Author Archives: driwancybermuseum

The Italy Collections Exhibition

.Driwancybermuseum’s Blogtarian betawi tempo dulu                                            WELCOME COLLECTORS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD                          SELAMAT DATANG KOLEKTOR INDONESIA DAN ASIAN                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :

The Italy Collections Exhibition





Frame One: Dr Iwan private  Italy Collections

I.The Italy Imperial Collections

II.The Republic Of Italy Collections

rame Two :

The Italy Historic Collections


History of Italy
Flag of Italy
This article is part of a series

Ancient history
Prehistoric Italy
Etruscan civilization (12th–6th c. BC)
Magna Graecia (8th–7th c. BC)
Ancient Rome (8th c. BC–5th c. AD)
Ostrogothic domination (5th–6th c.)
Middle Ages
Italy in the Middle Ages
Byzantine reconquest of Italy (6th–8th c.)
Lombard domination (6th–8th c.)
Italy in the Carolingian Empire and HRE
Islam and Normans in southern Italy
Maritime Republics and Italian city-states
Early modern period
Italian Renaissance (14th–16th c.)
Italian Wars (1494–1559)
Foreign domination (1559–1814)
Italian unification (1815–1861)
Modern history
Monarchy (1861–1945)
Italy in World War I (1914–1918)
Fascism and Colonial Empire (1918–1945)
Italy in World War II (1940–1945)
Republic (1945–present)
Years of lead (1970s–1980s)
Historical states
Military history
Economic history
Genetic history
Citizenship history
Fashion history
Postal history
Railway history
Currency history
Musical history

Italy Portal

v • d • e

Italy, united in 1861, has significantly contributed to the cultural and social development of the entire Mediterranean area. Many cultures and civilizations have existed there since prehistoric times.

Culturally and linguistically, the origins of Italian history can be traced back to the 9th century BC, when earliest accounts date the presence of Italic tribes in modern central Italy. Linguistically they are divided into Oscans, Umbrians and Latins. Later the Latin culture became dominant, as Rome emerged as the dominant city around 350 BC. Other pre-Roman civilizations include Magna Graecia in Southern Italy and the earlier Etruscan civilization, which flourished between 900 and 150 BC in the Center North, Po Valley, Latium and Campania.[1]

After the Roman Republic and Empire dominated this part of the world for many centuries, came an Italy whose people would make immeasurable contributions. Some of these contributions led to the development of European philosophy, science, and art during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Dominated by city-states for much of the medieval and Renaissance period, the Italian peninsula also experienced several foreign dominations. Parts of Italy were annexed to the Spanish, the Austrian and Napoleon’s empire, while the Vatican maintained control over the central part of it, before the Italian Peninsula was eventually liberated and unified amidst much struggle in the 19th and 20th centuries.

In the late-19th century and early 20th century, or the new Kingdom of Italy, the country built a colonial empire, colonizing parts of Africa, and countries along the Mediterranean. Italy suffered enormous losses in World War I but came out on the winning side. The Fascists, led by Benito Mussolini, took over and set up an authoritarian dictatorship 1922-43. Italy was a junior partner of Nazi Germany and Japan in World War II, and after the southern regions had been liberated in 1943 the Fascists fought on until surrendering in 1945 as the “Republic of Salò”. Italy was a hard-fought a battlefield 1943-45.

In 1946, due to a referendum, the Kingdom of Italy was abolished,[2] and 2 June 1946 saw the birth of the Italian Republic. The 1950s and 1960s in Italy saw a period of rapid modernization and economic growth succeeding the disastrous consequences of World War II, and ever since, Italy has been one of the founding nations, or has joined, several organizations, such as the European Economic Community, which later became the European Union, the United Nations, NATO, UNESCO, the G7, which afterwords became the G8, the G20, and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Italy is currently ranked as a regional power,[3][4][5][6][7] and Italy has been classified in a study, measuring hard power, as being the 11th greatest worldwide national power.[8]

 Origins of the name

The name Italy (Italia) is an ancient name for the country and people of Southern Italy. Mythological roots of the name date back to a legendary ancient king named ‘Italus’, though a more likely origin may be from ancient Oscan VÍTELIÚ, meaning “land of young cattle”, as Italy was a land rich in cattle since ancient times. The name Italia was imposed upon the Roman Republic by the conquering Italic tribes of the contemporary Abruzzo region, centering in the area of Corfinium (Corfinio). Coins bearing the name Italia were minted by an alliance of Italic tribes (Sabines, Samnites, Umbrians and others) competing with Rome in the 1st century BC. By the time of Emperor Augustus, the multi-ethnic territory of Italy was included in the Roman Italy (Italia) as the central unit of the Empire; Cisalpine Gaul, the Upper Po valley, for example, was appended in 42 BC. After the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the Lombard invasions, “Italy” or “Italian” gradually became the collective name for diverse states appearing on the peninsula and their overseas properties. Pallotino claims that the name was originally derived from the Itali settled in modern Calabria. The Greeks gradually came to use the name for a greater region, but it was not until the time of the Roman conquests that the term was expanded to cover the entire peninsula.[9]

Prehistoric Italy

Main article: Prehistoric Italy

In prehistoric times, the Italian peninsula was rather different than it is now. During glaciations, for example, the islands of Elba and Sicily were connected to the mainland. The Adriatic Sea began at what is now the Gargano peninsula, and what is now its surface up to Venice was a fertile plain with a humid climate.

The presence of the Homo neanderthalensis has been demonstrated in archaeological findings dating to c. 50,000 years ago (late Pleistocene). There are some twenty such sites, the most important being that of the Grotta Guattari at San Felice Circeo, on the Tyrrhenian Sea south to Rome. Other are the grotta di Fumane (province of Verona), grotta San Bernardino ( province of Vicenza) and the Breuil grotto, also in San Felice.

Modern man appeared during the upper Palaeolithic. Remains of the Aurignacian variety have been found in the grotto of Fumane, dating to c. 34.000 years ago.

Remains of the later prehistoric age have been found in Liguria, Lombardy (stone carvings in Valcamonica) and in Sardinia (nuraghe). The most famous is perhaps that of Ötzi the Iceman, the mummy of a mountain hunter found in the Similaun glacier in South Tyrol, dating to c. 3000 BC (Copper Age).

Petroglyph in Foppe of Nadro.


Important relics of neolithic Italy are the Rock Drawings in Valcamonica, dating from about 8000 BC.

 Copper Age

At the same time of the appearance of metalwork, Indoeuropean people migrated to Italy. Approximatively four waves of population from north to the Alps have been identified. A first Indoeuropean migration occurred around the mid-3rd millennium BC, from population who imported copper smithing. The Remedello culture took over the Po Valley.

Bronze Age

A second wave of immigration occurred from the late 3rd-early 2nd millennium BC, with tribes identified with the Beaker culture and by the use of bronze smithing, in the Padan Plain, in Tuscany and on the coasts of Sardinia and Sicily.

In the mid-2nd millennium BC, a third wave arrived, associated with the Terramare culture. The Terramare culture takes its name from the black earth (terremare) residue of settlement mounds, which have long served the fertilizing needs of local farmers. The occupations of the terramare people as compared with their Neolithic predecessors may be inferred with comparative certainty. They were still hunters, but had domesticated animals; they were fairly skillful metallurgists, casting bronze in moulds of stone and clay, and they were also agriculturists, cultivating beans, the vine, wheat and flax.

 Iron Age (8th to 5th c BC)

Main article: Ancient Italic peoples

From the late 2nd millennium to the early 1st millennium BC, a fourth wave, the Villanovan culture, related to the Central European Urnfield culture, brought iron-working to the Italian peninsula. Villanovans practiced cremation and buried the ashes of their dead in pottery urns of distinctive double-cone shape. Generally speaking, Villanovan settlements were centered in the Po River valley and Etruria around Bologna, later an important Etruscan center, and areas in Emilia Romagna (at Verruchio and Fermi), in Tuscany and Lazio. Further south, in Campania, a region where inhumation was the general practice, Villanovan cremation burials have been identified at Capua, at the “princely tombs” of Pontecagnano near Salerno (finds conserved in the Museum of Agro Picentino) and at Sala Consilina.


Main article: Etruscan civilization

A culture that is identifiably and certainly Etruscan developed in Italy after about 800 BC approximately over the range of the preceding Iron Age Villanovan culture. The latter gave way in the 5th century to an increasingly orientalizing culture that was influenced also by Greek neighbors in Magna Graecia, the Hellenic civilization of southern Italy. The Etruscans are generally believed to have spoken a non-Indo-European language or an ancient anatolic language (Luvio).Some inscriptions (500 BC) in a similar Etruscan language have been found on the Egean island of Lemnos. Etruscans were a monogamous society that emphasized pairing. The historical Etruscans had achieved a state system of society, with remnants of the chiefdom and tribal forms. In this they were ahead of the surrounding Italics, who still had chiefs and tribes. Rome was in a sense the first Italic state, but it began as an Etruscan one. The Etruscan system of belief was an immanent polytheism; that is, all visible phenomena were considered to be a manifestation of divine power, and that power was subdivided into deities that acted continually on the world of man and could, by human action or inaction, be dissuaded against or persuaded in favor of human affairs. Rome was founded in Etruscan territory. Despite the words of the sources, which indicated that Campania and Latium also had been Etruscan, scholars[who?] took the view that Rome was on the edge of Etruscan territory. Near the Etruscan center of Viterbo, an Etruscan citadel now called Acquarossa was destroyed ca 500 BC and never rebuilt, thus preserving relatively undisturbed Etruscan structures, which have been excavated under the auspices of the Swedish Institute at Rome.

The origins of the Etruscans are lost in prehistory. The main hypotheses are that they are indigenous, probably stemming from the Villanovan culture, or that they are the result of invasion from the north or the Near East.

Etruscan expansion was focused both to the north beyond the Apennines and into Campania. Some small towns in the 6th century BC have disappeared during this time, ostensibly consumed by greater, more powerful neighbors. However, there exists no doubt that the political structure of the Etruscan culture was similar, albeit more aristocratic, to Magna Graecia in the south. The mining and commerce of metal, especially copper and iron, led to an enrichment of the Etruscans and to the expansion of their influence in the Italian peninsula and the western Mediterranean sea. Here their interests collided with those of the Greeks, especially in the 6th century BC, when Phoceans of Italy founded colonies along the coast of France, Catalonia and Corsica. This led the Etruscans to ally themselves with the Carthaginians, whose interests also collided with the Greeks.[10][11]

Around 540 BC, the Battle of Alalia led to a new distribution of power in the western Mediterranean Sea. Though the battle had no clear winner, Carthage managed to expand its sphere of influence at the expense of the Greeks, and Etruria saw itself relegated to the northern Tyrrhenian Sea with full ownership of Corsica. From the first half of the 5th century, the new international political situation meant the beginning of the Etruscan decline after losing their southern provinces. In 480 BC, Etruria’s ally Carthage was defeated by a coalition of Magna Graecia cities led by Syracuse. A few years later, in 474, Syracuse’s tyrant Hiero defeated the Etruscans at the Battle of Cumae. Etruria’s influence over the cities of Latium and Campania weakened, and it was taken over by Romans and Samnites. In the 4th century, Etruria saw a Gallic invasion end its influence over the Po valley and the Adriatic coast. Meanwhile, Rome had started annexing Etruscan cities. This led to the loss of their north provinces. Etruscia was assimilated by Rome around 500 BC.[10][11]

Etruscan walled town, Civita di Bagnoregio.

The wolf, feeding the twins Romulus and Remus, probably the most famous legend of the founding of the city.

Those who subscribe to an Italic foundation of Rome, followed by an Etruscan invasion, typically speak of an Etruscan “influence” on Roman culture; that is, cultural objects that were adopted at Rome from neighboring Etruria. The prevalent view today is that Rome was founded by Italics and merged with Etruscans later. In that case Etruscan cultural objects are not a heritage but are influences.[clarification needed]

The main criterion for deciding whether an object originated at Rome and traveled by influence to the Etruscans, or descended to the Romans from the Etruscans, is date. Many, if not most, of the Etruscan cities were older than Rome. If we find that a given feature was there first, it cannot have originated at Rome. A second criterion is the opinion of the ancient sources. They tell us outright that certain institutions and customs came from the Etruscans. Rome is located on the edge of what was Etruscan territory. When Etruscan settlements turned up south of the border, it was presumed that the Etruscans spread there after the foundation of Rome, but the settlements are now known to have preceded Rome.

Etruscan settlements were frequently built on a hill—the steeper the better—and surrounded by thick walls. According to Roman mythology, when Romulus and Remus founded Rome, they did so on the Palatine Hill according to Etruscan ritual; that is, they began with a pomerium or sacred ditch. Then, they proceeded to the walls. Romulus was required to kill Remus when the latter jumped over the wall, breaking its magic spell (see also under Pons Sublicius). The name of Rome is believed by some to be Etruscan, occurring in a standard form stating “place from which”: Velzna-χ, “from Velzna”, Sveama-χ, “from Sveama”, Ruma-χ, “from Ruma”. We do not know what it means however. If Tiberius is from θefarie, then Ruma would have been placed on the Thefar river. A heavily discussed topic between scholars is who was the founding population of Rome. In 390 BC the city of Rome was attacked by the Gauls, and as a result may have lost many – though not all – of its earlier records. Certainly, the history of Rome before that date is not as secure as it later becomes, but enough material remains to give a good picture of the development of the city and its institutions.

Later history relates that some Etruscans lived in the Tuscus vicus, the “Etruscan quarter”, and that there was an Etruscan line of kings (albeit ones descended from a Greek, Demaratus the Corinthian) which succeeded kings of Latin and Sabine origin. Etruscophile historians would argue that this, together with evidence for institutions, religious elements and other cultural elements, prove that Rome was founded by Italics. The true picture is rather more complicated, not least because the Etruscan cities were separate entities which never came together to form a single Etruscan state. Furthermore, there were strong Latin and Italic elements to Roman culture, and later Romans proudly celebrated these multiple, ‘multicultural’ influences on the city.

Under Romulus and Numa Pompilius the people were said to have been divided into thirty curiae and three tribes. Very few words of Etruscan entered the Latin language, but the names of at least two of the tribes—Ramnes and Luceres—seem to be Etruscan.

Magna Graecia

Main article: Magna Graecia

In the 8th and 7th centuries BC, for various reasons, including demographic crisis (famine, overcrowding, etc.), the search for new commercial outlets and ports, and expulsion from their homeland, Greeks began to settle in southern Italy (Cerchiai, pp. 14–18). Also during this period, Greek colonies were established in places as widely separated as the eastern coast of the Black Sea and Massalia (Marseille). They included settlements in Sicily and the southern part of the Italian peninsula. The Romans called the area of Sicily and the foot of the boot of Italy Magna Graecia (Latin, “Great Greece”), since it was so densely inhabited by the Greeks. The ancient geographers differed on whether the term included Sicily or merely Apulia and CalabriaStrabo being the most prominent advocate of the wider definitions.

With this colonization, Greek culture was exported to Italy, in its dialects of the Ancient Greek language, its religious rites and its traditions of the independent polis. An original Hellenic civilization soon developed, later interacting with the native Italic and Latin civilisations. The most important cultural transplant was the Chalcidean/Cumaean variety of the Greek alphabet, which was adopted by the Etruscans; the Old Italic alphabet subsequently evolved into the Latin alphabet, which became the most widely used alphabet in the world.

Many of the new Hellenic cities became very rich and powerful, like Capua, Neapolis (Νεάπολις, Naples), Syracuse, Acragas, Sybaris, (Σύβαρις). Other cities in Magna Graecia included Tarentum (Τάρας), Epizephyrian Locris (Λοκροί Ἐπιζεφύριοι), Rhegium (Ῥήγιον), Croton (Κρότων), Thurii (Θούριοι), Elea (Ἐλέα), Nola (Νῶλα), Ancona (Ἀγκών), Syessa (Σύεσσα), Bari (Βάριον) and others.

Following the Pyrrhic War, Magna Graecia was absorbed into the Roman Republic

In the 8th and 7th centuries BC, driven by unsettled conditions at home, Greek colonies were established in Sicily and the southern part of the Italian peninsula. During the Early Middle Ages, following the Gothic War that was disastrous for the region, new waves of Byzantine Christian Greeks came to Magna Graecia from Greece and Asia Minor, as southern Italy remained loosely governed by the Eastern Roman Empire until the advent first of the Lombards, then of the Normans. Moreover, the Byzantines found in southern Italy people of common cultural root, the Greek-speaking eredi ellenofoni of Magna Graecia. The main city of Magna Graecia was Naples, especially in 420 BC, when the port of the city became one of the most important of the mediterranean sea.[12]

Romans (5th c. BC to 5th c. AD)

See also: Italia (Roman Empire)

The Colosseum in Rome, built in the 1st century AD

Beginning and Kingdom

According to legend, Rome was founded in 753 BC by Romulus and Remus, and was then governed by seven Kings of Rome. In the following centuries, Rome started expanding its territory, defeating its neighbours (Veium, the other Latins, the Samnites) one after the other.

The traditional account of Roman history, which has come down to us through Livy, Plutarch, Dionysius of Halicarnassus and others, is that in Rome’s 1st centuries, it was ruled by a succession of seven kings. The traditional chronology, as codified by Varro, allots 243 years for their reigns, an average of almost 35 years, which, since the work of Barthold Georg Niebuhr, has been generally discounted by modern scholarship. The Gauls destroyed all of Rome’s historical records when they sacked the city after the Battle of the Allia in 390 BC (Varronian, according to Polybius the battle occurred in 387/6), so no contemporary records of the kingdom exist, and all accounts of the kings must be carefully questioned.[13]

Italia, under the Roman Republic and later Empire, was the Italian peninsula from Rubicon to Calabria. During the Republic, Italia was not a province, but rather the territory of the city of Rome, thus having a special status: for example, military commanders were not allowed to bring their armies within Italia, and Julius Caesar passing the Rubicon with his legions marked the start of the civil war.

Roman Italy (in green) as organized by Augustus c. 7 AD.

Octavius was awarded the titles of Augustus and Princeps by what remained of the Senate, and was proclaimed Imperator (which at the time only meant “supreme commander”) by his Legions. Even if he was careful to abide the rules of the old republic, Octavius actually ruled as an Emperor, and the Roman Empire was born. This became apparent in 14 AD, when he died and was succeeded by his adoptive son, the former general Tiberius.

The Battle of Actium resulted in the defeat and subsequent suicides of Mark Antony and Cleopatra. Octavian, now sole ruler of Rome, began a full-scale reformation of military, fiscal and political matters. The powers that he secured for himself were identical in form, if not in name, to those that his predecessor Julius Caesar had secured years earlier as Roman Dictator.

In 36 BC, he was given the power of a Plebeian Tribune, which gave him veto power over the senate, the ability to control the principle legislative assembly (the Plebeian Council), and made his person and office sacrosanct. Up until 32 BC, his status as a Triumvir gave him the powers of an autocrat, but when he deposed Mark Antony that year, he resigned from the Triumvirate, and was then given powers identical to those that he had given up. In 29 BC, Octavian was given the authority of a Roman Censor, and thus the power to appoint new senators.[14]

The senate granted Octavian a unique grade of Proconsular imperium, which gave him authority over all Proconsuls (military governors).[15] The unruly provinces at the borders, where the vast majority of the legions were stationed, were under the control of Augustus. These provinces were classified as imperial provinces. The peaceful senatorial provinces were under the control of the Senate. The Roman legions, which had reached an unprecedented number (around 50) because of the civil wars, were reduced to 28.

Augustus also created nine special cohorts, ostensibly to maintain the peace in Italy, keeping at least three of them stationed at Rome. These cohorts became known as the Praetorian Guard. In 27 BC, Octavian transferred control of the state back to the Senate and the People of Rome.[14] The Senate refused the offer, which, in effect, functioned as a popular ratification of his position within the state. Octavian was also granted the title of “Augustus” by the senate,[16] and took the title of Princeps, or “first citizen”.[15]

As the adopted heir of Caesar, Augustus preferred to be called by this name. Caesar was a component of his family name. Julio-Claudian rule lasted for almost a century (from Julius Caesar in the mid-1st century BC to the emperor Nero in the mid-1st century AD). By the time of the Flavian Dynasty, and the reign of Vespasian, and that of his two sons, Titus and Domitian, the term Caesar had evolved, almost de facto, from a family name into a formal title.

Augustus’ final goal was to figure out a method to ensure an orderly succession. In 6 BC Augustus granted tribunician powers to his stepson Tiberius,[17] and before long Augustus realized that he had no choice but to recognize Tiberius as his heir. In AD 13, the point was settled beyond question. A law was passed which linked Augustus’ powers over the provinces to those of Tiberius,[18] so that now Tiberius’ legal powers were equivalent to, and independent from, those of Augustus.[18] Within a year, Augustus was dead.

The establishment of the empire brought substantial benefits to the provinces, which could now appeal to the emperor against rapacious administrators, rather than to the corrupt senatorial class to whom the administrators usually belonged. Furthermore, Roman citizenship was slowly extended to the provinces, and the rule of law became less arbitrary.

In the early 1st century AD and the 2nd century AD, Roman Italy thrived. Rome became the centre of Western Civilzation, and even though much of Roman culture was heavily influenced by that of the Greeks and the Etruscans, the Romans revolutionized modern society and the arts, particularly regarding politics, education, law, the military system, architecture, philosophy, cuisine and the ways of life. Rome became one of the most important political, cultural, scientifical, educational and literary centres of all time, and its vibrant artistic scene was also thanks to the emperors’ grand construction works, building impressive and grand palaces, temples and monuments, and the several poets, writers and philosophers who resided there at the time, such as Livy, Seneca and Tacitus, to name but a few.

Despite its military strength, the empire made few efforts to expand its already vast extent; the most notable being the conquest of Britain, begun by emperor Claudius (47), and emperor Trajans conquest of Dacia (101-102, 105-106). In the 1st and 2nd century, Roman legions were also employed in intermittent warfare with the Germanic tribes to the north and the Parthian Empire to the east. While armed insurrections (e.g. the Hebraic insurrection in Judea) (70) and brief civil wars (e.g. in 68 AD the year of the four emperors) demanded the legions attention on several occasions.

After the death of emperor Theodosius I (395), Italia became part of the Western Roman Empire. Then came the years of the barbarian invasions, and the capital was moved from Mediolanum to Ravenna. In 476, with the death of Romulus Augustulus and the return of the imperial ensigns to Constantinople, the Western Roman Empire ends; for a few years Italia stayed united under the rule of Odoacer, but later it was divided between several kingdoms, and did not reunite under a single ruler until thirteen centuries later.

Middle Ages (6th to 14th c.)

Italy in the year 1000.

The Early, High and Late Middle Ages

The Iron Crown with which Lombard rulers were crowned. They established a Kingdom of Italy which lasted until 774, when it was conquered by the Franks. Their influence on Italian political geography is plainly visible in the regional appellation Lombardy.

In 476, the last Roman Emperor was overthrown by the Germanic general Odoacer who ruled Italy until 493, largely maintaining Roman customs and culture. Odoacer’s rule came to an end when the Ostrogoths under the leadership of Theodoric conquered Italy. This led to the Gothic War during which the armies of Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian won a pyrrhic victory over the Goths in Italy. The Gothic War destroyed the infrastructure of Italy and allowed the more barbarous Germanic tribe, the Lombards to take control of Italy. The Lombards established a kingdom in northern Italy and three principalities in the South. After the Lombard invasion, the popes (for example, St. Gregory) were nominally subject to the eastern emperor, but often received little help from Constantinople, and had to fill the lack of stately power, providing essential services (such as food for the needy) and protecting Rome from Lombard incursions; in this way, the popes started building an independent state.

In the 6th century AD the Byzantine Emperor Justinian reconquered Italy from the Ostrogoths. The invasion of a new wave of Germanic tribes, the Lombards, doomed his attempt to resurrect the Western Roman Empire but the repercussions of Justinian’s failure resounded further still. For the next thirteen centuries, whilst new nation-states arose in the lands north of the Alps, the Italian political landscape was a patchwork of feuding city states, petty tyrannies, and foreign invaders.

For several centuries the armies and Exarchs, Justinian’s successors, were a tenacious force in Italian affairs – strong enough to prevent other powers such as the Arabs, the Holy Roman Empire, or the Papacy from establishing a unified Italian Kingdom, but too weak to drive out these “interlopers” and recreate Roman Italy. Later Imperial orders such as the Carolingians, the Ottonians and Hohenstaufens also managed to impose their overlordship in Italy. But their successes were as transitory as Justinian’s and a unified Italian state remained a dream until the 19th century.

In 751 the Lombards seized Ravenna and the Exarchate of Ravenna was abolished. This ended the Byzantine presence in central Italy, although some coastal cities and some areas in south Italy remained under Byzantine control until the 11th century. Facing a new Lombard offensive, the papacy appealed to the Franks for aid. In 756 Frankish forces defeated the Lombards and gave the Papacy legal authority over much of central Italy, thus creating the Papal States.

The age of Charlemagne was therefore one of stability for Italy, though it was generally dominated by non-Italian interests. The 11th century signed the end of the darkest period in the Middle Ages. Trade slowly increased, especially on the seas where the four Italian cities of Amalfi, Pisa, Genoa and Venice became major powers. The papacy regained its authority, and started a long struggle with the empire, about both ecclesiastical and secular matter. The first episode was the Investiture controversy. In the 12th century those Italian cities which lay in the Holy Roman Empire launched a successful effort to win autonomy from the Holy Roman Empire; this made north Italy a land of quasi-independent or independent city-states until the 19th century.

In 1155 the Byzantine Emperor Manuel I Komnenos attempted to invade southern Italy. The Emperor sent his generals Michael Palaiologos and John Doukas with Byzantine troops and large quantities of gold to invade Apulia (1155). However, the invasion soon stalled. By 1158 the Byzantine army had left Italy, with only a few permanent gains.

No ultramontane Empire could succeed in unifying Italy—or in achieving more than a temporary hegemony—because its success threatened the survival of medieval Italy’s other powers: the Byzantines, the Papacy, and the Normans. These—and the descendants of the Lombards, who became fused with earlier Italian ethnic groups—conspired against, fought, and eventually destroyed any attempt to create a dominant political order in Italy. It was against this vacuum of authority that one must view the rise of the institutions of the Signoria and the Communi.

Comuni and Signorie

Palazzo Vecchio, originally called the Palazzo della Signoria.

In Italian history the rise of the Signorie (sing.: Signoria) is a phase often associated with the decline of the medieval commune system of government and the rise of the dynastic state. In this context the word Signoria (here to be understood as “Lordly Power”) is used in opposition to the institution of the Commune or city republic.

Indeed, contemporary observers and modern historians see the rise of the Signoria as a reaction to the failure of the Communi to maintain law-and-order and suppress party strife and civil discord. In the anarchic conditions that often prevailed in medieval Italian city states, people looked to strong men to restore order and disarm the feuding elites. In times of anarchy or crisis, cities sometimes offered the Signoria to individuals perceived as strong enough to save the state. For example, the Tuscan state of Pisa offered the Signoria to Charles VIII of France in the hope that he would protect the independence of Pisa from its long term enemy Florence. Similarly, Siena offered the Signoria to Cesare Borgia.

Types of Signoria

The composition and specific functions of the Signoria varied from city to city. In some states (such as Verona under the Della Scala family or Florence in the days of Cosimo de Medici and Lorenzo the Magnificent) the polity was what we would term today a single party state in which the dominant party had vested the Signoria of the state in a single family or dynasty.

In Florence this arrangement was unofficial as it was not constitutionally formalized before the Medici were expelled from the city in 1494.

In other states (such as the Milan of the Visconti) the dynasty’s right to the Signoria was a formally recognized part of the Commune’s constitution, which had been “ratified” by the People and recognized by the Pope or the Holy Roman Empire.

Maritime Republics

Main article: Repubbliche Marinare

Ensign of the Italian Navy, sporting the coat of arms of the four main Repubbliche Marinare[19]

Italy at this time was notable for its merchant Republics, including the Republic of Florence and the Maritime Republics. They were city-states and they were generally republics in that they were formally independent, though most of them originated from territories once belonging to the Byzantine Empire (the main exceptions being Genoa and Pisa). All these cities during the time of their independence had similar (though not identical) systems of government in which the merchant class had considerable power. Although in practice these were oligarchical, and bore little resemblance to a modern democracy, the relative political freedom they afforded was conducive to academic and artistic advancement.

The four classic Maritime Republics in Italy are Venice, Genoa, Pisa, Amalfi and they are always given in that order, reflecting the temporal sequence of their dominance. However, other towns in Italy also have a history of being Maritime Republics, though historically less prominent. These include Gaeta, Ancona, Molfetta, Trani and, in Dalmatia (under Italian cultural influence), Ragusa and Zara.

Venice and Genoa were Europe’s gateway to trade with the East, and a producer of fine glass, while Florence was a capital of silk, wool, banks and jewelry. The wealth such business brought to Italy meant that large public and private artistic projects could be commissioned. The Maritime Republics were heavily involved in the Crusades, providing support but most especially taking advantage of the political and trading opportunities resulting from these wars. The Fourth Crusade, notionally intended to “liberate” Jerusalem, actually entailed the Venetian conquest of Zara and Constantinople.

Each of the Maritime Republics over time had dominion over different overseas lands, including many of the islands of the Mediterranean and especially Sardinia and Corsica, lands on the Adriatic, and lands in the Near East and North Africa.

Renaissance (15th to 16th c.)

Italy in 1494, before the invasion by Charles VIII of France that year.

Michelangelo’s David, symbol of the Italian Renaissance.

Main article: Italian Renaissance

By the late Middle Ages, central and southern Italy, once the heartland of the Roman Empire, was far poorer than the north. Rome was a city largely in ruins, and the Papal States were a loosely administered region with little law and order. Partly because of this, the Papacy had relocated to Avignon in France. Naples, Sicily, and Sardinia had for some time been under foreign domination. The Italian trade routes that covered the Mediterranean and beyond were major conduits of culture and knowledge. The city-states of Italy expanded greatly during this period and grew in power to become de facto fully independent of the Holy Roman Empire.

The Italian Renaissance began in Tuscany, centered in the city of Florence. It then spread south, having an especially significant impact on Rome, which was largely rebuilt by the Renaissance popes. The Italian Renaissance peaked in the late 15th century as foreign invasions plunged the region into turmoil. From the late 14th century, Florence’s leading family had been the Albizzi. The Renaissance ideals first spread from Florence to the neighbouring states of Tuscany such as Siena and Lucca. The Tuscan culture soon became the model for all the states of Northern Italy, and the Tuscan variety of Italian came to predominate throughout the region, especially in literature. In 1447 Francesco Persaliano came to power in Milan and rapidly transformed that still medieval city into a major centre of art and learning. Venice, one of the wealthiest cities due to its control of the Mediterranean Sea, also became a centre for Renaissance culture, especially architecture. In 1478 the Papacy returned to Rome, but that once imperial city remained poor and largely in ruins through the first years of the Renaissance. As a cultural movement, the Italian Renaissance affected only a small part of the population. Northern Italy was the most urbanized region of Europe[citation needed], but three quarters of the people were still rural peasants.

The Renaissance was so called because it was a “rebirth” of certain classical ideas that had long been lost to Europe. It has been argued that the fuel for this rebirth was the rediscovery of ancient texts that had been forgotten by Western civilization, but were preserved in some monastic libraries and in the Islamic world, and the translations of Greek and Arabic texts into Latin.

Renaissance scholars such as Niccolò de’ Niccoli and Poggio Bracciolini scoured the libraries in search of works by such classical authors as Plato, Cicero and Vitruvius. The works of ancient Greek and Hellenistic writers (such as Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Ptolemy) and Muslim scientists were imported into the Christian world, providing new intellectual material for European scholars.

The Italian Renaissance is best known for its cultural achievements. Accounts of Renaissance literature usually begin with Petrarch (best known for the elegantly polished vernacular sonnet sequence of the Canzoniere and for the craze for book collecting that he initiated) and his friend and contemporary Boccaccio (author of the Decameron). Famous vernacular poets of the 15th century include the renaissance epic authors Luigi Pulci (Morgante), Matteo Maria Boiardo (Orlando Innamorato), and Ludovico Ariosto (Orlando Furioso). 15th century writers such as the poet Poliziano and the Platonist philosopher Marsilio Ficino made extensive translations from both Latin and Greek. In the early 16th century, Castiglione (The Book of the Courtier) laid out his vision of the ideal gentleman and lady, while Machiavelli cast a jaundiced eye on “la verita effetuale delle cose” — the actual truth of things — in The Prince, composed, humanist style, chiefly of parallel ancient and modern examples of Virtù. Italian Renaissance painting exercised a dominant influence on subsequent European painting (see Western painting) for centuries afterwards, with artists such as Giotto di Bondone, Masaccio, Piero della Francesca, Domenico Ghirlandaio, Perugino, Michelangelo, Raphael, Botticelli, Leonardo da Vinci, and Titian. The same is true for architecture, as practiced by Brunelleschi, Leone Alberti, Andrea Palladio, and Bramante. Their works include Florence Cathedral, St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, and the Tempio Malatestiano in Rimini (to name a only a few, not to mention many splended private residences: see Renaissance architecture). Finally, the Aldine Press, founded by the printer Aldo Manuzio, active in Venice, developed Italic type and the small, relatively portable and inexpensive printed book that could be carried in one’s pocket, as well as being the first to publish editions of books in Ancient Greek. Yet cultural contributions notwithstanding, some present-day historians also see the era as one of the beginning of economic regression for Italy (due to the opening up of the Atlantic trade routes and repeated foreign invasions) and of little progress in experimental science, which made its great leaps forward among Protestant culture in the 17th century.

The Black Death in 1348 inflicted a terrible blow to Italy, killing one third of the population.[20]

The recovery from the disaster led to a resurgence of cities, trade and economy which greatly stimulated the successive phase of the Humanism and Renaissance (15th-16th centuries) when Italy again returned to be the center of Western civilization, strongly influencing the other European countries with Courts like Este in Ferrara and De Medici in Florence.

Northern Italy and upper Central Italy were divided into a number of warring city-states, the most powerful being Milan, Florence, Pisa, Siena, Genoa, Ferrara, Mantua, Verona and Venice. High Medieval Northern Italy was further divided by the long running battle for supremacy between the forces of the Papacy and of the Holy Roman Empire: each city aligned itself with one faction or the other, yet was divided internally between the two warring parties, Guelfs and Ghibellines. Warfare between the states was common, invasion from outside Italy confined to intermittent sorties of Holy Roman Emperors. Renaissance politics developed from this background. Since the 13th century, as armies became primarily composed of mercenaries, prosperous city-states could field considerable forces, despite their low populations. In the course of the 15th century, the most powerful city-states annexed their smaller neighbors. Florence took Pisa in 1406, Venice captured Padua and Verona, while the Duchy of Milan annexed a number of nearby areas including Pavia and Parma.

The first part of the Renaissance saw almost constant warfare on land and sea as the city-states vied for preeminence. On land, these wars were primarily fought by armies of mercenaries known as condottieri, bands of soldiers drawn from around Europe, but especially Germany and Switzerland, led largely by Italian captains. The mercenaries were not willing to risk their lives unduly, and war became one largely of sieges and maneuvering, occasioning few pitched battles. It was also in the interest of mercenaries on both sides to prolong any conflict, to continue their employment. Mercenaries were also a constant threat to their employers; if not paid, they often turned on their patron. If it became obvious that a state was entirely dependent on mercenaries, the temptation was great for the mercenaries to take over the running of it themselves—this occurred on a number of occasions.[21]

At sea, Italian city-states sent many fleets out to do battle. The main contenders were Pisa, Genoa, and Venice, but after a long conflict the Genoese succeeded in reducing Pisa. Venice proved to be a more powerful adversary, and with the decline of Genoese power during the 15th century Venice became pre-eminent on the seas. In response to threats from the landward side, from the early 15th century Venice developed an increased interest in controlling the terrafirma as the Venetian Renaissance opened.

On land, decades of fighting saw Florence, Milan and Venice emerge as the dominant players, and these two powers finally set aside their differences and agreed to the Peace of Lodi in 1454, which saw relative calm brought to the region for the first time in centuries. This peace would hold for the next forty years, and Venice’s unquestioned hegemony over the sea also led to unprecedented peace for much of the rest of the 15th century. In the beginning of the 15th century, adventurer and traders such as Niccolò Da Conti (1395–1469) traveled as far as Southeast Asia and back, bringing fresh knowledge on the state of the world, presaging further European voyages of exploration in the years to come.

A series of foreign invasions of Italy known as the Italian Wars would continue for several decades. These began with the 1494 invasion by France that wreaked widespread devastation on Northern Italy and ended the independence of many of the city-states. Most damaging was the May 6, 1527 Sack of Rome by Spanish and German troops that all but ended the role of the Papacy as the largest patron of Renaissance art and architecture.

 Foreign domination (1559 to 1814)

Main article: Early Modern Italy

[edit] 1559–1796

The War of the League of Cambrai was a major conflict in the Italian Wars. The principal participants of the war were France, the Papal States, and the Republic of Venice; they were joined, at various times, by nearly every significant power in Western Europe, including Spain, the Holy Roman Empire, the Kingdom of England, the Kingdom of Scotland, the Duchy of Milan, Florence, the Duchy of Ferrara, and the Swiss.

The history of Italy in the Early Modern period was characterized by foreign domination: Following the Italian Wars (1494 to 1559), Italy saw a long period of relative peace, first under Habsburg Spain (1559 to 1713) and then under Habsburg Austria (1713 to 1796). During the Napoleonic era, Italy was a client state of the French Republic (1796 to 1814). The Congress of Vienna (1814) restored the situation of the late 18th century, which was however quickly overturned by the incipient movement of Italian unification.

The Black Death repeatedly returned to haunt Italy throughout the 14th to 17th centuries. The plague of 1575–77 claimed some 50,000 victims in Venice.[22] In the first half of the 17th century a plague claimed some 1,730,000 victims, or about 14% of Italy’s population.[23] The Great Plague of Milan occurred from 1629 through 1631 in northern Italy, with the cities of Lombardy and Venice experiencing particularly high death rates. In 1656 the plague killed about half of Naples‘ 300,000 inhabitants.[24]

Galileo’s first observations of the moons of Jupiter.

The Musicians by Caravaggio

 Napoleonic invasion

Italy before the Napoleonic invasion (1796).

At the end of the 18th century, Italy was almost in the same political conditions as in the 16th century; the main differences were that Austria had replaced Spain as the dominant foreign power after the War of Spanish Succession (and that too was not true with regards to Naples and Sicily), and that the dukes of Savoy (a mountainous region between Italy and France) had become kings of Sardinia by increasing their Italian possessions, which now included Sardinia and the north-western region of Piedmont.

This situation was shaken in 1796, when the French Army of Italy under Napoleon invaded Italy, with the aims of forcing the First Coalition to abandon Sardinia (where they had created an anti-revolutionary puppet-ruler) and forcing Austria to withdraw from Italy. The first battles came on 9 April, between the French and the Piedmontese, and within only two weeks Victor Amadeus III of Sardinia was forced to sign an armistice. On May 15 the French general then entered Milan, where he was welcomed as a liberator. Subsequently beating off Austrian counterattacks and continuing to advance, he arrived in the Veneto in 1797. Here occurred the Veronese Easters, an act of rebellion against French oppression, that tied down Napoleon for about a week.

On October 1797 Napoleon signed the Treaty of Campo Formio, by which the Republic of Venice was annexed to the Austrian state, dashing Italian nationalists’ hopes that it might become an independent state. This treaty gave Austrian recognition to the existence of the Cisalpine Republic (made up of Lombardy, Emilia Romagna and small parts of Tuscany and Veneto), and annexed Piedmont to France. Even if, like the other states created by the invasion, the Cisalpine Republic was just a satellite of France, these satellites sparked a nationalist movement. The Cisalpine Republic was converted into the Italian Republic in 1802, under the presidency of Napoleon.

In 1805, after the French victory over the Third Coalition and the Peace of Pressburg, Napoleon recovered Veneto and Dalmatia, annexing them to the Italian Republic and renaming it the Kingdom of Italy. Also that year a second satellite state, the Ligurian Republic (successor to the old Republic of Genoa), was pressured into merging with France. In 1806, he conquered the Kingdom of Naples and granted it to his brother and then (from 1808) to Joachim Murat, along with marrying his sisters Elisa and Paolina off to the princes of Massa-Carrara and Guastalla. In 1808, he also annexed Marche and Tuscany to the Kingdom of Italy.

In 1809, Bonaparte occupied Rome, for contrasts with the pope, who had excommunicated him, and to maintain his own state efficiently,[25] exiling the Pope first to Savona and then to France.

After Russia, the other states of Europe re-allied themselves and defeated Napoleon at the Battle of Leipzig, after which his Italian allied states, with Murat first among them, abandoned him to ally with Austria.[26] Defeated at Paris on 6 April 1814, Napoleon was compelled to renounce his throne and sent into exile on Elba. The resulting Congress of Vienna (1814) restored a situation close to that of 1795, dividing Italy between Austria (in the north-east and Lombardy), the Kingdom of Sardinia, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies (in the south and in Sicily), and Tuscany, the Papal States and other minor states in the centre. However, old republics such as Venice and Genoa were not recreated, Venice went to Austria, and Genoa went to the Kingdom of Sardinia.

On Napoleon’s escape and return to France (the Hundred Days), he regained Murat’s support, but Murat proved unable to convince the Italians to fight for Napoleon with his Proclamation of Rimini and was beaten and killed. The Italian kingdoms thus fell, and Italy’s Restoration period began, with many pre-Napoleonic sovereigns returned to their thrones. Piedmont, Genoa and Nice came to be united, as did Sardinia (which went on to create the State of Savoy), while Lombardy, Veneto, Istria and Dalmatia were re-annexed to Austria. The dukedoms of Parma and Modena re-formed, and the Papal States and the Kingdom of Naples returned to the Bourbons. The political and social events in the restoration period of Italy (1815–1835) led to popular uprisings through-out the peninsula and greatly shaped what would become the Italian Wars of Independence. All this led to a new Kingdom of Italy and Italian unification.

 Unification (1814 to 1861)

Main article: Italian unification

Italian unification process

The Risorgimento was the political and social process that unified different states of the Italian peninsula into the single nation of Italy.

It is difficult to pin down exact dates for the beginning and end of Italian reunification, but most scholars agree that it began with the end of Napoleonic rule and the Congress of Vienna in 1815, and approximately ended with the Franco-Prussian War in 1871, though the last “città irredente” did not join the Kingdom of Italy until the Italian victory in World War I.

As Napoleon’s reign began to fail, other national monarchs he had installed tried to keep their thrones by feeding those nationalistic sentiments, setting the stage for the revolutions to come. Among these monarchs were the viceroy of Italy, Eugène de Beauharnais, who tried to get Austrian approval for his succession to the Kingdom of Italy, and Joachim Murat, who called for Italian patriots’ help for the unification of Italy under his rule.[27] Following the defeat of Napoleonic France, the Congress of Vienna (1815) was convened to redraw the European continent. In Italy, the Congress restored the pre-Napoleonic patchwork of independent governments, either directly ruled or strongly influenced by the prevailing European powers, particularly Austria.

At the time, the struggle for Italian unification was perceived to be waged primarily against the Austrian Empire and the Habsburgs, since they directly controlled the predominantly Italian-speaking northeastern part of present-day Italy and were the single most powerful force against unification. The Austrian Empire vigorously repressed nationalist sentiment growing on the Italian peninsula, as well as in the other parts of Habsburg domains. Austrian Chancellor Franz Metternich, an influential diplomat at the Congress of Vienna, stated that the word Italy was nothing more than “a geographic expression.” [28]

Artistic and literary sentiment also turned towards nationalism; and perhaps the most famous of proto-nationalist works was Alessandro Manzoni‘s I Promessi Sposi (The Betrothed). Some read this novel as a thinly veiled allegorical critique of Austrian rule. The novel was published in 1827 and extensively revised in the following years. The 1840 version of I Promessi Sposi used a standardized version of the Tuscan dialect, a conscious effort by the author to provide a language and force people to learn it.

Those in favour of unification also faced opposition from the Holy See, particularly after failed attempts to broker a confederation with the Papal States, which would have left the Papacy with some measure of autonomy over the region. The pope at the time, Pius IX, feared that giving up power in the region could mean the persecution of Italian Catholics.[29]

Even among those who wanted to see the peninsula unified into one country, different groups could not agree on what form a unified state would take. Vincenzo Gioberti, a Piedmontese priest, had suggested a confederation of Italian states under rulership of the Pope. His book,Of the Moral and Civil Primacy of the Italians, was published in 1843 and created a link between the Papacy and the Risorgimento. Many leading revolutionaries wanted a republic, but eventually it was a king and his chief minister who had the power to unite the Italian states as a monarchy.

One of the most influential revolutionary groups was the Carbonari (coal-burners), a secret organization formed in southern Italy early in the 19th century. Inspired by the principles of the French Revolution, its members were mainly drawn from the middle class and intellectuals. After the Congress of Vienna divided the Italian peninsula among the European powers, the Carbonari movement spread into the Papal States, the Kingdom of Sardinia, the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, the Duchy of Modena and the Kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia. The revolutionaries were so feared that the reigning authorities passed an ordinance condemning to death anyone who attended a Carbonari meeting. The society, however, continued to exist and was at the root of many of the political disturbances in Italy from 1820 until after unification. The Carbonari condemned Napoleon III to death for failing to unite Italy, and the group almost succeeded in assassinating him in 1858. Many leaders of the unification movement were at one time members of this organization. (Note: Napoleon III, as a young man, fought on the side of the ‘Carbonari’.)

Two prominent radical figures in the unification movement were Giuseppe Mazzini and Giuseppe Garibaldi. The more conservative constitutional monarchic figures included Count Cavour and Victor Emmanuel II, who would later become the first king of a united Italy.

Mazzini’s activity in revolutionary movements caused him to be imprisoned soon after he joined. While in prison, he concluded that Italy could – and therefore should – be unified and formulated his program for establishing a free, independent, and republican nation with Rome as its capital. After Mazzini’s release in 1831, he went to Marseille, where he organized a new political society called La Giovine Italia (Young Italy). The new society, whose motto was “God and the People,” sought the unification of Italy.

The creation of the Kingdom of Italy was the result of concerted efforts by Italian nationalists and monarchists loyal to the House of Savoy to establish a united kingdom encompassing the entire Italian Peninsula.

The Kingdom of Sardinia industrialized from 1830 onward. A constitution, the Statuto Albertino was enacted in the year of revolutions, 1848, under liberal pressure. Under the same pressure, the First Italian War of Independence was declared on Austria. After initial success the war took a turn for the worse and the Kingdom of Sardinia lost.

Garibaldi, a native of Nice (then part of the Kingdom of Sardinia), participated in an uprising in Piedmont in 1834, was sentenced to death, and escaped to South America. He spent fourteen years there, taking part in several wars, and returned to Italy in 1848.

After the Revolutions of 1848, the apparent leader of the Italian unification movement was Italian nationalist Giuseppe Garibaldi. He was popular amongst southern Italians.[30] Garibaldi led the Italian republican drive for unification in southern Italy, but the northern Italian monarchy of the House of Savoy in the Kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia whose government was led by Camillo Benso, conte di Cavour, also had the ambition of establishing a united Italian state. Though the kingdom had no physical connection to Rome (deemed the natural capital of Italy), the kingdom had successfully challenged Austria in the Second Italian War of Independence, liberating Lombardy-Venetia from Austrian rule. The kingdom also had established important alliances which helped it improve the possibility of Italian unification, such as Britain and France in the Crimean War.

 Monarchy, Fascism and World Wars (1861-1945)

Italy became a nation-state belatedly—on March 17, 1861, when most of the states of the peninsula were united under king Victor Emmanuel II of the Savoy dynasty, which ruled over Piedmont. The architects of Italian unification were Count Camillo Benso di Cavour, the Chief Minister of Victor Emmanuel, and Giuseppe Garibaldi, a general and national hero. In 1866 Prussian Prime Minister Otto von Bismarck offered Victor Emmanuel II an alliance with the Kingdom of Prussia in the Austro-Prussian War. In exchange Prussia would allow Italy to annex Austrian-controlled Venice. King Emmanuel agreed to the alliance and the Third Italian War of Independence began. The victory against Austria allowed Italy to annex Venice. The one major obstacle to Italian unity remained Rome.

In 1870, Prussia went to war with France starting the Franco-Prussian War. To keep the large Prussian army at bay, France abandoned its positions in Rome in order to fight the Prussians. Italy benefited from Prussia’s victory against France by being able to take over the Papal State from French authority. Italian unification was completed, and shortly afterward Italy’s capital was moved to Rome. Rome itself remained for a decade under the Papacy, and became part of the Kingdom of Italy only on September 20, 1870, the final date of Italian unification. The Vatican City is now, since the Lateran Treaty of 1929, an independent enclave surrounded by Italy, as is San Marino.

