Karatun tarihin Falasɗinu na zamani ta idanun 'yan asalin ƙasar na iya karkatar da hankali daga kallo da tsarin lokutan da Daular Usmaniyya, Birtaniya da Sahyoniyya suka mamaye, da kuma samar da sababbin ra'ayoyin 'yan asali.

Reading the history of modern Palestine through the eyes of the indigenous people can shift the emphasis away from hegemonic Ottoman, British and Zionist gaze and chronologies and provide new indigenous perspectives.

Sabon Acre na zamani na iya zama misali ga wannan ra'ayi. Wannan babban birni mai kyau da shahara, babban birnin daular al-ʿUmar, ya farfado daga toka ya zama ɗaya daga cikin muhimman cibiyoyin birane na Falasɗinawa na zamani tsawon kusan ƙarni biyu. Wannan ba shi ne sakamakon lissafin daular Usmaniyya ba ko "gadon Usmaniyya" ba, sai dai sakamakon ƙudurin ƴan asali da kuma ƙoƙarinsu na bayyana kansu.

Modern (new) Acre can be a case study of this perspective. This beautiful and iconic capital of al-ʿUmar’s state rose from the ashes to become one the most important modern Palestinian urban centres for nearly two centuries. This was less to do with imperial Ottoman calculations or the ‘Ottoman heritage’, and more the result of sheer indigenous determination and self-definition.

Duk da haka, a ƙarshen karni na 19 martabar Akka ta ragu zuwa amfanin garin Haifa da ke bakin teku kusa da ita, saboda an ƙirƙiri injunan tururi masu ƙarfi a Yamma, waɗanda ke sarrafa manyan jiragen ruwa; an buɗe sabbin hanyoyin kasuwanci, kuma gaɓar Falasdinu ta zama wani ɓangare na hanyar da manyan kamfanonin jiragen ruwa na Turai ke bi akai-akai (Seikaly 2002b: 97).

However, by the end of the 19th century Acre’s standing had declined to the advantage of the nearby coastal town of Haifa, as new powerful steam engines were developed in the West, powering bigger ships; new trade routes were opened up and the coast of Palestine became part of the regular route of the major European steamship companies (Seikaly 2002b: 97).

Tare da tashin ra'ayin kishin ƙasa na Falasɗinawa masu adawa da mulkin mallaka, da fitowar sababbin hanyoyi na nazarin tarihin al'umma, da raguwar labarun masu manyan mutane, al-ʿUmar ya fito a matsayin jarumin ‘kishin ƙasa’ a wajen Falasɗinawa a yau (Joudah 1987, 2015). Duk da haka, ya kamata a dubi masarautar kanta ta al-ʿUmar cikin yanayin zamaninsa; a fili yake burinsa na daular mulki ne, ba na kishin ƙasa ba.

With the rise of anti-colonialist Palestinian nationalism, the emergence of new approaches to people’s history and the decline of elite narratives, al-ʿUmar has emerged as a ‘nationalist’ hero among Palestinians today (Joudah 1987, 2015). Yet al-ʿUmar’s self-governing entity should be seen within the context of his age; clearly his aims were dynastic not nationalist:

Ga Falasdinawa suna yawan ambaton kokarin shugaban Falasdinu Dhaher al-Umar na kwace iko da yawancin yankunan Falasdinu daga hannun Daular Usmaniyya a karshen karni na sha takwas, a matsayin hujja cewa 'yancin kan Falasdinu yana da tushe a tarihi … Amma danganta wadannan kalubale da 'sanin kishin kasa mai tushe a yanki' batu ne mabambanci kuma mai rikitarwa. (Abu Lughod 1988: 203)

Anxious to ‘prove’ a historical basis for Palestinian Independence, Palestinians often refer to the effort of the Palestinian leader Dhaher al-Umar to wrest control of much of Palestine from the Ottomans in the late eighteenth century … But to attribute these challenges to ‘national, territorially-based consciousness’ is an altogether different and murky issue. (Abu Lughod 1988: 203)

