Marriage, Wealth, and Social Networking: A Case Study of Marriages in Gaza in the 1900s
Enes Niziplioglu, Sarah Buessow, Olaf Berg, and Johann Buessow
This article is about new insights into the intersection of gender, economics, Islamic law, and Ottoman state administration as it becomes visible through the practice of an important legal institution of the Muslim community in late Ottoman Palestine: the bridal gift (mahr, also known as a “dower” or a “bride price”). In particular, it seeks to answer the following research questions:
- What patterns can be identified in the payment of nuptial gifts? Can this tell us anything about social stratification in society?
- What kind of correlation can be detected between mahr amounts and the respective ages of the bride and the groom? And to what extent did it matter whether Muslim spouses were previously married? (It is important to note in this context that divorce was accepted in Islamic legal practice, while it was almost impossible for members of Christian and Jewish communities.)
The starting point for this research is a rarely discussed source that we would first like to briefly introduce. The unique collection of Ottoman population registers in Jerusalem, made available to us thanks to their collection by British authorities followed by their cataloging and digitization by the Israeli State Archives (ISA), contains a number of distinct registers that have revealed various new insights into past social, cultural, and economic dynamics. In previous articles in the LOOP Research Notes, Johann Buessow and Olaf Berg introduced and discussed the content of the corpus of late Ottoman census registers in the ISA collection. This was followed by a focused analysis by Soad Kilinc on the insights provided by the Esas Defterleri, or
“Basic Registers,” which constitute the largest part of the collection. Finally, Sarah Buessow and Katharina Krause introduced and discussed the Vefayat Defterleri, or “Death Registers.”
In this blog article, we use another kind of registers, the Münakehat Defterleri (Marriage Registers) to carry out a case study on how the institution of the mahr was practiced in late Ottoman Palestine.
After outlining the general characteristics of the institution,we introduce a marriage register from early 20th-century Gaza. Next, we analyze patterns in the more than 400 entries for mahr in this register. Finally, we discuss which factors may have led to the different amounts of dower payments, using individual cases of married couples as examples. These individual cases allow for preliminary conclusions, but they are hardly representative. Still, we argue that such analysis (which needs to be refined in future work) can provide valuable insights into the socioeconomic landscape of the Gaza region during the early 20th century.
The Mahr: Definition, Function, and Variations
Mahr payments could be of great importance for the destinies of individual women and households, and they were watched with great interest in the local societies of the Ottoman Empire. Notarized by local authorities such as neighborhood headmen (muhtars), imams, or judges, they were a publicly documented matter (Engelschalk 1989). In wealthy families, the mahr was often part of maintaining social networks. Middle-class and poor families also used marriage for social networking, but had fewer opportunities to use the bridal gift for this purpose. 1
There are also a number of popular myths about the mahr. For example, it is widely believed in the region even today that the age of the bride influences the amount of the mahr, with the highest sums reportedly being paid when young women are married especially to older men. Contrary to this, our study shows that there was no distinct correlation between the mahr sums and the age gap of the spouses (see Figure 5). The Ottoman form not only records the age of the bride, but also whether or not she was “virgin” (bakir, bakire, bikr), i.e., whether or not she had been married before. In contrast to age, this indeed generally had an influence on the amount of the mahr.
As these examples already show, they allow innovative insights into a range of issues that are still of great interest in Muslim societies today, and in some cases are truly “hot topics.” These include gender relations, social polarization, and Islamic law. Let’s take a closer look at some of these aspects to see what we can learn from the late Ottoman marriage registers.
Islamic legal literature (fiqh) defines marriage as a contract (ʿaqd) made between the groom and the guardian (wāli) of the bride, with mahr as an essential component. Without the mahr, the marriage cannot be deemed legitimate (Spies 1991). The legal nature and function of the mahr, however, has remained controversial among jurists. Some Muslim jurists view it as purchase money, referring to the woman’s possessions and ownership rights; hence, it can be regarded as a price paid in a sales contract. On the other hand, the mainstream of jurists in mainstream Sunni Muslim tradition argue that mahr is an appropriate legal safeguard of property for women, or a symbol and mark of honor (ibid.).
