Phoenicians

Chapter 14

Traditional Districts of Mount Lebanon

Dawood Pasha was succeeded in 1868 by “Nasri Franco”, an Aleppine1 Latin rite
Catholic. Patriarch Boulos Mass’ad2 (1854-1890) during his visit to Istanbul in 1867
had spoken on his behalf, consequently after his appointment, Franco Pasha
enjoyed very good relations with the Maronite leaders.
His appointment was due to the fact that Dawood
had resigned in hope of acquiring additional
concession (due to his historical moves he had made
before) from the Sultan. Fuad Pasha who was the
Grand Vizier in Istanbul, considered this an opportunity
to cut short the potentially complicated problems if he
was to remain in office – they accepted his resignation
and appointed Franko Nasri Kusa, originally from
Aleppo.
Fuad obtained all the necessary approvals from the
related ambassadors in Istanbul for his appointment,
emphasizing the new governor of Mount Lebanon was an Ottoman official
responsible to the Sultan, even if the previous protocols “suggested” full clearance
of his appointment by the representatives of the European powers – in the end,
Fuad was obliged to sign an international protocol announcing Franko’s
appointment. Nonetheless, the new governor read between the lines and
understood fully the message from Istanbul.
Throughout his tenure, he remained loyal to the general policy, shunning direct
talks and intimate consultations with the representatives of European powers. He

1
Armenian Rite Archdiocese in Syria. The city of Aleppo is situated in the plain that stretches from the Orontes to the Euphrates in the
northwestern extremity of the Syrian desert. It rises in the middle of an oasis on the eight little hills, and is watered by the Kouik. Ancient
Egyptian records mention this town. According to an Arab tradition, Abraham lived in it, and distributed some milk to every comer, whence the
town's name, Haleb.
2
Patriarch Masad from Ashkout provided leadership during the tragic events of 1860. In 1867, he went to Rome to assist at the 1800th
anniversary of the martyrdom of Saints Peter and Paul. This was perhaps the second time a reigning Maronite Patriarch had visited Rome. He did
not attend the First Vatican Council (1869-70), but was represented by a mission headed by Peter Bustany, Archbishop of Tyre and Saida. From
Rome, the Patriarch went to Paris where Napoleon III welcomed him with all the honors due his rank. He traveled to Istanbul, where the Sultan
Abdul-Aziz offered him hospitality in a palace where care had been taken to install a chapel. Patriarch Masad died on April 18, 1890. Besides
having been a strong and resourceful leader, he was a person of great intellect and had written many theological works.
established a friendly and smooth relationship with the governor of Damascus, in
return both the grand vizier (Istanbul) and the governor provided him with moral,
material and financial support when the budget of the mountain fell short and for
improvement of many public work projects.
This “smooth” relationship went by the wayside, with reference to France (the
principal external contester of Ottoman rights on the mountain), as they were
bogged down in serious internal problems, and other European affairs. France’s
involvement in Italian affairs, its devastating defeat at the hands of Prussia in 1870,
and the internal confusion and change of regime kept their attention away,
permitting the Ottomans to run amuck on the mountain and with its policy.
Following events, demonstrate their action and how events outside of Lebanon,
either directly or indirectly affected (and today do affect) the country on a scale not
felt or realized by any country, especially one the size of Lebanon.
After France had pulled its act together and its diplomats awoke from their deep
sleep in Lebanon, the Ottoman Empire was coming apart at the seams, having its
hands full of internal and external problems. When Franko died in office in 1873,
the Ottoman government put Rustem Pasha’s name forward as the new governor of
Mount Lebanon, he was a capable and an experienced diplomat who had served the
Ottoman government as ambassador to Florence and St Petersburg.
The French ambassador in Istanbul “considered” blocking his appointment,
knowing Rustem’s reluctance in previous matters supporting French interests. But,
unable to propose a better nomination, they consented. Despite their hands being
tied in Istanbul, they managed to organize a Francophile demonstration in Mount
Lebanon soon after Rustem Pasha’s arrival, to impress upon him the extent of the
French influence among the Maronites and demonstrate that a smooth
administration of the affairs of the Mountain necessitated catering to French and
Maronite interests.
Rustem ignored the demonstration.
He was to base his administration of the outspoken belief that the “best”
interests of the people of the mountain lay in their willingness to work together
peacefully towards a prosperous life under the hand of their “legitimate” sovereign,
the Sultan. Continuing with his “outspoken beliefs” he maintained that “his” only
concern and of that of the “Ottoman – Islamic” Sultan was the same, of the welfare
of the people of Mount Lebanon, who were and mostly are today Maronite
Christians.
Note: I know that I am supposed to be writing a short synopsis on the history of
the Phoenicians/Lebanon, and supposed to maintain a certain amount of objective
opinion on the events that transpired over the course of their history. But in
reading (many) sources that pertain to the Sunni’s, Shi’a, Druze and even the
Nusairiyeh I have read time and time again, how it’ okay to lie to the Gentiles, Jews
and any other religion that is outside of their respective sect – and so from time to
time I tend to loose my objectivity.