Duk da haka, tashin al-ʿUmar daga wani yanayi mara ƙarfi daga cikin Falasɗinu, jagorancinsa mai inganci, shahararsa a tsakanin manoman Falasɗinu saboda kawar da tsarin harajin iltizam na Ottoman mai zalunci – aƙalla a lokacin mulkinsa – nasarorinsa masu ban mamaki a fagen yaƙi, juriyarsa mai inganci ga mulkin kai tsaye na daular Ottoman a Falasɗinu, da manufofinsa masu haƙuri da addini ga Kiristoci, Yahudawa, Druze da Shi'a, duk sun haɗu suka ba shi matsayin tatsuniya a tsakanin Falasɗinawa. Na gaskiya da na tunani, al-ʿUmar ya samar da abin koyi ga Falasɗinawa na zamani.

Nevertheless, al-ʿUmar’s emergence from a relatively humble background from ‘within Palestine’, his effective leadership, his popularity among the Palestinian peasantry for getting rid of the oppressive Ottoman Iltizam system – at least under his rule – his spectacular military successes, his effective resistance to Ottoman imperial direct rule in Palestine and his religiously tolerant policies towards Christians, Jews, Druze and Shiites all combined to give him a mythical status among Palestinians. Real and imagined, al-ʿUmar provided a role model for modern Palestinians.

Duka da haka, kishin ƙasar Falasɗinu a matsayin al'umma, sabanin farkon zamanantarwar Falasɗinu a karni na goma sha takwas, ci gaba ne na ƙarshen zamanin Daular Usmaniyya, kuma babu wata shaida ta tarihi da ke nuna cewa akwai akidar kishin ƙasar Falasɗinu a lokacin Dhahir al-ʿUmar, ko kuma cewa ya ƙirƙiro ta. A bayyane yake cewa tatsuniyar 'kishin ƙasa' da ke ɗaukar Dhahir al-ʿUmar a matsayin wanda ya kafa jiha ta farko ta 'kishin ƙasar Falasɗinu' tana da ƙarfi da burgewa sosai fiye da ainihin yanayin wannan shugaba mai ƙarfi da zamaninsa. Duk da haka, ba a iya musanta gadon tarihi na masarautarsa ta Falasɗinu da ya gina da kansa kuma ya tafiyar da ita, da kuma tasirin da manufofinta suka bari a Falasɗinu ta zamani.

However, Palestinian national consciousness, as opposed to 18th century early modernities in Palestine, is a late Ottoman development and there is no historical evidence that a nationalist Palestinian ideology existed at the time of, or was developed by, al-ʿUmar. Evidently the ‘nationalist’ myth of Dhahir al-ʿUmar as the founder of the first modern ‘Palestinian national state’ is far more powerful and inspiring than the actual context of this powerful leader and his age. Yet the historical legacy of his self-fashioned and self-governing Palestinian entity and the lasting impact of its policies on modern Palestine are undeniable.

Har ila yau, abu mafi muhimmanci, a tsawon yawancin karni na sha takwas, daulolin masu cin gashin kansu na al-ʿUmar da al-Jazzar, waɗanda ke da tushe a Galili, tare da kusantar kasuwanci da kawancen soji da ƙasashen Turai, musamman Rasha, Birtaniya da Faransa, sun haɗa Galili da dukkan gaɓar tekun Falasdinu, daga Lebanon zuwa Gaza, politically da kuma a zahiri, ƙarƙashin gwamnati guda da ke Falasdinu. Idan aka duba Falasdinu a matsayin ƙasa guda ɗaya ta fuskar siyasa da yanki, tasirin wannan gado na karni na sha takwas zai bayyana nan da nan ta yadda sabbin hotunan Falasdinu suka bunkasa a karni na sha tara.

Also, crucially, for much of the 18th century the Galilee-based autonomous regimes of al-ʿUmar and al-Jazzar, with their close trade links and military alliances with European powers, Russia, Britain and France in particular, politically and physically linked the Galilee with the entire Palestinian coast from Lebanon to Gaza under a Palestine-based single administration. From the perspective of viewing Palestine as a single geo-political entity, the impact of this historic legacy of the 18th century would soon become evident in the way new representations of Palestine evolved in the 19th century.

