If you look at a map of the modern Arab world, it may look confusing. Political boundaries between countries may seem arbitrary, nonsensical, or simply odd. In some places you see straight lines through the desert dividing two countries. In other cases, wavy and haphazard lines separate nations. Where did these lines in the sand come from?
In the case of Lebanon, the lines that separate Lebanon from neighboring countries are relatively recent. A civil war between two groups in the area led to a European intervention in 1860 that drew up the lines, separating Lebanon from the surrounding areas it has historically been united with.
Lebanon Under The Ottomans
In 1517, the Ottoman Empire conquered most of Arab Western Asia from the Mamluk Sultanate. Sultan Selim decided to organize the region comprising modern-day Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan into a district called Eyalet Sham (إيالة شام in Ottoman Turkish), which roughly translates to the “Province of Syria”. The province was further divided into administrative subdivisions called sanjaks.
From the 1600s to the 1800s, the region was reorganized numerous times. At times, parts of modern Lebanon would be organized under districts governed from Damascus, Beirut, Tripoli, or Jerusalem.
Ottoman control was generally restricted to the cities, however. In the mountains and rural areas of Lebanon, the Ottomans gave semi-autonomous rule to the local Druze and Christian communities, usually under the Ma’an or Shihab families. Throughout the Ottoman Empire, many rural parts stayed under local control, with local authorities acting as tax collectors for the Ottoman authorities. The same held true in Lebanon. Although the Ottomans maintained nominal authority, the local families were given freedom to rule as they pleased as long as they recognized Ottoman authority.
Maronite Christians and the Druze
The system that the Ottomans had been ruling Lebanon through generally worked with little conflict. However, in the 1800s, religious conflict between the Maronite Christians and the Druze began to boil over.
The Maronites are a Catholic religious group that owes their allegiance to the Pope in Rome. They had existed in Syria since before the Muslim conquest in the 600s. They are living proof of the policy of religious tolerance that Islam has exercised for the past 1400 years, as they have always been given religious freedom without being hassled by Muslim authorities.
A Maronite monk in Lebanon
The Druze are a unique religious group. They emerged in the 1000s as an offshoot of the extremist Shia group, the Ismaili Fatmids. Although borrowing numerous ideas from mainstream Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, the Druze insist on being their own religious group, separate from any others.
In the 1840s, conflict between the Druze and the Maronites began to become a problem in the coastal region of Syria, where the two groups consisted a majority of the population. In order to attempt to solve the problem, the Ottoman authorities decided to divide the region into two administrative districts in 1842. The northern district was governed by the Maronites and the southern one by the Druze.
European Intervention
The French and the British at this time were seeking to increase their influence in the Muslim world, while still competing with each other. As a result, the French tended to support the Maronites (their Catholic brethren in any case) and the British supported the Druze. With international backing, the two groups escalated their violence. In the summer of 1860, over 10,000 Maronite Christians were massacred by the Druze in Damascus.
The Christian Quarter of Damascus after the Druze massacres in 1860
Muslims in Syria generally stayed neutral and aided many of the Christians who were seeking to escape massacred. Abd al-Qadir, a Muslim Algerian scholar living in exile in Damascus was particularly noteworthy with his support of the Christians in Damascus. His efforts to save them from Druze paramilitaries was met with recognition by the French and American governments.
French troops arriving in Beirut in 1860
In any case, the Ottoman authorities were able to suppress the violence between the two sides within a few months of the outbreak of the war. The Ottomans then reestablished direct control over the area to prevent further violence from happening. Regardless of the success of the Ottomans in stopping the violence, the French took the opportunity to intervene.
The major European powers of the day (Austria, Great Britain, Prussia, and Russia) all granted France the authority to send troops to Lebanon to protect the Maronite Christians, despite the ceasing of violence there. The French soon imposed a treaty on the Ottoman sultan Abdülmecid I in 1861. This treaty forced the Ottomans to appoint a non-Lebanese Christian governor for the region that would be approved by the great powers of Europe.
