Lebanon’s Popular Uprisings (‘ammiyyat)

In January 1821, Abdallah Pasha, the Ottoman governor of Saida, asked for an advance payment of the annual tax from Emir Bashir. Unable to fulfill this obligation, Emir Bashir passed on the extra tax burden to the Christian peasants of Mount Lebanon’s northern districts (Metn, Kisrawan, Batrun, and Jbayl). He spared the Druze-dominated southern districts of Mount Lebanon (Shuf, and the four regions (iqlim) of Jezzin, Tufah, Kharrub and Jabl al-Rihan), for fear of alienating the Druze lords.

The peasant resistance to Emir Bashir’s exorbitant tax demands consisted of two movements: the Ammiyya of Antilyas (winter-spring 1821) and the Ammiyya of Lihfid (summer 1821). The Maronite archbishop, Yusuf Istifan (1759-1823), led a group of Maronite commoners, with some Druze and Shiites, and gathered at the Church in Antilyas (Havemann 1983). They swore to resist the payment of taxes and demanded that the land and poll taxes be levied once a year. Historians estimate that more than 6,000 rebels were present at this meeting (Havemann 1983). They vowed not to betray one another and to struggle together for the common good. They produced a convenant between them. In the covenant, the insurgents emphasized that they were acting for the sake of the general interest and public welfare (al-salih al-ummumi) (Havemann, 1983). Villages that were taking part in the movement elected deputies (wukala) from the ranks of the commoners, who negotiated for them.

Faced with the commoners’ resistance, Emir Bashir went into exile to Hawran with his retinue, at which point he renegotiated his return with the Ottoman governor and enlisted the support of the Druze and Maronite notables. He rejected all the commoners’ demands and reimposed his tax policy on Mount Lebanon’s northern districts. The commoners in Jubayl, Batrun, and Akkar rose again and gathered in Lihfid, a village in the district of Batrun. They demanded to be treated on equal terms with the Druze concerning taxation and other matters. They also called for the tax collectors assigned by the ruling Emir to be from the same respective region. With the support of the muqata’jis, Emir Bashir brutally crushed the resistance in a battle near Lihfid, putting an end to the insurgency. One leader of the movement, Antonious Abu Khattar al-Ayturini, a notable historian of Mount Lebanon, was caught and tortured. He died soon after. Maronite Archbishop Istfan died of poisoning in 1823. While the 1821 ‘Ammiya failed to change the conditions of Mount Lebanon’s peasants, it was the first articulation of a majority community that undermined the traditional ties of kinship and loyalty between the commoners and their feudal lords.

The 1840 resistance movements in Mount Lebanon occurred in the context of the Egyptian occupation of Lebanon (1830-1840). In 1830, the forces of Egypt’s ruler Muhammad Ali occupied Syria, under the leadership of his son, Ibrahim Pasha, and the cooperation of Emir Bashir. Although the presence of the Egyptians pointed to a new era of unprecedented development following the implementation of modernization policies, the permanent state of emergency, harsh taxation, forced labor, enforced military conscriptions, and disarmament alienated a wide sector of the population.

In 1840, Muhammad Ali ordered the disarmament of the Christians of Mount Lebanon in preparation for general conscription. This decision was received with apprehension by the Druze and Maronites who decided to rebel against Muhammad Ali’s rule. On June 8, 1840, Maronites, Druze, Sunni, and Shi’a representatives met at a church in Antilyas and took a solemn oath to support each other and to remain “one voice one mind.” (See document). They called for a reduction in tax, the abolition of compulsory labor, the restitution of firearms, administrative reform, and the representation of religious communities in the council (diwan) of Bayt al-Din (Emir Bashir’s Palace in the Shuf). In that council, two elected representatives from each denomination (ta’ifa) would advise the ruling Emir and support him in his politics. This marked the first intimation of confessional representation in Mount Lebanon’s political organization. The movement of 1840 included participants from different social classes, peasants, disgruntled muqata’jis, Maronite clergy, and traders of the newly emergent bourgeoisie merchant class living in urban centers. The Maronite Patriarch urged monks and priests to support the popular uprising (al-qiyam al-jumhuri). This assumption of political leadership by the Maronite Church was an important aspect of the 1840 rebellion (Havemann, 1983).

Put down by Ibrahim Pasha, the insurgency reignited again in August 1840 with British and Ottoman support. On July 15, 1840, the London Agreement formalized the policy of the European power (except France) to expel the Egyptians from Syria. The translator (known as a dragoman), Richard Wood (1806-1900), was dispatched to manage the affairs of Mount Lebanon (Ozvaci 2021). It involved large military action with French and British agents supplying weapons and logistical support. These European powers promised the Lebanese the restitution of their ancient privileges and introduced new rights as proclaimed by the Gulhane Edict of 1839 if they paid allegiance to the Sultan. By September, the British had assembled twenty-two warships and mobilized an allied ground force. On September 6, the British bombarded Beirut from the sea, followed by the landing of the troops in Jounieh. By November, the Egyptian army had withdrawn from Syria. A new history of interventionism in the East was thus inaugurated, in which European powers felt compelled to intervene by a sense of duty and right (Ozavci 2021).

Following the reinstitution of Ottoman power, the political and administrative status of Mount Lebanon underwent several important changes. Conflicting demands or requests were put forth, with the Maronite Church insisting that the ruler of Mount Lebanon should be a Maronite from the Shihab family, a proposition rejected by the Druze. The Druze shaykhs saw the restoration of Ottoman sovereignty as the restitution of their old privileges, whereas the Maronite commoners wanted a rupture with the past, and demanded rights of protection and equality, guaranteed by the Tanzimat edits. Intercommunal violence erupted in 1841 Dayr al-Qamar, ushering in what Ussama Makdisi (2000) has called “the age of sectarianism”, followed by more sectarian strife in 1842 and 1845.

Following protracted discussions between European powers, the Ottomans, and the local elites over the reorganization of Mount Lebanon, a joint Ottoman-European decision was reached in January 1843 to divide Mount Lebanon along communal lines. Two sectarian divisions were created, the northern Christian district, under a Maronite district governor (qa’immaqam), and a southern Druze district under a Druze district governor.

The peasant rebellion of 1858 was the most sustained popular mobilization in 19th-century Mount Lebanon (Makdisi 2000). It drew support from poor and landless peasants from the district of Kisrawan, who rose in protest against heavy taxation and mistreatment. A poor harvest in 1858 and an economic downturn in Europe (the collapse of the global silk trade because of the Crimean war) aggravated the economic condition in Mount Lebanon. The Khazins, impoverished, with reduced political power, were imposing harsh taxes and forced labor on their peasants. The unrest started in 1858 in many villages of Kisrawan, where young men held meetings to discuss their grievances against their feudal lords, the Khazin shaykhs. The rebellion began in earnest in January 1859 with the election of Tanyus Shahin (1815-1895), a muleteer and blacksmith, as leader of the movement. He rallied the peasants in the expulsion of the entire Khazin family from their properties, stripping them of their possessions.

The term ‘ammiya does not occur in the sources to refer to the peasant revolts of 1858. This may be explained because the movement was confined to Kisrawan (Havemann 1983). The commoners’ demands in 1858 went beyond fair taxation. They demanded the overturn of the feudal relationship of political, economic, and social subordination that existed between the muqata’ji class and the commoners. In direct reference to Ottoman Imperial reform edicts promulgated in 1839 (The Gulhane Edict) and 1856, they demanded complete equality between the commoners and the noble families. Economically, they asked to repeal customary obligations and payments, abolish forced labor, and more favorable tenancy terms (Havemann 1983). They insisted on electing their representatives and creating a place for themselves within the realm of traditional elite politics. The peasants’ revolts threatened both entrenched privileges of the old muqata’ji class and Muslims’ superior status, as defined by the Shari’a law.

In taking the revolution outside of Kisrawan to the southern districts, Shahin’s movement took a sectarian turn as he assumed a Christian rhetoric of solidarity that was not well received in the mixed southern districts with its Druze landowners (Makdisi 2000). The peasant rebellion ended in sectarian violence between Druze and Maronites which erupted between May-June 1860. The Ottoman peace treaty in July 1860 put an end to the conflict, and the movement was dissolved. A new Règlement of 1861 abolished feudal privileges and created a new system of rule, the Mutasarrifiya of Mount Lebanon, which lasted till 1915 (Akarlı 1993)