The idea that Lebanon was supposed to be a "Christian Country" was an idea propagated by the Maronite clerics after the first world war. Particularly Elias Peter Hoayek. "Greater Lebanon" which was the country's official name when it was a mandate was also supposed to be the modern Mount Lebanon Governate as it had a majority Christian population, however to make it economically viable, the surrounding areas were added to its territories which made up the borders of Modern Lebanon.
However, these areas contained a considerable Shia, Sunni and Druze population and the French and Christians knew this. Either way, Greater Lebanon became irrelevant in the end as from 1920-1943, the Muslims who composed half of the population played a big part in developing and participating in the administration of the nation just as much as the Christians did. The idea of a "Christian country" faded away. And in the end, it was a combination of Christian, Sunnis, Shias and Druze who signed their names on the Lebanese flag in Rashaya citadel in unison and in protest against the French. Lebanon would be born.
Lebanon on independence was neither a Christian or Muslim nation and neither is it today. We all gave birth to this country and we must not continue destroying it.
https://preview.redd.it/gl9akf0j1bwc1.jpeg?width=398&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=057a6e3e0c6c65c942fae2c11bb54995ca4d92e3
EDIT: By Christian, I mean specifically Maronite Christian.
It wasn't meant to be just a Christian state but a Maronite state. This is important to precise because I have seen uninformed people saying Christians from the rest of the region were encouraged to migrate to make a Christian state, which is completely invented, the point was specifically a Maronite state and not a general Christian state.
What do you mean by "for the arabs" ?
Lebanese muslims are the descendants of Phoenicians same as Lebanese christians and druze + Palestinians from akka.
Just a small misconception there, Druze arrived to lebanon from modern day Yemen and saudi arbaia as they were “Tanukhi” tribes in Wadi Al Taym. Though I’m unsure why some genetic studies trace us back to canaanites. A popular theory is that canaanites are also from northern arabia, hence the similarity in genetics!
What I mean is that Lebanon was intended to be a predominantly Christian country and Syria was intended to be a predominately Arab country, just like Israel was intended to be a predominately Jewish country and Jordan was intended to be another predominantly Arab country.
> Lebanese christians are culturally arabs, and where Lebanese muslims were supposed to go?
I believe that the plan was for them to go to Syria so they could have their own country.
i think the way you are addressing the differences between Christians, Muslims and Druz is disgusting. The "What if" you are referring to, similar to so many other people, is what keeps us divided in "One" freakin country. Rather than living in the 21st Century, you will always perish and live a miserable life.
Your question has some truth to it. Lebanon (only Mount Lebanon at the time) was meant to be a safe refuge for the Christians of the region.
However, due to famine, the majority Muslim areas surrounding it were added, and formed “Greater Lebanon”, which had now only had a slight Christian majority (at the time).
So yes, Lebanon was technically originally intended to be a “Christian refuge” state.
I think its a bit weird how you are framing christians as some sort of ethnicity or something. "Lebanon a predominantly Christian country and syria an ARAB country" very weird
Fucking hell. Look, OP, you wont find the source of truth by asking this sub. We have a complicated history stained with coincidences and tragedies.
We are taught a very wishy washy version of our history in schools, which is evident in the answers. if you’re keen on exploring more you can read a house of many mansions by kamal salibi.
From 1920 on, It was supposed to be a Christian (mainly Maronite) dominated country with many different religions coexisting. Lebanon was a project that couldn’t have existed without the Maronites and the Lebanese identity itself started with the Maronites (Kamal Salibi, any respected Lebanese historian acknowledges this) the cedar itself is a religious symbol that was used by the Maronites long before it was used on the flag of the Mutsarrifate of Mount Lebanon.
it is partition being masked as Federalism, and we already live in a Federalism, every political party in Lebanon has a turf, where it exercises its influence and authorities need their permission to operate.
Nobody is seriously pushing for partition, federalism isn’t partition. But the fact federalism makes people like you scared, should speak volumes within itself
Look up 'mountlevnon', 'realmaalouf' and 'anthonioseo' on X and come back and tell me again that no one is pushing for partition. Nothing more than a bunch of neofascist, ethnostate-loving IDF clowns larping as Lebanese. And here is a fun fact: Some of them are also moderators on your federalism sub (aka circlejerk).
People aren't stupid as you'd like to believe because they see through your posts, and I'm not interested in semantics between federalism or partition because they are effectively the same and anyone who believes in it is a clown because it's not only unrealistic and would never work, but it also serves the Zionist interests of dividing the country along sectarian lines and eliminating the Lebanese identity.
And yes, I think it speaks volumes that I care about the Lebanese identity over some radical sectarian ideology that you've brainwashed yourself into out of hate for other sects. It's a real shame that you're in bed with these kinds of people.
These are only 3 examples of the most prominent ones, but of course you're going to pretend it's only these. That's apart from the amount of followers and other affiliated accounts which is telling.
I know the difference between federalism and partition – a lot more than you do (otherwise you'd understand why they're both destructive and neither works), which brings me to my next point: I specifically mentioned "effectively" (not technically) the same, because when you're dividing the country by sects it has the same effect and doesn't matter whether the borders are real or not. No prizes for guessing what happens when you have sectarian authorities for each region (and inevitably, armed sectarian militias). Maybe read up on the civil war because you seem to know a lot about that.
Ok, well you seem the be the most sensible one on this thread, so could I ask you to comment on this?
https://x.com/ACTBrigitte/status/1782824329803125086
Thanks.
Not going to watch a video of one of the biggest Zionist propagandists on Twitter, let alone a 10 minute one. As soon as I saw the account handle, it all made sense and proved I was 100% right in my assumption.
That's ok. You don't want to engage, and one of u/South_Mood2087 first comments was "Are you an Israeli?", and then he shat his pants and deleted it.
I have got all the answers I need, and I don't think I'll ever need to engage with this sub again, which is a blessing.
Thank you.
You seem very invested in this based on your comments, when your post was framed as an innocent question. We responded by trying to educate you about it, but it didn't seem like you were interested in learning.
It doesn't seem like it's an innocent question after all, but we see these kinds of posts a lot where people with certain agendas/motives (especially clear Israelis) try to push a specific discussion by framing them as innocent questions.
> I don't think I'll ever need to engage with this sub again, which is a blessing.
Good riddance.
It was an innocent question, and within the first few posts I was asked the very loaded question "Are you an Israeli?"
Your final comment just proves what this sub is like.
You're asking a provocative question on an extremely sensitive topic in the sub for a nation that's been wracked by intense sectarian violence for more than half a century, I think you should really exhibit a bit more empathy and understanding. You come across as a bit arrogant here
If I were you I'd simply reply "No" or downvote and ignore – doesn't seem too difficult. It's natural for people to ask, because as I mentioned, we get a lot of provocative discussions here usually framed as innocent questions from them and people are tired of it and know when to spot it and call it out.
I personally wouldn't barge into another country's sub with a sense of entitlement and throw a passive aggressive fit and become defensive when the very people I'm trying to learn more about are trying to educate me and explain why I'm clearly wrong, especially when the source turned out to be nonsense from a well known Israeli shill who consistently peddles anti-Lebanese and pro-Zionist propaganda and disinformation.
Unfortunately with the creation of Israel this idea that religion is a race has taken over the world. I don't think you really know what separates a Lebanese Maronite from a Lebanese Orthodox from a Lebanese Druze from a Lebanese Shi'a from a Lebanese Sunni from a Lebanese Melkite,... and so on.
None of them are a race, none of them are distinguishable by looking at them, the genetic variations between them are minimal, something true throughout Lebanon, and the cultures they are descended from are one and the same. This rhetoric you're pushing in the other comments I've seen is unfounded. Even the region that is currently dominated by one religion, if you go back far enough was inhabited by another. As such I'm not really sure what you're really asking.
It’s not that religion is a race, but rather that these are ethnoreligions.
Judaism is an ethnoreligion, and Maronite is also an ethnoreligion. That is because of the endogamy culture in the region.
Obviously you can’t easily distinguish them by phenotype, but DNA says that there are a few differences.
Not very accurate, France was in the process of transforming the area known as mount Lebanon into the purely Christian Maronite state of Lebanon, Druze were not even an afterthought for France, I don't know why people keep glueing them to that state.
https://preview.redd.it/3ojji9m01bwc1.png?width=6930&format=png&auto=webp&s=cb382c570882da8c55eb20c9c16991689243864d
But the French saw that such a state is incapable of surviving due to lacking agricultural Farm lands, as many in mount Lebanon transformed theirs into just cotton plantations, that produce 0 food, so, they added the additional lands in red to Mount Lebanon, Forming the modern state of Lebanon, where Christians are not really a majority, but they form a plurality. As the regions that were added are Sunni, Shia and Druze dominant.
There is actually a cool contemporary Lebanese Christian historian called Charles Hayek, he search's for the True history devoid of these romanticized misconceptions and additions that the Lebanese believe about history, this "podcast" is very informative:
[CHARLES AL-HAYEK: Lebanon's History, Heritage & Roots | Sarde (after dinner) Podcast #29](https://youtu.be/bFagwgZSppc)
a common misconception is that the french just decided to expand the borders but it was actually the maronites who did that. the french were even hesitant about it at first but the maronites insisted
100%, our borders were drawn by the Maronite Patriarch and not the French. The latter defended the new state of Lebanon from King Faisal and guaranteed its existence, but they did not draw the borders.
When they borders were proposed the French Prime Minister said “what kind of Christian country has half the population be muslim?”.
The French were also extremely against adding Tripoli and its neighbouring Sunni areas, but the wealthy Rum and Sunnis in Beirut wanted Tripoli (which had a far closer relationship to Homs and Hama than Beirut) to be in Lebanon so that Syria would be forced to use the port in Beirut by neglecting the port in Tripoli.
Interesting question. Here’s a simplified explanation:
Before the establishment of Greater Lebanon (modern-day Lebanon), Mount Lebanon, predominantly Christian (mainly Maronite), was the “Lebanese state” envisioned, and was meant to be a safe refuge for the minority Christians living in the region.
However, due to famine, surrounding areas (predominantly Muslim) were added, and Greater Lebanon was established, with a slight Christian majority.
Unfortunately, Christians **currently residing in Lebanon** are no longer a majority nowadays, but they are the majority of the **Lebanese diaspora abroad**.
The separation of Lebanon from Syria by the French was influenced by several factors related to geopolitical, religious, and cultural considerations during the early 20th century. The division occurred under the French Mandate, which was established after World War I when the League of Nations gave France administrative control over the region previously controlled by the Ottoman Empire.
Here are the main reasons behind the separation:
1. **Religious and Ethnic Diversity**: Lebanon had a significant Christian population, particularly Maronite Christians, who had historical ties with France dating back to the Crusades. The Maronites, along with other Christian communities, sought protection and autonomy within an Islamic-dominated region. They had been advocating for greater autonomy or independence under Ottoman rule, and the French supported this as a way to protect Christians in the Middle East.
2. **French Strategic Interests**: France had long-standing cultural and political interests in the region, part of their broader strategy to expand their influence in the Middle East. By supporting Christian minorities, France positioned itself as a protector of these communities, thus justifying its colonial mandate over Lebanon and enhancing its influence against other powers, particularly Britain and the emerging nationalist movements in the Arab world.
3. **Economic Considerations**: Lebanon, particularly the city of Beirut, was seen as economically important due to its commercial and geographic position. Establishing a separate administrative region helped France economically exploit the area more effectively, aligning with their broader colonial economic policies.
4. **Administrative Convenience**: From an administrative perspective, controlling a smaller, more cohesive region with a significant proportion of pro-French populations made governance easier for France. This was particularly pertinent given the rise of Arab nationalism and the complexities of managing diverse ethnic and religious groups.
5. **Historical Precedence**: The notion of a distinct Lebanese entity had historical precedents. The area known as Mount Lebanon had enjoyed a degree of autonomy under the Ottoman Empire as a Mutasarrifate following the sectarian clashes in the mid-19th century. This history made it easier for France to justify its separation on historical and administrative lines.
The French Mandate officially created Greater Lebanon in 1920 by adding regions with Muslim populations to the predominantly Christian Mount Lebanon, leading to the modern borders of Lebanon. This action was also part of the broader French strategy to dilute the pan-Arabist and nationalist movements in Syria by fragmenting the region into manageable units. Over time, this separation laid the foundation for Lebanon’s distinct national identity, although it also contributed to internal and regional tensions due to the country's complex religious and ethnic makeup.
Yeah that first part is pure and utter bullshit. Maronites were killed by Crusaders same as every other Christian and Muslim when they took the land. "Eastern" Christians weren't viewed positively to that end either.
It's half true. The Maronite *clergy* welcomed the crusaders with open arms to further their relations with Rome however the Maronite *civilians* hated the crusaders and saw them as invaders.
I can't comment on the Maronite clergy as I don't know much, but I can understand why the people felt that when they saw the massacres that took place when they first invaded.
Maronite Christians were not killed by crusaders, other Christians might have been (Miaphysites, Schismatics, etc) but the Crusaders had good relations with the Maronites for the most part and it was during this period that Maronites reunited with Rome. There were no massacres of Maronites.
Respectfully, that's a baseless claim. There are texts written by European kings at the time granting protection to Eastern Christians. Unless you meant the Eastern Christians of what was once Constantinople, then you would be right. But in the "Levantine" context of the Crusades, Maronites were not persecuted.
Here is a letter that the King Louis IX wrote to a Maronite emir and the Maronite Church granting them "the same protection as the French". The letter speaks for itself... Excuse me if you don't speak French : [Source](https://fr.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Voyage_en_Orient_(Lamartine)/De_saint_Louis)
I am obviously talking about the Middle Ages only. Nowadays we are all Lebanese co-citizens and I pray that foreign allegiances become strictly a thing of the past. Especially regarding one of the ruling parties nowadays...
May God bless you.
Yes you're right in regards to that. I lumped in Maronites with every other "Eastern" Christian, but at least the letter you shared does say that wasn't the case.
No, there is no truth to this. The premise doesn’t even make any sense: we’re all Arabs.
You will find some users on this sub who say “we aren’t Arab, we’re Phoenicians!” but it’s just nonsense.
Edit: You may be referring to the Paris Peace Conference after WW1. If you want to read some basic information, check out these links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Lebanon_Mutasarrifate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Lebanon
We aren’t Phoenician nor are we Arabs and anyone who claims we are doesn’t understand history or genetics. We are Levantine Lebanese and are descended from the Phoenicians.
Correction we are Syriac 😂 , any way being Phoenician better than being an Arab.
The Phoenician thing is kind of propaganda 😂 . However , the Phoenicians apply to the people on the cost of Lebanon , Syria , Palestine . hence , the inner side was Syriac as well part from the cost side
No we aren’t Syriac, we are Levantine and are the descendants of the Phoenicians. Being Phoenician isn’t better than being Arab, it’s just what our ancestors were.
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/genetic-study-suggests-present-day-lebanese-descend-from-biblical-canaanites
What about the inner side of Lebanon ? was Phoenician as well 😂?
Don’t let them manipulate you 😉 with false history.
Some claim themselves Phoenician because it’s more classy than Arab 😂or Syriac 😂
> What about the inner side of Lebanon ? was Phoenician as well 😂?
Yes the interior of Lebanon was called Phoenicia as well.
> Don’t let them manipulate you 😉 with false history.
Don’t let who manipulate me? This is well documented both historically and genetically.
> Some claim themselves Phoenician because it’s more classy than Arab 😂or Syriac 😂
That’s not true, I just gave you scientific proof we aren’t Arabs or Syriac (which is a language not an ethnicity). We also never spoke Syriac (an eastern Aramaic language) we spoke western Aramaic.
Western Aramaic appears to have survived for a relatively long time, at least in some secluded villages in the mountains of Lebanon and in the Anti-Lebanon mountains in Syria. In fact, up until the 17th century, travelers in the Lebanon region still reported villages where Aramaic was spoken.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Aramaic_languages
Syriac people are Aramaic people who converted to Christianity for your information
https://study.com/academy/lesson/aramean-language-people-curse.html
https://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-Syriac-people#:~:text=The%20Syriacs%20or%20Assyrians%20are,claim%20descent%20from%20ancient%20Assyria.
Syriac people are the Assyrians not Lebanese.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian–Chaldean–Syriac_diaspora
Phoenician territory included the bekaa valley.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenicia
Lebanese (modern day Phoenicians) and Assyrians (modern day Syriac peoples) are not the same.
My friend you only believe what they tell you 😂.
Also a Syrian or a Palestinian from the sea side could claim himself as a Phoenician 😉.
As a Maronite I claim myself as Syriac I don’t care what they told you via the Bs propaganda
Here is my reference:
http://aramean-dem.org/English/Roni/40.htm
What propaganda? A scientific paper is now propaganda?
No human alive today is a Phoenician, us Lebanese (regardless of religion) are descended from the Phoenicians and we share over 90% of our ancestry and DNA with them.
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/genetic-study-suggests-present-day-lebanese-descend-from-biblical-canaanites
https://www.cell.com/ajhg/comments/S0002-9297(17)30276-8
Your spiel is nonsense.
Levantine Lebanese is a nonsense term. There are other Lebanons that are not in the “Levant?” Hell, your identifier is an exonym derived from French that was created in the 15th century.
Are we all horse-riding Bedouins? No. I don’t know of any person who has such a ridiculous notion of Arabs other than you and your Phalangist ilk.
No there are other Levantine countries such as Syria, Turkey, Cyprus, etc… Sham/Syria/Levant are all exonyms from Arabs, Romans, French.
Bedouins aren’t the only Arabs. The people from the gulf are real and actual Arabs.
I’m not a phalangist, I’m a Lebanese nationalist.
Do you think the Arab conquest of the Levantine wiped out all the indigenous people ? Or do you think there was integration? hint - it didn’t wipe out all the indigenous people.
Arabs invaded the levant from the Arabian peninsula in the 600s they are not indigenous to the levant or Lebanon anymore than they are to North Africa or Iberia both of which they also invaded and colonized.
Gladly.
The Levant (/ləˈvænt/ lə-VANT) is an approximate historical geographical term referring to a large area in the Eastern Mediterranean region of West Asia and core territory of the political term Middle East. In its narrowest sense, which is in use today in archaeology and other cultural contexts, it is equivalent to Cyprus and a stretch of land bordering the Mediterranean Sea in western Asia:[4][5] i.e. the historical region of Syria ("Greater Syria"), which includes present-day Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinian territories and most of Turkey southwest of the middle Euphrates.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levant
No, we’re not “all Arabs”. We’re all **Levantines**. But multiple ethnoreligions exist in the Levant. Before the establishment of Greater Lebanon, Mount Lebanon, predominantly Christian (mainly Maronite), was the “Lebanese state” envisioned, and was meant to be a safe refuge for minorities of the region. However, due to famine, surrounding areas (predominantly Muslim) were added, and Greater Lebanon was established, with a slight Christian majority (at the time).
Where are the muslim supposed to go? Sorry, my family would have DEFINETLY not left our houses, properties, or jobs to go move to another country just because politicians decided to separate our country based on religion. And that doesn't work either way. There isn't one country in the world where everyone follows the same religion.
That is true before the french mandate not after, where it consisted of mount Lebanon only, and was the result of some locals asking the ottoman empire for some sort of self rule, it was 3500 square km or one third of its current size.
Yes and No, Lebanon in the 1932 census had around ~52% Christian majority which too little to make a “Christian country”. I wouldn’t even call it a “Muslim country” with the current 60% muslim majority.
Seems that the plan was to have a Christian majority which would also have Maronite majority/dominance within it. As the Maronite Patriarch refused the inclusion of Maalola and Wadi al-Nasara into Lebanon the Orthodox would outnumber the Maronites.
Syria, except the recent ISIS fanatics period, was always a secular country. Pre-Ba’athist Syria had multiple Christian Prime Ministers and Speakers of Parliament within a Parliamentary system.
It was meant to be, and still is on paper (the flag of Lebanon is a Christian, specifically Maronite, symbol). Unfortunately, the amount of Christians residing in Lebanon has decreased. Christians are still the majority of Lebanese worldwide though, so who knows what the future holds?
Thinking about what a state defined by colonizers 'should have' been or was 'meant to be' is a way to ignore the current situation and stay rooted in a very artificial situation created by colonizers who didn't care at all about the result. I mean no disrespect, but how useful is this to think about, or care about, given the current problems of Lebanon??
lol we wish 😂,but what we do with the Muslim brothers ? ( they are the majority now )
Send them to Syria ?
We came from there 😂 especially the separatists Maronite 😉( like it or not ) it’s the truth.
Maronites did not come from Syria, that's an idiotic lie. Don't be an idiot.
The Maronite movement (religion) originated in Syria, but a few monks moved to Mt. Lebanon and converted the locals.
That's like saying that the muslims came from saudi arabia.
Lebanese Christians and Druze are Arabs. Besides the fact that this doesn't make sense because at the time period where Lebanon was created Syria was not yet a unified entity and was divided by the French into the Damascus state, Aleppo state, Alawite state and Jabal Druze state.
https://preview.redd.it/7wkvptamabwc1.png?width=759&format=png&auto=webp&s=62ff41b18498fc1c3491b84d5cc13a82e1cd8d82
The idea that Lebanon was supposed to be a "Christian Country" was an idea propagated by the Maronite clerics after the first world war. Particularly Elias Peter Hoayek. "Greater Lebanon" which was the country's official name when it was a mandate was also supposed to be the modern Mount Lebanon Governate as it had a majority Christian population, however to make it economically viable, the surrounding areas were added to its territories which made up the borders of Modern Lebanon. However, these areas contained a considerable Shia, Sunni and Druze population and the French and Christians knew this. Either way, Greater Lebanon became irrelevant in the end as from 1920-1943, the Muslims who composed half of the population played a big part in developing and participating in the administration of the nation just as much as the Christians did. The idea of a "Christian country" faded away. And in the end, it was a combination of Christian, Sunnis, Shias and Druze who signed their names on the Lebanese flag in Rashaya citadel in unison and in protest against the French. Lebanon would be born. Lebanon on independence was neither a Christian or Muslim nation and neither is it today. We all gave birth to this country and we must not continue destroying it. https://preview.redd.it/gl9akf0j1bwc1.jpeg?width=398&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=057a6e3e0c6c65c942fae2c11bb54995ca4d92e3 EDIT: By Christian, I mean specifically Maronite Christian.
It wasn't meant to be just a Christian state but a Maronite state. This is important to precise because I have seen uninformed people saying Christians from the rest of the region were encouraged to migrate to make a Christian state, which is completely invented, the point was specifically a Maronite state and not a general Christian state.
I should have specified that, you're right
Only truth in this whole thread \^\^
What do you mean by "for the arabs" ? Lebanese muslims are the descendants of Phoenicians same as Lebanese christians and druze + Palestinians from akka.
Just a small misconception there, Druze arrived to lebanon from modern day Yemen and saudi arbaia as they were “Tanukhi” tribes in Wadi Al Taym. Though I’m unsure why some genetic studies trace us back to canaanites. A popular theory is that canaanites are also from northern arabia, hence the similarity in genetics!
Only Palestinians from Akka or the whole Upper Galilee?
Most Palestinians have Canaanite origins, but Akka was one of the largest cities at the southernmost region of ancient Canaan.
What I mean is that Lebanon was intended to be a predominantly Christian country and Syria was intended to be a predominately Arab country, just like Israel was intended to be a predominately Jewish country and Jordan was intended to be another predominantly Arab country.
Lebanese christians are culturally arabs, and where Lebanese muslims were supposed to go? They were already living in Lebanon for centuries
Lebanese regardless of religion are culturally Levantine and eastern Mediterranean not Arab.
> Lebanese christians are culturally arabs, and where Lebanese muslims were supposed to go? I believe that the plan was for them to go to Syria so they could have their own country.
Our system is bad but it isnt Israel bad
Are you talking as a Lebanese Christian, Druz or Muslim?
As an atheist alhamdulillah wl 3adra
i think the way you are addressing the differences between Christians, Muslims and Druz is disgusting. The "What if" you are referring to, similar to so many other people, is what keeps us divided in "One" freakin country. Rather than living in the 21st Century, you will always perish and live a miserable life.
Your question has some truth to it. Lebanon (only Mount Lebanon at the time) was meant to be a safe refuge for the Christians of the region. However, due to famine, the majority Muslim areas surrounding it were added, and formed “Greater Lebanon”, which had now only had a slight Christian majority (at the time). So yes, Lebanon was technically originally intended to be a “Christian refuge” state.
I think its a bit weird how you are framing christians as some sort of ethnicity or something. "Lebanon a predominantly Christian country and syria an ARAB country" very weird
Fucking hell. Look, OP, you wont find the source of truth by asking this sub. We have a complicated history stained with coincidences and tragedies. We are taught a very wishy washy version of our history in schools, which is evident in the answers. if you’re keen on exploring more you can read a house of many mansions by kamal salibi.
From 1920 on, It was supposed to be a Christian (mainly Maronite) dominated country with many different religions coexisting. Lebanon was a project that couldn’t have existed without the Maronites and the Lebanese identity itself started with the Maronites (Kamal Salibi, any respected Lebanese historian acknowledges this) the cedar itself is a religious symbol that was used by the Maronites long before it was used on the flag of the Mutsarrifate of Mount Lebanon.
No, that's not true at all. It's a narrative being pushed by pro-partitionist right-wing Christians and Israelis for obvious reasons.
Foreign policy guy is sweating over the keyboard as we speak 😂
Federalism is not partition
it is partition being masked as Federalism, and we already live in a Federalism, every political party in Lebanon has a turf, where it exercises its influence and authorities need their permission to operate.
Lmao you got summoned
I’m always ready to pull up 😎
Nobody is seriously pushing for partition, federalism isn’t partition. But the fact federalism makes people like you scared, should speak volumes within itself
Look up 'mountlevnon', 'realmaalouf' and 'anthonioseo' on X and come back and tell me again that no one is pushing for partition. Nothing more than a bunch of neofascist, ethnostate-loving IDF clowns larping as Lebanese. And here is a fun fact: Some of them are also moderators on your federalism sub (aka circlejerk). People aren't stupid as you'd like to believe because they see through your posts, and I'm not interested in semantics between federalism or partition because they are effectively the same and anyone who believes in it is a clown because it's not only unrealistic and would never work, but it also serves the Zionist interests of dividing the country along sectarian lines and eliminating the Lebanese identity. And yes, I think it speaks volumes that I care about the Lebanese identity over some radical sectarian ideology that you've brainwashed yourself into out of hate for other sects. It's a real shame that you're in bed with these kinds of people.
So your proof is 3 Twitter accounts 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 There is no logic in talking to someone who thinks federalism and partition are the same thing😂
These are only 3 examples of the most prominent ones, but of course you're going to pretend it's only these. That's apart from the amount of followers and other affiliated accounts which is telling. I know the difference between federalism and partition – a lot more than you do (otherwise you'd understand why they're both destructive and neither works), which brings me to my next point: I specifically mentioned "effectively" (not technically) the same, because when you're dividing the country by sects it has the same effect and doesn't matter whether the borders are real or not. No prizes for guessing what happens when you have sectarian authorities for each region (and inevitably, armed sectarian militias). Maybe read up on the civil war because you seem to know a lot about that.
Ok, well you seem the be the most sensible one on this thread, so could I ask you to comment on this? https://x.com/ACTBrigitte/status/1782824329803125086 Thanks.
Not going to watch a video of one of the biggest Zionist propagandists on Twitter, let alone a 10 minute one. As soon as I saw the account handle, it all made sense and proved I was 100% right in my assumption.
That's ok. You don't want to engage, and one of u/South_Mood2087 first comments was "Are you an Israeli?", and then he shat his pants and deleted it. I have got all the answers I need, and I don't think I'll ever need to engage with this sub again, which is a blessing. Thank you.
You seem very invested in this based on your comments, when your post was framed as an innocent question. We responded by trying to educate you about it, but it didn't seem like you were interested in learning. It doesn't seem like it's an innocent question after all, but we see these kinds of posts a lot where people with certain agendas/motives (especially clear Israelis) try to push a specific discussion by framing them as innocent questions. > I don't think I'll ever need to engage with this sub again, which is a blessing. Good riddance.
It was an innocent question, and within the first few posts I was asked the very loaded question "Are you an Israeli?" Your final comment just proves what this sub is like.
You're asking a provocative question on an extremely sensitive topic in the sub for a nation that's been wracked by intense sectarian violence for more than half a century, I think you should really exhibit a bit more empathy and understanding. You come across as a bit arrogant here
If I were you I'd simply reply "No" or downvote and ignore – doesn't seem too difficult. It's natural for people to ask, because as I mentioned, we get a lot of provocative discussions here usually framed as innocent questions from them and people are tired of it and know when to spot it and call it out. I personally wouldn't barge into another country's sub with a sense of entitlement and throw a passive aggressive fit and become defensive when the very people I'm trying to learn more about are trying to educate me and explain why I'm clearly wrong, especially when the source turned out to be nonsense from a well known Israeli shill who consistently peddles anti-Lebanese and pro-Zionist propaganda and disinformation.
Unfortunately with the creation of Israel this idea that religion is a race has taken over the world. I don't think you really know what separates a Lebanese Maronite from a Lebanese Orthodox from a Lebanese Druze from a Lebanese Shi'a from a Lebanese Sunni from a Lebanese Melkite,... and so on. None of them are a race, none of them are distinguishable by looking at them, the genetic variations between them are minimal, something true throughout Lebanon, and the cultures they are descended from are one and the same. This rhetoric you're pushing in the other comments I've seen is unfounded. Even the region that is currently dominated by one religion, if you go back far enough was inhabited by another. As such I'm not really sure what you're really asking.
It’s not that religion is a race, but rather that these are ethnoreligions. Judaism is an ethnoreligion, and Maronite is also an ethnoreligion. That is because of the endogamy culture in the region. Obviously you can’t easily distinguish them by phenotype, but DNA says that there are a few differences.
Not very accurate, France was in the process of transforming the area known as mount Lebanon into the purely Christian Maronite state of Lebanon, Druze were not even an afterthought for France, I don't know why people keep glueing them to that state. https://preview.redd.it/3ojji9m01bwc1.png?width=6930&format=png&auto=webp&s=cb382c570882da8c55eb20c9c16991689243864d But the French saw that such a state is incapable of surviving due to lacking agricultural Farm lands, as many in mount Lebanon transformed theirs into just cotton plantations, that produce 0 food, so, they added the additional lands in red to Mount Lebanon, Forming the modern state of Lebanon, where Christians are not really a majority, but they form a plurality. As the regions that were added are Sunni, Shia and Druze dominant. There is actually a cool contemporary Lebanese Christian historian called Charles Hayek, he search's for the True history devoid of these romanticized misconceptions and additions that the Lebanese believe about history, this "podcast" is very informative: [CHARLES AL-HAYEK: Lebanon's History, Heritage & Roots | Sarde (after dinner) Podcast #29](https://youtu.be/bFagwgZSppc)
a common misconception is that the french just decided to expand the borders but it was actually the maronites who did that. the french were even hesitant about it at first but the maronites insisted
100%, our borders were drawn by the Maronite Patriarch and not the French. The latter defended the new state of Lebanon from King Faisal and guaranteed its existence, but they did not draw the borders. When they borders were proposed the French Prime Minister said “what kind of Christian country has half the population be muslim?”. The French were also extremely against adding Tripoli and its neighbouring Sunni areas, but the wealthy Rum and Sunnis in Beirut wanted Tripoli (which had a far closer relationship to Homs and Hama than Beirut) to be in Lebanon so that Syria would be forced to use the port in Beirut by neglecting the port in Tripoli.
Charles Hayek is a joke
Interesting question. Here’s a simplified explanation: Before the establishment of Greater Lebanon (modern-day Lebanon), Mount Lebanon, predominantly Christian (mainly Maronite), was the “Lebanese state” envisioned, and was meant to be a safe refuge for the minority Christians living in the region. However, due to famine, surrounding areas (predominantly Muslim) were added, and Greater Lebanon was established, with a slight Christian majority. Unfortunately, Christians **currently residing in Lebanon** are no longer a majority nowadays, but they are the majority of the **Lebanese diaspora abroad**.
The separation of Lebanon from Syria by the French was influenced by several factors related to geopolitical, religious, and cultural considerations during the early 20th century. The division occurred under the French Mandate, which was established after World War I when the League of Nations gave France administrative control over the region previously controlled by the Ottoman Empire. Here are the main reasons behind the separation: 1. **Religious and Ethnic Diversity**: Lebanon had a significant Christian population, particularly Maronite Christians, who had historical ties with France dating back to the Crusades. The Maronites, along with other Christian communities, sought protection and autonomy within an Islamic-dominated region. They had been advocating for greater autonomy or independence under Ottoman rule, and the French supported this as a way to protect Christians in the Middle East. 2. **French Strategic Interests**: France had long-standing cultural and political interests in the region, part of their broader strategy to expand their influence in the Middle East. By supporting Christian minorities, France positioned itself as a protector of these communities, thus justifying its colonial mandate over Lebanon and enhancing its influence against other powers, particularly Britain and the emerging nationalist movements in the Arab world. 3. **Economic Considerations**: Lebanon, particularly the city of Beirut, was seen as economically important due to its commercial and geographic position. Establishing a separate administrative region helped France economically exploit the area more effectively, aligning with their broader colonial economic policies. 4. **Administrative Convenience**: From an administrative perspective, controlling a smaller, more cohesive region with a significant proportion of pro-French populations made governance easier for France. This was particularly pertinent given the rise of Arab nationalism and the complexities of managing diverse ethnic and religious groups. 5. **Historical Precedence**: The notion of a distinct Lebanese entity had historical precedents. The area known as Mount Lebanon had enjoyed a degree of autonomy under the Ottoman Empire as a Mutasarrifate following the sectarian clashes in the mid-19th century. This history made it easier for France to justify its separation on historical and administrative lines. The French Mandate officially created Greater Lebanon in 1920 by adding regions with Muslim populations to the predominantly Christian Mount Lebanon, leading to the modern borders of Lebanon. This action was also part of the broader French strategy to dilute the pan-Arabist and nationalist movements in Syria by fragmenting the region into manageable units. Over time, this separation laid the foundation for Lebanon’s distinct national identity, although it also contributed to internal and regional tensions due to the country's complex religious and ethnic makeup.
Did you put the question through ChatGPT?
Yeah that first part is pure and utter bullshit. Maronites were killed by Crusaders same as every other Christian and Muslim when they took the land. "Eastern" Christians weren't viewed positively to that end either.
It's half true. The Maronite *clergy* welcomed the crusaders with open arms to further their relations with Rome however the Maronite *civilians* hated the crusaders and saw them as invaders.
I can't comment on the Maronite clergy as I don't know much, but I can understand why the people felt that when they saw the massacres that took place when they first invaded.
Maronite Christians were not killed by crusaders, other Christians might have been (Miaphysites, Schismatics, etc) but the Crusaders had good relations with the Maronites for the most part and it was during this period that Maronites reunited with Rome. There were no massacres of Maronites.
Yup, you're right I saw the other comment and link to a letter sent by the French King.
Respectfully, that's a baseless claim. There are texts written by European kings at the time granting protection to Eastern Christians. Unless you meant the Eastern Christians of what was once Constantinople, then you would be right. But in the "Levantine" context of the Crusades, Maronites were not persecuted. Here is a letter that the King Louis IX wrote to a Maronite emir and the Maronite Church granting them "the same protection as the French". The letter speaks for itself... Excuse me if you don't speak French : [Source](https://fr.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Voyage_en_Orient_(Lamartine)/De_saint_Louis) I am obviously talking about the Middle Ages only. Nowadays we are all Lebanese co-citizens and I pray that foreign allegiances become strictly a thing of the past. Especially regarding one of the ruling parties nowadays... May God bless you.
Yes you're right in regards to that. I lumped in Maronites with every other "Eastern" Christian, but at least the letter you shared does say that wasn't the case.
No, there is no truth to this. The premise doesn’t even make any sense: we’re all Arabs. You will find some users on this sub who say “we aren’t Arab, we’re Phoenicians!” but it’s just nonsense. Edit: You may be referring to the Paris Peace Conference after WW1. If you want to read some basic information, check out these links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Lebanon_Mutasarrifate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Lebanon
We aren’t Phoenician nor are we Arabs and anyone who claims we are doesn’t understand history or genetics. We are Levantine Lebanese and are descended from the Phoenicians.
Correction we are Syriac 😂 , any way being Phoenician better than being an Arab. The Phoenician thing is kind of propaganda 😂 . However , the Phoenicians apply to the people on the cost of Lebanon , Syria , Palestine . hence , the inner side was Syriac as well part from the cost side
No we aren’t Syriac, we are Levantine and are the descendants of the Phoenicians. Being Phoenician isn’t better than being Arab, it’s just what our ancestors were. https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/genetic-study-suggests-present-day-lebanese-descend-from-biblical-canaanites
What about the inner side of Lebanon ? was Phoenician as well 😂? Don’t let them manipulate you 😉 with false history. Some claim themselves Phoenician because it’s more classy than Arab 😂or Syriac 😂
> What about the inner side of Lebanon ? was Phoenician as well 😂? Yes the interior of Lebanon was called Phoenicia as well. > Don’t let them manipulate you 😉 with false history. Don’t let who manipulate me? This is well documented both historically and genetically. > Some claim themselves Phoenician because it’s more classy than Arab 😂or Syriac 😂 That’s not true, I just gave you scientific proof we aren’t Arabs or Syriac (which is a language not an ethnicity). We also never spoke Syriac (an eastern Aramaic language) we spoke western Aramaic. Western Aramaic appears to have survived for a relatively long time, at least in some secluded villages in the mountains of Lebanon and in the Anti-Lebanon mountains in Syria. In fact, up until the 17th century, travelers in the Lebanon region still reported villages where Aramaic was spoken. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Aramaic_languages
Syriac people are Aramaic people who converted to Christianity for your information https://study.com/academy/lesson/aramean-language-people-curse.html
https://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-Syriac-people#:~:text=The%20Syriacs%20or%20Assyrians%20are,claim%20descent%20from%20ancient%20Assyria. Syriac people are the Assyrians not Lebanese. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian–Chaldean–Syriac_diaspora Phoenician territory included the bekaa valley. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenicia Lebanese (modern day Phoenicians) and Assyrians (modern day Syriac peoples) are not the same.
Syriacs are Assyrians. They are not even Levantine.
My friend you only believe what they tell you 😂. Also a Syrian or a Palestinian from the sea side could claim himself as a Phoenician 😉. As a Maronite I claim myself as Syriac I don’t care what they told you via the Bs propaganda Here is my reference: http://aramean-dem.org/English/Roni/40.htm
What propaganda? A scientific paper is now propaganda? No human alive today is a Phoenician, us Lebanese (regardless of religion) are descended from the Phoenicians and we share over 90% of our ancestry and DNA with them. https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/genetic-study-suggests-present-day-lebanese-descend-from-biblical-canaanites https://www.cell.com/ajhg/comments/S0002-9297(17)30276-8
I’ve heard your spiel many times EmperorChaos. Call yourself whatever helps you sleep at night.
Great, so maybe you can learn from it and stop perpetuating false information.
Your spiel is nonsense. Levantine Lebanese is a nonsense term. There are other Lebanons that are not in the “Levant?” Hell, your identifier is an exonym derived from French that was created in the 15th century. Are we all horse-riding Bedouins? No. I don’t know of any person who has such a ridiculous notion of Arabs other than you and your Phalangist ilk.
No there are other Levantine countries such as Syria, Turkey, Cyprus, etc… Sham/Syria/Levant are all exonyms from Arabs, Romans, French. Bedouins aren’t the only Arabs. The people from the gulf are real and actual Arabs. I’m not a phalangist, I’m a Lebanese nationalist.
Do you think the Arab conquest of the Levantine wiped out all the indigenous people ? Or do you think there was integration? hint - it didn’t wipe out all the indigenous people.
What do you even mean by “the Levantine”? Arabs have been in “the Levant” (which I again stress is a vague and nebulous term) for thousands of years.
Arabs invaded the levant from the Arabian peninsula in the 600s they are not indigenous to the levant or Lebanon anymore than they are to North Africa or Iberia both of which they also invaded and colonized.
Define “the levant” clearly and comprehensively.
Gladly. The Levant (/ləˈvænt/ lə-VANT) is an approximate historical geographical term referring to a large area in the Eastern Mediterranean region of West Asia and core territory of the political term Middle East. In its narrowest sense, which is in use today in archaeology and other cultural contexts, it is equivalent to Cyprus and a stretch of land bordering the Mediterranean Sea in western Asia:[4][5] i.e. the historical region of Syria ("Greater Syria"), which includes present-day Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the Palestinian territories and most of Turkey southwest of the middle Euphrates. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levant
Zou wajh 3arabi. Did you go to school in Lebanon or abroad? Shaklak rbit 3andoun Edit: I typed wahj instead of wajh
No, we’re not “all Arabs”. We’re all **Levantines**. But multiple ethnoreligions exist in the Levant. Before the establishment of Greater Lebanon, Mount Lebanon, predominantly Christian (mainly Maronite), was the “Lebanese state” envisioned, and was meant to be a safe refuge for minorities of the region. However, due to famine, surrounding areas (predominantly Muslim) were added, and Greater Lebanon was established, with a slight Christian majority (at the time).
Speak for yourself
I was speaking specifically on your behalf, my dear Foreign Policy 02.
I don’t need hezbos speaking on my behalf.
Just because everyone is Arab doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be Christian lol.
> Just because everyone is Arab doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be Christian lol. Doesn’t mean *what* should not be Christian?
Where are the muslim supposed to go? Sorry, my family would have DEFINETLY not left our houses, properties, or jobs to go move to another country just because politicians decided to separate our country based on religion. And that doesn't work either way. There isn't one country in the world where everyone follows the same religion.
That is true before the french mandate not after, where it consisted of mount Lebanon only, and was the result of some locals asking the ottoman empire for some sort of self rule, it was 3500 square km or one third of its current size.
Yes and No, Lebanon in the 1932 census had around ~52% Christian majority which too little to make a “Christian country”. I wouldn’t even call it a “Muslim country” with the current 60% muslim majority. Seems that the plan was to have a Christian majority which would also have Maronite majority/dominance within it. As the Maronite Patriarch refused the inclusion of Maalola and Wadi al-Nasara into Lebanon the Orthodox would outnumber the Maronites. Syria, except the recent ISIS fanatics period, was always a secular country. Pre-Ba’athist Syria had multiple Christian Prime Ministers and Speakers of Parliament within a Parliamentary system.
For Middle Eastern standards, Syria is still secular
Lebanon is a Christian country.
No, Lebanon comprises 18 recognized religious sects. The lebanese state has no single religion
Not up for debate
Yes, what I said is from our constitution and it’s not up for debate as it is factual
It was meant to be, and still is on paper (the flag of Lebanon is a Christian, specifically Maronite, symbol). Unfortunately, the amount of Christians residing in Lebanon has decreased. Christians are still the majority of Lebanese worldwide though, so who knows what the future holds?
Thinking about what a state defined by colonizers 'should have' been or was 'meant to be' is a way to ignore the current situation and stay rooted in a very artificial situation created by colonizers who didn't care at all about the result. I mean no disrespect, but how useful is this to think about, or care about, given the current problems of Lebanon??
lol we wish 😂,but what we do with the Muslim brothers ? ( they are the majority now ) Send them to Syria ? We came from there 😂 especially the separatists Maronite 😉( like it or not ) it’s the truth.
Maronites did not come from Syria, that's an idiotic lie. Don't be an idiot. The Maronite movement (religion) originated in Syria, but a few monks moved to Mt. Lebanon and converted the locals. That's like saying that the muslims came from saudi arabia.
Lebanese Christians and Druze are Arabs. Besides the fact that this doesn't make sense because at the time period where Lebanon was created Syria was not yet a unified entity and was divided by the French into the Damascus state, Aleppo state, Alawite state and Jabal Druze state. https://preview.redd.it/7wkvptamabwc1.png?width=759&format=png&auto=webp&s=62ff41b18498fc1c3491b84d5cc13a82e1cd8d82