Palestine A Four Thousand Year History by Nur Masalha

Today there are many formally sovereign states in the Arab world, but not all of them are genuinely sovereign or independent when it comes to foreign policy. By contrast, al-ʿUmar’s state in Palestine was sovereign in substance and reality, while nominally still part of the Ottoman Empire.

However, al-ʿUmar’s state was formally recognised by the Ottomans as an autonomous Emirate and at its peak in 1774 (a year before he was killed outside Acre) its territory extended from south Lebanon along the entire Palestinian coast to Gaza and included some regions in northern Transjordan.

He also twice laid siege to the city of Nablus (Doumani 1995: 42).

The headquarters of his administration shifted westwards, from his first capital in Tiberias to ‘Araabah in central Galilee, then to Nazareth, then to Deir Hanna and finally to the port city of Acre in 1746. In the early 16th century Tiberias had become a city of refuge for Andalusian Arab-Jewish survivors of the Spanish Inquisition. These skilled Jewish migrants eventually contributed both to the expansion of the town’s silk industry and the growth of Tiberias’ role as a trade centre between Damascus and the Hijaz.

Al-‘Umar expanded and fortified Tiberias further, but now Acre was the capital of the Galilee and the centre of his lucrative international trade with Europe. Acre remained the centre of his regime for nearly three decades and subsequently became the capital of another autonomous regime in Palestine, that of Ahmad Pasha al-Jazzar (the ‘Butcher’), who lived in the palace built by al-ʿUmar for another two decades from 1776 until 1804. Al-ʿUmar’s regime would demonstrate once again the continuing interdependence of urban centres with their rural contexts in Palestine – a continuing feature of the history of Palestine, ancient, medieval and modern. With his Galilee- based Emirate or dawlah qutriyyah, al-ʿUmar became internationally known in the 18th century as ‘King of Galilee’ (Nasrallah 2015: x).

In the mid-18th century the deeply weakened Ottoman regime had to come to terms with the new power realities in Palestine, a country which remained only nominally part of the Ottoman Empire. In 1768 the Ottoman authorities were forced into a humiliating position of having to recognise al-ʿUmar’s regime in Palestine in the way the Ottomans had been forced to recognise the emirate of Mount Lebanon and the regime of Emir Fakhr-al-Din II a century earlier. The Ottomans granted al-ʿUmar the title of ‘Sheikh of Acre, Emir of Nazareth, Tiberias, Safed, and Sheikh of all Galilee’ (Philipp 2015).

Al-ʿUmar’s economic policies, which benefited the Palestinian peasantry, his military strategies and regional and international alliances (with the autonomous Druze Emirs of Mount Lebanon, Mamluk Egypt and Russia) were partly dictated by his struggle with the Ottoman Empire and partly by his monopolisation of the flourishing cotton and olive oil exports to Europe, especially raw cotton to England following its Industrial Revolution and the expanding British textile industry’s demand for raw cotton from Palestine and the Near East. Al-ʿUmar’s rise to power in the 18th century was facilitated by the considerable growth of cotton cultivation in Palestine and the export of this cash crop to France and England. The use of cotton for fabric is known to date back to prehistoric times and cotton had been cultivated in ancient Egypt and Persia, and it was also known to the Arabs since Antiquity. For many centuries since the Middle Ages Palestine and the Galilee had been a major area of cotton cultivation (Quataert 2002: 27; Le Strange 1890: 16‒19; 2014: 18‒19; al-Maqdisi 1994). Already in the 10th century AD Palestinian historian al-Maqdisi commented on the fact that cotton was one of the key agricultural products of Palestine (cited in Le Strange 2014: 18‒19; also Le Strange 1890: 16‒19; al-Maqdisi 1994).