Nationalistic Effects of the Treaty
The treaty that the French imposed on the Ottomans effectively created an independent French colony called Lebanon in the middle of the Muslim world. Although the Ottomans officially retained control over the area until 1918, the French exercised great influence in the new country. In the treaty, the French dictated the borders of modern Lebanon to the Ottomans. The borders were meant to only surround the Christian areas, creating a Christian-majority country in the midst of the Muslim world that the French could use to exercise their power in Syria.
The treaty created the first political separation of Lebanon from the rest of Syria since the beginning of Islamic rule there in the 600s. Whereas historically modern-day Lebanon had been considered as a part of “Greater Syria”, now it was considered its own country with its own national identity centered around Christian nationalism and European ideas. Ethnically, culturally, and religiously, Syria (including Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan) had always been considered a unified region.
The French creation of Lebanon began the process of breaking apart the Muslim lands into independent disunited states. Much emphasis was placed on nationalism as a unifying force instead of religious or cultural similarities. As a result, the people of Lebanon began to see themselves as inherently different and separate from the people throughout the rest of Syria – a mentality that continues today throughout the Arab world. This European policy of promoting nationalism to decrease Islamic or Arab unity has been greatly successful for them.
Today, the Muslim world remains completely disunited with arbitrary lines in the sand drawn by European powers to keep people separated and thus increase European and “Western” influence in the region. Without the unity shown in earlier Muslim eras, the great successes and power of the Muslim world cannot be regained.
Bibliography:
Hourani, Albert Habib. A History Of The Arab Peoples. New York: Mjf Books, 1997. Print.
Ochsenwald, William, and Sydney Fisher. The Middle East: A History. 6th. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003. Print.
Good work. I always wanted all the Arab to unite.
@Farhan Khan, you either didnt understand the contex of this article or you are agreeing on Nationalism just like the Europeans promoted it to Muslims and now we are fighting each other over land and watching our brothers and sisters being killed in the neighbouring country because we regard our self a defferent Nation so forget Arab and be part of the Ummah my brother in Islam.
Well, the pakistani government is the biggest ally of the USA. It provides safe routes to afghanistan, and it allows drone strikes against its own people. It will not make me say that all pakistani are bad, just like you generalize against arabs. The primitive ideas about ethnicity or nationality is the biggest problem out there, and it serves only the enemies of Islam.
VERY INFORMATIVE
Dear author: This article is politicised. Please read the bible, Lebanon was mentioned in the old and new tesetement over 70 times referring to the same geographical land that existed today. Yes the colonists played role in dividing the arabic nation, no doubt about their intentions to divide us, but the arabs are tribal and short sighted too , and did not calculate their long term losses, but only their short term gains, this is why they lost Palestine. No need to divert the course of history by referring to Lebanon as an invented land. This country existed as long as Palestine did,The road to recapture Palestine should be established equally via all the arabic countries especially the wealthy ones :Saudi Arabia, Syria (yes Syria!) , Lebanon, Egypt and all the remaining countries surrounding Palestine. It is not fair to put the entire burden of the war with Israel on the smallest and one of the most debted country in the arabic world. Please be scientific in your research and ask these questions : who created Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia? Enough putting the burden of Palestinean_Israeli on a country that suffered the most. Out of fear of God, we need to do so. Salam
Karenina,
If you read the article carefully, I am writing about the invention of the modern political entity of Lebanon. Clearly I am not claiming that Lebanon is an invented land, nor am I pointing out Lebanon as a new political entity while all other countries in that part of the world are not. There is not one Arab country whose modern political boundaries and existence as an independent state is older than 150 years. Unity was the rule up until European colonization, as this article indicates.
Also, Israel was not mentioned in the article so I don’t understand why you claim that I put the burden of that conflict on Lebanon.
Firas
Karenina,
Whilst the Bible does mention Lebanon (which means white in Hebrew), it does not refer to a country or state, but to a mountain ridge. The states in that region were the Canaanite (Phoenician) city-states of Sidon, Tyre, Jubeil etc.
In fact when the European colonialists wanted to divide up the Muslim world, it’s precisely the Bible that they looked to for new names to carve the Muslim lands up into. Jordan, Palestine & Lebanon all come from the Bible, so that explains why the name existed so long ago, because the modern re-naming was done in imitation of this. Not because of any long lasting supposed “nation” of Lebanon. There never was any such thing.
Regards,
Abu Rashid.
I agree with Karenina, that like all whimsical state created by the imperial European, Saudi & all roughnecking neighbor were created for some purpose.
Nice article, The way of facts are presented are glaring. Nationalism is a science of keeping brother away from a brother. This nationalism cuts the Muslim brotherhood inclusive of all humanity considering non Muslims.
Mashallah, I completely agree with the writer. There is no questions that the zionist colonial powers, have strategically planned to divide the Muslim countries. Apart from nationalism, the usury/bankingsystem plaid a crucial role for the destruction of the Islamic Ottoman caliphate.
Karenina ur statement is exactly what the Jews claim about Palestine ..
Said dahdouli, what Zionism has anything to do with the article? The Zionist movement didn’t exist in the time Lebanon was “invented” and Jews only got their right not long before.. read some history before commenting
Not really reader but, the main reason to divide the Muslim countries into modern Arabic, was to pave the way for a jewish state in Palestine. The Rothschilds (jewish Khazars from eastern Europe) were in power of finance at that time in Europe and are still today. The plan for a political movement for jews to colonize Palestine, was planned since the Roman Empire. The actual founder of zionism was not by Theodr Herzl, it was rather by Moses Hess who also was a founder Communism/Socialism. Zionism started to become a movement step by step when Moses Hess wrote the book Jerusalem and Rome. http://www.zionismontheweb.org/Moses_Hess_Rome_and_Jerusalem.htm
wow
[...] were to take control of what is now Iraq, Kuwait, and Jordan. The French were given modern Syria, Lebanon, and southern Turkey. The status of Palestine was to be determined later, with Zionist ambitions to [...]
[...] were to take control of what is now Iraq, Kuwait, and Jordan. The French were given modern Syria,Lebanon, and southern Turkey. The status of Palestine was to be determined later, with Zionist ambitions to [...]
Cool sites…
Here are some of the sites we recommend for our visitor…
So cool…
The information mentioned in the article are some of the best available…
Great Content…
we like to honor many other internet pages on the web, even if they aren’t linked to us, by linking to them. Under are some webpages worth checking out…
Check this out…
The information mentioned in the article are some of the best available…
Websites we think you should visit…
we like to honor many other internet sites on the web, even if they aren’t linked to us, by linking to them. Under are some webpages worth checking out…
All states were created by colonialists: Afghanistan(1919), Saudi Arabia and Iran(1921), Egypt(1922), Turkey(1923), Iraq(1932), Jordan(1945), Syria(1945), Indonesia(1945), Lebanon(1945), Pakistan(1947), Israel(1948), Sudan(50s), Malaysia(50s), Mauritania and Morocco(50s), Kuwait(60s), Algeria(60s), Somalia(60s), Nigeria(60s), Mali(60s), Niger(60s), Burkina Faso(60s), Senegal(60s), Qatar(1971), United Arab Emirates(1971), Bangladesh(1971), Bahrain(1971), Oman(1971), Yemen(60s), five Central Asian countries and Azerbaijan(1991) and South Sudan(2011).
National wars have happened, In 1971 Pakistan and Bangladesh went into war, there’s an estimate death rate of 3 million, in the 80s Iraq and Iran went into war resulting in 1.5 million deaths and during the Gulf War $60 billion was spent.
The people of Bilad-ash-Sham are the same in terms of cuisine, music, history, dress code, weddings, language and all four countries have Roman and Byzantine ruins,