Rustem made a point of cementing cordial relationships with all major groups
and institutions wielding influence in an on the mountain, including the Maronite
Church and the French Consulate, at first this helped to foster institutionalization
and respectability of the local government, but things were falling apart in Istanbul,
beginning in the 1870s, and his position became tenuous, to say the least.
Internal problems in the Ottoman domain included natural disasters that
destroyed much of the agricultural crops in Anatolia (1872-1874), and government
efforts to relieve the famine by grain purchases met with enforced prices in the
Balkan provinces, these high prices only increased the tension and the government
quest for food for their people. Regardless, peasant unrest fed by increasingly
popular sentiments towards the government led to an all-out rebellion(s) against
the Ottoman rule. They were running short of cash, and their debt only increased
due to sinking fund payment on debts incurred in previous years. The European
creditors in panic, met in Istanbul to go over the internal and external problems of
the Ottoman Empire – they were, to say the least – in tall cotton and their threshing
machines were on the fritz.
Naturally, being who they were, the Ottoman government found the proposed
solutions too humiliating to accept, but the following 1877 Russian-Ottoman War
(Ottomans declared war on April 24th, 1877 – 283 days later the Russians accepted
truce offered by Ottomans on January 31st, 1878) presented even more far-reaching
consequences – possible breakup of the Empire became a common topic at tea
parties (diplomatic circles) across Europe and the Middle East.
The discussion were just that, discussions --- partly due to disagreements among
the major concerned European players, and partly because of the “bitterly” realistic
policy followed by the Ottoman government under the relatively stable leadership o
the new Sultan, “Abdulhamid II – 1876/1909”, and members of his court who (in
making common sense prevailed) along with him ended the confusion running
rampant through the Empire, and to dismantle a part of his realm. In the “Berlin
Treaty” of 1878 and a series of related agreements, the Ottoman Empire
surrendered large tracts of territory to other states, an agreed to pay an
“enormous” sum as war indemnity to Russia and to put a “significant” portion of
their treasury under the administration of an international agency specially formed
to service the payment of the Ottoman public debt.
Those developments created serious rumblings on the mountain, the citizens of
greater Lebanon alarmed by the intensification of religious sentiments among the
Muslim population in urban centers, as the Istanbul conference failed to produce
any acceptable solutions and war with Russia became evident, some Christians
living in the vicinity took refuge in Mount Lebanon.
According to Istanbul, the Russian and French consulates and the expansionist
agitators in Mount Lebanon instigated the panic. The Sultan ordered Rustem Pasha
and his colleague in Damascu to approach the issue with care, and use all measures
to calm and reassure the panic-stricken Christians. The two pasha’s did their job!
Unfortunately another problem surfaced, – the Druze and the Maronites
developed differences (again) and sporadic clashes begin all over again on the
mountain. Rustem called in the regular troops from Damascus and deployed them
in the centers of tension, and worked very hard to reconcile the conflicting parties,
in preventing a major crisis the grand vizier conveyed to Rustem the Sultan’s
praises with a short note:
His Imperial Majesty the Sultan wishes you to continue the precautions taken,
pay utmost attention to preventing the occurrence of events or situations which
may serve as a pretext for foreign intervention at these critical times, and continue
to foster the motives and means necessary for elimination of the traces of hostility
from the minds of the people, for the sake of the complete restoration of peace and
order in Mount Lebanon.
Managing to keep the peace and reasonable quiet through the Russo-Ottoman
War (283 days) he could not avoid a growing rift in his relationship with first the
Maronite Church and then the French Consulate in Beirut. When the defeat of the
Ottomans cast the future of the Empire in doubt, the Maronite Bishop Butrus
Bustain at Dier al-Qamar considered the time had come to settle the score with
Rustem, whose secularist3 administrative policy he evidently disliked. With the
assistance of his colleague in Beirut, Bishop Yusuf Dibs, he launched a campaign
based on accusations of “misconduct” against Rustem.
Rustem responded by removing Bishop Bustani to Jerusalem in June 1878, on the
grounds that his activities were endangering sectarian 4 harmony in the Shouf, the
most sensitive district in the Mountain. At this time, both the French charge
d’affaires and the British consul in Beirut agreed with him, not only to defend him
against “undeserved” accusations but also because they agreed with him on the
disruptive nature of the Bishop’s activities --- the French ambassador to Istanbul felt
the same way.
They felt different in the city on the Rhine, although France was “guaranteed” a
free hand in Tunisia in compensation for the Russian, British, and Austro-Hungarian
gains in the “Berlin Treaty – June 13th, July 13th, 1878”, the Quai d’Orsay (French
Ministry Foreign Affairs) was getting a tickle in their craw (suspicious) of being
outmaneuvered by their old enemies the British when in came to Syria and Egypt,
just in case a further breakup of the Ottoman Empire was down the line. The Bishop
returned to Die al-Qamar.
Convinced in their thinking they knew and understood they could not afford to
alienate the Maronite church, their closest and firmest ally the French had in the
region. This feelings an their following decision marked a shift in French priorities
from a firm commitment to the “Reglement” as a means toward a viable
administration in Mount Lebanon – making a decision to work close cooperation with
the Maronite Church in defense of any French interests.
French documents, examined by John Spagnolo5, showed that from 1879 onward
French diplomats in the region increased the uncooperative relations with Rustem
Pasha – this manifesting itself even in the “most obvious” cases of simple
administrative functions, such as the mountains (mustasarrifiyya’s) budgetary
problems and his attitude to the Church.
It is noted in Maronite history that when the governor visited “Ehden” he
summoned the monks of “Saint Anthony’s Monastery” at Qozhaya, harassed and

3
the rejection of religion or its exclusion from a philosophical or moral system
4
religion relating to or involving relations between religious groups or denominations
5
France and Ottoman Lebanon, 1861-1914 by John P. Spagnolo
humiliated them, and “ordered” some of them put in the “Beit El-Deen” prison.
While they were passing by “Batroun” some of their brother monks from the
monasteries of Jubail and Batroun made an attempt to free them, but this was
stopped by a platoon of Gendarmerie. When the monks reached the prison they
were put to hard labor, and over a period of time their harsh treatment resulted in
the death of a several of them – nothing of this sort had ever happened before to
the Church under Ottoman rule.
The occupation of Egypt in July 1882 by the British6 clearly increased the anxiety
of the Quai d’Orsay and reinforced their position on solidifying their connections in
Mount Lebanon. The French diplomats in the region and in Istanbul were order to
block Rustems’ reappointment 6-months before he tenure ended in April – 1883,
and to work toward a replacement “amenable” to French interests.
Interestedly, simultaneous petitions complaining about Rustem’s polices began
to pour into the government offices in Istanbul, as well as the embassies of the
major players from various parts of Mount Lebanon. The government asked the
governor of Damascus, “Ahmed Hamdi Pasha”, to inquire into the complaints.
Ahmed defended Rustem in two consecutive reports. First, he laid out the
petitions in detail – whereas Rustem was accused deviations from the guidelines set
forth in the Reglement in dealing with the judicial system, levying extraordinary
duties, arbitrary dismissal of judges and other officials, and interference in the
judicial process.
According to Ahmed’s inquiries and observations, the first two accusations were
outlandish – alterations in the judicial system were aimed at improving its efficiency
and were inspired by the recent reorganization of the Ottoman courts “after” the
French model. Extraordinary duties had been collected to build bridges and roads
for the exclusive benefit of the Lebanese. Ahmed Hamdi Pasha admitted he had
stepped into the middle of the judicial process only when he dismissed certain
officials who had abused their authority in the defense of criminals, because of their
sectarian sympathies. Complaints, however, about the tolerance he’s shown to the
district-governor “Mustafa Arslan” and his vindictive acts against his opponents
were not entirely baseless.

6
In August Sir Garnet Wolsley and an army of 20,000 invaded the Suez Canal Zone. Wolsley was authorized to crush the Urabi
forces and clear the country of rebels. The decisive battle was fought at Tall al Kabir on September 13, 1882. The Urabi forces were
routed and the capital captured. The nominal authority of the khedive was restored, and the British occupation of Egypt, which was
to last for seventy-two years, had begun.
 At the end of the day, the petitions reflected “not” the general opinion of the
people of the Mountain – only the determination of a militant and predominantly
Maronite minority, to prevent his reappointment as governor.
Under the blessings of the French consul, “Patrimonio”, the Maronite clergy had
led the movement, and within their congregation people who desired positions
under a “new” government collected and even forged signatures on the petitions.
In his second report to Istanbul, Hamdi laid out the motive behind the French:
The French view the uninterrupted intensification of their influence in Mount
Lebanon as a crucial investment toward acquiring the whole of Syria as a cardinal
principle of their policy in the region. The fulfillment of this objective depends upon
their intensification of the power and influence of the Maronite clergy, who nourish
desires for independence and feel strongly attached to the French.
Rustem driven by his determination to protect the Reglement and taking
advantage of the recent defeat of France by the Germans, made an effort to bring
the bishops’ interference in governmental affairs to a complete end. This policy
undermined the Church’s interests and influence, making his elimination and
replacement by someone amenable to the French extremely important and a big
reason for the successful outcome of their policy.
According to Ahmed Hamdi Pasha, this alliance between the Maronite Church
and the French Consulate was the real source of the complaints against Rustem,
otherwise (he went on) Rustems’ efforts to improve the conditions necessary for a
peaceful, stable, and just order in Mount Lebanon, were widely acknowledged and
appreciated by its citizens. Ahmed also realized that although Rustem was the ideal
governor, the determined opposition of France would not let it happen, and that
they were looking for some reason (big or small) to become directly involved in the
government of Mount Lebanon, as a stepping stone to their ambitions to occupy
Syria.
In order to stop their plans, it became important that the government of Istanbul
manage to appoint in Rustem place a governor who was extremely experienced in
diplomatic relations, capable of handling the affairs of the Mountain prudently, and
“not” the least sympathetic to the French or their aspirations.
The Sultan, “Abdulhamid II” wanted to keep Rustem, when this proved
impossible, he vetoed a number of candidates until the Foreign Ministry was able to
the name of “one” acceptable to the European players as well as the Sultan.
 The candidate, “Vasa Efendi”, counselor of the governor of Edirne7. He was
made a pasha and in 1883 appointed Mount Lebanon’s new governor for a term of
ten-years.

7
city in Thrace, the westernmost part of Turkey