of faith, so it should be a starting point for

    any true believer. Following is a summary of the ideas shown in some books

    Because of Malak Hefni Nassif’s opposition to unveiling, her ideas were

    re-published in 1976 by a writer called Abdel Aal Mohamed El Gabri. The

    writer selects what to put in the book, and comments on what she says,

    putting attractive titles that would appeal to a conservative reader such as

    “The Corrupted Morals of the Educated Women”, though what is written

    under this title does not denounce educating women but simply differentiate

    between learning sciences and being morally disciplined. He would also

    attract the misogynous type of a reader by a chapter entitled “The

    Misbehavior of Women” in which she criticizes some qualities that may be in

    the woman’s character such as ignorance or snobbery.

    Ni’mat Sidki wrote her book “El-Tabarruj” in 1975, she argues that God has

    punished her for immodest dress and use of make up by an inflammation in

    the gums. She writes: “I am a sinner deserving this punishment and more, for

    the mouth which God has disciplined with illness and pain wore lipstick and

    did not command the good and forbid the evil…” (Hoffman-Lad P. 29-30).

    Sidki resorts to Harb’s interpretation of holy text concluding that God forbids

    women from displaying their bodies to preserve the society from the harms

    In 1978, El-Gohari, in a book dedicated to Hassan el Banna, the founder of

    the Muslim Brother’s Group, illustrates that Hijab means covering the

    woman’s beauty (Ziena) and segregation from men. He puts two conditions

    for women’s education or work: sex dichotomy and women’s veil (El Gohari

    P. 43). El-Gohari asserts that there is nothing to argue about as far as the

    Hijab is concerned, women should veil, period. He quotes a Hadith cited by

    Fatema that when the Prophet was asked which is best for the woman, his

    answer was that “She should not see nor be seen by a man” (El-Gohari P.

    44). (The same Hadith was discredited by Fahmi Houeidi in Al-Ahram article

    in 1996). He dedicates the biggest part of his book to denouncing women’s

    El-Bahi starts his book in a way similar to that of Talat Harb, the first half of

    the book is dedicated to denouncing the Western woman, drawing an image

    of a society rife with homosexuality, pre-marital sex, infanticide and adultery.

    The second half targets the feminist agenda articulated by groups during the

    first half of the century such as equality in inheritance, in taking her opinion

    (al shoura), in marrying without a “wali”, in having a judge to effect divorce

    and polygamy, and equality in testimony, concluding that Islam does not

    butter women with hypocrisy, but gives them all their due rights, and hence

    there can never be more rights to claim.

    The avalanche of such conservative ideas and the prevalence of the veil has

    alarmed secular feminists like Nawal Al-Saadawi who published in 1972 “El

    Mara’a wal Gins” (Women & Sex) denouncing the conservative ideas that

    “disguise” itself in religious jargon (Researchers of El Maraa Al Gadida,

    1995) . In another booklet, she argues that since rural women who constitute

    80% of the population are never veiled, then, according to the conservatives’

    logic, this majority of women are corrupt and immoral, a conclusion that can

    not be true (Hoffman-Ladd P. 35). In 1996, Al Saadawi published a short

    story in Al-Ahram newspaper, allegedly a true story of one of the cases who

    came to her as a psychiatrist, the story implies that the veil and the rigid

    patriarchal family authority lead to psychological distortion and sexual

    repression. Though, she never says these words, the story is full of

    metaphors implying the idea. The protagonist is a veiled girl who dreams of

    Noah arch leaving her out crying and agonizing her doom. The girl would fall

    in love for a Pharoanic statue and the story ends with her throwing the statue

    away and falling apart. Whether it is a true story or not, it carries

    Al-Saadawi’s message and counter argument against the veil. The story was

    refused by all publishers and seems to have reached Al-Ahram after a long

    Prevalence of the conservative ideas of the seventies books made the veil

    question become as best described by Fadwa El Guindi’s statement: “A

    woman in public has a choice: either looking secular, modern, feminine, and

    passive (hence very vulnerable to indignities), or becoming a religieuse (a

    Muslim Sister), hence formidable, untouchable and silently threatening” (El

    el-Sha’arawi is a popular Islamic thinker and vigorously promotes the veil in

    its modern sense. In 1980 he argues in his book “Al Maraa Kama Aradaha

    Allah” that when the woman is not veiled, she is displaying her beauty

    seducing those who can not afford to marry. Since those young men can not

    marry and have for example to wait till they finish their education, they will

    have to resort to sin to fulfill this desire. Hence, women’s unveiling pollutes

    the society and leads to immorality. He further argues that when the woman

    takes the veil, she protects herself from being compared to a younger or a

    more beautiful woman, and if the husband does not see any other woman but

    his wife, he will desire no woman but her. (Hoffman-Lad P. 31). So,

    according to el-Sha’arawi, women’s veil preserves the family and protects

    the whole society – nothing can be more important, and the price is not so

    Defying an argument that Hijab was introduced by the Mamluk to protect

    girls from being kidnapped, he says that even if this is the case, we still need

    to protect the girls from being kidnapped in the streets of Cairo by veiling

    The same argument that a female’s dressing code is responsible if she is

    kidnapped or raped is echoed at an Al-Shaab article on 12/13/92, and later in

    Al Ahram on 5/16/97 by Abdel Wahhab Metawei in Barid El Gom’a, in reply

    to a mother’s problem whose daughter was raped because of her immodest

    Sound Tracks Sold in front of Mosques (1997)

    Sheikh Kishk, died few years ago, starts his tapes with a prayer containing

    “Ostor Awratena” (God to cover our weaknesses / pudenda), the word

    “awratena” is a loaded term as the translation indicates, and whether he says

    it or not, the word has a notorious connotation with a woman’s body as

    explained in the vernacular section. He laments the good old days when

    things were cheap, when women stayed at home and obeyed their husbands,

    comparing it to women who (in a sarcastic tone) want to have the right to

    divorce themselves. Kishk puts four pre-requisitions for women to go to

    heaven: to pray five times a day, cover her hair, cover her pudenda, and

    obey her husband. He does not tell where he got this combination from, most

    probably, it is an outcome of his speculations. Kishk’s theatrical

    performance, audio dramatic effects, overwhelms the audience, leaving no

    Wagdi Ghoneim, in a tape entitled “Solouk El Okht El Moslima” (The

    Behavior of the Moslem Sister), starts off the tape with a quotation “Every

    new innovation is Bida’a, and every Bida’a is from the Satan”, the new

    innovation he is referring to is women’s unveiling and leaving the house. That

    was just the introductory phrase. He then moves to the name of the tape: he

    says that he had wished to call the tape (The Behavior of the Veiled

    Woman), because “unfortunately” there are women who are still unveiled,

    and hence, are unworthy of advice. The tape is well focused and logically

    constructed (in contrast to Kishk’s which moves from one topic to the other)

    on the expected behavior of the veiled woman and her language in the street,

    in public, in family occasions, with neighbors, in means of transportation and

    at work. The number of do’s and don’ts reached at the end of the tape is

    alarming, one feels like the preacher wants to control and put constraints on

    every single move or word of the woman. His justification to these

    constraints is that the veiled woman is an “ambassador” of Islam. This way

    he overweighs small errands and everyday activities turning them into

    representation missions that should strictly follow complicated protocols. The

    word “awra” is again used extensively, every unveiled woman has her “awra”

    seen by strangers. Even the veiled who is not orthodox enough, leaving her

    neck, ears, a part of her legs or arms seen, has her “awra” seen by others.

    This way every part of the body, except the hands the face is “awra”, the

    power of using the word is in its connotation with sexual organs, it may be

    acceptable that the arms be seen but if they are as sacred as the sexual

    organs, then letting them to be seen is a big crime.

    The hijab in Schools and the Nikab Universities

    In 1994, Dr. Hussein Kamel Bahaa’ El-Din, Minister of Education, fueled

    the battle on the veil with decree No. 113 preventing school administrations

    from imposing the hijab on girls. Given the symbolic importance of the veil,

    the decree mobilized many writers attacking or defending the Minister’s

    What made things more difficult was a fatwa issued by an-Al Azhar

    committee denouncing the Minister’s decision and considering it as an assault

    on the religious teachings. The thread was picked by the government’s

    opposition, and papers like Al-Ahrar came out with titles like: “The Volcano

    of Anger sweeps Egypt because of the Minister’s decree .. Parents beg to the

    Minister to have Mercy .. The Minister is appealing to the lime lights with his

    decree …” (Al-Ahrar Sept. 5, 94).

    The whole issue was turned into a political issue, it was not a matter of

    wearing the veil or not, the Minister’s decree did not say that girls should not

    wear it, he said that parent’s approval should be obtained first. Yet, given the

    political tension between Islamic groups and the government, the decree was

    considered as an aggression on the later’s domain specifically within the

    administration of the schools which impose the hijab sometimes on girls who

    The Minister had earlier problems when he insisted that “Monakabat” are not

    allowed inside university campuses unless they show their face to security.

    This decision has stirred the many of opposition groups who took it into their

    shoulders to write the story of any Monakaba who was denied the right to

    get into campus with great sympathy in their papers.

    Abdel Azim Ramadan, a historian with many publications, takes part in the

    debate. In an articles published in “October Magazine” on September 4, 94,

    Ramadan took the Minister’s side, against the fatwa. He starts (a bit on the

    defensive) by saying that he was a graduate of Al-Azhar, is indebted to this

    educational institution and has nothing against it whatsoever. Ramadan treats

    the Azhar fatwa as a political act inciting the people against the Minister and

    embarrassing the government, putting a precedence to counterfeit any other

    minister’s decision and threatening the government’s autonomy. For the rest

    of the article, Ramadan tries desperately to put the veil issue in its place as a

    personal religious decision, arguing that it is only one aspect of religiosity that

    can not substitute the other aspects, he reiterates that the decree did not

    prevent girls from wearing the hijab, it just prevented the administration from

    imposing it by putting the condition of the parent’s approval. Finally, he

    argues that the Islamic groups’ opposition to the decree is because they want

    to have the authority to impose a dress on girls that would even transgress

    On August 24, 94, and within the same context, “Akher Sa’aa” presents a

    book review of “The Responsibilty of the Muslim Woman in Structuring the

    Family and the Society” by Mohammed Bahy el Din Salem. The title of the

    article (written in a big font) was “All Religions have called for the Hijab ..

    Unveiling is due to Ignorance of the True Teachings of the Religion”. The

    book as reviewed by the article is full of quotations from the Bible, the Old

    Testament and of course the Quor’an, concluding with what is in the title.

    Saied Ashmawi and Tantawi (August 1994)

    Within the great commotion caused by the Minister’s decree, Saied Ashmawi

    wrote in Rose-al-Yousef an article declaring that the Hijab is not mandated

    by Islam, interpreting three Qur’anic verses: Ayet El Hijab, Ayet El Khimar,

    Ayet El Galaleeb, and some of the Prophet’s Hadith, and concluding that the

    hijab phenomenon is an expression of politicized Islam and is being used as a

    tool by the leaders of Gamaat Islamia. Tantawi, then Grand Mufti of Egypt

    replies advocating Hijab interpreting the same verses, and denying its

    connection with whatever is called “politicized Islam” as he puts it. The

    debate goes on, but unfortunately ends up with the two sides discrediting

    each other, and that was the sad end of the debate.

    O ye who believe! Enter not the dwellings of the

    Prophet for a meal without waiting for the proper time,

    unless permission be granted you. But if ye are invited,

    enter, and when your meal is ended, then disperse,

    Linger not for conversation. Lo1 that would cause

    annoyance to the Prophet, and he would be shy of

    (asking) you (to go); but Allah is not shy of the truth.

    And when ye ask of them (the wives of the prophet)

    anything, ask it of them from behind a curtain. That is

    purer for your hearts and for their hearts

    Ashmawi interprets this verse as binding only to the wives of the prophet and

    not to any women. It even does not include the concubines he took giving the

    Hadith told by Anas Ben Malek that when the Prophet married Safia ben

    Yehia, people knew that he is taking her as a wife not a concubine when he

    veiled her (put a curtain is the literal translation). Tantawi argues that

    Ashmawi’s interpretation is wrong and that the Hijab applies to all women, it

    is a religious doctrine (Hokm Share’ie)

    Works Cited

    Ahmed, Leila. Women and Gender in Islam. Cairo: The American University
    in Cairo, 1992.

    Amin, Kasim. Tahrir El-Mara’a. Cairo: Oriental Library, 1899.

    Ashmawi, Saied. “El-Hijab Lais Farida.” Rose-al-Youssif 6/13/94 1994:

    Ashmawi, Saied. “Al-hijab Lais Farida Islamiah.” Rose-al-Youssif 6/27/94
    1994: 81-83.

    Ashmawi, Saide. “Lagnet el Fatwa el Shara’ia bel Azhar Gheir Share’ia.”
    Rose-al-Youssif 8/22/94 1994: 28-31.

    Badran, Margot. Feminists, Islam, and Nation. Princeton, New Jersy:
    Princeton University Press, 1995.

    El-Bahi, Mohammed. El-Islam Wa Itigah El-Moslima El Moa’sira. Cairo: Dar

    Polemics on Veiling Egyptian Women in the Twentieth Century. (2018, Sep 06). Retrieved from

    Hi, my name is Amy 👋

    In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

    Get help with your paper