Shiia keserwan, Myth or Reality

Iron Maiden

Iron Maiden

Paragon of Bacon
Orange Room Supporter
dear all, we know fridays are hard and digressing into side subjects is quite tempting, but please try to stick to the subject at hand.

Blessings from the god emperor

 
  • Advertisement
  • JB81

    JB81

    Legendary Member
    Byzantine emperors are European Christians. We're talking about Lebanese Christians. You're reaching.
    Even for the most part, Byzantine Emperors were not hostile to other Christians under their rule.
    It happened that a couple of them adopted the monophysites belief, killed couple hundred Christians here and there... But as usual, killing done by Christians are always exaggerated... All the said killings are not equal to one day of Mamluks persecutions towards the Maronites
     
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    When I say native, I mean "born in." Christianity was born in the Levant, while Islam was born in the Arabian peninsula.



    Those were horrible and inexcusable events. Without excusing them, let's not forget that they were a response to Palestinians committing such massacres against Maronite villages.

    The Muslims of the country had united with the Palestinian refugees, and the Christians were being persecuted in their own country, and feared for their survival.

    Even in this horrible example, it is not the Maronites who set out to exterminate anyone.



    Well...it is both. People are making both claims: that Keserwan originally had a Shia identity, and that the Maronites persecuted the Shia out of Mount Lebanon.



    I started this thread in response to both claims above, and I maintain that it's a false narrative.



    The presence of a Shia emirate in Mount Lebanon does not preclude the prior presence of Maronites in that region.

    So let's recap:

    A narrative is often told of the Shia preceding Maronites in the Mount Lebanon region, and being persecuted out of the region by Maronite newcomers.

    There are two claims here, and there needs to be evidence presented for both.

    - Can the proponents of this narrative prove that no Maronites were in Mount Lebanon prior to the Shia?

    - Did Maronites persecute the Shia out of Mount Lebanon?

    So far, neither claim has been proven. On the contrary, the evidence seems to suggest that both claims are either false, exagerrated, or incomplete.
    From what I understand, no one is saying there were no Maronites. What is being said is that Keserwan was mainly Shia unlike today. Same with Tripoli.

    No one is saying the Maronites drove out the Shia. But the Maronites were complicit. They, in other words worked with the Sunnis, knowing well the Sunni mamluks were oppressors and slaughtering and cleansing the Shia from the land.

    Replace the mamluks with Israel and keserwan with jnoub, the same could have played out with the SLA.

    What is actually very sad and funny at the same time is the fact that today Lebanese Christians whine and cry that they have been oppressed and persecuted by Sunni Muslim caliphate rule. But here we have them conniving with Sunnis to cleanse out another community. Whenever Christians cry of oppression, this should be brought up to rub on their faces. Maronites had no problem with Sunni oppression in this case, so far it wasn't Maronites who were the target.
     
    Last edited:
    Rafidi

    Rafidi

    Legendary Member
    Intolerance of the christian church is nothing in comparison to your Islamic rats. I can't believe I am even comparing the two. Go look at your islamic conquest before pointing fingers at the church. The whole islamic religion was based on the sword.
    But you connived with your conquerors to drive out the Shia. That makes you the same if not worse than your oppressors.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    From what I understand, no one is saying there were no Maronites. What is being said is that Keserwan was mainly Shia unlike today. Same with Tripoli.

    No one is saying the Maronites drove out the Shia. But the Maronites were complicit. They, in order words worked with the Sunnis, knowing well the Sunni mamluks were oppressors and slaughtering and cleansing the Shia from the land.

    Replace the mamluks with Israel and keserwan with jnoub, the same could have played out with the SLA.
    there you go, proof from within historical records that the Maronites were very well established in Kesrwan prior to the mameluk's invasion.