Islamic legal scholars have classified the dower into two main forms, shedding light on two specific concepts associated with this legal institution. First, there is the model of the “specified” mahr (mahr al-musammā)– an amount that is expressly stipulated in the event of marriage. It is important to note that in late Ottoman Palestine, women who were unable to use their specified mahr frequently sought legal recourse (Agmon 2006, 130). The second is the concept of the “customary” mahr (mahr al-mithl), which is an unspecified amount considered “appropriate” based on the family and social status of the bride. Hilma Granqvist’s study illustrated how factors such as cousin marriage and marrying brides from other villages influenced mahr amounts (Granqvist 1931, 69). A key question, however, is how these customary mahr values were affected by broader economic transformations. To be specific, did significant economic shifts alter the customary sums, reflecting a transition toward a more market-based economy?
A second legal distinction is based on payment timing. In this regard, jurists distinguish between (1) “prompt” mahr (mahr muʿajjal, or muaccal in Turkish), which is paid at the time of the marriage contract and (2) “deferred” mahr (mahr muʾajjal, müeccel), paid later, often upon divorce or after the husband’s death.
Various schools of law have set minimum amounts for the mahr. The Hanafites and Shafiites, the most important schools of law in Ottoman Palestine, set ten dirhams as the minimum amount. (Spies 1991).2
Theoretically speaking, the mahr provided economic security that a woman could use to start a new family or sustain herself if her husband died or if she got divorced (Tucker 1994, 297). From a historian’s point of view, by examining the gift presented to the bride, it is possible to observe and assess the socioeconomic condition of households and communities in different geographies of the Muslim world (e.g., Moors 1994; Mundy and Saumarez Smith 2003).
The question now arises as to the local circumstances under which these general legal concepts were put into practice and notarized by Ottoman officials in Gaza. Can the listings of mahr sums tell us something about this particular local society?
Before turning to specific examples, it needs to be added that mahr was collected not only in currency, but also in gifts, such as household goods, or land and other forms of property. In addition, there were also practices that bypassed the bridal gift in the form of an exchange of brides between two different families (Granqvist 1931, 117).
In the opinion of many Islamic jurists, the mahr is intended to ensure legal security of property for the woman (Spies 1991)3 However, social anthropological studies have found that women in Palestine and the wider eastern Mediterranean region during the late Ottoman and colonial periods often had little or no actual control over the property values transferred in the process (Granqvist 1931, 23; Moors 1994; Mundy and Saumarez Smith 2003).
What is unique about the late Ottoman marriage registers as a source is that they record mahr amounts in a standardized form for a large section of the population in specific regions. Thus, we get a statistical picture of monetary values transferred in marriages among people in different social milieus, even though we do not know whether the mahr sums mentioned in our document were actually paid in cash or whether they were paid in kind subsequently converted into Ottoman currency values.
Introducing the Late Ottoman Marriage Registers
The primary source of this case study consists of records of marriages that were contracted in the early 20th century in Gaza, a coastal port town, and the center of a subdistrict with around 60 villages (see Figure 1; Ben-Bassat and Buessow 2024). The Ottoman Marriage Registers, Münakehat-i Mahsus Vukuat Defterleri, are a promising but so far neglected source for capturing various socioeconomic segments or strata of society.4
The marriage registers in our corpus were kept in Gaza City and brought together reports of marriages from both the city itself and the Gaza subdistrict. They were submitted by the muhtars (headmen) of the various villages, neighborhoods, and religious communities.5


Each entry is divided into three parts: first, the date and place of the contract (vukuat); second, information about the groom (zevc); and third, information about the bride (zevce). The information about the spouses includes: names (sometimes supplemented by occupation and/or title), dates and places of birth of the bride and groom, names of the parents, the religious community, names of representatives and witnesses (vekils), and the numbers of the households in which they were registered..
The dower itself is noted in the section on the bride, specifying the type of dower and the currency in which it was paid, i.e., lira (Ottoman pound) or kuruş (Ottoman piastre).
Between the entries for the spouses, the type of marriage is noted with regard to the marital status of the bride. There are two categories: bakir, “virgin/unmarried,” or thayyib, remarried after divorce or death of a previous husband.

Figure 3. The entry reads: “Type of Marriage: virgin” (nevʿi münakehat: bakir).

We next turn to analyzing the patterns in which the total dower amounts were paid. This means looking at socioeconomic status, the difference between “virgin” and “previously married” status, and the age difference between the married couples as possible factors influencing the amount.