[edit] Liberalism to Fascism, and World War I

In Northern Italy, industrialisation and modernisation began in the last part of the 19th century. The south, at the same time, was overpopulated, forcing millions of people to search for a better life abroad. It is estimated that around one million Italian people moved to other European countries such as France, Switzerland, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg. Parliamentary democracy developed considerably in the 20th century. The Sardinian Statuto Albertino of 1848, extended to the whole Kingdom of Italy in 1861, provided for basic freedoms, but the electoral laws excluded the non-propertied and uneducated classes from voting.

After unification, Italy’s politics favored radical socialism due to a regionally fragmented right, as conservative Prime Minister Marco Minghetti only held on to power by enacting revolutionary and socialist-leaning policies to appease the opposition such as the nationalization of railways. In 1876, Minghetti was ousted and replaced by socialist Agostino Depretis, who began the long Socialist Period. The Socialist Period was marked by corruption, government instability, poverty, and use of authoritarian measures by the Italian government.

Depretis began his term as Prime Minister by initiating an experimental political idea called Trasformismo (transformism). The theory of Trasformismo was that a cabinet should select a variety of moderates and capable politicians from a non-partisan perspective. In practice, trasformismo was authoritarian and corrupt, Depretis pressured districts to vote for his candidates if they wished to gain favourable concessions from Depretis when in power. The results of the 1876 election resulted in only four representatives from the right being elected, allowing the government to be dominated by Depretis. Despotic and corrupt actions are believed to be the key means in which Depretis managed to keep support in southern Italy. Depretis put through authoritarian measures, such as the banning public meetings, placing “dangerous” individuals in internal exile on remote penal islands across Italy and adopting militarist policies. Depretis enacted controversial legislation for the time, such was abolishing arrest for debt, making elementary education free and compulsory while ending compulsory religious teaching in elementary schools.[31]

The first government of Depretis collapsed after his dismisal of his Interior Minister, and ended with his resignation in 1877. The second government of Depretis started in 1881. Depretis’ goals included widening suffrage in 1882 and increasing the tax intake from Italians by expanding the minimum requirements of who could pay taxes and the creation of a new electoral system called which resulted in large numbers of inexperienced deputies in the Italian parliament.[32] In 1887, Depretis was finally pushed out of office after years of political decline.

In 1887, Depretis cabinet minister and former Garibaldi republican Francesco Crispi became Prime Minister. Crispi’s major concerns before during his reign was protecting Italy from their dangerous neighbour Austria-Hungary. To challenge the threat, Crispi worked to build Italy as a great world power through increased military expenditures, advocation of expansionism,[33] and trying to win Germany’s favor even by joining the Triple Alliance which included both Germany and Austria-Hungary in 1882 which remained officially intact until 1915. While helping Italy develop strategically, he continued trasformismo and was authoritarian, once suggesting the use of martial law to ban opposition parties.[34] Despite being authoritarian, Crispi put through liberal policies such as the Public Health Act of 1888 and establishing tribunals for redress against abuses by the government.[35]

The overwhelming attention paid to foreign policy alienated the agricultural community in Italy which had been in decline since 1873.”.[36] Both radical and conservative forces in the Italian parliament demanded that the government investigate how to improve agriculture in Italy.[37] The investigation which started in 1877 and was released eight years later, showed that agriculture was not improving , that landowners were swallowing up revenue from their lands and contributing almost nothing to the development of the land. There was aggravation by lower class Italians to the break-up of communal lands which benefited only landlords.[37] Most of the workers on the agricultural lands were not peasants but short-term labourers who at best were employed for one year.[37] Peasants without stable income were forced to live off meager food supplies, disease was spreading rapidly, plagues were reported, including a major cholera epidemic which killed at least 55,000 people.[38]

The Italian government could not deal with the situation effectively due to the mass overspending of the Depretis government that left Italy in huge debt. Italy also suffered economically because of overproduction of grapes for their vineyards in the 1870s and 1880s when France’s vineyard industry was suffering from vine disease caused by insects. Italy during that time prospered as the largest exporter of wine in Europe but following the recovery of France in 1888, southern Italy was overproducing and had to cut back which caused greater unemployment and bankruptcies.[39]

In 1913 male universal suffrage was allowed. The Socialist Party became the main political party, outclassing the traditional liberal and conservative organisations. Starting from the last two decades of the 19th century, Italy developed its own colonial Empire. Italian colonies were Somalia and Eritrea; an attempt to occupy Ethiopia failed in the First Italo–Ethiopian War of 1895-1896. In 1911, Giovanni Giolitti‘s government sent forces to occupy Libya and declared war on the Ottoman Empire which held Libya. Italy soon conquered and annexed Tripoli and the Dodecanese Islands. Nationalists advocated Italy’s domination of the Mediterranean Sea by occupying Greece as well as the Adriatic coastal region of Dalmatia.[40]

[edit] First World War

The First World War (1914–1918) was an unexpected development that forced the decision whether or not to honor the alliance with Germany. At first Italy remained neutral, saying that the Triple Alliance was only for defensive purposes. Public opinion in Italy was sharply divided, with Catholics and socialists recommending peace. However extreme nationalists saw their opportunity to gain their “irredenta” – that is, the border regions that were controlled by Austria. The nationalists won out, and in April 1915, the Italian government secretly agreed to the London Pact. Italy would declare war on the Austro-Hungarian Empire in exchange for promises of major territorial rewards. Italy entered the war with an army of 875,000 men, but the army was poorly led and lacked heavy artillery and machine guns, their war supplies having been largely depleted in the war of 1911-12 against Turkey. Italy proved unable to prosecute the war effectively, as fighting raged for three years on a very narrow front along the Isonzo River, where the Austrians held the high ground. In 1916, Italy declared war on Germany, which provided significant aid to the Austrians. Some 650,000 Italian soldiers died and 950,000 were wounded, while the economy required large-scale Allied funding to survive.[41]

Italy blocked serious peace negotiations, staying in the war primarily to gain new territory to the north. The Treaty of St. Germain awarded the victorious Italian nation Alto Adige, Trento, Trieste, Istria, and the city of Zadar. Italy did not receive other territories promised by the Pact of London, so this victory was considered “mutilated”. Subsequently, after the Greco-Turkish War of 1919-1922, Italy formally annexed the Dodecanese (Possedimenti Italiani dell’Egeo), that she had occupied during the war.

[edit] Fascism and World War II

Main articles: Fascist Italy, Military history of Italy during World War II , Italian Social Republic, and Economy of Italy under Fascism, 1922-1943

The Italian Empire in 1939

Premier Vittorio Orlando fell from power June 1919, suffering blame for mismanagement of the Italian position at the peace conference. Severe economic difficulties, disillusionment, and wounded national pride caused severe unrest and the rise of extremism. Rebel peasants seized lands promised them during the war. In 1920-21 major strikes broke out in the northern factories areas and the government seemed helpless. In 1919 Gabriele D’Annunzio seized control of the only an established something of a dictatorship in that city. Premier Giovanni Gioliti alienated the rich and the Catholic Church by his plan to make holders of national bonds register and pay taxes.

[edit] Mussolini marches on Rome

In 1921 Giolitti won the national election with the assistance of Benito Mussolini‘s Fascist Party, which controlled 35 seats. A series of weak governments resulted. Mussolini announced a march on Rome on October 27, 1922, and the King refused to proclaim martial law. Mussolini’s “Black shirts”, a paramilitary unit, took control of Rome; he was made Premier, and a month later he received dictatorial powers. In 1924, Mussolini’s coalition won two-thirds of the vote and 375 of the 403 seats. The enemies of Fascism were silenced by terrorism and brute force, as the opposition deputies withdrew in protest in 1924. Mussolini took control of Albania in 1927, and in 1929 made peace with the Catholic Church. The “Lateran Accords” made Catholicism the official state religion, established Vatican City as an independent country, and paid the pope for the papal territory seized in the 19th century.

[edit] Economics

Until 1925, when Alberto de Stefani ceased to be Minister of Economics, policies were mostly in line with classical liberalism (suppression of inheritance and luxury tax, suppression of taxes on foreign capital;[42] life insurance transferred to private enterprises in 1923,[43] state monopoly on telephones and matches was abandoned, etc.). However, this policy did not contradict seemingly opposite-minded ones: various banking and industrial companies were financially supported by the state. One of Mussolini’s first acts was to fund the metallurgical trust Ansaldo to the height of 400 millions Liras. Following the deflation crisis which started in 1926, banks such as the Banco di Roma, the Banco di Napoli or the Banco di Sicilia were also assisted by the state.[44] In 1924, the Unione Radiofonica Italiana (URI) was formed by private entrepreneurs and part of the Marconi group, and granted the same year a monopoly of radio broadcasts. After the war, the URI became the RAI.

An image showing a railway station during the Italian occupation of Eritrea, in Africa. The photograph dates from 1938.

Starting in 1925, Italy’s policies became more protectionist. Tariffs of grains were increased in an attempt to strengthen domestic production (“Battle for Grain“), which was ultimately a failure. Thus, according to historian Denis Mack Smith (1981), “Success in this battle was… another illusory propaganda victory won at the expense of the Italian economy in general and consumers in particular”. also pointed out “Those who gained were the owners of the Latifondia and the propertied classes in general… his policy conferred a heavy subsidy on the Latifondisti.”[45]

Affected by the Great Depression, the Italian state attempted to respond to it both by elaborating public works programs such as the taming of the Pontine Marshes, developing hydroelectricity, improving the railways which in the process improved job opportunities, and launching military rearmament.[46] The Istituto per la Ricostruzione Industriale (IRI) institute was created in 1933, with the aim of subsiding floundering companies. It soon controlled important parts of the economy, through government-linked companies, including Alfa Romeo.

Economically Italy improved with the GNP growing at 2% a year; automobile production was increasing especially those owned by Fiat,[47] its aeronautical industry was making advances.[48] Mussolini also championed agrarianism as part of what he called battles for Land, Lira and Grain; in aims of propaganda, he physically took part in these activities alongside the workers creating a strong public image.[49][50]

[edit] Ethiopia

Italy conquered an empire in Ethiopia in 1936, defying the league of Nations and world opinion. An economic boycott proved ineffective, and only strengthened Mussolini’s political stature. Italy sent forces into Spain in 1936-39 to fight against the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War.

[edit] World War II

Mussolini supported Hitler at the Munich conference in 1938, and increasingly became an ally of the Germans. Although Italy was militarily weak and unprepared, Mussolini declared war on France once it had been defeated by Germany in 1940. Italy then signed an official “Axis” alliance with Germany and Japan in September 1940.

Now at war with Britain, Italy sent an invasion army into Egypt. However, British warplanes severely damaged half the Italian fleet at Toronto on November 11, 1940. The British counterattack in Egypt was successful, reaching deep into Libya. The British, with only 555 killed, captured 130,000 Italian prisoners. In Ethiopia Italy scored some initial gains but by spring 1941 the British counterattack destroyed the Italian base in Ethiopia. Germany now had to rescue its weak Italian ally, and sent its tank forces to north Africa to fight the British. The British took control of the Mediterranean, and cut off reinforcements and supplies to the Germans and Italians, leading to their surrender in early 1943.

The Allied Powers invaded Sicily in August 1943 and then invaded the peninsula in September. Mussolini and his Fascists lost power after these debacles, as the King brought in a new government under Pietro Badoglio. Italy now joined the Allies. However, Germany had invaded and seized control of Italy north of Naples, rescued Mussolini from prison, and installed him as the nominal leader of a puppet state, the Italian Social Republic. The Italian campaign from 1943 to 1945 involved mountainous warfare, with little movement and high casualties. The civilians suffered heavily. Rome fell on June 4, 1944, and the Allies soon reached Florence, but could make no further progress. The Allied breakthrough came in April 1945, as the German defenses collapsed. Mussolini try to flee to Switzerland, but was captured and executed by Communist Italian partisans on April 28, 1945.

[edit] Italian Republic (after 1945)

[edit] The First Republic (1946-1992)

Italy was in chaos at the end of the war, with numerous resistance groups settling old scores, with weekly killings and assassinations. The political system was totally reorganized. Fascism was suppressed, and new parties emerged, especially the Christian Democrats led by Alcide de Gasperi (1881–1954), the Social Democrats led by Giuseppe Saragat, and the Communists led by Palmiro Togliatti (1893–1964). In June 1945, an all party government was formed, headed by Gasperi, and including the Communists. A referendum ended the monarchy in June 1946. Elections in 1946 elected 556 members of the Constituent Assembly, with 207 Christian Democrats, 115 Socialists, and 104 Communists. A new constitution was written, setting up a parliamentary system, with a nominal president. The 1929 Concordat with the Vatican was continued, and Catholicism remained the official state religion. From the Fascist era, the Republic retained the Institute for Industrial Reconstruction (IRI) headed by Enrico Mattei; it became Eni the national oil company and was a powerful centralizing economic force. The entire postwar era was characterized by political instability, and the collapse and re-formation of new coalitions. Usually the Christian Democrats selected the prime minister. In 1947 the communist left the government permanently. Economic chaos continued, with large-scale strikes in 1947. By 1950, the economy had largely stabilized, with the industrialized North far more prosperous than the Mezzogiorno (the rural South).[51]

Under the Paris Peace Treaties of 1947, the eastern border area was annexed by Yugoslavia. In 1954, the free territory of Trieste was divided between Italy and Yugoslavia. In 1949, Italy joined NATO and became an ally of the United States, which helped to revive the Italian economy through the Marshall Plan. Moreover, Italy became a member of the European Economic Community, which later transformed into the European Union (EU). In 1950s and 1960s the country enjoyed prolonged economic growth.

[edit] Years of Lead

Italy faced political instability in the 1970s, which ended in the 1980s. Known as the Years of Lead, this period was characterized by widespread social conflicts and terrorist acts carried out by extra-parliamentary movements. The assassination of the leader of the Christian Democracy (DC), Aldo Moro, led to the end of a “historic compromise” between the DC and the Communist Party (PCI). In the 1980s, for the first time, two governments were managed by a republican and a socialist (Bettino Craxi) rather than by a member of DC.

At the end of the Lead years, the PCI gradually increased their votes thanks to Enrico Berlinguer. The Socialist party (PSI), led by Bettino Craxi, became more and more critical of the communists and of the Soviet Union; Craxi himself pushed in favour of US president Ronald Reagan‘s positioning of Pershing missiles in Italy.

[edit] 21st century

In 2000, a Parliament Commission report from the Olive Tree left-of-centre coalition concluded that the strategy of tension had been supported by the United States to “stop the PCI, and to a certain degree also the PSI, from reaching executive power in the country”.[52][53] The report was not approved by the right-of-centre coalition. A source in the U.S. Embassy in Rome characterized the report as “allegations that have come up over the last 20 years” and have “absolutely nothing to them”, while other commentators deemed it nothing more than “a manoeuvre dictated primarily by domestic political considerations”.[54]

[edit] The Second Republic (1992-present)

Bettino Craxi, viewed by many as the symbol of Tangentopoli, leader of the Italian Socialist Party, is greeted by a salvo of coins as a sign of loathing by protesters.

From 1992 to 1997, Italy faced significant challenges as voters disenchanted with political paralysis, massive government debt, extensive corruption, and organized crime’s considerable influence collectively called the political system Tangentopoli. As Tangentopoli was under a set of judicial investigations by the name of Mani pulite (Italian for “clean hands”), voters demanded political, economic, and ethical reforms. The Tangentopoli scandals involved all major parties, but especially those in the government coalition: between 1992 and 1994 the DC underwent a severe crisis and was dissolved, splitting up into several pieces, among whom the Italian People’s Party and the Christian Democratic Center. The PSI (and the other governing minor parties) completely dissolved.

The 1994 elections also swept media magnate Silvio Berlusconi (leader of “Pole of Freedoms” coalition) into office as Prime Minister. Berlusconi, however, was forced to step down in December 1994 when the Lega Nord withdrew support. The Berlusconi government was succeeded by a technical government headed by Prime Minister Lamberto Dini, which left office in early 1996.

In April 1996, national elections led to the victory of a centre-left coalition under the leadership of Romano Prodi. Prodi’s first government became the third-longest to stay in power before he narrowly lost a vote of confidence, by three votes, in October 1998. A new government was formed by Democrats of the Left leader and former communist Massimo D’Alema, but in April 2000, following poor performance by his coalition in regional elections, D’Alema resigned. The succeeding centre-left government, including most of the same parties, was headed by Giuliano Amato (social-democratic), who previously served as Prime Minister in 1992-93, from April 2000 until June 2001. In 2001 the centre-right formed the government and Silvio Berlusconi was able to remain in power for a complete five year mandate, becoming the longest government in post-war Italy. Berlusconi participated in the US-led military coalition in Iraq.

The elections in 2006 returned Prodi in the government with a slim majority in the Senate. In the first year of his government, Mr. Prodi has followed a cautious policy of economic liberalization and reduction of public debt.

Berlusconi won the last elections in 2008 and now the center-right coalition is back in power.

[edit] Maps of Italy’s historical development

Iron Age Italy

The Etruscan civilization of 1200-550 BC

Italy in 400 BC

Magna Graecia around 280 BC

Roman Italy

Roman Empire at its greatest extent

Lombard Duchy of Benevento in the 8th century AD

Map of Italy in 1000 AD

Italy in 1050 AD

Italy and Illyria in 1084 AD

Italy 1328 AD

The Duchy of Milan in 1400 AD, at around its greatest extent.

Map of Italy in 1494 AD

Map of Savoy in the 16th century, with the white lines showing the modern borders

Map of Italy in 1796 AD

Northern Italy in 1796 AD. The duchies of Milan, Mantua, and Modena and Reggio were merged into the Cisalpine Republic, along with the Papal Legations (here labelled Papal States) and parts of Novara and the Venetian Republic.

The Duchy of Modena and Reggio in the 19th century.

Map of Italy in 1810 AD

Mainland Piedmont with Savoy, Nice, Genoa and the island of Sardinia in 1815 AD.

Unification of Italy 1815-1870 AD

The Kingdom of Lombardy–Venetia between 1815–1866 AD

Map of Italy in 1859 AD

The United Provinces of Central Italy (1859 1860 AD).

Map of Italy in 1860 AD

Map of Italian Kingdom in 1861 AD

Map of Italian Kingdom in 1870 AD

Venezia in 1888 AD

Map of Italian Kingdom in 1919 AD

Italian Empire in 1940 AD, notice expansion into Dalmatia

Italian reach, circa 1942 AD, notice expansion into Savoy and Dalmatia

Map of Italian Mediterranean during the summer of 1942 AD

The Italia insulare region

The Mezzogiorno region

The Alto Adige province

the edn @copyright Dr Iwan Suwandy 2010

The Chess Collections Exhibition

Driwancybermuseum’s Blog

tarian betawi tempo dulu                 



                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM

                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :

The Chess Collections Exhibition

Frame One :

The Dr Iwan Private Chess Collections

I.The Chess Champion Legendary Profile

II. The Vintage Chess ‘s Book Collections


III. The Caricature Of Chess Collections

IV.The Chess Promotional Label

lV.The Vintage Chess Grandmaster Profile

Frame Two:

The Chess Historic Collections



The history of chess spans some 1500 years. The earliest predecessors of the game originated in India, prior to the 6th century AD. From India, the game spread to Persia. When the Arabs conquered Persia, chess was taken up by the Muslim world and subsequently spread to Southern Europe. In Europe, the game evolved into its current form in the 15th century. In the second half of the 19th century, modern tournament play began, and the first world chess championship was held in 1886. The 20th century saw great leaps forward in chess theory and the establishment of the World Chess Federation (FIDE). Developments in the 21st century include the employment of computers for analysis, which actually based back in the 70’s with the very first programmed chess games on the market. Also team consultations, and online gaming appeared in the mid 90’s.


The precursors of chess originated in India during the Gupta empire,[1][2][3][4] where its early form in the 6th century was known as chaturaṅga, which translates as “four divisions [of the military]“: infantry, cavalry, elephantry, and chariotry, represented by the pieces that would evolve into the modern pawn, knight, bishop, and rook, respectively.[5] In Sassanid Persia around 600 the name became shatranj and the rules were developed further, and players started calling “Shāh!” (Persian for “King!”) when attacking the opponent’s king, and “Shāh māt!” (Persian for “the king is dead”) when the king was attacked and could not escape from attack; these exclamations persisted in chess as it traveled to other lands thereafter.

The game was taken up by the Muslim world after the Islamic conquest of Persia, with the pieces largely retaining their Persian names. The Moors of North Africa rendered Persian “shatranj” as shaṭerej, which gave rise to the Spanish acedrex, axedrez and ajedrez; in Portuguese it became xadrez, and in Greek zatrikion, but in the rest of Europe it was replaced by versions of the Persian shāh (“king”). Thus, the game came to be called ludus scacchorum or scacc(h)i in Latin, scacchi in Italian, escacs in Catalan, échecs in French (Old French eschecs); schaken in Dutch, Schach in German, szachy in Polish, šahs in Latvian, skak in Danish, sjakk in Norwegian, schack in Swedish, šakki in Finnish, šah in Slovene, and şah in Romanian; there are two theories about why this change happened:

  1. From the exclamation “check” or “checkmate” as it was pronounced in various languages.
  2. From the first chessmen known of in Western Europe (except Iberia and Greece) being ornamental chess kings brought in as curios by Muslim traders.

Chess spread directly from the Middle East to Russia, where chess became known as шахматы (shakhmaty, treated as a plural).

The game reached Western Europe and Russia by at least three routes, the earliest being in the 9th century. By the year 1000 it had spread throughout Europe.[6] Introduced into the Iberian Peninsula by the Moors in the 10th century, it was described in a famous 13th century manuscript covering shatranj and backgammon and dice named the Libro de los juegos.

Chess spread throughout the world and many variants of the game soon began taking shape.[7] This game was introduced to the Near East from India and became a part of the princely or courtly education of Persian nobility.[8] Buddhist pilgrims, Silk Road traders and others carried it to the Far East where it was transformed and assimilated into a game often played on the intersection of the lines of the board rather than within the squares.[7][9] Chaturanga reached Europe through Persia, the Byzantine empire and the expanding Arabian empire.[10] Muslims carried chess to North Africa, Sicily, and Iberia by the 10th century.[7]

The game was developed extensively in Europe, and by the late 15th century, it had survived a series of prohibitions and Christian Church sanctions to almost take the shape of the modern game.[11] Modern history saw reliable reference works,[12] competitive chess tournaments[13] and exciting new variants which added to the game’s popularity,[13] further bolstered by reliable timing mechanisms (first introduced in 1861), effective rules[13] and charismatic players.[14]

[edit] India

Krishna and Radha playing chaturanga on an 8×8 Ashtāpada.

The earliest precursor of modern chess is a game called chaturanga, which flourished in India by the 6th century, and is the earliest known game to have two essential features found in all later chess variations — different pieces having different powers (which was not the case with checkers and go), and victory depending on the fate of one piece, the king of modern chess.[7] Other game pieces (speculatively called “chess pieces”) uncovered in archaeological findings are considered as coming from other, distantly related, board games, which may have had boards of 100 squares or more.[7]

Chess was designed for an ashtāpada (Sanskrit for “having eight feet”, i.e. an 8×8 squared board), which may have been used earlier for a backgammon-type race game (perhaps related to a dice-driven race game still played in south India where the track starts at the middle of a side and spirals in to the center).[15] Ashtāpada, the uncheckered 8×8 board served as the main board for playing Chaturanga.[16] Other Indian boards included the 10×10 Dasapada and the 9×9 Saturankam.[16] Traditional Indian chessboards often have X markings on some or all of squares a1 a4 a5 a8 d1 d4 d5 d8 e1 e4 e5 e8 h1 h4 h5 h8: these may have been “safe squares” where capturing was not allowed in a dice-driven backgammon-type race game played on the ashtāpada before chess was invented.[15]

The Cox-Forbes theory, started in the late 19th century, mainly from the works of Captain Hiram Cox and Duncan Forbes, proposed that the four-handed game chaturaji was the original form of chaturanga.[17] Other scholars dispute this and say that the two-handed form was the first.[18]

In Sanskrit, “chaturanga” (चतुरङ्ग) literally means “having four limbs (or parts)” and in epic poetry often means “army” (the four parts are elephants, chariots, horsemen, foot soldiers).[8] The name came from a battle formation mentioned in the Indian epic Mahabharata.[7] The game Chaturanga was a battle simulation game[8] which rendered Indian military strategy of the time.[19]

Some people formerly played chess using a dice to decide which piece to move. There was an unproven theory that chess started as this dice-chess and that the gambling and dice aspects of the game were removed because of Hindu religious objections.[20]

Scholars in areas to which the game subsequently spread, for example the Arab Abu al-Hasan ‘Alī al-Mas’ūdī, detailed the Indian use of chess as a tool for military strategy, mathematics, gambling and even its vague association with astronomy.[21] Mas’ūdī notes that ivory in India was chiefly used for the production of chess and backgammon pieces, and asserts that the game was introduced to Persia from India, along with the book Kelileh va Demneh, during the reign of emperor Nushirwan.[21]

In some variants, a win was by checkmate, or by stalemate, or by “bare king” (taking all of an opponent’s pieces except the king).

In some parts of India the pieces in the places of the Rook and Knight and Bishop were renamed by words meaning (in this order) Boat, Horse, Elephant, or Elephant, Horse, Camel, but keeping the same moves.[15]

In early chess the moves of the pieces were:

  • King: as now.
  • Queen: one square diagonally, only.
  • Bishop:
    • In the version that went into Persia: two squares diagonally (no more or less), but could jump over a piece between
    • In a version sometimes found in India in former times: two squares sideways or front-and-back (no more or less), but could jump over a piece between.
    • In versions found in Southeast Asia: one square diagonally, or one square forwards.
  • Knight: as now.
  • Rook: as now.
  • Pawn: one square forwards (not two), capturing one square diagonally forward; promoted to queen only.

Two Arab travelers each recorded a severe Indian chess rule against stalemate[22]:

  • A stalemated player thereby at once wins.
  • A stalemated king can take one of the enemy pieces that would check the king if the king moves.

[edit] Iran (Persia)

Iranian shatranj set, glazed fritware, 12th century. New York Metropolitan Museum of Art.[23]

Persian manuscript from the 14th century describing how an ambassador from India brought chess to the Persian court.

Shams-e-Tabrīzī as portrayed in a 1500 painting in a page of a copy of Rumi‘s poem dedicated to Shams.

The Karnamak-i Ardeshir-i Papakan, a Pahlavi epical treatise about the founder of the Sassanid Persian Empire, mentions the game of chatrang as one of the accomplishments of the legendary hero, Ardashir I, founder of the Empire.[24] The oldest recorded game in chess history is a 10th century game played between a historian from Baghdad and a pupil.[10]

In the 11th century Shahnameh, Ferdowsi describes a Raja visiting from India who re-enacts the past battles on the chessboard.[21] A translation in English, based on the manuscripts in the British Museum, is given below:[24]

One day an ambassador from the king of Hind arrived at the Persian court of Chosroes[disambiguation needed], and after an oriental exchange of courtesies, the ambassador produced rich presents from his sovereign and amongst them was an elaborate board with curiously carved pieces of ebony and ivory. He then issued a challenge:
“Oh great king, fetch your wise men and let them solve the mysteries of this game. If they succeed my master the king of Hind will pay tribute as an overlord, but if they fail it will be proof that the Persians are of lower intellect and we shall demand tribute from Iran.”
The courtiers were shown the board, and after a day and a night in deep thought one of them, Bozorgmehr, solved the mystery and was richly rewarded by his delighted sovereign.
(One recent chess book author thought that this story may be true, and that Bozorgmehr likely found the rules by bribing the Indian envoys.)

The appearance of the chess pieces had altered greatly since the times of chaturanga, with ornate pieces and chess pieces depicting animals giving way to abstract shapes.[25] The Islamic sets of later centuries followed a pattern which assigned names and abstract shapes to the chess pieces, as Islam forbids depiction of animals and human beings in art.[25] These pieces were usually made of simple clay and carved stone.[25]

[edit] East Asia

[edit] China

In China, there is a game named Xiangqi (or Xiangxi), dated back to no later than the warring states period.[citation needed] It was believed to be invented in southern China. The game was described in Chu Ci and Han dynasty books.[citation needed] In its ancient form, Xiangqi had six pieces (History of Xiangqi (Chinese)). Some believed that Indian chess was derived from xiangqi (The Origin of Chess). Some believed that xiangqi had been derived from the Indian Chaturanga.[26] This theory goes as follows: Chaturanga was transformed and assimilated into the game xiangqi where the pieces are placed on the intersection of the lines of the board rather than within the squares.[7] The object of the Chinese variation is similar to Chaturanga, i.e. to render helpless the opponent’s king, sometimes known as general.[26] Chinese chess also borrows elements from the game of Go, which was played in China since at least the 6th century BC.[26] Owing to the influence of Go, Chinese chess is played on the intersections of the lines on the board, rather than in the squares.[26] Chinese chess pieces are usually flat and resemble those used in checkers, with pieces differentiated by writing their names on the flat surface.[26]

An alternative origin theory contends that chess arose from Xiangqi or a predecessor thereof, existing in China since the 2nd century BC.[27] David H. Li, a retired accountant, professor of accounting and translator of ancient Chinese texts, hypothesizes that general Han Xin drew on the earlier game of Liubo to develop an early form of Chinese chess in the winter of 204–203 BC.[27] The German chess historian Peter Banaschak, however, points out that Li’s main hypothesis “is based on virtually nothing”. He notes that the “Xuanguai lu,” authored by the Tang Dynasty minister Niu Sengru (779–847), remains the first real source on the Chinese chess variant xiangqi.[28]

[edit] Japan

A prominent variant of chess in East Asia is the game of Shogi, transmitted from India to China and Korea before finally reaching Japan.[29] The two distinguishing features of Shogi are: 1) The captured pieces may be reused by the captor and played as a part of the captor’s forces, and 2) Pawns capture as they move, one square straight ahead.[29]

[edit] Mongolia

Chess is recorded from Mongolian-inhabited areas, where the pieces are now called:

  • King: – Noyon – Ноён – lord
  • Queen – Bers / Nohoi – Бэрс / Нохой – dog (to guard the livestock)
  • Bishop: – Temē – Тэмээ – camel
  • Knight- Morĭ – Морь – horse
  • Rook – Tereg – Тэрэг – cart
  • Pawn – Hū – Хүү – boy (the piece often showed a puppy)

Names recorded from the 1880s by Russian sources, quoted in Murray,[15] among the Soyot people (who at the time spoke the Soyot Turkic language) include: merzé (dog), täbä (camel), ot (horse), ōl (child) and Mongolian names for the other pieces.

The change with the Queen is likely due to the Arabic word firzān or Persian word farzīn (= “vizier“) being confused with Turkic or Mongolian native words (merzé = “mastiff”, bar or bars = “tiger”, arslan = “lion”).[15]

Chess in Mongolia is now played following the usual international rules.

[edit] East Siberia

Chess was also recorded from the Yakuts, Tunguses, and Yukaghirs; but only as a children’s game among the Chukchi. Chessmen have been collected from the Yakutat people in Alaska, having no resemblance to European chessmen, and thus likely part of a chess tradition coming from Siberia.[15]

[edit] Arab world

Main article: Shatranj

Chess passed from Persia to the Arab world, where its name changed to Arabic shatranj. From there it passed to Western Europe, probably via Spain.

Over the centuries, features of European chess (e.g. the modern moves of Queen and Bishop, and castling) found their way via trade into Islamic areas. Murray’s[15] sources found the old moves of Queen and Bishop still current in Ethiopia.

[edit] Europe

[edit] Early history

Knights Templar playing chess, Libro de los juegos, 1283

Shatranj made its way via the expanding Islamic Arabian empire to Europe and the Byzantine empire.[10] Chess appeared in Southern Europe during the end of the first millennium, often introduced to new lands by conquering armies, such as the Norman Conquest of England.[11] Chess remained largely unpopular in Northern Europe but started gaining popularity as soon as figure pieces were introduced.[11]

The sides are conventionally called White and Black. But, in earlier European chess writings, the sides were often called Red and Black because those were the commonly available colors of ink when handwriting drawing a chess game layout. In such layouts, each piece was represented by its name, often abbreviated (e.g. “ch’r” for French “chevalier” = “knight“).

The social value attached to the game – seen as a prestigious pastime associated with nobility and high culture – is clear from the expensive and exquisitely made chessboards of the medieval era.[30] The popularity of chess in the Western courtly society peaked between the 12th and the 15th centuries.[31] The game found mention in the vernacular and Latin language literature throughout Europe, and many works were written on or about chess between the 12th and the 15th centuries.[31] Harold James Ruthven Murray divides the works into three distinct parts: the didactic works e.g. Alexander of Neckham’s De scaccis (approx. 1180); works of morality like Liber de moribus hominum et officiis nobilium sive super ludo scacchorum (Book of the customs of men and the duties of nobles or the Book of Chess), written by Jacobus de Cessolis; and the works related to various chess problems, written largely after 1205.[31] Chess terms, like check, were used by authors as a metaphor for various situations.[32] Chess was soon incorporated into the knightly style of life in Europe.[33] Peter Alfonsi, in his work Disciplina Clericalis, listed chess among the seven skills that a good knight must acquire.[33] Chess also became a subject of art during this period, with caskets and pendants decorated in various chess forms.[34] Queen Margaret of England‘s green and red chess sets – made of jasper and crystal – symbolized chess’s position in royal art treasures.[32] Kings Henry I, Henry II and Richard I of England were chess patrons.[7] Other monarchs who gained similar status were Alfonso X of Castile and Ivan IV of Russia.[7]

Saint Peter Damian denounced the bishop of Florence in 1061 for playing chess even when aware of its evil effects on the society.[11] The bishop of Florence defended himself by declaring that chess involved skill and was therefore “unlike other games,” similar arguments followed in the coming centuries.[11] Two separate incidents in 13th century London involving men of Essex resorting to violence resulting in death as an outcome of playing chess further caused sensation and alarm.[11] The growing popularity of the game – now associated with revelry and violence – alarmed the Church.[11]

The practice of playing chess for money became so widespread during the 13th century that Louis IX of France issued an ordinance against gambling in 1254.[30] This ordinance turned out to be unenforceable and was largely neglected by the common public, and even the courtly society, which continued to enjoy the now prohibited chess tournaments uninterrupted.[30]

By the mid-12th century, the pieces of the chess set were depicted as kings, queens, bishops, knights and men at arms.[35] Chessmen made of ivory began to appear in North-West Europe, and ornate pieces of traditional knight warriors were used as early as the mid 13th century.[36] The initially nondescript pawn had now found association with the pedes, pedinus, or the footman, which symbolized both infantry and loyal domestic service.[35]

The following table provides a glimpse of the changes in names and character of chess pieces as they transitioned from India through Persia to Europe:[37][38]

A comparison of the Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic, Latin, English, Spanish, Italian and French terms for chessmen
Sanskrit Persian Arabic Latin English Spanish Italian French
Raja (King) Shah Malik Rex King Rey Re Roi
Mantri (Minister) Vazir (Vizir) Wazir/Firz Regina Queen Reina Regina Reine
Gajah (war elephant) Pil Al-Phil/Fil Episcopus/Comes/Calvus Bishop/Count/Councillor Alfil/Obispo Alfiere Fou
Ashva (horse) Asp Fars/Hisan Miles/Eques Knight Caballo Cavallo Cavalier
Ratha (chariot) Rokh Qalaah/Rukh Rochus/Marchio Rook/Margrave Torre/Roque Torre/Rocco Tour
Padati (footman/footsoldier) Piadeh Baidaq/Jondi Pedes/Pedinus Pawn Peón Pedone/Pedina Pion

The game, as played during the early Middle Ages, was slow, with many games lasting for days.[11] Some variations in rules began to change the shape of the game in by 1300 AD.[39] A notable, but initially unpopular, change was the ability of the pawn to move two places in the first move instead of one.[39]

In Europe some of the pieces gradually got new names:

  • Fers: “queen”, because it starts beside the King.
  • Aufin: “bishop”, because its two points looked like a bishop’s mitre; In French fou; and others. Its Latin name alfinus was reinterpreted many ways.

Attempts to make the start of the game run faster to get the opposing pieces in contact sooner included:

  • Pawn moving two squares in its first move. This led to the en passant rule: a pawn placed so that it could have captured the enemy pawn if it had moved one square forward was allowed to capture it on the passed square. In Italy, the contrary rule (passar battaglia = “to pass battle”) applied: a pawn that moved two squares forward had passed the danger of attack on the intermediate square. It was sometimes not allowed to do this to cover check.[40]
  • King jumping once, to make it quicker to put the king safe in a corner. (This eventually led to castling.)
Solid white.svg a b c d e f g h Solid white.svg
8 a8 __ b8 __ c8 black king d8 __ e8 __ f8 __ g8 __ h8 __ 8
7 a7 __ b7 __ c7 __ d7 __ e7 white king f7 __ g7 __ h7 __ 7
6 a6 __ b6 black pawn c6 __ d6 __ e6 __ f6 __ g6 __ h6 __ 6
5 a5 __ b5 __ c5 black bishop d5 __ e5 __ f5 __ g5 __ h5 __ 5
4 a4 __ b4 __ c4 __ d4 __ e4 __ f4 __ g4 __ h4 __ 4
3 a3 __ b3 __ c3 __ d3 __ e3 __ f3 __ g3 __ h3 __ 3
2 a2 __ b2 __ c2 __ d2 __ e2 __ f2 __ g2 __ h2 __ 2
1 a1 __ b1 __ c1 white rook d1 __ e1 __ f1 __ g1 __ h1 __ 1
Solid white.svg a b c d e f g h Solid white.svg
Check by pinned piece
  • Queen once moving two squares with jump, diagonally or straight. This right was sometimes extended to a new queen made by promoting a pawn.
  • The short assize. (“assize” = “sitting”.) Here the pawns started on the third rank; the queens started on d3 and d6 along with the queens’ pawns; the players arranged their other pieces as they wished behind their pawns at the start of the game. This idea did not endure.[15]

Other sporadic variations in the rules of chess included:

  • Ignoring check from a piece which was covering check, as some said that in theory (in the diagram on the right), B x K would allow R x K in reply.[15]

[edit] Origins of the modern game

The queen and bishop remained relatively weak until[11] between 1475 AD and 1500 AD in Spain or Portugal or France or Italy, the queen’s and bishop’s modern moves started and spread, making chess close to its modern form. This form of chess got such names as “Queen’s Chess” or “Mad Queen Chess” (Italian alla rabiosa = “in the mad manner”).[6] This led to much more value being attached to the previously minor tactic of pawn promotion.[15] Checkmate became easier and games could now be won in fewer moves.[39][41] These new rules quickly spread throughout western Europe and in Spain,[42][43] with the exception of the rules about stalemate, which were finalized in the early nineteenth century.[44]

In some areas (e.g. Russia), the queen could also move like a knight.

A poem Caïssa published in 1527 led to the chess rook being often renamed as “castle”, and the modern shape of the Rook chesspiece; see Vida’s poem for more information.

An Italian player, Gioacchino Greco, regarded as one of the first true professionals of the game, authored an analysis of a number of composed games that illustrated two differing approaches to chess.[12] This influential work went to some extent in popularizing chess and demonstrated the many theories regarding gameplay and tactics.[12]

The first full work dealing with the various winning combinations was written by François-André Danican Philidor of France, regarded as the best chess player in the world for nearly 50 years, and published in the 18th century.[12] He wrote and published L’Analyse des échecs (The Analysis of Chess), an influential work which appeared in more than 100 editions.[12]

A woodcut drawn from Caxton’s chess book printed in England in 1474

A tactical puzzle from Lucena’s 1497 book

“Marguerite d’Alençon et son frère François d’Angoulême jouant aux échecs” from the book Échecs amoureux, 16th century

Portrait of François-André Danican Philidor from L’analyse des échecs. London, second edition, 1777

Original Staunton chess pieces by Nathaniel Cook from 1849

Writings about the theory of how to play chess began to appear in the 15th century. The oldest surviving printed chess book, Repetición de Amores y Arte de Ajedrez (Repetition of Love and the Art of Playing Chess) by Spanish churchman Luis Ramirez de Lucena was published in Salamanca in 1497.[42] Lucena and later masters like Portuguese Pedro Damiano, Italians Giovanni Leonardo Di Bona, Giulio Cesare Polerio and Gioachino Greco or Spanish bishop Ruy López de Segura developed elements of openings and started to analyze simple endgames. In the eighteenth century the center of European chess life moved from the Southern European countries to France. The two most important French masters were François-André Danican Philidor, a musician by profession, who discovered the importance of pawns for chess strategy, and later Louis-Charles Mahé de La Bourdonnais who won a famous series of matches with the Irish master Alexander McDonnell in 1834.[45] Centers of chess life in this period were coffee houses in big European cities like Café de la Régence in Paris[46] and Simpson’s Divan in London.[47]

As the nineteenth century progressed, chess organization developed quickly. Many chess clubs, chess books and chess journals appeared. There were correspondence matches between cities; for example the London Chess Club played against the Edinburgh Chess Club in 1824.[48] Chess problems became a regular part of nineteenth century newspapers; Bernhard Horwitz, Josef Kling and Samuel Loyd composed some of the most influential problems. In 1843, von der Lasa published his and Bilguer’s Handbuch des Schachspiels (Handbook of Chess), the first comprehensive manual of chess theory.

[edit] Modern competition-style chess

Competitive chess became visible in 1834, and the 1851 London Chess tournament raised concerns about the time taken by the players to deliberate their moves.[13] On recording time it was found that players often took hours to analyze moves, and one player took as much as two hours and 20 minutes to think over a single move at the London tournament.[13] The following years saw the development of speed chess, five-minute chess and the most popular variant, a version allowing a bank of time to each player in which to play a previously agreed number of moves, e.g. two hours for 30 moves.[13] In the final variant, the player who made the predetermined number of moves in the agreed time received additional time budget for his next moves.[13] Penalties for exceeding a time limit came in form of fines and forfeiture. Since fines were easy to bear for professional players, forfeiture became the only effective penalty; this added “lost on time” to the traditional means of losing such as checkmate and resigning.[13]

Stamp of the USSR devoted to the accomplished Estonian player and analyst Paul Keres, 1991.

In 1861 the first time limits, using sandglasses, were employed in a tournament match at Bristol, England.[13] The sandglasses were later replaced by pendulums.[13] Modern clocks, consisting of two parallel timers with a small button for a player to press after completing a move, were later employed to aid the players.[13] A tiny latch called a flag further helped settle arguments over players exceeding time limit at the turn of the 19th century.[13]

A Russian composer, Vladimir Korolkov, authored a work entitled “Excelsior” in 1958 in which the White side wins only by making six consecutive captures by a pawn.[14] Position analysis became particularly popular in the 19th century.[14] Many leading players were also accomplished analysts, including Max Euwe, Mikhail Botvinnik, Vasily Smyslov and Jan Timman.[14] Digital clocks appeared in the 1980s.[13]

Another problem that arose in competitive chess was when adjourning a game for a meal break or overnight. If the players are X and Y, and X moved last before the adjournment, this would make it much easier for Y than for X to analyze the game during the adjournment. Preventing access to a chess set to work out moves during the adjournment in his hotel room or wherever would not stop him from analyzing the position in his head. Various strange ideas were attempted, but the eventual solution was the “sealed move”: X, last thing before the adjournment, does not make his move but writes it on a piece of paper which he hands to a referee, who after the adjournment makes the move, and X and Y then continue the game.

[edit] Birth of a sport (1850–1945)

The "Immortal Game", Anderssen-Kieseritzky, 1851

The first modern chess tournament was held in London in 1851 and won, surprisingly, by German Adolf Anderssen, relatively unknown at the time. Anderssen was hailed as the leading chess master and his brilliant, energetic attacking style became typical for the time, although it was later regarded as strategically shallow.[49][50] Sparkling games like Anderssen’s Immortal game and Evergreen Game or Morphy’s Opera game were regarded as the highest possible summit of the chess art.[51]

Deeper insight into the nature of chess came with two younger players. American Paul Morphy, an extraordinary chess prodigy, won against all important competitors, including Anderssen, during his short chess career between 1857 and 1863. Morphy’s success stemmed from a combination of brilliant attacks and sound strategy; he intuitively knew how to prepare attacks.[52] Prague-born Wilhelm Steinitz later described how to avoid weaknesses in one’s own position and how to create and exploit such weaknesses in the opponent’s position.[53] In addition to his theoretical achievements, Steinitz founded an important tradition: his triumph over the leading German master Johannes Zukertort in 1886 is regarded as the first official World Chess Championship. Steinitz lost his crown in 1894 to a much younger German mathematician Emanuel Lasker, who maintained this title for 27 years, the longest tenure of all World Champions.[54]

Wilhelm Steinitz, the first World Chess Champion

It took a prodigy from Cuba, José Raúl Capablanca (World champion 1921–27), who loved simple positions and endgames, to end the German-speaking dominance in chess; he was undefeated in tournament play for eight years until 1924. His successor was Russian-French Alexander Alekhine, a strong attacking player, who died as the World champion in 1946, having briefly lost the title to Dutch player Max Euwe in 1935 and regaining it two years later.[55]

Between the world wars, chess was revolutionized by the new theoretical school of so-called hypermodernists like Aron Nimzowitsch and Richard Réti. They advocated controlling the center of the board with distant pieces rather than with pawns, inviting opponents to occupy the center with pawns which become objects of attack.[56]

Since the end of 19th century, the number of annually held master tournaments and matches quickly grew. Some sources state that in 1914 the title of chess grandmaster was first formally conferred by Tsar Nicholas II of Russia to Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Tarrasch and Marshall, but this is a disputed claim.[57] The tradition of awarding such titles was continued by the World Chess Federation (FIDE), founded in 1924 in Paris. In 1927, Women’s World Chess Championship was established; the first to hold it was Czech-English master Vera Menchik.[58]

[edit] Post-war era (1945 and later)

World Champions José Raúl Capablanca (left) and Emanuel Lasker in 1925

After the death of Alekhine, a new World Champion was sought in a tournament of elite players ruled by FIDE, who have controlled the title since then, with one interruption. The winner of the 1948 tournament, Russian Mikhail Botvinnik, started an era of Soviet dominance in the chess world. Until the end of the Soviet Union, there was only one non-Soviet champion, American Bobby Fischer (champion 1972–1975).[59]

In the previous informal system, the World Champion decided which challenger he would play for the title and the challenger was forced to seek sponsors for the match.[60] FIDE set up a new system of qualifying tournaments and matches. The world’s strongest players were seeded into “Interzonal tournaments”, where they were joined by players who had qualified from “Zonal tournaments”. The leading finishers in these Interzonals would go on the “Candidates” stage, which was initially a tournament, later a series of knock-out matches. The winner of the Candidates would then play the reigning champion for the title. A champion defeated in a match had a right to play a rematch a year later. This system worked on a three-year cycle.[60]

Botvinnik participated in championship matches over a period of fifteen years. He won the world championship tournament in 1948 and retained the title in tied matches in 1951 and 1954. In 1957, he lost to Vasily Smyslov, but regained the title in a rematch in 1958. In 1960, he lost the title to the Latvian prodigy Mikhail Tal, an accomplished tactician and attacking player. Botvinnik again regained the title in a rematch in 1961.

Following the 1961 event, FIDE abolished the automatic right of a deposed champion to a rematch, and the next champion, Armenian Tigran Petrosian, a genius of defense and strong positional player, was able to hold the title for two cycles, 1963–1969. His successor, Boris Spassky from Russia (1969–1972), was a player able to win in both positional and sharp tactical style.[61]

Current World Champion Viswanathan Anand

The next championship, the so-called Match of the Century, saw the first non-Soviet challenger since World War II, American Bobby Fischer, who defeated his Candidates opponents by unheard-of margins and clearly won the world championship match. In 1975, however, Fischer refused to defend his title against Soviet Anatoly Karpov when FIDE refused to meet his demands

, and Karpov obtained the title by default. Karpov defended his title twice against Viktor Korchnoi and dominated the 1970s and early 1980s with a string of tournament successes.[62]

Karpov’s reign finally ended in 1985 at the hands of another Russian player, Garry Kasparov. Kasparov and Karpov contested five world title matches between 1984 and 1990; Karpov never won his title back


In 1993, Garry Kasparov and Nigel Short broke with FIDE to organize their own match for the title and formed a competing Professional Chess Association (PCA). From then until 2006, there were two simultaneous World Champions and World Championships: the PCA or Classical champion extending the Steinitzian tradition in which the current champion plays a challenger in a series of many games; the other following FIDE’s new format of many players competing in a tournament to determine the champion. Kasparov lost his Classical title in 2000 to Vladimir Kramnik of Russia.

Earlier in 1999, Kasparov as the reigning world champion played a game online against the world team composed of more than 50,000 participants from more than 75 countries. The moves of the world team were decided by plurality vote, and after 62 moves played over four months Kasparov won the game. The number of ideas, the complexity, and the contribution it has made to chess theory make it one of the most important chess game ever played.