    Towards the end of the 13th century the Mamelukes of Egypt began to gain the upper hand in the eastern Mediterranean. The crusaders in retreat found refuge among the Maronites in Lebanon. While the Franks tried to hold the line there, they were defeated by the Sultan’s troops. In 1267 upper Lebanon was destroyed. Many captives were beheaded, trees were cut and the churches were destroyed. From 1289 to 1291 the whole of the Lebanese coast fell to the invaders. The once flourishing cities of the Mediterranean went up in flames as the Moslems took their vengeance on the Christians. According to the Historian Theodore of Hama, even in Kisrawan, not a monastery, church or fort was saved from destruction. The last Crusader fortress, St. John of Acre, fell shortly after Beyrouth in 1291. A good number of Maronites grouped around their Patriarch and established at Hadeth a center of resistance. But the Patriarch himself was soon captured. The loss of the Latin states caused the conquered to look to the island of Cyprus, acquired in 1192 by Guy de Lusignan. Many Maronites followed the movement of immigration to Cyprus. They chose to live in the higher elevations of the island where they preserved their culture and their customs. We know that there was a Maronite bishop in Cyprus as early as 1340. The Maronite immigration also extended to Rhodes. The period of the Crusades marks an important milestone in the history of the Maronites. The communication with the West from this time on were to increase and become solidified. Many religious orders were to come to Lebanon in succeeding centuries and establish institutions and schools. European culture would also be transmitted. Latinization of the Maronite rite, which had its beginnings with the Crusades, was to continue with the Synod of Mount Lebanon in 1736. Even politically, the Maronites looked for aid and support more often than not from the countries of Europe, especially France.​
    At this time the Maronites, massed in the northern part of Lebanon, belonged politically to the rule of Tripoli. However, they continued to be governed directly by their mouqaddamin. The role of the mouqaddamin consisted principally in raising the tax. They were subcollectors under the Moslem collector appointed by the sultan. About 1655 the government of a significant Maronite district, that of Besharri, was conferred on the Metouali or Shiite family of Hamada, which resulted in a number of Maronites fleeing to the south of Nahr Ibrahim and to the villages of the coast. The first Hamada governors were just and good administrators, but their successors adopted an entirely opposites direction, and imposed much oppression. Many Maronites were forced to emigrate and a majority of them took refuge in the district of Kesrawan.

    trouble is that you have no historical facts to back your claims, you might want them to be true, but you can rest assured they are not.
     
    CitizenOfTheRepublic

    CitizenOfTheRepublic

    Legendary Member
    I remember reading somewhere that the Mameluk period was also one of the harshest in terms of forced conversion. Don't want to drift too much out of topic but can anyone corroborate this. Since we're talking about how kind and loving they were to everyone in Lebanon.
     
    Genius

    Genius

    Legendary Member
    there you go, proof from within historical records that the Maronites were very well established in Kesrwan prior to the mameluk's invasion.

    Towards the end of the 13th century the Mamelukes of Egypt began to gain the upper hand in the eastern Mediterranean. The crusaders in retreat found refuge among the Maronites in Lebanon. While the Franks tried to hold the line there, they were defeated by the Sultan’s troops. In 1267 upper Lebanon was destroyed. Many captives were beheaded, trees were cut and the churches were destroyed. From 1289 to 1291 the whole of the Lebanese coast fell to the invaders. The once flourishing cities of the Mediterranean went up in flames as the Moslems took their vengeance on the Christians. According to the Historian Theodore of Hama, even in Kisrawan, not a monastery, church or fort was saved from destruction. The last Crusader fortress, St. John of Acre, fell shortly after Beyrouth in 1291. A good number of Maronites grouped around their Patriarch and established at Hadeth a center of resistance. But the Patriarch himself was soon captured. The loss of the Latin states caused the conquered to look to the island of Cyprus, acquired in 1192 by Guy de Lusignan. Many Maronites followed the movement of immigration to Cyprus. They chose to live in the higher elevations of the island where they preserved their culture and their customs. We know that there was a Maronite bishop in Cyprus as early as 1340. The Maronite immigration also extended to Rhodes. The period of the Crusades marks an important milestone in the history of the Maronites. The communication with the West from this time on were to increase and become solidified. Many religious orders were to come to Lebanon in succeeding centuries and establish institutions and schools. European culture would also be transmitted. Latinization of the Maronite rite, which had its beginnings with the Crusades, was to continue with the Synod of Mount Lebanon in 1736. Even politically, the Maronites looked for aid and support more often than not from the countries of Europe, especially France.​
    At this time the Maronites, massed in the northern part of Lebanon, belonged politically to the rule of Tripoli. However, they continued to be governed directly by their mouqaddamin. The role of the mouqaddamin consisted principally in raising the tax. They were subcollectors under the Moslem collector appointed by the sultan. About 1655 the government of a significant Maronite district, that of Besharri, was conferred on the Metouali or Shiite family of Hamada, which resulted in a number of Maronites fleeing to the south of Nahr Ibrahim and to the villages of the coast. The first Hamada governors were just and good administrators, but their successors adopted an entirely opposites direction, and imposed much oppression. Many Maronites were forced to emigrate and a majority of them took refuge in the district of Kesrawan.

    trouble is that you have no historical facts to back your claims, you might want them to be true, but you can rest assured they are not.
    There are more and more questionable periods in history that are buried under the carpets. History in lebanon is a lie, written very similar to the govt formation today.

    The shias conspired with the west even more than the maronites. Aside from the crusaders, When bonaparte came to power, the shias in lebanon were his biggest ally, while the maronite went madly against him. Same with communism. Now Iran. History repeats itself, many communities never believed and still do not believe in lebanon.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    There are more and more questionable periods in history that are buried under the carpets. History in lebanon is a lie, written very similar to the govt formation today.

    The shias conspired with the west even more than the maronites. Aside from the crusaders, When bonaparte came to power, the shias in lebanon were his biggest ally, while the maronite went madly against him. Same with communism. Now Iran. History repeats itself, many communities never believed and still do not believe in lebanon.
    it suffices to note that we still did not incorporate our civil war into our history books because each party wants to dictate its own version of the event to realize all the BS that may have been injected across the ages..
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    I remember reading somewhere that the Mameluk period was also one of the harshest in terms of forced conversion. Don't want to drift too much out of topic but can anyone corroborate this. Since we're talking about how kind and loving they were to everyone in Lebanon.
    In a report sent from Qannoubin to the Holy Father in 1475 by the Papal legate, Brother Alexander of Arioste states: “In the midst of this nation [Maronite] live the Saracens . . . Their tyranny knows no rest; also, in parts of Lebanon, there is only desolation, provoking tears. Under the pretext of raising a certain tribute that they call gelia, they [the agents of the authority] despoil the poor mountain people of all that they have; afterwards, they beat them with rods, inflicting all sorts of torments to extort from them what they do not have. Against these vexations, there is only one recourse possible, apostasy. Many might have fallen if it had not been for the charity of their pious Patriarch [Peter ibn Hassan] who came to their aid. Dismayed at the peril to the souls of his sheep, he gave over all the revenues of his churches to satisfy the greed of the tyrants. The door of the patriarchal monastery was walled up; sometimes he was obliged to hide in caves hollowed out of the earth.

    source
     
    Indie

    Indie

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    From what I understand, no one is saying there were no Maronites. What is being said is that Keserwan was mainly Shia unlike today. Same with Tripoli.

    No one is saying the Maronites drove out the Shia. But the Maronites were complicit. They, in other words worked with the Sunnis, knowing well the Sunni mamluks were oppressors and slaughtering and cleansing the Shia from the land.

    Replace the mamluks with Israel and keserwan with jnoub, the same could have played out with the SLA.

    What is actually very sad and funny at the same time is the fact that today Lebanese Christians whine and cry that they have been oppressed and persecuted by Sunni Muslim caliphate rule. But here we have them conniving with Sunnis to cleanse out another community. Whenever Christians cry of oppression, this should be brought up to rub on their faces. Maronites had no problem with Sunni oppression in this case, so far it wasn't Maronites who were the target.
    Maronites did not connive with Sunnis against the Shia. Maronites were colonized by the Muslim invaders from Arabia and had to follow their rules or die.

    This is what your prophet taught, remember? Convert, pay jizya and follow our orders, or die.

    If two Muslim groups had conflict between each other, it was not up to the Maronites to take a side in that conflict.

    Funny how history repeats itself: today, you have President Aoun and FPM willing to work with, both, the Sunni and the Shia, but the two Muslim sects are the ones fighting each other and refusing to cooperate...while blaming Christians for their misfortunes.
     
    The_FPMer

    The_FPMer

    Active Member
    In a report sent from Qannoubin to the Holy Father in 1475 by the Papal legate, Brother Alexander of Arioste states: “In the midst of this nation [Maronite] live the Saracens . . . Their tyranny knows no rest; also, in parts of Lebanon, there is only desolation, provoking tears. Under the pretext of raising a certain tribute that they call gelia, they [the agents of the authority] despoil the poor mountain people of all that they have; afterwards, they beat them with rods, inflicting all sorts of torments to extort from them what they do not have. Against these vexations, there is only one recourse possible, apostasy. Many might have fallen if it had not been for the charity of their pious Patriarch [Peter ibn Hassan] who came to their aid. Dismayed at the peril to the souls of his sheep, he gave over all the revenues of his churches to satisfy the greed of the tyrants. The door of the patriarchal monastery was walled up; sometimes he was obliged to hide in caves hollowed out of the earth.

    source
    Some things never change.
     
    light-in-dark

    light-in-dark

    Legendary Member
    dear all, we know fridays are hard and digressing into side subjects is quite tempting, but please try to stick to the subject at hand.

    Blessings from the god emperor

    Are you from the Nuvo ordo seclorum
    Followers. It seems like that lol hereticus. Bi2sa al massir
     
    Ice Tea

    Ice Tea

    Active Member
    there you go, proof from within historical records that the Maronites were very well established in Kesrwan prior to the mameluk's invasion.

    Towards the end of the 13th century the Mamelukes of Egypt began to gain the upper hand in the eastern Mediterranean. The crusaders in retreat found refuge among the Maronites in Lebanon. While the Franks tried to hold the line there, they were defeated by the Sultan’s troops. In 1267 upper Lebanon was destroyed. Many captives were beheaded, trees were cut and the churches were destroyed. From 1289 to 1291 the whole of the Lebanese coast fell to the invaders. The once flourishing cities of the Mediterranean went up in flames as the Moslems took their vengeance on the Christians. According to the Historian Theodore of Hama, even in Kisrawan, not a monastery, church or fort was saved from destruction. The last Crusader fortress, St. John of Acre, fell shortly after Beyrouth in 1291. A good number of Maronites grouped around their Patriarch and established at Hadeth a center of resistance. But the Patriarch himself was soon captured. The loss of the Latin states caused the conquered to look to the island of Cyprus, acquired in 1192 by Guy de Lusignan. Many Maronites followed the movement of immigration to Cyprus. They chose to live in the higher elevations of the island where they preserved their culture and their customs. We know that there was a Maronite bishop in Cyprus as early as 1340. The Maronite immigration also extended to Rhodes. The period of the Crusades marks an important milestone in the history of the Maronites. The communication with the West from this time on were to increase and become solidified. Many religious orders were to come to Lebanon in succeeding centuries and establish institutions and schools. European culture would also be transmitted. Latinization of the Maronite rite, which had its beginnings with the Crusades, was to continue with the Synod of Mount Lebanon in 1736. Even politically, the Maronites looked for aid and support more often than not from the countries of Europe, especially France.​
    At this time the Maronites, massed in the northern part of Lebanon, belonged politically to the rule of Tripoli. However, they continued to be governed directly by their mouqaddamin. The role of the mouqaddamin consisted principally in raising the tax. They were subcollectors under the Moslem collector appointed by the sultan. About 1655 the government of a significant Maronite district, that of Besharri, was conferred on the Metouali or Shiite family of Hamada, which resulted in a number of Maronites fleeing to the south of Nahr Ibrahim and to the villages of the coast. The first Hamada governors were just and good administrators, but their successors adopted an entirely opposites direction, and imposed much oppression. Many Maronites were forced to emigrate and a majority of them took refuge in the district of Kesrawan.

    trouble is that you have no historical facts to back your claims, you might want them to be true, but you can rest assured they are not.

    Oh waitttt, so apparently it was actually the Shias who persecuted the Maronites when they lived up north?

    It was kinda obvious. Maronites were not in power to persecuted anyone. The Mamlukes actually intrusted the Shia to collect their heavy taxes from the Maronites, and even use violence against them. Just proves that the migration of the Shias from that area was just the typical Sunni-Shia thing, they fight and kill each other and them blame everything on Christians.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    With FPM, politically there is sense of a comeback to the governance, thus taking the Maronites out of the political depression.

    Honestly, I could be wrong, it is the Church who doesn't have a long term vision. It is a wealthy institution, with influence locally and internationally, yet the cost of housing teachings and health is unbarred. There is so much that FPM can do because at the end of the day, it is a Lebanese party, I can't dedicate all it's policies for Christians only, but also to other Lebanese.

    It is the Church job to have a vision for the Christians but it does seem to lack it.
    the reality is that neither the church nor FPM are working on a long term strategy, both of them "deyrina rebbeniyi", which might be good as far as the divine plan is concerned, who knows? on the ground however, it is about a few individuals who are spearheading the efforts on their own.. i have always been in favor of an institutional road map and strategic planing rather than sporadic heroism of few people. but it seems that this kind of approach is still like kryptonite on this side of the world.. it is not a hopeless situation though, and things may take a turn for the better just when no one expects it.
     
    Dark Angel

    Dark Angel

    Legendary Member
    which the christians have done in the region :)
    really? in the last decade there was some decent although shy Christian presence in iraq and syria, now that is practically gone, we are the last bastillion alongside with the qopts in egypt. so you can rest assured the Christians in the levant have done everything except grow and prosper. if things keep going in this direction there won't be any Christians left in the region within a few decades from now.
     
    The_FPMer

    The_FPMer

    Active Member
    really? in the last decade there was some decent although shy Christian presence in iraq and syria, now that is practically gone, we are the last bastillion alongside with the qopts in egypt. so you can rest assured the Christians in the levant have done everything except grow and prosper. if things keep going in this direction there won't be any Christians left in the region within a few decades from now.
    But why? GB has exceptional organizational skills and certainly has a vision at least for FPM. Is it the schism between the political parties? But that so, what prevents the Churches from doing so?
     
    Lebanon_not_Arabic

    Lebanon_not_Arabic

    Well-Known Member
    It's nice and interesting to dig up the forgotten and unknown past.

    Anyway, we all have a chapter we don't read out loud ... BUT I CAN READ THIS CHAPTER OUT LOUD.
     
    Iron Maiden

    Iron Maiden

    Paragon of Bacon
    Orange Room Supporter
    Are you from the Nuvo ordo seclorum
    Followers. It seems like that lol hereticus. Bi2sa al massir
    No i am an adept of the Ordo Hereticus tasked with protecting the forum from itself by purging any form of heresy.


    There is no greater enemy to the Forum than the man who acts against it
     
    Top