Sizeable cotton cultivation and international trade with Palestine and al-Sham continued in the course of the Mamluk period but flourished in late Ottoman Palestine, especially in the 18th century. Today Suq al-Qattanin (‘Market of the Cotton Merchants’) – also known as Suq of Amir Tankaz al-Nasiri, the Mamluk ruler of Palestine and Syria – in the Old City of Jerusalem is a monumental and toponymic testament to the long history and significance of this Palestinian cotton industry. Suq al-Qattanin is located on the west side of the Haram al-Sharif. The market dates from 1336–1337 AD and contains some of the most exquisite and richest Islamic architecture in Jerusalem. In the middle of the Suq there is the signature of one of the craftsmen who worked on its construction. Written in Arabic naskhi script, the inscription reads: ‘May God have mercy on him, the work of Muhammad bin Ahmad bin ‘Alish. The Suq has two entrances, one to the west and the other to the east, called Bab al-Qattanin (‘Gate of the Cotton Merchants’), which opens on to the west side of the Haram. Suq al-Qattanin is considered to be one of the most complete and beautiful medieval suqs not only in Palestine, but in the whole of the Near East (Burgoyne 1987; Burgoyne and Abu al-Hajj 1979: 128–129).3

From the time of the Crusades the Levant and north Palestine had supplied both regional and European textile markets via port cities such as Acre. The cultivation of cotton in Palestine was maintained throughout the Ottoman period but grew dramatically in the 18th century under the effective leadership of al-ʿUmar, who got involved in the world’s most profitable commodity at the time: cotton. Al-‘Umar’s rise coincided with the rise of French and British demand for raw cotton following the Industrial Revolution in the 18th century. British capitalism and the manufacturing industries of Lancashire enabled Britain to emerge as the leading exporter of manufactured textiles. From the late 18th century onwards, the British city of Manchester acquired the nickname ‘Cottonpolis’ due to the cotton industry’s predominance within the city, and Manchester’s role at the heart of the regional and international cotton trade. Of course, the incorporation of Palestine into the modern European markets and British-dominated global capitalist system and import of textiles from Lancashire to Palestine posed a major challenge to the locally produced textiles in Palestine (Doumani 1995).

Al-ʿUmar’s rule was of modern creation. His administration grew rich on foreign export of cotton and olive oil and his rule consolidated and expanded this lucrative trade with Europe and by the mid-18th century regional and global trade in cotton and textiles made his capital city of Acre and the Palestinian city of Nablus the biggest and the most prosperous cities in the country and among the largest cities of al-Sham (Doumani 1995; Philipp 2001). Despite the massive technological developments in Europe in the 19th century and subsequent decline of the cotton economy of the Galilee (Heyd 1942), even in the mid-19th century the British Consul in Jerusalem James Finn would recall his journeys in central Palestine and the Nablus‒Jenin‒Tulkarem triangle, and note that the cotton plantations he visited were ‘beautifully clean and orderly’ (Kamel 2015). In fact, as a consequence of al-ʿUmar’s policies, for over a century between the 1730s and 1860s cotton would remain the main export from Palestine to Europe.

Before 1852 Palestine exported its cotton mainly to the al-Sham region, Italy, France and, to a lesser extent, England. In 1859 it was reported by a British geographical gazetteer that Tobacco, lent[ils], olives, cotton and silk, are extensively produced in this pash.[lik of Acre] [‘a part of Palestine’] … The only manufactures are silk and cotton fabrics. The situation of this district is highly favourable to commerce. The exports from Acre and Beirut, its principal ports, are wool, cotton, silk, tobacco, gums, dried fruits, gallnuts, madder-root, and skins. The export trade is principally carried on with France and Italy … This pash.[lik] is of modern creation. In 1749 it formed part of the pash.[lik] of Saida or Sidon, when Dhahir, son of Omar, an Arab Sheikh, having invaded Acre, succeeded in subduing the whole pash.[lik] to his way.4

However, after 1870 cotton lost its leading role as the key cash crop shipped to Europe, being replaced by the oranges of Palestine (the iconic Jaffa oranges). Benefiting from new agricultural innovations and new tree grafting techniques, the Palestine Arab citrus industry became the number one produce exported to Europe throughout the last quarter of the 19th century (Lucas 2003: 21‒22). During the second half of the 19th century modern cotton-spinning machinery was also imported into Palestine and a small-scale cotton-spinning industry continued into the 20th century.