The FIDE World Chess Championship 2006 reunified the titles, when Kramnik beat the FIDE World Champion Veselin Topalov and became the undisputed World Chess Champion.[65]

In September 2007, Viswanathan Anand from India became the next champion by winning a championship tournament


In October 2008, Anand retained his title, decisively winning the rematch against Kramnik

the end@copyright Dr Iwan Suwandy 2010.[67]


Driwancybermuseum’s Blog

tarian betawi tempo dulu                 



                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM

                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :


The  Saddam Husein Collections

Frame one :

Pre Saddam Collections

1.British Occupation Baghdad

Baghdad Occupied British picture 1915



Frame two :

The Saddam Husein Collections Exhibition

1.Postal History

1) Saddam Era

(1) Early Saddam Era

(a)Postal used sony electronic gurantee card send from Iraq to Ireland in 1985

this card send from Ramadi city ,look the picture of this city below

(b) early saddam stamps

 (2) The Last Day Saddam During  Iraq War

2)Postal used Cover from several city during Iraq War 2003 with the city pictures


The latest Saddam stamp postal used cover cds baghdad 8.3.03,12 days before liberation by US and multinational army.

Baghdad picture 20 mar 03 during liberation

university of Baghdad picture

university of baghdad postmark


(3) Samara

 (4) Kut





(9) Rahmadi


(11)unidentified city postmark via Baghdad

3)Post Saddam Era

2.Book and Illustrations



Frame Three :

The Saddam Husein Historic Collections Exhibition

Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti (Arabic: صدام حسين التكريتي Ṣaddām Ḥusayn ʿAbd al-Majīd al-Tikrītī[2]; 28 April 1937[3] – 30 December 2006)[4] was the President of Iraq from 16 July 1979 until 9 April 2003.[5][6] A leading member of the revolutionary Ba’ath Party, which espoused secular pan-Arabism, economic modernization, and Arab socialism, Saddam played a key role in the 1968 coup that brought the party to long-term power.

As vice president under the ailing General Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, and at a time when many groups were considered capable of overthrowing the government, Saddam created security forces through which he tightly controlled conflict between the government and the armed forces. In the early 1970s, Saddam spearheaded Iraq’s nationalization of the Western-owned Iraq Petroleum Company, which had long held a monopoly on the country’s oil. Through the 1970s, Saddam cemented his authority over the apparatuses of government as Iraq’s economy grew at a rapid pace.[7]

As president, Saddam maintained power during the Iran–Iraq War of 1980 through 1988, and throughout the Persian Gulf War of 1991. During these conflicts, Saddam suppressed several movements, particularly Shi’a and Kurdish movements seeking to overthrow the government or gain independence, respectively. Whereas some Arabs venerated him for his aggressive stance against foreign intervention and for his support for the Palestinians,[8] other Arabs and Western leaders vilified him as the force behind both a deadly attack on northern Iraq in 1988 and, two years later, an invasion of Kuwait to the south.

By 2003, the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair perceived that Saddam maintained links to terrorist organizations, had weapons of mass destruction, and thus needed to be overthrown. In March of that year, the U.S. and its allies invaded Iraq without United Nations support, eventually deposing Saddam. The links to terrorist organizations have never been proven nor have weapons of mass destruction been found in Iraq. Captured by U.S. forces on 13 December 2003, Saddam was brought to trial under the Iraqi interim government set up by U.S.-led forces. On 5 November 2006, he was convicted of charges related to the 1982 killing of 148 Iraqi Shi’ites convicted of planning an assassination attempt against him, and was sentenced to death by hanging. Saddam was executed on 30 December 2006.[9] By the time of his death, Saddam had become a prolific author.[10][11][12][13] Among his works are multiple novels dealing with themes of romance, politics, and war.[14][15][16][17]



Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid al-Tikriti was born in the town of Al-Awja, 13 km (8 mi) from the Iraqi town of Tikrit, to a family of shepherds from the al-Begat tribal group, a sub-group of the Al-Bu Nasir (البو ناصر) tribe. His mother, Subha Tulfah al-Mussallat, named her newborn son Saddam, which in Arabic means “One who confronts”; he is always referred to by this personal name, which may be followed by the patronymic and other elements. He never knew his father, Hussein ‘Abid al-Majid, who disappeared six months before Saddam was born. Shortly afterward, Saddam’s 13-year-old brother died of cancer. The infant Saddam was sent to the family of his maternal uncle Khairallah Talfah until he was three.[18]

His mother remarried, and Saddam gained three half-brothers through this marriage. His stepfather, Ibrahim al-Hassan, treated Saddam harshly after his return. At around 10 Saddam fled the family and returned to live in Baghdad with his uncle Kharaillah Tulfah. Tulfah, the father of Saddam’s future wife, was a devout Sunni Muslim and a veteran from the 1941 Anglo-Iraqi War between Iraqi nationalists and the United Kingdom, which remained a major colonial power in the region.[19] Later in his life relatives from his native Tikrit became some of his closest advisors and supporters. Under the guidance of his uncle he attended a nationalistic high school in Baghdad. After secondary school Saddam studied at an Iraqi law school for three years, dropping out in 1957 at the age of 20 to join the revolutionary pan-Arab Ba’ath Party, of which his uncle was a supporter. During this time, Saddam apparently supported himself as a secondary school teacher.[20]

Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath Party student cell, Cairo, in the period 1959–63

Revolutionary sentiment was characteristic of the era in Iraq and throughout the Middle East. In Iraq progressives and socialists assailed traditional political elites (colonial era bureaucrats and landowners, wealthy merchants and tribal chiefs, monarchists).[21] Moreover, the pan-Arab nationalism of Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt profoundly influenced young Ba’athists like Saddam. The rise of Nasser foreshadowed a wave of revolutions throughout the Middle East in the 1950s and 1960s, with the collapse of the monarchies of Iraq, Egypt, and Libya. Nasser inspired nationalists throughout the Middle East by fighting the British and the French during the Suez Crisis of 1956, modernizing Egypt, and uniting the Arab world politically.[22]

In 1958, a year after Saddam had joined the Ba’ath party, army officers led by General Abd al-Karim Qasim overthrew Faisal II of Iraq. The Ba’athists opposed the new government, and in 1959 Saddam was involved in the unsuccessful United States-backed plot to assassinate Abdul Karim Qassim.[23]

Rise to power

Saddam Hussein after the successful 1963 Ba’ath party coup

Saddam Hussein in Cairo after fleeing there following the failed assassination attempt against Qassim

Army officers with ties to the Ba’ath Party overthrew Qassim in a coup in 1963. Ba’athist leaders were appointed to the cabinet and Abdul Salam Arif became president. Arif dismissed and arrested the Ba’athist leaders later that year. Saddam returned to Iraq, but was imprisoned in 1964. Just prior to his imprisonment and until 1968, Saddam held the position of Ba’ath party secretary.[24] He escaped from prison in 1967 and quickly became a leading member of the party. In 1968, Saddam participated in a bloodless coup led by Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr that overthrew Abdul Rahman Arif. Al-Bakr was named president and Saddam was named his deputy, and deputy chairman of the Baathist Revolutionary Command Council. According to biographers, Saddam never forgot the tensions within the first Ba’athist government, which formed the basis for his measures to promote Ba’ath party unity as well as his resolve to maintain power and programs to ensure social stability.

Saddam Hussein in the past was seen by U.S. intelligence services as a bulwark of anti-communism in the 1960s and 1970s.[25] Although Saddam was al-Bakr’s deputy, he was a strong behind-the-scenes party politician. Al-Bakr was the older and more prestigious of the two, but by 1969 Saddam Hussein clearly had become the moving force behind the party.

Modernization program

Promoting women’s literacy and education in the 1970s

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, as vice chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, formally the al-Bakr’s second-in-command, Saddam built a reputation as a progressive, effective politician.[26] At this time, Saddam moved up the ranks in the new government by aiding attempts to strengthen and unify the Ba’ath party and taking a leading role in addressing the country’s major domestic problems and expanding the party’s following.

After the Baathists took power in 1968, Saddam focused on attaining stability in a nation riddled with profound tensions. Long before Saddam, Iraq had been split along social, ethnic, religious, and economic fault lines: Sunni versus Shi’ite, Arab versus Kurd, tribal chief versus urban merchant, nomad versus peasant.[27] Stable rule in a country rife with factionalism required both massive repression and the improvement of living standards.[27]

Saddam actively fostered the modernization of the Iraqi economy along with the creation of a strong security apparatus to prevent coups within the power structure and insurrections apart from it. Ever concerned with broadening his base of support among the diverse elements of Iraqi society and mobilizing mass support, he closely followed the administration of state welfare and development programs.

At the center of this strategy was Iraq’s oil. On 1 June 1972, Saddam oversaw the seizure of international oil interests, which, at the time, dominated the country’s oil sector. A year later, world oil prices rose dramatically as a result of the 1973 energy crisis, and skyrocketing revenues enabled Saddam to expand his agenda.

Within just a few years, Iraq was providing social services that were unprecedented among Middle Eastern countries. Saddam established and controlled the “National Campaign for the Eradication of Illiteracy” and the campaign for “Compulsory Free Education in Iraq,” and largely under his auspices, the government established universal free schooling up to the highest education levels; hundreds of thousands learned to read in the years following the initiation of the program. The government also supported families of soldiers, granted free hospitalization to everyone, and gave subsidies to farmers. Iraq created one of the most modernized public-health systems in the Middle East, earning Saddam an award from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).[28][29]

To diversify the largely oil-based Iraqi economy, Saddam implemented a national infrastructure campaign that made great progress in building roads, promoting mining, and developing other industries. The campaign revolutionized Iraq’s energy industries. Electricity was brought to nearly every city in Iraq, and many outlying areas.

Before the 1970s, most of Iraq’s people lived in the countryside, where Saddam himself was born and raised, and roughly two-thirds were peasants. This number would decrease quickly during the 1970s as the country invested much of its oil profits into industrial expansion.

Nevertheless, Saddam focused on fostering loyalty to the Ba’athist government in the rural areas. After nationalizing foreign oil interests, Saddam supervised the modernization of the countryside, mechanizing agriculture on a large scale, and distributing land to peasant farmers.[20] The Ba’athists established farm cooperatives, in which profits were distributed according to the labors of the individual and the unskilled were trained. The government also doubled expenditures for agricultural development in 1974–1975. Moreover, agrarian reform in Iraq improved the living standard of the peasantry and increased production.

Saddam became personally associated with Ba’athist welfare and economic development programs in the eyes of many Iraqis, widening his appeal both within his traditional base and among new sectors of the population. These programs were part of a combination of “carrot and stick” tactics to enhance support in the working class, the peasantry, and within the party and the government bureaucracy.

Saddam’s organizational prowess was credited with Iraq’s rapid pace of development in the 1970s; development went forward at such a fevered pitch that two million people from other Arab countries and even Yugoslavia worked in Iraq to meet the growing demand for labor.


In 1976, Saddam rose to the position of general in the Iraqi armed forces, and rapidly became the strongman of the government. As the ailing, elderly al-Bakr became unable to execute his duties, Saddam took on an increasingly prominent role as the face of the government both internally and externally. He soon became the architect of Iraq’s foreign policy and represented the nation in all diplomatic situations. He was the de facto leader of Iraq some years before he formally came to power in 1979. He slowly began to consolidate his power over Iraq’s government and the Ba’ath party. Relationships with fellow party members were carefully cultivated, and Saddam soon accumulated a powerful circle of support within the party.

In 1979 al-Bakr started to make treaties with Syria, also under Ba’athist leadership, that would lead to unification between the two countries. Syrian President Hafez al-Assad would become deputy leader in a union, and this would drive Saddam to obscurity. Saddam acted to secure his grip on power. He forced the ailing al-Bakr to resign on 16 July 1979, and formally assumed the presidency.

Shortly afterwards, he convened an assembly of Ba’ath party leaders on 22 July 1979. During the assembly, which he ordered videotaped (viewable via this reference[30]), Saddam claimed to have found a fifth column within the Ba’ath Party and directed Muhyi Abdel-Hussein to read out a confession and the names of 68 alleged co-conspirators. These members were labelled “disloyal” and were removed from the room one by one and taken into custody. After the list was read, Saddam congratulated those still seated in the room for their past and future loyalty. The 68 people arrested at the meeting were subsequently tried together and found guilty of treason. 22 were sentenced to execution. Other high-ranking members of the party formed the firing squad. By 1 August 1979, hundreds of high-ranking Ba’ath party members had been executed.[31][32]

Secular leadership

To the consternation of Islamic conservatives, Saddam’s government gave women added freedoms and offered them high-level government and industry jobs. Saddam also created a Western-style legal system, making Iraq the only country in the Persian Gulf region not ruled according to traditional Islamic law (Sharia). Saddam abolished the Sharia courts, except for personal injury claims.

Domestic conflict impeded Saddam’s modernizing projects. Iraqi society is divided along lines of language, religion and ethnicity; Saddam’s government rested on the support of the 20% minority of largely working class, peasant, and lower middle class Sunnis, continuing a pattern that dates back at least to the British colonial authority’s reliance on them as administrators.

The Shi’a majority were long a source of opposition to the government’s secular policies, and the Ba’ath Party was increasingly concerned about potential Shi’a Islamist influence following the Iranian Revolution of 1979. The Kurds of northern Iraq (who are Sunni but not Arabs) were also permanently hostile to the Ba’athist party’s pan-Arabism. To maintain power Saddam tended either to provide them with benefits so as to co-opt them into the regime, or to take repressive measures against them. The major instruments for accomplishing this control were the paramilitary and police organizations. Beginning in 1974, Taha Yassin Ramadan (himself a Kurd Baathist), a close associate of Saddam, commanded the People’s Army, which was responsible for internal security. As the Ba’ath Party’s paramilitary, the People’s Army acted as a counterweight against any coup attempts by the regular armed forces. In addition to the People’s Army, the Department of General Intelligence (Mukhabarat) was the most notorious arm of the state security system, feared for its use of torture and assassination. It was commanded by Barzan Ibrahim al-Tikriti, Saddam’s younger half-brother. Since 1982, foreign observers believed that this department operated both at home and abroad in their mission to seek out and eliminate Saddam’s perceived opponents.[33]

Saddam justified Iraqi nationalism by claiming a unique role of Iraq in the history of the Arab world. As president, Saddam made frequent references to the Abbasid period, when Baghdad was the political, cultural, and economic capital of the Arab world. He also promoted Iraq’s pre-Islamic role as Mesopotamia, the ancient cradle of civilization, alluding to such historical figures as Nebuchadnezzar II and Hammurabi. He devoted resources to archaeological explorations. In effect, Saddam sought to combine pan-Arabism and Iraqi nationalism, by promoting the vision of an Arab world united and led by Iraq.

As a sign of his consolidation of power, Saddam’s personality cult pervaded Iraqi society. Thousands of portraits, posters, statues and murals were erected in his honor all over Iraq. His face could be seen on the sides of office buildings, schools, airports, and shops, as well as on Iraqi currency. Saddam’s personality cult reflected his efforts to appeal to the various elements in Iraqi society. He appeared in the costumes of the Bedouin, the traditional clothes of the Iraqi peasant (which he essentially wore during his childhood), and even Kurdish clothing, but also appeared in Western suits, projecting the image of an urbane and modern leader. Sometimes he would also be portrayed as a devout Muslim, wearing full headdress and robe, praying toward Mecca.

Foreign affairs

Shakinghands high.OGG

Donald Rumsfeld, at the time Ronald Reagan‘s special envoy to the Middle East, meeting Saddam Hussein on 19–20 December 1983. During the 1980s, the United States maintained cordial relations with Saddam as a bulwark against Iran.

Saddam Hussein rarely left Iraq, so Tariq Aziz, one of Saddam’s aides, traveled abroad and represented Iraq at many diplomatic meetings.[34] In foreign affairs, Saddam sought to have Iraq play a leading role in the Middle East. Iraq signed an aid pact with the Soviet Union in 1972, and arms were sent along with several thousand advisers. However, the 1978 crackdown on Iraqi Communists and a shift of trade toward the West strained Iraqi relations with the Soviet Union; Iraq then took on a more Western orientation until the Persian Gulf War in 1991.[35]

After the oil crisis of 1973, France had changed to a more pro-Arab policy and was accordingly rewarded by Saddam with closer ties. He made a state visit to France in 1976, cementing close ties with some French business and ruling political circles. In 1975 Saddam negotiated an accord with Iran that contained Iraqi concessions on border disputes. In return, Iran agreed to stop supporting opposition Kurds in Iraq. Saddam led Arab opposition to the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel (1979).

Saddam initiated Iraq’s nuclear enrichment project in the 1980s, with French assistance. The first Iraqi nuclear reactor was named by the French “Osirak“. Osirak was destroyed on 7 June 1981[36] by an Israeli air strike (Operation Opera).

Nearly from its founding as a modern state in 1920, Iraq has had to deal with Kurdish separatists in the northern part of the country.[37] Saddam did negotiate an agreement in 1970 with separatist Kurdish leaders, giving them autonomy, but the agreement broke down. The result was brutal fighting between the government and Kurdish groups and even Iraqi bombing of Kurdish villages in Iran, which caused Iraqi relations with Iran to deteriorate. However, after Saddam had negotiated the 1975 treaty with Iran, the Shah withdrew support for the Kurds, who suffered a total defeat.

Iran–Iraq War

Main article: Iran–Iraq War

Saddam Hussein greeting Carlos Cardoen, a Chilean businessman who provided the regime with cluster bombs in the 1980s

In 1979 Iran’s Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi was overthrown by the Islamic Revolution, thus giving way to an Islamic republic led by the Ayatollah Khomeini. The influence of revolutionary Shi’ite Islam grew apace in the region, particularly in countries with large Shi’ite populations, especially Iraq. Saddam feared that radical Islamic ideas—hostile to his secular rule—were rapidly spreading inside his country among the majority Shi’ite population.

There had also been bitter enmity between Saddam and Khomeini since the 1970s. Khomeini, having been exiled from Iran in 1964, took up residence in Iraq, at the Shi’ite holy city of An Najaf. There he involved himself with Iraqi Shi’ites and developed a strong, worldwide religious and political following against the Iranian Government, whom Saddam tolerated. However, when Khomeini began to urge the Shi’ites there to overthrow Saddam and under pressure from the Shah, who had agreed to a rapprochement between Iraq and Iran in 1975, Saddam agreed to expel Khomeini in 1978 to France. However this turned out to be an imminent failure and a political catalyst, for Khomeini had access to more media connections and also collaborated with a much larger Iranian community under his support whom he used to his advantage.

After Khomeini gained power, skirmishes between Iraq and revolutionary Iran occurred for ten months over the sovereignty of the disputed Shatt al-Arab waterway, which divides the two countries. During this period, Saddam Hussein publicly maintained that it was in Iraq’s interest not to engage with Iran, and that it was in the interests of both nations to maintain peaceful relations. However, in a private meeting with Salah Omar Al-Ali, Iraq’s permanent ambassador to the United Nations, he revealed that he intended to invade and occupy a large part of Iran within months. Later (probably to appeal for support from the United States and most Western nations), he would make toppling the Islamic government one of his intentions as well. Iraq invaded Iran, first attacking Mehrabad Airport of Tehran and then entering the oil-rich Iranian land of Khuzestan, which also has a sizable Arab minority, on 22 September 1980 and declared it a new province of Iraq. With the support of the Arab states, the United States, and Europe, and heavily financed by the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, Saddam Hussein had become “the defender of the Arab world” against a revolutionary Iran. The only exception was The Soviet Union, who initially refused to supply Iraq on the basis of Neutrality in the conflict, although in his memoirs, Mikhail Gorbachev claimed that Leonid Brezhnev refused to aid Saddam over infuriation of Saddam’s treatment of Iraqi Communists. Consequently, many viewed Iraq as “an agent of the civilized world”.[38] The blatant disregard of international law and violations of international borders were ignored. Instead Iraq received economic and military support from its allies, who conveniently overlooked Saddam’s use of chemical warfare against the Kurds and the Iranians and Iraq’s efforts to develop nuclear weapons.[38]

In the first days of the war, there was heavy ground fighting around strategic ports as Iraq launched an attack on Khuzestan. After making some initial gains, Iraq’s troops began to suffer losses from human wave attacks by Iran. By 1982, Iraq was on the defensive and looking for ways to end the war.

At this point, Saddam asked his ministers for candid advice. Health Minister Dr Riyadh Ibrahim suggested that Saddam temporarily step down to promote peace negotiations. Initially, Saddam Hussein appeared to take in this opinion as part of his cabinet democracy. A few weeks later, Dr Ibrahim was sacked when held responsible for a fatal incident in an Iraqi hospital where a patient died from intravenous administration of the wrong concentration of Potassium supplement.

Dr Ibrahim was arrested a few days after he started his new life as a sacked Minister. He was known to have publicly declared before that arrest that he was “glad that he got away alive.” Pieces of Ibrahim’s dismembered body were delivered to his wife the next day.[39]

Iraq quickly found itself bogged down in one of the longest and most destructive wars of attrition of the twentieth century. During the war, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian forces fighting on the southern front and Kurdish separatists who were attempting to open up a northern front in Iraq with the help of Iran. These chemical weapons were developed by Iraq from materials and technology supplied primarily by West German companies.[40]

Saddam reached out to other Arab governments for cash and political support during the war, particularly after Iraq’s oil industry severely suffered at the hands of the Iranian navy in the Persian Gulf. Iraq successfully gained some military and financial aid, as well as diplomatic and moral support, from the Soviet Union, China, France, and the United States, which together feared the prospects of the expansion of revolutionary Iran’s influence in the region. The Iranians, demanding that the international community should force Iraq to pay war reparations to Iran, refused any suggestions for a cease-fire. Despite several calls for a ceasefire by the United Nations Security Council, hostilities continued until 20 August 1988.

On 16 March 1988, the Kurdish town of Halabja was attacked with a mix of mustard gas and nerve agents, killing 5,000 civilians, and maiming, disfiguring, or seriously debilitating 10,000 more. (see Halabja poison gas attack)[41] The attack occurred in conjunction with the 1988 al-Anfal campaign designed to reassert central control of the mostly Kurdish population of areas of northern Iraq and defeat the Kurdish peshmerga rebel forces. The United States now maintains that Saddam ordered the attack to terrorize the Kurdish population in northern Iraq,[41] but Saddam’s regime claimed at the time that Iran was responsible for the attack[42] and US analysts supported the claim until several years later. (See also Halabja poison gas attack – Early U.S. allegations of Iranian involvement.)

The bloody eight-year war ended in a stalemate. There were hundreds of thousands of casualties with estimates of up to one million dead. Neither side had achieved what they had originally desired and at the borders were left nearly unchanged. The southern, oil rich and prosperous Khuzestan and Basra area (the main focus of the war, and the primary source of their economies) were almost completely destroyed and were left at the pre 1979 border, while Iran managed to make some small gains on its borders in the Northern Kurdish area. Both economies, previously healthy and expanding, were left in ruins.

Borrowing money from the U.S. was making Iraq dependent on outside loans, embarrassing a leader who had sought to define Arab nationalism. Saddam also borrowed a tremendous amount of money from other Arab states during the 1980s to fight Iran, mainly to prevent the expansion of Shiite radicalism. However, this had proven to completely backfire both on Iraq and on the part of the Arab states, for Khomeini was praised as a hero for managing to defend Iran and maintain the war with little foreign support against the heavily backed Iraq, and only managed to boost Islamic radicalism in the Arab states. Faced with rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure, Saddam desperately sought out cash once again, this time for postwar reconstruction.

Tensions with Kuwait

The end of the war with Iran served to deepen latent tensions between Iraq and its wealthy neighbor Kuwait. Saddam urged the Kuwaitis to forgive the Iraqi debt accumulated in the war, some $30 billion, but they refused.[43]

Saddam pushed oil-exporting countries to raise oil prices by cutting back production; Kuwait refused, however. In addition to refusing the request, Kuwait spearheaded the opposition in OPEC to the cuts that Saddam had requested. Kuwait was pumping large amounts of oil, and thus keeping prices low, when Iraq needed to sell high-priced oil from its wells to pay off a huge debt.

Saddam had always argued that Kuwait was historically an integral part of Iraq, and that Kuwait had only come into being through the maneuverings of British imperialism; this echoed a belief that Iraqi nationalists had voiced for the past 50 years. This belief was one of the few articles of faith uniting the political scene in a nation rife with sharp social, ethnic, religious, and ideological divides.[43]

The extent of Kuwaiti oil reserves also intensified tensions in the region. The oil reserves of Kuwait (with a population of 2 million next to Iraq’s 25) were roughly equal to those of Iraq. Taken together, Iraq and Kuwait sat on top of some 20 percent of the world’s known oil reserves; as an article of comparison, Saudi Arabia holds 25 percent.[43]

Saddam complained to the U.S. State Department that the Kuwaiti monarchy had slant drilled oil out of wells that Iraq considered to be within its disputed border with Kuwait. Saddam still had an experienced and well-equipped army, which he used to influence regional affairs. He later ordered troops to the Iraq–Kuwait border.

U.S. Ambassador to Iraq April Catherine Glaspie meets Saddam for an emergency meeting.

As Iraq-Kuwait relations rapidly deteriorated, Saddam was receiving conflicting information about how the U.S. would respond to the prospects of an invasion. For one, Washington had been taking measures to cultivate a constructive relationship with Iraq for roughly a decade. The Reagan administration gave Saddam roughly $40 billion in aid in the 1980s to fight Iran, nearly all of it on credit. The U.S. also gave Saddam billions of dollars to keep him from forming a strong alliance with the Soviets.[44] Saddam’s Iraq became “the third-largest recipient of US assistance”.[45]

U.S. ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie met with Saddam in an emergency meeting on 25 July, where the Iraqi leader stated his intention to give negotiations only.. one more brief chance before forcing Iraq’s claims on Kuwait.[46] U.S. officials attempted to maintain a conciliatory line with Iraq, indicating that while George H. W. Bush and James Baker did not want force used, they would not take any position on the Iraq–Kuwait boundary dispute and did not want to become involved.[47] Whatever Glapsie did or did not say in her interview with Saddam, the Iraqis assumed that the United States had invested too much in building relations with Iraq over the 1980s to sacrifice them for Kuwait.[48] Later, Iraq and Kuwait met for a final negotiation session, which failed. Saddam then sent his troops into Kuwait. As tensions between Washington and Saddam began to escalate, the Soviet Union, under Mikhail Gorbachev, strengthened its military relationship with the Iraqi leader, providing him military advisers, arms and aid.[49]

Gulf War

Saddam Hussein with the flag of Iraq he implemented during the Gulf War

Main articles: Invasion of Kuwait and Gulf War

On 2 August 1990, Saddam invaded and annexed Kuwait, thus sparking an international crisis. Just two years after the 1988 Iraq and Iran truce, “Saddam Hussein did what his Gulf patrons had earlier paid him to prevent.” Having removed the threat of Iranian fundamentalism he “overran Kuwait and confronted his Gulf neighbors in the name of Arab nationalism and Islam.”[38]

The U.S. had provided assistance to Saddam Hussein in the war with Iran, but with Iraq’s seizure of the oil-rich emirate of Kuwait in August 1990 the United States led a United Nations coalition that drove Iraq’s troops from Kuwait in February 1991. The ability for Saddam Hussein to pursue such military aggression was from a “military machine paid for in large part by the tens of billions of dollars Kuwait and the Gulf states had poured into Iraq and the weapons and technology provided by the Soviet Union, Germany, and France.”[38]

U.S. President George H. W. Bush responded cautiously for the first several days. On one hand, Kuwait, prior to this point, had been a virulent enemy of Israel and was the Persian Gulf monarchy that had had the most friendly relations with the Soviets.[50] On the other hand, Washington foreign policymakers, along with Middle East experts, military critics, and firms heavily invested in the region, were extremely concerned with stability in this region.[51] The invasion immediately triggered fears that the world’s price of oil, and therefore control of the world economy, was at stake. Britain profited heavily from billions of dollars of Kuwaiti investments and bank deposits. Bush was perhaps swayed while meeting with British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, who happened to be in the U.S. at the time.[52]

Co-operation between the United States and the Soviet Union made possible the passage of resolutions in the United Nations Security Council giving Iraq a deadline to leave Kuwait and approving the use of force if Saddam did not comply with the timetable. U.S. officials feared Iraqi retaliation against oil-rich Saudi Arabia, since the 1940s a close ally of Washington, for the Saudis’ opposition to the invasion of Kuwait. Accordingly, the U.S. and a group of allies, including countries as diverse as Egypt, Syria and Czechoslovakia, deployed a massive amount of troops along the Saudi border with Kuwait and Iraq in order to encircle the Iraqi army, the largest in the Middle East.

During the period of negotiations and threats following the invasion, Saddam focused renewed attention on the Palestinian problem by promising to withdraw his forces from Kuwait if Israel would relinquish the occupied territories in the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and the Gaza Strip. Saddam’s proposal further split the Arab world, pitting U.S.- and Western-supported Arab states against the Palestinians. The allies ultimately rejected any linkage between the Kuwait crisis and Palestinian issues.

Saddam ignored the Security Council deadline. Backed by the Security Council, a U.S.-led coalition launched round-the-clock missile and aerial attacks on Iraq, beginning 16 January 1991. Israel, though subjected to attack by Iraqi missiles, refrained from retaliating in order not to provoke Arab states into leaving the coalition. A ground force consisting largely of U.S. and British armoured and infantry divisions ejected Saddam’s army from Kuwait in February 1991 and occupied the southern portion of Iraq as far as the Euphrates.

On 6 March 1991, Bush announced:

What is at stake is more than one small country, it is a big idea — a new world order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind: peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law.

In the end, the over-manned and under-equipped Iraqi army proved unable to compete on the battlefield with the highly mobile coalition land forces and their overpowering air support. Some 175,000 Iraqis were taken prisoner and casualties were estimated at over 85,000. As part of the cease-fire agreement, Iraq agreed to scrap all poison gas and germ weapons and allow UN observers to inspect the sites. UN trade sanctions would remain in effect until Iraq complied with all terms. Saddam publicly claimed victory at the end of the war.

Postwar period

Iraq’s ethnic and religious divisions, together with the brutality of the conflict that this had engendered, laid the groundwork for postwar rebellions. In the aftermath of the fighting, social and ethnic unrest among Shi’ite Muslims, Kurds, and dissident military units threatened the stability of Saddam’s government. Uprisings erupted in the Kurdish north and Shi’a southern and central parts of Iraq, but were ruthlessly repressed.

The United States, which had urged Iraqis to rise up against Saddam, did nothing to assist the rebellions. The Iranians, despite the widespread Shi’ite rebellions, had no interest in provoking another war, while Turkey opposed any prospect of Kurdish independence, and the Saudis and other conservative Arab states feared an Iran-style Shi’ite revolution. Saddam, having survived the immediate crisis in the wake of defeat, was left firmly in control of Iraq, although the country never recovered either economically or militarily from the Gulf War. Saddam routinely cited his survival as “proof” that Iraq had in fact won the war against the U.S. This message earned Saddam a great deal of popularity in many sectors of the Arab world. John Esposito, however, claims that “Arabs and Muslims were pulled in two directions. That they rallied not so much to Saddam Hussein as to the bipolar nature of the confrontation (the West versus the Arab Muslim world) and the issues that Saddam proclaimed: Arab unity, self-sufficiency, and social justice.” As a result, Saddam Hussein appealed to many people for the same reasons that attracted more and more followers to Islamic revivalism and also for the same reasons that fueled anti-Western feelings. “As one U.S. Muslim observer noted: People forgot about Saddam’s record and concentrated on America…Saddam Hussein might be wrong, but it is not America who should correct him.” A shift was, therefore, clearly visible among many Islamic movements in the post war period “from an initial Islamic ideological rejection of Saddam Hussein, the secular persecutor of Islamic movements, and his invasion of Kuwait to a more populist Arab nationalist, anti-imperialist support for Saddam (or more precisely those issues he represented or championed) and the condemnation of foreign intervention and occupation.”[38]

Saddam, therefore, increasingly portrayed himself as a devout Muslim, in an effort to co-opt the conservative religious segments of society. Some elements of Sharia law were re-introduced, and the ritual phrase “Allahu Akbar” (“God is great”), in Saddam’s handwriting, was added to the national flag.

Relations between the United States and Iraq remained tense following the Gulf War. The U.S. launched a missile attack aimed at Iraq’s intelligence headquarters in Baghdad 26 June 1993, citing evidence of repeated Iraqi violations of the “no fly zones” imposed after the Gulf War and for incursions into Kuwait.

The UN sanctions placed upon Iraq when it invaded Kuwait were not lifted, blocking Iraqi oil exports. This caused immense hardship in Iraq and virtually destroyed the Iraqi economy and state infrastructure. Only smuggling across the Syrian border, and humanitarian aid ameliorated the humanitarian crisis.[53] On 9 December 1996 the United Nations allowed Saddam’s government to begin selling limited amounts of oil for food and medicine. Limited amounts of income from the United Nations started flowing into Iraq through the UN Oil for Food program.

U.S. officials continued to accuse Saddam of violating the terms of the Gulf War’s cease fire, by developing weapons of mass destruction and other banned weaponry, and violating the UN-imposed sanctions and “no-fly zones.” Isolated military strikes by U.S. and British forces continued on Iraq sporadically, the largest being Operation Desert Fox in 1998. Western charges of Iraqi resistance to UN access to suspected weapons were the pretext for crises between 1997 and 1998, culminating in intensive U.S. and British missile strikes on Iraq, 16–19 December 1998. After two years of intermittent activity, U.S. and British warplanes struck harder at sites near Baghdad in February 2001.

Saddam’s support base of Tikriti tribesmen, family members, and other supporters was divided after the war, and in the following years, contributing to the government’s increasingly repressive and arbitrary nature. Domestic repression inside Iraq grew worse, and Saddam’s sons, Uday and Qusay Hussein, became increasingly powerful and carried out a private reign of terror.

Iraqi co-operation with UN weapons inspection teams was intermittent throughout the 1990s.

2003 invasion of Iraq

Main article: 2003 invasion of Iraq

Satellite channels broadcasting the besieged Iraqi leader among cheering crowds as U.S.-led troops push toward the capital city.[54]
4 April 2003.

The latest Letter from Iraq with Saddam Husein Stamps on postal used cover

The U.S. continued to view Saddam as a bellicose tyrant who was a threat to the stability of the region. During the 1990s, President Bill Clinton maintained sanctions and ordered air strikes in the “Iraqi no-fly zones” (Operation Desert Fox), in the hope that Saddam would be overthrown by political enemies inside Iraq.

The domestic political equation changed in the U.S. after the September 11, 2001 attacks; in his January 2002 state of the union address to Congress, President George W. Bush spoke of an “axis of evil” consisting of Iran, North Korea, and Iraq. Moreover, Bush announced that he would possibly take action to topple the Iraqi government, because of the alleged threat of its “weapons of mass destruction”. Bush claimed, “The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade… Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror.”[55][56] Saddam Hussein claimed that he falsely led the world to believe Iraq possessed nuclear weapons in order to appear strong against Iran.[57]

With war looming on 24 February 2003, Saddam Hussein took part in an interview with CBS News reporter Dan Rather. Talking for more than three hours, he expressed a wish to have a live televised debate with George W. Bush, which was declined. It was his first interview with a U.S. reporter in over a decade.[58] CBS aired the taped interview later that week.

The Iraqi government and military collapsed within three weeks of the beginning of the U.S.-led 2003 invasion of Iraq on 20 March. The United States made at least two attempts to kill Saddam with targeted air strikes, but both failed to hit their target, killing civilians instead.[citation needed] By the beginning of April, U.S.-led forces occupied much of Iraq. The resistance of the much-weakened Iraqi Army either crumbled or shifted to guerrilla tactics, and it appeared that Saddam had lost control of Iraq. He was last seen in a video which purported to show him in the Baghdad suburbs surrounded by supporters. When Baghdad fell to U.S-led forces on 9 April, Saddam was nowhere to be found.

Incarceration and trial

Capture and incarceration

Saddam shortly after capture by American forces, and after being shaved to confirm his identity

In April 2003, Saddam’s whereabouts remained in question during the weeks following the fall of Baghdad and the conclusion of the major fighting of the war. Various sightings of Saddam were reported in the weeks following the war but none was authenticated. At various times Saddam released audio tapes promoting popular resistance to the U.S.-led occupation.

Saddam was placed at the top of the U.S. list of “most-wanted Iraqis“. In July 2003, his sons Uday and Qusay and 14-year-old grandson Mustapha were killed in a three-hour[59] gunfight with U.S. forces.

On 14 December 2003, U.S. administrator in Iraq L. Paul Bremer announced that Saddam Hussein had been captured at a farmhouse in ad-Dawr near Tikrit.[60] Bremer presented video footage of Saddam in custody.

Saddam was shown with a full beard and hair longer than his familiar appearance. He was described by U.S. officials as being in good health. Bremer reported plans to put Saddam on trial, but claimed that the details of such a trial had not yet been determined. Iraqis and Americans who spoke with Saddam after his capture generally reported that he remained self-assured, describing himself as a “firm but just leader.”

According to U.S. military sources, following his capture by U.S. forces on 13 December Saddam was transported to a U.S. base near Tikrit, and later taken to the U.S. base near Baghdad. The day after his capture he was reportedly visited by longtime opponents such as Ahmed Chalabi.

British tabloid newspaper The Sun posted a picture of Saddam wearing white briefs on the front cover of a newspaper. Other photographs inside the paper show Saddam washing his trousers, shuffling, and sleeping. The United States Government stated that it considers the release of the pictures a violation of the Geneva Convention, and that it would investigate the photographs.[61][62] During this period Hussein was interrogated by FBI agent George Piro.[63]

The guards at the Baghdad detention facility called their prisoner “Vic,” and let him plant a little garden near his cell. The nickname and the garden are among the details about the former Iraqi leader that emerged during a 27 March 2008 tour of prison of the Baghdad cell where Saddam slept, bathed, and kept a journal in the final days before his execution.[64]


Saddam speaking at a pre-trial hearing

On 30 June 2004, Saddam Hussein, held in custody by U.S. forces at the U.S. base “Camp Cropper“, along with 11 other senior Baathist leaders, were handed over legally (though not physically) to the interim Iraqi government to stand trial for crimes against humanity and other offences.

A few weeks later, he was charged by the Iraqi Special Tribunal with crimes committed against residents of Dujail in 1982, following a failed assassination attempt against him. Specific charges included the murder of 148 people, torture of women and children and the illegal arrest of 399 others.[65][66]

Main article: Dujail Massacre

Among the many challenges of the trial were:

  • Saddam and his lawyers’ contesting the court’s authority and maintaining that he was still the President of Iraq.[67]
  • The assassinations and attempts on the lives of several of Saddam’s lawyers.
  • The replacement of the chief presiding judge, midway through the trial.

On 5 November 2006, Saddam Hussein was found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to death by hanging. Saddam’s half brother, Barzan Ibrahim, and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, head of Iraq’s Revolutionary Court in 1982, were convicted of similar charges. The verdict and sentencing were both appealed but subsequently affirmed by Iraq’s Supreme Court of Appeals.[68] On 30 December 2006, Saddam was hanged.[9]


Saddam was hanged on the first day of Eid ul-Adha, 30 December 2006, despite his wish to be shot (which he felt would be more dignified).[69] The execution was carried out at Camp Justice, an Iraqi army base in Kadhimiya, a neighborhood of northeast Baghdad.

The execution was videotaped on a mobile phone and his captors could be heard insulting Saddam. The video was leaked to electronic media and posted on the Internet within hours, becoming the subject of global controversy.[70] It was later claimed by the head guard at the tomb where his body remains that Saddam’s body was stabbed six times after the execution.[71]

Not long before the execution, Saddam’s lawyers released his last letter. The following includes several excerpts:

To the great nation, to the people of our country, and humanity,Many of you have known the writer of this letter to be faithful, honest, caring for others, wise, of sound judgment, just, decisive, careful with the wealth of the people and the state … and that his heart is big enough to embrace all without discrimination.You have known your brother and leader very well and he never bowed to the despots and, in accordance with the wishes of those who loved him, remained a sword and a banner.This is how you want your brother, son or leader to be … and those who will lead you (in the future) should have the same qualifications.Here, I offer my soul to God as a sacrifice, and if He wants, He will send it to heaven with the martyrs, or, He will postpone that … so let us be patient and depend on Him against the unjust nations.Remember that God has enabled you to become an example of love, forgiveness and brotherly coexistence … I call on you not to hate because hate does not leave a space for a person to be fair and it makes you blind and closes all doors of thinking and keeps away one from balanced thinking and making the right choice.I also call on you not to hate the peoples of the other countries that attacked us and differentiate between the decision-makers and peoples. Anyone who repents – whether in Iraq or abroad – you must forgive him.You should know that among the aggressors, there are people who support your struggle against the invaders, and some of them volunteered for the legal defence of prisoners, including Saddam Hussein … some of these people wept profusely when they said goodbye to me.Dear faithful people, I say goodbye to you, but I will be with the merciful God who helps those who take refuge in him and who will never disappoint any faithful, honest believer … God is Great … God is great … Long live our nation … Long live our great struggling people … Long live Iraq, long live Iraq … Long live Palestine … Long live jihad and the mujahedeen.Saddam Hussein President and Commander in Chief of the Iraqi Mujahed Armed ForcesAdditional clarification note:I have written this letter because the lawyers told me that the so-called criminal court—established and named by the invaders—will allow the so-called defendants the chance for a last word. But that court and its chief judge did not give us the chance to say a word, and issued its verdict without explanation and read out the sentence—dictated by the invaders—without presenting the evidence. I wanted the people to know this.[72]
— Letter by Saddam Hussein

A second unofficial video, apparently showing Saddam’s body on a trolley, emerged several days later. It sparked speculation that the execution was carried out incorrectly as Saddam Hussein had a gaping hole in his neck.[73]

Saddam was buried at his birthplace of Al-Awja in Tikrit, Iraq, 3 km (2 mi) from his sons Uday and Qusay Hussein, on 31 December 2006.[74]

Marriage and family relationships

Saddam Hussein’s family (clockwise from top L), son-in-law Saddam Kamel and daughter Rana, son Qusay and daughter-in-law Sahar, daughter Raghad and son-in-law Hussein Kamal, son Uday, daughter Hala, Saddam Hussein and his first wife Sajda Talfah, pose in this undated photo from the private archive of an official photographer for the regime.

While Saddam has no official marital history he is believed to have been married to at least four women, two of whom have been confirmed as his wives, and had five children.[citation needed]

  • Saddam married his first wife and cousin Sajida Talfah (or Tulfah/Tilfah) [75] in 1958[76] in an arranged marriage. Sajida is the daughter of Khairallah Talfah, Saddam’s uncle and mentor. Their marriage was arranged for Hussein at age five when Sajida was seven; however, the two never met until their wedding. They were married in Egypt during his exile. The couple had five children.[75]
  • Uday Hussein (18 June 1964 – 22 July 2003), was Saddam’s oldest son, who ran the Iraqi Football Association, Fedayeen Saddam, and several media corporations in Iraq including Iraqi TV and the newspaper Babel. Uday, while originally Saddam’s favorite son and raised to succeed him he eventually fell out of favour with his father due to his erratic behavior; he was responsible for many car crashes and rapes around Baghdad, constant feuds with other members of his family, and killing his father’s favorite valet and food taster Kamel Hana Gegeo at a party in Egypt honoring Egyptian first lady Suzanne Mubarak. He was widely known for his paranoia and his obsession with torturing people who disappointed him in any way, which included tardy girlfriends, friends who disagreed with him and, most notoriously, Iraqi athletes who performed poorly. He was briefly married to Izzat Ibrahim ad-Douri‘s daughter but later divorced her. The couple had no children. He was killed in a gun battle with US Forces in Mosul.[citation needed]
  • Qusay Hussein (17 May 1966 – 22 July 2003), was Saddam’s second—and, after the mid-1990s, his favorite—son. Qusay was believed to have been Saddam’s later intended successor as he was less erratic than his older brother and kept a low profile. He was second in command of the military (behind his father) and ran the elite Iraqi Republican Guard and the SSO. He was believed to have ordered the army to kill thousands of rebelling Marsh Arabs and was instrumental in suppressing Shi’ite rebellions in the mid-90’s. He was married once and had three children. His oldest son, Mustapha Hussein, was killed along with Uday and Qusay in Mosul.[citation needed]
  • Raghad Hussein (2 September 1968) is Saddam’s oldest daughter. After the war, Raghad fled to Amman, Jordan where she received sanctuary from the royal family. She is currently wanted by the Iraqi Government for allegedly financing and supporting the insurgency and the now banned Iraqi Ba’ath Party.[77][78] The Jordanian royal family refused to hand her over. She married Hussein Kamel al-Majid and has five children from this marriage.[citation needed]
  • Rana Hussein (c. 1969), is Saddam’s second daughter. She like her sister fled to Jordan and has stood up for her father’s rights. She was married to Saddam Kamel and has had four children from this marriage.
  • Hala Hussein (c. 1972), is Saddam’s third and youngest daughter. Very little information is known about her. Her father arranged for her to marry General Kamal Mustafa Abdallah Sultan al-Tikriti in 1998. She fled with her children and sisters to Jordan. The couple have two children.[citation needed]
  • Saddam married his second wife, Samira Shahbandar,[75] in 1986. She was originally the wife of an Iraqi Airways executive but later became the mistress of Saddam. Eventually, Saddam forced Samira’s husband to divorce her so he could marry her.[75] There have been no political issues from this marriage. After the war, Samira fled to Beirut, Lebanon. She is believed to have mothered Hussein’s sixth child.[75] Members of Hussein’s family have denied this.
  • Saddam had allegedly married a third wife, Nidal al-Hamdani, the general manager of the Solar Energy Research Center in the Council of Scientific Research.[79] She bore him no children. Her current whereabouts are unknown.[citation needed]
  • Wafa el-Mullah al-Howeish is rumoured to have married Saddam as his fourth wife in 2002. There is no firm evidence for this marriage. Wafa is the daughter of Abdul Tawab el-Mullah Howeish, a former minister of military industry in Iraq and Saddam’s last deputy Prime Minister. There were no children from this marriage. Her current whereabouts are unknown.[citation needed]

In August 1995, Raghad and her husband Hussein Kamel al-Majid and Rana and her husband, Saddam Kamel al-Majid, defected to Jordan, taking their children with them. They returned to Iraq when they received assurances that Saddam would pardon them. Within three days of their return in February 1996, both of the Kamel brothers were attacked and killed in a gunfight with other clan members who considered them traitors. Saddam had made it clear that although pardoned, they would lose all status and would not receive any protection.[citation needed]

In August 2003, Saddam’s daughters Raghad and Rana received sanctuary in Amman, Jordan, where they are currently staying with their nine children. That month, they spoke with CNN and the Arab satellite station Al-Arabiya in Amman. When asked about her father, Raghad told CNN, “He was a very good father, loving, has a big heart.” Asked if she wanted to give a message to her father, she said: “I love you and I miss you.” Her sister Rana also remarked, “He had so many feelings and he was very tender with all of us.”[80]

the end@copyright Dr Iwan Suwandy 2010

The Kuwait Collections Exhibition

Driwancybermuseum’s Blog

tarian betawi tempo dulu                 



                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM

                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :

The Kuwait Collections Exhibition

Ancient History

 The Greeks

In 3rd century BC, the Ancient Greeks colonized the island, Failaka, on today’s Kuwait coast under Alexander the Great and named it “Ikaros”. Some believe the name came from an island off the Greek coast, where it is believed that the mythical Icarus was buried, which resembled Failaka. Others however believe it was named so due to its heat and the belief that it was close to the sun.[1]

In 127 BC, out of the ruins of the Seleucid Greek Empire, Characene was founded at the head of the Persian Gulf in borders similar to present day Kuwait. Its capital was Charax Spasinou, “The Fort of Hyspaosines”. The city was an important port in the trade from Mesopotamia to India and provided port facilities for the great city of Susa, further up the Tigris River. Trajan, the Roman emperor, visited Charax in 116 AD, during his invasion of Parthia, and watched the ships leaving for India. He reportedly lamented the fact that he was not younger so that he could, like Alexander, have gone there himself.

 The Founding of Kuwait

 The Anaza and Bani Utbah (Early Migration and Settlement)

Kuwait was founded in the early eighteenth century by members of the Bani Utbah tribe in the year 1705. Kuwait was then known as Guraine; the Bani Utbah established the town and port of Guraine and called it Kuwait (“little fort,” from kut, “fort”, ultimately derived from Persian kud, meaning “city”) In the first half of the eighteenth century, the great grandfather’s of the Al-Khalifa , Al-Sabah , and Al-Jalahma arrived at Kuwait.[2][clarification needed] They were descendants of the Anizah tribe who gradually migrated in the early eighteenth century from Nejd to the shores of the Persian Gulf. According to one local tradition, the Sabahs migrated south to flee drought in Najd in 1710, but found conditions bleaker. Finding conditions no better there, they finally migrated north to Kuwait where they found water and consequently settled. On the last leg of the journey they moved to the north and arrived at Kuwait in 1716. When they arrived at Kuwait, the great grandfather’s of the Al-Khalifa , Al-Sabah , and Al-Jalahma found a settlement by the Bani Utbah . Possibly the Bani Utbah had built a fortress from which the name Kuwait, a diminutive of kut or fortress, derives. Al Khalifa, Al-Sabah and Al Jalahma then entered under the umbrella of the Bani Utbah. They also raised the Al Sulami flag which belongs to the Bani Utbah. This flag was mentioned by John Gordon Lorimer in his gazetteer as being a stripped flag with four red stripes and 3 white stripes.[3] It was raised on their ships during wartime and in the pearl season and on special occasions such as weddings and during Eid and in the “ Ardha of war” [4] The Bani Utbah migrated from Kuwait in 1732 to Zubarah and Furaiha in Qatar passing the torch to the Al Khalifa, Al-Sabah,and Al Jalahma.

