uva-dare (digital academic repository) identities in early arabic … · to his son, carried him to...

UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (http://dare.uva.nl)

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository)

Identities in early Arabic journalism: The case of Louis Ṣābūnjī

Visser, R.W.

Link to publication

Citation for published version (APA):Visser, R. W. (2014). Identities in early Arabic journalism: The case of Louis Ṣābūnjī.

General rightsIt is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s),other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Disclaimer/Complaints regulationsIf you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, statingyour reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Askthe Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam,The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible.

Download date: 25 Nov 2020

https://dare.uva.nl/personal/pure/en/publications/identities-in-early-arabic-journalism-the-case-of-louis-bnj(b86c10a0-a35e-488d-af89-3b9822e0f199).html

125

4TheBeeinconflictwithBuṭrusal-Bustānī(1870)

“One day a boy saw a bee [naḥla] that sat on a flower[zahra]. The boy was very thoughtless and started toconfront the bee with hatred and aggression. The beenoticed this, turned towards him, and stung him betweenthe eyes. He immediately fainted and fell to the ground,beatingitwithhishandsandhisfeet.Thenhisfather,whowasapeasant farmer,heardhim.At thatverymomenthewasardentlyworkingwithanunrefinedpen,whichheusedtowriteletterstohisfriends.Heputthepenaside,hurriedtohisson,carriedhimtothehouse,andaskedthemotheroftheboytocurehim.Hiswifesaidtohim:‘bringmesomehoneyof thebeethatstunghim,asthiswillcuretheboy’.Herhusbandthensaidtoher:‘Alaswoman,whattodonow,becausethebeewhostunghimisdead’.Shesaid:‘Buthowandwhen?’Hethensaid:‘Well,ourancestorsalreadyknewthatabeedieswhenitstingsaperson’.Whenhesaidthis,the bee suddenly buzzed around him, and he jumpedaround in frightof it.Hewanted tochase it away,but thebeewasmore headstrong than him and stung him in hisgloomyface.(…)Thewomansaid: ‘Tellme,whenwillyoustopbeingstupid?(…)Goddidnotgivethebeeaweapontodestroyitself,buttoprotectitselffromitsenemy.”1

Soon after Ṣābūnjī started his magazine al-Naḥla in 1870, heinitiated a polemic with Buṭrus al-Bustānī and his son Salīm al-Bustānī. This chapter deals with this polemic, which unfolded indifferent periodicals. Ṣābūnjī’s side was represented in al-Naḥlaandal-Naḥlawal-zahra,andtheBustānīs’sidewasrepresentedintheirtwoperiodicals,al-Jinānandal-Janna.Ṣābūnjīcameoffworst;bothhismagazineswerebannedbytheOttomanauthoritieswhilethe Bustānīs were allowed to continue their periodicals. Theparable above is taken from al-Naḥla wal-zahra; it gives a

1Shalfūn1871:13.

The Bee in conflict with Buṭrus al-Bustānī (1870)

126

metaphorical account of Ṣābūnjī’s conflictwith theBustānīs fromthe former’s perspective. The bee (Ṣābūnjī) is represented as thevictimofaggression,bytheson(Salīm)andbythefather(Buṭrus).Thesonisheedlessandimmatureandperhapsalsofrail.Thefatheris simple, naïve and distinctly pre-modern for unquestioninglyaccepting knowledge that is handed down through the ages. Thewomanisrepresentedasreasonableandintelligent,andsideswiththebee.Sheexplainsthatboththesonandthefatherareignorant,andthatthebeemerelyreactstowhattheydotoit.2

The firstpartof this chapter consistsof anaccountof therelations between Ṣābūnjī and the Bustānīs and of their polemic.BesidesashortarticlebyYazbakandafewlinesbyZolondek,thisconflicthasnotyetbeenstudied.3Thesecondpartanalyzes thosepassagesfromthepolemicthatgivesinformationaboutidentities.The identity thatplays themostprominent role in thepolemic isthe Eastern; others thatwill be discussed are the Syrian identityand different religious identities. Following the principles ofMembership Categorization Analysis, I will analyze how Ṣābūnjīmakes these identities relevant and consequential as part of hiscommunicative goals. The third part will discuss my conclusionsaboutthesereferencestocollectiveidentities.4.1 ṢābūnjīandtheBustānīsKeyplayersandtheirmagazinesTheChristian-Druze conflict of 1860was followedby a period of‘longpeace’andprosperityforMountLebanonandBeirut.4Duringthetwodecadesafter1860,BeirutbecamethemostvibrantcenterofculturallifeintheArabworld.Theyear1870wastobeacrucialyear for Arabic journalism. In that year alone seven periodicalswere launched in Beirut, including Ṣābūnjī’s al-Naḥla, Buṭrus al-Bustānī’sal-Jinān,andSalīmal-Bustānī’sal-Janna.

2Interestingly,beesdodiewhentheystingaperson.3Yazbak1957;Zolondek1966:102.4The term ‘longpeace’ is a reference to the title ofAkarli’s book (1993),whichdiscussesthisperiod.


127

Buṭrus al-Bustānī’s role as the architect of a newnationalandreligiouslyneutralconsciousnesshasoftenbeenstressed.5Toal-Bustānī, the inter-confessional riots of 1860 demonstrated thenecessityofembracingareligiouslyneutralwaṭanī-identitybasedon a shared Syrian fatherland, rather than a religiously inspiredidentitybasedonthereligiouscommunities.Al-Bustānīrepeatedlyarticulatedthisidea,firstlyinhisNafīrSūriyapamphletsof1860.6Inaddition,al-Bustānī’sNationalSchool(‘al-Madrasaal-Waṭaniyya’)wasgroundedonthesameprinciple.7InJanuary1870al-Bustānī’sal-Jinānmagazine appeared for the first time, becoming “the firstmajor Arabic literary, historical, socio-political, and educationaljournaloftheArabworld”.8Itwasalsoal-Jināninwhichal-Bustānīpropagated patriotic unity. Itsmotto, printed on the first page ofthefirst issue,underscoresthisunequivocally: ‘Ḥubbal-waṭanminal-īmān’ (approximately ‘Love of the fatherland is [an article] offaith’). Al-Jinān was published fortnightly, and addressed a widerange of subjects, including politics, society, history, andgeography.9DagmarGlaßnoticestheprioritythatal-Jinānaccordsto objective coverage of political events. She also underlines thereligious neutrality of al-Jinān, carefully avoiding sectariantensions.10Buṭrusal-Bustānīdiedin1883,buthisfamilymemberscontinuedal-Jinānuntil1886.11

Fruma Zachs analyzes the emergence of a Syrian non-religiousidentityinthewritingsofBuṭrusal-Bustānīandothers.12InhisreviewofZachs’book,Kedarasksthequestionwhethertherewas “any opposition to the writing of those Christian Arabintellectualsshedescribes?Wastherewritinginnewspapersorinbooks that expressed opposition to al-Bustānī and his

5Zachs2005;Sheehi2004;Sheehi2000.6Buṭrusal-Bustānīwasnottheveryfirsttopropagatethisidea,asKhalīlal-Khūrīalready called for patriotic unity in 1858 (Zachs 2005: 163-164). However, al-Bustānīwasthemostoutspokenperson.7SeeprimarilyHanssen2005:164-168.8Zolondek1966:144.9Onal-Jinān,seeprimarilyEissa2000andGlaß2004:134-139.10Glaß2004:136,138.11Ṭarrāzī1913b:45-47.12Zachs2005.


128

proclivities?”13As will be demonstrated in this chapter, this isindeedthecase.InDecember1870Ṣābūnjīwouldvigorouslyattackal-Bustānī’s religiously neutralwaṭanī-identity in the pages of hisnewmagazineal-Naḥla.

Ṣābūnjī started his magazine in May 1870, and it closelyresembledal-Jināninappearance,size,andsubjects.Ingeneral,thecontents of al-Naḥla were very varied. The first page of the firstissue (see the image) presents an outline of the contents thatal-Naḥla planned to address. He mentioned eight topics: science,industry, history, linguistics, and domestic and foreign events(ḥawādithwaṭaniyya, andḥawādithajnabiyya),humorousarticles,andshortstories.Thisfirstissueincluded,amongotherstopics,theuseofanimals formankind, tobacco, thebenefitsof industryovertrade,andhumansacrificeamongBabyloniansandtheAssyrians.

Interestingly, the outline of al-Naḥla also explicitlymentions what the magazine will avoid: religious and politicalsubjects. The statement that religiousmatters are omitted bringsal-Naḥla in agreementwithBuṭrus al-Bustānī’s policyof religiousneutrality. At some point Ṣābūnjī jettisoned the principle of notdiscussing religion; aswill be discussed below,al-Naḥla attackedal-Jinānforpropagatingatheism.Thesecondsubjecttobeavoided,politics,wasindeedgenerallyavoided,andthisaspectsetsal-Naḥlaapart from al-Jinān. As a consequence the absence of articles oncurrent affairs is remarkable; only the Franco-PrussianWar thatstartedinJuly1870generatedsomeattentionoftheperiodical.14

It seems that Ṣābūnjī wrote most of al-Naḥla’s articleshimself, but there were also other contributors. One of them,Bishāra Zalzal (1851-1905), later became amedical doctor and aregular contributor to other magazines as well.15One of Zalzal’ssubmissions to al-Naḥla discusses the need to buy locallymanufactured products as opposed to imported goods. This wasalsodoneby“ourearlyancestorsthePhoenicians,whodevelopedalargenumberofskillssuchastheproductionofpurple”.16The

13Kedar2008:784.14ṢābūnjīwasunmistakablysympathetictowardstheFrenchinthisconflict.15OnZalzalseeDāghir1972:498-499.16Ṣābūnjī1870b:74.

Al-Naḥla 1, dated 11 May 1870, Beirut, p.1.


130

genealogical relation between the ancient Phoenicians and thecurrent inhabitantsof theregion thatZalzalsketches is revealing.HisremarkpredatestheearliestArabicgenealogicalrelation,foundby Kaufman in his study on the emergence of Phoenicianism, byalmosttwentyyears.17 InJune1870Salīmal-Bustānī(1848-1884)startedal-Janna,anewspaperthatappearedtwiceaweek,consistingoffourpages.Buṭrus’sonalsobecameaprominentfigureintheBeiruticulturalscene. He is recognized particularly as a seminal figure in theevolution of the Arabic historical novel.18In addition, he wrotemany editorial articles, predominantly discussing politics, in hisfather’sal-Jinān. Salīm’sal-Janna appearedmuchmore frequentlythanthemonthlyal-Jinānandthefortnightlyal-Naḥla,andal-Jannahad a clear focus on current affairs, politics, and trade. One yearlaterSalīmal-Bustānīfoundedanadditionalnewspaper,al-Junayna,whichappearedfourtimesaweek.Simultaneouslyhecontinuedal-Janna,andthecombinational-Jannaandal-Junayna isregardedasthe first Arabic daily newspaper.19Both newspapers existed untilaboutthesametimethatal-Jinānceasedtobepublished,1886.AnaccountofthepolemicDuringthefirstsixmonthsof1870Ṣābūnjīwasonfriendlytermswith the Bustānīs. Ṣābūnjī wrote two articles in al-Jinān onlanguages and language theory, which appeared in February andMay.20Whenal-Naḥla appeared for the first time inMay,al-Jinānwished Ṣābūnjī good luck with his magazine. Similarly, al-Naḥlawished Salīm al-Bustānī good luck when he started al-Janna inJune.21Inexcitingmetaphors,ṢābūnjīpraisesthefactthatBeirut’sintellectual climate was booming. In reference to various Beiruti 17Kaufman(2004:41)mentionsanarticleinal-Muqtaṭaf,datingto1889.Hansen(2005:46)alsofoundreferencestothe“mythicallandsofPhoenicia”fromthelate1870s. Note also that, in 1872, Ṣābūnjī invoked the idea of Phoenicia in hisOldMotherPhoenicia.18SeeBawardi2007;Halevi2007;Sheehi2010;Moosa1997:157-196.19Onal-Jannaandal-Junayna,seeGlaß2004:84-85.Ihavenotfoundanycopiesofal-Junayna.20Ṣābūnjī1870a;Ṣābūnjī1870c.21Ṣābūnjī1870b:61.


131

magazines,Ṣābūnjīwritesthatthebee(al-naḥla)cannowflyfromgardentogarden(from jinān to janna)andfromgardentoflower(from janna to zahra) in order to collect good things. In a line ofpoetryṢābūnjīalsowrites(qtd1):“MayHe[God]preordainthathe[Salīm al-Bustānī] plantshis pretty small garden, so that our tinybeecanindulgeonthenectarofitsflowers.”22InsomewhatcoverttermsṢābūnjīproposesfriendlyrelationsandpossiblycooperationwith al-Janna. However, following the metaphor closely wouldsuggestal-Naḥla to be parasitizingal-Janna. This is of coursenotwhatṢābūnjīmeant,but itbecomesaratheradequatedescriptionoftheeventsthatoccurredlaterthatyear. FourweeksafterṢābūnjīhadwishedSalīmal-Bustānīgoodluck, he accused Salīm’s al-Janna of instigating apocalyptic fearsamonghisreadingpublic,therebyinitiatingthefirstoftwodistinctconflicts.Al-Janna had quoted two English astronomers who hadobservedthatthesun’ssurfacewasin‘greatdisturbance’,andthatthesunwassendingoutbeamsofelectriclight.23Beforetheendofnext year, thismight result in ‘strange events’ thatwere hithertounseenintheworld.InṢābūnjī’sresponsetothisarticleheclaimedthat al-Janna was spreading fears about drought and disasterbecauseof this increasedsolaractivity.24Hedevotedninepages–half of the issue ofal-Naḥla– to refuting these claims, and hedidthis inaparticularlyarrogantmanner.TheBustānīsrespondedtoal-Naḥla with an article in al-Jinān, and not in al-Janna, whichpublished the original article.25This response did not explicitlymentionṢābūnjī’scritique,butitinformeditsreadersthat,asfarasthey could surmise, there was no reason to worry about theincreasedsolaractivityoranystrangeevents. Inhis turn,Ṣābūnjī

22Ṣābūnjī 1870b: 61.Note Ṣābūnjī’s usage of the term ‘small garden’ (junayna);Salīmal-Bustānīlaterstartedanewspaperwiththatname.23The point under discussion is the discovery of solar flames by RichardCarrington and Richard Hodgson. For a contemporary account in an Americannewspaper,seeinthebibliography‘TheSunandtheEarth’(1870).Unfortunately,theissueofal-JannathatcontainedthearticlethatṢābūnjīrespondedto,thefifthissue dated 9 July 1870, has probably not survived. I have reconstructed itscontentsonthebasisoflaterreferencesinal-Jinānandal-Naḥla.24Ṣābūnjī1870b:113-121.25Bustānī1870:432.


132

wroteanumberofarticlesonthesunandonelectricityintheninthandtenthissuesofal-Naḥla.Thesearticlesdidnotexplicitlyreferto al-Janna or al-Jinān, but the conflict clearly resonated in al-Naḥla’schoiceoftopics.

TheBustānīsthenrespondedforasecondtimeinal-Jinān,directly addressing al-Naḥla and questioning Ṣābūnjī’s motives.26This second response triggered Ṣābūnjī to become downrighthostile toal-Janna andnowalso toal-Jinān.Theeleventh issueofal-NaḥlaincludedthreearticlesthatattackedtheBustānīs.ThefirstarticlecriticizedtheinterferenceofBuṭrusal-Bustānī’sal-Jināninaconflict that was initiated by Salīm al-Bustānī’s al-Janna. Thesecond article, entitled ‘The downfall of the sunbeam of al-Jannaand al-Jinān’, systematically refutes al-Jinān’s second response toal-Naḥla. In this article Ṣābūnjī accuses the Bustānīs of narrow-mindedness, intellectual incapability, and detestable self-aggrandizement.27The third article is a parable entitled ‘Fatherlyadvice’,whichissimilartotheparablethatintroducedthischapter.Theparablementionsayoungboywhotriestotakehoneyfromahive,angrybeeswhostrikeback,andafatherwhorescueshissonandexplainstohimhowtohandlebeesproperly.Alsoincludedintheeleventh issueofal-Naḥlawasacontribution–aeulogyonal-Naḥla– by a certain AḥmadWahbī.28AḥmadWahbī subsequentlycomplains in al-Jinān that Ṣābūnjī had distorted his originalcontribution to al-Naḥla so that it became a farmore outspokenpro-Ṣābūnjī and anti-Bustānī text. 29 Ṣābūnjī did not respondanymoretothischargeoffalsification,andtheconflictfizzledoutinAugust.

InDecember1870Ṣābūnjīinitiatedasecondconflict,whenal-Naḥlaopenedits29thissuewiththeheader‘WaronGod,kings,andbelievers!InstigatedbyastudentofVoltaireinal-Jinān’.30ThearticlethatṢābūnjīrespondedtohadappearedunderthetitle‘The

26Bustānī1870:461-462.27‘al-qulūb al-ḍayyiqa wal-afkār al-qāṣira wal-ighrāq fī maḥabbat al-dhāt al-munkara’(Ṣābūnjī1870b:164).28Ṣābūnjī1870b:169.29Bustānī1870:526-528.30Ṣābūnjī1870b:449.

Al-Naḥla 29, dated 10 December 1870, Beirut, p.449.


134

War’ in al-Jinān. 31 This article, written by an anonymouscontributor,mainlycriticizedincapablerulersandwarmongers,allwithout any mention of the name Voltaire. Despite this, Ṣābūnjīargued that Rousseau, Machiavelli, and primarily Voltaire, whomhe unambiguously and repeatedly referred to as ‘the unbelieverVoltaire’, had inspired the author of the article. On this basis heconcludesthatal-Jinān“spreadtheteachingsofunbeliefunderthepretextofcivilizationand loveof the fatherland”.32Inaddition,heclassified Arabic translations of Voltaire’s works, and byimplication also the article in al-Jinān, as a “flood of misery”.33Almosttheentire29thissueofal-Naḥlaisdedicatedtorebuttingal-Jinān’sarticle.

BoththeanonymousauthorofthearticleandtheBustānīsresponded to Ṣābūnjī’s accusations in the 24th issue of al-Jinān,primarilycondemningṢābūnjī’saggressivetone.TheyarguedthatṢābūnjīconsciouslymisrepresentedtheirarticle“undertheveilofprotectingthereligions”,thathehaddonesooutofjealousyofthesuccessofal-Jinān,andthathewantedtofermenttroubleinorderto overshadow al-Jinān’s earlier accusations of falsification.34The30th issue of al-Naḥla is largely silent on thematter, but the 31stissue pours a torrent of abuse over al-Jinān. It not onlysystematically responds to the last issue of al-Jinān, but it alsoincludesnewattacksandaccusationsdirectedattheBustānīs.Forinstance,ṢābūnjīarguedthatBuṭrusal-Bustānīplagiarizedothers’work,35and that the novel al-Huyām fī jinān al-Shām, written bySalīmal-Bustānī andpublished serially inal-Jinān, “corrupted thehealthymindsofyoungpeople”.36

Atsomepointduringtheirconflict, theBustānīscontactedtheOttoman authorities in order to convince them to take action

31Bustānī1870:689-690and721-722.32Ṣābūnjī1870b:463.33Ṣābūnjī1870b:463.34Bustānī1870:747-750.35Ṣābūnjī1870b:494-495.HespecificallymentionsJarmānūsFarḥāt(1670-1732),aMaronitearchbishopofAleppo.36Ṣābūnjī1870b:492.ThisnovelbySalīmal-Bustānīhasreceivedsomescholarlyattentioninthelastfewyears;seeBawardi2007;Sheehi2010.


135

againstal-Naḥla,whichtheydid.37Ṣābūnjīwasfirstwarnednottoengage in slanderous behavior towards the Bustānīs. He did notobey, and he was consequently prohibited from publishing inBeirut. The 31st issue of al-Naḥla, published on 24 December,provedtobethelast.

Ṣābūnjī immediately triedtoavoidthebanbycooperatingwithanotherBeiruti journalist,YūsufShalfūn,whohadpublishedal-Zahramagazine in 1870. They joined forces and published thefirst issueofal-Naḥlawal-zahramagazineon2January1871,andthesecondissueon5January1871.Thefirstpageofthefirstissueannounced that this new magazine would fight “unbelief andviciousness”, a statement in which the conflict with the Bustānīsclearly resonates.38The first issue of the magazine also includedthe parable ‘A boy and a bee’ with which this chapter wasintroduced.39Because of its polemical tone and contents, andbecause the title included the word al-Naḥla, it is quiteunsurprising that thismagazinewasalsobannedby theOttomanauthorities. However, Ṣābūnjī and Shalfūn did not give up. Theyrewrotethefirstissueal-Naḥlawal-zahra,renamedital-Najāḥ,andrepublished it on 9 January 1871. A comparison between theoriginal al-Naḥlawal-zahra and the rewritten al-Najāḥ (see nextpageforthefirstpageofbothissues)showsanumberofsignificantalterations.Forexample,thereferencetothefightagainstunbeliefandviciousnesswasdeleted,aswellasthementioningofal-Naḥlainthefirstline.Atthesametime,notallthepolemicalcontentwasremoved in al-Najāḥ, as the parable was maintained. Again, theauthorities responded; on condition that Louis Ṣābūnjīwouldnotparticipate, Shalfūn was permitted to continue publishing al-Najāḥ.40Oneweeklater,thethirdissue41ofal-Najāḥappeared,andfromthispointonṢābūnjī’snamenolongerappeared. 37Yazbak1957:65.38Shalfūn1871:1.39Shalfūn1871:13.40Yazbak1957:68.41ShalfūnandṢābūnjīdidnotbothertomakeasecondissueofal-Najāḥ;instead,the second issue ofal-Naḥlawal-zahrawaspresented as the second issue ofal-Najāḥ.Importantly,thisissuedidnotincludeanypolemicalcontent,sotherewasnoimmediateneedtorewriteit.

Al-Naḥla wal-Zahra 1, dated 2 January 1871, Beirut, p.1.

Al-Najāḥ 1, dated 9 January 1871, Beirut, p.1.


138

Despite thisprohibition,Ṣābūnjīanonymouslycontributeda number of articles toal-Najāḥ untilMay or August 1871.42Onecopyofthethirdissueofal-Najāḥcontainsafewmarginalnotes,inthe handwriting of Ṣābūnjī, that point out which articles werewritten by him.43In addition, it seems that Ṣābūnjī was alsoresponsibleforthetranslationandpublicationofAlexandreDumas’novelTheCountofMontecristo,whichappearedseriallyinal-Najāḥuntil August 1871.44However, during the spring and summer aconflict about Ṣābūnjī’s remuneration emerged which ruined hisrelationwith Shalfūn and the newprinter ofal-Najāḥ, Rizq AllāhKhaḍrā.45On16August1871Ṣābūnjī announced in themagazineal-Bashīrthathewouldquitworkingforal-Najāḥaltogether.46TwodayslaterheleftBeirutandboardedashiptoEgypt.47

Ṣābūnjī became the first Syrian journalist of many morewholaterfledOttomancensorship.InEgypthepublishedal-Naḥlaal-ḥurra (‘The Free Bee’), a pamphlet in which he continued hispolemicwith theBustānīs. Itsmotto, printed on the first page, istelling: “The Free Bee is printed in a free country, published ifnecessary and without schedule, in order to correct thecommentaries of al-Janna and al-Jinān among the people”.Unfortunately,nocopyofTheFreeBeehasbeenfound.48

42Ṣābūnjī points to May in Ḥallāq 1874: 40 and to August in the magazine al-Bashīr(foundinHolt2009:63).43Onearticlediscusses theFranco-PrussianWar, and theotherdiscussesVictorHugo.ThecopythatincludesthesenotesisintheBeyazıtStateLibraryinIstanbul.44Holt2009:63.Ṣābūnjī’sincompletetranslationwasneverpublished.45For an account of this conflict, see Ḥallāq 1874: 39-43. The conflict was stillunresolvedin1874.RizqAllāhKhaḍrāreturnsagaininthe1874conflictwiththeMaronites,discussedinthenextchapter.46Holt2009:63.47Frost1890:48.48The electronic database of the Alexandria Library (see in the bibliographyBibliothecaAlexandria(n.d.)givesal-Naḥlaal-ḥurra’smotto,butnocopyseemstobepreserved there.TheBeyazıtStateLibrary in Istanbulmayholdacopyofal-Naḥlaal-ḥurra,butithasnotbeenfoundthereeither.IthankMr.ÖzcanGeçerforhisenquiriesaboutthispamphlet.


139

4.2 IdentitiesincommunicationIn this study I approach Ṣābūnjī’s and Bustānīs’ debates as apolemic. As stated in themethodological chapter, I discern threeparties to everypolemic: the twopartieswho competewith eachother regarding a certain topic or topics, and the reading publicwho is addressed. As such, the two opposing factions arecompeting for authority and legitimacy in the eyes of the public.This principle is clearly discernible in the conflict underconsideration. In both cases of disagreement, solar activity andVoltaire, Ṣābūnjī explicitly stirred up the conflict by reactingstrongly to a seemingly insignificant article. In this way Ṣābūnjīstresses the incapacity of the Bustānīs to grasp, evaluate, andexplaintheissuesathandtohispublic,therebydelegitimizingtheirauthority to address these issues. At the same time, Ṣābūnjīstresseshisowncapacity toarticulateandexplain these issues tothepublic.ThisvyingforauthorityintheeyesofthereadingpublicreflectstheirintensecompetitioninBeirut;bothLouisṢābūnjīandthe Bustānīs were simultaneously active in literature, education,journalism,andreligion. In the following pages Iwill study passages inal-Naḥla –andincidentallyalsoinal-Jinān–whichprovideinformationabouthow ‘we’ are or how ‘we’ should act, whether ‘we’ is framed asArabs, Syrians, Easterns, et cetera. Following the principles ofMembershipCategorizationAnalysis, Iapproachthereferences toidentitiesasactsofascribinganidentity,whicharemadeaspartofcommunication with others. From this perspective, references toidentities carry functions in the communication that takes place,andthesefunctionsvaryfromsituationtosituation.Consequently,eachreferencetoanidentitycarriesasituatedfunction.Atthesametime,notevery identitycanbe invokedwith thesame function inthe same context. This iswhereDiscourse Analysis complementsMCA.Whetheridentities‘fit’themessagedependsonthemeaningsthatareassociatedwiththeidentities.Thesemeaningsaresociallyconstructed in discourse. On the one hand, the language userremakes a meaning of an identity by referring to it incommunication, thereby reifying the discourse of identity.Simultaneously, discourses of identity provide the language user


140

withinformationwhichidentitiesfitandwhichdonot.Thus,eachreference to an identity also reflects a process of negotiationbetween language user and discourses of identity. This approachlets the people involved themselves –Ṣābūnjī and his peers– settheirsituatedidentitiesintheirinteractionwithothers,andinthiscasewiththeirreaders.Thisapproachisinspiredbythedesiretosee how they made sense of the various identities that wereavailabletothem.SolarflamesandtheblessingsoftheEastIn thispolemic, the topic of identity is not an issue. Instead, theydebateaboutthesun,electricity,andothertopicsinthedomainofthe natural sciences.However, one short passages does include areference to an identity, and thereby touches upon the issue ofidentity.Itakethisshortpassageseparatelyandanalyzeitindetail.Al-Jinān discusses the potential harm of the solar flames, andexplainsthatthereisnoreasontoworry(qtd2):

“Intheend,trustingdivineprovidence,wedonotfearevilfromthesunbeamofthetwomentionedscientists.Ifit[thesunbeam] visits our planet, then we the Easterners haveblessingsof theprophetsandthesaints, thatpush itawayfromourcountryandthatavertitsevilfromus.”49

Al-JinānspeakshereonbehalfoftheEasterners,andstatesthat‘wetheEasterners’donotfearevilfromthesunbeam.Thereferenceto‘wetheEasterners’isunderstoodastheactofascribinganidentity(Eastern) to a social group (‘we’). The ‘we’ is now cast into acategory with characteristics or features that are normatively orconventionally associatedwithEasterners.The situation inwhichthisactof claimingan identity isperformed isapotentialnaturaldisaster. This situation makes identities that normatively orconventionally connote confidence or security suitable forreference. In this light, the situated function of this reference to 49Bustānī 1870: 432.Afteral-Janna hadpublished its initial article on the solarflames,Ṣābūnjīrespondedinal-Naḥla,andsubsequentlytheBustānīsrespondedtoṢābūnjīinal-Jinān.Thispassageisfromthisresponse.


141

being Eastern is to communicate to the readers that there is noneed to worry about the solar flames. Being Eastern fits thissituation,becauseofitsassociationwithdivineprivileges.Thus,al-Jināncouchesthepracticeof ‘worryingaboutnaturaldisasters’asun-Eastern.Aspointedout inthemethodologicalchapter, this isastudyondiscursivepractices,andspecificallyreferencingpractices.Thismeans that the questionwhether ‘we’ really are Eastern, orwhethertheEastreally isdivinelyblessed, is irrelevant.Similarly,the question of who precisely are meant by ‘we the Easterners’(does it include the Japanese? or Moroccans?) is also irrelevant.Any reference to East and Easterners is understood as havingsituated functions within the communication that takes place,ratherthanasreflectinganysocialreality.

Al-Jinān’sinvocationoftheEasternidentityismediatedbyaparticularmeaning that is attached to theEast,namely that theEastisdistinctbecauseofitsreligiousnature.Asasocialconstruct,thismeaningispartofthediscourseofbeingEastern,andal-Jinān’sreferencereflectsthisdiscourse.Atthesametime,al-JinānrepeatsandreproducestheideathattheEastisreligious,therebyreifyingthe discourse of being Eastern. In otherwords,al-Jinān ‘reminds’its readers that the East is indeed very religious and thereforedistinct from the non-East. If, forwhatever reason, the reader orlistenerwasnotalreadyawareofthisreligiousconnotation,thenafew of these reminders make it clear to him that this is a well-knownconnotationoftheEastandoftheEasterners.AscribingtheEasternidentityisthereforenotonlyanactofmakingareferencetoanidentitybutalsoanactofre-makingadiscourseofidentity.

Ṣābūnjī did not reply to al-Jinān’s remark about Easternblessings,nordidhemakesimilarusageofreferencestoidentitiesinordertoachieveparticularcommunicativegoals.Consequently,the dispute on the solar flames did not evolve into more than ascientificdebateonthenatureof thesunandthesolarsystem. Incontrast,aswillbeshowninthefollowingpages,thesecondtopicofdisagreementdidtaketheformofaclashofidentities,becomingafull-blowndisputeoveridentity,society,andbehavior.


142

VoltaireThe second polemic revolves around the person of Voltaire. TheessenceofṢābūnjī’scriticismisthatVoltaireisanunbelieverwhoshouldnotbe“receivedhospitably”byal-Jinān.50Ṣābūnjīregularlyrefers to him as “Voltaire the unbeliever”, “leader of theunbelievers” (raʾīs al-kafara) or variations of these expressions.Thisunbelief, Ṣābūnjī argues, “destroyssoundminds like fireandasphalt”.51ThedisagreementaboutVoltairebecomesanexampleofcontestingidentitywhenṢābūnjīcaststheconflictinanus-versus-themdichotomy(qtd3):

“Ourcountryishonoredbyreligionssincethebeginning;wedonotwantittobecomedishonoredwiththeunbeliefofcertainstudentsofVoltairetheforeignerandothers,bythewritersofal-Jinān.”52

Inthisquote,ṢābūnjīexplicitlycontrastsVoltairewith‘us’,andhedoesthisalonganaxisofreligionandunbelief.Ontheoneendoftheaxislies‘ourcountry’,whichisdefinedbyonecharacteristic:itishonoredbyreligions.On theotherendof theaxis lies ‘Voltairethe foreigner’, who is presented as a threat to the religiouscharacterof‘ourcountry’.Theexplicitlabel‘foreigner’furthermorehighlightshisOtherness.Thesituated functionof thereference to‘our country’ is to demonstrate why Voltaire’s unbelief isundesirable: it is incompatible with the essence of ‘our country’.Thisessencecannotbemissedbecause it isexplicitlyspelledout:‘ourcountry’ishonoredwithreligions.Ṣābūnjītherebyremindshisreadingpublicoftheassociationof‘ourcountry’withreligions,andatthesametimealsoreproducesandreifiesthisassociation.

It is not coincidental that the meaning that informed thereferenceto ‘ourcountry’ inthe lastquote isessentiallythesamemeaningthatinformedal-Jinān’sreferenceto‘wetheEasterners’inthe previous discussion about the solar flames. Both referencesreflect and reproduce a socially shared discourse that associates 50Ṣābūnjī1870b:457.51Ṣābūnjī1870b:458.52Ṣābūnjī1870b:459.


143

religionasadefiningaspectof theirowncommunity. Inal-Jinān’squote about the solar flames the ‘we’ was explicitly defined asEasterners,while in Ṣābūnjī’s quote the ‘we’ is implicated by thephrase ‘ourcountry’.A fewpages further intohispolemicagainstal-Jinān, Ṣābūnjī makes explicit mention of the East, writing that(qtd4):

“SomeEasternersfrom[thecityof]Aleppo,whoarewhollyengaged inWesternizationandwhopropagate civilizationandthemarginalizationofreligiousness(…)atthemomentresiding in Marseille, dishonor the Arabic language bytranslatingtwentyoftheunbelieverVoltaire’sbooksintoit(…)They thenprinted them inMarseilleandsent themtoAleppo in order to disseminate, through their assistants,the blasphemies and unbelief of Voltaire. They therebybringafloodofmiseryoverourEast.”53

In this quote, Ṣābūnjī frames his attack on al-Jinān again as acollision between a religious in-group that is symbolized by ‘ourEast’, with an out-group that is symbolized by Westernization(tafarnuj) and by Voltaire. It is here that Ṣābūnjī unambiguouslyspeaks on behalf of the Easterners. ‘Our East’ is represented asunder threat, from the books that ‘some Easterners’ havetranslated,produced,andshippedtoAleppo.Ṣābūnjīcouchestheseacts as decidedly un-Eastern: they cause a “flood ofmisery” overtheEast. In this light, the reference to theEastern identity of thepeople from Aleppo must be read ironically; the quote drawsattentiontotheirfailuretoactinconformitywithwhatisexpectedof Easterners. In this way Ṣābūnjī questions and contests theEastern identity of these Easterners from Aleppo and theirassistants. By implication, Ṣābūnjī also addresses the Bustānīsbecause their articles in al-Jinān also devote attention, Ṣābūnjī

53Ṣābūnjī1870b:463.IhavebeenunabletoascertainwhoṢābūnjīexactlyrefersto.ApossiblecandidateisJibrāʾīlDallāl,whoresidedinMarseilleandwhowroteapoemwhich“reflectstheanti-clericalwritingsofVoltaire”(Somekh1992:63).ForfurtherinformationonDallāl,seeṬarrāzī1913b:230-234.


144

alleges, to Voltaire.54He thereby also questions and contests theEasternidentityoftheBustānīs.

The quote has not only an Eastern aspect, but also anArabicaspect,because‘ourEast’islinkedwiththeArabiclanguage.Thus,ṢābūnjīcouchesthethreatofWesternizationandVoltairenotonly as un-Eastern, but also as un-Arabic. By representing theArabiclanguageasamediumthatshouldnotbeusedforVoltaire’satheism, the Arabic language also acquires connotations withreligiousness.

Finally, the term ‘civilization’ (tamaddun) is used in anambiguoussense.Ashasbeenstressed,civilizationhadadistinctlypositiveconnotationduringtheNahḍaera.However,inthisquoteit is contextualizedby twonegativeconcepts:Westernizationand‘the marginalization of religiousness’. Obviously, the civilizationthat theEasterners inAleppocalled for isnot thecivilizationthatwould appeal to Ṣābūnjī. It seems that Ṣābūnjī paraphrased the‘EasternersinAleppo’,whomerelypropagatedcivilization,butwhowerenot–inṢābūnjī’seyes–civilized.

Finally, the ‘propagation of civilization’ of the Easternersfrom Aleppo underlines the presence of diametrically opposedideas on what the term ‘civilization’ exactly entailed during theNahḍa era. As pointed out in the second chapter, the concern foracquiringprogressandcivilizationcanbeunderstoodasamantra,and the quote above nicely illustrates this. In another passageṢābūnjī gives his interpretation of what the term ‘civilization’meant, and he frames it in religious terms. He writes that ‘realcivilization’ (tamaddun ḥaqīqī) “can only be built on thefoundationsofreligions”,andonthisbasisconcludesthatVoltaire’sunbelief isuncivilized.55Inextension,heconcludes thatal-Bustānīacted inconflictwith civilization, because of the attention that heallegedly devoted to Voltaire. What Ṣābūnjī does is attack al-Bustānī on common grounds, namely their mutual concern forprogress and civilization. It is important to note that this line of

54ItmustbestressedagainthatthecontestedarticledoesnotmentionthenameVoltaireinthefirstplace.55Ṣābūnjī1870b:457.


145

argumentation is possible because of the ambiguity of what thetermsprogressandcivilizationexactlyentailed.VoltairetheOtherThroughout the polemic Ṣābūnjī stressed that Voltaire was anunbeliever(kāfir),andhecontrastedhimwiththereligiousnessofthe own community (‘our country’ in quote 2, and ‘our East’ inquote 3). In this light the unbelief of Voltaire functions asconstitutive Other that defines ‘our country’ and ‘our East’ asessentiallyreligious.ThisfunctionofVoltairecanbeunderstoodasreflectingaconcernaboutavoidingtafarnuj,aconcernwhichwasalsosharedbytheBustānīs.ThequestioniswhethertheunbeliefofVoltaireisalsoframedasacharacteristicofacollectiveidentitythatVoltairebelongsto.Inotherwords,thequestioniswhetherṢābūnjīrepresents the unbelief of Voltaire as typicallyWestern, typicallyFrench, or typicallyEuropean. In order to answer this question, Iwilladdressquotes2and3again.

In quote 2 Ṣābūnjī writes that “we do not want it [ourcountry] to become dishonored with the unbelief of certainstudents of Voltaire the foreigner and others”. He referred toVoltaire the ‘foreigner’ (al-ajnabī) rather than Voltaire theFrenchman,VoltairetheEuropean,orjustVoltaire.Theexpression‘foreigner’ has strong connotations of exclusion, always denotingOthernessofanout-groupratherthanreinforcingthesamenessofan in-group. In addition, this particular foreigner –Voltaire– isrepeatedlyreferredtoasanunbeliever,atermthatcarriesaverystrong negative connotation. Hence, in this particular exampleṢābūnjīattachesanegativeassociationtotheterm‘foreigner’.

Itseemsthatthenegativeassociationofthetermal-ajnabīinthisexamplewasnotanisolatedcase.Invariousothercasesinal-Naḥla the term ajnabī and ajānib carries a, sometimes subtle,negative connotation. InBishāra Zalzal’s contribution toal-Naḥla,briefly discussed above, Zalzalwrites that people should not buyforeign products (al-maṣnūʿāt al-ajnabiyya) which are alsoproducedlocally,suchasshoesandchairs,soasnottorobthelocalartisans of their income. He also argues that it is a popularmisconceptionthat‘productsofforeigners’(maṣnūʿātal-ajānib)are


146

better than local products.56In this example the term ajnabī andajānibalsocarryanegativeconnotation.Bycontrast,referencestoEuropeans,English,orFrencharenotgenerallyused in a contextthat invokes negative images about Westernization or tafarnuj,aboutunbelief,orabouttheprotectionoftheowneconomy.Fromthis point of view it can be argued that Ṣābūnjī called Voltaire a‘foreigner’ in order to invoke negative associations, associationsthat would have been absent when referring to Voltaire as aFrenchmanorasaEuropean. Returningtothequestion:doestheunbeliefofVoltairetheforeignerinquote2reflectandreproducetheideathatunbeliefisa typical characteristicof foreigners? It seems that this is not thecase, as the meaning of the terms ajnabī and ajānibdoes not gobeyondageneralnegativitythatisusedasrhetoricaldevice.InthecaseofVoltairethesituatedfunctionofthetermajnabīistostressthe religiousness of Ṣābūnjī’s own community. In the case of theforeignproductsthesituatedfunctionofthesametermistostressthatbuyinglocalproductsisbetter. In quote 3 Ṣābūnjī wrote that “Some Easterners fromAleppo” were “wholly engaged in Westernization” as they havetranslated and produced Voltaire’s books and shipped them toAleppo. In this example Voltaire was not explicitly defined as aforeigner,butwasassociatedwiththenegativeconceptoftafarnuj,or Westernization.57The question here is whether tafarnuj is animplicitreferencetoacollectiveidentity,forinstancetoEuropeans,Westerners, or to the community of Ifranj.58If so, the secondquestion is whether this usage reflects and reproduces the ideathatthiscollectiveidentityischaracterizedbyunbelief.

Thetermsforeignerandtafarnujcarrysimilarassociations:bothareambiguoustermsthatcanpointtodifferentpracticesandvaluesatdifferentoccasions,suchasclothing,smoking,orgender

56Ṣābūnjī1870b:74-76.57Thetermissometimesalsotranslatedas‘Frankification’,forinstancebyDawn(1991:7).58ThetermIfranjinreferencetoacollectiveidentityisusedsparsely.ṢābūnjīuseditinhisLondon-basedal-Naḥlain1879(seeṢābūnjī1879-1880:102).Buṭrusal-Bustānīhadalreadyusedthetermin1859(foundinSheehi2011:62).


147

relations.59In addition,both carrynegative connotations; tafarnujevenmoresothanforeigner.Atthesametime,thetermtafarnujisdifferent from the term ‘foreigner’ as tafarnuj lacks the strongassociation of exclusion that the term foreigner has. From thispoint of view the term tafarnuj might well be used in order todenote an in-group of Ifranj or Europeans. In the conflict aboutVoltaire, however, Ṣābūnjī never applies the term tafarnuj tocollectiveidentities,topeople.Inotherwords,henevercreatedanEast-Ifranj or an East-Europe dichotomy in the conflict aboutVoltaire.60Thus, the term tafarnuj also functions as constitutiveOther that defines the East, rather than denoting a collectiveidentity of Ifranj or Europeans.61This is essentially the samefunctionasthetermajnabīcarriedinquote2.

An observation that sheds more light on the relationbetweentafarnujandtheWestorEuropeisthatṢābūnjīregularlydisplays an anti-essential image when discussing Europeans. Forexample,inanattempttopositionVoltaireincontemporaryFrenchdebates Ṣābūnjī declares that (qtd 5) “the French elite hate tomention Voltaire and distance themselves from him”.62WhatṢābūnjī points out here is that there are some French who hateVoltaire and some French who do not. This anti-essentialrepresentationmakesitimpossibletoassociatereligionorunbeliefwith the French.63Similarly, in a discussion in al-Naḥla thatcriticizestobacco,Ṣābūnjīwritesthat(qtd6): 59Thishasalreadybeendiscussedinthesecondchapterofthisthesis.60Ṣābūnjīcouldhavedoneso,becausetheterms‘Europe’(Urubbā)andEast(al-sharq)wereverycommon;thetermWestwasdefinitelylesscommonin1870butitdoesoccurintheeighthissueofal-Naḥla,whereṢābūnjīreferredtoSaintAugustineas‘oneofthepillarsoftheWest’(aḥadaʿmidatal-gharb,Ṣābūnjī1870b:162).61Interestingly,thedichotomybetweenareligiousEastversusamaterialistWestlaterbecameamuchusedtoposinArabicwritings,especiallyinIslamistdiscourse(Woltering2011:130-133).AprecursortothistoposcanbeseeninthediscussionaboutVoltaire,wheretheEastisrepresentedasessentiallyreligious,buttheWestisnotyetrepresentedasessentiallyunreligiousormaterialist.62Ṣābūnjī1870b:482.63Instead, Ṣābūnjī sketched an ‘elite’ as in-group, and he discursively placedhimselfinthisgrouptoo,becauseheagreeswiththiselite.


148

“It is not only the peoples of barbaric countries [whosmoke]; it is astonishing that the civilized peoples ofEurope,despite theirgreatknowledge, areplaguedby theobjectionabletragedyoftobacco.”64

Again, an anti-essentialist image occurs, as Ṣābūnjī suggests thattherearesomeEuropeanswhosmokeandsomewhodonotsmoke.This aspect makes them similar to ‘the people of barbariccountries’,astheyalsoincludepeoplewhosmokeandwhodonotdo so. In spite of this anti-essential image, the quote does reflectand reproduce the idea that Europeans are more advanced than‘barbarians’. The smoking of the Europeans is represented as adeviation fromthenorm,becauseoftheexplicitreferencetotheircivilizationandtheirgreatknowledge.Thisnormativitysetsthemapart from the barbarians; their smoking is not ‘astonishing’, butrathertheirexpectedbehavior.

Inthelightofquotes4and5,itcannotbemaintainedthatthetermtafarnuj inquote3isanimplicitreferencetoacollectiveidentity, denoting Europeans,Westerners, or French. Instead, thereferencetotafarnujhasasituatedfunctionasconstitutiveOther,defining ‘our East’ as religious rather than defining any othercollective identityasunreligious.Thus, the termtafarnujacquiresits meaning in quote 3 in contrast with the ‘we’ who arerepresentedasessentiallyreligious.ContestingthewaṭanInthediscussionaboveithasbeenshownhowṢābūnjīrepresentedthe Bustānīs as un-Eastern, by invoking and reproducing socialknowledge that understands the East as essentially religious. Insimple words, al-Naḥla communicated to its readers thatEasternersarenormativelyreligious,andthatpeoplewhoarenotreligious cannot really be called Easterners.What is important isthat Ṣābūnjī framed membership of a collective identity –theEasterners–inreligiousterms.Aspointedoutinthesecondchapter,Buṭrus al-Bustānī repeatedly defined Selves and Others in

64Ṣābūnjī1870b:8.


149

religiouslyneutral terms. InhisproposedSyrian fatherlandall itsinhabitants are bound together, regardless of religious affiliation.In the conflict about Voltaire, Ṣābūnjī attacked al-Bustānī’sideologically inspired concept of a Syrian fatherland and theassociatedreligiouslyneutralidentity.Inal-NaḥlaṢābūnjīconnectsVoltaire’s unbeliefwith this identity, directly attacking Buṭrus al-Bustānī(qtd7):

“Until nowwedid not understand themeaning of his [al-Bustānī’s]repeatedstatementthatwe,thesonsoftheEast,should leave behind the religious union and adopt theunion of the fatherland. But now we understand that itmeansthatweshouldrefuseobediencetofaith,andthatweshould adopt unbelief under the pretext of ‘love of thefatherlandandcivilization’.”65

Afewpagesfurther,thesameideareturns(qtd8):

“Itcomestomymindthattheheadofal-Jinānagreedwiththementioned[persons]66inordertospreadtheteachingsofunbeliefintheEastunderthepretextof‘civilizationandloveofthefatherland’.”67

InthesetwoquotesṢābūnjīchargesal-BustānīofhavingadoubleagendaandactinginconflictwiththereligiousessenceoftheEast.Hedoes so byquestioning al-Bustānī’s ideological project that herepeatedly stressed in various publications: the need to avoidseeing the identity of their own community in religious terms.Instead, al-Bustānī proposes to see this ‘own community’ ingeographicalterms,groundedinawaṭanorfatherlandthatislovedbythepeoplewhoinhabitit. Ṣābūnjī does not denounce the expressions ‘fatherland’(waṭan) or ‘love for the fatherland’ (ḥubb al-waṭan); he merely

65Ṣābūnjī1870b:459.66In theprevious lineṢābūnjīmentions "Voltaire ‘theunbeliever’,RousseauandMachiavelli”(Ṣābūnjī1870b:463).67Ṣābūnjī1870b:463.


150

rejectsal-Bustānī’sreligiouslyneutralviews.InṢābūnjī’sdefinitionofthephrase‘loveforthefatherland’,heagainattachesareligiousconnotation.AccordingtoṢābūnjī,realloveofthefatherland(ḥubbal-waṭanal-ḥaqīqī) “is the concern for maintaining religions andauthorities; it is not, what the owner of al-Jinān thinks it is,spreadingerrorandunbelief”.68

Thediscursive techniqueof juxtaposingaconceptwith itssuperlative(‘realloveforthefatherland’asopposedto‘loveforthefatherland’) has been seen before, as Ṣābūnjī contrasted al-Bustānī’s civilization (al-tamaddun) with real civilization (al-tamaddun al-ḥaqīqī), which is built on religious foundations.69Hence,Ṣābūnjīattacksal-Bustānīoncommongrounds:bothsharea concern for the fatherland and for civilization. Theirdisagreement,however,liesintheirdifferentinterpretationsoftheexpressionsḥubbal-waṭanandtamaddun.Asimilartechniquecanbeseeninal-Jinān’soriginalarticle‘TheWar’,inwhichtheauthorwrites that ‘true religion’ (al-dīn al-ṣaḥīḥ) forbids killing andplundering. 70 Thus, acquiring or maintaining civilization(tamaddun), love for the fatherland (ḥubbal-waṭan), and religion(dīn) are all concerns that Ṣābūnjī shared with al-Bustānī.Nevertheless, the two attached different interpretations to theseterms. This resulted in trivial oppositionswhere civilization, loveforthefatherland,andreligionwerecontrastedwiththeir‘real’or‘true’ counterparts. These juxtapositions highlight, firstly, theimportance of these terms in the social consciousness, andsecondly, the ambiguity of what these terms exactly entailed.Importantly, their quarrels also make it clear that simplydismissing civilization or religionwas not commeilfaut for earlyArabjournalists.

Returningtothetermḥubbal-waṭan;Ṣābūnjīalreadyusedthis term in 1866,71and it also, sparsely, appears in al-Naḥla. Itsfourth issue includes a poem entitled ‘Ḥubb al-waṭan’, which issignificant as the termwaṭan unequivocally refers to the city of

68Ṣābūnjī1870b:459.69Ṣābūnjī1870b:457.70Bustānī1870:721.71Ṣābūnjī1866:140.


151

Beirut.72Thisusageisremarkable,becausethetermwaṭanusuallyreferstoasubstantially largergeographicalarea, includingMountLebanon, often Ottoman Syria, and sometimes even the OttomanEmpireinitsentirety.Ṣābūnjī‘shrinks’hisfatherland,hiswaṭan,sothatitincludesonlyonecity.However,theeffectofthisisthattheunifying, supra-confessional meaning that al-Bustānī repeatedlyattached to the term is lost. The associations with the sectarianviolence that devastated Mount Lebanon (and not Beirut, whichbecame a place of refuge) are also lost. Whereas al-Bustānīcombined and unified various social groups under one header,Ṣābūnjī unraveled the concept again so that the term is onlyapplicabletohiscityofresidence.Fromthisperspective,Ṣābūnjī’sreference to Beirut as his waṭan can be read as a subtlecontestationofal-Bustānī’sideologyofunityinthefatherland. Another example where Ṣābūnjī contested al-Bustānī’sunderstandingofaunitedwaṭancanbereadinṢābūnjī’susageofthe plural awṭān. In the preliminary issue of al-Naḥla, Ṣābūnjīaddressed his reading public with the term ‘oh sons of thefatherlands’ (yā banī al-awṭān). 73 This wording has closeassociations with the well-known expression ‘oh sons of thefatherland’ (yāabnāʾal-waṭan),whichwasused repeatedly by al-Bustānī.74Ṣābūnjīchangedthesingularwaṭanintothepluralawṭān,andinthiswayhealsochallengedtheideologicallyinspiredunityof al-Bustānī. What Ṣābūnjī stresses is the presence of differentfatherlands, and these are all addressed by al-Naḥla. In this wayṢābūnjī diametrically opposes al-Bustānī’s call forone fatherland.Al-Bustānī’s call forunitywasan ideologically inspiredanswer tothesocietalillofsectarianism,whileinṢābūnjī’susageofthepluralawṭān thismeaningisentirely lost.Onecouldevenarguethatthepluralawṭāndrawsextraattentiontotheinternaldivisionsamongal-Naḥla’stargetaudience.

Finally,thetopicofreligionobviouslyplayedanimportantroleinthepolemicwithal-Bustānī.Asareminder,thefirstissueof

72Ṣābūnjī1870b:58-60.73Ṣābūnjī1870b:2.74For instance, every issue ofNafīrSūriya(1860) addressed its readerswithyāabnāʾal-waṭan.


152

Ṣābūnjī’sal-Naḥlaexplicitlyexcludedreligionfromthelistoftopicsthat it would address. Until the conflict about Voltaire, Ṣābūnjīindeed refrained from discussing religious issues. In the polemicwithal-Jinān,however,Ṣābūnjīreturnedtohisearlierstatementbyclaiming that he meant to avoid displaying a preference for anyreligious denomination, rather than avoiding the topic of religionentirely.75Interestingly,thisjustificationisinlinewithal-Bustānī’snon-sectarianism, as al-Bustānī also avoided stressing religiousdivisions.YetṢābūnjīdoesnotseemtobeconcernedaboutfightingsectariandivisions,unlikeal-Bustānī.AscribingreligiousidentitiesṢābūnjīstatedthathedidnotwanttodisplayapreferenceforanyparticular religious denomination in al-Naḥla in order to avoidreligious polarization.76In spite of this, in a number of casesṢābūnjī referred to religious identities in ways that suggestdisapproval. I argue that in those cases Ṣābūnjī actually nurturesreligious polarization. In the 29th issue of al-Naḥla, Ṣābūnjīaddresses the magazine al-Nashra al-Shahriyya, which waspublished by the American Protestant mission in Beirut.77Thefollowing passage was written as an attempt to convince itsAmerican Protestant editors to take action against al-Bustānī.Ṣābūnjīwrites(qtd9):

“And you, Protestant publication [al-Nashra al-Shahriyya](…) who considered it to be your habit to defend thedoctrines of your American church, what made you shutyour eyes to one notable of your religious denomination,who published in his al-Jinān [texts that] defame yourreligion, and the religionofyour leaders, and thatof yourfoundersLuther,Calvin,andZwingli?”78

75Ṣābūnjī1870b:457.76Ṣābūnjī1870b:457.77Formoreinformationaboutthismagazine,seeṬarrāzī1913a:69.78Ṣābūnjī1870b:459.


153

In this quote, Buṭrus al-Bustānī is identified as a Protestant, andProtestantismisdefinedasanAmericanandthereforeasaforeignchurch. It is here that Ṣābūnjī represents al-Bustānī as‘Americanized’ Easterner. This charge fits within Ṣābūnjī’s widerattemptatcontestingal-Bustānī’sidentityasoneof‘us’.Bydefiningal-Bustānī as an adherent of a foreign church, Ṣābūnjī representsal-Bustānīas failing toact inaccordancewithwhat isexpectedofmembersof‘our’community.Inaddition,Ṣābūnjīalsocriticizesal-Nashra al-Shahriyya and the American mission for failing to actproperly:theyhavenottakenactionagainstal-Bustānī.

Ṣābūnjīdoesnotonlycontestal-Bustānī’sEastern identityinthisquote,healsonurturesreligiouspolarization.Aspointedoutinthemethodologicalchapter,referringtosomeone’sidentityisanact of making this identity relevant and consequential for thecommunicationthatgoeson.Atthesametime,makingsomeone’sreligious identity relevant and consequential highlights thedifferences between religious denominations. Referring tosomeone’sreligious identity thereforestressesreligiousdivisions,andthis isexactlywhatal-Bustānīwantedtocounterbalance.TheOthernessof theProtestant community is evenmorepronouncedwhenrepresentingitasaforeignandasanAmericanproduct.Thisand similar references contribute to a climate of religiouspolarizationinwhichsectariantensionscanthrive.

TheeffectofṢābūnjī’saddressingtheProtestantmagazineal-Nashra al-Shahriyya should also be discussed. Ṣābūnjī arguesthattheAmericanmissionshouldreprimandal-Bustānībecauseheis ‘one of their notables’. The implicit assumption that underliesthispetitionisthatProtestantsshouldreprimandotherProtestantsbecausetheyareProtestants.Inotherwords,Ṣābūnjīdismissesthepossibility that other Protestants could agreewith al-Bustānī. Hethereby stresses the normativity of unity within a religiouscommunity, at the expense of individual members such as al-Bustānī. In the fragmented religious landscapeofMount Lebanonand Syria, this discursive need for internal unity also connotesreligiouspolarization.

A second example in which Ṣābūnjī makes al-Bustānī’sreligiousidentityrelevantpertainstoal-Bustānī’sconversion.Asa


154

reminder, al-Bustānī was born a Maronite, and converted toProtestantismintheearly1840s.Referringtothisepisode,Ṣābūnjīwritesthatal-Bustānī“didnotentirelyembracethenewProtestantreligion”, that“his intentionssometimes leadhimtowardstheoldcircumstances[theMaronitecause]andsometimestothemoderncircumstances[theProtestantcause]”,andthat“hechangescolorslike a chameleon”.79Besides demonstrating a certain dislike forreligious conversion, Ṣābūnjī also correlates one’s religion withone’s behavior. He stresses that a change of religion should bematched by a change of behavior, so that one’s religion is visibleandunderstandabletooutsideobservers.Bysuggestingthatthereare discrepancies between al-Bustānī’s religion and his outwardbehavior, Ṣābūnjī insinuates that al-Bustānī’s religious identity issuperficial. From al-Bustānī’s point of view this insinuation wasirrelevant, because he repeatedly stressed that religiousdifferences should be bridged in order to fight religiouspolarizationandsectariantensions.80

In both examples discussed above Ṣābūnjī’s criticism alsoarticulates the necessity of safeguarding the internal unity ofreligious communities, and to avoid transgressing the bordersbetweenthesecommunities.Hetherebycontributestoaclimateofreligiouspolarization,andthisisexactlytheclimatethatal-Bustānīwanted to counterbalance with his waṭan-ideology. In this light,Ṣābūnjī’sdesiredunitywithinareligiouscommunitycontrastswiththe unity across the different religious communities, as proposedbyal-Bustānī.It isthiscontrastthatmakesṢābūnjī’s invocationofal-Bustānī’s religious identity forceful. By making his religiousidentityrelevantṢābūnjīpointsouttoal-Bustānīandtohisreadingpublic thatone’sreligious identityapparentlymatterstowhoyouare.Thiscontrastswiththepositionofal-Bustānī,whorepeatedly 79Ṣābūnjī1870b:458.Ṣābūnjīparaphraseshereasentencefromal-Jinān’sarticle‘TheWar’.Initsintroductorywordstheanonymousauthorwritesthatthisarticlemayoffendpeople“whostillclingontotheoldcircumstances,or[whoclingonto]the circumstances of this era, but whose intentions lead them to a differentposition”(Bustānī1870:689).80Forinstance,al-Bustānīwritesthat“TheinhabitantsofSyria,irrespectiveoftheirreligiousdenominations[madhāhib],classes[hayʾāt],ethnicities[ajnās],branches[tashaʿʿubāt],arethesonsofthefatherland”(Bustānī[1860]1990:21).


155

stressed that one’s religious identity should not and does notmatter within the shared fatherland. Ṣābūnjī’s references to al-Bustānī’s religious identity can therefore be read as a directconfrontationofthelatter’swaṭan-ideology.Thebarbarians!Inthischapterthemantraofcivilizationandprogress inal-Naḥlahas appeared a few times. In the quote criticizing tobacco (seeabove,qtd6),Ṣābūnjījuxtaposedthe“peopleofbarbariccountries”with the “civilizedpeoples ofEurope”, demonstrating ahierarchybetween the two in the social consciousness of Ṣābūnjī’s socialmilieu. Similarly, the charge thatal-Jinān’s article ‘TheWar’ goesagainst real civilization demonstrates a common concern foracquiring civilization. Both examples show the presence of aconceptual ladder on which behavior, values, and also collectiveidentitiescanbemeasuredandcomparedaccording to their levelofcivilization.Inthisframeworktheleastcivilizedgroupofpeople,the conceptual barbarians, are at thebottomof the ladder. Everyuncivilizedacttakesitsactoronestepdownontheladder,andonestep closer to becoming a barbarian.81Charging someone withuncivilized behavior thus becomes a reference to someone’sregressiontowardsbarbarism.

Interestingly, in the polemic on Voltaire both Ṣābūnjī andal-Bustānī make this regression explicit, by referring to thebarbarians. In response to Ṣābūnjī’s polemical writings, theanonymous reporter of al-Jinān represents Ṣābūnjī as anuncivilizedpersonbyaskinganumberofrhetoricalquestions(qtd10):

“And who is this man, who opposed the welfare of theworld?Ishetheheroofthebattlefieldwhosehabit it istokillandtoplunder?Orakingwhoaimstoconqueranotherking’s land? (…) Or one of the leaders of the Bedouins,

81MakdisialsofoundthesameprincipleinthewritingsofBuṭrusal-Bustānī,albeitwith ‘Africa’ as the lowest point on the ladder. Hewrites that “for Bustānī, theevents of 1860 [sectarian violence] represented a regression away frommodernityandadeclinetowardAfrica”(Makdisi2002a:614).


156

whose nature it is to raid and to commit evils andadversities? Or one of the barbarians from central Africawhowantwars,justlikewewanttohunt,inordertotakepossessionofthemembersoftheirraceandeatthem?Oradevilwholovestodestroycultureandtohangtheflagsoflove,comfort,andpeaceathalf-mastbecauseofhisnaturaldisposition towards evil and animosity? But no, he is notoneofthose;heisapriest.”82

Each sentence of this quote invokes social knowledge thatprescribes how not to act. On the one hand, conquering, raiding,killing, plundering, cannibalism, and ragingwars are representedas reproachable, and so are the peoplewhodo so –heroes of thebattlefield, kings, Bedouins, barbarians from Central Africa, anddevils. On the other hand,welfare, civilization, love, comfort, andpeacearerepresentedascommendable,andsoarethepeoplewhoareassociatedwiththem,eventhoughthesearenotmentioned.Byaskingtherhetoricalquestions,thereporterofal-JinānassociatedṢābūnjīwith the first –bad– groupwhile associating himselfwiththesecond–good–group,byimplication. The two collective identities that are mentioned in thequote, the Bedouins and the barbarians from Central Africa, arereferredtobecausetheysymbolizeaninferiorstateofcivilization.Ṣābūnjīhadalreadyreferred toBarbarians in the29th issueofal-Naḥla, where he juxtaposed a war of defensewith a “war of theVandals and of Basūs” in order to argue that not all wars arenecessarilybad.83Hereturnedtothisquoteinthe31stissue,wherehe explained that theVandalswere barbarianswho attacked anddestroyedItaly.84Hence,bothal-Naḥlaandal-Jinānmakeuseofthesamebackgroundknowledgeassociatedwithbarbarians,buttheyuse this backgroundknowledge in entirely different contexts andforentirelydifferentreasons.Al-Naḥlausedthebarbarianstoshowthatoneneeds todistinguishgoodwars frombadwars,whileal-

82Bustānī1870:747.83Ṣābūnjī1870b:451.TheBasūsWarwasalegendarypre-Islamicwar;seeFück1960.84Ṣābūnjī1870b:486.ṢābūnjīexplicitlyusesthetermItaly.


157

JinānusedtheconcepttoillustratethatṢābūnjī’sbehavior‘opposesthe welfare of the world’. Put differently, the references tobarbarians carry situated functions in different contexts. At thesame time, the discursive framework makes the barbarianssuitableforreferenceinthesedifferentcontexts.4.3 MutuallydependingidentitiesIntheintroductionIdiscernedtwomodelsthatattempttofitthe–inevitably hybridized– identities of Ṣābūnjī and his peers. Theoverlap approach stipulates that people had different identitiesthat overlap, and the compartmentalization approach stipulatesthattheyhaddifferentcultural,ethnic,linguistic,religious,national,and political identities, and each of these identities correspondwithone identity,Arab, Christian, Syrian,Ottoman, andothers. InthepresentstudyIsetasidethesetwomodelsinordertofocusonhowṢābūnjīusesreferencestoidentities.

Thepolemicsjustdescribeddemonstratethatthemeaningof terms such as East and fatherland, ‘waṭan’, are contested anddebatedexactlybythosepeoplewhoallegedlyareEastern,orarethe inhabitantsof thewaṭan.Thismeans that it cannotsimplybedecided who is Easterners and for which reasons, or what is aSyrianwaṭanandforwhichreasons.Fromthisperspective,itistheact of claiming identities that needs to be studied, and thereferences to identities and their situated functions in thecommunicationthatgoeson.Itistheindividualwhogivesmeaningto the social world by making use of the identities withincommunicationwithotherindividuals.Simultaneously,thereadersof the polemic are confronted with the presence of diverginginterpretationsofwhatitmeanstobeEasternorSyrian,andwhatisexpectedofEasternersandSyrians.Thispluralityinvitesthemtoreflectontheiridentitytoo.

On the most general level, the polemic entails Ṣābūnjīcontesting al-Bustānī’s identity of Easterner. He does so byinvoking background knowledge that sketches the East asessentially religious, and he uses this background knowledge inorder to criticize the writings in al-Jinān, which, Ṣābūnjī argues,


158

spreadsatheism. In thiswayhe representsal-Jinān’s authors andeditorsasun-Eastern.

Within this seemingly conventional polemic, Ṣābūnjī alsotakesintoaccountideasaboutforeignersandaboutWesternization,ortafarnuj.Firstly,theessentiallyreligiousEastiscontrastedwiththe foreignandthemutafarnij.Throughthis juxtapositionṢābūnjīarticulates the idea that the defining aspect that separates theforeignfromtheEastis foundintheirrelationtoreligion.Ṣābūnjīrepresents atheism as a symptom of the foreign and of themutafarnij, and as incompatible with the East. According to thislogic, Ṣābūnjī posits that it is not coincidental that Voltaire is aforeignerandnotanEasterner;Voltaire’satheismisrepresentedasasymptomoftheforeigner.TheforeignatheismofVoltaireandthecontrastingreligiousnessoftheEastmutuallyreinforceeachotherinṢābūnjī’spolemicalwritingsagainstal-Bustānī.

Secondly, Ṣābūnjī contrasts being religiouswith awaṭanī-identity, and specifically with al-Bustānī’s ideologically inspiredusageofthetermwaṭan.Al-Bustānīfrequentlystatedthattheunityof thewaṭan is the answer to sectarian violence and to religiouspolarization.However,Ṣābūnjīallegedthatal-Bustānīhadahiddenagenda:thathewantedtospreadunbeliefunderthepretextofloveof the fatherland. Ṣābūnjī asserts that a waṭanī-identity, in al-Bustānī’susage, is associatedwithhavingno religion,which thenconflicts with the perceived religiousness of the East and of theEasterners.He thus linksawaṭanī-identitywith thenon-East, theforeign, and the mutafarnij, terms that all carry negativeconnotations.

At the heart of these encounters between identities liesreligion as the central axis that determines one’s identity.On theone hand, Ṣābūnjī’s references to Eastern, Arab, Maronite,Protestant, andother identitieswere informedby thepresence ofreligiousness. On the other hand, his references to foreign,mutafarnij, and waṭanī-identities were informed by a lack ofreligiousness. With each reference to any of these identities,Ṣābūnjīarticulatesthatitisreligionthatmakesuswhoweare.Thesameprimacyofreligionasthedeterminingfactorofone’sidentityis visible in Ṣābūnjī’s representation of al-Bustānī’s conversion.


159

WhatmattersmostinṢābūnjī’stextsisbeingreligious,ratherthanbeingEastern,Arab,orSyrian.

Afocusonthefunctionofreferencestocollectiveidentitieswithin this polemic demonstrates how discourses of identitiesinterrelatewithanddependoneachother.Thefundamentalaspectthattiestheseidentitiestogether,orsetsthemapart,isreligion.Inthis framework, the ‘us’ is repeatedly represented by Ṣābūnjī asessentially religious. The religious ‘us’ is often labeled as Easternand often referred to by implication, in phrases such as ‘ourcountry’. Al-Bustānī had already articulated the idea that theEasterners–or,inotherwords,‘we’–arereligiouslyblessedintheearlierdiscussionabout thesolar flames.Thesituated functionofthis referencewas to calm the Eastern readers about a potentialnaturaldisaster.ThisshowsthatattheonsetofthepolemicaboutVoltaire the idea that ‘we’ are particularly religious was alreadypartoftheirsocialconsciousness.Ṣābūnjīreproducedthisideainadifferent context, and used it with a different situated function,namely to criticize al-Bustānī for acting in conflict with what isallegedly expected of Easterners. In spite of these differentfunctions, both Ṣābūnjī’s and al-Bustānī’s reference reflect,reproduce,andreifytheideathat‘we’arereligious.

The polemic also demonstrates that the relation betweenthe East and the waṭan was contested. Ṣābūnjī frames beingEastern in opposition to a waṭanī-identity, thereby representingthesetwoasmutuallyexclusive.Hearguedthat the termḥubbal-waṭan carried associations with maintaining religions, and hetherebysuggestedthatal-Bustānīdidnotreallylovehisfatherland.InthiswayṢābūnjīquestionedandcontestedal-Bustānī’s identityasoneof‘us’.Itcanbesurmisedthatal-BustānīdidnotagreewithṢābūnjī.Accordingtoal-Bustānī,thenotionofwaṭanwaspremisedbyhisideologyofunityacrossthedifferentreligiouscommunitiesin Mount Lebanon and geographical Syria. Fundamentally, al-Bustānī’s approachdoesnot correspondwithṢābūnjī’sunraveledusage of the term waṭan and awṭān. Again, Ṣābūnjī’s and al-Bustānī’sreferencestoEasternandwaṭanī-identitieshavedifferentfunctionsandaremadefordifferentreasons.


160

In conclusion, the overlap approach and thecompartmentalizationapproachcannotaccountforthepresenceofdebate and disagreement on the meaning of terms that denotecollectiveidentities.ThemeaningofEastandwaṭan,anditsvariousderivatives, such as Syrian or even Beiruti, were not fullycrystallized in 1870, and this ambiguity gave intellectuals theopportunity tocontestanddebate thesemeanings.Thesedebatesremain unaddressed when observing that both al-Bustānī andṢābūnjī used terms likewaṭan and ḥubbal-waṭan, and that bothreferredtothemselvesasEasternersandasSyrians.Secondly,bothapproaches cannot account for the presence of underlyingprinciples that inform references to different identities. In thispolemic, the underlying principlewas religion and faith. Inmanyreferences to identities, identitywas framed either in conformitywith, or in opposition to, religion and faith. This underlyingprinciple remains obscured when studying different identities,such as Eastern, Maronite, or Syrian, in isolation from thecommunicativecontext.

uva-dare (digital academic repository) identities in early arabic … · to his son, carried him to...

Documents