Tasirin Turawa a kan tsarin mulki na "zamani" da kuma tsarin wayewa na Dhaher al-ʿUmar sun bayyana sosai. Wannan yunkurin farko na zamanantarwa ya samu sauki saboda gaskiyar cewa ikon addini mai ra'ayin gargajiya a ƙasar, wanda ke hannun muftis a biranen Falasdinu, koyaushe yana ƙarƙashin ikon siyasa. Wani masanin tsoffin abubuwa, masanin kimiyya kuma matafiyi dan Italiya, Giovanni Filippo Mariti, wanda ya isa Acre a 1760 kuma ya zauna a unguwar Faransawa tsawon shekaru biyu, ya rubuta a cikin littafinsa Travels Through Cyprus, Syria, and Palestine game da tasirin ra'ayoyin Turawa a kan babban birnin Dhaher al-ʿUmar, Acre. Ya bayyana saurin mayar da martani na Gwamnan Acre ga annobar cutar da ke yaduwa a lokacin, wadda ke shafar ba Falasdinu kaɗai ba har ma da Masar da Siriya. Manyan da kananan annoba (wani lokaci tare da yunwa) sun kasance wani abu da ke faruwa akai-akai a Falasdinu ta zamanin da, tare da mummunan tasiri ta fuskar yawan mutuwa a ƙasar. Ƙananan annoba kuma sun faru a biranen tashoshin jiragen ruwa na Bahar Rum na Falasdinu a lokacin Yakin Duniya na Farko da na Biyu. Duk da haka, a 1760 al-ʿUmar mai wayewa ya yi aiki da ƙarfin hali, ya yi watsi da camfe-camfen addini, kuma ya ɗora matakan kariya ciki har da keɓe mutane sosai a Acre da matakan da suka shafi 'yan kasuwa masu shiga da fita daga birnin; waɗannan matakai sun taimaka wajen rage tasirin annobar a kan birnin mai cunkoso kuma sun ceci rayuka da yawa.

European influences on the ‘modernising’ and enlightened administration of Dhaher al-ʿUmar were much in evidence. These early modernisation efforts were facilitated by the fact the conservative religious authority in the country, which rested with the muftis in the cities of Palestine, was always subordinate to the political authority. Italian antiquarian, scientist and traveller Giovanni Filippo Mariti, who arrived in Acre in 1760 and resided in the French quarter for two years, writes in Travels Through Cyprus, Syria, and Palestine about the influence of European ideas on the capital of Dhaher al-ʿUmar, Acre. He describes the swift response of the Governor of Acre to the then raging plague which was affecting not only Palestine but also Egypt and Syria. Large and small epidemics (occasionally combined with famine) had been a recurrent feature of medieval Palestine with devastating effects in terms of the high death toll in the country. Small epidemics also occurred in the Mediterranean port cities of Palestine during the First and Second World War. Yet in 1760 the enlightened al-ʿUmar acted decisively, brushing aside religious superstitions and imposing precautionary measures including a strict quarantine in Acre and measures affecting traders entering and leaving the city; these measures helped to minimise the effect of the epidemic on the crowded city and saved many lives:

Gwamnan Acre ya dakatar da yaɗuwar wannan annoba ta hanyar ba mazauna garin hanyoyin kaucewa barnarta; kuma duk da cewa waɗannan hanyoyi sun saɓa wa akidun addinin Musulunci, an karɓe su da hannu biyu. Turawa suka zama abin koyi; gwamnan kuwa, bayan ya samu daga gare su duk bayanan da ake bukata, ya kulle kansa, bisa misalinsu, tare da iyalinsa masu yawa. Mufti [babban alkalin addini a Acre], wanda aka haife shi a matsayin mai kare dokar Musulunci, shi kaɗai ba zai iya koyi da halin da dokar ta yi Allah wadai da shi ba. Maimakon ya kulle kansa cikin shiru a matsayin mai hankali, sai ya yi ruri yana kushe wannan sabuwar hanya; ya zargi gwamnan da halinsa … Sai dai gwamnan ya yi dariya kawai da wannan wauta ta Mufti mai ibada, sannan ya aika da wata runduna ta sojoji su ci shi tarar takardun sequins ɗari biyu da hamsin.6

