Lebanese History Revisionism Thread

[Myso]

As for the first, I wouldn't be surprised at all to be quite honest since our history is always embellished with nonsense added later on by different people. Why is it that the feudal families in Lebanon during the Ottoman times, always have "glorious roots" .. ? Some families claim they are descended from men who lived in the early Islamic period, others claim descend through Ghassanid kings and princes, others claim their ancestors were related to the Nabataeans. It's all a mishmash, now it might have some truth in it but we can't really just verify such claims. How on earth will you be able to verify your relation with a king who lived in the 3rd century CE .. ? It seems you have to go through some mental gymnastics and/or extreme hardship and get real evidence to eventually convince your self of it. Not that it's certainly false, but it's just way too perfect to be true.

Yeah, even my own family claimed noble roots to reach power. It was a common thing back then.

As for the second one, I disagree. Now sure, lots of people moved from modern-day Syria be it Christians or Muslims, and lots followed the Maronite church after their arrival and all, but the bulk of the Maronites were natives who converted upon the arrival of John Maron to Lebanon with his monks, and subsequently the local Christians (or non-Christians) followed their tradition and spread out from the north to mount Lebanon steadily through the ages.

This is the standard Leb Maronite theory.
But records show that (1) Fakhriddine 2 allowed a mass immigration from Syria to Lebanon in the 1600s. To appease Europe at the time as he wanted to win their favor. (2) St Maron himself was Syrian and seems to have had more influence in Syria. Syrian Alewites even curse him in weekly prayers for stealing their converts. While you find little to no references of him from Lebanese groups.

As for the fifth, I do agree to an extent. Phoenician culture started to decline during the advent of the Achaemenid conquest, and later on more during the Hellenic era, and so the traditions passed on since the times of the Phoenicians must be few, not pervasive. Genetically we're very close to them, and continuity with the Bronze Age Canaanites till present is evident through genetics.

What I should have said was that we're not uniquely caananite or Phoenician as Lebanese (genetically speaking) to make it our "Lebanese identity". It's more of a Levantine thing that is not limited to Lebanon. Yes, we are perhaps the closest. But the results of Syrians and Jordanians are impressive as well. And some matching the results of many Lebanese. It's very diluted.

As for the sixth one, I've no idea what to say. I mean, if they had "squinty eyes" then they must've had some East Asian admixture, but it's not found in Shias as evidenced through genetic samples from all Lebanese sects .. What a weird description. Do you have the link to the work?

No, I recall it from faint memory... I didn't read it from an original source but cited in another book. Not sure if it was within "Secret Sects of Syria". I'll have to look for it when I have time and post it here.

 

[Myso]

Btw, I had Arbelletto on ignore. So didn't see his emotional, childish response. The author is Palestinian Christian and says 99% of Leb Druze history is false. So not sure where the Druze bias is that he spotted. It's probably his own nose.

 

[Xynus87]

What I should have said was that we're not uniquely caananite or Phoenician as Lebanese (genetically speaking) to make it our "Lebanese identity". It's more of a Levantine thing that is not limited to Lebanon. Yes, we are perhaps the closest. But the results of Syrians and Jordanians are impressive as well. And some matching the results of many Lebanese. It's very diluted.

I don't know why I didn't respond to this, what you said is 100% true. To add, something I have wanted to highlight, that as Lebanese, our genetic heritage is much more mixed than just "Phoenician". It's certainly true to say we as Lebanese maintain blood from multiple groups that existed within modern-day Lebanon and the surrounding regions. To label ourselves as Phoenician is to ignore a very big chunk of our genetic heritage from other groups in antiquity, Semitic (Amorites, Aramaeans and others besides Canaanites) or non-Semitic (Hurrians, Hittites etc.) and such groups that roamed around in the Levant settling here and there. I don't see how sound it is to make this claim culturally either, because we're not identical culturally. I believe Lebanese, or Levantine, would be correct labels one can go with.

 

[Myso]

I don't know why I didn't respond to this, what you said is 100% true. To add, something I have wanted to highlight, that as Lebanese, our genetic heritage is much more mixed than just "Phoenician". It's certainly true to say we as Lebanese maintain blood from multiple groups that existed within modern-day Lebanon and the surrounding regions. To label ourselves as Phoenician is to ignore a very big chunk of our genetic heritage from other groups in antiquity, Semitic (Amorites, Aramaeans and others besides Canaanites) or non-Semitic (Hurrians, Hittites etc.) and such groups that roamed around in the Levant settling here and there. I don't see how sound it is to make this claim culturally either, because we're not identical culturally. I believe Lebanese, or Levantine, would be correct labels one can go with.

