Were the Joumblatts actually feudalist?

ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

Active Member
Orange Room Supporter
I've always looked at them as feudalists. But I believe that's a misconception.

Feudalism basically is... "the dominant social system... in which the nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labor, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection."

Except that the Joumblatts didn't own the Druze lands. Their Druze followers had their own lands. For instance, most Druze lands belonged to the Talhook family. Abu Shakra had their own lands. Abd El Samad their own lands. Etc.

The Joumblatt rule over the Druze is tribal and religious. But not feudalistic. It seems that it was considered feudalism because they ruled over a mountain full of agricultural lands. But I don't see any evidence that points out that they actually made money of other farmers or owned the lands of Southern Mt Lebanon. They more seem like an irrelevant family in terms of land ownership compared to other Druze families.
 
  • Advertisement
  • ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    It's also a big lie what some history books and Arab historians say that the Joumblats entered the Druze faith in the 1600s through the Ottomans and after the door of the faith was closed. I've seen it repeated by Nadim Nicholas Taleb and others. But it comes from old Arslanian sources that didn't do any research.

    Truth is, the Joumblatts are one of the oldest Druze families. Their Sheikh Qasem Jumblatt was very politically relevant in Syria for a while and died in 1208. Long before the Ottomans arrived.

    They seem to have came to power as they're related to the Maans (who are also of Kurdish origins). And because they were very involved with politics, while Lebanese Druze families were probably more isolated.
     
    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Great story bro.
    Produce a map of old Lebanon and you'll see that for yourself. The two Druze ruling families, Arslanians and Joumblattians, never owned all or most of the lands in Mt Lebanon.
     
    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Produce a map of old Lebanon and you'll see that for yourself. The two Druze ruling families, Arslanians and Joumblattians, never owned all or most of the lands in Mt Lebanon.

    Or in Syria. (Where Joumbllats also ruled).
     
    Ice Tea

    Ice Tea

    Active Member
    Isn't Joumblatt only half Druze himself? And he married a non-Druze woman (Circasian I think). Which means his son Taymour is only a quarter Druze, who btw married a Shia woman, which means his kids are only 1/8 Druze.

    The Joumblatt family can no longer be considered Druze. I don't know how the noble and pure Lebanese Druze accept being ruled by this farce of a family.
     
    fidelio

    fidelio

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Isn't Joumblatt only half Druze himself? And he married a non-Druze woman (Circasian I think). Which means his son Taymour is only a quarter Druze, who btw married a Shia woman, which means his kids are only 1/8 Druze.

    The Joumblatt family can no longer be considered Druze. I don't know how the noble and pure Lebanese Druze accept being ruled by this farce of a family.
    Are you a 100% ice tea or of mixed beverages of the yellowish hue?
     
    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Isn't Joumblatt only half Druze himself? And he married a non-Druze woman (Circasian I think). Which means his son Taymour is only a quarter Druze, who btw married a Shia woman, which means his kids are only 1/8 Druze.

    The Joumblatt family can no longer be considered Druze. I don't know how the noble and pure Lebanese Druze accept being ruled by this farce of a family.
    The Druze Elders maintain that the representatives and politicians are allowed to marry outside of their faith for political relations. Which is why they attend their funerals. Shakib Arslan started this trend when he married his Circasian wife from Jordan. Teymour would be considered a Druze once he wears the special Abbayah handed down from his ancestors. But so far, he is proving incapable to be a leader. The PSP might be splitting up into different factions after Walid J. But his Druze status definitely wouldn't be revoked.
     
    fidelio

    fidelio

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    A "progressive" party headed by a reactionary tribal leader. Quite amazing actually that people still treat the two sides of the coin with the same amount of respect.

    One wishes the jumblat clan were merely feudal.
     
    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    A "progressive" party headed by a reactionary tribal leader. Quite amazing actually that people still treat the two sides of the coin with the same amount of respect.

    One wishes the jumblat clan were merely feudal.
    WJ remains a Dumbledore to your Cornelius Fudge. :)
     
    O Brother

    O Brother

    Legendary Member
    What with the stories of Kamal Jumblatt giving out lands to druze? is that even true? and what was the real reason for doing that?
     
    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    What with the stories of Kamal Jumblatt giving out lands to druze? is that even true? and what was the real reason for doing that?
    He gave lands in the Chouf to other Druze families. To prove his socialism, I think. But nothing significant. Walid J was able to regain them all.
     
    cedarheart

    cedarheart

    Well-Known Member
    interesting topic.
    The argument holds well in the way it is presented, however, it is based on a very common error which even well experienced historians (western and orientals) do: equating and translating the eastern term "ikta3" to the western word "feudum" while in reality and practice these 2 have some similarities but are very different.

    In his book "Encyclopedia of Islam", the prominent orientalist historian Claude Cahen said about ikta3:
    "a form of administrative grant, often (wrongly) translated by the European word "feudum". The nature of the ikta3 varied according to time and place, and a translation borrowed from other systems of institutions and conceptions has served only too often to mislead Western historians, and following them, even those of the East"

    In the Islamic sultan times. the "Iktaaji" was granted title and power by the supreme head of state to collect local taxes and manage an area. These grants weren't hereditary, they were revoked and granted as the supreme ruler decided. Furthermore, these titles and powers weren't granted on the basis of land ownership but on the basis of loyalty, social standing, ability to ensure rule and order, and willingness to obey to the supreme rules. In essence it was a top down system of power and to put it bluntly those who "kissed the sultan ass more" were able to ensure titles.

    In the Western/European world, kingdoms and empires were formed no only through conquest but although through allegiances and alliances of tribes and small chiefdoms. The local chiefs allied and (in some cases) elected a king, or after a defeat swore allegiance to a stronger chief who became king. over centuries this developed into what became known as the feudal system where a kingdom consisted of a puzzle of lands ruled by local feudal lords (each with a different nobility title) all under allegiance to the king. They provided him with tax money and soldiers, he provided them with stability, power, and new lands. The feudal titles were hereditary, the monarch couldn't revoke them unless of treason or by war. The nobility formed some sort of a political power that kept the monarch in check.

    so in conclusion, the Jumblat family is not a feudal family as understood in the western definition of feudum, but is/was an Ita3 family in the oriental/islamic sultanate system of governance.
     
    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    so in conclusion, the Jumblat family is not a feudal family as understood in the western definition of feudum, but is/was an Ita3 family in the oriental/islamic sultanate system of governance.
    Problem is, I couldn't find any sources that said Joumblatts did collect money from Druze. On the contrary Rasheed Joumblatt (descendant of Saed Joumblatt) claims that his grandfather refused to collect money from the Druze to pay the dowry (after being offered) for the 1860, but instead gave off all his wealth.
     
    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    ܐܵܠܘܼܟ̰ܵܐ

    Active Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Also, oddly enough, I went back to my family history, and there's no mention that we ever offered money to anyone. We just collected taxes in Syria on water for a period of time. But my family is not a ruling family or feudalistic. It just happened to own important agricultural lands in Syria before we were kicked out, but so did other families, it seems.
     
    CrusaderV

    CrusaderV

    Well-Known Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    Also, oddly enough, I went back to my family history, and there's no mention that we ever offered money to anyone. We just collected taxes in Syria on water for a period of time. But my family is not a ruling family or feudalistic. It just happened to own important agricultural lands in Syria before we were kicked out, but so did other families, it seems.
    Your Corrupted Criminal family are descendants from Ali Junbulad à Kurdish Ottoman emir
     
    Ice Tea

    Ice Tea

    Active Member
    Your Corrupted Criminal family are descendants from Ali Junbulad à Kurdish Ottoman emir
    That's probably just a family myth/oral tradition, just like some believe Rûms descend from the Ghassanids. When in reality both groups are among the purest Levantines and closer to each other than to anyone else.

    Joumblatts' historical origins are probably pure Levantine just as other Druze, what happened is they interwinded a lot with Muslims of different backgrounds (like Circasian) in recent times, so they are no longer purely Druze.
     
    Indie

    Indie

    Legendary Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    while the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labor, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection."
    That sounds similar to: "serfs give their zaim homage, political power (and the financial benefits that go with it), in exchange for wasta and sectarian protection."
     
    CrusaderV

    CrusaderV

    Well-Known Member
    Orange Room Supporter
    That's probably just a family myth/oral tradition, just like some believe Rûms descend from the Ghassanids. When in reality both groups are among the purest Levantines and closer to each other than to anyone else.

    Joumblatts' historical origins are probably pure Levantine just as other Druze, what happened is they interwinded a lot with Muslims of different backgrounds (like Circasian) in recent times, so they are no longer purely Druze.
    That’s what most historians agreed about
    You are Kurds
    Ha ha han?????????Clown
     
    Top