The governor of Acre checked the progress of this plague, by giving the inhabitants the means of withdrawing from its ravages; and these means, though contrary to the dogmas of the Mohametan religion, were eagerly embraced. The Europeans became their models; and the governor, after deriving them from every necessary information, shut himself up, after their example, together with his numerous family. The Muphti [mufti, top religious judge of Acre] alone, born the protector of the Mohametan law, cannot imitate a conduct which that law condemns. Instead of shutting himself up with silence in a prudent confinement, he thundered forth against this new method; reproached the governor for his conduct … The governor, however, only laughed at this pious folly of the Muphti and sent a detachment of soldiers to impose a fine on him of two hundred and fifty sequins.6

(Mariti 1792: 200‒201, 203‒204)

(Mariti 1792: 200‒201, 203‒204)

Al-ʿUmar, kamar Muhammad ‘Ali na Masar (1769–1849) kuma sabanin masu manyan birane na Ottoman a Falasdinu na Nablus da Kudus, mai karya dokoki ne kuma mai kafa mulki, ba mai karɓar dokoki daga wasu ba. Waɗannan masu manyan birane suna cikin halin ƙasƙanci inda yanayin iko ya sanya su a matsayi mai ƙarancin tasiri, iko da muhimmanci fiye da 'mai kafa doka' na Ottoman mai mulkin daular. Akasin haka, mulkin al-ʿUmar wanda yake cin gashin kansa a zahiri, an kafa shi ne domin adawa kai tsaye da kuma ƙalubalantar ikon mulkin Ottoman a Falasdinu, duk da cewa a zahiri yana amincewa da halaccin Khalifan Ottoman. Ikon al-ʿUmar yana aiki ne a cikin tsarin halaccin Musulunci da iko, kuma tarihin Musulunci a Falasdinu ya haifar da fahimtoki iri-iri game da iko, hukuma da halacci. Masu adawa da al-ʿUmar sun kira mulkinsa da sheikhdom, yayin da marigayi Albert Hourani ya kira shi 'ƙaramar masarauta' (wanda aka ambata a Joudeh 2015), amma zai fi dacewa a siffanta shi da wata sovereign 'frontier state' a yawancin Falasdinu tsawon sama da kwata karni. Duk da haka, ana iya siffanta shi da emirate a cikin faffadan tarihin Musulunci na iko da halacci. A tarihi, emirate wani yanki ne na siyasa ko jiha wadda emir, sultan, sheikh, kwamandan soja, gwamna ko yarima Musulmi ke mulki. A ma'anar kalma, emirate ko amirate (Larabci: imarah) shi ne gudanar da yankin ƙasa na emir. Kalmar Larabci kuma tana iya nufin masarauta ko yankin sarauta. A ƙarƙashin Musulunci, kuma har zuwa kwanan nan, emirates sun kasance nau'in mulki da jiha ta gaske da aka saba da shi. Nau'o'in emirates sun haɗa da sanannen Emirate na Córdoba, wanda jiha ce mai cin gashin kanta a Andalus tsakanin 756 zuwa 929, tare da Córdoba a matsayin babban birninta. Da farko dai yana da muhimmanci a amince da halaccin Halifofin Umayyawa a Dimashƙu, amma a zahiri Emirate na Córdoba ba wai kawai ya girma ba ne a sabanin kai tsaye da gwamnatin Abbasiyawa da kuma ƙin Halifofin Abbasiyawa a Baghdad, har ma ya bunƙasa ya canza zuwa Halifancin Córdoba. Da babban birninsa Córdoba, wannan ƙasa ta wanzu daga shekara ta 929 zuwa 1031, kuma a lokacin tana daga cikin ƙasashe mafi ci gaba a duniya. A Andalus ma, Emirate na Granada (wanda kuma aka sani da Masarautar Nasrid ta Granada; a Sifaniyanci: Reino Nazarí de Granada), an kafa shi a shekara ta 1248, kuma ya haɗu da Masarautar Kiristoci ta Castile, ya kuma ci gaba da zama ƙasa mai biyan haraji tsawon shekaru 250 na gaba. Ita ce ƙasa ta ƙarshe a Tsibirin Iberiya da Musulmi suka yi mulki. Ƙarnoni da dama bayan haka, a lokacin da ikon al-ʿUmar ya kai ƙololuwa a Falasɗinu a tsakiyar ƙarni na 18, Kuwait ta zama emirate a shekarun 1750, wanda Shaykh na Kuwait ke jagoranta. A ƙarshen ƙarni na 19 Emirate na Kuwait ya zama mafakar Birtaniya, kuma tun daga lokacin ya bunƙasa ya zama ƙasa ta zamani. Da a ce jihar al-ʿUmar ta tsira bayan mutuwar wanda ya kafa ta a shekara ta 1775, kuma ta ci gaba da wanzuwa har cikin ƙarni na 19, to da tarihin zamani na Falasɗinu za a karanta a rubuta shi ta idanun mazauna ƙasar Falasɗinu na asali, ba ta hanyar ra'ayoyin Ottoman, Birtaniya ko Zionist ba.