I also noticed a lot of variance among the Caananites themselves. They seem to have had isolated groups and were not uniform. A Sidon Caananite matches close to a Lebanese. But an average Caananite matches close to a Palestinian / Jordanian.

 

[M.jaafar]

6- Shiahs were originally Eastern immigrants.

Before we start, clarify something for me, which Shia do you mean, the Alawites, the Ismailis, or the Twelvers, I will assume you mean the Twelvers, as we are the majority subsect among all the Shia sects.

You are generalizing here, the Shia Muslims, just like the Sunnis, Druze and Christians are blend of people, united under the Islamic sect of Shia Islam, they do not come from only the east, it is important to understand that the levant have been for ages the crossroad of civilizations, every single great civilization that existed in history of mankind have left its mark in the Levant.
From what I have been able to collect through my own researches about this subject, I discovered few things that might be of interest for you:

1. Did you know that South Lebanon before the independence of Lebanon used to be known as the Autonomous region of Jabal Amel, it was always known as Jabal Amel, it also used to be the center of study of Shi'ism before Iran and Iraq for a very long time, many people aspiring to become a well knowledgeable Shia clerk travelled all the way to Jabal Amel.

2. Jabal Amel is named after the Banu Amilah tribe, which is a Yemeni christian tribe, that was forced out of Yemen alongside few other tribes in pre-Islamic times because of a flood caused by the destruction of the Marib Dam, this tribe shares an ancestry with the tribes of Hamadan, Lakhm, and Judham, the Banu Amilah tribe assimilated with the indigenous people but a large portion of their culture remained intact and they kept it, at one point they acted as foederati for the Byzantines against any possible threats from the tribes of the Arabian peninsula and the Persian-allied Lakhmids.

3. Some tribes came during the 'Islamic' conquest.

4. Since Jabal Amel was the center of study of Shi'ism, several people from areas of modern day Iraq and Iran travelled all the way to Jabal Amel and lived there.

5. from the days of the Umayyads all the way to the Ottomans, the Shia of the Levant were subjected to a powerful persecution, whole villages were emptied, whole communities were lost, Shia Muslims had to hide their religious affiliation so they do not get killed, some of them never returned back, some remained Christians, some remained Sunnis, at one point during the Ottoman era, the Shia community of Lebanon was on the verge of extinction had Persia not decided to become a Shia caliphate, the Ottomans used the Druze and Christians whenever they wanted for example Zahle did not always have a large number of Christians, Zahle used to be the capital of the Shia education, the Ottomans used the Christians allied with them to settle in zahle, alongside that, did you know that Tripoli as well, used to be a Shia majority area as well, there is a big possibility that the Sunnis in Tripoli are of Shia origin.

6. At one point Jabal Amel became part of a small short lived kingdom under the leadership of Zahir al Umar during the the time in between the war between the Ottomans and the Mamluks, he was a very tolerant figure that European Christians fled to his kingdom, p.s: 'Israel' stole this figure as its own, and it teaches its people that he is Israeli rather than an Arab.

That is why it's hard to know if the Shia are really of eastern origin only, there was African traces as well among Shia.

 

[Ice Tea]

Before we start, clarify something for me, which Shia do you mean, the Alawites, the Ismailis, or the Twelvers, I will assume you mean the Twelvers, as we are the majority subsect among all the Shia sects.

You are generalizing here, the Shia Muslims, just like the Sunnis, Druze and Christians are blend of people, united under the Islamic sect of Shia Islam, they do not come from only the east, it is important to understand that the levant have been for ages the crossroad of civilizations, every single great civilization that existed in history of mankind have left its mark in the Levant.
From what I have been able to collect through my own researches about this subject, I discovered few things that might be of interest for you:

1. Did you know that South Lebanon before the independence of Lebanon used to be known as the Autonomous region of Jabal Amel, it was always known as Jabal Amel, it also used to be the center of study of Shi'ism before Iran and Iraq for a very long time, many people aspiring to become a well knowledgeable Shia clerk travelled all the way to Jabal Amel.