Early Political and Economic Development

 Early Economy

Peace in a region dominated by the Bani Khalid, as well as internal problems that kept other regional powers from interfering, allowed the Al Khalifa) , Al-Sabah), and Al Jalahma to develop new maritime skills. Kuwait had arguably one of the best natural harbors in the Persian Gulf; its location allowed it to benefit from the caravan trade to Aleppo and Baghdad, Shatt al-Arab trade, and from smuggling trade into Ottoman territory that high tariffs encouraged. the Al Khalifa, Al-Sabah ,and Al Jalahma’s self-sufficiency to the desert was abandoned as they became linked to this trading network that included trade in horses, wood, spices, coffee, dates and especially pearls; Kuwait was located within close sail of the pearl banks that stretched down the Persian Gulf coast. In the summer, boats sailed for pearls; in the winter, they turned to entrepôt trade.

Early Political Environment

Trade became the basis of the economy and the Al Khalifa, Al-Sabah,and Al Jalahma developed new political and social arrangements to organize life in a settled economy. Tribal traditions were retained, but were placed within a complex occupational and social stratification; trade became tightly and hierarchically organized. Pearl divers were distinguished occupationally from ropepullers, captains, or merchants. The proceeds from the pearling industry were divided on the basis of occupation; at the top, a stratum of merchants, the core of which composed of the Al Khalifa), Al-Sabah,and Al Jalahma , became the elite. Above the merchants were the Al-Sabah family, who early on enjoyed some preeminence.

The al-Sabahs

Soon after the colony was founded, a Sabah became leader, ruling until his death in 1762. One tradition has it that political preeminence went to the Sabahs as part of an explicit agreement: in 1716, the heads of the al-Khalifa, al-Sabah, and al-Jalahima agreed to give the Sabahs preeminence in government and military affairs, subject to consultation, while the Khalifas controlled local commerce and the Jalahima maritime affairs. Another account has it that after reaching Kuwait the Bani Utub held a council and elected a representative to go to Basra to explain their peaceful intent to the Ottomans. The man chosen was a Sabah, Sabah I bin Jaber. Sabah diplomacy may have also been important with neighbouring tribes, especially as Bani Khalid power declined.

Many theories exist as to the source and origin of Sabah power. The Sabahs, because of their role in the caravan (as opposed to sea) trade, developed closer ties with the desert, and as a result became the tax collectors there, an important revenue source. Their rise has also been attributed to administrative functions; control of the harbor required administration and also increased the Shaikh’s power by giving him access to resources independent of the desert, hence some independence from tribal alliances. The port also gave the Shaikh a territorial base just as Kuwait’s entrepôt economy, oriented to fixed land and sea routes, caused the nomads to become sedentary and desert grazing for shipbuilding, pearling, and long-distance trade. As the people became more linked to the land, the settled became ascendent over the bedu, and the stakes of politics changed. As the political unit was slowly tied to the land, the idea of a people to a place emerged and enhanced the Shaikh’s power.

In 1762, Sabah I died and was succeeded by his youngest son, Abdullah. Shortly after Sabah’s death, in 1766, the al-Khalifa and, soon after, the al-Jalahima, left Kuwait en masse for Zubara in Qatar. Domestically, the al-Khalifa and al-Jalahima had been among the top contenders for power. Their emigration left the Sabahs in undisputed control, and by the end of Abdullah I‘s long rule (1762–1812), Sabah rule was secure, and the political hierarchy in Kuwait was well established, the merchants deferring to direct orders from the Shaikh. By the 19th century, not only was the ruling Sabah much stronger than a desert Shaikh but also capable of naming his son successor.

The Merchants

Sabah family rule, though well established, remained limited until well into the 20th century. This is because the merchants, owing to their financial power, could still check Sabah designs. The financial influence of the merchants came from their control of trade and imports, duties on which sustained the Shaikh. Because wealth was imbedded in movable property, refuge was tolerated by neighbouring Shaikhs, and Britain intervened only when important interests were at stake, secession was an effective merchant tactic. A large secession could reduce the shaikhdom’s economic and military power and create a refuge of future dissidents.

The Assassination of Muhammad bin Sabah

Although Kuwait was nominally governed from Basra, the Kuwaitis had traditionally maintained a relative degree of autonomous status; their cultural integration with the emirates of the Persian Gulf formed a network of tribal and trade relationships stronger than the tie to Ottoman Iraq.[5] In the 1870s, Ottoman officials were reasserting their presence in the Persian Gulf, with a military intervention in 1871—which was not effectively pursued—where family rivalries in Kuwait and Qatar were breeding chaos. The Ottomans were bankrupt, and when the European banks took control of the Ottoman budget in 1881, additional income was required from Kuwait and the Arabian peninsula. Midhat Pasha, the governor of Iraq, demanded that Kuwait submit to Ottoman rule. The al-Sabah found diplomatic allies in the British Foreign Office.

In May 1896, Shaikh Muhammad Al-Sabah was assassinated by his half-brother, Mubarak, who, in early 1897, was recognized, by the Ottoman sultan, as the qaimmaqam (provincial sub-governor) of Kuwait.[5]

 Mubarak the Great

Main article: Mubarak al-Sabah

In July 1897, Mubarak invited the British to deploy gunboats along the Kuwaiti coast. This led to what is known as the First Kuwaiti Crisis, in which the Ottomans demanded that the British stop interfering with their empire. In the end, the Ottoman Empire backed down, rather than go to war.

In January 1899, Mubarak signed an agreement with the British which pledged that Kuwait would never cede any territory nor receive agents or representatives of any foreign power without the British Government’s consent. In essence, this policy gave Britain control of Kuwait’s foreign policy. The treaty also gave Britain responsibility for Kuwait’s national security. In return, Britain agreed to grant an annual subsidy of 15,000 Indian rupees (£1,500) to the ruling family. In 1911, Mubarak raised taxes; therefore, three wealthy business men “Ibrahim Al-Mudhaf, Helal Al-Mutairi, and Shamlan bin Ali” led a protest against Mubarak by making Bahrain their main trade point, which negatively affected the Kuwaiti economy. However, Mubarak went to Bahrain and apologized for raising taxes and the three business men returned to Kuwait. In 1915, Mubarak the Great died and was succeeded by his son Jaber II Al-Sabah, who reigned for just over one year until his death in early 1917. His brother Sheikh Salim Al-Mubarak Al-Sabah succeeded him.

 The Anglo-Ottoman Convention

Despite the Kuwaiti government’s desire to either be independent or under British rule, in the Anglo-Ottoman Convention of 1913, the British concurred with the Ottoman Empire in defining Kuwait as an “autonomous caza” of the Ottoman Empire and that the Shaikhs of Kuwait were not independent leaders, but rather qaimmaqams (provincial sub-governors) of the Ottoman government.

The convention ruled that Shaikh Mubarak had authority over an area extending out to a radius of 80 km, from the capital. This region was marked by a red circle and included the islands of Auhah, Bubiyan, Failaka, Kubbar, Mashian, and Warba. A green circle designated an area extending out an additional 100 km, in radius, within which the qaimmaqam was authorized to collect tribute and taxes from the natives

The Border War with Najd

After World War I, the Ottoman Empire was defeated and the British invalidated the Anglo-Ottoman Convention, declaring Kuwait to be an “independent sheikhdom under British protectorate.” The power vacuum left by the fall of the Ottomans sharpened conflict between Kuwait and Najd. Shaikh Salim Al-Mubarak Al-Sabah insisted that Kuwait was in full control of all territory out to a radius of 140 km from the capital; however, the ruler of Najd, Abdul Aziz ibn Abdul Rahman ibn Saud, argued, in September 1920, that the borders of Kuwait did not extend past the walls of the capital. ibn Saud noted that the Convention had never been ratified and that Kuwait was not effectively in control of the disputed territory.

In May 1920 ibn Saud’s Wahhabi Bedouins of Nejd had attacked a Kuwaiti detachment in southern Kuwait, forcing its retreat. In October they raided Jahra, 40 km from the capital battles occurred in which the Kuwaitis were mostly victorious. In response, the British deployed gunboats, armored cars and aircraft. The Bedouins withdrew.

The Uqair Protocol

The 1920s and 30s saw the collapse of the pearl fishery and with it Kuwait’s economy. This is attributed to the invention of the artificial cultivation of pearls.

In response to the various Bedouin raids, the British High Commissioner in Baghdad, Sir Percy Cox, imposed the Uqair Protocol of 1922 which defined the boundaries between Iraq and Nejd; and between Kuwait and Nejd.

On April 1, 1923, Shaikh Ahmad al-Sabah wrote the British Political Agent in Kuwait, Major John More, “I still do not know what the border between Iraq and Kuwait is, I shall be glad if you will kindly give me this information.” More, upon learning that al-Sabah claimed the outer green line of the Anglo-Ottoman Convention (April 4), would relay the information to Sir Percy.

On April 19, Sir Percy stated that the British government recognized the outer line of the Convention as the border between Iraq and Kuwait. This decision limited Iraq’s access to the Persian Gulf at 58 km of mostly marshy and swampy coastline. As this would make it difficult for Iraq to become a naval power (the territory did not include any deepwater harbours), the Iraqi King Faisal I (whom the British installed as a puppet king in Iraq) did not agree to the plan. However, as his country was under British mandate, he had little say in the matter. Iraq and Kuwait would formally ratify the border in August. The border was re-recognized in 1932.

The discovery of oil in Kuwait, in 1938, revolutionized the sheikdom’s economy and made it a valuable asset to Britain. In 1941 on the same day as the German invasion of Russia (June 22) the British took total control over Iraq and Kuwait. (The British and Russians would invade the neighboring Iran in September of that year).


By early 1961, the British had withdrawn their special court system, which handled the cases of foreigners resident in Kuwait, and the Kuwaiti Government began to exercise legal jurisdiction under new laws drawn up by an Egyptian jurist. On June 19, 1961, Kuwait became fully independent following an exchange of notes with the United Kingdom.

 Relations with Saudi Arabia

The boundary with Saudi Arabia was set in 1922 with the Treaty of Uqair following the Battle of Jahrah. This treaty also established the Kuwait-Saudi Arabia Neutral Zone, an area of about 5,180 km². (2,000 sq. mi.) adjoining Kuwait’s southern border. In December 1969, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia signed an agreement dividing the Neutral Zone (now called the Divided Zone) and demarcating a new international boundary. Both countries share equally the Divided Zone’s petroleum, onshore and offshore.

 Relations with Iraq

Kuwait’s northern border with Iraq dates from an agreement made with Turkey in 1913[citation needed]. Iraq accepted this claim[citation needed]. However, following Kuwait’s independence in 1961, Iraq claimed Kuwait, under the pretense that Kuwait had been part of the Ottoman Empire subject to Iraqi suzerainty. Iraq appeared to be mobilising for a military invasion and on the June 27, 1961 the Amir of Kuwait requested assistance from the Saudi Arabian and British Governments. Britain rapidly deployed troops, aircraft and ships to the area (Operation Vantage).[6] In 1963, after Iraqi prime minister Abd al-Karim Qasim had been killed in a coup, Iraq reaffirmed its acceptance of Kuwaiti sovereignty and the boundary it had agreed to in 1913 and 1932, in the “Agreed Minutes between the State of Kuwait and the Republic of Iraq Regarding the Restoration of Friendly Relations, Recognition, and Related Matters.”

 The Invasion and Rebuilding of Kuwait

In the 1980s Kuwait, fearful of Iran after the Islamic Revolution in Iran, supported Iraq in the Iran–Iraq War. Kuwait sent large sums of money $5 bn to Iraq. As a consequence of this Iran attacked Kuwait’s oil tankers, and Kuwait was forced to seek protection from the United States, which sent warships to the Persian Gulf.

Kuwait was then invaded and annexed by Iraq (under Saddam Hussein) in August 1990. Hussein’s primary justifications included a charge that Kuwaiti territory was in fact an Iraqi province, and that annexation was retaliation for “economic warfare” Kuwait had waged through slant drilling into Iraq’s oil supplies. The monarchy was deposed after annexation, and an Iraqi governor named Alaa Hussein Ali installed.

U.S. President George H.W. Bush condemned the invasion, and led efforts to drive out the Iraqi forces. Authorized by the United Nations Security Council, an American-led coalition of 34 nations fought the First Persian Gulf War to reinstate the Kuwaiti Emir. Following several weeks of aerial bombardment, a U.S.-led United Nations (UN) coalition began a ground assault on February 23, 1991 that completely removed Iraqi forces from Kuwait in four days. After liberation, the UN, under Security Council Resolution 687, demarcated the Iraq-Kuwait boundary on the basis of the 1932 and the 1963 agreements between the two states.

In November 1994, Iraq formally accepted the UN-demarcated border with Kuwait, which had been further spelled out in Security Council Resolutions 773 (1992) and 883 (1993).

In the wake of the war, Kuwait expelled most of the 400,000 Palestinians who had been living there because of PLO support for Iraq.[7] Some Palestinians were killed. Before the expulsion, Palestinians accounted for a large portion of the people living in Kuwait. Even today, about two-thirds of the more than 3 million people in Kuwait are not Kuwaiti citizens.

Kuwait has spent more than five billion dollars to repair oil infrastructure damaged during 1990–1991 (see Kuwaiti oil fires).

In 2003, Kuwait served as the major staging base for the coalition forces in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq; Sabah Al Ahmed Al Jaber Al Sabah became the Emir of Kuwait on January 18, 2006

the end @copyright Dr Iwan Suwandy 2010

The Turkey Collections Exhibition

Driwancybermuseum’s Blog

tarian betawi tempo dulu                 



                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM

                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :

The Turkey Collection Exhibition

Frame One :

*Sultan Ahmad I

The Turkey During Ottoman Empire Collections





Sultan Osman Picture

Sultan Osman ceramic






M.Ali father Albania

First Ottoman stamps 1863


Ottoman stamps 1867
Ottoman stamps 1868

Last Ottoman Sultan


Istambul Unique Coll.


Vintage Book cover


Vintage Book cover


From the Thirteenth to the Nineteenth Century Cyber Museum Show
@copyright Dr Iwan s.2010

Many people chancing upon ‘Turkish during Ottoman Empire collections’ will be suprised that there such a subject as Turkish unique collections like postal collections , turkish vintage book with miniature painting and picture illustrations, also the vintage Turkish hand painted plate Ceramic belongs to Dr iwan S which found in Indonesia and he created this rare informations and installed in his uniquecollection blog for all the collectors all ver the world, especially for middle East collectors and also Indonesian Collectors.(Dr Iwan S.)


1.The 14th Century
In the second quater of the 14th century the Osmanlis were so strong’s son Orkhan wa able to consolidate Osmanli ( and Islamic) authrity in Westren Anatolia(Turkish) and crss the Dardanelle int Balkan Europe. Orkhan’s succession cmpleted the Islamicizatin of Europe’s southeastren corner in the second half of the century, and the Ottoman Empire was on its way.

2.The Ottoman Empire in 15th Century

(1) With the heart of Byzantium now in their control, the Ottoman Turks spent the next century cngquering the Arab world, a task that was aided immeasurably by the presence there of the remnant Mamluk and Seljuk population from the centuries of the Crusades. Thier authority eventually extended beynd Egypt to the berber Lands of the westren Medireanean, but their primaly cntrol over Arab culture was centered throughout the region f the fertile Crescent, frm the Nile to the Euphrates. For the fitst time since trhe collapse of the Roman empire a thousand yer earlier, the Middle East brought under the dominon of a foreign state-Ottoman Anatolia (later Turkey)-that had the pwer to maintain political order and security.

(2)The Reign Of Murad II (1421-1451)
look at the mini painting of Murad II ill.

(3.) The Reign of Mehmed II (1451-1481)
Look at The mini painting of Sultan Mehmed(Mahmoed) ill.

(4.) The Reign of Bayazid II (1481-1512)

4. The Ottoman empire in 16th Century

(1)The Beginning of the sixteenth century
By the beginnig f the 16th century condition in the middle east seemed favrable to renewal of ecnmic prperity and the renascence of Arab culture through a revival in fortune of the native mercantile classes,which were still mostly Arab. The Ottomans had restored order and security to the intercontinental trade rutes that passsed through the Fertile Crescent. They had eliminated mst of the internal squabbles between and among the Turks and Mamluks in provincial areas of Egypt, Palestine and Mesopotania. They shared a common religius outlok with their Arab subject. Nevertheless, instead of an era f increasing properity and advancing culture, a perid of further economic decline, plitical deterioration and culture stagnation was t be the Arab’s fate in the centuries to come

(2)The Reign of Selim I (1512-1520)

(3) The Era of Suleyman the Magnificent(1520-1566)

(a) The miniature painting , the Amik lake in the plain of Antakya and the rntes River with arabic descriptions of the stages of Sultan suleyman’s campaingn in the two Iraqs.(not illustrated)
(b) The miniature Painting, The westren half f Baghdad n the right bank of the Tigris with Arabric dsecription f the stages of Sultan suleyman’s campain in the two Iraqs (Not illustrated)
(c) The Miniatur Painting showing Sultan Suleyman recieving Sheyk Abd al-Latif .(illustrated)

(4)The Reign of Murad III (1574-1595)
(a) The Miniatur painting of sweeper cleaning the parade ground; in the background, the reviewing Sultan Murad III seated in a kiosk
(b) The Miniatur painting of Attendants entertaining the public; courtiers and Eutopean ambassador n the reviewing stand in the background (not ill.)
(c) The Miniatur painting of the taxidermist passing review in front of Sultan Murad III(not ill.)

4.The Ottoman empire during 17th century

(1)The Reign of Sultan Ahmed I (1603-1617)
(a) the miniatur painting , above : Music in the house f a notable, belw: grotesque dance performed by masked man during Sultan Ahmed I.

(2)The Reign of Sultan Ahmed II (1617-?)

5. The Ottoman empire during 18th century

(1)The Reign of Sultan Ahmed III (1703-1730)

(a)Several miniatur painting of Sulatn Ahmed III, only one ilustrated.

(2) 1798
The French invasion in this year, when the france broke out of Egypt and entered Palestine, the Ottman gvernment appealed to England for help. the England had interest to prevent a unilateral French takever of The Middle East, thus the England responded to the Ottoman appeal with a force of Military adviser and all ver the empire quickly trew the poorly supplied napleonic forces back into the Nile delta.

6. Othman Empire during 19th century
(1) The Reign of Sultan Mahmoud I

(a) 1801
Toward this end an Aglo-Ottoman force invaded the Nile Delta in this year and defeated the remaining French troops.

(b) Muhammad Ali , Ottoman visceroy of Egypt
A ranking officer in this force was aman of Turkish and persian ancestry whse father was an fficial in the Ottomans European province of Albania. His name was Muhammad Ali, and through a succession of events after defeat of the French he was appnted by the Ottoman emperor to be the new ruler of Egypt-the personal viceroy of the Ottoman sultan.

(c) The Wahhabi Revolt
At the end of the eighteen century, emerge a man named Abd. Al-Wahhab. as a priviladge son of the Wahhabi tribe, he had been sent to Bagdad for religious studies. repelled there by the Ottoman theological perversion of Islam, retuned to the Nejd inflamed by a passion fro reform, he preached a return to Muslim purity and a revival of the simplicity of Islam.
With the help of a local warrior sheik by the name of Muhammad Ibn Saud,the Wahhabi reform movement spread quickly, naturraly and fiercely through Arabia during the firs decade of the 19th century. But when Ibn saud began to lead tribal armies into Syria and Iraq to forcibly impose Wahhabism on the Arab strongholds of the Ottoman Sunnite realm, the conflict became more than religious; it became political, as well as, and when IBN saud and his wahhabi forces tok over the hejaz (look at the hejaztamps) and close off the anual pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, thereby compromising the authority of the ottoman Sultanate throughout the islamic world, they touched off a series of political and military event that would, a hundred years later, bring the entire Arab would out from under the yoke of Ottomanism and produce the Arab political awakening.The Ottoman Sultan at the time of Wahhabi revolvt was sultan Mahmoud II

(d) Sultan mahmoud II had set out to make reform in the Ottoman institutions so as the strenghten the empire sufficiently to meet the threat of the increasingly apparent European imperialist designs on the eastren mediterranean. but he was totally unprepared for the Wahhabi chalange to his authority. as Caliph, he was responsible for the safety of pilgrim travelling to the shrine.
(e) Action by Sultan mahmoud was imperative, but the Ottoman government could not put enough forces to attack Ibn saud and his arnies nor could it cmpel the pashas (governor) Syria and Iraq to carry ut imperial orders to destroy Wahabi.
(f) 1810
Muhammad Ali was the most powerful and influential man in the Arab part of the Ottman empire, and it was to him that Sultan mahmud finally appealed to put an end of the Wahhabi in Arabia.
(g) 1812
Muhammad ali responded by sending an expedition to the peninsula in this year.
(h) 1818
After six years of intermitten warfare the froce of Muhammad Ali, led by his son Ibrahim capture Dariyah, Ibn Saud’s capital in the Nejd and snuffed out the power of the Wahhabi in Arabia.
(i) 1821
In this year, the Ottoman Sultanate was faced another revolt-this time in Greece-Sultan Mahmoud again turned to his Egyptian viceroy for help, promising him dominion over Palestine and syria.
(j) 1825
Muhammad ali sent his army and Navy t Greece in this year.
(k) 1827
After two year fighting, the Muhammad Ali Egyptian frces were destroy and the Ottoman empire became weak, because Briatin,France and Russia jointly intervened out of their resctive self-interest.
Treaty of London signed by British, France and in 1828 by Russian and the Greek war of Independent were lasted..
Crete Island was administrated from Egypt and Serbia became an Autonom principlaity.
Despite the defeat, Muhammad Ali called Sultan Mahmoud n his promise of Syria, when Mahmoud refused, Muhammad Ali prmptly decided to seize Syria by force and in this yaer launched attack across Palestine. His cnquest of Syria was rapid and caused profound consternatin in the Sultanate. Muhammad Ali had made his intentions clear. He wan nw intent on Wrresting the sultanate away frm Mahmoud and taking it for himself.
Sultan Mahmud went to The British for help , but Ali had already cncinced them for his drive to Constantinople was directed at strengthening the Ottoman Empire so that it could resist grwing Russian imperialistic design in Ottman europe; If Ottoman Europe fell to Russia, the Russian would only be a short remove frm central and Westren Europe. the British supprted Muhammad Ali’s ratinale and Sultan Mahmoud then turned to Russia for assistance.
(k) Ottoman during a grave international crisis
Ninetheenth century European great pwer political cmpetitin was at its height and the Russians, perceiving an opportunity to gain an easy fothold in the Ottoman empire, promptly came to Mahmoud’s aids. This in turn brought British and French threats against the Ottoman and resulted in what in mdern plitician parlance wuld be called a grave International crisis.
After a gd deal of saber-rattling between Britain,France,Russia and the Ottman , thye crisis was relved,but nt befre Muhammad Ali was granted Syria (along with four more Muslim territries) and the Russian presence was firmly established by treaty at the very gates of Constantinople.
(l) The Rivality between Muhammad ali and Sultan Mahmoud
The rivalry between ali and Mahmoud continued unabated. while two jousted ver the limping empire, the European nations sharpened their attantion. If the Ottoman Epire were to disintegrate through its own internice strife, each of the European imperial pwers was intent on picking up the pieces for itself, or at least preventing its rivals from gaining control of the Ottoman domain.
(m) 1838
Muhammad Ali announced his intention to remove all ttoman lands from Syria westward from the cntrol of the sultanate and to incorporate them under his wn independent Egyptian rule. This brought an attack of forces from Constantinople.
(n) 1839
The Ottoman forces were completely routed by Ali’s armies in syria in June of 1839. Shrtly thereafter Sultan Mahmoud I died, and the disorganized Ottoman leadership had no choice but to accede to the victorious Alis’s demand.

2. Sultan Abdul Hamid II.

(1) 1840
(a)It looked now as though the sultanate and the center of Ottoman power were about to shift from Anatolia t Egypt, where the French would enjy special status. Britain could not permit this happened. The British persuaded three of the other four great European powers-Russia, Austria and Prussia- to join it in putting a stop to the transfer. The four then put pressure on France.
In this year France wasced, under the threat of war with Britain and Russia, to acquiese in a British attack n Muhammad Ali’s forces in Syria and palestine. The british won, thereby shring the Sultanate and forcing Ali to abandn his dream of ruling the Ottoman Empire. The European permitted Ali to retain independent control over Egypt,at the instance of France; in so doing they guaranteed Ali’s autonomy except in religious matters and thereby disctated Constantinople’sloss of Egypt. From this date on, the flow of event in the middle east was no longer dependent upon the Ottoman or Egyptian ruler, but upon the European powers.
(b)In this year the fisrt public post in Ottoman empire.

(2) The Cremean war (1854-1855)
The interplay of imperial rivalries and interesta in Europe subsequently brought the crimean war, which pitted Russian against the Ottomans , in alliance with Britain and France. Although the Ottmans won because they had enlisted the aid f Britain and France, their empire came inrrevocably under the economic and political tutelage f these two cuntries. Thereafter, the Ottoman gvernment fell into a steady state f decline. Constant iner-Arab warfare in the Fertile Crescent-ussually religius cmbat by Muslim against Christian incited by reactionary Ottoman ruler trying to shore up their influence-brought repeatedEuropean intervention.


Moldovia stamp 1858

Moldovia (now in Romania) were Principality under Ottoman empire forming theNothyern mst part of the Ottman empire (look at the rare local Moldovia stamps and the Admirality steam ship stamp used at Suez canal )

Moldovia (now under Romania) and wallacge declared their independence (look the rare Local Moldovia stamps ill.)

(a)Only 58 Post Offices in the entire Ottoman empiree including Europe and the first stamped with Ottman emblem was issued, the first stamps use fr the whole empire from Europe to the top of Arabia, westren to Libya.
(b) Ottman issued the firs stamp with ottoman emblem decrations (look at the illustration)

In this year The Ottoman wages another was with Russia-the one unsuccessful-and felt into functional bankrupcy. In rder to protect their investment, the british and French stepped up their intervention in Ottman affair.

(8) 1878
Bulgaria became Principality

(During Sultan Abdul Hamid II ,the Ottoman empire postal services in 1863 had Issued the first stamp with the Turkish Ottoman coat of arm, and in 1867 the second issued Moon and crescent design, in 1869 the third issued were overprint the second issued with new nominal currency, after that issued another rare type stamps like the figure of Sultan Abdul Hamid II
I have also found in Indonesia a vintage Turkish multicolour handpainted ceramic plate with the last Ottoman emperor Sultan Mahmoud I picture decoration. (please look the illustrations)

(9) 1882
(a)The first massive intervation came in this year, when the British occupied Egypt in rder to protect their Suezanal and other econmic interest during an uprising of nationalist Arab against the Ottman ruling-class descendants of Muhammad Ali. the occupation only served to fortify the native populatin’s resentment against freign presence and influence.
By 1882 the idea of revolutionary nationalism, forged out of the French revolutin, was a well-established idelogy throughout Europe. Indeed , it had fr some time been at the heart of the Ottoman empire’s troubles as first Greece, then other Ottoman province in southern Europe, struggled to free themselves frm Turkish cntrol and establish, by revlution, their own soverieghn states.
(b) The Sultan in 1882 was Abdukl Hamid II, and behind him were arrayed the frces of Ottoman reactionism.Hamid was a fanatical Muslim who promulgated a policy of Pan-Islam, a policy that envisioned the entire Ottoman world free of any other religious influences.

(10) 1890
By the 1890s small but vocal secret Arabic societies had sprung up in Syria, Iraq and Egypt devted t the struggle for local plitical independence frm Ottoman rule.Simultanneusly, in Europe, a small movement called Zionism -based on the Jews dream of restring their riginal hmeland -was gathering adherents and momentum.
( In the year 1905,a bk appeared in Paris called The Awakening Of The Arab Nation, published under the imprint of the League f the Arab Fatherland. it propunded the natin of an independent Arabic-language nation extending from the Tigris-Euphrates across Syria and Palestine to Suez canal. The state wuld have an Arab’sultan’ to exercise political rule and acaliph to administer religious affair. By 1905 then,Arab nationalism-however much the cncept dependened on a religius structure that cntradicated truly nationalistic impuls-was in its first stage of birth-Thomas Kiernan)
( In 1908, the stresses and strains to which Arabs were subjected during Sultan Hamid’s harsh regime were alleviated somewhat, if only temporarily, by a palace revlution in constantinople in july 1908. A group of yung turks exasperated with Hamid’s rampant depotism, ousted him in coup d’etat and set out under the banner of their Committee of Union and progress to intitute real reform within the empire and restoreit to its former glory.France already had control of the frmer Ottoman province of Algeria and Tunisia and was moving n Marocco. ritain was irmly ensconced in Egypt and alng the Arabian pennisula. in 1916 which ttally ignred Mac mahon’s agreement with Srafid Hussein. in 1917 Hussein and his sns succeessfully carried out their action and in this year had destroyed the llast remnats of Ottoman rule in Hejaz. france and Great Britain agree to futher and assist the setting up of indegenous gvernments and administrations in Syria and Mesopotamia.Thomas Kiernan)

(11) 1899
Crete became autonom



The history of Turkey refers to the history of the country now called Turkey. Although the lands have an ancient history, Turkic migration to the country is relatively new. The Turks, a society whose language belongs to the Turkic language family started moving from their original homelands to the modern Turkey in the 11th century. After the Turkic Seljuq Empire defeated forces of the Byzantine Empire at the Battle of Manzikert, the process was accelerated and the country was referred to as ‘Turchia’ in the Europe as early as the 12th century.[1] The Seljuq dynasty controlled Turkey until the country was invaded by the Mongols following the Battle of Kosedag. During the years when the country was under Mongol rule, some small Turkish states were born. One of these states was the Ottoman beylik which quickly controlled Western Anatolia and conquered much of Rumelia. After finally conquering Istanbul, the Ottoman state would become a large empire, called the Turkish Empire in Europe. Next, the Empire expanded to Eastern Anatolia, the Caucasus, the Middle East, Central Europe and North Africa. Although the Ottoman Empire’s power and prestige peaked in the 16th century; it did not fully reach the technological advance in military capabilities of the Western powers in the 19th century. Nevertheless, Turkey managed to maintain independence though some of its territories were ceded to its neighbours and some small countries gained independence from it. Following World War I in which Turkey was defeated, most of Anatolia and Eastern Thrace was occupied by the Allied powers including the capital city Istanbul. In order to resist the occupation, a cadre of young military officers formed a government in Ankara. The elected leader of the Ankara Government, Mustafa Kemal organized a successful war of independence against the Allied powers. After the liberation of Anatolia and the Eastern Thrace, the Republic of Turkey was established in 1923 with capital city Ankara.


 Turkic migration

Before the Turkic settlement, the local population of Anatolia had reached an estimated level of 12 to 14 million people during the late Roman Period.[2][3][4] The migration of Turks to the country of modern Turkey occurred during the main Turkic migration across most of Central Asia and into Europe and the Middle East which was between the 6th and 11th centuries. Mainly Turkic people living in the Seljuk Empire arrived Turkey in the eleventh century. The Seljuks proceeded to gradually conquer the Anatolian part of the Byzantine Empire. In the following centuries, the local population began to be assimilated into the Turkish people. More Turkic migrants began to intermingle with the local inhabitants over years, thus the Turkish-speaking population was bolstered.

Seljuq Dynasty

Main articles: Turkic migration, Seljuk Empire, and Sultanate of Rûm

The House of Seljuk was a branch of the Kınık Oğuz Turks who resided on the periphery of the Muslim world, north of the Caspian and Aral Seas in the Yabghu Khaganate of the Oğuz confederacy[5] in the 10th century. In the 11th century, the Turkic people living in the Seljuk Empire started migrating from their ancestral homelands towards the eastern regions of Anatolia, which eventually became a new homeland of Oğuz Turkic tribes following the Battle of Manzikert in 1071.

The victory of the Seljuks gave rise to the Seljuk Sultanate of Rum, a separate branch of the larger Seljuk Empire [6] and to some Turkish principalities (beyliks), mostly situated towards the Eastern Anatolia which were vassals of or at war with Seljuk Sultanate of Rum.

 Mongol Rule

A Mongol horse archer in the 13th century

Main articles: Mongol Empire and Ilkhanate

In 1243, the Seljuk armies were defeated by the Mongols in the Battle of Kosedag, and the Seljuk Sultanate of Rûm became a vassal of the Mongols. This caused the Seljuks to lose its power. Hulegu Khan, grandson of Genghis Khan founded the Ilkhanate in the southwestern part of the Mongol Empire. The Ilkhanate State ruled Anatolia by Mongol military governors. Last Seljuk sultan died in 1308. The Mongol invasion of Transoxiana, Iran, Azerbaijan and Anatolia caused Turkomens to move to Western Anatolia. [7] The Turkomens founded some Anatolian principalities (beyliks) under the Mongol dominion in Turkey.[8] The most powerful beyliks were the Karamanoğlu (or the Karamanid) and the Germiyan in the central area. Along the Aegean coast, from north to south, stretched Karesi, Saruhan, Aydınoğlu, Menteşe and Teke principalities. The Candaroğlu (also called İsfendiyaroğlu) controlled the Black Sea region round Kastamonu and Sinop.[9] The Beylik of Ottoman Dynasty was situated in the northwest of Anatolia, around Söğüt, and it was a small and insignificant state at that time. The Ottoman beylik would, however, evolve into the Ottoman Empire over the next 200 years, expanding throughout the Balkans, Anatolia.[10]

 Ottoman Dynasty

Mehmed II enters Constantinople

The Ottoman beylik’s first capital was located in Bursa in 1326. Edirne which was conquered in 1361 [11] was the next capital city. After largely expanding to Europe and Anatolia, in 1453, the Ottomans nearly completed the conquest of the Byzantine Empire by capturing its capital, Constantinople during the reign of Mehmed II. This city has become the capital city of the Empire following Edirne. The Ottoman Empire would continue to expand into the Eastern Anatolia, Central Europe, the Caucasus, North and East Africa, the islands in the Mediterranean, Greater Syria, Mesopotamia, and the Arabian peninsula in the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries.

The Ottoman Empire’s power and prestige peaked in the 16th and 17th centuries, particularly during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent. The empire was often at odds with the Holy Roman Empire in its steady advance towards Central Europe through the Balkans and the southern part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.[12] In addition, the Ottomans were often at war with Persia over territorial disputes. At sea, the empire contended with the Holy Leagues, composed of Habsburg Spain, the Republic of Venice and the Knights of St. John, for control of the Mediterranean. In the Indian Ocean, the Ottoman navy frequently confronted Portuguese fleets in order to defend its traditional monopoly over the maritime trade routes between East Asia and Western Europe; these routes faced new competition with the Portuguese discovery of the Cape of Good Hope in 1488.

The Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699 marked the beginning of the Ottoman decline; some territories were lost by the treaty: Austria received all of Hungary and Transylvania except the Banat; Venice obtained most of Dalmatia along with the Morea (the Peloponnesus peninsula in southern Greece); Poland recovered Podolia.[13] Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, the Ottoman Empire continued losing its territories, including Greece, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and the Balkans in the 19121913 Balkan Wars. Faced with territorial losses on all sides the Ottoman Empire forged an alliance with Germany who supported it with troops and equipment. The Ottoman Empire joined the World War I on the side of the Central Powers, after granting two German warships as refugees.

On October 30, 1918, the Armistice of Mudros was signed, followed by the imposition of Treaty of Sèvres on August 10, 1920 by Allied Powers, which was never ratified. The Treaty of Sèvres would break up the Ottoman Empire and force large concessions on territories of the Empire in favour of Greece, Italy, Britain and France.

Republic era

Turkey Map

Main articles: History of the Republic of Turkey and Atatürk’s reforms

The occupation of some parts of the country by the Allies in the aftermath of World War I prompted the establishment of the Turkish national movement.[12] Under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal, a military commander who had distinguished himself during the Battle of Gallipoli, the Turkish War of Independence was waged with the aim of revoking the terms of the Treaty of Sèvres.[14] By September 18, 1922, the occupying armies were expelled. On November 1, the newly founded parliament formally abolished the Sultanate, thus ending 623 years of Ottoman rule. The Treaty of Lausanne of July 24, 1923, led to the international recognition of the sovereignty of the newly formed “Republic of Turkey” as the successor state of the Ottoman Empire, and the republic was officially proclaimed on October 29, 1923, in the new capital of Ankara.[12] Mustafa Kemal became the republic’s first President of Turkey and subsequently introduced many radical reforms with the aim of founding a new secular republic from the remnants of its Ottoman past.[12] According to the Law on Family Names, the Turkish parliament presented Mustafa Kemal with the honorific surname “Atatürk” (Father of the Turks) in 1934.[14]

Ankara, the capital of Turkey today

Turkey remained neutral during most of World War II but entered on the side of the Allies on February 23, 1945, as a ceremonial gesture and in 1945 became a charter member of the United Nations.[15] Difficulties faced by Greece after the war in quelling a communist rebellion, along with demands by the Soviet Union for military bases in the Turkish Straits, prompted the United States to declare the Truman Doctrine in 1947. The doctrine enunciated American intentions to guarantee the security of Turkey and Greece, and resulted in large-scale U.S. military and economic support.[16]

After participating with the United Nations forces in the Korean conflict, Turkey joined NATO in 1952, becoming a bulwark against Soviet expansion into the Mediterranean. Following a decade of intercommunal violence on the island of Cyprus and the Greek military coup of July 1974, overthrowing President Makarios and installing Nikos Sampson as a dictator, Turkey invaded the Republic of Cyprus in 1974. Nine years later the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) was established. Turkey is the only country that recognises the TRNC [17]

The single-party period was followed by multiparty democracy after 1945. The Turkish democracy was interrupted by military coups d’état in 1960, 1971, 1980 and 1997.[18] In 1984, the PKK began an insurgency against the Turkish government; the conflict, which has claimed over 40,000 lives, continues today.[19] Since the liberalization of the Turkish economy during the 1980s, the country has enjoyed stronger economic growth and greater political stability.[20]
The end@copyright DR Iwan Suwandy 2010

The Jerusalem Collections Exhibition

Driwancybermuseum’s Blog

tarian betawi tempo dulu                 



                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM

                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :

The Jerusalem Collections Exhibition

Jerusalem (Hebrew: יְרוּשָׁלַיִם‎‎ About this sound (audio) (help·info), Yerushaláyim; Arabic: القُدس About this sound (audio) (help·info), al-Quds al-Sharif, “The Holy Sanctuary”)[ii] is the capital of Israel, though not internationally recognized as such.[iii] If the area and population of East Jerusalem is included,[citation needed] it is Israel’s largest city[1] in both population and area,[2] with a population of 763,800 residents over an area of 125.1 km2 (48.3 sq mi).[3][4][iv] Located in the Judean Mountains, between the Mediterranean Sea and the northern edge of the Dead Sea, modern Jerusalem has grown far beyond the boundaries of the Old City.

Jerusalem is a holy city to the three major Abrahamic religionsJudaism, Christianity and Islam. In Judaism, Jerusalem has been the holiest city since, according to the Torah, King David of Israel first established it as the capital of the united Kingdom of Israel in c. 1000 BCE, and his son Solomon commissioned the building of the First Temple in the city.[5] In Christianity, Jerusalem has been a holy city since, according to the New Testament, Jesus was crucified in c. 30 CE and 300 years later Saint Helena found the True Cross in the city. In Islam, Jerusalem is the third-holiest city.[6] It became the first Qibla, the focal point for Muslim prayer (Salah) in 610 CE,[7] and, according to Islamic tradition, Muhammad made his Night Journey there ten years later.[8][9] As a result, and despite having an area of only 0.9 square kilometres (0.35 sq mi),[10] the Old City is home to sites of key religious importance, among them the Temple Mount, the Western Wall, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque.

During its long history, Jerusalem has been destroyed twice, besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times, and captured and recaptured 44 times.[11] The oldest part of the city was settled in the 4th millennium BCE, making Jerusalem one of the oldest cities in the world.[12] The old walled city, a World Heritage site, has been traditionally divided into four quarters, although the names used today—the Armenian, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim Quarters—were introduced in the early 19th century.[13] The Old City was nominated for inclusion on the List of World Heritage Sites in Danger by Jordan in 1982.[14]

Today, the status of Jerusalem remains one of the core issues in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. After the 1967 Arab Israeli War, Israel annexed East Jerusalem (which was controlled by Jordan) and considers it a part of Israel, although the international community has rejected the annexation as illegal and considers East Jerusalem to be Palestinian territory held by Israel under military occupation.[15][16][17][18][19] The international community does not recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and most foreign embassies are located in Tel Aviv and its suburbs.[20][21] According to Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics 208,000 Palestinians live in East Jerusalem, which is sought as a future capital of a future Palestinian state.[22][23][24] Israel, however, considers the entire city to be a part of Israel following its annexation of East Jerusalem through the Jerusalem Law of 1980.

All branches of the Israeli government are located in Jerusalem, including the Knesset (Israel’s parliament), the residences of the Prime Minister and President, and the Supreme Court. Jerusalem is home to the Hebrew University and to the Israel Museum with its Shrine of the Book. The Jerusalem Biblical Zoo has ranked consistently as Israel’s top tourist attraction for Israelis.[25][26]


A city called Rušalimum or Urušalimum (Foundation of Shalem)[27] appears in ancient Egyptian records as the first two references to Jerusalem, in c. 2000 BCE and c. 1330 BCE respectively.[28][29][30] The form Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) first appears in the Bible, in the book of Joshua. This form has the appearance of a portmanteau (blend) of Yireh (an abiding place of the fear and the service of God)[31] and the original root S-L-M and is not a simple phonetic evolution of the form in the Amarna letters. The meaning of the common root S-L-M is unknown but is thought to refer to either “peace” (Salam or Shalom in modern Arabic and Hebrew) or Shalim, the god of dusk in the Canaanite religion.[32][33][34]

Typically the ending -im indicates the plural in Hebrew grammar and -ayim the dual thus leading to the suggestion that the name refers to the fact that the city sits on two hills.[35][36] However the pronunciation of the last syllable as -ayim appears to be a late development, which had not yet appeared at the time of the Septuagint.

The tradition names the oldest settled neighborhood of Jerusalem the City of David.[citation needed]Zion” initially referred to part of the city, but later came to signify the city as a whole and as a metophor for the Biblical Land of Israel. In Greek and Latin the city’s name was transliterated Hierosolyma (Ἱεροσόλυμα), although the city was renamed Aelia Capitolina for part of the Roman period of its history. In Arabic, Jerusalem is most commonly known as القُدس, transliterated as al-Quds and meaning “The Holy”.



Further information: Names of Jerusalem

Given the city’s central position in both Israeli nationalism (Zionism) and Palestinian nationalism, the selectivity required to summarise more than 5,000 years of inhabited history is often[37][38] influenced by ideological bias or background (see Historiography and nationalism). For example, the Jewish periods of the city’s history are important to Israeli nationalists (Zionists), whose discourse suggests that modern Jews descend from the Israelites and Maccabees,[39][40] whilst the Islamic, Christian and other non-Jewish periods of the city’s history are important to Palestinian nationalism, whose discourse suggests that modern Palestinians descend from all the different peoples who have lived in the region.[41][42] As a result, both sides claim the history of the city has been politicized by the other in order to strengthen their relative claims to the city,[37][38][43][44][45] and that this is borne out by the different focuses the different writers place on the various events and eras in the city’s history.

 Overview of Jerusalem’s historical periods

 Canaanite Period

Main article: City of David

Stepped Stone Structure, City of David

Ceramic evidence indicates the occupation of City of David, within present-day Jerusalem, as far back as the Copper Age (c. 4th millennium BCE),[12][46] with evidence of a permanent settlement during the early Bronze Age (c. 3000–2800 BCE).[46][47] The Execration Texts (c. 19th century BCE), which refer to a city called Roshlamem or Rosh-ramen[46] and the Amarna letters (c. 14th century BCE) may be the earliest mention of the city.[48][49] Some archaeologists, including Kathleen Kenyon, believe Jerusalem[50] as a city was founded by Northwest Semitic people with organized settlements from around 2600 BCE. According to Jewish tradition, the city was founded by Shem and Eber, ancestors of Abraham. In the biblical account, Jerusalem (“Salem”) when first mentioned is ruled by Melchizedek, an ally of Abraham (identified with Shem in legend). Later, in the time of Joshua, Jerusalem lay within territory allocated to the tribe of Benjamin (Joshua 18:28), but continued to be under the independent control of the Jebusites until it was conquered by David and made into the capital of the united Kingdom of Israel (c. 11th century BCE).[51][52][v] Recent excavations of a Large Stone Structure and a nearby Stepped Stone Structure are widely believed to be the remains of King David’s palace. The excavations have been interpreted by some archaeologists as lending credence to the biblical narrative.[53]

Temple periods

Main article: City of David

According to Hebrew scripture, King David reigned until 970 BCE. He was succeeded by his son Solomon,[54] who built the Holy Temple on Mount Moriah. Solomon’s Temple (later known as the First Temple), went on to play a pivotal role in Jewish history as the repository of the Ark of the Covenant.[55] For more than 400 years, until the Babylonian conquest in 587 BCE, Jerusalem was the political capital of the united Kingdom of Israel and then the Kingdom of Judah. During this period, known as the First Temple Period,[56] the Temple was the religious center of the Israelites.[57] On Solomon’s death (c. 930 BCE), the ten northern tribes split off to form the Kingdom of Israel. Under the leadership of the House of David and Solomon, Jerusalem remained the capital of the Kingdom of Judah.[58]

When the Assyrians conquered the Kingdom of Israel in 722 BCE, Jerusalem was strengthened by a great influx of refugees from the northern kingdom. The First Temple period ended around 586 BCE, as the Babylonians conquered Judah and Jerusalem, and laid waste to Solomon’s Temple.[56] In 538 BCE, after 50 years of Babylonian captivity, Persian King Cyrus the Great invited the Jews to return to Judah to rebuild the Temple.[59] Construction of the Second Temple was completed in 516 BCE, during the reign of Darius the Great, 70 years after the destruction of the First Temple.[60][61] In about 445 BCE, King Artaxerxes I of Persia issued a decree allowing the city and the walls to be rebuilt.[62] Jerusalem resumed its role as capital of Judah and center of Jewish worship. When Macedonian ruler Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire, Jerusalem and Judea came under Macedonian control, eventually falling to the Ptolemaic dynasty under Ptolemy I. In 198 BCE, Ptolemy V lost Jerusalem and Judea to the Seleucids under Antiochus III. The Seleucid attempt to recast Jerusalem as a Hellenized city-state came to a head in 168 BCE with the successful Maccabean revolt of Mattathias the High Priest and his five sons against Antiochus Epiphanes, and their establishment of the Hasmonean Kingdom in 152 BCE with Jerusalem again as its capital. In 63 BCE, Pompey the Great intervened in a Hasmonean struggle for the throne and captured Jerusalem, incorporating Judea into the Roman Republic.[63]

 Jewish–Roman wars

Roman siege and destruction of Jerusalem (David Roberts, 1850)

As Rome became stronger it installed Herod as a Jewish client king. Herod the Great, as he was known, devoted himself to developing and beautifying the city. He built walls, towers and palaces, and expanded the Temple Mount, buttressing the courtyard with blocks of stone weighing up to 100 tons. Under Herod, the area of the Temple Mount doubled in size.[54][64][65] Shortly after Herod’s death, in 6 CE Judea came under direct Roman rule as the Iudaea Province,[66] although Herod’s descendants through Agrippa II remained client kings of neighbouring territories until 96 CE. Roman rule over Jerusalem and the region began to be challenged with the First Jewish–Roman War, which resulted in the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE. Jerusalem once again served as the capital of Judea during the three-year rebellion known as the Bar Kokhba revolt, beginning in 132 CE. The Romans succeeded in suppressing the revolt in 135 CE. Emperor Hadrian romanized the city, renaming it Aelia Capitolina,[67] and banned the Jews from entering it. Hadrian renamed the entire Iudaea Province Syria Palaestina, after the biblical Philistines, in an attempt to de-Judaize the country.[68][69] The enforcement of the ban on Jews entering Aelia Capitolina continued until the 4th century CE.