Al-ʿUmar, like Muhammad ‘Ali of Egypt (1769–1849) and unlike the Palestinian Ottoman urban elites of Nablus and Jerusalem, was a rulebreaker and a ruler-maker, not a rule-taker, These urban elites were in a subordinate state of affairs where the power dynamic put them at a position of less influence, authority and significance than their imperial Ottoman ‘rule-maker’. By contrast, al-ʿUmar’s effectively independent regime was created in direct opposition and as a challenge to the authority of the Ottoman rule in Palestine, while nominally acknowledging the legitimacy of the Ottoman Caliph. Al-ʿUmar’s authority operated within the context of Islamic legitimacy and power and Islamic history of Palestine produced a variety of notions of power, authority and legitimacy. Al-ʿUmar’s state has been referred to by its detractors as a sheikhdom, while the late Albert Hourani referred to it as a ‘little kingdom’ (cited in Joudeh 2015), but it would be more appropriate to describe it as a sovereign ‘frontier state’ in most of Palestine for over a quarter of a century. However, it could be described as an emirate within the wider historical Islamic context of power and legitimacy. Historically an emirate was a geo-political entity or state that was ruled by a Muslim emir, sultan, sheikh, military commander, governor or prince. Etymologically emirate or amirate (Arabic: imarah) is the administration of territorial entity of an emir. The Arabic term could also imply principality. Under Islam, and until recently, emirates were a common form of governance and actual statehood. The variety of emirates included the famous Emirate of Córdoba, which was an independent state in Andalusia between 756 and 929, with Córdoba as its capital. Initially acknowledging the legitimacy of the Umayyad Caliphs in Damascus, in fact the Emirate of Córdoba not only grew in direct opposition to the Abbasid state and rejection of the Abbasid Caliphs in Baghdad, but also evolved and transformed itself into the Caliphate of Córdoba. With its capital in Córdoba, this state existed from 929 to 1031 and was at the time one of the most developed countries in the world. Also in Andalusia, the Emirate of Granada (also known as the Nasrid Kingdom of Granada; Spanish: Reino Nazarí de Granada), was established in 1248 and aligned with the Christian Kingdom of Castile, and remained a tributary state for the next 250 years. It was the last state in the Iberian Peninsula to be ruled by Muslims. Several centuries later, at the height of al-ʿUmar’s power in Palestine in the mid-18th century, Kuwait became an emirate in the 1750s, headed by the Shaykh of Kuwait. In the late 19th century the Emirate of Kuwait became a British protectorate and it has since evolved into a modern state. Had al-ʿUmar’s state survived the death of its founder in 1775 and persisted well into the 19th century, today the modern history of Palestine would be read and written with the eyes of the indigenous people of Palestine, rather than through Ottoman, British or Zionist perspectives.

Dawlah qutriyyah al-ʿUmar wa al-Jazzar al-Mustaqillah ta'thīr dā'im 'alā al-tafkīr al-Awrubbī wa al-'Uthmānī al-muta'akhkhir, wa 'alā al-wijdān wa al-dhākira al-Filasṭīniyya al-mu'āṣira, wa lā yumkin al-mubālagha fī ḥajmihi. Fī muntaṣaf al-qarn al-thāmin 'ashar, ḥawwala al-ʿUmar markaz al-sulṭa fī al-Jalīl min Ṣafad (wa Liwā' Ṣafad) ilā 'Akkā, al-madīna allatī ḥawwalahā ilā iḥda kubrā al-mudun wa al-aghnā wa al-aḥkam taḥṣīnan fī bilād al-Shām. Wa laysa min al-ṣudfa, idhan, anna Nābulyūn Bunābart sa'ā ilā ghazw al-madīna fī 'ām 1799 falam yanjaḥ. Wa ba'da sab'īn 'āman, fī awākhir sab'īnāt al-qarn al-tāsi' 'ashar – kamā sanarā fī al-faṣl al-tāsi' – a'āda al-'Uthmāniyyūn tanẓīm Filasṭīn wa anshā'ū sanjaq 'Akkā bi-wasfihi iḥda al-minṭaqāt al-idāriyya al-thalātha fī al-bilād. Wa li-muddat qarīb khamsat qurūn, min 1266 ḥattā awākhir al-qarn al-thāmin 'ashar, kānat Ṣafad 'āṣimat al-Jalīl, wa ba'da 1517 aqarra al-'Uthmāniyyūn mawqi'ahā al-idārī fī al-Jalīl bi-inshā' sanjaq Ṣafad al-idārī. Wa bi-al-naẓar ilā anna Ṣafad sayṭarat 'alā al-Jalīl wa shamāl Filasṭīn qurūnan ṭawīlatan taḥt ḥukm al-Mamālīk wa al-'Uthmāniyyīn, fa-yajib 'add inshā' sanjaq 'Akkā fī al-'aṣr al-'Uthmānī al-muta'akhkhir min al-turāth al-bāqī min Filasṭīn al-qarn al-thāmin 'ashar taḥt al-ḥukm al-'Umarī wa al-Jazzārī, fī ru'yat al-'Uthmāniyyīn al-muta'akhkhira li-Filasṭīn wa fī i'ādat tanẓīmihā al-idārī.

The lasting impact of al-ʿUmar’s dawlah qutriyyah and al-Jazzar’s powerful autonomous regime on both European and late Ottoman thinking as well as on the modern Palestinian psyche and memories can hardly be overstated. In the mid-18th century al-ʿUmar shifted the centre of power in Galilee from Safad (and the Liwa of Safad) to Acre, a town which al-ʿUmar transformed into one of the biggest, wealthiest and most well-fortified cities of the al-Sham region. It is hardly a coincidence, therefore, that in 1799 Napoleon Bonaparte sought but failed to conquer the city. Seventy years later, in the early 1870s – as we shall see in chapter nine – the Ottomans reorganised Palestine and created the sanjak of Acre as one of three administrative regions in the country. For nearly five centuries from 1266 until the early 18th century, Safad was the capital of the Galilee and after 1517 the Ottomans confirmed its administrative position in Galilee by creating the administrative sanjak of Safad. In view of the fact that the Safad had dominated the Galilee and northern Palestine for centuries under both the Mamluks and Ottomans, the creation of the sanjak of Acre in the late Ottoman period should also be counted as one the lasting legacies of 18th century Palestine under al-ʿUmar and al-Jazzar for the late Ottoman perception, and administrative reorganisation, of Palestine.

Sama da duka, mulkin al-ʿUmar mai ƙarfi ya samar da wata hanya daban da siyasar manyan mutane masu shiga tsakani (ta uba da mabiya) ta Falasɗinu, da kuma siyasar manyan birane mai alaƙa da iyali, mai gasa mai tsanani kuma mai yawan rigima, wadda ta addabi Falasɗinu a zamanin Daular Usmaniyya ta ƙarshe da kuma na Mandate har zuwa shekarar 1948.

Above all, al-ʿUmar’s powerful regime provided an alternative model to the intermediary (patron‒client) elite politics of Palestine and to the family-oriented, fiercely competitive and deeply fractious urban elite politics which bedevilled both late Ottoman and Mandatory Palestine until 1948.