2. Jabal Amel is named after the Banu Amilah tribe, which is a Yemeni christian tribe, that was forced out of Yemen alongside few other tribes in pre-Islamic times because of a flood caused by the destruction of the Marib Dam, this tribe shares an ancestry with the tribes of Hamadan, Lakhm, and Judham, the Banu Amilah tribe assimilated with the indigenous people but a large portion of their culture remained intact and they kept it, at one point they acted as foederati for the Byzantines against any possible threats from the tribes of the Arabian peninsula and the Persian-allied Lakhmids.

3. Some tribes came during the 'Islamic' conquest.

4. Since Jabal Amel was the center of study of Shi'ism, several people from areas of modern day Iraq and Iran travelled all the way to Jabal Amel and lived there.

5. from the days of the Umayyads all the way to the Ottomans, the Shia of the Levant were subjected to a powerful persecution, whole villages were emptied, whole communities were lost, Shia Muslims had to hide their religious affiliation so they do not get killed, some of them never returned back, some remained Christians, some remained Sunnis, at one point during the Ottoman era, the Shia community of Lebanon was on the verge of extinction had Persia not decided to become a Shia caliphate, the Ottomans used the Druze and Christians whenever they wanted for example Zahle did not always have a large number of Christians, Zahle used to be the capital of the Shia education, the Ottomans used the Christians allied with them to settle in zahle, alongside that, did you know that Tripoli as well, used to be a Shia majority area as well, there is a big possibility that the Sunnis in Tripoli are of Shia origin.

6. At one point Jabal Amel became part of a small short lived kingdom under the leadership of Zahir al Umar during the the time in between the war between the Ottomans and the Mamluks, he was a very tolerant figure that European Christians fled to his kingdom, p.s: 'Israel' stole this figure as its own, and it teaches its people that he is Israeli rather than an Arab.

That is why it's hard to know if the Shia are really of eastern origin only, there was African traces as well among Shia.

Zahle was literally FOUNDED by Christians.

 

[SAVO]

Before we start, clarify something for me, which Shia do you mean, the Alawites, the Ismailis, or the Twelvers, I will assume you mean the Twelvers, as we are the majority subsect among all the Shia sects.

You are generalizing here, the Shia Muslims, just like the Sunnis, Druze and Christians are blend of people, united under the Islamic sect of Shia Islam, they do not come from only the east, it is important to understand that the levant have been for ages the crossroad of civilizations, every single great civilization that existed in history of mankind have left its mark in the Levant.
From what I have been able to collect through my own researches about this subject, I discovered few things that might be of interest for you:

1. Did you know that South Lebanon before the independence of Lebanon used to be known as the Autonomous region of Jabal Amel, it was always known as Jabal Amel, it also used to be the center of study of Shi'ism before Iran and Iraq for a very long time, many people aspiring to become a well knowledgeable Shia clerk travelled all the way to Jabal Amel.

2. Jabal Amel is named after the Banu Amilah tribe, which is a Yemeni christian tribe, that was forced out of Yemen alongside few other tribes in pre-Islamic times because of a flood caused by the destruction of the Marib Dam, this tribe shares an ancestry with the tribes of Hamadan, Lakhm, and Judham, the Banu Amilah tribe assimilated with the indigenous people but a large portion of their culture remained intact and they kept it, at one point they acted as foederati for the Byzantines against any possible threats from the tribes of the Arabian peninsula and the Persian-allied Lakhmids.

3. Some tribes came during the 'Islamic' conquest.

4. Since Jabal Amel was the center of study of Shi'ism, several people from areas of modern day Iraq and Iran travelled all the way to Jabal Amel and lived there.

5. from the days of the Umayyads all the way to the Ottomans, the Shia of the Levant were subjected to a powerful persecution, whole villages were emptied, whole communities were lost, Shia Muslims had to hide their religious affiliation so they do not get killed, some of them never returned back, some remained Christians, some remained Sunnis, at one point during the Ottoman era, the Shia community of Lebanon was on the verge of extinction had Persia not decided to become a Shia caliphate, the Ottomans used the Druze and Christians whenever they wanted for example Zahle did not always have a large number of Christians, Zahle used to be the capital of the Shia education, the Ottomans used the Christians allied with them to settle in zahle, alongside that, did you know that Tripoli as well, used to be a Shia majority area as well, there is a big possibility that the Sunnis in Tripoli are of Shia origin.