Interestingly, in the 18th century the high quality of Palestinian and Levantine cotton seeds led to its transferral to the soils of the colonies of North America. But unlike the settler-colonialism of North America, in which cultivating and harvesting cotton became the leading occupation of slaves, the Palestine cotton plantations were cultivated by ordinary farmers.

Yet ‘still, canton production in the Levant during the late eighteenth century exceeded, by a factor of nearly thirty, that in the American colonies’ (Quataert 2002: 27). The expanded port city of Acre became the first ‘modern’ Palestinian city in the 18th century to be directly affected by the new foreign trade, the British Industrial Revolution and England’s demand for raw cotton.

For a century between 1730 and 1831 the export of highly profitable cash crops – first cotton and then grain – made Acre the largest centre of trade and political power on the Palestinian/Lebanese coast. The city also began to play a role in international politics in the last quarter of the 18th century (Philipp 2001: 3). First under al-ʿUmar and later under al-Jazzar – the Acrebased ruler from 1776 until his death in 1804:

[Modern] Acre was the key to the first region in the eastern Mediterranean that was tied into modern economy ... an important fortified city of perhaps 25,000 inhabitants [which] was closely connected with the ever-rising demand for cotton in Europe.

(Philipp 2001: 1)

Under the impact of international trade during the rule of both al-ʿUmar and al-Jazzar:

[W]ithin a very short period of time, [modern] Acre bloomed into a city possessing several mosques ... caravansaries ... [public] baths and markets. It also boasted fortified walls and an aqueduct to ensure its water supply. The [Galilee] villages further inland developed most of what was to become the basis of Palestine’s agricultural economy.

(Rosen-Ayalon 1998: 520)

Of modern creation, and perhaps the most monumental symbol of the culture of early modern Palestine is the White Mosque of modern Acre, famously known as al-Jazzar Mosque, which became the most powerful symbol of the modern capital of northern Palestine. Constructed in 1781, eighteen years before the Napoleonic invasion of Palestine, and influenced architecturally by the grand Ottoman mosques of Istanbul, its namesake (the White Mosque) evoked memories of the famous White Mosque of al-Ramla, the capital of Jund Filastin, the province of Palestine throughout early Islam. The compound of the White Mosque included an Islamic theological academy, the first college of its kind in Palestine. Modelled on the al-Azhar university college of Cairo, and departing from the traditional medieval Islamic schools (madrasahs) of Jerusalem, the mosque/college compound contained student lodging, an Islamic court and a major public library, all paid for by Palestinian local taxes and by the flourishing regional and international trade in cotton and other cash crops of Palestine. Spectacularly overlooking the Eastern Mediterranean Sea, al-Jazzar Mosque was also a statement of the reorientation of modern Palestine towards Europe under the impact of the international trade policies and the monumental building programmes pursued by the two powerful leaders, al-ʿUmar and al-Jazzar.

The encouragement of foreign trade, promotion of local agricultural innovations and export of profitable cash crops such as cotton, grain and olive oil to Europe, which began under al-ʿUmar in the 1730s, continued until 1830 and the legacy of this foreign trade stimulated the development in the Shamouti orange (which became internationally known as the Jaffa orange). Developed by Palestinian farmers in the mid-19th century, Shamouti oranges were an almost seedless variety of oranges with a tough skin that made them particularly suitable for international export (Issawi 2006: 127; Gerber 1982). Like the export of Palestine cotton and grain in the 18th and 19th centuries, much of the Shamouti orange crop was exported to France and England from the mid-19th century onwards.

Al-ʿUmar’s powerful state ushered in a new dynamic era in Palestine, after a long period of Ottoman neglect, stagnation and rampant exploitation of the Palestinian peasantry, during which Palestine was turned into a frontier country and an imperial backwater. In this new dynastic period under al-ʿUmar, the Galilee and large parts of Palestine experienced effective and fair taxation, urban expansion and economic development. Many public buildings, fortresses, fortifications, warehouses, khans (caravanserais)

– the most spectacular of which is the exquisitely-built Khan al-Tujjar of Acre; today the site is at the centre of Israeli Judaisation policies in the Arab city – and numerous places of worship were built throughout his domain. Many of these sites and monuments can still be seen today throughout the Galilee. Al-ʿUmar’s state pursued religiously inclusive policies and encouraged the involvement of religious minorities (Christians, Jews and Shi’ites) in his administration, finance and economy. Statehood and early modernities in 18th century Palestine were intertwined:

Under the leadership of Dhaher al-ʿUmar al-Zaidani (1730‒75), a powerful and protective state was formed in northern Palestine that fostered development. Security was ensured for agricultural production, mainly wheat and cotton for export, particularly to France whose agents resided in the Zaidani capital and port of Acre.