The amounts of mahr paid in the Gaza region and what they might reveal about local society
Our analysis of 416 marriages in Gaza in the early 20th century yielded two main observations and one hypothesis. First, the data shows that there were four typical ranges for the size of the dower, which we have tentatively classified as “economic classes” (see Figure 5):
- For most marriages entered in the Gaza marriage registry, we find amounts between 1,800 and 4,500 kuruş (Figures 5 and 6). We refer to this as the “lower middle class” of mahr amounts. With 68% of entries, this is by far the most common range.
- Below this is a smaller group of entries (14%) with payments between 534 and 1,800 kuruş, which we refer to as the “lower class.”
- Above lies an equally sized “upper-middle class” of amounts between 4,500 and 6,800 kuruş
- The 16 highest values form a small and heterogeneous “upper class,” with amounts ranging from 6,800 kuruş to the extremely high sum of 28,800 kuruş.
This means that more than two-thirds of the cases accumulated in a “lower middle- class” area, between narrow bands of lower, upper-middle and upper classes. This finding subsequently led us to the question of if marriages among the poorest population might be underrepresented in our register (see Figure 6).


What were the amounts paid actually worth? Anecdotal evidence can help to illustrate the relative value of mahr sums in late Ottoman Palestine. In the 1900s, for example, the monthly living expenses for a wife and two daughters in the city of Jerusalem amounted to approximately 150 kuruş, while the monthly rent for a shop was around 60 kuruş (Salameh 2019, 81). The monthly salary of a mid-ranking Ottoman official was 500 kuruş (Buessow 2011, 564). This means that the mahr payments from those of the “upper middle class” according to our stratification model were substantial payments – equivalent to about 10 times the average monthly salary of a middle-ranking civil servant. With a sum of 5,000 kuruş, a mother with two daughters could have lived in a city for almost three years. A “lower class” mahr of 900 kuruş would have covered their living expenses for only half a year.
The sums paid in the upper-class segment stand in stark contrast to all of this (see Figure 7). Wealthy families often paid high mahr sums to communicate their economic prowess. As we know from anecdotal evidence, exceptionally high mahr amounts were often only one element in lavish ceremonies and gift exchanges that served to help maintain social networks between elite families (Granqvist 1931, 125; Salameh 2019).
The age difference between spouses in our sample varies greatly. However, it does not appear to significantly alter the amount of the bridal gift (see Figure 7). However, the bride’s marital history, and particularly her “virginity,” significantly impacted the mahr value. A frequency analysis of bridal gifts paid for remarried women (registered as thayyib) shows a shift of the two major blocs to values between 1,000 and 3,500 kuruş for the lower middle class and 3,800 to 5,800 kuruş for the upper middle class. However, some exceptional bride gifts of up to 20,100 kuruş were also recorded for this group of women (see Figure 8).
For instance, a 20-year-old woman married a 25-year-old man. Since she was previously married for a short period, she received a lower mahr than another woman of the same age and social background. Conversely, a woman who remained unmarried until the age of 25 could expect an above-average bridal gift than when marrying an 18-year-old man, which was unusual. Similarly, as Sarah Buessow has described, there were large differences in the mahr sums in the marriages of orphaned and half-orphaned brides under the age of 14. This means that if the girl was a half-orphan and her father, who was considered the protector of her honor, had died, her bridal gift was well below average. If the girl was half-orphaned, but it was her mother who had died, the mahr sum was above average. (Buessow 2025).


The data show a significantly different pattern of bridal gifts between urban and rural sectors. As shown in Figure 9, the median mahr in cities was 2,500 kuruş, while the median mahr in villages was 3,500 kuruş. The frequency analysis shows a more compact sector between 1,800 and 4,500 kuruş while the city shows a broader differentiated field of bridal gifts with a clear peak around 2,000 kuruş as a kind of standard mahr.


Marriage examples
The differences in the amount of the dower reflect a complex interplay of social and economic factors. It is likely that the amounts in the Ottoman marriage register that we analyzed corresponded to socioeconomic strata, but this is by no means certain for every single case; other factors, in particular the marital status of the bride, clearly played a role. These intervening factors probably also included whether the husband was in a polygynous marriage and whether the bride was his first or second wife. This interplay of factors requires a more detailed statistical analysis, which is a task for future research. Until then, we will have to content ourselves with individual observations of a qualitative nature. Below, we present examples of marriages from each of the four dower classes we have identified. For some of the individuals mentioned, we have additional information from the basic registers of the census in Gaza, which we examined as part of an earlier research project (see Ben-Bassat and Buessow 2024, Buessow 2023).
Marriages involving urban elites or those with solid connections to the administrative centers tended to involve higher mahr values. Among the upper class of mahr amounts in our sample is the marriage of Nazifa Hanım, born in Bosnia and registered in Istanbul’s Çemberlitaş neighborhood, with Rashīd Efendi al-Shawwā, son of Ḥājj Saʿīd Efendi (ISA, Nüfus book 279, 28-29). She received a mahr of 20,100 kuruş upon her marriage to Rashīd Efendi, whose father was the famous Saʿīd al-Shawwā (1868-1930), who belonged to Gaza’s oligarchic business elite and served as mayor of the city from 1906 until the end of Ottoman rule (Ben-Bassat and Buessow 2024, 141). In this marriage, the groom was six years younger than the bride, and their marriage very likely formed part of an alliance of an urban elite family from Gaza with elite circles in the imperial capital. Although she had already been married before, and was hence, a thayyib, she received a high mahr.
In the upper middle class of mahr amounts, we find the marriage of Sulaymān al-Saghā and Maryam, daughter of Shukr Turk (ISA, Nüfus book 279, 16-17). The husband was young at age 16-17, the wife very young, only 12-13 years old at the time of the marriage. Not surprisingly, Sulaymān came from the Zaytun neighborhood in Gaza city, where practically all Greek Orthodox of Gaza resided. very surprisingly, however, Maryam came from a Muslim family in the Judayda neighborhood. Since marriages between Muslim women and Christian men were generally frowned upon, this is an unusual interfaith marriage, the circumstances of which remain to be clarified.
The following are two examples from the lower middle-class section in our sample. The marriage of Salām Badrān, from the village of Simsim, to Ḥalīma from Hamama village involved a payment of 4,000 kuruş (ISA, Nüfus book 279, 14-15). This mahr sum corresponds to the lower middle class within our dataset. The age gap between Ḥalīma, age 16, who was registered as a “maiden” and was about thirty years younger than her husband Salām, who was 47 years old, is atypically large. It seems reasonable to interpret the bridal gift, which is in the upper middle range of the data set, as an expression of above-average prosperity in Salām’s family, in addition to Ḥalīma’s “maiden” (bakir) marriage status, a factor that usually led to higher mahr values.
Given the rural background of both spouses, the sum of 4,000 kuruş, or 20 times the monthly salary of an Ottoman civil servant, seems considerable. In other words, a farmer or artisan in the Gaza region would certainly have had to make considerable efforts to raise that much money. Conversely, a bride who actually had such a sum at her disposal would have had considerable financial security. It would be interesting to know whether the amount was actually paid in cash, or whether it consisted of other assets, such as land, trees, goods, or services, which were converted into a kuruş amount for registration purposes. ʿAli al-Lawḥ and Fāṭima, both from urban Gaza, specifically the Daraj and Zaytun neighborhoods, are a more typical example for the lower middle-class mahr marriages in our dataset. Fāṭima was of “maiden” status and ʿAli was four years older than her. Fāṭima received an amount of 3,000 kuruş (ISA, Nüfus book 279, 24-25).
Lastly, the marriage of Aḥmad Muḥyī, son of ʿAbd al-Qādir from Zarnuqa village, and Fāṭima, daughter of Husayn al-Kūt from Barqa village is typical of the lower class in our dataset (ISA, Nüfus book 279, 32-33). Fatima received a modest sum of 700 kuruṣ as mahr. This can be explained by her age and marriage status: She was registered as thayyib. The reason was that she was divorced. At the time of her marriage with Aḥmad Muḥyī, she was close to 30 years old and almost eight years older than her husband.
Conclusion
An analysis of mahr amounts for over 400 marriages in Gaza since the beginning of the 20th century provides important insights into the local socioeconomic landscape. The data reveal a clear stratification of mahr amounts. In our model, the segment of payments between 1,800 and 4,500 kuruş made up more than two-thirds (68%) of all dowers. In comparison with the other segments, this corresponds to a “lower middle-class” demographic. The next largest shares of payments in our sample, both with a share of 14%, can respectively be assigned to a “lower middle class” (with payments below 1,800 kuruş), and “upper middle class” (payments of 4,500-6,800 kuruş). The picture is complemented by a small “upper class” of 4% of very high payments (more than 6,800 kuruş).
The data also show a significantly different pattern of bridal gifts in urban and rural locations in the region of Gaza. Surprisingly, the median mahr in villages (3,500 kuruş) was considerably higher than in cities (2,500 kuruş). Gaza city shows a more broadly differentiated range of bridal gifts, with a clear peak around 2,000 kuruş as a kind of standard mahr. In contrast, villages in the region had a more homogenous pattern of mahr payments.
It remains to be seen to what extent mahr payments were indicative of any general socioeconomic stratification in local society. To get a clearer perspective, it would first be necessary assess the biases in the sample. Is it possible, for example, that the poor population in Gaza did not register their marriages with the Ottoman authorities? If so, how overrepresented are the wealthy strata in the register? How are urban and rural areas represented? How equally or unequally are the individual villages in the Gaza subdistrict represented in our source? In any case, the large gap between the middle classes and a small, empire-wide networked elite is remarkable, and yet consistent with date from other sources.
Further research is also necessary to see whether this pattern changes with more data, for instance if we increase the sample from Gaza (by adding data from Nüfus Book 251) or by analyzing samples from the other regions that are covered by the ISA sample: Jerusalem (Nüfus Book 167) and Hebron (Nüfus Books 191, 193, and 201). Despite these obvious unanswered questions, the patterns of mahr sums appear to have great potential to serve as a proxy for social stratification in late Ottoman Palestinian society.
Marriages involving the highest amounts of mahr were likely associated with alliances between affluent households. Examples from the highest strata illustrate how elite circles utilized the mahr to communicate their economic prowess and to maintain social networks. Moreover, our analysis indicates that the “virgin” status of the bride, irrespective of age, played a significant role in determining the bridal gift.
There are numerous other questions that would benefit from studies using the late Ottoman Palestinian marriage registers. Can the sums paid in certain places, be they neighborhoods or villages, tell us anything about the general prosperity of their inhabitants? What can the distribution of prompt (muaccal) and deferred (müeccel) payments tell us? And can the marriage records, perhaps combined with complementary sources such as sijillat, i.e., court files), also help answer the crucial question of the extent to which the mahr served as financial security for women? Also related to the issue of gender, what might we learn about the institution of the vekils, usually senior male relatives who served as representatives of the brideand witnesses of the wedding contract? Who were the people who served as representatives of the brideand witnesses of the wedding contract? Who had a vekil and who did not? Did habits of marrying and making the bridal gift change over time? In the case of Gaza, extant court records from the years 1857-1861 (see Ben-Bassat and Buessow 2024, 14) might provide some insight into these changes over time.
Finally, there is still little research into the application of Islamic law in the Ottoman Empire generally; nevertheless, the application of marriage law in Palestine is a good example of this, both as a highly relevant area of law as well as from a geographical perspective. In upcoming research blog articles, we plan to explore the court records of Jerusalem and Gaza to see whether it is possible to trace such non-monetary transactions in marriages in late Ottoman Palestine.
References
Sources
Ibn ʿĀbidīn. Radd al-Muḥtār ʿalā l-Durr al-Mukhtār. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 2003.
Israel State Archives (ISA), Nüfus registers.
Studies
Agmon, Iris. 1998. “Women, Class, and Gender: Muslim Jaffa and Haifa at the Turn of the 20th Century.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 30, 4: 477–500.
Agmon, Iris. 2006. Family and Court: Legal Culture and Modernity in Late Ottoman Palestine. New York: Syracuse University Press.
Bree, Pim van, and Geert Kessels. 2013. “Nodegoat: A Web-based Data Management, Network Analysis & Visualisation Environment.” LAB1100. https://nodegoat.net/. Accessed August 31, 2024.
Ben-Bassat and Johann Buessow. 2024. Late Ottoman Gaza: An Eastern Mediterranean Hub in Transformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Buessow, Johann and Olaf Berg. 2023. “The ISA Corpus of Ottoman Census Registers, or: What Sorts of Demographic Information Did the Ottoman Empire Collect in Palestine?” LOOP – Late Ottoman Palestinians 2023. https://doi.org/10.58079/vxa9. Accessed November 26, 2024.
Buessow, Sarah. “Children in Vulnerable Positions in the 19th Century Ottoman Empire.”Krit:Arab, January 1, 2025. https://kritarab.hypotheses.org/1102. Accessed April 9,2025.
Buessow, Sarah and Katharina Krause. 2024. The Death Register of Ottoman Hebron (1905-1915). Formal Aspects, Surprising Finds, and Research Questions. LOOP – Late Ottoman Palestinians. https://doi.org/10.58079/124ul. Accessed April 14, 2025.
Engelschalk, Gisela. 1989. “Ein Münakehat Defteri der Jahrhundertwende”. Osmanlı Araştırmaları 9: 323-330.
Granqvist, Hilma. 1931. Marriage Conditions in a Palestinian Village. Vol. 1. Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.
Käs, Fabian. 2014. “Gold”, Encyclopaedia of Islam 3.
Kilinç, Soad. “Esas Defterleri: What Information Do the ‘Basic Registers’ of the Ottoman Census Contain and What Research Questions Do They Raise?” LOOP – Late OttomanPalestinians, April 5, 2024. https://doi.org/10.58079/w6bq. Accessed November 26, 2024.
Moors, Annelies. 1994. “Women and Dower Property in Twentieth-Century Palestine: The Case of Jabal Nablus.” Islamic Law and Society 1, 3: 301–31.
Mundy, Martha and Richard Saumarez Smith. 2003. “‘Al-Mahr Zaituna’: Property and Family in the Hills Facing Palestine, 1880–1940.” In Beshara Doumani (ed.), Family History in the Middle East: Household, Property and Gender. 119-150. Albany: SUNY Press.
Salameh, Khader. 2019. “Thurayya’s Wedding: A Glimpse of Ottoman Jerusalem from the Khalidi Library.” Jerusalem Quarterly 79: 77–99.
Spies, Otto, 1991. “Mahr.” Encyclopaedia of Islam 2.
Tucker, Judith E. 1994. “Muftīs and Matrimony: Islamic Law and Gender in Ottoman Syria and Palestine.” Islamic Law and Society 1, 3: 265–300.
Yazbak, Mahmoud. 2002. “Minor Marriages and Khiyār Al-Bulūgh in Ottoman Palestine: A Note on Women’s Strategies in a Patriarchal Society.” Islamic Law and Society 9, 3: 386-409.
- See Granqvist 1931 on the forging of marriage alliances and mahr payments among people of mostly modest means in the village of Artas near Bethlehem.[↩]
- Dirham is the name of a historical silver coin, the Arab-Islamic equivalent of the late antique drachma. Its value relative to the gold standard has changed over the centuries, which is why it only represents a very approximate value. See Käs 2014.[↩]
- For an example of this position in an influential Islamic legal manual, see Ibn ʿĀbidīn (d. 1836), Radd al-Muḥtār, 2:452.[↩]
- These marriage registers record not only Muslim couples, but also some Christian and Jewish couples. The ISA corpus contains six marriage registers covering parts of Jerusalem, Hebron, Gaza, and Northern Palestine (Buessow and Berg 2023). Together, they record almost 10,000 married couples from various religious affiliations. The present study is based on ISA, Nüfus book 279, Gaza Marriage Register, 1905-1917. The register is incomplete; several pages are missing and some are only partially legible due to damage. All 416 fully documented cases in the register were recorded in the Nodegoat database of the LOOP research project at Ruhr University Bochum. For more on the database design, see van Bree and Kessels 2013.[↩]
- See Engelschalk 1989 for an analysis of a muhtar’s marriage register from the Küçük Piyale neighborhood in Kasımpaşa, Istanbul, for the years 1888-1920, including useful legal and administrative contextualization of the registration procedure.[↩]
The text only may be used under licence Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 International. All other elements (illustrations, imported files) are “All rights reserved”, unless otherwise stated.
OpenEdition suggests that you cite this post as follows:
Enes Niziplioglu, Sarah Büssow, Olaf Berg, Johann Büssow (June 1, 2025). Marriage, Wealth, and Social Networking: A Case Study of Marriages in Gaza in the 1900s. LOOP – Late Ottoman Palestinians. Retrieved June 6, 2026 from https://doi.org/10.58079/141cd