6. At one point Jabal Amel became part of a small short lived kingdom under the leadership of Zahir al Umar during the the time in between the war between the Ottomans and the Mamluks, he was a very tolerant figure that European Christians fled to his kingdom, p.s: 'Israel' stole this figure as its own, and it teaches its people that he is Israeli rather than an Arab.

That is why it's hard to know if the Shia are really of eastern origin only, there was African traces as well among Shia.

Mr jaafar,

some of what you say is true ... small part-.

about the rest ,,would you link the source of your claims ?

 

[Myso]

Before we start, clarify something for me, which Shia do you mean, the Alawites, the Ismailis, or the Twelvers, I will assume you mean the Twelvers, as we are the majority subsect among all the Shia sects.

You are generalizing here, the Shia Muslims, just like the Sunnis, Druze and Christians are blend of people, united under the Islamic sect of Shia Islam, they do not come from only the east, it is important to understand that the levant have been for ages the crossroad of civilizations, every single great civilization that existed in history of mankind have left its mark in the Levant.
From what I have been able to collect through my own researches about this subject, I discovered few things that might be of interest for you:

1. Did you know that South Lebanon before the independence of Lebanon used to be known as the Autonomous region of Jabal Amel, it was always known as Jabal Amel, it also used to be the center of study of Shi'ism before Iran and Iraq for a very long time, many people aspiring to become a well knowledgeable Shia clerk travelled all the way to Jabal Amel.

2. Jabal Amel is named after the Banu Amilah tribe, which is a Yemeni christian tribe, that was forced out of Yemen alongside few other tribes in pre-Islamic times because of a flood caused by the destruction of the Marib Dam, this tribe shares an ancestry with the tribes of Hamadan, Lakhm, and Judham, the Banu Amilah tribe assimilated with the indigenous people but a large portion of their culture remained intact and they kept it, at one point they acted as foederati for the Byzantines against any possible threats from the tribes of the Arabian peninsula and the Persian-allied Lakhmids.

3. Some tribes came during the 'Islamic' conquest.

4. Since Jabal Amel was the center of study of Shi'ism, several people from areas of modern day Iraq and Iran travelled all the way to Jabal Amel and lived there.

5. from the days of the Umayyads all the way to the Ottomans, the Shia of the Levant were subjected to a powerful persecution, whole villages were emptied, whole communities were lost, Shia Muslims had to hide their religious affiliation so they do not get killed, some of them never returned back, some remained Christians, some remained Sunnis, at one point during the Ottoman era, the Shia community of Lebanon was on the verge of extinction had Persia not decided to become a Shia caliphate, the Ottomans used the Druze and Christians whenever they wanted for example Zahle did not always have a large number of Christians, Zahle used to be the capital of the Shia education, the Ottomans used the Christians allied with them to settle in zahle, alongside that, did you know that Tripoli as well, used to be a Shia majority area as well, there is a big possibility that the Sunnis in Tripoli are of Shia origin.

6. At one point Jabal Amel became part of a small short lived kingdom under the leadership of Zahir al Umar during the the time in between the war between the Ottomans and the Mamluks, he was a very tolerant figure that European Christians fled to his kingdom, p.s: 'Israel' stole this figure as its own, and it teaches its people that he is Israeli rather than an Arab.

That is why it's hard to know if the Shia are really of eastern origin only, there was African traces as well among Shia.

That's mostly true. Thanks for your contribution. I think there's a lack of proper genetic study of Lebanese Shiah. Results I compared personally seem to be more matching of the Lebanese Druze.

 

[M.jaafar]

Mr jaafar,

some of what you say is true ... small part-.

about the rest ,,would you link the source of your claims ?

Can you point which ones,I will gladly post links.

 

[M.jaafar]

That's mostly true. Thanks for your contribution. I think there's a lack of proper genetic study of Lebanese Shia. Results I compared personally seem to be more matching of the Lebanese Druze.

There is a lack of everything when it comes to studying the Shia Muslims, our whole history, and unique culture have been lumped to nothing but
1.Shia are those who support Ali
2.Makes a large leep in history and reach the Safavid conversion of Persia from Sunni to Shia
3. Makes another large leep in history to the Iranian revolution and Hezbollah.

simplifying our whole history into these three events, which is bad, does not show our whole history, most modern day history books talk excessively about Sunnis, Druze, Christians, Jews but when it comes to the Shia, we aren't there.

The Druze are originally Shia, although the Druze consider themselves an Ethno-religious group, the Druze split from the Ismaili Shia(Sometimes called Seveners), before the battle of karbala there was no Shia Twelvers in the Levant, there was a lot of Shia groups, after the Battle of Karbala and its aftermath which led to Imam Zayn al-Abidin to pass through modern day Baalbek, that is when a group of Shia taught by him became known as Shia Twelvers, do you know that this is not our real name, our real name is Shia Uthmanis(Twelvers).

 

[M.jaafar]

Zahle was literally FOUNDED by Christians.

I am sorry, not Zahle, I do not know why I wrote Zahle instead of Jezzine, it does not seem that I can edit posts older than 24 hours.
and did you not read that Banu Amilah was a Christian Yemeni tribe that later on became Muslim, and then Shia Muslim.

 

[SAVO]

There is a lack of everything when it comes to studying the Shia Muslims, our whole history, and unique culture have been lumped to nothing but
1.Shia are those who support Ali
2.Makes a large leep in history and reach the Safavid conversion of Persia from Sunni to Shia
3. Makes another large leep in history to the Iranian revolution and Hezbollah.

simplifying our whole history into these three events, which is bad, does not show our whole history, most modern day history books talk excessively about Sunnis, Druze, Christians, Jews but when it comes to the Shia, we aren't there.

The Druze are originally Shia, although the Druze consider themselves an Ethno-religious group, the Druze split from the Ismaili Shia(Sometimes called Seveners), before the battle of karbala there was no Shia Twelvers in the Levant, there was a lot of Shia groups, after the Battle of Karbala and its aftermath which led to Imam Zayn al-Abidin to pass through modern day Baalbek, that is when a group of Shia taught by him became known as Shia Twelvers, do you know that this is not our real name, our real name is Shia Uthmanis(Twelvers).

Let me sum it up to you.
You've been posting since 2 day about your information regarding shia glorious history..and their ancient roots ( even before islam ) and you claim most of lebanon was shia.. and shia had their independent political entity etc and at the end..you say : " ahhh there is no much information about shia history and to say this "
1.Shia are those who support Ali
2.Makes a large leep in history and reach the Safavid conversion of Persia from Sunni to Shia
3. Makes another large leep in history to the Iranian revolution and Hezbollah..." ( cit. From your own post ) ..

There is some serious problems about your historical theory of shia ..dont you think so ?

 

[SAVO]

I am sorry, not Zahle, I do not know why I wrote Zahle instead of Jezzine, it does not seem that I can edit posts older than 24 hours.
and did you not read that Banu Amilah was a Christian Yemeni tribe that later on became Muslim, and then Shia Muslim.

now i will tell you my theory about shia ..

from maomet weed part in the grotto of hiraa with his friends till the battle of karbala .. there was no shia and sunni .
in karbala battle , islam was divided into 2 camps after 2 candidate on the throne of khilafa ... one won and one lost..
what happen after is usual in similar stories , instead to play the role " solta " and "mou3arada " like in any democracy , they went one after exterminating the other .. the minor part were the shia so were persecuted all over the khilafa ..
and they had to flee or emigrate like do any persecuted community ..
happened that there is a country called lebanon , famous by its mountains that give refuge to persecuted people .. so they naturally fled to the mountains of south lebanon .

the byzantine empire , back then , who was at war with the islamic khilafa ( ommayade and abbasside ) , gave support to the shia opposition group ( the grand father of soros was financing ong in south lebanon back then) and supported the established of independent shia state to rebel against the khilafa .

so prove me wrong ...

 

[Xynus87]

Before we start, clarify something for me, which Shia do you mean, the Alawites, the Ismailis, or the Twelvers, I will assume you mean the Twelvers, as we are the majority subsect among all the Shia sects.

You are generalizing here, the Shia Muslims, just like the Sunnis, Druze and Christians are blend of people, united under the Islamic sect of Shia Islam, they do not come from only the east, it is important to understand that the levant have been for ages the crossroad of civilizations, every single great civilization that existed in history of mankind have left its mark in the Levant.
From what I have been able to collect through my own researches about this subject, I discovered few things that might be of interest for you:

1. Did you know that South Lebanon before the independence of Lebanon used to be known as the Autonomous region of Jabal Amel, it was always known as Jabal Amel, it also used to be the center of study of Shi'ism before Iran and Iraq for a very long time, many people aspiring to become a well knowledgeable Shia clerk travelled all the way to Jabal Amel.

2. Jabal Amel is named after the Banu Amilah tribe, which is a Yemeni christian tribe, that was forced out of Yemen alongside few other tribes in pre-Islamic times because of a flood caused by the destruction of the Marib Dam, this tribe shares an ancestry with the tribes of Hamadan, Lakhm, and Judham, the Banu Amilah tribe assimilated with the indigenous people but a large portion of their culture remained intact and they kept it, at one point they acted as foederati for the Byzantines against any possible threats from the tribes of the Arabian peninsula and the Persian-allied Lakhmids.

3. Some tribes came during the 'Islamic' conquest.

4. Since Jabal Amel was the center of study of Shi'ism, several people from areas of modern day Iraq and Iran travelled all the way to Jabal Amel and lived there.

5. from the days of the Umayyads all the way to the Ottomans, the Shia of the Levant were subjected to a powerful persecution, whole villages were emptied, whole communities were lost, Shia Muslims had to hide their religious affiliation so they do not get killed, some of them never returned back, some remained Christians, some remained Sunnis, at one point during the Ottoman era, the Shia community of Lebanon was on the verge of extinction had Persia not decided to become a Shia caliphate, the Ottomans used the Druze and Christians whenever they wanted for example Zahle did not always have a large number of Christians, Zahle used to be the capital of the Shia education, the Ottomans used the Christians allied with them to settle in zahle, alongside that, did you know that Tripoli as well, used to be a Shia majority area as well, there is a big possibility that the Sunnis in Tripoli are of Shia origin.

6. At one point Jabal Amel became part of a small short lived kingdom under the leadership of Zahir al Umar during the the time in between the war between the Ottomans and the Mamluks, he was a very tolerant figure that European Christians fled to his kingdom, p.s: 'Israel' stole this figure as its own, and it teaches its people that he is Israeli rather than an Arab.

That is why it's hard to know if the Shia are really of eastern origin only, there was African traces as well among Shia.

Shias are overwhelmingly, and by that I mean 95-100%, of native Levantine stock. Also, I believe you mean Karak, which is close to Zahle, not Zahle. Karak was indeed a major city for Shiite scholars between the 15th and 18th centuries, even later. Jizzine was also, as you mentioned, an important city, it was the major town in the very southern extremities of Mount Lebanon to receive the Shiite influx from Keserwan, after 1305 and even until the 16th century. It became probably the most important city for religious education in all of Lebanon. However the population at Jizzine was largely replaced by the incoming Christians in 17th and 18th centuries from the north. I believe there was some Druze effect there too but I'm not too sure if it was before or after Shiites sought refuge there.

 

[Xynus87]

now i will tell you my theory about shia ..

from maomet weed part in the grotto of hiraa with his friends till the battle of karbala .. there was no shia and sunni .
in karbala battle , islam was divided into 2 camps after 2 candidate on the throne of khilafa ... one won and one lost..
what happen after is usual in similar stories , instead to play the role " solta " and "mou3arada " like in any democracy , they went one after exterminating the other .. the minor part were the shia so were persecuted all over the khilafa ..
and they had to flee or emigrate like do any persecuted community ..
happened that there is a country called lebanon , famous by its mountains that give refuge to persecuted people .. so they naturally fled to the mountains of south lebanon .

the byzantine empire , back then , who was at war with the islamic khilafa ( ommayade and abbasside ) , gave support to the shia opposition group ( the grand father of soros was financing ong in south lebanon back then) and supported the established of independent shia state to rebel against the khilafa .

so prove me wrong ...

The origins of Shi'ism in modern-day Lebanon are largely unknown. As in, no one is yet certain as to what caused Shiism to prosper in this part of the Levant. However, it was most likely a mixed process. Here's some theories that I have read, in addition to the critique I have wrote: (Also, quick note: modern Lebanon did not exist in the 10th and 11th centuries, or any time before 1920)
The first hypothesis: Shiism was the result of a migration of large Arab tribal Shiite groups, mostly Iraq and Iran, seeking refuge in modern-day Lebanon that settled here and producing what now we call Lebanese Shiites.
Critique: Of course, there is absolutely no evidence for this, both from the historical or genetic aspects. Such a large migration would have been recorded in chronology and by the historians of the times.

The second hypothesis: The introduction of Shiism in Lebanon was a result of influence from other Shiites. There's evidence of the existence of Yemenite & Persian garrisons, Yemenites being from tribes such as Hamadan همدان (which was a largely Shiite tribe) on modern Lebanese territory, and so this suggests that the presence of these peoples implies Shiism spread through foreign influence.
Critique: The problem with this theory is that, while it somehow provides an answer for Lebanese Shiites, it does not answer as to the presence of Shiites in other parts of the region such as in Syria.

The third hypothesis: Shiism in Lebanon started to spread after the Fatimid conquest of the Levant in the early 11th century (~1000 AD) as the Ismaili version of Shia Islam, and the conversion to Twelver Islam happened largely slightly before the start of the crusades when the Fatimids started to crumble and with the Nusayris kicked out of Aleppo and northern Syria in 1070. As evidence for this theory, we can observe how the early Shiite scholars in Lebanon went to study outside of Lebanon, such as Shahid Awwal who studied in Hilla in the 1300s. This implies Twelver Seminaries were non-existent. This Ismaili presence was in all cities on the coast and deep to mainland northern Palestine such as in cities of Safed, Tiberias and Jerusalem, where the inhabitants were mainly Shiites according to Nasir ad-Din Khusrow who visited it in 1040 AD. The crumbling of the Fatimids would have prompted the Ismailis at that area to convert to a sect that was less involved in political matters and successions, at that time, such as Twelver Shia Islam, or to Sunni Islam. That is one of the reasons.

I favour the third hypothesis but there's some things I've been reconsidering.

 

[SAVO]

I am sorry, not Zahle, I do not know why I wrote Zahle instead of Jezzine, it does not seem that I can edit posts older than 24 hours.
and did you not read that Banu Amilah was a Christian Yemeni tribe that later on became Muslim, and then Shia Muslim.

too late dude ..
hizballa guys followed you and went on street to reclaim zahle as shia ..

 

[M.jaafar]

You've been posting since 2 day about your information regarding shia glorious history..and their ancient roots ( even before islam )

Is there a problem with it, talking about a history not usually discussed.

you claim most of lebanon was shia..

How did you reach this conclusion, because I never claimed that most of Lebanon was Shia, what I said is that specific areas had a Shia majority, that simply vanished.
Tripoli for example, for a very long time like 80 years, have been the capital of the kingdom of Banu Amar, till they lost it after the crusade invasion.

and shia had their independent political entity etc and at the end..you say : " ahhh there is no much information about shia history and to say this "

I think you mistook what I meant by: " There is a lack of everything when it comes to studying the Shia Muslims", the resources are found, the history and events are recorded, it's just that nobody ever made an effort to collect all the information together and study them and then place them in modern day history books that are read by thousands of people on the globe, it's always talking about Sunnis, Christians and Jews, no offense.

from maomet weed part in the grotto of hiraa with his friends till the battle of karbala

I don't really understand what do you mean by this sentence, what is a maomet weed.

islam was divided into 2 camps after 2 candidate on the throne of khilafa ... one won and one lost..
what happen after is usual in similar stories , instead to play the role " solta " and "mou3arada " like in any democracy , they went one after exterminating the other .. the minor part were the shia so were persecuted all over the khilafa ..

I disagree with your assessment, you see, during the era of the first 3 caliphs there was no problems, there is a misconception being spread about the Muslims during that specific era, and it's joined by oblivious Muslims as well to make matters even worse.
1. There was no candidates, all the people that would have voted in favor of Imam Ali were not even present because they were busy saying their last farewells to Prophet Mohammad, this ain't no democratic process, people who proposed that prophet Mohammad household should be present were shrugged aside.
2. Imam Ali instructed his people to accept the situation because he did not want to start a civil war, he did not want to be the one to destroy what Prophet Mohammad has built, you understand the weight that was put on Imam Ali shoulder, this was his test from God, he could have started a civil war, and trust me when I say Imam Ali can take back the throne, but at what price, he will have to kill the Sahaba that did not back him, he will have to kill other Muslims, alongside the fact that powerful kingdoms still existed that are waiting for anything that would happen in the Muslim world to get in.
3. The story about how the Shia and Sunnis exterminated each other as soon as the first caliph was picked is an exaggeration, it never happened, there was no Sunnis in that time they were referred to as the other Muslims that did not vote for Imam Ali, and the term Shia referred to Shia of Ali.
4. the Shia and Proto-Sunnis would have good relations under the era of the first 2 caliphs and for sometime the 3rd, the problems started with the assassination of Uthman, and the rise of the Ummayads who were obsessed with power to the point where they waged wars against other Muslims, and the 4th caliph, Imam Ali army had Sunnis, and Shia.
5. with the rise of the Umayyads the first dynasty, the first attempt at exploiting Islam for political benefits started, the Umayyads created their own religious corp that made the Umayyads look as if they were the purest Muslims, the manifestation of Islam, they would spread among the Muslims that not following the Umayyads amounts to a sin, this religious corp would wage wars against other Muslims have the Umayyads wish so, by using this religious authority to spread propaganda that the other group is not a real Muslim, and from the era of the Umayyads all the way to the ottomans, it was always the same thing

So, the actual problem started because of the Umayyads, the so called Sunni-Shia fight is not really an old 1400 years fight, it's a recent one.

and they had to flee or emigrate like do any persecuted community ..

You are partially correct, but, not all the Shia had to flee, and certainly the Ummayads only banished the leaders of the Shia, this is how old empires worked, the Romans did this to the Jerusalem Jews, they banished the Jewish elite only to several parts in the Roman empire that did not speak hebrew, to severe the ties between them and their followers, the Shia of the Levant for example, aren't all emigrants because of Persecution, parts of the Shia community are indigenous people, or people that came to the Levant even way before Islam.

the byzantine empire , back then , who was at war with the islamic khilafa ( ommayade and abbasside ) , gave support to the shia opposition group ( the grand father of soros was financing ong in south lebanon back then) and supported the established of independent shia state to rebel against the khilafa .

Wrong, this is a lie, created by the Umayyads to justify killing the Shia, accusing the Shia of all the problems was a common theme by the Umayyads, a theme that seems to have never died:
1. Wene the Crusaders invaded, extremist Sunnis accused the Shia of the levant of conspiring with the crusaders, despite the fact that the Shia Muslims did fight against the crusaders.
2. Wene the mongol hordes invaded, once again the Shia Muslims were accused of being the reason why the 'Muslim' armies failed, because SHia conspired with the mongols.

the Shia Muslims were the scapegoat, a person they can accuse for their failures, the Shia Muslims did not collaborate with the byzantine empire against the Umayyads, the Umayyads were disposed by the Abbasids who were formed in majority of Non-Arab Sunnis, Egyptian Sunnis, Shia Muslims, the Abbasids used the battle of Karbala as a tool to get rid of the Umayyads.

too late dude ..
hizballa guys followed you and went on street to reclaim zahle as shia ..

The problem with our Lebanese society is that Generalization is running rampant, if a person from a group, political party, community, religious creed or family name you hate commits a crime, or something bad, the whole group is blamed, we need to get rid of this rotten mentality, I myself have been a victim of generalization based on my family name, in my 2nd year in the university there was this girl that hated me because according to her 'Jaafar clan kills Lebanese army, Jaafar clan do drugs.......' despite the fact that I am not even from Baalbek, I am from the far South, now haters gonna hate, I would not care, if she did not cut me off every time I was speaking, waits till its my time to present my project and then claims she has to leave.

Nobody said that everyone that supports Hezbollah is an angel, there is idiots that support Hezbollah, and these people in the video are the idiots, the Non-educated, the fools, these people are a problem that have existed in many political parties, all political parties, militias, militaries, and any form of an alliance have the Good, the idiot, the Bad and the Ugly, these idiots have always been bad news for the good Hezbollah supporters, they are looked down upon even among the other Hezbollah supporters, the educated ones, here In Lebanon we have a problem, if a Shia individual commits a crime, he is automatically accused of being a Hezbollah member, no matter if it's true or false, this is a very big problem, if a Hezbollah member does this, they can punish him, but if a Hezbollah supporter does this, they do not have power on him, they cannot do anything, because they are not officially members of Hezbollah, A Hezbollah supporter =/= A Hezbollah member.

 

[Xynus87]

According to the 1932 consensus on Wikipedia, Shias formed only 40,000 out of 791,000 Lebanese in the consensus? Then in 1956 the numbers apparently became 90,605. However, from other sources, I find numbers closer to 160,000 in 1932. This is odd.