Peasants and religious minorities were protected and thus had a stake in the success of the state. In 1764‒65, al-ʿUmar established a new town [Haifa] and secured it with walls. (Seikaly 2002b: 97)

The political stability and effective and fair taxation system provided by al-ʿUmar in northern Palestine and the expansion and transformation of historic urban centres such Acre, Tiberias and Safad also led to the founding of ‘modern’ Haifa’ and the transformation of Nazareth from a small village into a major town in Palestine. Modern Haifa, or the ‘new Haifa’ (Haifa al-Jadidah), was founded by al-ʿUmar in 1764‒1765. This was done by moving the 250 local inhabitants to the fortified village of Haifa 2.4 kilometres to the east of the old hamlet.5 This ‘new/modern’ Palestinian Arab village became the nucleus of the modern town of Haifa (Yazbak 1998), today the third largest city in Israel. The new village was originally named in Arabic al-ʿImarah al-Jadidah (‘the New Construction’), a term applied to modern buildings in Palestine in the 18th century. Local Palestinians first called the village New Haifa and later simply Haifa. This new Arab village grew into an Arab town which in the 20th century developed into the modern city of Haifa (Seikaly 2002a, 2002b; Sharon 2013: 262; Mariti 1792: 318). In a similar vein, the ‘new’ era of al-ʿUmar’s state symbolised the beginning of the modern history of Palestine.

The new agricultural economy and foreign trade of Palestine led to the transformation of Nazareth – al-Nasirah in Arabic, retaining the ‘feminine’ endings common to many Palestinian Arabic toponyms of Galilee – by al-ʿUmar’s state from a small hamlet into a large town by encouraging immigration to it. The ‘new town’ of Nazareth played important economic, religious and strategic roles under al-ʿUmar’s rule.

Al-ʿUmar’s fourth capital was Nazareth and for this purpose he commissioned the construction of a new government house known as the Saraya (the ‘Palace’). This historic building was constructed around 1740 and later in the 19th century served as the residence of the local Ottoman Governor of Nazareth and its subdistrict and subsequently as the city’s municipal headquarters until 1991. While using Nazareth to secure his control over the hugely fertile agricultural lands of central Galilee (Yazbak 1998: 15) and Marj Ibn ‘Amer, the rich granary of Palestine, al-ʿUmar encouraged religious toleration and protected the Christian communities in the town, which he also used to strengthen his international ties with France (Emmett 1995:

22). Al-ʿUmar also encouraged the Franciscans to purchase land and build a church in Nazareth in 1730, and enabled the Greek Orthodox community to build St Gabriel Church in 1767 (Emmett 1995: 220).

Beginning as a market town for the surrounding countryside under Dhaher al-ʿUmar, today Nazareth is the largest Palestinian city in Israel and the capital of the Palestinians inside Israel. Today the descendants of al-ʿUmar still live in Galilee and Nazareth and are known as the ‘Dhawahri’, in memory of Dhaher – along with the Fahoums, Zu’bis and ‘Onallas, the Muslim families which constituted part of Nazareth’s urban traditional Muslim land-owning elite which first rose under al-ʿUmar’s rule and continued to dominate the city’s politics throughout the late Ottoman and British Mandatory periods and under Israel since 1948 (Srouji 2003: 187).

Modern geo-political representations of Palestine are often located in the late Ottoman period or in 19th century Palestine and the actual historical links between the Palestinian ‘statehood’ created by al-ʿUmar and the modern conceptions of Palestine are complex. However, in history the line between fact and fiction or myth and reality is often blurred. The practically independent statehood in Palestine lasted nearly half a century from the late 1720s until 1775, far longer than the British Mandatory period in Palestine.