It is not far from our subject to speak about two forms of government that were almost completely popular in character. One of them has already ended, and the other began later and continued to flourish for some time. These were the commonwealth of the Mamluks in Egypt and the later government established in Algiers.
Both systems were unusual because power did not pass from father to son in the normal royal way. Instead, leadership was controlled by a military group. These examples show a very different political model from hereditary monarchy.
The Mamluk Commonwealth in Egypt
The first example was the rule of the Mamluks in Egypt. The Mamluks were originally military slaves who rose to great power. Over time, they removed the ruling family and took control of the government themselves. One famous Mamluk ruler was Al-Ashraf Khalil, although many others ruled before and after him Customized Turkey Tours.
The Mamluks created a special law to protect their system. The sons of Mamluk leaders were allowed to inherit their fathers’ private property, such as land and goods. However, they were not allowed to inherit their fathers’ official positions or titles. A son could not automatically become a Mamluk ruler simply because of his birth.
This rule was meant to prevent the creation of a hereditary noble class. The Mamluk system depended on military strength and personal ability, not family lineage. In fact, many Mamluk leaders had originally been born outside Egypt and brought there as young slaves.
The Government of Algiers
A similar form of government later appeared in Algiers. In this case, power was largely controlled by military leaders known as Deys. One example is Baba Ali Chaouch, who ruled in the eighteenth century.
In Algiers, the ruling authority was not strictly hereditary. Leaders were often chosen from among military officers. As in the Mamluk system, sons did not automatically succeed their fathers in political power. Authority depended more on military support and political skill than on noble birth.
A Different Political Model
Both Egypt under the Mamluks and Algiers under the Deys show a form of government that was not based on royal succession. Instead of a single ruling family passing power through generations, leadership changed according to strength, influence, and support.
These examples stand in contrast to monarchies where royal blood decides everything. In these popular or military commonwealths, power belonged to a group rather than to one hereditary dynasty. Although these systems had their own problems, they demonstrate that different political structures existed alongside traditional monarchy.