Aspects of the history of europe and the middle east




Yüklə 68.93 Kb.
tarix17.04.2016
ölçüsü68.93 Kb.






IB HISTORY HIGHER LEVEL OPTION 5
ASPECTS OF THE HISTORY OF EUROPE AND THE MIDDLE EAST
MAIN THEME:
Lebanon in 19th century:

This chapter will examine the following issues in 19th century Lebanese history:
A. Levels of Ottoman control;
B. Communal tensions and Civil War 1860;
C. Extent of autonomy after 1861.
I
THE CIVIL WAR OF 1860
(Ia)
TRIGGER

1860:
On 9th of July, 1860, a mob of 20,000-50,000 from the Maidan, and Salihya districts of Damascus attacked, killed and pillaged the Christian Quarter and its inhabitants.

5,000 to 12,000 were estimated to have perished.
The Greek Orthodox, the Greek Catholic and the Armenian churches were the first to be burned. The Russian consulate was the first to be attacked, followed by the French, then the Dutch, Austrian, Belgian and the American consulates. Abdu Costi, the American Consul was beaten and left for dead. The Prussian and the English Consulates were saved.



(A rare glass negative photograph of the Christian quarter of Damascus, Lebanon, July 1860)
For one tourists view of the Christian quarter looks like today, go to

http://www.pbase.com/bmcmorrow/damascuschristianquarter

and for a tourist’s video



http://www.walkonearth.com/videos/damascus_christian_quarter.html

This was the beginning of yet another Civil War in Lebanon. Why did this happen?



(Ib)
INTRODUCTION
In the 19th century, Lebanon was a part of the Ottoman Empire. It was very closely related to the area then known as Syria.
THE 4 ESSENTIALS
In any discussion of pre-civil war Lebanon, you must mention these 4 elements:
1. the confessional groups,

2. the economic tensions/disparities between peasants and landlords,

3. the political control/weakness of the Ottomans

4. the external influence of Britain and France and Egypt.
An important issue in the history of Lebanon is the role of both internal and external factors in major events such as civil wars. These 4 essential factors can be broken down into internal and external factors.
INTERNAL
The internal factors are the social, religious, economic and political tensions within Lebanon. (‘communal tensions’)
EXTERNAL
The external factors are the influence of the Ottomans, Britain and France on the internal affairs of Lebanon. (levels of Ottoman control; extent of autonomy after 1861)
TO ANSWER A QUESTION ON LEBANON IN 19th CENTURY, YOU MUST AT THE VERY LEAST, HAVE THE FOLLOWING 6 ELEMENTS AT YOUR DISPOSAL:
(i) remember the name of the country, the name of the Empire of which it was a part (Mount Lebanon; Ottoman Empire);

(ii) remember the date of the civil war (1860);

(iii) remember the name of the settlement that concluded it.

(iv) remember that Lebanese society was made up of 5 religious groups:

Druze, Maronite Christians, Sunni and Shia Muslims.

(v) You must also be able to say something about the elements in Lebanese society which allowed for these groups to live peacefully together.

(vi) You must be able to say something about the influence of external powers on Lebanon.

(II)
NOTES ON LEBANON 1820-19141
In 19th century, Lebanon was a part of Greater Syria, which included Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Jordan, all of which was itself a part of the Ottoman Empire, but which had achieved some autonomy from the Ottoman Empire.
In 1800, within Greater Syria, about .quarter of a million people lived in the area known as Mount Lebanon.
(This area consisted mainly of the mountainous regions. It was where religious dissidents went to get away from central power. They had developed ways in which to live together quite harmoniously)
It was governed by what has been called ‘the politics of the notables’ – intermediaries between the locals, and the Ottoman governor and Istanbul. (CLUE: the various ways in which political power was enacted was a main cause of the civil war)
However, Tanzimat reforms were interfering with this system, and so notables were losing some influence.
Emir Bashir II was Ottoman governor from Shihab family. His reforms and Bashir’s increasing ties with Maronites upset Jumblatt (a Druze notable).
1821 and 1825 there were wars between the two. Bashir II killed Jumblatt and suppressed the Druze.
With the help of the French as well as Ibrahim Ali, Bashir II ruled.
Tensions were heighted due to isolation of Druze and economic success of Maronites.
Some of the Maronites turned to the economic opportunities offered by increasing penetration of Europe in the Levant.

From 1830s onwards, the port of Beirut expanded.

Ottomans needed exports to sell in Europe.

So, in order to grow more wheat and barley for export, notables started to bring new tracts of land under cultivation. The Tanzimat Land Code of 1858 helped them in this.

It helped create vast private estates in Greater Syria for notables bought huge tracts of uncultivated state land.
Some peasants who bought them registered them in the name of the notable patron thinking they would be looked after
At this point we connect up with Muhammad Ali’s foreign policy. He was always trying to expand Egypt. In 1831-40 Ibrahim, his son, invaded Greater Syria, taking Jerusalem, Damascus and Aleppo, (he had already started getting the Sudan and Jordan and Mecca.)
From 1831, Greater Syria was governed by Muhammad Ali’s son, Ibrahim Pasha (1831-1840) until he was forced out by the European powers in 1840.

This left a political vacuum in Mount Lebanon which lasted for the next 20 years, which were marked by lots of civil strife and conflict.


The Ottomans could never quite fully assert their control, whilst all the time, former Druze lords attempted to regain power and privilges. (This was the time of the Tanzimat.) 1841 Bashir III was introduced. He was not as good as Bashir II. There were more massacres of Christians by Druze

Increasing clashes between Maronites and Druze led the Ottomans to propose, in 1841, dividing Mount Lebanon into 2 units: this was known as the double Qa’imaqamate.


But the two communities were too mixed up together for it to be a practical solution.
1841-1845 direct clashes - they tried to separet Maronite north and Druze south.

(Jews were lower profile, so not a target)

In 1845 Civil War broke out.
The Europeans encouraged the Ottomans to bring it to an end. Their solution was made by Shakib Effendi: as a way of recognising how complex Lebanese society was he allowed for the representation of each sect (Maronites, Druze, Sunni, Shi’ite, Greek Orthodox, greek Catholic) on each of the two councils of the Qa’imaqamate.
They were assisted by deputies in both districts (north and south).
They tried to introduce representative councils, but 1858 put an end to this
1850 : anti-Chrstian riots in Aleppo

1856 : anti Christian riots in Nablus


1858: the Kisrwan rebellion dealt this a mortal blow (showing that there was still no effective entralised political power)
1858 started in the North as Maronite peasants against Maronite muqata’ajis, but ended up in south as Maronite peasants against their Druze landlords.
1860: Maronites defeated, loads killed, 100,000 refugees.
1860 July – it spread to Damscus. 5-10,000 Christians were massacred.
(this was also partly caused by Muslim hostility to Christians)
This brought in the French army. Napoleon III had to appease French Catholic public.

1860: Civil War erupted.


(there was a distinct lack of a viable political system. French support for Maronites turned it into a struggle for ultimate political control.
.

(III)
ANALYSIS
CAUSES OF PRE-CIVILWAR TENSION
HISTORIOGRAPHY:
Cleveland says the tensions were a cause of:

(a) the Tanzimat reforms in the Ottoman Empire which led to ‘the disruption of long-established patterns of life’ , and

(b) ‘European economic penetration of Greater Syria’ from 1850s onwards
ECONOMIC
Ibrahim Pasha introduced the domestic reforms his father had introduced in Egypt.

The monopoly system (which made it a captive market for Egyptian textiles) damaged local craft industries


In addition
CAUSE OF TENSIONS
Ibrahim Pasha (governor of Greater Syria 1833-1840) caused tensions between Muslims and Christians in Mount Lebanon, in other words the Maronites Christians and the Druze (the minority, a branch of Shi’ism) who had lived together relatively harmoniously for centuries.
FACT TO PROVE THIS CLAIM

He tried to introduce universal conscription and disarm the local population.

And in 1837, when some Druze communities refused, he sent a force of thousands of Christians against them. The Christians enlarged the territory they controlled.

In 1839 Ibrahim changed his mind and asked Christians to return their arms. They refused. This led to a general uprising against Ibrahim.


Ottomans sent forces, trying to take advantage of the weakness of Ibrahim. But they were beaten. Then, the British, worried about Ali, landed in Lebanon in 1840. As a consequence, the revolt against Ibrahim really took off.
Ibrahim returned to Egypt and the powers of Europe imposed a settlement on this Ottoman –Egypt conflict. (Treaty of London 1841).
The 1838 Treaty of Balata abolished all monopolies in the Ottoman empire and allowed the entry of European goods at a favourable tariff rate of 3%. This, alongside a more vigorous enforcement of Capitulations, meant greater role of Europeans in the Middle East.
CONSEQUENCES OF THIS
POLITICAL
Greater Syria was restored to Ottoman rule.
SOCIAL
It changed sectarian relations (this means relations between the different religious groups.
The Maronites had gained more power. Ottoman decrees of 1839 and 1856 promised them equality.
This encouraged them to get more involved in commercial transactions with Europeans. They were making money, building school and so on.
The Druze and Sunni saw this as a minority getting too big in what they saw was a Muslim state.
This erupted into civil war.
The civil war began when the Druze attacked several Christian villages in Mount Lebanon. This then spilled over into Damascus.
To avoid European intervention the Ottomans dispatched a force under Fuad Pasha, to punish the Muslims.

However the Europeans were not satisfied. They organised a settlement.


This took place in 1861 conference in Istanbul.
OTHER ECONOMIC
(Decline of handicrafts in face of local, as opposed to European factory production. In 1830s the silk weavers started using Jacquard looms and so increased output.)
Prior to 1840, religious rivalries were not the driving force of Lebanese politics.
Maronites and Druze helped bring down Bashir II, who was under Egyptian influence.
After 1840 the change in the balance between the religious groups was exacerbated by European influence and Ottomans trying to re-establish control.
IV
POST CIVIL WAR SETTLEMENT:
EXTENT OF AUTONOMY
Their aim was to assure the safety of the Christian population.

It made Mount Lebanon an autonomous administrative entity, in the form of a mutasarrifiyyah – governed by a non-Lebanese Ottoman Christian subject and protected by the European powers.


As awkward as it seemed, it brought peace and prosperity to the region until 1914.
1861
Under European pressure, mainly from France, an Ottoman edict issued in 1861 (effective in 1864) made Mount Lebanon a Mutesarrifiyyet governed by a Mutasarrıf. This meant that the majorly Maronite mountain was no longer subordinate to any of the surrounding Eyalets. The edict also granted that the Mutasarrıf be Christian.
These reforms came after a sectarian war in the mountain between the Maronites and the Druze, the latters were supposidly backed by the Ottomans.

[edit] 1864


As part of the Tanzimat reforms, an Ottoman law passed in 1864 provided for a standard provincial administration throughout the empire with the Eyalets becoming smaller Vilayets governed by a Wali or governor still appointed by the Porte but with new provincial assemblies participating in administration.

[edit] 1874


In 1874, Jerusalem became a Mutesarrifiyyet gaining a special administrative status.

POST CIVIL WAR : EXTENT OF AUTONOMY


New system introduced in 1861(revised 1864):
Mount Lebanon (but not Beirut, Biqa, Tripoli, or Sidon) was made autonomous under IN guarantnee, and a Christian governor, and multi-communal council.
System of muqata ajis was abolished.

Taxation was limited.


Yapp argues that 1861 settlement “began the process by which Lebanon became an independent state.”
And the type of polity that eventually emerged in it.
Maronites fought hard to keep it independent.

Britain and France protected it and looked after Druze and Maronites respectively.


Ottomans saw 1861 as a temporary reverse. They aimed at and retook full control in 1914.
Ottomans saw Mount Lebanona srequiring access to the sea if it was to become an indepdnent state. ML needed financial and military help from Ottomans.
So there were instabilities in this Lebanese settlement which made them look for other solutions.

Mount Lebanon was made into one political unit – Mutasarrifiyya. Its Governor was to be a non-Lebanese Christian.


He was to be supported by an Administrative Council : 12 elected representatives chosen on the basis of sectarian representation: (each of the 12 were chosen by an elected village Shaykhs)
4 Maronites, 3 Druze, 2 Greek Orthodox, 1 Greek Catholic, 1 Sunni, 1 Shi’ite. (even though the Druze were only 10% of the population. By 1913, 60% of the 400,000 population was Maronite, 12% Gk Orth, 7% Gk Cath; 11% Druze)
They took care of taxation, and government spending, each councillor representing one of the 12 districts or qada’.
This Mutasarrifiyya also had its own police force.
Economy:
The economy was dominated by silk production (French-owned and local factories)

The Maronite Church was riding to become the owner of one third of the agricultural land in Mount Lebanon.


Demography:
Increasing emigration to North and South America, Egypt and Sudan (100,000 between 1860-1908).
Maronite middle class started to say they wanted to incorporate Beirut and other areas into Mount Lebanon, so as to improve the economy, thus absorbing labour surplus that was being lost by emigration.
By 1914, Mutasarrifiyya was abolished and the Ottomans had appointed their own Muslim Governor.
1918: Anglo-French and Arab forces created Greater Lebanon out of Syria and Lebanon.
1920 French mandate over Greater Lebanon declared. Muslims were now half of the population.
1926: New constitution for the Republic of Lebanon, but the French High Commissioner retained the main authority until Lebanon indepdence in 1943.
Throughout that time there was a continuation of the ottomanian confessional nature of the representation.

After 1933 it was always assumed President would be a Maronite; after 1937 Prime Minister always a Sunni;




V
IB QUESTIONS
Questions on Lebanon are usually about either:


  1. the tensions in Lebanon prior to 1860 and the way in which they can be said to have been causes of the Civil War.

For example:


To what extent were communal tensions in Lebanon responsible for the outbreak of civil war in 1860? (May 2001)
Assess the significance of religious tensions in creating instability in Lebanon which led to Civil War in 1860. (May 2003)
Or,


  1. Lebanese society after the Civil War and the setting up of the post-civil war settlement known as the Montassarifiah.

For example:


To what extent did Lebanon achieve real autonomy as a consequence of the 1861 Settlement? (May 2002)
Analyse the nature and extent of internal and external problems confronting Lebanon in the post-civil war period. (May 2001)
Or,


  1. both.


To what extent were the tensions which led to civil war in Lebanon in 1860 resolved by the conflict itself and the settlement which followed? (May 2004)
HOW TO APPROACH A TYPICAL QUESTION ON LEBANON c. 1860
(Va)
PRE-CIVIL WAR
To what extent were communal tensions in Lebanon responsible for the outbreak of civil war in 1860? (MAY 2001)
INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH
(THIS PARTICULAR VARIETY OF INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH HAS A SUMMARY OF THE OVERALL ARGUMENT)
One of the most infamous events of the civil war of 1860 in Lebanon was the attack of the Christian Quarter of Damsacus in July 1860. When looking at a photograph of the aftermath, one could be forgiven for thinking that this massacre was the result by the eruption of long standing sectarian tensions and religious differences. After all, an estimated 11,000 Christians, mainly Maronite Christian, were targeted and killed. Yet this would be to overlook and underestimate the finely balanced system that had developed in Lebanon and Greater Syria which allowed these different religious groups to live and work together for many years. Indeed, it will be argued in this essay that if one is to explain the outbreak of civil war one has to look at other internal factors beyond communal tensions per se, be it political instability, in particular the role of the policies of Ibrahim Pasha’s in creating communal tension. But more important than those internal political factors were external factors, in particular the role of Britain, France, the Ottomans and Egypt. These too can be seen in the photograph. The fact that a number of European embassies were also destroyed in this incident is clear evidence in itself of those external factors, most notably the impact that increasing presence of European trade had had on the socio-economic structure of Lebanese society in the 19th century.
FIRST PARAGRAPH OF THE ARGUMENT: WHAT IS IT GOING TO SAY?
IT IS GOING TO SAY ‘YES, COMMUNAL TENSIONS OBVIOUSLY HAD A ROLE TO PLAY IN BRINGING ABOUT CIVIL WAR.
SO THIS PARAGRAPH CONTAINS THE FIRST POINT (WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE) IN FIRST PART OF ARGUMENT
The civil war is most remembered for the attack on the Christian quarters in Damascus in July 1860. If that is seen as the trigger of the civil war then one might be forgive for assuming that it was caused by communal tensions. Indeed, there is a great deal of evidence to suggest that communal tension was both a short term and a long term cause. For wherever one looks, one can find examples of violent conflict between the different communal groups, most notably the Druze, the Maronite Christians, and the Sunni and Shia Muslims, or even the minorities of the Alawites and the Jabal Druze. From timte to time, long before 1860, these tensions broke out into open hostility. Perhaps the most obvious examples are those of clashes of 1841 and 1845. So much so that it is often said that the system of co-habitation had collapsed by the early 1840s. Further more, even before the system collapsed in the 1840s, one might even point to the outbursts of violent conflict between Druze and Maronites of 1821 and 1825 as further examples of this long term simmering communal tension.
SECOND PARAGRAPH: THIS WILL CONSIST OF YOUR SECOND POINT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY A COUNTER-CLAIM WITH REGARD THE ROLE OF COMMUNAL TENSION.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT WILL NOW ARGUE THAT WHILST THERE WERE PROBLEMS FROM TME TO TIME, THEY WERE EXCEPTIONS RATHER THAN THE RULE AND THAT IN LEBANON THEY ACTUAL HAD A GOOD SYSTEM WHEREBY PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT RELIGIONS COULD LIVE TOGETHER RELATIVELY PEACEFULLY
Having said that, up until the 1830s, Lebanese society had managed to create a finely balanced system to keep it functioning peacefully. (Proof?) In Mount Lebanon, an area which consisted mainly of the mountainous regions, were religious dissidents went to get away from central power, they had developed ways in which to live together quite harmoniously.
THIRD PARAGRAPH: THIS WILL CONTAIN YOUR THIRD POINT: WHICH IS THAT YOU THINK THAT ECONOMIC CHANGE WAS A MORE IMPORTANT FACTOR IN BRINGING ABOUT THE CIVIL WAR TO THE EXTENT THAT IT EXACERBATED THIS CONFESSIONAL DIVIDED. (HOW? PROOF?)
Indeed, it seems fair to argue that the destabilisation that led to civil war was more a cause of long and short term impact of economic change on the fabric of society rather than innate communal tensions.
In 18th century the Maronite community had become stronger and more prominent, both financially, politically and socially. Many of them moved from their northern base into Druze areas.
It could be argued that the times it did collapse and break out into open conflict can be called the exception and can be put down, in the case of 1821 and 1825 to the personal political conflict between Ottoman Shiab governor Emir Bashir II against the Druze notable Jumblatt. But for the most part, as Cleveland has tried to argue, they managed to develop a system, particularly in the Mount Lebanon area which allowed them to work and live with each other in relative peace and stability.
In addition to this, the area had a semi-autonomous status, ruled by the Shihab dynasty, with notable families acting in a semi-feudal manner.

POLITICAL INSTABILITY


Similarly the replacement of Bashir II by the Ottoman-British puppet Bashir III

EXTERNAL INFLUENCE:


Levels of Ottoman Rule
The politics of the notables – intermediaries between the locals, and the Ottoman governor and Istanbul. Indeed, even this can be put down to external factors, for the Tanzimat reforms were interfering with this, and so notables were losing some influence. (Emir Bashir II was ottoman governor from Shihabs. He upset Jumblatt (a Druze notable) because of this and his increasing ties with Maronites. 1821 and 1825 there were wars between the two. Bashir II killed Jumblatt and suppressed the Druze.

Wherever one looks for causes of this civil war one finds the hand of foreign interference.

In October 1860, France, Britain, Austria, Prussia, and the Ottoman Empire, the members of the commission set up to investigation its causes, all agreed that the partition of Mount Lebanon in 1842 between Druzes and Christians had been responsible for the massacre.

This was the so-called Double Qaimaqamate by which, in the wake of the fighting in the early 1840s, Lebanon was divided into two separate administrative entities, a southern one ruled by Druze and a northern one ruled by Maronite.


Similarly one can blame the outbursts in the 1840s on the mishandling of the social fabric represented by the policies and actions of Ibrahim Pasha.
Moreover, given that it was not until 1842 that the system really started to collapse, then one must look elsewhere beyond communal tensions for causes that explain the civl war that eventually broke out in 1860.

ECONOMIC CAUSE:


If basic political mishandling and instability are a more important factor, even more crucial than that were economic factors. This economic factor can be put down to the fact that Increasing trade with Europe gave the economic advantage to the Maronites who had close links with France. This meant that they were becoming richer than some of the Druze families who ran Lebanon in a feudal way. This created a new type of tension, an economic imbalance which exacerbated existing social and communal tensions.
BUT BE IT POLITICAL OR ECONOMIC? IT CAN ALL BE BLAMED ON EXTERNAL CAUSES, OR THE INTERFERENCE OF FOREIGN POWERS, BE IT BRITAIN, FRANCE? EGYPT OR THE OTTOMANS. FOR EXAMPLE

therefore some of them turned to the economic opportunities offered by increasing penetration of Europe in the Levant.

From 1830s onwards, the port of Beirut expanded.

Ottomans needed exports to sell in Europe.


So, in order to grow more wheat and barley for export, notables started to bring new tracts of land under cultivation. The Tanzimat Land Code of 1858 helped them in this.

It helped create vast private estates in Greater Syria for notables bought huge tracts of uncultivated state land.

Some peasants who bought them registered them in the name of the notable patron thinking they would be looked after

ANOTHER EXTERNAL CAUSE


Ibrahim Pasha introduced the domestic reforms his father had introduced in Egypt.

The monopoly system (which made it a captive market for Egyptian textiles) damaged local craft industries


In addition
IBRAHIM AS A CAUSE OF TENSIONS

Ibrahim Pasha (governor of Greater Syria 1833-1840) caused tensions between Muslims and Christians in Mount Lebanon, in other words the Maronites Christians and the Druze (the minority, a branch of Shia’ism) who had lived together relatively harmoniously for centuries.


FACT TO PROVE THIS CLAIM

He tried to introduce universal conscription and disarm the local population.

And in 1837, when some Druze communities refused, he sent a force of thousands of Christians against them. The Christians enlarged the territory they controlled.

In 1839 Ibrahim changed his mind and asked Christians to return their arms. They refused. This led to a general uprising against Ibrahim.

EXTERNAL INFLUENCE
On top of those internal difficulties, the Ottoman Empire hoped that those difficulties Lebanon was facing would enable the Ottomans to restore their own Direct rule over Lebanon. In other words the destabilising presence of Ibrahim Pasha.

VI
MISC NOTES
RELIGIONS IN LEBANON
are members of one of the Lebanese or Syriac Eastern Catholic Churches (They follow different Eastern Christian liturgical traditions: Alexandrian, Antiochian, Armenian, Byzantine and Chaldean) with a heritage reaching back to Maron the Syriac Monk in the early 5th century.

Unique amongst Eastern Rite Catholics, the Maronites are Eastern Christians who have always remained in communion with the Bishop of Rome

They spoke Aramaic

‘stil 1.5 m in Lebanon, about 30% of population.

Druze – is an offshott of Islam, with a mix of is said to have begun as an offshoot of Islam, but is unique in its incorporation of Gnostic, neo-Platonic and other philosophies, similar to other followers of Ismaili Shi'a Islam.
17th rise of Shihab. although they professed Sunni Islam. Secretly, they showed sympathy with Druzism, the religion of the majority of their subjects.
The Shihab leadership continued until the middle of the 19th century and culminated in the illustrious governorship of Amir Bashir Shihab II (1788-1840) who, after Fakhr-al-Din, was the most powerful feudal lord Lebanon produced. Though governor of the Druze Mountain Bashir was a crypto-Christian, and it was he whose aid Napoleon solicited in 1799 during his campaign against Syria.

His rival was Jumblatt.

In 1788, after abdication of his predecessor, he was elected an emir and would rule under Ottoman suzerainty, being appointed wali or governor of Mount Lebanon, the Beqaa Valley and Jebel Amil, together forming about two thirds of modern day Lebanon. He would reform taxes and attempt to break the feudal system, in order to undercut rivals, the most important of which was also named Bashir: Bashir Jumblatt, whose wealth and feudal backers equaled or exceeded Bashir II – and who had increasing support in the Druze community.

Jumblatt declared a rebellion, and between 1821 and 1825 there were massacres and battles, with the Maronites attempting to gain control of the Mt. Lebanon district, and the Druze gaining control over the Beqaa valley. In 1825 Bashir II defeated his rival and killed him after the battle of al Simqaniya. Bashir II was not a forgiving man and repressed the Druze, particularly in and around Beirut.


Trying to obtain greater degree of autonomy he supported Muhammad Ali's rise against the Ottoman Empire and allied with Ali's son Ibrahim Pasha who occupied Syria on his father's behalf. This way United Kingdom's and Austrian interests were threatened, so in 1840 they both helped the Ottomans to drive Ibrahim Pasha from Syria. Bashir was captured and sent into exile to Malta. For a short time the direct Ottoman rule over Lebanon was imposed until Bashir Shihab III, another member of the Shihab family, was appointed an emir.

The Druzes and their Christian Maronite neighbors, who had thus far lived as religious communities on friendly terms, entered a period of social disturbance in the year 1840, which culminated in the civil war of 1860. For this disturbance the Ottoman Sultan was, in a great measure, responsible. The Sultan, realizing that the only way to bring the semi-independent people of Lebanon under his direct control was to sow the seeds of discord among the people themselves, inaugurated in the mountain a policy long tried and found successful in the Ottoman provinces, the policy of "divide and rule".[


Mt L was Christian.
It was expanded into Gtr L, north and sth.

After this Christian and Druze start coming into conflict – why?

Umar pasha made it worse.
European powers suggested dividing Mt L up into Christian and Druze sections.

This was done in December 1842 = the Double Qaimaqamate

The Beirut-Damascus highway was the dividing line between the two districts.
ROLE OF OUTSIDE POWERS
The French, for example, supported the Christians,

The Britsih supported the Druzes,

the Ottomans fomented strife to increase their control.
In 1845 the Ottomans tried to calm the tension by appointing councils on which all groups were represented – the system of majlis
The Kasrawan uprising,

In 1858, the peasants of Kasrawan, overburdened by heavy taxes, rebelled against the feudal practices that prevailed in Mount Lebanon. This meant against their Druze landlords.


On May 22, 1860, a small group of Maronites fired on a group of Druzes at the entrance to Beirut, killing one and wounding two. This sparked off a torrent of violence which swept through Lebabon.
9-11th July 25,000 Christinas killed in Damascus.
the Algerian exile Abd al-Qadir saved many Chrsitians
It gave an excuse for the French to intervene.
On October 5, 1860, an international commission composed of France, Britain, Austria, Prussia, and the Ottoman Empire met to investigate the causes of the events of 1860 and to recommend a new administrative and judicial system for Lebanon that would prevent the recurrence of such events.
THEIR SOLUTION
Hence, in the Statute of 1861 Mount Lebanon was separated from Syria and reunited under a non-Lebanese Christian mutasarrif (governor) appointed by the Ottoman sultan, with the approval of the European powers. The mutasarrif was to be assisted by an administrative council of twelve members from the various religious communities in Lebanon.
the sultan deposed Bashir III on January 13, 1842
MAIN GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES OF LEBANON
Main coastal ctiies from Tyre in South, Sidon, Beirut, up to Tripoli in North.
Lebanon Mountains

Litiani River and Orentes River

Biqa Valley

Anti Lebanon Mountains.



All run north to south.

1 In 17th century, the muqata ajis were big landowners, given the land by the Ottomans in return for the promise to provide military support for the Ottomans. Naturally they wielded most of the power at a local level. Although they eventually all coalesced under certain ‘notables’ (hakims or amirs) who acted as the intermediaries between them and the Ottoman governors. Struggles between them had little to do with religious differences. (then, 18thc rise of Maronites; their southern migration; rise of Shihab family) In 18th century the Maronite community had become stronger and more prominent, both financially, politically and socially. Many of them moved from their northern base into Druze areas. Politically, this time saw the rise of the Shihab family who embraced Christianity. Thye beat the muqata ajis and took their wealth. Until 1825 they relied on an alliance with the great Druze family of the Janbalats (Jumblatts); But once they got beat, the Shihabs were sole rulers. On top of it Bashir II had Egyptian support. Bashir III had Shiab support. 1831 M Ali invaded Syria. 1861 Mt L got special status.



Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©azrefs.org 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə