It began in Egypt when a missionary of the Egyptian Fatimid, Al-Hakim (996-1021), while following the Ismaili doctrine of the Imam as the supreme authority and protector of Islam, proclaimed himself the incarnation of the Deity, in the same manner that Jesus Christ was for the Christians.6 The peculiarities of the Druze religion is to be utterly secret. Their holy book is called Al-Hikma (wisdom), and is quite different from the Koran. The Syrian mountain Hawran, Jabal Al-Druz, bears their name because of the influx of refugee that took place at the end of the eighteenth century as a result of the victory of the Druze Qaysites, most of whom were converted to Christianity, over the Druze Yamanites.

In the nineteenth century, the Druze-Maronite relation caused two major events in Lebanon that proved to be detrimental to the security of the nation. The first important date prolongates from 1830 to 1860. In 1830, Syria and Lebanon fell under the occupation of the Egyptian armies of Ibrahim Pasha, the son of Muhammad Ali. The Egyptians were helped by Bechir Chehab II, Emir of Mount Lebanon (1789-1840), who wanted to drive outside of his territories the jurisdiction of the Sublime Porte, i.e. Turkish dominion. He consented to the invasion of Lebanon provided he was given help by the Egyptians to strengthen his power meantime. After the conquest, Bechir II was offered by Ibrahim Pasha to rule over the entire Syria, but he declined the offer in order to care for the Lebanese alone.

The most interesting happening during the occupation is that the Maronite peasants who had travelled from the northern to southern districts of Lebanon, thus outnumbering the Druzes in their own regions, were all in favor of Ibrahim Pasha’s invasion. Many times they joined the Egyptian armies to fight back the Turkish Sultan, despite the fact that the Druzes preferred the Turks. However, around 1840 the Maronites joined forces with the Druzes to expel the oppression of the Egyptians that was becoming burdensome, even to them.

Following the downfall of Ibrahim Pasha’s reign, Lebanon came to be divided into two governorates. The northern mountainous areas were put under the supervision of a Maronite qaim maqam, or governor; while the southern was governed by a Druze qaim maqam. And both of them were controlled by the direct representative of the Ottoman Sultan, who presided in Beirut and Sidon. The politics of the Sublime Porte during the following fourtieth and fiftieth was the application of the old military principle of divide et impera, the divide and rule policy; thus the Porte would irritate the two classes against each other so that he remained powerful over the weakened governors. Moreover, Turkish authorities never really intervened whenever internal upheaval and civil wars broke out between Maronites and Druzes. For instance, in 1858 the Christian farmers of Kisrawan revolted against their feudal lord, the Khazim family. The Khazim family was a system of primogeniture; they owned the lands of Kisrawan, made the peasants pay exorbitant taxes, and refused to the peasants the right to elect their own wakils, or representatives, as it was the case in southern districts. In their insurrection against the Khazim, the peasants received moral encouragement from the Maronite clergy, and on many occasions asked assistance from the Druzes of the south.

At first, the south had decided to lend support to the beleaguered Christians. Yet, at the advice of Kourshid Pasha, the Turkish governor of Beirut, they retracted their forces and thought to protect themselves from possible peasants’ revolt on their own lands. Kourshid Pasha’s prediction was accurate. For around 1860, the Maronite peasants of the south, inspired by their brethren of the north, arose against their Druze overlords. Immediately, news spread that the intention of the Maronites of the south was not only meant to eliminate the feudal Druzes but also was directed against the Druze as a people. The lady historian Leila Meo writes about this incident:

This class struggle soon turned into a religious war when the rank and file of the Druze, seeing the uprising as a direct threat to the continued existence of their own people, came to the assistance of their feudal chiefs. The Druze was well organized. The Maronites, although more numerous, lacked both organization and adequate arms. And so a general massacre of Maronite and other Christian villages ensued, while the local Turkish authorities made no immediate attempt to put an end to the bloodshed.7

Europe was not happy with the 1860’s massacre, although I have to admit she was not so innocent in the whole affair. Ever since the Crusaders landed in the Levant, and due especially to the existence of the Maronite Catholics and other Eastern Christian rites, five European countries have incessantly muddled in the Levant politics sometimes wisely, sometimes unwisely. France called itself the protégé of the Maronites; Russia made itself a duty to look over the interests of the Greek Orthodox; England took sides with the Druzes of Lebanon; Austria-Hungary played the mitigated role of the Catholic sects of the Eastern churches; and Prussia more for political jealousy than other reasons, interfered in the politics of the Sublime Porte.

The immediate historical consequence following the 1860 event was the establishment on June 9, 1861, of the Mutasarrifyya of Mount Lebanon. This happened with the intervention of the Concert of the five European powers and the Sublime Porte. The pact concluded between these six countries, stated clearly that Mutasarrifyya signifies that the two governorates would unify into a single governorate, presided by a Christian non-Lebanese Governor General, whose duty would be to report to the Sultan in Constantinople and not any more to the Turkish Pasha of Sidon as it was before. Furthermore, the Governor General was to be elected by the Porte and confirmed by the Concert of Europe.

The first Governor General to be appointed over the new autonomous Lebanese province, was Daoud Pasha, “an Armenian by birth, Roman Catholic by persuasion, director of the telegraph at Constantinople and author of a French work on Anglo-Saxon laws.”8 After him seven other Mutasarrifs followed until the outbreak of the first world War.