In the five centuries following the Bar Kokhba revolt, the city remained under Roman then Byzantine rule. During the 4th century, the Roman Emperor Constantine I constructed Christian sites in Jerusalem, such as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Jerusalem reached a peak in size and population at the end of the Second Temple Period, when the city covered two square kilometers (0.8 sq mi.) and had a population of 200,000.[68][70] From the days of Constantine until the 7th century, Jews were banned from Jerusalem.[71]

 Roman-Persian wars

The eastern continuation of the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, maintained control of the city for years. Within the span of a few decades, Jerusalem shifted from Byzantine to Persian rule and returned to Roman-Byzantine dominion once more. Following Sassanid Khosrau II‘s early 7th century push into Byzantine, advancing through Syria, Sassanid Generals Shahrbaraz and Shahin attacked the Byzantine-controlled city of Jerusalem (Persian: Dej Houdkh). They were aided by the Jews of Palestine, who had risen up against the Byzantines.[72]

In the Siege of Jerusalem (614), after 21 days of relentless siege warfare, Jerusalem was captured. The Byzantine chronicles relate that the Sassanid army and the Jews slaughtered tens of thousands of Christians in the city, an episode which has been the subject of much debate between historians.[73] The conquered city would remain in Sassanid hands for some fifteen years until the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius reconquered it in 629.[72]

Arab rule

Dome of the Rock viewed through Cotton Gate

Jerusalem is considered Islam’s third holiest city after Mecca and Medina. Among Muslims of an earlier era it was referred to as Bayt al-Maqdes; later it became known as al-Quds al-Sharif. The Islamization of Jerusalem began in the first year A.H. (620 CE), when Muslims were instructed to face the city while performing their daily prostrations and, according to Muslim religious tradition, Muhammad’s night journey and ascension to heaven took place. After 16 months, the direction of prayer was changed to Mecca.[74] In 638 the Islamic Caliphate extended its dominion to Jerusalem.[75] With the Arab conquest, Jews were allowed back into the city.[76] The Rashidun caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab signed a treaty with Monophysite Christian Patriarch Sophronius, assuring him that Jerusalem’s Christian holy places and population would be protected under Muslim rule.[77] When led to pray at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the holiest site for Christians, the caliph Umar refused to pray in the church so that Muslims would not request converting the church to a mosque. He prayed outside the church, where the Mosque of Umar (Omar) stands to this day, opposite the entrance to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. According to the Gaullic bishop Arculf, who lived in Jerusalem from 679 to 688, the Mosque of Umar was a rectangular wooden structure built over ruins which could accommodate 3,000 worshipers.[78] When the Muslims went to Bayt Al-Maqdes for the first time, They searched for the site of the Far Away Holy Mosque (Al-Masjed Al-Aqsa) that was mentioned in Quran and Hadith according to Islamic beliefs. They found the site full of rubbish, they cleaned it and started using it for prayers thereafter. The Umayyad caliph Abd al-Malik commissioned the construction of the Dome of the Rock in the late 7th century.[79] The 10th century historian al-Muqaddasi writes that Abd al-Malik built the shrine in order to compete in grandeur with Jerusalem’s monumental churches.[78] Over the next four hundred years Jerusalem’s prominence diminished as Arab powers in the region jockeyed for control.[80]

Crusader, Ayyubid, and Mamluk period

Medieval illustration of capture of Jerusalem during the First Crusade, 1099

In 1099, The Fatimid ruler expelled the native Christian population before Jerusalem was conquered by the Crusaders, who massacred most of its Muslim and Jewish inhabitants when they took the solidly defended city by assault, after a period of siege; later the Crusaders created the Kingdom of Jerusalem. By early June 1099 Jerusalem’s population had declined from 70,000 to less than 30,000.[81]

In 1187, the city was wrested from the Crusaders by Saladin who permitted Jews and Muslims to return and settle in the city.[82] Under the Ayyubid dynasty of Saladin, a period of huge investment began in the construction of houses, markets, public baths, and pilgrim hostels as well as the establishment of religious endowments. However, for most of the 13th century, Jerusalem declined to the status of a village due to city’s fall of strategic value and Ayyubid internecine struggles.[83]

In 1244, Jerusalem was sacked by the Khwarezmian Tartars, who decimated the city’s Christian population and drove out the Jews.[84] The Khwarezmian Tartars were driven out by the Ayyubids in 1247. From 1250 to 1517, Jerusalem was ruled by the Mamluks. During this period of time many clashes occurred between the Mamluks on one side and the crusaders and the Mongols on the other side. The area also suffered from many earthquakes and black plague.

Ottoman era

David’s Citadel and the Ottoman walls

In 1517, Jerusalem and environs fell to the Ottoman Turks, who generally remained in control until 1917.[82] Jerusalem enjoyed a prosperous period of renewal and peace under Suleiman the Magnificent – including the rebuilding of magnificent walls around the Old City. Throughout much of Ottoman rule, Jerusalem remained a provincial, if religiously important center, and did not straddle the main trade route between Damascus and Cairo.[85] However, the Muslim Turks brought many innovations: modern postal systems run by the various consulates; the use of the wheel for modes of transportation; stagecoach and carriage, the wheelbarrow and the cart; and the oil-lantern, among the first signs of modernization in the city.[86] In the mid 19th century, the Ottomans constructed the first paved road from Jaffa to Jerusalem, and by 1892 the railroad had reached the city



With the annexation of Jerusalem by Muhammad Ali of Egypt in 1831, foreign missions and consulates began to establish a foothold in the city. In 1836, Ibrahim Pasha allowed Jerusalem’s Jewish residents to restore four major synagogues, among them the Hurva.[87] In the 1834 Arab revolt in Palestine, Qasim al-Ahmad led his forces from Nablus and attacked Jerusalem, aided by the Abu Ghosh clan, entered the city on May 31, 1834. The Christians and Jews of Jerusalem were subjected to attacks. Ibrahim’s Egyptian army routed Qasim’s forces in Jerusalem the following month.[88]

Ottoman rule was reinstated in 1840, but many Egyptian Muslims remained in Jerusalem and Jews from Algiers and North Africa began to settle in the city in growing numbers.[87] In the 1840s and 1850s, the international powers began a tug-of-war in Palestine as they sought to extend their protection over the region’s religious minorities, a struggle carried out mainly through consular representatives in Jerusalem.[89] According to the Prussian consul, the population in 1845 was 16,410, with 7,120 Jews, 5,000 Muslims, 3,390 Christians, 800 Turkish soldiers and 100 Europeans.[87] The volume of Christian pilgrims increased under the Ottomans, doubling the city’s population around Easter time.[90]

In the 1860s, new neighborhoods began to develop outside the Old City walls to house pilgrims and relieve the intense overcrowding and poor sanitation inside the city. The Russian Compound and Mishkenot Sha’ananim were founded in 1860.[91] In 1867 an American Missionary reports an estimated population of Jerusalem of ‘above’ 15,000. With 4,000 to 5,000 Jews and 6,000 Muslims. Every year there were 5,000 to 6,000 Russian Christian Pilgrims.[92]

British Mandate and 1948 War

”The British Mandate Palestine War Collections”


Ottoman Turkey Stamp
Ottoman Palestine Stamp
Ottoman Palestine stamp
French Libanon Stamp
British Soldier WW I
Mufti al Huseini
al Huseini and Hitler
Hitler and Mussolini
British Palestine soldier
British Palestine Police
Vintage British Aircraft WWI
British leader inspection
British Patrol Car
British ID Check
Jewish immigran
Yewish immigran
Palestine Postcard 1930
Palestine label 1934
Palestina coin 1927
Palestine coin 1931
Palestine coin 1935
Palestine coin 1950
British Palestine Medal
Palestine medal 1935
Palestine revenue
Palestine revenue
Palestine revenue
Palestine stamp 100C
Palestine stamp 50 C
Palestine Postage due
Palestine CDS Tel Aviv 1945
YMCA Australia Map Palestine 1942
British Malta ArmyPO 1943
British Australia ArmyPO 1943
British Egypt ArmyPO 1944
Registered Cairo 1944
British Ceylon ArmyPO 1945
British Canada ArmyPO 1941
British Africa ArmyPO 1941
British India Army PO1941
Transjordan Used cover 1948
Used Cover Liban 1950
Syrie Used cover 1949
Jerusalem Map 1916
Vintage Jeusalem
Ancient Jerusalem
UN Jerusalem postmark
Gaza Map 1916
Gaza Postmark 1942
Vintage Gaza postcard
Vintage Gaza
Vintage Jaffa
Vintage Jaffa
Tiberias postmark 1942
Holy Tiberias lake
Vintage Tiberias
Israel Independent 1948
Ben Guiron
Israel First Leader
Egypt ovpt Palestine


Map 1917-1922
British Palestine flag

UCM CyberMuseum
special show in chronologic historic collections related
during Palestine under British occupation created by
@copyright Dr Iwan S. compile from UCM vintage books
postal, revenue and numismatic collections.
The first and best showed in the Cyber space.


1. 1914
(1)The World War I 1914-1918 , Gaza fell to British Forces and becomes a
part of the British Mandate of Palestine.
(2)in 1914 WW I , Turkey (Ottoman) vs Germany as a result it was embroiled in a conflict to realese Palestine from the control
of the Ottoman Empire , let the Jewish population and the Arab population in Palestine to support the aligument of the United Kingdom , France and Russia during WW I.
(look the illustrations of the last ottoman King stamps and the earliest Ottoman Palestine stamps)

2. 1916
(1)The Anglo-French Skyes-Picot agreement allocated the British empire the area of present day Jordan (that time Transjordan), the area between Jordan river , the mediteranian sea and Iraq.
(UCM have Transjordania Postally used cover, if collectors want to see please asking via comment.
(2) The vintage Gaza and Jerusalem Map 1916 collections
(look the map illustration combined with the vintage city photo , Postally used cover via or from the City with cancellation postmark)

(1)The Mandated formalized British rules in Palestine, the bounderies
of the new states laid down within the territory of the Mandate Palestine, Transjordania and French territory in Middle East
(look at the British Mandate of Palestine Map 1917-1922 illustr. and Tranjodarnia Postally used covers 1948)
(2)The British Forces managed to defeat the Ottoman Turkyes forces and Occupied Palestine, and that area reamined under British Military Administrations until the WW I end.
(3) Balfour declaration
This declaration to favour establisment in palestine of a national home for the Jeiwsh people but that nothing should be done to prejudice the cure and religion right to the existing non Jewish communication in Palestina. This declaration was seen by Yewish Nationalist as the conerstone of a future Jewish Homeland.

The Faizal-Weizman Agreement for Arab-Jewish cooperation in which Faizal(King of Iraq) conditionally accepted the Balfour declaration.
(look the postal used cover of King Faizal iraq 1938 illustration)

5. 1920
(1)Palestine Riots
(2) After WW I and the Collaps of the Ottoman empire, in this year the League of Nation formally assigned the Palestine mandate to United Kingdom.

5. 1921
(1) Palestine Riots in Jaffa
(2) The Haganah was fourted a defence Forces for the Jewish population at the British Mandate of Palestine.
(3) From this year until 1948, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem , Amin al Husaeni became the leader of the Palestinean National Movement and played a key role in the Palestinean opposition.

6.June 1922
(1) The British Mandate of Palestine was a legal instrument for
administration of Plaestine formally approved by The Leaguaed
Nation base on a draft by the principal Allied and associated
power after WW I.
(2) The British Mandate Palestine Map collection (ill caption
Map 1917-1922) with the border of Franch Mandate Libanon and British Mandate Egypt.
Look at the France Mandate Libanon stamps , and Libanon postally used cover after the war 1950.

From 1919 until 1926 90.000 Jewish immigrant arrived in Palestine.
look the illustration of Jewish immigrant Pasport.

Palestine Arab Riots.
In this religious-Nationalist riots, Yew were massacred in Hebron and the survivors were expelled from the town . Devastation also
took place in Safed and Jerusalem.

9. 1930
Visit Palestine picture postcard collection (ill.caption Visit Palestine Card 1930)

10 1931
British mandate Palestine Coin 1931(ill capt. Palestine coin 1931)

British Mandate Palestine fair at Tel Aviv in this year, look at the Tel Aviv Fair flying Label collection (ill cap. Palestine label 1934)

Palestine Medal 1935

13 1936
Arab Revolt in Palestine from 1936 until 1939..
As the Europe was preparing for war, the Supreme Muslim Council in Palestine led by Amin al Hussaeni instigated his Arab revolt. This revolt were made by the Arab leader in Palestine and the Nazi Movement in Germany.
(Look illustration of Al Huseini profile and Hitler with him photo).

The Peel proposed accepted in this year which included a Jewish state in Part of Palestine.

Postally used cover send from Iraq with King Faizal stamp, postal cacelletion (marK) CDS Baghdad Sep.10.38 to Palestine. In 1919 the King Faizal agree with The Arab-Jewish cooperation of Faizal-Weizman Balfour declaration. (Ironically later Sadam Husein after beat Faizal and he was against the Israel Jews)

(1)The White paper of 1939.
The British respond to the ooutbreaks of Violent with white paper, sought a One State Solution. established a quota for Jewish imigration set by the British in the short term and by the Arab population in the long term placed restriction on the rights of Jews to buy land from Arab in attempt to limit the Social Political demage.
These restriction reamined until the end of the Mandate period which occured in paralel WW II and the holocaust during which many Jewish refugee tried to escape from Europe.
As a resultduring 1930-1940 the leader of Yishui arranged a couple of illegal immigration waves of Jews to the British Mandate of Palestine.
(2) Ben Gurion, the famous Jews leader, said he wanted to concentrated the masses of his Jews people in this country (Palestine) and its environments.(look at Ben Gurion profile vintage photo ills.)


1. 1940
(1) June,10th.1940
The Kingdom of Italy declared war on the French Republic and
the United Kingdom.
During the battle of Franch, the French country had already beaten by the German Hitler Nazi soldiers, and at that time
Italy Mossulini soldiers joined the war.The Italy invasion French was short time life.
(look the Mussolini and Hitler photo illustration)
(2) June,25th.1940
The British and the Force of the Commonwealth nation joined
the war in Middle east.
( look The British and Commenwealth nation Forces postally used
cover to Middle east including Palestine, during the WWII in Middles east including Palestine :
b1. The postally military covers from Tanganjika African forces
b.2. The postally used Free Military postal cover from British Middle east Forces send registered from Cairo.
b.3. The postally used Military cover from British India forces
b.4. The postally used cover from British Canada Forces
b.5. The Postally used cover from British Australia Forces
(3) July 1940
Italian bombing British Mandate Palestine centered on tel Aviv and Haifa such Acre and Jaffa also suffered.
(look at the Tel Aviv vintage picture, palestine stamp postally used CDS Tel Aviv 1945, Haifa and Jaffa vintage picture illustr.)
Mid 1940, Italian also bombing America operated oil refineries in the British Protectorated Bahrain.

(1)The connections led to cooperation between Palestinian National Movement and the Axis Hitler Germany powers during WWII .
(2) May 1941
Amin al Husayani issued a Fatwa for a holy war against British Forces. During his meeting with Adolf Hitler, Amin asked Germany to opposed, as part of the Arab struggle for independence.
He recieved a promise from Hitler that Germany would eliminate the existing Jews foundation in Palestine after the German would gain Victory in the WW II.During the WWII Amin joined the Nazis ,serving with the Wafen SS in Bosnia.
(3) The establisment of a Jewish National home in Palestine.

3.August,13th .1942.
The very rare Australia YMCA NGO organization official free
postal cover send to Tiberias, via CDS Gaza and Jaffa. 13.AUG.42.
(look at the vintage map 1916 and picture illustration of the Palestine city Gaza,Jaffa,Tiberias and jerusalem )

5. 1945
(1)British Mandate Palestine stamp still used CDS Tel Aviv 10.JY.45.
(illustration Tel Aviv CDS 10.JY.45 and Tel Aviv vintage Photo illustrations.)
(2) As a result of the British policies ,the Jewish Resistance Organization united and established the the Jewish Resistance Movement with coordinated armed attack against the British military which took place between 1945-1946.


The British Mandate Palestine stamp still used CDS Tel Aviv 10 JY 45. (illustrated)

2. 1946
(1)Following the King David Hotel Jerusalem bombing, in which the irgun blew up this hotel, the Head Quaters of British Administration , have Shocked the public because of the death of many innocent Civilian.
(2) In this year the Jewish Resistance Movement was disassambled . The leader of the Yishui decided instead to concentrate their effort on the illegal immigration and began to organized a massive Jewish immigration of European Jewuh refugee to Palestina using small boat operating in secrecy, many of which imprisoned in Camps on Cyprus. (UCM have the Cyprus pstally used cover during WW II, asked the ill. via comment)
(3) Details of the Holocaust had a major effect on the situation in Palestine and propelled large support for the Zionist cause in addition.(look illustration of Holocaust photo)
(4) The newly formed United Nation recommanded that Mandate Palestine WILL SPLIT INTO THREE PARTS :
(a) A Jewish State with a majority Jewish population
(b) An Arab State with a majority Arab population
(c) An International Zone comprising Jerusalem and the surrounding area where the Jews and Arab population would be roughly equal.
(d) The British government which tried to resolve the issued throughout the years, in the means of diplomacy eventually decided to return the written Mandate of Palestine to the Council of the United Nation.

(1)A previous phase of Civil war in Middle east including Palestine between 1947-1948 because Arab rejection of the 1947 United nation Petition plan of Palestine. UN General Assembly Resolution 181 that woud have created an Arab state and a Jewish State side by side, five Arab states invaded the territory of the former British mandate palestine.
(2)May ,14th 1947
One day before the British Mandate expired, DAVID BEN GURION declared the establisment of the State of Israel. Declaration refined to the decission of the UN General assembly as a legal justification for thr Establisment of the State of Israel.
(look The Irael Proclamation vintage picture and the news papers about this Independence proclamation.)

(1)May 14th 1948
In this day the termination of the British Mandate of Palestine over and the declaration of the establisment of the State of Israel by Israel first leader Ben Gurion and this declaration sparked a full scale war.
(Look illustration of the local news paper about The New Israel state is born , combined with Vintage Ben Guiron photo and painted label.)
(2) May 15th 1948
Arab Israel war was erupted the four armiest of Jordan,Egypt and Iraq invaded the newly self-declared State (Israel) followed not long after by units from Lebanon.
The war resulted in an Israeli victory with Israel annexing territories beyond the partition borders for a proposed Jewish State and into the orders for a proposed Palestinian Arab State Jordan,syria and Lebanon.
(3)During Arab Israel war about 856.000 Jews fled or were expelled from their homes in Arab countries , and most were forced to abandon their property .Jews from libya , Iraq ,Yemen ,Syria, Lebanon and North Africa left due to physical and Political insecurity.
After the war, some of the Palestinian refugee whom lived in Camps in the West bank within Jordan, controlled territory, and the Gaza strip Egyptian controlled territory
(look Egypt stamps overprint Palestina were used in this area ill) Syria tried to return by infiltration into the Israeli territory.
(4) July,30th.1948
The rare Postally Used Amman Registered cover send just after the Arab-Israel war and the Jews living in the camp at the Westbank Palestine near Transjordan, send from Transjordnan to United stated Salem city with via several city postmarked CDS Amman 30 July 48,Amman sencored stamped, CDS Bairout (lebanon) 2.8.48 and CDS Salem (USA) 10.8.48.
This cover was sent between two Arab-Israel war in Mei 1948 and 1949.

(1)Egypt ,Iraq,Jordan, Lebanon and Syria attacked the State of Israel, leading to fight mostly on the former territory of the British mandate Palestine and for a short time also on the Sinai Penisulla and southern Lebanon.
The war concluded with the 1949 Armistice Agreement but it didnot mask the end of Arab-Israel conflict.
(2) Arab Egypt signed the 1949 Armistice Agreement with Israel. The remaining territories, the Gaza strip and the west Bank, were occupied by Egypt and TRansjordania.
(look at the Egypt stamps overprint Palestine ill and the very rare vintage book With palestine gaza and Jerusalem Map ,and the vintage picture photo book illustration of Jerusalem, and other holy city Tabor ,Samaria , Nazareth ,Bethelhem , Jericho , Kapernaun , hebron, Juda, Garizim, Ebal, Jesreel, and Karmel .(illustration only Jerusalem and Bethelhem , the other will installed if the collectors asked via comment).

The installed still in processing, after 100% installed will
anounced at The UCN-uniquecollection Cyber News.UCM
informations. after this will show The Palestine Liberation
war Collections.

After this year 1950-2000, please look at The Palestine Liberation War Collection will installed later.

Further information: British Mandate of Palestine, 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine, 1948 Arab-Israeli War, and Siege of Jerusalem (1948)

General Edmund Allenby enters the Old City of Jerusalem on December 11, 1917

In 1917 after the Battle of Jerusalem, the British Army, led by General Edmund Allenby, captured the city,[93] and in 1922, the League of Nations at the Conference of Lausanne entrusted the United Kingdom to administer the Mandate for Palestine, the neighbouring mandate of Transjordan to the east across the River Jordan, and the Iraq Mandate beyond it.

From 1922 to 1948 the total population of the city rose from 52,000 to 165,000 with two thirds of Jews and one-third of Arabs (Muslims and Christians).[94] The situation between Arabs and Jews in Palestine was not quiet. At Jerusalem, in particular riots occurred in 1920 and in 1929. Under the British, new garden suburbs were built in the western and northern parts of the city[95][96] and institutions of higher learning such as the Hebrew University were founded

:”The Rare Palestina Book 1938″ March 22, 2010 by uniquecollection

Palestina Book 1938
PalestineWar Map
Jerusalem at night
Jerusalem morning
Jerusalem Picture
Jerusalem Map
Jerusalem Map
Jerusalem city
Jaffa city
Islamic Jerusalem
Jews Colonies
Talpiot Tomb
Aim Harod
Cave Tel Aviv
Palestine Post Jerusalem
Mufti Jerusalem
King Ibn Saud
Balfour declaretion
Mr Balfour
British Indian soldier
British Australian Troops
Vintage Hebron picture
Jews Independent Proclamation
Palestine Book 1938

Created by Dr iwan S. based on the vintage Book written by Pierre van Passei, Days of our Years 1903-1938. arranged in chrnologic historic information added UCM collections illustration(The writer only told the story and Dr Iwan S. arranged chronologic historic in systematic informations,please colectors read before The British Prtectorate Palestine War Collections.)

1.Palestine 1907
In the country where Mark Twain saw nothing but sackcloth and ashes, and where in 1907 the Prime Minister of Holand, Dr Abraham Kuyper wept over the poverty and the godforsaken loneliness of the Landscape.

2.Jerusalem 1914
The general atmosphere here in Jerusalem is reminiscent of 1914 behind the lines in the cities of France and Belgium.

3.Turkey attack n the Suez Canal in 1915
Jemal Pashas attack n the Suez Canal in 1915 at the head f a german-Turkish army and the Turkish commanders declaratin that after the war he prpsed to return to Constantineple via Alexandria made the bjective of the Central Pwers in the part of the world perilously clear. The Germano-Turkish campaign on the brders of the Red Sea was nt primarily a manuever to lessen British power f resistent n the Westren frnt: it was a threat to the mst vulnerable link in Britains imperial line of cmmunication.

4.The Allenbys gesture 1917
I could well understand Allenby gesture in 1917 when he and his officers walked bareheaded through the gates of Jerusalem.

5. Jerusalem 1921
Those who remembered what had happened eight years earlier realized at once the party of Arab Landlords, headed by the Mufti of Jerusalem who had been sentenced to ten years of hard labor in 1921 for incitement to riot and soon thereafter amnestied by a Jewish High Commisioner, had returned to the attack. The flag-waving incident at the Wall had been as good a device as any to throw sand in the eyes of public opinion. Clever propagandist sould easily-and did-magnify this intrinsically insignifivant demonstration on the part of children into a challenge of jewish chauvinists.

5.The Riot 1921 and King Feisal.
The riots of 1921 had given a first intimation the certain influential Palestinian Arabs were not in agreement with King Feisal of Iraq, who, as chief spokesman of the Arabic peoples at the peace Conference in Paris, had expressed his entire satisfaction with the International plan to set aside Palestina as a national home for the Jews people. Feizal,who was unquestionably the ablest of the Arab chiefs, had welcomed the Jew back to the near East, convinced that his return would prove a real blessing to the Arabs.Scarcely had Feisal spoken when the Palestinian Arab rioted.


1.The First Visit to Palestine in 1926
On my first visit to Palestine in 1926 , I raced over the splendid asphalt road which links the Mediterranean with Jerusalem, and covered in less that two hours what took Chanteaubriand nearly a week of travel. That road was built by Jewish pioneers. It is part of a system of modern highways that cover the Holy Land like a net-all of it work of the last fifteen years. There stand today a living monument to the revival of JUdaism- a land of pleasant gardens interspersed with cities teeming with every bracnch of modern human endeavor.
The transformation of Palestine is one of the wnder of our age.The all-engulfing desert had been pushed back : the wasteland have been reclaimed , and the sick soil has been nourish back to health. It is a miracle of creative love. For with that rare selfless devotion to which mas has risen in great moment of history, bands of Jewish boy and girls from the squalid ghettos of eastren Europre have redeemed for the coming generations of their people what had been lost for centuries.
When I landed,dynamos were zooming their deep basso on the spot where Jonah took ship in Jaffa. An entire city, Tel Aviv, spot less and white , had sprouted from the barren aand dunes to the north. in the seaboard region I walked through an endless array of of orange groves whose parfume in springtime mingled with that of the rose field of Sharon.
Olive skinned jewish boys were dragging baskets of earth up the mountain slopes and restoring the vine terraces and the hanging gardens of Solomon.
A hydraulic pump plunked out its rhytmic singsong at that ford on the Yarmuk river where, the legend says, the Majestic figure of Abraham entere history. There where wheat fields on Armagedon , a diary farm in bogs below Gilboa where disaster overtook Saul and Jonathan, prospectors at work in the blood -drenched land of the Philistines, surveyrs setting up their instrument in Ramoth Gilead, telephone wires being strung out to Jerico, a hydroelectric station rearing its steel towers where the Baptist met Jesus. There was talk of a real-estate boom in Sodom. Costly machinery was being installed on the shores of the Dead Sea to extract the sixteen-billion-dolars chemical treasure in the accured lake.That was the Palestine I saw.

2.Travel Around The Holyland
(1)Travel in Holyland does not mean the same thing to everybody. In our time, to feel that there is a tie which binds all of us Westren-ers to that little notch of land on the eastren shore of the Mediterranean. Yet, it was in this insignificant country,from the heart of an insignificant tribe of nomads, that there sprang the impulse which gave humanity a new hope and a new vision , annihilating the ancients gruesme wheel of fate and put in its place the conception of the oneness, the holiness and the abso-luteness God, which is the final condition of the oneness of man and the vital source of History wherein grows the root of freedom and humanity.
It was not Palestines natural beauty which attracted me, the amizing white light of the sun, the magic night when the stars swayed to and fro like lightships dancing on the swell of darkened sea and heaven seemed so near that you felt like reaching out and touching it with your fingers.It was the mystery of it all-the mysery of Israel, the mystery of taht people whose history is a series of Gesta Dei per Hebraeos, a people, as Danis de Rouge-mont said, Like no other in that it has sacrificed philosophy, fine arts , sciense, industry , all culture, in fact, for the accomp-lishments of one thing, a spiritual vocation. If the Palestine is the Jews national home , it is my spiritual home.
The Alps are undoubtedly more impressive than Hermon and the Lebanon. The Jordan cannot be compared with the majesty of the Danube, the mississippi or Rhine. By the side of Baalbek and the Acropolis, the Holylands ruin are lowly heaps of dust. I met tourists, among the Jews, to whom a visit to palestine seemed a waste of time and money. They found that there was little to please the eye and yet. Jerusalem was and remains the city of cities, the Holy City, the heart and soul of humanity. Deeper than any other motif, that of religion has been woven into the texture of mankinmds evolution. That motif came from Jerusalem.
(2) I went the rounds of the holy places like any other pilgrim. Their gaudiness dismayed me. The commercialization of sacred shrines of dubious authenticity . A Franciscan monk led me, half-a;dollar taper in gand, up a stairway in the basilica of the Tomb and said we stood on Calvary. I saw a goat nibbling grass next t the chapel erected on the spot where once, my guide explained , stood the veritable cross. An Abyssinian priest, sutprised in his morming ablutions on the roof, grinned in a friendly fashion and dressed hastilly to collect a few coppers.
Through the thorns and weed of Gethsemane’s garden, I waded to a cave said to be The Real Grave prepared by Joseph f Arimathea. I put my hand, for half a shilling, on an imprint in a wall on the Via Dolorosa where Christ supported himself on the way to Golgotha.
I saw Greek and Latin monk chase each other around with brooms in the holiest shrine of Christendoom. I sat with a local English official who explained his presence in the basilica as the end of a search for the coolest place in twn ; I attended a Mass celebrated by the Latin Patriach and heard the Greek clergy, before the Patriach had intoned the Ite,Missa est, start a racket with bells and gongs because the Latin service had that day impinged for half a minute on the time allotted the Eastren rite.
I stuck it out to the bitterend and viewed the basin made in Germany, in which Jesus was said to have washed the feet of his diciples at the Last Supper; I beheld the saddle-yes,the saddle- on which He rode into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, and I came away with the coin (sold to me by a sly Arab for ten Piasters) lost by the women in the parable. When I scraped the dirt off it later, I saw the rubiscund effigy of King Carlos of Portugal and the date 1898.

That was the Old city, the Jerusalem of the past, of moldering ruins and sacred sites, f fakirs and beggars, pilgrims and tourists, crumbling synagogues monasteries, of the Wailing Wall and the multitudinus bazaars. There, in a perpetual twilight, in the Stables of Solomon, brown men and Black men, men with green turbans and dirty headclthes, men with fuzzy bonners of rabbitskin-all push and stumble their way foward over the slippery cobblestone in a Labyrinthine maze f alleys, rubbing elbow with English soldier in tropical uniform.
Greek priests with parasols and cylindrical hats, Protestant pastords with Roman collars, Dominican monks with Bombay hats, veiled women in soiled clothes that drag in the filth, half naked camel drivers, Badouin peasants, Chasidic rabbis, Mohammedan ulemas (Ulama), blind mendicants rattling jingling silver bells, hashis peddlers. Levantine guides , Russian nuns, Syrian money-changers, Ethiopian manuscript writers, Turkish dragonmans, Arabian Sheiks, Greek tourist agent, Armenian prelated and egyptian porters.
Every second hole in the wall is a refresment parlor with a gramaphone going full blast. From an early hour the bazaar roars with the shouting and bellwing of Marchants, huckters and beggars. Each guild or confraternity has its own destinctive call. A camel drivers demand for passage in an unerthly searching yell, a blind man announces his approach with the monotonous singsong call of the hoot owl, while the porters , bent low under staggering lads, emit growls like wild beast if they do not simply rely n bumping thei way through.
Every transaction before the vegetable stalls make you think of preliminary sparring in a prize fight. instead of the American rule that the customer is alway right, the bazaars fundamental principle seems to require a demonstration of blazing enmity towards a prospective client,
A Policeman elbows his way through the crwd and traffics begins to mve again. Life ges on , Moslem, Believers. beloved of Allah, take a look at these gift from God. They can he had for asking. Brighten the eyes of your spuses. Take a pound of grapes from my stores.

4.Under the Jaffa Gate
Under the high vault of the Jaffa Gate, acoal-black storyteller hunched down, put his begging bowl in front on the flagstone and waits for some customers to collect. Presently a group of strolling Bedouins , on a visit to Jerussalem, click their coins in the box and squat down in a semicircle arun the Nubian. He begins talking to them in a whisper so that they have to bend their heads fward to catch his word.That story will be retold tonight in the villages of the Plain.

5.Watch a cockfighting
On a quet side street men and women are squatting in a circle to watch a cockfight. They laungh like happy children as one rooster picks out his opponents left eye.The spectacle is interrupted by the arrival of individual who is rolling ver the ground.

6.The boy and a Islamic Holy man
A boy calls out that we are in the presence of a holy man. He expects to roll all the way to Mecca. The holy roller bellows at the top of his voice that Allah is God and Mohammed Gods prophet. He has accumulated so much dirt n his garment that he looks like animated bale of dung. His wife brings up the rear guard, clinking the collection box and toting a sleeping baby on her back. The child is almst hidden under a quivering mass of verdigris -flies.

7. Call to prayer
Just before sunset, when the muezzins sing out theirulutating call to prayer, the bazaar suddenly grows silent as a tmb. In less tha an hour all activities ceases, the shop are made invisible by the row of shutters, and the only sound in the night is the echo of the slow step of the military watchmen in the vaulted passages.

III.Palestina in 1929

1. The New Jerusalem
The new jerusalem lies outside the walls.Spread out over a dozen hills, it has grown far beyond the limits of the city of both the Solomonian or the Herodian epoch. Brand-new suburbs encompass it. These are inhabited by the jewish intelligensia, the modern businessman and officialdom. Jaffa road, with its European cafes, restaurants, movies, concert halls, bookshops, bankimg houses, art exhibits and shop, is the central artery where a cosmoplitan night life is developing. In daytime this district is teeming with activity. A distinctive Hebraic style of architecture had not yet made its appearance. The influence of Le Corbusier and Berlage was predominant in the suburbs, while in the more elaborate ediffices culd be detected. Building, making room,redeeming the soil , creating possibilities for the steady flow of newcomers, setting up new industies-these were the major objectives when first i visit the land in 1926.

3.Visit to Hulda
In the mnth f June,1929, the gvernment’s inspectr came n his usual mnthly visit t Hulda and tld the headman of the clny :’I have rders to take these rifles away’ “Why,? asked the Jews.’Did we ever misuse them?’ ‘No, I d not think you ever took them out of the box except n the occasion when I came here to inspect them’ replied the inspector,’But it is a general rule. All these armories are to be called in’ ‘But’ , stameed the Jew,’these guns are our nly guarantee of security. The Arabs in the neighbring villages knw ftheir presence. If they get t knw that the guns are gne, we will be in danger. No! I will not give up these riffles withut a written rder frm the chief of the military department in Jerusalem.’
‘The Inspector shrugged his shulders. But on his next visit, he had the written rder from the government , signed by the chief inspector of His Majesty’s military frces in palestine. “If yu must tahe away is ur nly prtectin.’ sain the Jew to the englishman,’please take them away in the night so that the Arabs ut there in the surrunding villages will nt know they have been remved. Desd that sund fair t yu?’ “Very fair’ said the Inspector.
4.Visit the Zionist colonies
The Zionist or Jewish colonization wrk in Palestine was distinguished frm all other enterprises of a similar character in the wrld by the daring nature and the greet freedom of it social and ecnomic experiment. Man may make his chice f a half dozen different scialist and c-perative formulas before entering as established colony or founding a new settlement.

5.Arabs Attack Talpiot
We fund work going n normally in the colonies. The Arabs had only attacked places where they knew that n or little resistance culd be offered, for instance in Talpiot, aresidential suburb of Jerusalem, where many of the professrs f the Hebrew university lived.

6.Village Aim Harod
The central village, Ain Harod, which gives its name t the cantn, is the largest single socialistic agricultural experiment carried n in Palestine. In 1929 Ain Harod was already entirely self-sustaining and self-sufficinet. It pssessed a small canning plant, a shoe factry, abrick factry, acommunal bakery and a clothing factory. At Aim Harod we found the ancient Tomb of Harod

7. Habima the National Hebrew Theater
The Habima, the national Hebrew theater, agrup f the mst talented artist in the world , fmerly of Moscw aaand Paris, andnow established in Tel Aviv, gave regular performances in thecommunal halls f thse colonies in Esdraelon, where lecture cuorses on every conceivable subject in the world wre currently given.

8.Jews al cafes of Tel Aviv
When this type of Jewish burgeis consents to visit Palestine-for in the end they all cme, he prefered to sit in the boardwalk cafes of Tel Aviv and discuss the fall and rise of real estate, the perfrmance of the habima Theater and the latest developments of the Arab question.

9.The Christian Pilgrim
Tourist seldom visit those Socialist clnies, Christian pilgrimages t the holy land nt at all. The pilgrims, of whom there are still thousands going to the Holy land each year in spite of Russia’s elimination frm the pius traffic, spend a few dayss around the holy places; Naxareth, Bethany, Bethlehem, Eammaus. They never bother to look at one of the most modernistic colonization schemes in the world. And this is nt merely indifference. Many of the leaders f pilgrimage, whether frm France, Belgium, Ireland, Germany and Pland, I met on boats caoming from or ging t the Holyland on my annual visits t Palestine were deeply indignant over the fact that Jews were fishing in the Lake of Tiberias, fr instance, or that adiary farm had been laid ut r a hydroelectric statin put up near sme spot were christ nce lingered. Galilee, intheir idea , should have remained as it was , undisturbed and petic, as in the days when the Lord walked n earth.

10.Hotel Amdursky in Jerusalem
AsI alighted from my car ne evening, shaking the dust off my feet in front of the Hotel Amdursky in Jerusalem after a sizzlingly hot trip frm Galilee, the proprietor of the establishment, an old man with a beard like Aarn’s, wh was of the establisment, an old of evening n the prch with some fellw patriarchs, walked up t me swiftly and, talking me aside with a great ado of mystery, whispered in my ear,’There are a cuple of Jews waiting t see you’
“What? A cuple of Jews in Jerusalem ? surely that is nothing t get excited about.
“Wait till you see this delegation and yu will change your opinion’ he assure me.
‘Where are they?’
“In the parlr n the first flor. They have been waiting since eleven ‘clck this morning. They say they must see you n a most urgent matter’ He chuckeld and ndded his head meaningfully as he stumbled up the stairs in his embridered slippers to annunce my arrival. We followed the proprietor t the parlor, Marek Schwartz and i.
two men rse frm the red plush divan as we entered the room. They came fward, bowing several times in grave salutain :’Shalom! peace upon You!’ One was a youth with a cal-black beard and hollow cheeks. He had the largest pair f eyes I ever saw in ahuman being, except the Negus of Ethipia-the kind of eyes Max Band likes to paint : shimmering pol f Jet with a flame in the pupils. I nticed that he kept his hands in the sleeves of his violet caftan like a Chines mandarin.
Kis cmpanion was an old man who n a stick and whose beard almost came down to his waist. Bth wre the fuzzy bonnets which the CHasidim have brught with them from carpatho-Russia: those strange cntraptions f yellow bushy fur which seemed the most incongruos headgear a man could possibly wear in the blistering heat f a Judean summer.
“Please be seated, Father’ Marek Schwartz , who was to serve as interpreter, said in Hebrew.
The oldman looked at him reproachfully ‘ We do not use the holy language in day life’ he said “we are nt Zinist!’
“That makes it easier, for then we’ll all speak yiddish’ I interupted. ‘Kabbalist’ whispered Marek. “what can I do for you,sir?’ I asked , when the ldman refused a glass of tea, althugh he must have been starving. He signified his intentin to remain standing during the interview.
‘Are yu Mr van Paasen?’ he began. “That is my name’.”Yu are a friend f the Jewish people?’ ‘I dnot like the expression, Master’ I said.”Has anyone ever heard f afriend f the bulgarian peple r f a friend f Albania.There t ften an element f cndescensin in that term” ‘ Yu have spken well’ he answered,’But yu are nevertheless a friend. Were yu not instrumental in having some Jews set free from Jail’. ‘ I may have had smething to do with that.’ ‘yu are a friend f Israel then. We cannt repay you fr yur arvices.’ ‘h, that is all right,Father. I have dne nothing-I only wish i culd…’ ‘The Eternal ne, blessed be He, will himself reward yu. It is said: the holy nes amongst the Gentliles…..’
‘Please , Master, d nt include me in their cmpany. I assue yu I am nt worthy’ ‘ Yu are in positin t do smething for Israel.’ he resumed after pause. ‘ I would be most happy to do that.’ ‘It may be difficult for yu, for I do nt know yur circumstances.’ He went n’ But we think yu can be f immense services to us the Jews here in Palestine and to all the world.You must leave the Holuland at nce!” ‘Leave Palestine?At nce?’ I gasped i n amazement.” How can I be f the slightest service to yu if I leave this cunty. D yu mean that I shuld go to England r Geneva and relate the plight f the Jews?’
The oldman made a gesture of annyance.’God forbid!’ he said, thrwing up his hand.” That wuld be wrse than remaining here.’ ‘The what is it?’ “Yu see , it is this way.’ he said, moving a little clser and talking with great earnestness.”We are Kabbalists. We have a hly bk called Zar, the bok f light. Now there is a prophecy in that bok which has bearing n the very time we are living. The prphecy says that there will cme a day when three rabbis wil be slain in a city f the south’ He came still closer until ur faces were but a few inches apart.’ Now, in the book f Zar it is further said that seven times seven weeks after the slaying f these Rabonim , Messiah will come.’
‘Yes?’ ‘ But in the interval the Jews must suffer and suffer as they have never suffered befre. They must suffer till their cries f pain are heard in heaven, till the external ne blessed be HE, takes pity n them’. He paused a mment and lked at me appealingly.’Donnot you see.’ He said.’ what you are doing? If you succeed, yu delay the coming of Messiah. You see ? wonnot you plese go away, leave this country s that yu will nt to be tempted t help the jews. The best way to help the jewish peple is to let them suffer. You would not stand in the way f Messiah , wuld you?. “God frbid!’ I said in turn.’ I prmise yu t leave in a few days!’ The yungman kissed my hands in gratitude,

10.The Palestine Post of Jerusalem
By a freak f circumstances I was the nly correspondent whose reports and observatin on the disturbances in Palestie were published in Jerusalem itself. They were relayed from Newyork to London , whence a syndicate distributed them t its member papers in Europe and asia , of which The Palestine Post of Jerusalem was one. Every word I wrote therefre culd be srutinized daily by Arab, Jews and british alike.
11.Omar Mosque Jerusalem
Falsified photgraphs showing the mar mosque of Jeusalem in ruins, with an inscriptin that the edifice had been bombed by the Zionist, were handed out to the Arabs of Hebron as they were leaving their place of worship n Friday evening. August the twentythird. a Jew passing by n his way to the synagogue was stabbed to death. When he learned f the murder, Rabbi Slonim, a man born and bred in the city and afriend of the Arab ntables, notified the British Police commander that the Arabs seemed t be strangely excited.He was told t mind his own bussiness. An hur later the synagogue was attacked by a mob, and the Jews at preywr were slaughtered. n the saturday morning following, the Yeshiva r theological seminary, which stand away from the center of the town on the road to Jerusalem, was put to the sack, and thestudents were slain. A delegation of Jewish citizen thereuponset out to visit the police station, but was met by the Lynchers. The jews returned and tok refuge in the huse of Rabbi Slonim, where they remained until evening, when the mob appeared before the door. Unable to batter it down, the Arabs climbed up the trees at the rear f the huse and, dropping onto the balcony,entered through the windows on the first floor.
Mounted police-Arab troopers in the service of the government- had appeared outside by this time, and sme of the Jews ran down the stairs of Slonims house and out into the roadway. They implored the policemen to dismount and protect their friends and realtives inside the house and clung around the necks of the horses. From upper windows came the terrifying screms of the old people, but the police galloped off, leaving the boys in the road to be cut down by Arabs arriving frm all side for the orgy of blood. When I visited the place in the company f captai marek Schwarts, a former Austrian artilerry officer and Mr Erns Davies ,correspondent of the ld Berliner Tageblatt, the blood stdnin ahuge on the slightly stonefloor of the house. Clocks,crockery, tables and windows had beens smasahed to smithereens. Of the unlted articles, not a single item had been left intact except a large black-and-white photograph f Dr Theodore Herzl, the founder of plitical Zionism. Around the pictures frame the murderes had draped the blood-drenched underwear of a women,
We stod silently contemplating the scene of slaughter when the door was flung open bu a British soldier with fixed bayonet. (oh my God why must that happened between the same humans, only because the different religious , I prayed to God with hope no more murdered anymore in Palestine)


(1)Ai Hameen el Husseini,Grand Mufti f Jerusalem proved to be an amiable youngmab with a sikken red beard, a disharming smile and big blue saucer-eyes. Ein gemutlichcher Viennese one might have said, had he been dressed in a frock cat striped trosers. Only he was not attired in the European stylist. He wore a gown of dark red silk and on his head a white cloth wrapped around a green fez, in token of an accomplished pilgrimage to Mecca. His strinkingly Nordic features clothes in that Oriental costume made him look like a European dressed up for a masquerade ball. I had waited for ten minutes in an antechamber where a mixed crowd of ulemas, eunuchs, beggars and bodyguards was poosted to impress the stranger with the importance of the man who was about to recieve me in audience.Before being ushered into a high-ceilinged chamber overlooking the garden of the mosque of Omar.

(2)I had also been prompted to address the Grand Mufti with the title of Eminence. The advice came from Jamal el Husseini, the Grand Muftis cousin and chief secretary. Once inthe great mans presence, I was informed by Jamal that His Eminence was a direct lineal descendant of Mohammeds only daughter, Fatima , and a prospective candidate for the office of Khalif-ul-Islam.
When I opened my eyes rather incredulously at this startling announcement, the secretary went on to say that it was generally recognized in the Mohammedan world that since the apostasy of Kemal Pasha and his deposition of the Turkish Sultan, the office of supreme spiritual head of islam should be more suitable for the positian than -? He bowed in the direction of his smiling cousin. I also bowed. I coul seen Ai Hameen liked the Idea tremendously.

(3) But, I asked naively, isnot His Majesty Ibn Saud of the Wahabites also candidate? But that is neither here nor there, the mufti interupted in a pompous Levantine French. He wanted to know where I was staying. He hoped that I had found confertable quaters, for my stayin in the Holyland, he thought,was going to be a long one. We were in for quite a spell of restlessmess- in fact, the disturbances, he brusquely announced, wouldnot terminate till both the Jews and the English had evacuated Palestine. When I said that I was stopping atvthe Hotel Allenby, the two cusin threw up their hand in consternation and said, What, in a Jewish Hotel? In that breeding nest of anti Arabic intreque?. I ttold him that all the correspondents I knew were staying there and that we had the acting High Commissioner for dinner on the previous evening.
‘Incredible!, came the reply. ‘What seems more incredible to me’I said. ‘is that your Eminence should think that the English are ever going to go home or that the Zionist will give up their plan for redeeming the land of Israel’.
‘There will be no peace in this country until they go’,declared the Mufti.’In the English we recognize our real enemies. It is the British government and not the Jews who have foisted the snadalous Balfour declaration on us. It is Ramsay Mac Donald who has misrepresented the situation in this Holy Land in his book Palestine. We have clearly shown the world out attitude in this issue and we are determined t fight in ut to the end’ , he added,
‘The British will have to put a soldier with a bayonet in front of every Jews if they want peace without a whlesale oxodus of the jews. Our peple are at the end of their patience. They cannot bear the sight of the Jews any longer’
“The outbreaks are to be taken as an organized attempt on the part of the arabs, under the leadership of Your Eminence, to
thwart the establishment of a Jewish home in Palestine?’ I asked.
Hameen was on the point of replying in this question, when Jamal stayed him. The two cousins exchanged a few remarks in Arabic.
At the end of their consultation Jamal informed me that His Eminence was going to furnish me with a written declaration at the close of the audience. I wan now asked tohonor him by accepting a cup of coffee.

(4) The Grand Mufti was toying with a gold box of cigarettes. He eyed me from the side, but when I turned my head and loked him in the face he smiled-the same candid baby smile he had worn when I entered. He asked me to step over to the open window to take a look at the garden while a black servant in awhite gown arranged the trays on the low table of carved ivory

(5)’Please tell me’,resumed the Grand Mufti, when we had taken our seat again and he hat lit a fresh cigaret,’What is the general impression in the world on the present deplrable situation in Palestine/what is your personal view? You have been in Palestine before; I understand you live in Paris. Surely, you have formed an opinion? Who is held responsible for these horrible outbreaks? the French people do understand, I trust!’
‘It is my personal opinin’I said. ‘that these riot were an attept to strike terror in the hearts of the Zionists at amoment when they had secured the co-operatin of an influential section of Jewry to speed up Palestines industrial and agricultural develpment.This bloodshed was intended t patalyze the process of building a Jewish National Home.Am I right?’
The Mufti did not reply,’cntinuez, je vous prie’ he said.
‘As to the respnsibility’Icontinued,’for what Your Wminence calls these horrible utbreaks, public pinion in france and in America, I am sorry to say, points directly to yourself and nt only in those distant countries, the most influential newspaper in Egypt, La Bourse Egyptiene, inone of its latest issues to arrive here in Jerusalem, declares that the murder of the Palestine Jews in an echo of the Muftis inflmmatory exhorations in themosque’.
At these words the grandon of the Prophet jumpede up from the divan, threw his cigaret away, and quickly walked toward
s me, his eyes blazing with anger, Jamal casually uncovered his belt so that two silver-handled daggers came into view. The Mufti was striding up and down the room with quick nervous steps. His fury made him gnash his teeth.’Your Eminence asked me a question’I said, ‘ I answered truthfully. Why grow angry? I came here to find out to what extent the foreign public opinion is in terror’.
His Eminence calmed dwn at once.He lit a new cigaret,’Lok at these hands’ he said dramatically, stretching ut his rose-perfumed palms,’These is no blood n these hands. I declare before God that I have n share in the shedding f Jewish blood.Moreover’, he went on,’it is nt true that foreign public pinion favors the Jews. We have distinct evidence to the contrary. We have telegrams from Moscow upholding our stand. nly this morning we had awire from henri Barbusse, president of the Antiimperialist League in Paris, assuring us of the sympathy of the members of his organization in our struggle agains the Balfur declaration and Jews usurpation.Why,’ He went on,’the whole Moslem world is solidity behind the Arab people of Palestine. Mass demonstrations of prtest are held every day in the large egyptian cities. I have a telegraphic offer from his Majesty,King Ibn Saud of Hejaz, so send an army of a hundred thousand men across Trans-Jordan to chase the Jews out of Palestine.’
‘However, we donot need the Kings aid’ the Mufti went on,’We will win by means of an economic bycott. The Jewish industries in Palestine cannot exist without the market of the surrounding Arabic countries. We have proclaimed a world boycott against Jewish goods. That boyctt is growing tighter every day. we will nt rest till the Jewish industries are broken and the English, in pity, tke their Jewish proteges away on thei battleships’
‘It is a horrible shame t put responsibility of these riots at the feet of the Arabs. it is crime. a dstardly ignominy. The Arab is a kind and loyal creature. The Jews, frtunetely, cannot easily forget what Colonel Lawrence has said of the Arabs. We are not murderers or fiends. I would have you understand, Why do you say Arabs are responsible for this slaughter?’
‘Did those Jewish women , children and old men in Hebron , Lifta and Safed commitsuicide ?’ I asked.
‘No’, snapped the Mufti,’we were provoked . We were challenged in our hliest pssesions. The Hebron Arabs learned that the Jews had decided to drive them out, to push them into the sea. The Jews are syealing our land. They want everythng we have’ The Mufti broke down and buried his head in his hands,’My country is being runined by the Jews,’ he turned up a dramatically tearful face,’ My country,Palestine, just when we had shaken off the Turkish yoke and turned up the rad of freedom’
‘The Turkish yoke?’ Iasked,’ Did your Eminence not serve a volunteer in the Turkish army?
At this question the Mufti looked straight at his cusin, said something in Arabic, and left the room.
‘Could I see the telegram from Barbuse and from King Ibn Saud?’ Iasked Jamal.”Cpies will be attached to the document yu will find at your hotel later in the day’,he replied.
‘one more question pleas ‘, I said, turning to Jamal:’on that fateful Friday in august, when the rioting broke out in Jerusalem after the morning service in the msque, where was His Eminence?’
‘He was in Amman ,capital of TransJordan . Why do yu asked?’
‘The Egyptian press avers that His Eminence applied for a visa to go to Syria to escape a possible accusation that his sermon that mrning had incited the Moslems to draw the sword, but he was refused by the French authorities’.
‘ His Eminence was in Amman, I tell you. Why do yu pay attention to the gossip column in an egyptian newspaper? I thought you had cometo find out the truth’
“Quite,’ I said,’that is what I have come for, but it is true, is it not, that alarge number of out-of-town Moslems attended the service in te mosque that morning?’ “There were some,ndoubt’ ,’Peasant frm the Muftis family estates?’ “I cannt tell, why do you aske?’ “I ask because the sentence f seven years at hard labor which the gvernment of Palestine impsed his Eminence in 1920 was to punish him fr previous seditious sermon in which he called upon village leaders to bring their men into Jerusalem to exterminate the jews’
‘His eminence never was in prison’. ‘I know that he fled to damascus. It was sir Herbert Samuel wh amnestied him two years later.’
‘You ught to be careful’ warned Jamal, as i wnet out,’that you do not get poisoned in that Jewish hotel’
‘Or shot frmambush on the road t Bethelhem?’ I retorted,


1.The Balfour declaration
Why were these bloody outbreaks agains the Jews inPalestine occuring at almost regular intervals? Who was the Mufti ? Why did England permit this upstart madman, who was a government officeholder, to wreck a scheme that England had promised to bring to a successful isue? Were the Zionist trying to force something down the Arabs throat?Was the Jew pushing the Arab off the land/ And If so, was the british overlord permitting that in justice to be perpetrated on the original inhibitants ofthe country, the people whose civic and religious rights he was pledge to protect undre the very terms of the balfour Declaration? What role was England playing in Palestine/ and finally,was british power,which hold miilions in India within bounds of law and order, insufficient to cople with a few thousand riots Arabs in Palestine? I had been sent to investigate the questions in 1929. I admit that I was symphatic to the aims of the Jewish national movement of which the rebuilding of Palestine is the central motif. The idea of Palestines redemption seemed a fascinating adventure to me. To behold the land of Jesus rise again from the dust was something to which I looked foward with anticipation. In order to wrest this land from the hands of the Moslem, all Christendom had once faced East. Of course, I wa not looking foward to a new Crusade. I entertained no feeling f antipathy towards the Arabs. On the contrary, I commiserated deeply with their hard lot under Turkish domination and under a rapacious landlord class of feudal nobles.BUt I agreed with Lord Cecil, Smuts, and Lloyd George that Palestines liberation from the tUrkish yoke was one of the few relly wort-while things horn out of the Great War. As the son of a Bible people, I looked foward with lively anticipation towards the fulfillment of the age-old dream of the jewish people. But I was upwilling that the Hebraic Renaissance should come about at the expense of the palestinian Arabs. If Jewish nationalism should have attempted to grow strong by discriminating against the Arabs, I would have been willing to champion the cause of the Arabs.
It will perhaps be argued that the objectivity of my approach to the Plaestinian problem was vitiated by a pre-existent symphaty with the aims of the Jewish national movement. The Arab leader took this view at once when they became aware of the nature of my published observation in the American press. The Mufti of jerusalem led off with a vehement denuciation in the Arabic newspapers of Palestine ,Syria and Egypt. I was called a hireling of the jews who had been sent to concoct anti Arabic propaganda. The press campaign for my expulsion from the holy Land was too clearly an attempt to divert public attention from the implications of the murderous assault upo peaceful Jewish settlements to have merited a refutation. Not my journalistic activity in the holyland, but, rather, the muftis personal share of responsibility in the massacre wa one of the things that required investigation. I would therefore not have paid the slightest notice to the personages verbal fuminations,considering that I had merely done my duty in pointing to him as the evil puppeteer in the bloody disturbance, if it were not that I began to recieve telephone calls and anonymous letters threating me with violence and even death.There were not idle thraets,either.On two occasions I was fired on by Arab snipers. I oqed my life the presnce of mind of my friend, Captai Marck Schwartz and his chauffeur, Menachen Katan, who had managed to circumvent one ambush which had been prepared in ths neighborhood of Lifta and another one near bethelhem. On bth occasions we had come safely through the shower of bullets that bet downon our car. But when I reported the second attack to the commander of the british police post in Hebron, this gentleman, a certain Captain Saunders, remarked : I should think that half the fun of being a journalist is to go about unarmed and still comethrough these scrapes unscathed. Moreever, he added, Why do these thing happen to you ? I have recieved no complaints from your colleagues ofthe press in jerusalem.
upon my return to Jerusalem that day something flew past my head as I was about to enter the hotel. I saw a dagger quivering in the doorpst. Had it not been that some boys ofthe Haganah, the Jewish self-defense Corps, voluntarily constituted themselves into abodyguard, the intimation ofthe palestine government that my further presence in Palestine was undesirable would, I feel , have been quite unnecesssary.
I believe my offense was that I tok either the jewish or the Arabic propaganda bureus. I questioned everybody, from the Mufti down to the mst destitue Arabic peasants in the country and the murderous hooligans in the jails of hebron and jerusalem who had been caught, their blooddripping knives in hand. Only when I refused to accepttbthe explanations of a spontaneous uprising aginst the Jews, with which the Mufti and his agents and spokeman sought to impress foreign correspondents, in several instances quite successfylly, did the mufti denounce me as a hireling of the Jews and did I become persona non grata at Govermen House. The conincidence was significant!.

(The Balfour declaration informations, please click The Bristish Mandate Palestine War in this blog)

2.Britain parried that threat with a concentartion in Egypt of Indian and Australian Troops
Britain parried the threat of The Germano Turkish army with a concentratin in Egypt of Indian and Australian trops, who first repulsed the Turkish attack and the crossed to the Arabian penisula where, two year later, after certain Arabic tribes had been persuaded by Colonel T.E.Lawrence, on the prmise of boundless lot, t revolt against the Turk, the age-old Ottoman dminion over Arabia was brken by General Allenby. In this campaign Palestine fell into British hand in the latter part f 1917, ahortly after lord balfour, the British Foreingn Secretatry. made public his famous note , known as the balfour Declaration, whein the British gvernemnt declare itself favrly disposed towards the establisment of a National Home for the Jewish people in Palestine.
The Holyland ccupation by the British armies was the culmination f a struggle for supremacy between rival imperialism in the Near and Middle East.
At the request of the Jewish people, represent by the Zionist rganization, Britain was charged by the League of Nations t assume the mandate over the Holyland. at the cnference of San Remo in 1920, the mandate was ratified by all the Leagues members, fifty-three states in all, and subsequently under the terms f a saparate diplmatic instrument by the USA. Befre ratifying, the then Secretary f States, Mr Bainbridge Colby, specifically asked Britain whar her intentions were in the Hly Land, and the answer Lord Curzn gave was that England had but ne objective-the facilitatin of the building of a National Home for the Jewish people. However,even before the ratification of the mandate, Britain had taken charge of Palestine and had placed the administratin f the cuntry in the hands of the Colnial Office, instead of the Foreign ffice as France had done in the case Syria.

2. Mossulini occupation Ethopia
For Mussolini’s conquest of Ethopia has made f Eritrea a most frmidable ptential threat to British communication with India, the far East and the antipodean dominins of Australia and New zealand. Before Ethiopia passed into Italian hands the value of Eritre as a military and naval basa on the Red Sea was nullified by an Ethiopia that was friendly to Britain and that could, in the event of a war between Britain and Italy, be quickly militarized thrugh Kenya and the Sudan, and thus become a threat in Mussolini’s Back (click The British Mandate palestine in this blg thoe lok at the illustration of British Kenya Army . British Australia and India army postal History).
Mossulini was therefore nt wrng when he denunced the Ethiopian Empire as a menace to Italy’s imperium, and his ccupation of that land was amaster stroke f imperialist maneuvering. Furthermore , the installatin of Italian gun emplacements at Ceuta n the North Afican coast opposite Gibraltar has seriusly dimished the value f that ancient rck as a key position of British imperial power, it become clear that palestine and Cyprus are britain’s nly remaining bases for the naval, aerial and land defense of the Suez Canal.

1.The Peel Commision’sInvetigatin 1937
Without a word of warning, Britain cut down the propsal f a Jewish state in a partitioned Palestine, made by and adopted by Briatin after the Peel Commision’s inverstigatin in 1937- a scheme under which the Jews were to contrl no mre that four hundred square miles. Not only did this encourage the Arab natinalist t keep up the campaign of terrorism but it may well have provoked the jews, in turn, to measures f violence. A full-fledged civil war in Palestine wuld given Britain the excuse to say that neither f the two parties is mature for self-gvernment-and the Jewish Natinal Hme shuld be allowes t stagnate.

Of an abandonment or even a curtailment f the scpe of the Jewish nationalHome, by a cessatin or a limitation f Jewish immigartion into Palestine, there must be and there can be n quesrion. It is true that if brstruction be England’s plan-all signs point t such an eventuality-the Zinist mvement and the Jewish peple will probably have neither the strength nor the plitical influence to parry so cruel and so undeserved a blow. But other have. And ther must act. for the Jewish problem, of which Palestine is the kernel, in no longer an academic question on which men can afford t debate and discourse at Leissure. By their stracism of the Jew, the Fascist states have made of the Jewish question an integral and inseparable part of the greater problem confrontating civilization one that can no longer solved by the establisment of partial or rtemprary havens of refuge.

3. Not All Jewish People were expect to come to Palestine
Not all Jewish people were expected to come to Palestine because the geographical limits f the cuntry wuld nt have permitted the settlement of so great a number. nly a kernel f the jewish people,withdrawn from the galuth, wa to there build a civilizatin marked by the ethos f the hebraic spirit and make a cntribution t the sum ttal f human civilization in accordance with the natinal character and the natinal genius of the Jewish people.


As the British Mandate for Palestine was expiring, the 1947 UN Partition Plan recommended “the creation of a special international regime in the City of Jerusalem, constituting it as a corpus separatum under the administration of the United Nations.”[98] The international regime (which also included the city of Bethlehem) was to remain in force for a period of ten years, whereupon a referendum was to be held in which the residents were to decide the future regime of their city. However, this plan was not implemented, as the 1948 war erupted, while the British withdrew from Palestine and Israel declared its independence.[99] The war led to displacement of Arab and Jewish populations in the city. The 1,500 residents of the Jewish Quarter of the Old City were expelled and a few hundred taken prisoner when the Arab Legion captured the quarter on 28 May.[100][101] The Arab Legion also attacked Western Jerusalem with snipers.[102]

Division and reunification 1948–1967

Further information: Positions on Jerusalem
See also: UN General Assembly Resolution 194 and Occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem by Jordan

Israeli policemen meet a Jordanian Legionnaire near the Mandelbaum Gate

The war of 1948 resulted in Jerusalem being divided, with the old walled city lying entirely on the Jordanian side of the line. A no-man’s land between East and West Jerusalem came into being in November 1948: Moshe Dayan, commander of the Israeli forces in Jerusalem, met with his Jordanian counterpart Abdullah el Tell in a deserted house in Jerusalem’s Musrara neighborhood and marked out their respective positions: Israel’s position in red and Jordan’s in green. This rough map, which was not meant as an official one, became the final line in the 1949 Armistice Agreements, which divided the city and left Mount Scopus as an Israeli exclave inside East Jerusalem.[103] Barbed wire and concrete barriers ran down the center of the city, passing close by Jaffa Gate on the western side of the old walled city, and a crossing point was established at Mandelbaum Gate slightly to the north of the old walled city. Military skirmishes frequently threatened the ceasefire. After the establishment of the State of Israel, Jerusalem was declared its capital. Jordan formally annexed East Jerusalem in 1950, subjecting it to Jordanian law.[99][104] Only the United Kingdom and Pakistan formally recognized such annexation, which, in regard to Jerusalem, was on a de facto basis.[105] Also, it is dubious if Pakistan recognized Jordan’s annexation.[106][107]

After 1948, since the old walled city in its entirety was to the east of the armistice line, Jordan was able to take control of all the holy places therein, and contrary to the terms of the armistice agreement, Israelis were denied access to Jewish holy sites, many of which were desecrated. 34 of the 35 synagogues in the Old City ,including the Hurva and the Tiferet Yisrael Synagogue, were destroyed over the course of the next 19 years, either razed or used as stables and hen-houses. Many other historic and religiously significant buildings were replaced by modern structures.

Jordan allowed only very limited access to Christian holy sites.[109] During this period, the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque underwent major renovations.[110]

Map of East Jerusalem

In 1967, the Six-Day War saw hand to hand fighting between Israeli and Jordanian soldiers on the Temple Mount, and it resulted in Israel capturing East Jerusalem. Hence Jewish and Christian access to the holy sites inside the old walled city was restored, while the Temple Mount remained under the jurisdiction of an Islamic waqf. The Moroccan Quarter, which was located adjacent to the Western Wall, was vacated and razed[111] to make way for a plaza for those visiting the wall.[112] Since the war, Israel has expanded the city’s boundaries and established a ring of Jewish neighbourhoods on land east of the Green Line. Since 1967, Israel has gone to considerable lengths to make the sections of Jerusalem it captured in the Six Day War more Jewish.[113]

IDF Paratroopers at Western Wall shortly after its capture.[a]

However, the takeover of East Jerusalem was met with international criticism. Following the passing of Israel’s Jerusalem Law, which declared Jerusalem, “complete and united”, the capital of Israel,[114] the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution that declared the law “a violation of international law” and requested all member states to withdraw all remaining embassies from the city.[115]

The status of the city, and especially its holy places, remains a core issue in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Israeli government has approved building plans in the Muslim Quarter of the Old City[116] in order to expand the Jewish presence in East Jerusalem, while prominent Islamic leaders have made claims that Jews have no historical connection to Jerusalem, alleging that the 2,500-year old Western Wall was constructed as part of a mosque.[117] Palestinians envision East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state,[118][119] and the city’s borders have been the subject of bilateral talks. A strong longing for peace is symbolized by the Peace Monument (with farming tools made out of scrap weapons), facing the Old City wall near the former Israeli-Jordanian border and quoting from the book of Isaiah in Arabic and Hebrew.[120]


View of Jerusalem Forest from Yad Vashem

Jerusalem is situated on the southern spur of a plateau in the Judean Mountains, which include the Mount of Olives (East) and Mount Scopus (North East). The elevation of the Old City is approximately 760 m (2,490 ft).[121] The whole of Jerusalem is surrounded by valleys and dry riverbeds (wadis). The Kidron, Hinnom, and Tyropoeon Valleys intersect in an area just south of the Old City of Jerusalem.[122] The Kidron Valley runs to the east of the Old City and separates the Mount of Olives from the city proper. Along the southern side of old Jerusalem is the Valley of Hinnom, a steep ravine associated in biblical eschatology with the concept of Gehenna or Hell.[123] The Tyropoeon Valley commenced in the northwest near the Damascus Gate, ran south-southeasterly through the center of the Old City down to the Pool of Siloam, and divided the lower part into two hills, the Temple Mount to the east, and the rest of the city to the west (the lower and the upper cities described by Josephus). Today, this valley is hidden by debris that has accumulated over the centuries.[122]

In biblical times, Jerusalem was surrounded by forests of almond, olive and pine trees. Over centuries of warfare and neglect, these forests were destroyed. Farmers in the Jerusalem region thus built stone terraces along the slopes to hold back the soil, a feature still very much in evidence in the Jerusalem landscape.[citation needed]

Water supply has always been a major problem in Jerusalem, as attested to by the intricate network of ancient aqueducts, tunnels, pools and cisterns found in the city.[124]

Jerusalem is 60 kilometers (37 mi)[125] east of Tel Aviv and the Mediterranean Sea. On the opposite side of the city, approximately 35 kilometers (22 mi)[126] away, is the Dead Sea, the lowest body of water on Earth. Neighboring cities and towns include Bethlehem and Beit Jala to the south, Abu Dis and Ma’ale Adumim to the east, Mevaseret Zion to the west, and Ramallah and Giv’at Ze’ev to the north.[127][128][129]

Panorama of the Temple Mount, including Al-Aqsa Mosque, and Dome of the Rock, from the Mount of Olives

The city is characterized by a Mediterranean climate, with hot, dry summers, and mild, wet winters. Snow usually occurs once or twice a winter, although the city experiences heavy snowfall every three to four years on average. January is the coldest month of the year, with an average temperature of 9.1 °C (48.4 °F); July and August are the hottest months, with an average temperature of 24.2 °C (75.6 °F), and the summer months are usually rainless. The average annual precipitation is around 550 mm (22 in), with rain occurring mostly between October and May.[130]

Most of the air pollution in Jerusalem comes from vehicular traffic.[131] Many main streets in Jerusalem were not built to accommodate such a large volume of traffic, leading to traffic congestion and more carbon monoxide released into the air. Industrial pollution inside the city is sparse, but emissions from factories on the Israeli Mediterranean coast can travel eastward and settle over the city.[131][132]

[hide]Climate data for Jerusalem (1881-2007)
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year
Record high °C (°F) 23.4
Average high °C (°F) 11.8
Daily mean °C (°F) 9.1
Average low °C (°F) 6.4
Record low °C (°F) -6.7
Rainfall mm (inches) 133.2
Avg. rainy days 12.9 11.7 9.6 4.4 1.3 0 0 0 0.3 3.6 7.3 10.9 62
Source: Israel Meteorological Service [133][134]


Population of Jerusalem
Year Total
1844 15,510
1876 25,030
1896 45,420
1922 62,578
1931 90,053
1944 157,000
1948 165,000
1967 263,307
1980 407,100
1985 457,700
1990 524,400
1995 617,000
2000 657,500
2005 706,400
2010 776,000

In December 2007, Jerusalem had a population of 747,600—64% were Jewish, 32% Muslim, and 2% Christian.[3] At the end of 2005, the population density was 5,750.4 inhabitants per square kilometer (14,893.5/sq mi).[2][135] According to a study published in 2000, the percentage of Jews in the city’s population had been decreasing; this was attributed to a higher Muslim birth rate, and Jewish residents leaving. The study also found that about nine percent of the Old City’s 32,488 people were Jews.[136]

In 2005, 2,850 new immigrants settled in Jerusalem, mostly from the United States, France and the former Soviet Union. In terms of the local population, the number of outgoing residents exceeds the number of incoming residents. In 2005, 16,000 left Jerusalem and only 10,000 moved in.[2] Nevertheless, the population of Jerusalem continues to rise due to the high birth rate, especially in the Arab and Haredi Jewish communities. Consequently, the total fertility rate in Jerusalem (4.02) is higher than in Tel Aviv (1.98) and well above the national average of 2.90. The average size of Jerusalem’s 180,000 households is 3.8 people.[2]

In 2005, the total population grew by 13,000 (1.8%)—similar to Israeli national average, but the religious and ethnic composition is shifting. While 31% of the Jewish population is made up of children below the age fifteen, the figure for the Arab population is 42%.[2] This would seem to corroborate the observation that the percentage of Jews in Jerusalem has declined over the past four decades. In 1967, Jews accounted for 74 percent of the population, while the figure for 2006 is down nine percent.[137] Possible factors are the high cost of housing, fewer job opportunities and the increasingly religious character of the city, although proportionally, young Haredim are leaving in higher numbers.[citation needed] Many people are moving to the suburbs and coastal cities in search of cheaper housing and a more secular lifestyle.[138]

In 2009, the percentage of Haredim in the city is increasing. As of 2009, out of 150,100 schoolchildren, 59,900 or 40% are in state-run secular and National Religious schools, while 90,200 or 60% are in Haredi schools. This correlates with the high number of children in Haredi families.[139][140]

While many Israelis see Jerusalem as poor, rundown and riddled with religious and political tension, the city has been a magnet for Palestinians, offering more jobs and opportunity than any city in the West Bank or Gaza Strip. Palestinian officials have encouraged Arabs over the years to stay in the city to maintain their claim.[141][142] Palestinians are attracted to the access to jobs, healthcare, social security, other benefits, and quality of life Israel provides to Jerusalem residents.[143] Arab residents of Jerusalem who choose not to have Israeli citizenship are granted an Israeli identity card that allows them to pass through checkpoints with relative ease and to travel throughout Israel, making it easier to find work. Residents also are entitled to the subsidized healthcare and social security benefits Israel provides its citizens. Arabs in Jerusalem can send their children to Israeli-run schools, although not every neighborhood has one, and universities. Israeli doctors and highly regarded hospitals such as Hadassah Medical Center are available to residents.[144]

Demographics and the Jewish-Arab population divide play a major role in the dispute over Jerusalem. In 1998, the Jerusalem Development Authority proposed expanding city limits to the west to include more areas heavily populated with Jews.[145]

East Jerusalem, 2006

Criticism of urban planning

Critics of efforts to promote a Jewish majority in Israel say that government planning policies are motivated by demographic considerations and seek to limit Arab construction while promoting Jewish construction.[146] According to a World Bank report, the number of recorded building violations between 1996 and 2000 was four and half times higher in Jewish neighborhoods but four times fewer demolition orders were issued in West Jerusalem than in East Jerusalem; Arabs in Jerusalem were less likely to receive construction permits than Jews, and “the authorities are much more likely to take action against Palestinian violators” than Jewish violators of the permit process.[147] In recent years, private Jewish foundations have received permission from the government to develop projects on disputed lands, such as the City of David archaeological park in the 60% Arab neighborhood of Silwan (adjacent to the Old City),[148] and the Museum of Tolerance on Mamilla cemetery (adjacent to Zion Square).[147][149] Opponents view such urban planning moves as geared towards the Judaization of Jerusalem.[150][151][152]

 Local government

Safra Square, Jerusalem City Hall

The Jerusalem City Council is a body of 31 elected members headed by the mayor, who serves a five-year term and appoints six deputies. The former mayor of Jerusalem, Uri Lupolianski, was elected in 2003.[153] In the November 2008 city elections, Nir Barkat came out as the winner and is now the mayor. Apart from the mayor and his deputies, City Council members receive no salaries and work on a voluntary basis. The longest-serving Jerusalem mayor was Teddy Kollek, who spent 28 years—-six consecutive terms-—in office. Most of the meetings of the Jerusalem City Council are private, but each month, it holds a session that is open to the public.[153] Within the city council, religious political parties form an especially powerful faction, accounting for the majority of its seats.[154] The headquarters of the Jerusalem Municipality and the mayor’s office are at Safra Square (Kikar Safra) on Jaffa Road. The municipal complex, comprising two modern buildings and ten renovated historic buildings surrounding a large plaza, opened in 1993.[155] The city falls under the Jerusalem District, with Jerusalem as the district’s capital.

Political status

The Knesset Building in Jerusalem, home to the legislative branch of the Israeli government

Under the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine passed by the United Nations in 1947, Jerusalem was envisaged to become a corpus separatum administered by the United Nations. While the Jewish leaders accepted the partition plan, the Arab leadership (the Arab Higher Committee in Palestine and the Arab League) rejected it, opposing any partition.[156][157] In the war of 1948, the western part of the city was occupied by forces of the nascent state of Israel, while the eastern part was occupied by Jordan. The international community largely considers the legal status of Jerusalem to derive from the partition plan, and correspondingly refuses to recognize Israeli sovereignty in the city.

On December 5, 1949, the State of Israel’s first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, proclaimed Jerusalem as Israel’s capital,[158] and since then all branches of the Israeli governmentlegislative, judicial, and executive—have resided there, except for the Ministry of Defense, located at HaKirya in Tel Aviv.[159] At the time of the proclamation, Jerusalem was divided between Israel and Jordan and thus only West Jerusalem was considered Israel’s capital. Immediately after the 1967 Six-Day War, however, Israel took control of East Jerusalem, making it a de facto part of the Israeli capital. Israel enshrined the status of the “complete and united” Jerusalem—west and east—as its capital, in the 1980 Basic Law: Jerusalem, Capital of Israel.[160]

The status of a “united Jerusalem” as Israel’s “eternal capital”[158][161] has been a matter of immense controversy within the international community. Although some countries maintain consulates in Jerusalem, all embassies are located outside of the city proper, mostly in Tel Aviv.[20][162] Due to the non-recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, non-Israeli press use Tel Aviv as a metonym for Israel.[163][164][165][166]

The non-binding United Nations Security Council Resolution 478, passed on August 20, 1980, declared that the Basic Law was “null and void and must be rescinded forthwith.” Member states were advised to withdraw their diplomatic representation from the city as a punitive measure. Most of the remaining countries with embassies in Jerusalem complied with the resolution by relocating them to Tel Aviv, where many embassies already resided prior to Resolution 478. Currently there are no embassies located within the city limits of Jerusalem, although there are embassies in Mevaseret Zion, on the outskirts of Jerusalem, and four consulates in the city itself.[162] In 1995, the United States Congress had planned to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem with the passage of the Jerusalem Embassy Act.[167] However, former U.S. President George W. Bush has argued that Congressional resolutions regarding the status of Jerusalem are merely advisory. The Constitution reserves foreign relations as an executive power, and as such, the United States embassy is still in Tel Aviv.[168]

On 28 October 2009, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned that Jerusalem must be the capital of both Israel and Palestine if peace is to be achieved.[169]

View of modern Jerusalem

Israel’s most prominent governmental institutions, including the Knesset,[170] the Supreme Court,[171] and the official residences of the President and Prime Minister, are located in Jerusalem. Prior to the creation of the State of Israel, Jerusalem served as the administrative capital of the British Mandate, which included present-day Israel and Jordan.[172] From 1949 until 1967, West Jerusalem served as Israel’s capital, but was not recognized as such internationally because UN General Assembly Resolution 194 envisaged Jerusalem as an international city. As a result of the Six-Day War in 1967, the whole of Jerusalem came under Israeli control. On June 27, 1967, the government of Levi Eshkol extended Israeli law and jurisdiction to East Jerusalem, but agreed that administration of the Temple Mount compound would be maintained by the Jordanian waqf, under the Jordanian Ministry of Religious Endowments.[173] In 1988, Israel ordered the closure of Orient House, home of the Arab Studies Society, but also the headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Organization, for security reasons. The building reopened in 1992 as a Palestinian guesthouse.[174][175] The Oslo Accords stated that the final status of Jerusalem would be determined by negotiations with the Palestinian National Authority, which regards East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state.[22] Mahmoud Abbas has said that any agreement that did not not include East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine would be unacceptable.[176]

 Religious significance

The Western Wall, known as the Kotel

The al-Aqsa Mosque, a sacred site for Muslims

Jerusalem plays an important role in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The 2000 Statistical Yearbook of Jerusalem lists 1204 synagogues, 158 churches, and 73 mosques within the city.[177] Despite efforts to maintain peaceful religious coexistence, some sites, such as the Temple Mount, have been a continuous source of friction and controversy.

Church of the Holy Sepulchre

Jerusalem has been sacred to the Jews since King David proclaimed it his capital in the 10th century BCE. Jerusalem was the site of Solomon’s Temple and the Second Temple.[5] It is mentioned in the Bible 632 times. Today, the Western Wall, a remnant of the wall surrounding the Second Temple, is a Jewish holy site second only to the Holy of Holies on the Temple Mount itself.[178] Synagogues around the world are traditionally built with the Holy Ark facing Jerusalem,[179] and Arks within Jerusalem face the “Holy of Holies”.[180] As prescribed in the Mishna and codified in the Shulchan Aruch, daily prayers are recited while facing towards Jerusalem and the Temple Mount. Many Jews have “Mizrach” plaques hung on a wall of their homes to indicate the direction of prayer.[180][181]

Christianity reveres Jerusalem not only for its Old Testament history but also for its significance in the life of Jesus. According to the New Testament, Jesus was brought to Jerusalem soon after his birth[182] and later in his life cleansed the Second Temple.[183] The Cenacle, believed to be the site of Jesus’ Last Supper, is located on Mount Zion in the same building that houses the Tomb of King David.[184][185] Another prominent Christian site in Jerusalem is Golgotha, the site of the crucifixion. The Gospel of John describes it as being located outside Jerusalem,[186] but recent archaeological evidence suggests Golgotha is a short distance from the Old City walls, within the present-day confines of the city.[187] The land currently occupied by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre is considered one of the top candidates for Golgotha and thus has been a Christian pilgrimage site for the past two thousand years.[187][188][189]

Jerusalem is considered by some as the third-holiest city in Sunni Islam.[6] For approximately a year, before it was permanently switched to the Kabaa in Mecca, the qibla (direction of prayer) for Muslims was Jerusalem.[190] The city’s lasting place in Islam, however, is primarily due to Muhammad‘s Night of Ascension (c. CE 620). Muslims believe Muhammad was miraculously transported one night from Mecca to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, whereupon he ascended to Heaven to meet previous prophets of Islam.[191][192] The first verse in the Qur’an’s Surat al-Isra notes the destination of Muhammad’s journey as al-Aqsa (the farthest) mosque,[193] in assumed reference to the location in Jerusalem. Today, the Temple Mount is topped by two Islamic landmarks intended to commemorate the event—al-Aqsa Mosque, derived from the name mentioned in the Qur’an, and the Dome of the Rock, which stands over the Foundation Stone, from which Muslims believe Muhammad ascended to Heaven.[194]


The Shrine of the Book, housing the Dead Sea Scrolls, at the Israel Museum

Although Jerusalem is known primarily for its religious significance, the city is also home to many artistic and cultural venues. The Israel Museum attracts nearly one million visitors a year, approximately one-third of them tourists.[195] The 20-acre (81,000 m2) museum complex comprises several buildings featuring special exhibits and extensive collections of Judaica, archaeological findings, and Israeli and European art. The Dead Sea scrolls, discovered in the mid-20th century in the Qumran caves near the Dead Sea, are housed in the Museum’s Shrine of the Book.[196] The Youth Wing, which mounts changing exhibits and runs an extensive art education program, is visited by 100,000 children a year. The museum has a large outdoor sculpture garden, and a scale-model of the Second Temple.[195] The Rockefeller Museum, located in East Jerusalem, was the first archaeological museum in the Middle East. It was built in 1938 during the British Mandate.[197][198]

The Jerusalem Theater at night

Yad Vashem, Israel’s national memorial to the victims of the Holocaust, houses the world’s largest library of Holocaust-related information,[199] with an estimated 100,000 books and articles. The complex contains a state-of-the-art museum that explores the genocide of the Jews through exhibits that focus on the personal stories of individuals and families killed in the Holocaust and an art gallery featuring the work of artists who perished. Yad Vashem also commemorates the 1.5 million Jewish children murdered by the Nazis, and honors the Righteous among the Nations.[200] The Museum on the Seam, which explores issues of coexistence through art, is situated on the road dividing eastern and western Jerusalem.[201]

The Jerusalem Symphony Orchestra, established in the 1940s,[202] has appeared around the world.[202] Other arts facilities include the International Convention Center (Binyanei HaUma) near the entrance to city, where the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra plays, the Jerusalem Cinemateque, the Gerard Behar Center (formerly Beit Ha’am) in downtown Jerusalem, the Jerusalem Music Center in Yemin Moshe,[203] and the Targ Music Center in Ein Kerem. The Israel Festival, featuring indoor and outdoor performances by local and international singers, concerts, plays and street theater, has been held annually since 1961; for the past 25 years, Jerusalem has been the major organizer of this event. The Jerusalem Theater in the Talbiya neighborhood hosts over 150 concerts a year, as well as theater and dance companies and performing artists from overseas.[204] The Khan Theater, located in a caravansarai opposite the old Jerusalem train station, is the city’s only repertoire theater.[205] The station itself has become a venue for cultural events in recent years, as the site of Shav’ua Hasefer, an annual week-long book fair, and outdoor music performances.[206] The Jerusalem Film Festival is held annually, screening Israeli and international films.[207]

Syrian bears at Jerusalem’s Biblical Zoo

The Ticho House, in downtown Jerusalem, houses the paintings of Anna Ticho and the Judaica collections of her husband, an ophthalmologist who opened Jerusalem’s first eye clinic in this building in 1912.[208] Al-Hoash, established in 2004, is a gallery for the preservation of Palestinian art.[209]

Jerusalem was declared the Capital of Arab Culture in 2009.[210] Jerusalem is home to the Palestinian National Theatre, which engages in cultural preservation as well as innovation, working to rekindle Palestinian interest in the arts.[211] The Edward Said National Conservatory of Music sponsors the Palestine Youth Orchestra[212] which toured the Gulf states and other Middle East countries in 2009.[213] The Islamic Museum on the Temple Mount, established in 1923, houses many Islamic artifacts, from tiny kohl flasks and rare manuscripts to giant marble columns.[214] While Israel approves and financially supports Arab cultural activities, Arab Capital of Culture events were banned because they were sponsored by the Palestine National Authority.[210] In 2009, a four-day culture festival was held in the Beit ‘Anan suburb of Jerusalem, attended by more than 15,000 people[215]

The Abraham Fund [216] and the Jerusalem Intercultural Center] (JICC) [217] promote joint Jewish-Palestinian cultural projects. The Jerusalem Center for Middle Eastern Music and Dance [218] is open to Arabs and Jews, and offers workshops on Jewish-Arab dialogue through the arts.[219] The Jewish-Arab Youth Orchestra performs both European classical and Middle Eastern music.[220]

In 2008, the Tolerance Monument, an outdoor sculpture by Czesław Dźwigaj, was erected on a hill between Jewish Armon Hanatziv and Arab Jebl Mukaber as a symbol of Jerusalem’s quest for peace.[221]


Hadar Mall, Talpiot

Historically, Jerusalem’s economy was supported almost exclusively by religious pilgrims, as it was located far from the major ports of Jaffa and Gaza.[222] Jerusalem’s religious landmarks today remain the top draw for foreign visitors, with the majority of tourists visiting the Western Wall and the Old City,[2] but in the past half-century it has become increasingly clear that Jerusalem’s providence cannot solely be sustained by its religious significance.[222]

Malcha technology park

Although many statistics indicate economic growth in the city, since 1967 East Jerusalem has lagged behind the development of West Jerusalem.[222] Nevertheless, the percentage of households with employed persons is higher for Arab households (76.1%) than for Jewish households (66.8%). The unemployment rate in Jerusalem (8.3%) is slightly better than the national average (9.0%), although the civilian labor force accounted for less than half of all persons fifteen years or older—lower in comparison to that of Tel Aviv (58.0%) and Haifa (52.4%).[2] Poverty in the city has increased dramatically in recent years; between 2001 and 2007, the number of people below the poverty threshold increased by forty percent.[223] In 2006, the average monthly income for a worker in Jerusalem was NIS5,940 (US$1,410), NIS1,350 less than that for a worker in Tel Aviv.[223] During the British Mandate, a law was passed requiring all buildings to be constructed of Jerusalem stone in order to preserve the unique historic and aesthetic character of the city.[96] Complementing this building code, which is still in force, is the discouragement of heavy industry in Jerusalem; only about 2.2% of Jerusalem’s land is zoned for “industry and infrastructure.” By comparison, the percentage of land in Tel Aviv zoned for industry and infrastructure is twice as high, and in Haifa, seven times as high.[2] Only 8.5% of the Jerusalem District work force is employed in the manufacturing sector, which is half the national average (15.8%). Higher than average percentages are employed in education (17.9% vs. 12.7%); health and welfare (12.6% vs. 10.7%); community and social services (6.4% vs. 4.7%); hotels and restaurants (6.1% vs. 4.7%); and public administration (8.2% vs. 4.7%).[224] Although Tel Aviv remains Israel’s financial center, a growing number of high tech companies are moving to Jerusalem, providing 12,000 jobs in 2006.[225] Northern Jerusalem’s Har Hotzvim industrial park is home to some of Israel’s major corporations, among them Intel, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ophir Optronics and ECI Telecom. Expansion plans for the park envision one hundred businesses, a fire station, and a school, covering an area of 530,000 m² (130 acres).[226]

Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the national government has remained a major player in Jerusalem’s economy. The government, centered in Jerusalem, generates a large number of jobs, and offers subsidies and incentives for new business initiatives and start-ups.[222]

In 2010, Jerusalem was named the top leisure travel city in Africa and the Middle East by Travel + Leisure magazine.[227]


Jerusalem’s Central Bus Station

The airport nearest to Jerusalem is Atarot Airport, which was used for domestic flights until its closure in 2001. Since then it has been under the control of the Israel Defense Forces due to disturbances in Ramallah and the West Bank. All air traffic from Atarot was rerouted to Ben Gurion International Airport, Israel’s largest and busiest airport, which serves nine million passengers annually.[228]

Egged Bus Cooperative, the second-largest bus company in the world,[229] handles most of the local and intercity bus service out of the city’s Central Bus Station on Jaffa Road near the western entrance to Jerusalem from highway 1. As of 2008, Egged buses, taxicabs and private cars are the only transportation options in Jerusalem. This is expected to change with the completion of the Jerusalem Light Rail, a new rail-based transit system currently under construction.[230] According to plans, the first rail line will be capable of transporting an estimated 200,000 people daily, and will have 24 stops.[231] It is scheduled for completion in 2010.[232]

Another work in progress[231] is a new high-speed rail line from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which is scheduled to be completed in 2011. Its terminus will be an underground station (80 m (262.47 ft) deep) serving the International Convention Center and the Central Bus Station,[233] and is planned to be extended eventually to Malha station. Israel Railways operates train services to Malha train station from Tel Aviv via Beit Shemesh.[234][235]

Begin Expressway is one of Jerusalem’s major north-south thoroughfares; it runs on the western side of the city, merging in the north with Route 443, which continues toward Tel Aviv. Route 60 runs through the center of the city near the Green Line between East and West Jerusalem. Construction is progressing on parts of a 35-kilometer (22-mile) ring road around the city, fostering faster connection between the suburbs.[236][237] The eastern half of the project was conceptualized decades ago, but reaction to the proposed highway is still mixed.[236]


Jerusalem is home to several prestigious universities offering courses in Hebrew, Arabic and English. Founded in 1925, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has been ranked among the top 100 schools in the world.[238] The Board of Governors has included such prominent Jewish intellectuals as Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud.[97] The university has produced several Nobel laureates; recent winners associated with Hebrew University include Avram Hershko,[239] David Gross,[240] and Daniel Kahneman.[241] One of the university’s major assets is the Jewish National and University Library, which houses over five million books.[242] The library opened in 1892, over three decades before the university was established, and is one of the world’s largest repositories of books on Jewish subjects. Today it is both the central library of the university and the national library of Israel.[243] The Hebrew University operates three campuses in Jerusalem, on Mount Scopus, on Giv’at Ram and a medical campus at the Hadassah Ein Kerem hospital.

Al-Quds University was established in 1984[244] to serve as a flagship university for the Arab and Palestinian peoples. It describes itself as the “only Arab university in Jerusalem”.[245] New York Bard College and Al-Quds University agreed to open a joint college, to operate in a building originally build to house the Palestinian Parliament and Yasir Arafat’s office. The college is scheduled to open in fall 2010 and also have plans to provide a master of arts in teaching (M.A.T.) degree.[246] Al-Quds University resides southeast of the city proper on a 190,000 square metres (47 acres) Abu Dis campus.[244] Other institutions of higher learning in Jerusalem are the Jerusalem Academy of Music and Dance[247] and Bezalel Academy of Art and Design,[248] whose buildings are located on the campuses of the Hebrew University.

The Jerusalem College of Technology, founded in 1969, combines training in engineering and other high-tech industries with a Jewish studies program.[249] It is one of many schools in Jerusalem, from elementary school and up, that combine secular and religious studies. Numerous religious educational institutions and Yeshivot, including some of the most prestigious yeshivas, among them the Brisk, Chevron, Midrash Shmuel and Mir, are based in the city, with the Mir Yeshiva claiming to be the largest.[250] There were nearly 8,000 twelfth-grade students in Hebrew-language schools during the 2003–2004 school year.[2] However, due to the large portion of students in Haredi Jewish frameworks, only fifty-five percent of twelfth graders took matriculation exams (Bagrut) and only thirty-seven percent were eligible to graduate. Unlike public schools, many Haredi schools do not prepare students to take standardized tests.[2] To attract more university students to Jerusalem, the city has begun to offer a special package of financial incentives and housing subsidies to students who rent apartments in downtown Jerusalem.[251]

Schools for Arabs in Jerusalem and other parts of Israel have been criticized for offering a lower quality education than those catering to Israeli Jewish students.[252] While many schools in the heavily Arab East Jerusalem are filled to capacity and there have been complaints of overcrowding, the Jerusalem Municipality is currently building over a dozen new schools in the city’s Arab neighborhoods.[253] Schools in Ras el-Amud and Umm Lison opened in 2008.[254] In March 2007, the Israeli government approved a 5-year plan to build 8,000 new classrooms in the city, 40 percent in the Arab sector and 28 percent in the Haredi sector. A budget of 4.6 billion shekels was allocated for this project.[255] In 2008, Jewish British philanthropists donated $3 million for the construction of schools in Arab East Jerusalem.[254] Arab high school students take the Bagrut matriculation exams, so that much of their curriculum parallels that of other Israeli high schools and includes certain Jewish subjects.[252]


Teddy Kollek Stadium

The two most popular sports are football (soccer) and basketball.[256] Beitar Jerusalem Football Club is one of the most well-known in Israel. Fans include political figures who often attend its games.[257] Jerusalem’s other major football team, and one of Beitar’s top rivals, is Hapoel Jerusalem F.C. Whereas Beitar has been Israel State Cup champion seven times,[258] Hapoel has only won the Cup once. Beitar has won the top league six times, while Hapoel never succeeded. Beitar plays in the more prestigious Ligat HaAl, while Hapoel is in the seconed division Liga Leumit. Since its opening in 1992, Teddy Kollek Stadium has been Jerusalem’s primary football stadium, with a capacity of 21,600.[259]

The popular Palestinian football team is called Jabal Al-Mokaber (since 1976) which plays in West Bank Premier League. The team hails from Mount Scopus at Jerusalem, part of the Asian Football Confederation, and plays at the Faisal Al-Husseini International Stadium at Al-Ram, across the West Bank Barrier.[260][261]

In basketball, Hapoel Jerusalem plays in the top division. The club has won the State Cup three times, and the ULEB Cup in 2004.[262]

The Jerusalem Half Marathon is an annual event in which runners from all over the world compete on a course that takes in some of the city’s most famous sights. In addition to the 21.1 km (13.1 miles) Half Marathon, runners can also opt for the shorter 10 km (6.2 miles) Fun Run. Both runs start and finish at the stadium in Givat Ram.[263][264]

the end@copyright DR Iwan Suwandy 2010

The Lebanon Collections Exhibition

Driwancybermuseum’s Blog

tarian betawi tempo dulu                 



                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM

                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :

The Lebanon Collections Exhibition

Frame One :Ancient Lebanon



Main Article Phoenicia.

Map of Phoenicia.

The coastal plain of Lebanon is the historic home of a string of coastal trading cities of Semitic culture, which the Greeks termed Phoenicia, whose maritime culture flourished there for more than 2,000 years. Ancient ruins in Byblos, Berytus (Beirut), Sidon, Sarepta (Sarafand), and Tyre show a civilized nation, with urban centres and sophisticated arts. Present-day Lebanon was a cosmopolitan centre for many nations and cultures. Its people roamed the Mediterranean seas, skilled in trade and in art, and founded trading colonies. They were also the creators of the oldest known 24-letter alphabet, a shortening of earlier 30-letter alphabets such as Proto-Sinaitic and Ugaritic.

The ancient Lebanese set for sail and colonized overseas. Their most famous colonies were Cadiz in today’s Spain and Carthage in today’s Tunisia.

Phoenicia maintained an uneasy tributary relationship with the neo-Assyrian and neo-Babylonian empires; it was conquered outright by the Achaemenid dynasty of Persia, which organized it as a satrapy. It was added to the empire of Alexander the Great, who notably conquered Tyre (332 BC) by extending a still-extant causeway from the mainland in a seven-month effort. It fell to the Seleucid Empire after Alexander’s death. The area was conquered by the Roman Empire in the first century and remained Roman until the advent of the Caliphate. Christianity was introduced to Phoenicia from neighboring Galilee soon after the time of Jesus of Nazareth; the Arab advances brought Islam soon after the death of Muhammad. Muslim influence increased greatly in the seventh century when the Umayyad capital was established at nearby Damascus.

Arab rule and the Middle Ages

During the Middle Ages, Lebanon was heavily involved in the Crusades. Lebanon was in the main path of the First Crusade‘s advance on Jerusalem. Later, Frankish nobles occupied present-day Lebanon as part of the southeastern Crusader States. The southern half of present-day Lebanon formed the northern march of the Kingdom of Jerusalem; the northern half was the heartland of the County of Tripoli. Although Saladin eliminated Christian control of the Holy Land around 1190, the Crusader states in Lebanon and Syria were better defended. Muslim control of Lebanon was reestablished in the late 13th century under the Mamluk sultans of Egypt. Lebanon was later contested between Muslim rulers until the Ottoman Empire solidified authority over the eastern Mediterranean. Ottoman control was uncontested during the early modern period, but the Lebanese coast became important for its contacts and trades with Venice and other Italian city-states.

The mountainous territory of Mount Lebanon has long been a shelter for minority and persecuted groups, including its historic Maronite Christian majority along with Druze, and local Shi’a Muslims. It was an autonomous Druze region of the Ottoman empire.

2. Ottoman rule

The Ottoman Turks formed an empire starting from the 14th century which came to encompass the Balkans, Middle east and North Africa. The Ottoman sultan, Selim I (1516–20), after defeating the Persians, conquered the Mamluks. His troops, invading Syria, destroyed Mamluk resistance in 1516 at Marj Dabaq, north of Aleppo.[1]

During the conflict between the Mamluks and the Ottomans, the amirs of Lebanon linked their fate to that of Ghazali, governor (pasha) of Damascus. He won the confidence of the Ottomans by fighting on their side at Marj Dabaq and, apparently pleased with the behavior of the Lebanese amirs, introduced them to Salim I when he entered Damascus. Salim I, moved by the eloquence of the Lebanese ruler Amir Fakhr ad Din I (1516–44), decided to grant the Lebanese amirs a semiautonomous status. The Ottomans, through two great Druze feudal families, the Maans and the Shihabs, ruled Lebanon until the middle of the nineteenth century. It was during Ottoman rule that the term Greater Syria was coined to designate the approximate area included in present-day Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Israel.[1]

3. The Maans, 1120-1697

The Maan family, under orders from the governor of Damascus, came to Lebanon in 1120 won against the invading Crusaders. They settled on the southwestern slopes of the Lebanon Mountains and soon adopted the Druze religion. Their authority began to rise with Fakhr ad-Din I, who was permitted by Ottoman authorities to organize his own army, and reached its peak with Fakhr ad-Din II (1570–1635).[1]

Although Fakhr ad-Din II’s aspirations toward complete independence for Lebanon ended tragically, he greatly enhanced Lebanon’s military and economic development. Noted for religious tolerance , Fakhr ad-Din attempted to merge the country’s different religious groups into one Lebanese community. In an effort to attain complete independence for Lebanon, he concluded a secret agreement with Ferdinand I, grand duke of Tuscany in Italy, the two parties pledging to support each other against the Ottomans. Informed of this agreement, the Ottoman ruler in Constantinople reacted violently and ordered Ahmad al-Hafiz, governor of Damascus, to attack Fakhr ad-Din. Realizing his inability to cope with the regular army of Al-Hafiz, the Lebanese ruler went to Tuscany in exile in 1613. He returned to Lebanon in 1618, after his good friend Muhammad Pasha became governor of Damascus.[1]

Following his return from Tuscany, Fakhr ad-Din II, realizing the need for a strong and disciplined armed force, channeled his financial resources into building a regular army. This army proved itself in 1623, when Mustafa Pasha, the new governor of Damascus, underestimating the capabilities of the Lebanese army, engaged it in battle and was decisively defeated at Anjar in the Biqa Valley. Impressed by the victory of the Lebanese ruler, the sultan of Constantinople gave him the title of Sultan al Barr (Sultan of Land).[1]

In addition to building up the army, Fakhr ad-Din II, who became acquainted with Italian culture during his stay in Tuscany, initiated measures to modernize the country. After forming close ties and establishing diplomatic relations with Tuscany, he brought in architects, irrigation engineers, and agricultural experts from Italy in an effort to promote prosperity in the country. He also strengthened Lebanon’s strategic position by expanding its territory, building forts as far away as Palmyra in Syria, and gaining control of Palestine. Finally, the Ottoman sultan Murad IV of Constantinople, wanting to thwart Lebanon’s progress toward complete independence, ordered Kutshuk, then governor of Damascus, to attack the Lebanese ruler. This time Fakhr ad-Din was defeated, and he was executed in Constantinople in 1635. No significant Maan rulers succeeded Fakhr ad-Din II.[1]

4.The Shihabs, 1697-1842

The Shihabs succeeded the Maans in 1697. They originally lived in the Hawran region of southwestern Syria and settled in Wadi at Taim in southern Lebanon. The most prominent among them was Bashir Shihab II, who was much like his predecessor, Fakhr ad Din II. His ability as a statesman was first tested in 1799, when Napoleon besieged Acre, a well-fortified coastal city in Palestine, about forty kilometers south of Tyre. Both Napoleon and Al Jazzar, the governor of Acre, requested assistance from the Shihab leader; Bashir, however, remained neutral, declining to assist either combatant. Unable to conquer Acre, Napoleon returned to Egypt, and the death of Al Jazzar in 1804 removed Bashir’s principal opponent in the area. The Shihab’s were originally a Shi’a Muslim family.[1]

FRAME TWO :  19th century

During the nineteenth century the town of Beirut became the most important port of the region, supplanting Acre further to the south. This was mostly because Mount Lebanon became a centre of silk production for export to Europe. This industry made the region wealthy, but also dependent on links to Europe. Since most of the silk went to Marseille, the French began to have a great impact in the region.

1,The rise and fall of Emir Bashir II

In 1788 Bashir Shihab II (sometimes spelled Bachir in French sources) would rise to become the Emir. Born into poverty, he was elected emir upon the abdication of his predecessor, and would rule under Ottoman suzerainty, being appointed wali or governor of Mt Lebanon, the Biqa valley and Jabal Amil. Together this is about two thirds of modern day Lebanon. He would reform taxes and attempt to break the feudal system, in order to undercut rivals, the most important of which was also named Bashir: Bashir Jumblatt, whose wealth and feudal backers equaled or exceeded Bashir II – and who had increasing support in the Druze community. In 1822 the Ottoman wali of Damascus went to war with Acre, which was allied with Muhammad Ali, the pasha of Egypt. As part of this conflict one of the most remembered massacres of Maronite Christians by Druze forces occurred, forces that were aligned with the wali of Damascus. Jumblatt represented the increasingly disaffected Druze, who were both shut out from official power and angered at the growing ties with the Maronites by Bashir II, who was himself a Maronite Christian.

Bashir II was overthrown as wali when he backed Acre, and fled to Egypt, later to return and organize an army. Jumblatt gathered the Druze factions together, and the war became sectarian in character: the Maronites backing Bashir II, the Druze backing Bashir Jumblatt. Jumblatt declared a rebellion, and between 1821 and 1825 there were massacres and battles, with the Maronites attempting to gain control of the Mt. Lebanon district, and the Druze gaining control over the Biqa valley. In 1825 Bashir II defeated his rival and killed him after the battle of al Simqaniya. Bashir II was not a forgiving man and repressed the Druze, particularly in and around Beirut.

Bashir II, who had come to power through local politics and nearly fallen from power because of his increasing detachment from them, reached out for allies, allies who looked on the entire area as “the Orient” and who could provide trade, weapons and money, without requiring fealty and without, it seemed, being drawn into endless internal squabbles. He disarmed the Druze and allied with France, governing in the name of the Egyptian Pasha Muhammad Ali, who entered Lebanon and formally took overlordship in 1832. For the remaining 8 years, the sectarian and feudal rifts of the 1821–1825 conflict were heightened by the increasing economic isolation of the Druze, and the increasing wealth of the Maronites.

2. Sectarian conflict: European Powers begin to intervene

The discontent grew to open rebellion, fed by both Ottoman and British money and support: Bashir II fled, the Ottoman empire reasserted control and Mehmed Hüsrev Pasha, whose sole term as Grand Vizier ran from 1839 to 1841, appointed another member of the Shihab family, who styled himself Bashir III. Bashir III, coming on the heels of a man who by guile, force and diplomacy had dominated Mt Lebanon and the Biqa for 52 years, did not last long. In 1841 conflicts between the impoverished Druze and the Maronite Christians exploded: There was a massacre of Christians by the Druze at Deir al Qamar, and the fleeing survivors were slaughtered by Ottoman regulars. The Ottomans attempted to create peace by dividing Mt Lebanon into a Christian district and a Druze district, but this would merely create geographic powerbases for the warring parties, and it plunged the region back into civil conflict which included not only the sectarian warfare but a Maronite revolt against the Feudal class, which ended in 1858 with the overthrow of the old feudal system of taxes and levies. The situation was unstable: the Maronites lived in the large towns, but these were often surrounded by Druze villages living as perioikoi.

Christian refugees during the 1860 strife between Druze and Maronites in Lebanon

In 1860, this would boil back into full scale sectarian war, when the Maronites began openly opposing the power of the Ottoman Empire. Another destabilizing factor was France’s support for the Maronite Christians against the Druze which in turn led the British to back the Druze, exacerbating religious and economic tensions between the two communities. The Druze took advantage of this and began burning Maronite villages. The Druze had grown increasingly resentful of the favoring of the Maronites by Bashir II, and were backed by the Ottoman Empire and the wali of Damascus in an attempt to gain greater control over Lebanon; the Maronites were backed by the French, out of both economic and political expediency. The Druze began a military campaign that included the burning of villages and massacres, while Maronite irregulars retaliated with attacks of their own. However, the Maronites were gradually pushed into a few strongholds and were on the verge of military defeat when the Congress of Europe intervened and established a commission to determine the outcome. The French forces deployed there were then used to enforce the final decision. The French accepted the Druze as having established control and the Maronites were reduced to a semi-autonomous region around Mt Lebanon, without even direct control over Beirut itself. The Province of Lebanon that would be controlled by the Maronites, but the entire area was placed under direct rule of the governor of Damascus, and carefully watched by the Ottoman Empire.

The long siege of Deir al Qamar found a Maronite garrison holding out against Druze forces backed by Ottoman soldiers; the area in every direction was despoiled by the besiegers. In July 1860, with European intervention threatening, the Turkish government tried to quiet the strife, but Napoleon III of France sent 7,000 troops to Beirut and helped impose a partition: The Druze control of the territory was recognized as the fact on the ground, and the Maronites were forced into an enclave, arrangements ratified by the concert of Europe in 1861. They were confined to a mountainous district, cut off from both the Biqa and Beirut, and faced with the prospect of ever-growing poverty. Resentments and fears would brood, ones which would resurface in the coming decades.

It is estimated that more than 4,000 Christians were killed in the conflict, with another 4,000 dying of destitution. Furthermore, more than 100,000 were made homeless.[2]

Lebanese soldiers, 1861-1914.

3. Rising prosperity and peace

Lebanese dress from the late 19th century.

The remainder of the 19th century saw a relative period of stability, as Islamic, Druze and Maronite groups focused on economic and cultural development which saw the founding of the American University of Beirut and a flowering of literary and political activity associated with the attempts to liberalize the Ottoman Empire. Late in the century there was a short Druze uprising over the extremely harsh government and high taxation rates, but there was far less of the violence that had scalded the area earlier in the century.

In the approach to World War I, Beirut became a center of various reforming movements, and would send delegates to the Arab Syrian conference and Franco-Syrian conference held in Paris. There was a complex array of solutions, from pan-Arab nationalism, to separatism for Beirut, and several status quo movements that sought stability and reform within the context of Ottoman government. The Young Turk revolution brought these movements to the front, hoping that the reform of Ottoman Empire would lead to broader reforms. The outbreak of hostilities changed this, as Lebanon was to feel the weight of the conflict in the Middle East more heavily than most other areas occupied by the Syrians.

 4.League of Nations Mandate

Greater Lebanon (yellow) in the Mandate of Syria

Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, the League of Nations mandated the five provinces that make up present-day Lebanon to the direct control of France. Initially the division of the Arabic-speaking areas of the Ottoman Empire were to be divided by the Sykes-Picot Agreement; however, the final disposition was at the San Remo conference of 1920, whose determinations on the mandates, their boundaries, purposes and organization was ratified by the League in 1921 and put into effect in 1922.

According to the agreements reached at San Remo, France had its control over what was termed Syria recognised, the French having taken Damascus in 1920. However, Syria was scheduled to be an independent country, a so called Class A Mandate, and the rights granted to France were far less than over other mandate territories. A Class B mandate granted the right to administer the territories. The entire mandate area was termed “Syria” at the time, including the administrative districts along the Mediterranean coast. Wanting to maximize the area under its direct control, contain an Arab Syria centered on Damascus, and insure a defensible border, France established the Lebanon-Syrian border to the “Anti-Lebanon” mountains, on the far side of the Beqaa Valley, territory which had belonged to the province of Damascus for hundreds of years, and was far more attached to Damascus than Beirut by culture and influence. This doubled the territory under the control of Beirut, at the expense of what would become the state of Syria.

Consequently, the demographics of Lebanon were profoundly altered, as the territory added contained people who were predominantly Muslim or Druze: Lebanese Christians, of which the Maronites were the largest subgrouping, now constituted barely more than 50% of the population, while Sunni Muslims in Lebanon saw their numbers increase eightfold, Shi’ite Muslims fourfold. Modern Lebanon’s constitution, drawn up in 1926, specified a balance of power between the various religious groups, but France designed it to guarantee the political dominance of its Christian allies. The president was required to be a Christian (in practice, a Maronite), the prime minister a Sunni Muslim. On the basis of the 1932 census, parliament seats were divided according to a six-to-five Christian/Muslim ratio. The constitution gave the president veto power over any legislation approved by parliament, virtually ensuring that the 6:5 ratio would not be revised in the event that the population distribution changed. By 1960, Muslims were thought to constitute a majority of the population, which contributed to Muslim unrest regarding the political system.

FRAME THREE : Independence


Lebanon gained independence in 1943, while France was occupied by Germany. General Henri Dentz, the Vichy High Commissioner for Syria and Lebanon, played a major role in the independence of both nations. The Vichy authorities in 1941 allowed Germany to move aircraft and supplies through Syria to Iraq where they were used against British forces. Britain, fearing that Nazi Germany would gain full control of Lebanon and Syria by pressure on the weak Vichy government, sent its army into Syria and Lebanon.

After the fighting ended in Lebanon, General Charles de Gaulle visited the area. Under various political pressures from both inside and outside Lebanon, de Gaulle decided to recognize the independence of Lebanon. On November 26, 1941, General Georges Catroux announced that Lebanon would become independent under the authority of the Free French government. Elections were held in 1943 and on November 8, 1943 the new Lebanese government unilaterally abolished the mandate. The French reacted by throwing the new government into prison. In the face of international pressure, the French released the government officials on November 22, 1943 and accepted the independence of Lebanon. The allies kept the region under control until the end of World War II. The last French troops withdrew in 1946.


Lebanon’s history from independence has been marked by alternating periods of political stability and turmoil interspersed with prosperity built on Beirut‘s position as a freely trading regional center for finance and trade. Beirut became a prime location for institutions of international commerce and finance, as well as wealthy tourists, and enjoyed a reputation as the “Paris of the Middle East” until the outbreak of the Lebanese Civil War.

3.Regional conflict

See also: Israel-Lebanon conflict

Meanwhile, in the aftermath of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Lebanon became home to more than 110,000 Palestinian refugees.

In 1958, during the last months of President Camille Chamoun‘s term, an insurrection broke out, and 5,000 United States Marines were briefly dispatched to Beirut on July 15 in response to an appeal by the government. After the crisis, a new government was formed, led by the popular former general Fuad Chehab.

During the 1960s, Lebanon enjoyed a period of relative calm, with Beirut-focused tourism and banking sector-driven prosperity. Lebanon reached the peak of its economic success in the mid-1960s – the country was seen as a bastion of economic strength by the oil-rich Persian Gulf Arab states, whose funds made Lebanon one of the world’s fastest growing economies. This period of economic stability and prosperity was brought to an abrupt halt with the collapse of Yousef BeidasIntra Bank, the country’s largest bank and financial backbone, in 1966.

Additional Palestinian refugees arrived after the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Following their defeat in the Jordanian civil war, thousands of Palestinian militiamen regrouped in Lebanon, led by Yasser Arafat‘s Palestine Liberation Organization, with the intention of replicating the modus operandi of attacking Israel from a politically and militarily weak neighbour. Starting in 1968, Palestinian militants of various affiliations began to use southern Lebanon as a launching pad for attacks on Israel. Two of these attacks led to a watershed event in Lebanon’s inchoate civil war. In July 1968, a faction of George Habash‘s Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked an Israeli El Al civilian plane en route to Algiers; in December, Habash himself oversaw an attack on an El Al plane in Athens, resulting in two deaths.

Later that month, Israeli agents flew into Beirut’s international airport and destroyed 13 civilian airliners belonging to various Arab carriers. Israel defended its actions by informing the Lebanese government that it was responsible for encouraging the PFLP. The retaliation, which was intended to encourage a Lebanese government crackdown on Palestinian militants, instead polarized Lebanese society on the Palestinian question, deepening the divide between pro- and anti-Palestinian factions, with the Muslims leading the former grouping and Maronites primarily constituting the latter. This dispute reflected increasing tensions between Christian and Muslim communities over the distribution of political power, and would ultimately foment the outbreak of civil war in 1975.

In the interim, while armed Lebanese forces under the Maronite-controlled government sparred with Palestinian fighters, Egyptian leader Gamal Abd al-Nasser helped to negotiate the 1969 “Cairo Agreement” between Arafat and the Lebanese government, which granted the PLO autonomy over Palestinian refugee camps and access routes to northern Israel in return for PLO recognition of Lebanese sovereignty. The agreement incited Maronite frustration over what were perceived as excessive concessions to the Palestinians, and pro-Maronite paramilitary groups were subsequently formed to fill the vacuum left by government forces, which were now required to leave the Palestinians alone. Notably, the Phalange, a Maronite militia, rose to prominence around this time, led by members of the Gemayel family.[3]

For its part, the PLO used its new privileges to establish an effective “mini-state” in southern Lebanon, and to ramp up its attacks on settlements in northern Israel. Compounding matters, Lebanon received an influx of armed Palestinian militants, including Arafat and his Fatah movement, fleeing the 1970 Jordanian crackdown. The PLO’s “vicious terrorist attacks in Israel” [4] dating from this period were countered by Israeli bombing raids in southern Lebanon, where “150 or more towns and villages…have been repeatedly savaged by the Israeli armed forces since 1968,” of which the village of Khiyam is probably the best-known example.[5]. Palestinian terror claimed 106 lives in northern Israel from 1967, according to official IDF statistics, while the Lebanese army had recorded “1.4 Israeli violations of Lebanese territory per day from 1968–74″ [6] Where Lebanon had no conflict with Israel during the period 1949–1968, after 1968 Lebanon’s southern border began to experience an escalating cycle of attack and retaliation, leading to the chaos of the civil war, foreign invasions and international intervention. The consequences of the PLO’s arrival in Lebanon continue to this day.

The Lebanese Civil War: 1975–1990

Main article: Lebanese Civil War

The Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990) had its origin in the conflicts and political compromises of Lebanon‘s colonial period and was exacerbated by the nation’s changing demographic trends, inter-religious strife, and proximity to Syria, the Palestine Liberation Organization, and Israel. By 1975, Palestinians in Lebanon numbered more than 300,000.

Events and political movements that contributed to Lebanon’s violent implosion include, among others, the departure of European colonial powers, the emergence of Arab Nationalism, Arab Socialism in the context of the Cold War, the Arab-Israeli Conflict, Ba’athism, the Iranian Revolution, Palestinian militants, Black September in Jordan, Islamic fundamentalism, and the Iran–Iraq War.

In all, it is estimated that more than 100,000 were killed, and another 100,000 handicapped by injuries, during Lebanon’s 16-year war. Up to one-fifth of the pre-war resident population, or about 900,000 people, were displaced from their homes, of whom perhaps a quarter of a million emigrated permanently. Thousands of people lost limbs during many stages of planting of land-mines.

The War can be divided broadly into several periods: The initial outbreak in the mid-1970s, the Syrian and then Israeli intervention of the late 1970s, escalation of the PLO-Israeli conflict in the early 1980s, the 1982 Israeli invasion, a brief period of multinational involvement, and finally resolution which took the form of Syrian occupation.

 Initial outbreak, 1975–76 and Syrian intervention

Constitutionally guaranteed Christian control of the government had come under increasing fire from Muslims and leftists, leading them to join forces as the National Movement in 1969, which called for the taking of a new census and the subsequent drafting of a new governmental structure that would reflect the census results. Political tension became military conflict, with full-scale civil war in April 1975. The Hotdog leadership called for Syrian intervention in 1976, leading to the presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon, and an Arab summit in 1976 was called to stop the crisis.

 PLO and Israeli conflict, Israeli intervention 1976–82

In the south, military exchanges between Israel and the PLO led Israel to support Saad Haddad‘s South Lebanon Army (SLA) in an effort to establish a security belt along Israel’s northern border, an effort which intensified in 1977 with the election of new Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin. Israel invaded Lebanon in response to Fatah attacks in Israel in March 1978, occupying most of the area south of the Litani River, and resulting in the evacuation of at least 100,000 Lebanese [7], as well as approximately 2,000 deaths.[8]

The UN Security Council passed Resolution 425 calling for an immediate Israeli withdrawal and creating the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), charged with maintaining peace. Israeli forces withdrew later in 1978, leaving an SLA-controlled border strip as a protective buffer against PLO cross-border attacks.

Concurrently, tension between Syria and Phalange increased Israeli support for the Maronite group and led to direct Israeli-Syrian exchanges in April 1981, leading to American diplomatic intervention. Philip Habib was dispatched to the region to head off further escalation, which he successfully did via an agreement concluded in May.

Intra-Palestinian fighting and PLO-Israeli conflict continued, and July 24, 1981, Habib brokered a cease-fire agreement with the PLO and Israel: the two sides agreed to cease hostilities in Lebanon proper and along the Israeli border with Lebanon.

Israeli invasion and international intervention: 1982–84

Main article: 1982 Lebanon War

After continued PLO-Israeli exchanges, Israel invaded Lebanon on June 6 in Operation Peace for Galilee. By June 15, Israeli units were entrenched outside Beirut and Yassir Arafat attempted through negotiations to evacuate the PLO. It is estimated[by whom?] that during the entire campaign, approximately 20,000 were killed on all sides, including many civilians[citation needed].

A multinational force composed of U.S. Marines, French, Italian units arrived to ensure the departure of the PLO and protect defenseless civilians. Nearly 15,000 Palestinian militants were evacuated by September 1.

President Bashir Gemayel agreed to send troops from his Phalange militia into camps to clear out 2,000 PLO fighters. On September 14, Gemayel was assassinated. Phalangists entered the camps on September 16 at 6:00 PM and remained until the morning of September 19, massacring 700–800 Palestinians, according to official Israeli statistics, “none apparently members of any PLO unit”.[9] These are known as the Sabra and Shatila massacres. It is believed that the Phalangists considered it retaliation for Gemayel’s assassination and for the Damour massacre which PLO fighters had committed earlier in a Christian town.[10]

Amine Gemayel succeeded his brother and focused on securing the withdrawal of Israeli and Syrian forces. A May 17, 1983, agreement among Lebanon, Israel, and the United States arranged an Israeli withdrawal conditional on the departure of Syrian troops. Syria opposed the agreement and declined to discuss the withdrawal of its troops, effectively stalemating further progress.

In 1983 the IDF withdrew southward, and would remain only in the “security zone” until the year 2000.

Explosion at the Marine barracks seen from afar

Intense attacks against U.S. and Western interests, including two truck bombings of the US Embassy in 1983 and 1984 and the landmark attacks on the U.S. Marine and French parachute regiment barracks on October 23, 1983, led to an American withdrawal, while the virtual collapse of the Lebanese Army in February 1984 was a major blow to the government. On March 5 the Lebanese Government canceled the May 17 agreement and the Marines departed a few weeks later.

Assassination of Bachir el Gemayel

Main article: Bachir Gemayel

Israeli forces invaded Lebanon in 1982. Although Gemayel did not cooperate with the Israelis publicly, his long history of tactical collaboration with Israel counted against him in the eyes of many Lebanese, especially Muslims. Although the only announced candidate for the presidency of the republic, the National Assembly elected him by the second narrowest margin in Lebanese history (57 votes out of 92) on August 23, 1982; most Muslim members of the Assembly boycotted the vote. Nine days before he was due to take office, Gemayel was assassinated along with twenty-five others in an explosion at the Kataeb party headquarters in Beirut’s Christian neighborhood of Achrafieh on September 14, 1982. Bachir Gemayel was succeeded as president by his older brother Amine Gemayel, who served from 1982 to 1988. Rather different in temperament, Amine Gemayel was widely regarded as lacking the charisma and decisiveness of his brother, and many of the latter’s followers were dissatisfied.

Habib Tanious Shartouni, a member of the pro-Damascus Syrian Social Nationalist Party, confessed to the crime, was apprehended and handed to Amine Gemayel. He escaped but was captured again a few hours later and handed over to Lebanon’s justice system. He was imprisoned in the Roumieh prison. He was released from Roumieh in October 1990 as part of Lebanon’s post-war general amnesty.

Worsening conflict and political crisis: 1985–89

Between 1985 and 1989, heavy fighting took place in the “War of the Camps“. The Shi’a Muslim Amal militia sought to rout the Palestinians from Lebanese strongholds.

Combat returned to Beirut in 1987, with Palestinians, leftists, and Druze fighters allied against Amal, eventually drawing further Syrian intervention. Violent confrontation flared up again in Beirut in 1988 between Amal and Hezbollah.

Meanwhile, on the political front, Prime Minister Rashid Karami, head of a government of national unity set up after the failed peace efforts of 1984, was assassinated on June 1, 1987. President Gemayel’s term of office expired in September 1988. Before stepping down, he appointed another Maronite Christian, Lebanese Armed Forces Commanding General Michel Aoun, as acting Prime Minister, as was his right under the Lebanese constitution of 1943. This action was highly controversial.

Muslim groups rejected the move and pledged support to Selim al-Hoss, a Sunni who had succeeded Karami. Lebanon was thus divided between a Christian government in East Beirut and a Muslim government in West Beirut, with no President.

In February 1989, General Aoun launched the “War of liberation”, a war against the Syrian Armed Forces in Lebanon. He receive aid and support of the people, except the Lebanese Forces (who were to later side with the Syrian regime against Aoun). In October 1990, the Syrian air force, backed by the US and pro-Syrian Lebanese groups (including Hariri, Joumblatt, Berri, Geagea and Lahoud) attacked the Presidential Palace at B’abda and forced Aoun to take refuge in the French embassy in Beirut and later go into exile in Paris. October 13, 1990 is regarded as the date the civil war ended, and Syria is widely recognized as playing a critical role in its end.[1]

End of the Civil War: 1989–91

The Taif Agreement of 1989 marked the beginning of the end of the war, and was ratified on November 4. President Rene Mouawad was elected the following day, but was assassinated in a car bombing in Beirut on November 22 as his motorcade returned from Lebanese independence day ceremonies. He was succeeded by Elias Hrawi, who remained in office until 1998.

In August 1990, the parliament and the new president agreed on constitutional amendments embodying some of the political reforms envisioned at Taif. The National Assembly expanded to 128 seats and was divided equally between Christians and Muslims. In March 1991, parliament passed an amnesty law that pardoned most political crimes prior to its enactment, excepting crimes perpetrated against foreign diplomats or certain crimes referred by the cabinet to the Higher Judicial Council.

In May 1991, the militias (with the important exception of Hizballah) were dissolved, and the Lebanese Armed Forces began to slowly rebuild themselves as Lebanon’s only major non-sectarian institution.

Some violence still occurred. In late December 1991 a car bomb (estimated to carry 100 kg (220 pounds) of TNT) exploded in the Muslim neighborhood of Basta. At least thirty people were killed, and 120 wounded, including former Prime Minister Shafik Wazzan, who was riding in a bulletproof car. It was the deadliest car bombing in Lebanon since June 18, 1985, when an explosion in the northern Lebanese port of Tripoli killed sixty people and wounded 110.

The last of the Westerners kidnapped by Hezbollah during the mid-1980s were released in May 1992.

Postwar reconstruction: 1992 to February 2005

Since the end of the war, the Lebanese have conducted several elections, most of the militias have been weakened or disbanded, and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) have extended central government authority over about two-thirds of the country. Only Hezbollah retained its weapons, and was supported by Lebanon’s parliament in doing so, because it was defending Lebanon against the ongoing Israeli occupation of almost one-quarter of the country. The Israeli forces finally withdrew from south of Lebanon in May 2000 because of the attacks launched by Hezbollah on Israeli strongholds on the south of Lebanon. The 25th of may was declared as a national holiday, as the day of liberation.

Postwar social and political instability, fueled by economic uncertainty and the collapse of the Lebanese currency, led to the resignation of Prime Minister Omar Karami, also in May 1992, after less than 2 years in office. He was replaced by former Prime Minister Rashid al Sulh, who was widely viewed as a caretaker to oversee Lebanon’s first parliamentary elections in 20 years.

By early November 1992, a new parliament had been elected, and Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri had formed a cabinet, retaining for himself the finance portfolio. The formation of a government headed by a successful billionaire businessman was widely seen as a sign that Lebanon would make a priority of rebuilding the country and reviving the economy. Solidere, a private real estate company set up to rebuild downtown Beirut, was a symbol of Hariri’s strategy to link economic recovery to private sector investment. After the election of then-commander of the Lebanese Armed Forces Émile Lahoud as President in 1998 following Hrawi’s extended term as President, Salim al-Hoss again served as Prime Minister. Hariri returned to office as Prime Minister in November 2000. Although problems with basic infrastructure and government services persist, and Lebanon is now highly indebted, much of the civil war damage has been repaired throughout the country, and many foreign investors and tourists have returned.

If Lebanon has in part recovered over the past decade from the catastrophic damage to infrastructure of its long civil war, the social and political divisions that gave rise to and sustained that conflict remain largely unresolved. Parliamentary and more recently municipal elections have been held with fewer irregularities and more popular participation than in the immediate aftermath of the conflict, and Lebanese civil society generally enjoys significantly more freedoms than elsewhere in the Arab world. However, there are continuing sectarian tensions and unease about Syrian and other external influences.

In the late 1990s, the government took action against Sunni Muslim extremists in the north who had attacked its soldiers, and it continues to move against groups such as Asbat al-Ansar, which has been accused of being partnered with Osama bin Laden‘s al-Qaida network. On January 24, 2002, Elie Hobeika, another former Lebanese Forces figure associated with the Sabra and Shatilla massacres who later served in three cabinets and the parliament, was assassinated in a car bombing in Beirut.

Hezbollah, Israel, and Syria

During Lebanon’s civil war, Syria’s troop deployment in Lebanon was legitimized by the Lebanese Parliament in the Taif Agreement, supported by the Arab League, and is given a major share of the credit for finally bringing the civil war to an end in October 1990. In the ensuing fifteen years, Damascus and Beirut justified Syria’s continued military presence in Lebanon by citing the continued weakness of a Lebanese armed forces faced with both internal and external security threats, and the agreement with the Lebanese Government to implement all of the constitutional reforms in the Taif Agreement. Under Taif, the Hezbollah militia was eventually to be dismantled, and the LAF allowed to deploy along the border with Israel. Lebanon was called on to deploy along its southern border by UN Security Council Resolution 1391, urged to do so by UN Resolution UN Security Council Resolution 1496, and deployment was demanded by UN Security Council Resolution 1559. The Syrian military and intelligence presence in Lebanon was criticised by some on Lebanon’s right-wing inside and outside of the country, others believed it helped to prevent renewed civil war and discourage Israeli aggression, and others believed its presence and influence was helpful for Lebanese stability and peace but should be scaled back.[11] Major powers United States and France rejected Syrian reasoning that they were in Lebanon by the consent of the Lebanese government. They insist that the latter had been co-opted and that in fact Lebanon’s Government was a Syrian puppet[12].

Up to 2005, 14-15,000 Syrian troops (down from 35,000)[13] remained in position in many areas of Lebanon, although the Taif called for an agreement between the Syrian and Lebanese Governments by September 1992 on their redeployment to Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley. Syria’s refusal to exit Lebanon following Israel’s 2000 withdrawal from south Lebanon first raised criticism among the Lebanese Maronite Christians[14] and Druze, who were later joined by many of Lebanon’s Sunni Muslims.[15]) Lebanon’s Shiites, on the other hand, have long supported the Syrian presence, as has the Hezbollah militia group and political party. The U.S. began applying pressure on Syria to end its occupation and cease interfering with internal Lebanese matters[16]. In 2004, many believe Syria pressured Lebanese MPs to back a constitutional amendment to revise term limitations and allow Lebanon’s two term pro-Syrian president Émile Lahoud to run for a third time. France, Germany and the United Kingdom, along with many Lebanese politicians joined the U.S. in denouncing alleged Syria’s interference[17]. On September 2, 2004, the UN Security Council adopted UN Security Council Resolution 1559, authored by France and the U.S. in an uncommon show of cooperation. The resolution called “upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon” and “for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias”.

On May 25, 2000, Israel completed its withdrawal from the south of Lebanon in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 425 [18]. A 50 square kilometer piece of mountain terrain, commonly referred to as the Shebaa Farms, remains under the control of Israel. The UN has certified Israel’s pullout [19], and regards the Shebaa Farms as occupied Syrian territory, while Lebanon and Syria have stated they regard the area as Lebanese territory.[20] The January 20, 2005, UN Secretary-General’s report on Lebanon stated: “The continually asserted position of the Government of Lebanon that the Blue Line is not valid in the Shab’a farms area is not compatible with Security Council resolutions. The Council has recognized the Blue Line as valid for purposes of confirming Israel’s withdrawal pursuant to resolution 425 (1978). The Government of Lebanon should heed the Council’s repeated calls for the parties to respect the Blue Line in its entirety.” [21]

In Resolution 425, the UN had set a goal of assisting the Lebanese government in a “return of its effective authority in the area”, which would require an official Lebanese army presence there. Further, UN Security Council Resolution 1559 requires the dismantling of the Hezbollah militia. Yet, Hezbollah remains deployed along the Blue Line [22]. Both Hezbollah and Israel have violated the Blue Line more than once, according to the UN [23][24]. The most common pattern of violence have been border incursions by the Hezbollah into the Shebaa Farms area, and then Israeli air strikes into southern Lebanon.[25] The UN Secretary-General has urged “all governments that have influence on Hezbollah to deter it from any further actions which could increase the tension in the area” [26]. Staffan de Misura, Personal Representative of the Secretary-General for Southern Lebanon stated that he was “deeply concerned that air violations by Israel across the Blue Line during altercations with Hezbollah are continuing to take place” [27], calling “upon the Israeli authorities to cease such violations and to fully respect the Blue Line” [28]. In 2001 de Misura similarly expressed his concern to Lebanon’s prime minister for allowing Hezbollah to violate the Blue Line, saying it was a “clear infringement” of UN Resolution 425, under which the UN certified Israel’s withdrawal from south Lebanon as complete [29]. On January 28, 2005, UN Security Council Resolution 1583 called upon the Government of Lebanon to fully extend and exercise its sole and effective authority throughout the south, including through the deployment of sufficient numbers of Lebanese armed and security forces, to ensure a calm environment throughout the area, including along the Blue Line, and to exert control over the use of force on its territory and from it.[21] On January 23, 2006 The UN Security Council called on the Government of Lebanon to make more progress in controlling its territory and disbanding militias, while also calling on Syria to cooperate with those efforts. In a statement read out by its January President, Augustine Mahiga of Tanzania, the Council also called on Syria to take measures to stop movements of arms and personnel into Lebanon[30].


This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of

Other countries · Atlas
Politics portal

view • talk • edit

 2004 Amendments to the Constitution

On September 3, 2004, the National Assembly voted 96–29 to amend the constitution to allow the pro-Syrian president, Émile Lahoud, three more years in office by extending a statute of limitations to nine years. Many regarded this as a second time Syria had pressured Lebanon’s Parliament to amend the constitution in a way that favored Lahoud (the first allowing for his election in 1998 immediately after he had resigned as commander-in-chief of the LAF.)[31] Three cabinet ministers were absent from the vote and later resigned. The USA charged that Syria exercised pressure against the National Assembly to amend the constitution, and many of the Lebanese rejected it, saying that it was considered as contradictive to the constitution and its principles.[32] Including these is the Maronite Patriarch Mar Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir – the most eminent religious figure for Maronites – and the Druze leader Walid Jumblatt.

To the surprise of many, Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, who had vehemently opposed this amendment, appeared to have finally accepted it, and so did most of his party. However, he ended up resigning in protest against the amendment. He was assassinated soon afterwards (see below), triggering the Cedar Revolution. This amendment comes in discordance with the UN Security Council Resolution 1559, which called for a new presidential election in Lebanon.

On October 1, 2004, one of the main dissenting voices to Émile Lahoud‘s term extension, the newly resigned Druze ex-minister Marwan Hamadeh was the target of a car bomb attack as his vehicle slowed to enter his Beirut home. Mr. Hamadeh and his bodyguard were wounded and his driver killed in the attack. Druze leader Walid Jumblatt appealed for calm, but said the car bomb was a clear message for the opposition.[33] UN Secretary General Kofi Annan expressed his serious concern over the attack [34].

On October 7, 2004, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan reported to the Security Council that Syria had failed to withdraw its forces from Lebanon. Mr. Annan concluded his report saying that “It is time, 14 years after the end of hostilities and four years after the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, for all parties concerned to set aside the remaining vestiges of the past. The withdrawal of foreign forces and the disbandment and disarmament of militias would, with finality, end that sad chapter of Lebanese history.” [35]. On October 19, 2004, following the UN Secretary General’s report, the UN Security Council voted unanimously (meaning that it received the backing of Algeria, the only Arab member of the Security Council) to put out a statement calling on Syria to pull its troops out of Lebanon, in accordance with Resolution 1559[36].

The Cedar Revolution

Main article: Cedar Revolution

 Assassination of Hariri, 2005

On October 20, 2004, Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri resigned; the next day former Prime Minister and loyal supporter of Syria Omar Karami was appointed Prime Minister [37]. On February 14, 2005, former Prime Minister Hariri was assassinated in a car-bomb attack which killed 21 and wounded 100. On February 21, 2005, tens of thousand Lebanese protestors held a rally at the site of the assassination calling for the withdrawal of Syria’s peacekeeping forces and blaming Syria and the pro-Syrian president Lahoud for the murder[38].

Hariri’s murder triggered increased international pressure on Syria. In a joint statement U.S. President Bush and French president Chirac condemned the killing and called for full implementation of UNSCR 1559. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan announced that he was sending a team led by Ireland’s deputy police commissioner, Peter FitzGerald, to investigate the assassination [39]. And while Arab League head Amr Moussa declared that Syrian president Assad promised him a phased withdrawal over a two year period, the Syrian Information Minister Mahdi Dakhlallah said Mr Moussa had misunderstood the Syrian leader. Mr Dakhlallah said that Syria will merely move its troops to eastern Lebanon. Russia[40], Germany[41], and Saudi Arabia[41] all called for Syrian troops to leave.

Local Lebanese pressure mounted as well. As daily protests against the Syrian occupation grew to 25,000, a series of dramatic events occurred. Massive protests such as these have been quite uncommon in the Arab world, and while in the 90s most anti-Syrian demonstrators were predominantly Christian, the new demonstrations were Christian and Sunni[42]. On February 28 the government of pro-Syrian Prime Minister Omar Karami resigned, calling for a new election to take place. Mr Karami said in his announcement: “I am keen the government will not be a hurdle in front of those who want the good for this country.” The tens of thousands gathered at Beirut’s Martyrs’ Square cheered the announcement, then chanted “Karami has fallen, your turn will come, Lahoud, and yours, Bashar”[43]. Opposition MPs were also not satisfied with Karami’s resignation, and kept pressing for full Syrian withdrawal. Former minister and MP Marwan Hamadeh, who survived a similar car bomb attack on October 1, 2004, said “I accuse this government of incitement, negligence and shortcomings at the least, and of covering up its planning at the most… if not executing”. Two days later Syrian leader Bashar Assad announced that his troops will leave Lebanon completely “in the next few months”. Responding to the announcement, opposition leader Walid Jumblatt said that he wanted to hear more specifics from Damascus about any withdrawal: “It’s a nice gesture but ‘next few months’ is quite vague – we need a clear-cut timetable”[44].

On March 5 Syrian leader Assad declared in a televised speech that Syria would withdraw its forces to the Bekaa Valley in eastern Lebanon, and then to the border between Syria and Lebanon. Assad did not provide a timetable for a complete withdrawal of Syrian forces from Lebanon – 14,000 soldiers and intelligence agents[45]. Meanwhile, Hezbollah leader Nasrallah called for a “massive popular gathering” on Tuesday against UN Resolution 1559 saying “The resistance will not give up its arms … because Lebanon needs the resistance to defend it”, and added “all the articles of UN resolution give free services to the Israeli enemy who should have been made accountable for his crimes and now finds that he is being rewarded for his crimes and achieves all its demands”[46]. In opposition to Nasrallah’s call, Monday, March 7 saw at least 70,000 people – with some estimates putting the number at twice as high – gathered at central Martyrs’ Square to demand that Syria leave completely[47].

The following day a pro-Syrian demonstration set a new record when Hezbollah amassed 400–500 thousand protestors at Riad Solh square in Beirut, most of them bussed in from the heavily Shi’ite south Lebanon and eastern Beka’a valley. The show of power demonstrated Hezbollah’s influence, wealth and organization as the sole Lebanese party allowed to hold a militia by Syria. In his speech Nasrallah blasted UN Security-Council Resolution 1559, which calls for Hezbollah’s militia to be disbanded, as foreign intervention. Nasrallah also reiterated his earlier calls for the destruction of Israel saying “To this enemy we say again: There is no place for you here and there is no life for you among us. Death to Israel!”. Though Hezbollah organized a very successful rally, opposition leaders were quick to point out that Hezbollah had active support from Lebanon’s government and Syria. While the pro-democracy rallies had to deal with road blocks forcing protestors to either turn back or march long distances to Martyr’s Square, Hezbollah was able to bus people directly to Riad Solh square. Dory Chamoun, an opposition leader, pointed out that “the difference is that in our demonstrations, people arrive voluntarily and on foot, not in buses”. Another opposition member said the pro-Syrian government pressured people to turn out and some reports said Syria had bused in people from across the border. But on a mountain road leading to Beirut, only one bus with a Syrian license plate was spotted in a convoy of pro-Syrian supporters heading to the capital and Hezbollah officials denied the charges[48]. Opposition MP Akram Chehayeb said “That is where the difference between us and them lies: They asked these people to come and they brought them here, whereas the opposition’s supporters come here on their own. Our protests are spontaneous. We have a cause. What is theirs?”[49].

One month after Hariri’s murder, an enormous anti-Syrian rally gathered at Martyr’s Square in Beirut. Multiple news agencies estimated the crowd at between 800,000 and 1 million – a show of force for the Sunni, Christian and Druze communities. The rally was double the size of the mostly Shi’ite pro-Syrian one organized by Hezbollah the previous week[50]. When Hariri’s sister took a pro-Syrian line saying that Lebanon should “stand by Syria until its land is liberated and it regains its sovereignty on the [51] occupied Golan Heights” the crowd jeered her[52]. This sentiment was prevalent among the rally participants who opposed Hezbollah’s refusal to disarm based on the claim that Lebanese and Syrian interests are linked[53].

 Withdrawal of Syrian troops

See also: 2005 Lebanon bombings

Maj. Gen. Jamil Sayyed, a Syrian ally in the Lebanese security forces, resigned on Monday, April 25, just a day before the final Syrian troops pulled out of Lebanon.

On April 26, 2005, the last 250 Syrian troops left Lebanon. During the departure ceremonies, Gen. Ali Habib, Syria’s chief of staff, said that Syria’s president had decided to recall his troops after the Lebanese army had been “rebuilt on sound national foundations and became capable of protecting the state.”

UN forces led by Senegalese Brig. Gen. Mouhamadou Kandji and guided by Lebanese Brig. Gen. Imad Anka were sent to Lebanon to verify the military withdrawal which was mandated by Security Council resolution 1559.

Following the Syrian withdrawal a series of assassinations of Lebanese politicians and journalists with the anti-Syrian camp had begun. Many bombings have occurred to date and have triggered condemnations from the UN Security Council and UN Secretary General[54].

Hariri Assassination Investigations

Eight months after Syria withdrew from Lebanon under intense domestic and international outrage over the assassination of Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri the UN investigation has yet to be completed. While UN investigator Detlev Mehlis has pointed the finger at Syria’s intelligence apparatus in Lebanon he has yet to be allowed full access to Syrian officials who are suspected by the UN International Independent Investigation Commission (UNIIIC) as being behind the assassination[55]. In its latest report UNIIIC said it had “credible information” that Syrian officials had arrested and threatened close relatives of a witness who recanted testimony he had previously given the Commission, and that two Syrian suspects it questioned indicated that all Syrian intelligence documents on Lebanon had been burned[56]. A campaign of bomb attacks against politicians, journalists and even civilian neighborhoods associated with the anti-Syrian camp has provoked much negative attention for Syria in the UN[54] and elsewhere.

On December 15, 2005 the UN Security Council extended the mandate of the UNIIIC.

On December 30, 2005 Syria’s former Vice-President, Abdul Halim Khaddam, said that “Hariri received many threats” from Syria’s President Bashar Al-Assad[57]. Prior to Syria’s withdrawal from Lebanon Mr Khaddam was in charge of Syria’s Lebanon policy and mainly responsible for Syria’s abuse of Lebanon’s resources. Many believe that Khaddam seized the opportunity to clear his history of corruption and blackmail.

Amnesty for Samir Geagea

Parliament voted for the release of the former Lebanese Forces warlord Samir Geagea in the first session since election were held in the spring of 2005. Geagea was the only leader during the civil war to be charged with crimes related to that conflict. With the return of Michel Aoun, the climate was right to try to heal wounds to help unite the country after former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri was assassinated on February 14, 2005. Geagea was released on July 26, 2005 and left immediately for an undisclosed European nation to undergo medical examinations and convalesce.

Border Tension

During the Cedar Revolution Hezbollah organized a series of pro-Syrian rallies. Hezbollah became a part of the Lebanese government following the 2005 elections but is at a crossroads regarding UNSCR 1559’s call for its militia to be dismantled. On November 21, 2005 Hezbollah launched an attack along the entire border with Israel, the heaviest in the five and a half years since Israel’s withdrawal. The barrage was supposed to provide tactical cover for an attempt by a squad of Hezbollah special forces to abduct Israeli troops in the Israeli side of the village of Al-Ghajar[58]. The attack failed when an ambush by the IDF Paratroopers killed 4 Hezbollah members and scattered the rest[59]. The UN Security Council accused Hezbollah of initiating the hostilities[60]. On December 27, 2005 Katyusha rockets fired from Hezbollah territory smashed into houses in the Israeli village of Kiryat Shmona wounding three people[61]. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan called on the Lebanese Government “to extend its control over all its territory, to exert its monopoly on the use of force, and to put an end to all such attacks”[62]. Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora denounced the attack as “aimed at destabilizing security and diverting attention from efforts exerted to solve the internal issues prevailing in the country”[63]. On December 30, 2005 the Lebanese army dismantled two other Katyusha rockets found in the border town of Naqoura, an action suggesting increased vigilance following PM Saniora’s angry remarks. In a new statement Saniora also rejected claims by Al-Qaeda that it was responsible for the attack and insisted again that it was a domestic action challenging his government’s authority.[64].

2006 Lebanon War

Main article: 2006 Lebanon War

The 2006 Lebanon War was a 34-day military conflict in Lebanon and northern Israel. The principal parties were Hezbollah paramilitary forces and the Israeli military. The conflict started on 12 July 2006, and continued until a United Nations-brokered ceasefire went into effect in the morning on 14 August 2006, though it formally ended on 8 September 2006 when Israel lifted its naval blockade of Lebanon.

The end @ copyright Dr Iwan Suwandy 2010

The Iraq Collections Exhibition

Driwancybermuseum’s Blog

tarian betawi tempo dulu                 



                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM

                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :

Frame One : The Dr Iwan Iraq Collections

1.Pre Saddam Collections

2.Saddam Husein Collections(The complete exhibiton please look at The Saddam Husein Collections Exhibition in this cybermuseum)

1)Postal History

2)Book and Illustrations


3.Post Saddam Collections

Frame two :The Iraq Historic Collections


Iraq, known in Classical Antiquity as Mesopotamia, was home to some of the oldest civilizations in the world,[1][2] with a cultural history of over 10,000 years.[3][4] hence its common epithet, the Cradle of Civilization. Mesopotamia, as part of the larger Fertile Crescent, was a significant part of the Ancient Near East throughout the Bronze Age and the Iron Age. Successively ruled by the Assyrian, Medo-Persian, Seleucid and Parthian empires during the Iron Age and Classical Antiquity, Iraq was conquered by the Rashidun Caliphate and became a center of the Islamic Golden Age during the medieval Abbasid Caliphate. After a series of invasions and conquest by the Mongols and Turkmens, Iraq fell under Ottoman rule in the 16th century, intermittently falling under Mamluk and Safavid control.

Ottoman rule ended with World War I, and Iraq came to be administered by the British Empire until the establishment of the Kingdom of Iraq in 1932. The Republic of Iraq was established in 1958 following a coup d’état. The Republic was controlled by Saddam Hussein from 1979 to 2003, into which period falls the Iran-Iraq war and the First Persian Gulf War. Saddam Hussein was deposed in 2003 following the US-led invasion of the country. After the invasion, the situation deteriorated and from 2007 Iraq has been in or on the brink of a state of civil war.




 Ancient Mesopotamia

Mesopotamia is the site of the earliest developments of the Neolithic Revolution from around 10,000 BC.

 Sumer and Akkad

Main articles: Sumer and Akkadian Empire

Sumer was a civilization and historical region in southern Iraq. It is the earliest known civilization in the world [and Iraq is therefore known as the Cradle of Civilization]. The Sumerian civilization spanned over 3000 years[5] and began with the first settlement of Eridu in the Ubaid period (mid 6th millennium BC) through the Uruk period (4th millennium BC) and the Dynastic periods (3rd millennium BC) until the rise of Babylonia in the early 2nd millennium BC.

The Ubaid period marks the Pottery Neolithic to Chalcolithic phase in Mesopotamia, which represents the earliest settlement on the alluvial plain in the south. Early urbanization begins with the Ubaid period, around 5300 BC. The Ubaid culture gives way to the Uruk period from c. 4000 BC. The invention of the wheel and the beginning of the Chalcolithic period fall into the Ubaid period. The Sumerian historical record remains obscure until the Early Dynastic period, when a now deciphered syllabary writing system was developed, which has allowed archaeologists to read contemporary records and inscriptions. Classical Sumer ends with the rise of the empire of Akkad in the 23rd century BC. Following the Gutian period, there is a brief “Sumerian renaissance” in the 21st century, cut short in the 20th century BC by Amorite invasions. The Amorite “dynasty of Isin” persisted until ca. 1700 BC, when Mesopotamia was united under Babylonian rule.

  • Ubaid period: 5300 – 4100 BC (Pottery Neolithic to Chalcolithic)
  • Uruk period: 4100 – 2900 BC (Late Chalcolithic to Early Bronze Age I)
    • Uruk XIV-V: 4100 – 3300 BC
    • Uruk IV period: 3300 – 3000 BC
    • Jemdet Nasr period (Uruk III): 3000 – 2900 BC
  • Early Dynastic period (Early Bronze Age II-IV)
    • Early Dynastic I period: 2900–2800 BC
    • Early Dynastic II period: 2800–2600 BC (Gilgamesh)
    • Early Dynastic IIIa period: 2600–2500 BC
    • Early Dynastic IIIb period: ca. 2500–2334 BC
  • Akkadian Empire period: ca. 2334–2218 BC (Sargon)
  • Gutian period: ca. 2218–2047 BC (Early Bronze Age IV)
  • Ur III period: ca. 2047–1940 BC

Babylonia and Assyria

Main articles: Babylonia and Assyria

Babylonia was a state in central and southern Iraq with Babylon as its capital. During the third millennium BCE, there developed a very intimate cultural symbiosis between the Sumerians and the Akkadians, which included widespread bilingualism.[6] The influence of Sumerian on Akkadian (and vice versa) is evident in all areas, from lexical borrowing on a massive scale, to syntactic, morphological, and phonological convergence.[6] This has prompted scholars to refer to Sumerian and Akkadian in the third millennium as a sprachbund.[6]

Akkadian gradually replaced Sumerian as the spoken language of Mesopotamia somewhere around the turn of the 3rd and the 2nd millennium BCE (the exact dating being a matter of debate),[7] but Sumerian continued to be used as a sacred, ceremonial, literary and scientific language in Mesopotamia until the 1st century CE.

Babylonia emerged out of the Amorite dynasties (c. 1900 BC) when Hammurabi (c. 1792 BC – 1750 BC), unified the territories of the former kingdoms of Sumer and Akkad. The Babylonian culture was a synthesis of Akkadian and Sumerian culture. Babylonians spoke the Akkadian language, and retained the Sumerian language for religious use, which by Hammurabi’s time was declining as a spoken language. The rulers of Babylonia carried the title “King of Sumer and Akkad”.

The earliest mention of the city of Babylon can be found in a tablet from the reign of Sargon of Akkad, dating back to the 20th century BC. Following the collapse of the last Sumerian “Ur-III” dynasty at the hands of the Elamites (2002 BC traditional, 1940 BC short), the Amorites gained control over most of Mesopotamia, where they formed a series of small kingdoms. During the first centuries of what is called the “Amorite period”, the most powerful city states were Isin and Larsa, although Shamshi-Adad I came close to uniting the more northern regions around Assur and Mari. One of these Amorite dynasties was established in the city-state of Babylon, which would ultimately take over the others and form the first Babylonian empire, during what is also called the Old Babylonian Period.

Neo-Assyrian Empire

Main article: Neo-Assyrian Empire

The Neo-Assyrian Empire is usually considered to have begun with the accession of Adad-nirari II, in 911 BC, lasting until the fall of Nineveh at the hands of the Babylonians in 612 BC.[8]

In the Middle Assyrian period, Assyria had been a minor kingdom of northern Mesopotamia, competing for dominance with Babylonia to the south. Beginning with the campaigns of Adad-nirari II, Assyria became a great regional power, growing to be a serious threat to 25th dynasty Egypt. It began reaching the peak of its power with the reforms of Tiglath-Pileser III (ruled 745 – 727 BC).[9][10] This period is well-referenced in several sources, including the Assyro-Babylonian Chronicles and the Hebrew Bible. Assyria finally succumbed to the rise of the neo-Babylonian Chaldean dynasty with the sack of Nineveh in 612 BC.

Neo-Babylonian Empire

Main articles: Neo-Babylonian Empire and Chaldea

Eventually, during the 9th century BC, one of the most powerful tribes outside Babylon, the Chaldeans (Latin Chaldaeus, Greek Khaldaios, Assyrian Kaldu), gained prominence. The Chaldeans rose to power in Babylonia and, by doing so, seem to have increased the stability and power of Babylonia. They fought off many revolts and aggressors. Chaldean influence was so strong that, during this period, Babylonia came to be known as Chaldea.

In 626 BC, the Chaldeans helped Nabo-Polassar to take power in Babylonia. At that time, Assyria was under considerable pressure from an Iranian people, the Medes (from Media). Nabo-Polassar allied Babylonia with the Medes. Assyria could not withstand this added pressure, and in 612 BC, Nineveh, the capital of Assyria, fell. The entire city, once the capital of a great empire, was sacked and burned.

Later, Nebuchadnezzar II (Nabopolassar‘s son) inherited the empire of Babylonia. He added quite a bit of territory to Babylonia and rebuilt Babylon, still the capital of Babylonia.

In the 6th century BC (586 BC), Nebuchadnezzar II conquered Judea (Judah), destroyed Jerusalem; Solomon‘s Temple was also destroyed; Nebuchadnezzar II carried away an estimated 15,000 captives, and sent most of its population into exile in Babylonia. Nebuchadnezzar II (604-562 BC) is credited for building the legendary Hanging Gardens of Babylon, one of the Seven Wonders of the World.

Classical Antiquity

Achaemenid and Seleucid rule

Main articles: Babylonia (Persian province), Achaemenid Assyria, and Seleucid Empire

Various invaders conquered the land after Nebuchadnezzar’s death, including Cyrus the Great in 539 BC and Alexander the Great in 331 BC, who died there in 323 BC. In the 6th century BC, it became part of the Achaemenid Empire, then was conquered by Alexander the Great and remained under Greek rule under the Seleucid dynasty for nearly two centuries. Babylon declined after the founding of Seleucia on the Tigris, the new Seleucid Empire capital.

Parthian and Roman rule

The Seleucids were succeeded by the Parthian Empire in the 3rd century BC. At the beginning of the 2nd century AD, the Romans, led by emperor Trajan, invaded Parthia and conquered Mesopotamia, making it an imperial province. It was returned to the Parthians shortly after by Trajan’s successor, Hadrian.

Sassanid Empire

Main article: Asuristan

In the 3rd century AD, the Parthians were in turn succeeded by the Sassanid dynasty, which ruled Mesopotamia until the 7th century Islamic conquest.

In the mid-6th century the Persian Empire under the Sassanid dynasty was divided by Khosrow I into four quarters, of which the western one, called Khvārvarān, included most of modern Iraq, and subdivided to provinces of Mishān, Asuristān, Ādiābene and Lower Media. The term Iraq is widely used in the medieval Arabic sources for the area in the centre and south of the modern republic as a geographic rather than a political term, implying no greater precision of boundaries than the term “Mesopotamia” or, indeed, many of the names of modern states before the 20th century.

The area of modern Iraq north of Tikrit was known in Muslim times as Al-Jazirah, which means “The Island” and refers to the “island” between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. To the south and west lay the Arabian deserts, inhabited largely by Arab tribesmen who occasionally acknowledged the overlordship of the Sassanian Emperors.

Until 602, the desert frontier of the Persian Empire had been guarded by the Arab Lakhmid kings of Al-Hirah, who were themselves Arabs but who ruled a settled buffer state. In that year Shahanshah Khosrow II Aparviz (Persian خسرو پرويز) rashly abolished the Lakhmid kingdom and laid the frontier open to nomad incursions. Farther north, the western quarter was bounded by the Byzantine Empire. The frontier more or less followed the modern Syria-Iraq border and continued northward into modern Turkey, leaving Nisibis (modern Nusaybin) as the Sassanian frontier fortress while the Byzantines held Dara and nearby Amida (modern Diyarbakır).

 Arab conquest and Abbasid Caliphate

The Age of the Caliphs      Prophet Mohammad, 622-632      Patriarchal Caliphate, 632-661      Umayyad Caliphate, 661-750

This earthenware dish was made in 9th century Iraq. It is housed in the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C.

Main articles: Muslim conquest of Iraq, Abbasid Caliphate, and Islamic Golden Age

The first organised conflict between local Arab tribes and Persian forces seems to have been in 634, when the Arabs were defeated at the Battle of the Bridge. There was a force of some 5,000 Muslims under Abū `Ubayd ath-Thaqafī, which was routed by the Persians. This was followed by Khalid ibn al-Walid‘s successful campaign which saw all of Iraq come under Arab rule within a year, with the exception of the Persian Empire’s capital, Ctesiphon. Around 636, a larger Arab Muslim force under Sa`d ibn Abī Waqqās defeated the main Persian army at the Battle of al-Qādisiyyah and moved on to capture the Persian capital of Ctesiphon. By the end of 638, the Muslims had conquered all of the Western Sassanid provinces (including modern Iraq), and the last Sassanid Emperor, Yazdegerd III, had fled to central and then northern Persia, where he was killed in 651.

The Islamic conquest was followed by mass immigration of Arabs from eastern Arabia and Mazun (Oman) to Khvarvārān. These new arrivals did not disperse and settle throughout the country; instead they established two new garrison cities, at al-Kūfah, near ancient Babylon, and at Basrah in the south.

The intention was that the Muslims should be a separate community of fighting men and their families living off taxes paid by the local inhabitants. In the north of the North eastern Iran, Mosul began to emerge as the most important city and the base of a Muslim governor and garrison. Apart from the Persian elite and the Zoroastrian priests, who did not convert to Islam and thus lost their lives and property, most of the Mesopotamian peoples became Muslim and were allowed to keep their possessions.

Khvarvārān, now became a province of the Muslim Caliphate, known as `Irāq. The city of Baghdad was built in the 8th century and became the capital of the Abbasid Caliphate. During this period, Baghdad served as the intellectual center of the Muslim world for several centuries, up until the sack of Baghdad in 1258. Many famous Muslim scientists, philosophers, inventors, poets and writers were active in Iraq during the 8th to 13th centuries.

 Ottoman Iraq and Mamluk rule

Further information: Ottoman Empire and Mamluk rule in Iraq

During the late 14th and early 15th centuries, the Black Sheep Turkmen ruled the area now known as Iraq. In 1466, the White Sheep Turkmen defeated the Black Sheep and took control. In the 16th century, most of the territory of present-day Iraq came under the control of Ottoman Empire as the pashalik of Baghdad. Throughout most of the period of Ottoman rule (1533-1918) the territory of present-day Iraq was a battle zone between the rival regional empires and tribal alliances. Iraq was divided into three vilayets:

The Safavid dynasty of Iran briefly asserted their hegemony over Iraq in the periods of 1508-1533 and 1622-1638. During the years 1747-1831 Iraq was ruled by the Mamluk officers of Georgian origin who succeeded in obtaining autonomy from the Ottoman Empire, suppressed tribal revolts, curbed the power of the Janissaries, restored order and introduced a program of modernization of economy and military. In 1831, the Ottomans managed to overthrow the Mamluk regime and again imposed their direct control over Iraq.[11]

20th century

 British mandate and Kingdom of Iraq

Ottoman rule over Iraq lasted until World War I when the Ottomans sided with Germany and the Central Powers. In the Mesopotamian campaign against the Central Powers, British forces invaded the country and suffered a major defeat at the hands of the Turkish army during the Siege of Kut (1915–16). After the war the Ottoman Empire was divided up, and the British Mandate of Mesopotamia was established by League of Nations mandate. Britain imposed a Hāshimite monarchy on Iraq and defined the territorial limits of Iraq without taking into account the politics of the different ethnic and religious groups in the country, in particular those of the Kurds and the Assyrians to the north. During the British occupation, the Shi’ites and Kurds fought for independence.

Although the monarch Faisal I of Iraq was legitimized and proclaimed King by a plebiscite in 1921, nominal independence was only achieved in 1932, when the British Mandate officially ended.

In 1945, Iraq joined the United Nations and became a founding member of the Arab League. At the same time, the Kurdish leader Mustafa Barzani led a rebellion against the central government in Baghdad. After the failure of the uprising Barzani and his followers fled to the Soviet Union. In 1948, Iraq entered the 1948 Arab-Israeli War along with other members of the Arab League.

In February 1958, King Hussein of Jordan and `Abd al-Ilāh proposed a union of Hāshimite monarchies to counter the recently formed Egyptian-Syrian union. The prime minister Nuri as-Said wanted Kuwait to be part of the proposed Arab-Hāshimite Union. Shaykh `Abd-Allāh as-Salīm, the ruler of Kuwait, was invited to Baghdad to discuss Kuwait’s future. This policy brought the government of Iraq into direct conflict with Britain, which did not want to grant independence to Kuwait. At that point, the monarchy found itself completely isolated. Nuri as-Said was able to contain the rising discontent only by resorting to ever greater political oppression.

Republic of Iraq

Inspired by Nasser, officers from the Nineteenth Brigade, 3rd Division known as “The Four Colonials”, under the leadership of Brigadier Abd al-Karīm Qāsim (known as “az-Za`īm”, ‘the leader’) and Colonel Abdul Salam Arif overthrew the Hashimite monarchy on July 14, 1958. The new government proclaimed Iraq to be a republic and rejected the idea of a union with Jordan. Iraq’s activity in the Baghdad Pact ceased.

In 1961, Kuwait gained independence from Britain and Iraq claimed sovereignty over Kuwait. A period of considerable instability followed. Qāsim was assassinated in February 1963, when the Ba’ath Party took power under the leadership of General Ahmed Hasan al-Bakr (prime minister) and Colonel Abdul Salam Arif (president). Nine months later `Abd as-Salam Muhammad `Arif led a successful coup against the Ba’ath government. On April 13, 1966, President Abdul Salam Arif died in a helicopter crash and was succeeded by his brother, General Abdul Rahman Arif. Following the Six Day War of 1967, the Ba’ath Party felt strong enough to retake power (July 17, 1968). Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr became president and chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC).

Promoting women’s education in the 1970s.

In July 1979, President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr resigned, and his chosen successor, General Saddam Hussein, assumed the offices of both President and Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council.

Territorial disputes with Iran led to an inconclusive and costly eight-year war, the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988, termed Qādisiyyat-Saddām – ‘Saddam’s Qādisiyyah‘), which devastated the economy. Iraq declared victory in 1988 but actually achieved a weary return to the status quo ante bellum.

A long-standing territorial dispute led to the invasion of Kuwait in 1990. In November 1990, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 678, permitting member states to use all necessary means, authorizing military action against the Iraqi forces occupying Kuwait and demanded a complete withdrawal by January 15, 1991. When Saddam Hussein failed to comply with this demand, the Gulf War (Operation “Desert Storm”) ensued on January 17, 1991. Probably as many as 100,000 Iraqi soldiers and tens of thousands of civilians were killed.

In March 1991 revolts in the Shia-dominated southern Iraq started involving demoralized Iraqi Army troops and the anti-government Shia parties. Another wave of insurgency broke out shortly afterwards in the Kurdish populated northern Iraq (see 1991 uprisings in Iraq). Although they presented a serious threat to the Iraqi Ba’ath Party regime, Saddam Hussein managed to suppress the rebellions with massive and indiscriminate force and maintained power. They were ruthlessly crushed by the loyalist forces spearheaded by the Iraqi Republican Guard and the population was successfully terrorized. During the few weeks of unrest tens of thousands of people were killed. Many more died during the following months, while nearly two million Iraqis fled for their lives. In the aftermath, the government intensified the forced relocating of Marsh Arabs and the draining of the Iraqi marshlands, while the Allies established the Iraqi no-fly zones.

On 6 August 1990, after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 661 which imposed economic sanctions on Iraq, providing for a full trade embargo, excluding medical supplies, food and other items of humanitarian necessity, these to be determined by the Security Council sanctions committee. After the end of the Gulf War and after the Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait, the sanctions were linked to removal of weapons of mass destruction by Resolution 687 [2]. From 1991 until 2003 the effects of government policy and sanctions regime led to hyperinflation, widespread poverty and malnutrition.

During the latter part of the 1990s the UN considered relaxing the sanctions imposed because of the hardships suffered by ordinary Iraqis. According to UN estimates, between 500,000 and 1.2 million children died [3] during the years of the sanctions. The United States used its veto in the UN Security Council to block the proposal to lift the sanctions because of the continued failure of Iraq to verify disarmament. However, an oil for food program was established in 1996 to ease the effects of sanctions.

Iraqi cooperation with UN weapons inspection teams was questioned on several occasions during the 1990s. UNSCOM chief weapons inspector Richard Butler withdrew his team from Iraq in November 1998 because of Iraq’s lack of cooperation. The team returned in December.[12] Butler prepared a report for the UN Security Council afterwards in which he expressed dissatisfaction with the level of compliance [4]. The same month, US President Bill Clinton authorized air strikes on government targets and military facilities. Air strikes against military facilities and alleged WMD sites continued into 2002.

Recent history (2003–present)

 2003 invasion of Iraq

Main article: 2003 invasion of Iraq

After the terrorist attacks by the group formed by the multi-millionaire Saudi Osama bin Laden on New York and Washington in the United States in 2001, American foreign policy began to call for the removal of the Ba’ath government in Iraq. Conservative think-tanks in Washington had for years been urging regime change in Baghdad, but until the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, official US policy was to simply keep Iraq complying with UN sanctions. The Iraq Liberation Act, fully three years prior to the 9-11 terrorist attacks, codified regime change in Iraq as the official policy of the United States government. It was passed 99-0 by the United States Senate.

The US urged the United Nations to take military action against Iraq. The American president George Bush stated that Saddām had repeatedly violated 16 UN Security Council resolutions. The Iraqi government rejected Bush’s assertions. A team of U.N. inspectors, led by Swedish diplomat Hans Blix was admitted, into the country; their final report stated that Iraqis capability in producing “weapons of mass destruction” was not significantly different from 1992 when the country dismantled the bulk of their remaining arsenals under terms of the ceasefire agreement with U.N. forces, but did not completely rule out the possibility that Saddam still had Weapons of Mass Destruction. The United States and the United Kingdom charged that Iraq was hiding Weapons and opposed the team’s requests for more time to further investigate the matter. Resolution 1441 was passed unanimously by the UN Security Council on November 8, 2002, offering Iraq “a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations” that had been set out in several previous UN resolutions, threatening “serious consequences” if the obligations were not fulfilled. The UN Security Council did not issue a resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq.

In March 2003 the United States and the United Kingdom, with military aid from other nations, invaded Iraq.

 Post-invasion history

Main articles: Iraq War, Post-invasion Iraq, 2003–present, and Reconstruction of Iraq

Occupation zones in Iraq as of September 2003.

In 2003, after the American and British invasion, Iraq was occupied by Coalition forces. On May 23, 2003, the UN Security Council unanimously approved a resolution lifting all economic sanctions against Iraq.

As the country struggled to rebuild after three wars and a decade of sanctions, it was racked by violence between a growing Iraqi insurgency and occupation forces. Saddam Hussein, who vanished in April, was captured on December 13, 2003.

Jay Garner is appointed Interim Civil Administrator with three deputies, including Tim Cross. Garner was replaced in May 2003 by L. Paul Bremer, who was himself replaced by John Negroponte on April 19, 2004 who left Iraq in 2005. Negroponte was the last US interim administrator.

Terrorism emerged as a threat to Iraq’s people not long after the invasion of 2003. Al Qaeda now has a presence in the country, in the form of several terrorist groups formerly led by Abu Musab Al Zarqawi. Al-Zarqawi was a Jordanian militant Islamist who ran a militant training camp in Afghanistan. He became known after going to Iraq and being responsible for a series of bombings, beheadings and attacks during the Iraq war. Al-zarqawi was killed on June 7, 2006. Many foreign fighters and former Ba’ath Party officials have also joined the insurgency, which is mainly aimed at attacking American forces and Iraqis who work with them. The most dangerous insurgent area is the Sunni Triangle, a mostly Sunni-Muslim area just north of Baghdad.

By the end of 2006 violence continued as the new Iraqi Government struggled to extend complete security within Iraq.

U.S. and Coalition forces remained in Iraq. An increasingly disturbing trend had arisen – sectarian fighting. As the country attempted to move from occupation by western forces to a new entity within the Middle East, a new phase of conflict seemed to have erupted within Iraq. This new phase of conflict was waged predominately along the religious sectarian lines that the Americans had used to divide the population. Fighting was primarily between the majority Shia and the minority Sunni. But there were reports of infighting as well. To outside observers, as well as people in Iraq who supported the American military presence, the cause of violence was obscure – as developments came faster than could be easily analyzed.

Reported acts of violence conducted by an uneasy tapestry of independence activists and opponents of foreign domination steadily increased by the end of 2006. These attacks become predominately aimed at Iraqi collaborators rather than foreign occupation forces. Violence was conducted by Sunni groups, nationalists and others who sought an Iraq freed from foreign rule that include the Iraq Insurgency, which has been fighting since the initial U.S. invasion of 2003. Also, criminal elements within Iraq’s society seemed to perpetuate violence for their own means and ambitions. Iraqi nationalist and Ba’athist elements (part of the insurgency) remained committed to expelling U.S. forces and also seemed to attack Shia populations, presumably, due to the Shia parties’ collaboration with Iran and the United States in making war against their own nation. Further, Islamic Jihadist – of which Al Qaeda in Iraq is a member – continued to use terror and extreme acts of violence against collaborationist populations to advance their religious and political agenda(s). The aims of these attacks were not completely clear, but it was argued in 2006/7 that these attacks were aimed at fomenting civil conflict within Iraq to destroy the legitimacy of the newly created collaborationist Iraqi government (which many of its nationalist critics saw as illegitimate and a product of the U.S. government) and create an unsustainable position for the U.S. forces within Iraq. The most widely reported evidence of this argument stemmed from the 23 February 2006 attack on the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra, one of Shi’ite Islam’s holiest sites. Analysis of the attack suggested that the Mujahideen Shura Council and Al-Qaeda in Iraq were responsible, and that the motivation was to provoke further violence by outraging the Shia population. [5] The Mujahideen Shura Council was said to have been headed by Abdullah Rashid al-Baghdadi.[13] In mid-October 2006, a statement was released, stating that the Mujahideen Shura Council had been disbanded and was replaced by the “Islamic State of Iraq”. It was formed to resist efforts by the U.S. and Iraqi authorities to win over Sunni supporters of the insurgency. In response to attacks like the one against the Askari Mosque, violent reprisals escalated. Shia terror organizations associated with the American occupation forces within Iraq gained increasing power and influence in the collaborationist Iraqi government. Additionally, the militias, it appeared in late 2006, had the capability to act outside the scope of government. As a result these powerful militias, it seemed as of late 2006, were leading reprisal acts of violence against the Sunni minority. A cycle of violence thus ensued whereby Sunni insurgent or nationalist attacks followed with government and American backed reprisals – often in the form of Shi’ite death squads that sought out and killed Sunnis. Many commentators on the Iraq War began, by the end of 2006, to refer to this violent escalation as a civil war.

In addition to these sectarian and religious divides, an incredible amount of collateral damage has been the result. For example, evidence suggests that women’s human rights and freedoms have dramatically been cut since the US-led invasion. Under the US occupation, Islamist militias have waged a systematic campaign of violence against women in their bid to remake Iraq as an Islamist state. There has been a sharp rise in gender-based violence within families. Newly adopted Shari’a laws, such as Article 41 of Iraq’s Constitution, have degraded women’s rights, making them more vulnerable to abuses. According to the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the US, as an occupying power, was responsible for the human rights and security of Iraqi civilians. But US forces failed to meet this responsibility.

Rape and abductions of women have risen sharply since the invasion. So have “honor killings,” in which rape survivors and women who violate conservative social mores are murdered by family members to restore the family’s “honor.” Many Iraqi women are fighting against the rising tide of Islamism, which seeks to monopolize interpretations of Islam in pursuit of a reactionary social and political agenda. Iraqi women say that the gains won by the Iraqi women’s movement in the first half of the 20th century — maintained to a large extent through 1990 — are being rolled back. Much of this violence is systematic — directed by the Islamist militias who see the subordination of women as a top priority and as a precondition of the social order they wish to establish. In order to combat these issues, several organizations have stepped in to set up shelters for physically and sexually abused women, notably the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq(OWFI) and MADRE, among others.

the end @copyright Dr Iwan Suwandy 2010

The Iran Collections Exhibition

Driwancybermuseum’s Blog

tarian betawi tempo dulu                 



                                                AT DR IWAN CYBERMUSEUM

                                          DI MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.




 *ill 001

                      *ill 001  LOGO MUSEUM DUNIA MAYA DR IWAN S.*ill 001

                                THE FIRST INDONESIAN CYBERMUSEUM



                                        PENDIRI DAN PENEMU IDE

                                                     THE FOUNDER

                                            Dr IWAN SUWANDY, MHA




                         WELCOME TO THE MAIN HALL OF FREEDOM               


Showcase :

The  Iran History Collections Exhibition

Faravahar background
History of Iran
see also Kings of Persia · Timeline of Iran

Proto-Elamite period 3200–2800
Elamite dynasty 2800–550
Kassites 16th–12th cent.
Mannaeans 10th–7th cent.
Median Empire 728–550
Achaemenid Empire 550–330
Seleucid Empire 330–150
Parthian Empire 248–CE 226
Sassanid Empire 226–651
Islamic conquest 637–651
Umayyad Caliphate 661–750
Abbasid Caliphate 750–1258
Tahirid dynasty 821–873
Alavid dynasty 864–928
Sajid dynasty 889/890–929
Saffarid dynasty 861–1003
Samanid dynasty 875–999
Ziyarid dynasty 928–1043
Buyid dynasty 934–1062
Sallarid 942–979
Ma’munids 995-1017
Ghaznavid Empire 963–1187
Ghori dynasty 1149–1212
Seljuq dynasty 1037–1194
Khwarezmid dynasty 1077–1231
Ilkhanate 1256–1353
Muzaffarid dynasty 1314–1393
Chupanid dynasty 1337–1357
Sarbadars 1337–1376
Jalayerid dynasty 1339–1432
Timurid dynasty 1370–1506
Qara Qoyunlu 1407–1468
Aq Qoyunlu 1378–1508
Safavid dynasty 1501–1722/36
Hotaki dynasty 1722–1729
Afsharid dynasty 1736–1750
Zand dynasty 1750–1794
Qajar dynasty 1781–1925
Pahlavi dynasty 1925–1979
Interim Government 1979–1980
Islamic Republic since 1980


Page semi-protected

Geographical extent of Iranian influence in the 1st century BC. The Parthian Empire (mostly Western Iranian) is shown in red, other areas, dominated by Scythia (mostly Eastern Iranian), in orange.

History of Iran has been intertwined with the history of a larger historical region, Greater Iran, which consists of the area from the Euphrates in the west to the Indus River and Jaxartes in the east and from the Caucasus, Caspian Sea, and Aral Sea in the north to the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman in the south.

The southwestern part of the Iranian plateau participated in the wider Ancient Near East with Elam, from the Early Bronze Age. The Persian Empire proper begins in the Iron Age, following the influx of Iranian peoples which gave rise to the Median, Achaemenid, the Parthians, the Sassanid dynasties during classical antiquity.

Once a major empire of superpower proportions,[1][2] Persia as it had long been called, has been overrun frequently and has had its territory altered throughout the centuries. Invaded and occupied by Greeks, Arabs, Turks, Mongols, and others—and often caught up in the affairs of larger powers—Persia has always reasserted its national identity and has developed as a distinct political and cultural entity.

Iran is home to one of the world’s oldest continuous major civilizations, with historical and urban settlements dating back to 4000 BC.[3] The Medes unified Iran as a nation and empire in 625 BC.[4][4] The Achaemenid Empire (550–330 BC) was the first of the Iranian empires to rule in Middle east and central Asia. They were succeeded by the Seleucid Empire, Parthians and Sassanids which governed Iran for almost 1,000 years.

The Islamic conquest of Persia (633–656) and the end of the Sassanid Empire was a turning point in Iranian history. Islamicization in Iran took place during 8th to 10th century and led to the eventual decline of the Zoroastrian religion in Persia. However, the achievements of the previous Persian civilizations were not lost, but were to a great extent absorbed by the new Islamic polity and civilization.

After centuries of foreign occupation and short-lived native dynasties, Iran was once again reunified as an independent state in 1501 by the Safavid dynasty who established Shi’a Islam[5] as the official religion of their empire, marking one of the most important turning points in the history of Islam.[6] Iran had been a monarchy ruled by a shah, or emperor, almost without interruption from 1501 until the 1979 Iranian revolution, when Iran officially became an Islamic Republic on 1 April 1979.[7][8]




Further information: Archaeological sites in Iran
Further information: Tappeh Sialk, Jiroft culture, and Shahr-i Sokhta


The earliest archaeological artifacts in Iran were found in the Kashafrud and Ganj Par sites that date back to Lower Paleolithic. Mousterian Stone tools made by Neanderthal man have also been found.[9] There are also 9,000 year old human and animal figurines from Teppe Sarab in Kermanshah Province among the many other ancient artifacts.[9] There are more cultural remains of Neanderthal man dating back to the Middle Paleolithic period, which mainly have been found in the Zagros region and fewer in central Iran at sites such as Shanidar, Kobeh, Kunji, Bisetun, Tamtama, Warwasi, Palegawra, and Yafteh Cave.[10] Evidence for Upper Paleolithic and Epipaleolithic periods are known mainly from the Zagros region in the caves of Kermanshah and Khoramabad.

Neolithic to Chalcolithic

Golden Cup excavated at National Museum of Iran. First half of first millennium BC.

Arg-e Bam Before the 2003 earthquake.

In the eighth millennium BC, agricultural communities such as Chogha Bonut (the earliest village in Susiana) [11][12] started to form in western Iran, either as a result of indigenous development or of outside influences.[13] Around about the same time the earliest known clay vessels and modeled human and animal terracotta figurines were produced at Ganj Dareh, also in western Iran.[13] The south-western part of Iran was part of the Fertile Crescent where most of humanity’s first major crops were grown, in villages such as Susa (now a city still existing since 7000 BC)[14][15] and settlements such as Chogha Mish, dating back to 6800 BC;[3][16] there are 7,000 year old jars of wine excavated in the Zagros Mountains[17] (now on display at The University of Pennsylvania) and ruins of 7,000 year old settlements such as Sialk are further testament to that. The two main Neolithic Iranian settlements were the Zayandeh Rud River Civilization and Ganj Dareh.

Bronze Age

Dozens of pre-historic sites across the Iranian plateau point to the existence of ancient cultures and urban settlements in the fourth millennium BC,[3] One of the earliest civilizations in Iranian plateau was the Jiroft Civilization in southeastern Iran, in the province of Kerman. It is one of the most artifact-rich archaeological sites in the Middle East. Archaeological excavations in Jiroft led to the discovery of several objects belonging to the fourth millennium BC, a time that goes beyond the age of civilization in Mesopotamia. There is a large quantity of objects decorated with highly distinctive engravings of animals, mythological figures, and architectural motifs. The objects and their iconography are unlike anything ever seen before by archeologists. Many are made from chlorite, a gray-green soft stone; others are in copper, bronze, terracotta, and even lapis lazuli. Recent excavations at the sites have produced the world’s earliest inscription which pre-dates Mesopotamian inscriptions.[18][19]

There are records of numerous ancient civilizations on the Iranian plateau before the arrival of Iranian tribes from Central Asia during the Early Iron Age. One of the main civilizations of Iran was the Elam to the east of Mesopotamia, which started from around 3000 BC.[20] The Jiroft culture occupied southeastern Iran and may have existed as far back as 3000 BC[21] The Early Bronze Age saw the rise of urbanization into organized city states and the invention of writing (the Uruk period) in the Near East. While Bronze Age Elam made use of writing from an early time, the Proto-Elamite script remains undeciphered, and records from Sumer pertaining to Elam are scarce.

Further information: Tappeh Sialk, Jiroft civilization, Elam, and Mannaeans

Chogha Zanbil is one of the few extant ziggurats outside of Mesopotamia and is considered to be the best preserved example in the world.

Early Iron Age

Records become more tangible with the rise of the Neo-Assyrian Empire and its records of incursions from the Iranian plateau. As early as the 10th and 9th century BC early Iranian peoples speaking arrived on the Iranian plateau from Central Asia (Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex) and/or via the Caucasus.[22] The arrival of Iranians on the Iranian plateau forced the Elamites to relinquish one area of their empire after another and to take refuge in Susiana, Khuzistan and nearby area, which only then became coterminous with Elam.[23] By the mid 1st millennium BC, Medes, Persians, Bactrians and Parthians populated the Iranian plateau.


Median and Achaemenid Empire (650 BC–330 BC)

Main articles: Median Empire and Achaemenid Empire

The monument generally assumed to be the tomb of Cyrus the Great.

Achaemenid empire at its greatest extent.

The Immortal Soldiers at Darius’ palace at Susa.

Representation palace of Darius at Persepolis.

In 646 BC The Assyrian king Ashurbanipal sacked Susa, which ended Elamite supremacy in the region.[22] For over 150 years Assyrian kings of nearby Northern Mesopotamia were seeking to conquer Median tribes of Western Iran.[24] Under pressure from the Assyrian empire, the small kingdoms of the western Iranian plateau coalesced into increasingly larger and more centralized states.[22] In the second half of the 7th century BC, the Median tribes gained their independence and were united by Deioces. In 612 BC Cyaxares, Deioces‘ grandson, and the Babylonian king Nabopolassar invaded Assyria and laid siege to and eventually destroyed Nineveh, the Assyrian capital, which led to the fall of the Neo-Assyrian Empire.[25] The Medes are credited with the foundation of Iran as a nation and empire, and established the first Iranian empire, the largest of its day until Cyrus the Great established a unified empire of the Medes and Persians leading to the Achaemenian Empire (648–330 BC).

After his father’s death in 559 BC, Cyrus the Great became king of Anshan but like his predecessors, Cyrus had to recognize Mede overlordship. In 552 BC Cyrus led his armies against the Medes and captured Ecbatana in 549 BC, effectively conquering the Median Empire and also inheriting Assyria. Cyrus later conquered Lydia and Babylon. Cyrus the Great created the Cyrus Cylinder, considered to be the first declaration of human rights and was the first king whose name has the suffix “Great”. After Cyrus’ death, his son Cambyses ruled for seven years (531-522 BC) and continued his father’s work of conquest, making significant gains in Egypt. A power struggle followed Cambyses’ death and, despite his tenuous connection to the royal line, Darius was declared king (ruled 522-486 BC).

Darius’ first capital was at Susa, and he started the building programme at Persepolis. He rebuilt a canal between the Nile and the Red Sea, a forerunner of the modern Suez Canal. He improved the extensive road system, and it is during his reign that mention is first made of the Royal Road (shown on map), a great highway stretching all the way from Susa to Sardis with posting stations at regular intervals. Major reforms took place under Darius. Coinage, in the form of the daric (gold coin) and the shekel (silver coin) was introduced (coinage had already been invented over a century before in Lydia ca. 660 BC),[26] and administrative efficiency was increased. The Old Persian language appears in royal inscriptions, written in a specially adapted version of cuneiform. Under Cyrus the Great and Darius the Great, the Persian Empire eventually became the largest empire in human history up until that point, ruling and administrating over most of the then known world.[27] Their greatest achievement was the empire itself. The Persian Empire represented the world’s first superpower.[1][28] that was based on a model of tolerance and respect for other cultures and religions.[29]

In 499 BC Athens lent support to a revolt in Miletus which resulted in the sacking of Sardis. This led to an Achaemenid campaign against Greece known as the Greco-Persian Wars which lasted the first half of the 5th century BC. During the Greco-Persian wars Persia made some major advantages and razed Athens in 480 BC, but after a string of Greek victories the Persians were forced to withdraw while losing control of Macedonia, Thrace and Ionia. Fighting ended with the peace of Callias in 449 BC. In 404 BC following the death of Darius II Egypt rebelled under Amyrtaeus. Later Egyptian Pharaohs successfully resisted Persian attempts to reconquer Egypt until 343 BC when Egypt was reconquered by Artaxerxes III.

Panoramic view of Persepolis

The Hellenic conquest and the Seleucid Empire (312 BCE – 63 BCE)

Main article: Seleucid Empire

The Seleucid Empire in 200 BC, (before Antiochus was defeated by the Romans).

In 334 BC-331 BC Alexander the Great, also known in the Zoroastrian Arda Wiraz Nâmag as “the accursed Alexander”, defeated Darius III in the battles of Granicus, Issus and Gaugamela, swiftly conquering the Persian Empire by 331 BC. Alexander’s empire broke up shortly after his death, and Alexander’s general, Seleucus I Nicator, tried to take control of Persia, Mesopotamia, and later Syria and Asia Minor. His ruling family is known as the Seleucid Dynasty. However he was killed in 281 BC by Ptolemy Keraunos. Greek language, philosophy, and art came with the colonists. During the Seleucid Dynasty throughout Alexander’s former empire, Greek became the common tongue of diplomacy and literature. Overland trade brought about some fascinating cultural exchanges. Buddhism came in from India, while Zoroastrianism travelled west to influence Judaism. Incredible statues of the Buddha in classical Greek styles have been found in Persia and Afghanistan, illustrating the mix of cultures that occurred around this time (See Greco-Buddhism).

Parthian Empire (248 BC – 224 AD)

Main article: Parthian Empire

Bronze Statue of a Parthian prince, National Museum of Iran.

A bust from The National Museum of Iran of Queen Musa, wife of Phraates IV of Parthia.

Parthia was led by the Arsacid dynasty, who reunited and ruled over the Iranian plateau, after defeating the Greek Seleucid Empire, beginning in the late 3rd century BC, and intermittently controlled Mesopotamia between ca 150 BC and 224 AD. It was the second native dynasty of ancient Iran (Persia). Parthia was the Eastern arch-enemy of the Roman Empire; and it limited Rome’s expansion beyond Cappadocia (central Anatolia). The Parthian armies included two types of cavalry: the heavily armed and armoured cataphracts and lightly armed but highly mobile mounted archers. For the Romans, who relied on heavy infantry, the Parthians were too hard to defeat, as both types of cavalry were much faster and more mobile than foot soldiers. On the other hand, the Parthians found it difficult to occupy conquered areas as they were unskilled in siege warfare. Because of these weaknesses, neither the Romans nor the Parthians were able to completely annex each other.

The Parthian empire lasted five centuries, longer than most Eastern Empires. The end of this long lasted empire came in 224 AD, when the empire was loosely organized and the last king was defeated by one of the empire’s vassals, the Persians of the Sassanian dynasty.

Sassanid Empire (224 – 651 AD)

Main article: Sassanid Empire

The first Shah of the Sassanid Empire, Ardashir I, started reforming the country both economically and militarily. The empire’s territory encompassed all of today’s Iran, Iraq, Armenia, Afghanistan, eastern parts of Turkey, and parts of Syria, Pakistan, Caucasia, Central Asia, India and Arabia. During Khosrau II‘s rule in 590-628, Egypt, Jordan, Palestine and Lebanon were also annexed to the Empire. The Sassanians called their empire Erânshahr (or Iranshahr, “Dominion of the Aryans”, i.e. of Iranians).[30]

The Sassanid Empire at its greatest extent.

Rock-face relief at Naqsh-e Rustam of Iranian emperor Shapur I (on horseback) capturing Roman emperor Valerian I (kneeing) and Philip the Arab (standing) .

A chapter of Iran’s history followed after roughly six hundred years of conflict with the Roman Empire. During this time, the Sassanian and Romano-Byzantine armies clashed for influence in Mesopotamia, Armenia and the Levant. Under Justinian I, the war came to an uneasy peace with payment of tribute to the Sassanians. However the Sassanians used the deposition of the Byzantine Emperor Maurice as a casus belli to attack the Empire. After many gains, the Sassanians were defeated at Issus, Constantinople and finally Nineveh, resulting in peace. With the conclusion of the Roman-Persian wars, the war-exhausted Persians lost the Battle of al-Qâdisiyah (632) in Hilla, (present day Iraq) to the invading forces of Islam.

The Sassanian era, encompassing the length of the Late Antiquity period, is considered to be one of the most important and influential historical periods in Iran, and had a major impact on the world. In many ways the Sassanian period witnessed the highest achievement of Persian civilization, and constitutes the last great Iranian Empire before the adoption of Islam. Persia influenced Roman civilization considerably during Sassanian times,[31] their cultural influence extending far beyond the empire’s territorial borders, reaching as far as Western Europe,[32] Africa,[33] China and India[34] and also playing a prominent role in the formation of both European and Asiatic medieval art.[35] This influence carried forward to the Islamic world. The dynasty’s unique and aristocratic culture transformed the Islamic conquest and destruction of Iran into a Persian Renaissance.[32] Much of what later became known as Islamic culture, architecture, writing and other contributions to civilization, were taken from the Sassanian Persians into the broader Muslim world.[36]

Medieval Iran

Caliphate and Sultanate era

Main articles: Caliphate and Sultanate

Islamic Conquest

Main article: Islamic conquest of Iran

Stages of Islamic conquest      Expansion under the Prophet Mohammad, 622-632      Expansion during the Patriarchal Caliphate, 632-661      Expansion during the Umayyad Caliphate, 661-750

Muslims invaded Iran in the time of Umar (637) and conquered it after several great battles. Yazdegerd III fled from one district to another until a local miller killed him for his purse at Merv in 651.[37] By 674, Muslims had conquered Greater Khorasan (which included modern Iranian Khorasan province and modern Afghanistan, Transoxania, and Pakistan). The Islamic conquest of Persia led to the end of the Sassanid Empire and the eventual decline of the Zoroastrian religion in Persia. The majority of Iranians gradually converted to Islam. However, most of the achievements of the previous Persian civilizations were not lost, but were absorbed by the new Islamic polity.

As Bernard Lewis has quoted[38]

“These events have been variously seen in Iran: by some as a blessing, the advent of the true faith, the end of the age of ignorance and heathenism; by others as a humiliating national defeat, the conquest and subjugation of the country by foreign invaders. Both perceptions are of course valid, depending on one’s angle of vision.”

Umayyad Caliphate

Main article: Umayyads

After the fall of Sasanian dynasty in 651, the Umayyad Arabs adopted many Persian customs especially the administrative and the court mannerisms. Arab provincial governors were undoubtedly either Persianized Arameans or ethnic Persians; certainly Persian remained the language of official business of the caliphate until the adoption of Arabic toward the end of the 7th century,[39] when in 692 minting began at the caliphal capital, Damascus. The new Islamic coins evolved from imitations of Sassanian coins (as well as Byzantine), and the Pahlavi script on the coinage was replaced with Arabic alphabet.

During the reign of the Ummayad dynasty, the Arab conquerors imposed Arabic as the primary language of the subject peoples throughout their empire. Hajjāj ibn Yusuf, who was not happy with the prevalence of the Persian language in the divan, ordered the official language of the conquered lands to be replaced by Arabic, sometimes by force.[40] In Biruni’s From The Remaining Signs of Past Centuries for example it is written:

“When Qutaibah bin Muslim under the command of Al-Hajjaj bin Yousef was sent to Khwarazmia with a military expedition and conquered it for the second time, he swiftly killed whomever wrote the Khwarazmian native language that knew of the Khwarazmian heritage, history, and culture. He then killed all their Zoroastrian priests and burned and wasted their books, until gradually the illiterate only remained, who knew nothing of writing, and hence their history was mostly forgotten.”[41]

There are a number of historians who see the rule of the Umayyads as setting up the “dhimmah” to increase taxes from the dhimmis to benefit the Arab Muslim community financially and by discouraging conversion.[42] Governors lodged complaints with the caliph when he enacted laws that made conversion easier, depriving the provinces of revenues.

In the 7th century AD, when many non-Arabs such as Persians entered Islam were recognized as Mawali and treated as second class citizens by the ruling Arab elite, until the end of the Umayyad dynasty. During this era Islam was initially associated with the ethnic identity of the Arab and required formal association with an Arab tribe and the adoption of the client status of mawali.[42] The half-hearted policies of the late Umayyads to tolerate non-Arab Muslims and Shi’as had failed to quell unrest among these minorities. With the death of the Umayyad Caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik in 743, the Islamic world was launched into civil war. Abu Muslim was sent to Khorasan by the Abbasids initially as a propagandist and then to revolt on their behalf. He took Merv defeating the Umayyad governor there Nasr ibn Sayyar. He became the de facto Abbasid governor of Khurasan. In 750, Abu Muslim became leader of the Abbasid army and defeated the Umayyads at the Battle of the Zab. Abu Muslim stormed Damascus, the capital of the Umayyad caliphate, later that year.

Abbasid Caliphate and Iranian semi-independent governments

Main articles: Abbasids, Tahirids, Saffarids, Ziyarids, Samanids, and Buyids

The Saffarid dynasty in 900 AD.

Map of Iranian Dynasties c. 1000

The Abbasid army consisted primarily of Khorasanians and was led by an Iranian general, Abu Muslim Khorasani. It contained both Iranian and Arab elements, and the Abbasids enjoyed both Iranian and Arab support. The Abbasids overthrew the Umayyads in 750.[43]

One of the first changes the Abbasids made after taking power from the Umayyads was to move the empire’s capital from Damascus, in Levant, to Iraq. The latter region was influenced by Persian history and culture, and moving the capital was part of the Persian mawali demand for Arab influence in the empire. The city of Baghdad was constructed on the Tigris River, in 762, to serve as the new Abbasid capital. The Abbasids established the position of vizier like Barmakids in their administration, which was the equivalent of a “vice-caliph”, or second-in-command. Eventually, this change meant that many caliphs under the Abbasids ended up in a much more ceremonial role than ever before, with the vizier in real power. A new Persian bureaucracy began to replace the old Arab aristocracy, and the entire administration reflected these changes, demonstrating that the new dynasty was different in many ways to the Umayyads.[44]

By the 9th century, Abbasid control began to wane as regional leaders sprang up in the far corners of the empire to challenge the central authority of the Abbasid caliphate.[44] The Abbasid caliphs began enlisting Turkic-speaking warriors who had been moving out of Central Asia into Transoxiana as slave warriors as early as the ninth century. Shortly thereafter the real power of the Abbasid caliphs began to wane; eventually they became religious figureheads while the warrior slaves ruled. As the power of the Abbasid caliphs diminished, a series of dynasties rose in various parts of Iran, some with considerable influence and power. Among the most important of these overlapping dynasties were the Tahirids in Khorasan (820-72); the Saffarids in Sistan (867-903); and the Samanids (875-1005), originally at Bokhara. The Samanids eventually ruled an area from central Iran to Pakistan.[43] By the early 10th century, the Abbasids almost lost control to the growing Persian faction known as the Buwayhid dynasty(934-1055). Since much of the Abbasid administration had been Persian anyway, the Buwayhid were quietly able to assume real power in Baghdad. The Buwayhid were defeated in the mid-11th century by the Seljuk Turks, who continued to exert influence over the Abbasids, while publicly pledging allegiance to them. The balance of power in Baghdad remained as such – with the Abbasids in power in name only – until the Mongol invasion of 1258 sacked the city and definitively ended the Abbasid dynasty.[44]

During the Abbassid period an enfranchisement was experienced by the mawali and a shift was made in political conception from that of a primarily Arab empire to one of a Muslim empire[45] and c. 930 a requirement was enacted that required all bureaucrats of the empire be Muslim.[42]

Islamic golden age, Shu’ubiyya movement and Persianization process

Islamization was a long process by which Islam was gradually adopted by the majority population of Iran.

Richard Bulliet‘s “conversion curve” indicates that only about 10% of Iran converted to Islam during the relatively Arab-centric Umayyad period. Beginning in the Abassid period, with its mix of Persian as well as Arab rulers, the Muslim percentage of the population rose. As Persian Muslims consolidated their rule of the country, the Muslim population rose from approx. 40% in the mid 9th century to close to 100% by the end of 11th century.[45] Seyyed Hossein Nasr suggests that the rapid increase in conversion was aided by the Persian nationality of the rulers.[46]

Although Persians adopted the religion of their conquerors, over the centuries they worked to protect and revive their distinctive language and culture, a process known as Persianization. Arabs and Turks participated in this attempt.[47][48][49]

In the 9th and 10th centuries, non-Arab subjects of the Ummah created a movement called Shu’ubiyyah in response to the privileged status of Arabs. Most of those behind the movement were Persian, but references to Egyptians, Berbers and Aramaeans are attested.[50] Citing as its basis Islamic notions of equality of races and nations, the movement was primarily concerned with preserving Persian culture and protecting Persian identity, though within a Muslim context. The most notable effect of the movement was the survival of the Persian language to the present day.

The Samanid dynasty led the revival of Persian culture and the first important Persian poet after the arrival of Islam, Rudaki, was born during this era and was praised by Samanid kings. The Samanids also revived many ancient Persian festivals. Their successor, the Ghaznawids, who were of non-Iranian Turkic origin, also became instrumental in the revival of Persian.[51]

The culmination of the Persianization movement was the Shahname, the national epic of Iran, written almost entirely in Persian. This voluminous work, reflects Iran’s ancient history, its unique cultural values, its pre-islamic Zoroastrian religion, and its sense of nationhood.

According to Bernard Lewis: