MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY

HARALD SUERMANN*

The identity of a people is based on the perception of its own history. This is also the case of the , a relatively small community living in the mountains of largely isolated and criticised by other churches due to their union with . While as a confessional group they are firmly rooted in Lebanon, they take their identity not so much from the history and narratives of Lebanon or the Lebanese nation as a whole, as from their own history. In fact, there does not really exist a national . This is one of the major problems of Lebanon as a state. Each major confessional group has its own history and these histories in many respects lack a com- mon ground. The confessional proportional representation in politics and in society is one of the consequences. The shaping power of the dhimmi status of the and the system of the led to the self-conception of the confessional groups as nations. Also the Maronites per- ceive themselves as a Nation. Their history is above all the history of an eccle- siastical group, though it includes also other aspects of Near Eastern history.1 We do not know much about Maronite historiography before the fifteenth century. We have to presume that Maronites recorded their history during and before the time of the , but nearly nothing has come down to us. Many scholars think that the has destroyed older lit- erature after the union with Rome.2

* Harald Suermann is researcher at Missio (Aachen). This article is based on the intro- duction of his recent book: Die Gründungsgeschichte der Maronitischen Kirche, Orientalia Biblica et Christiana, 10 (Wiesbaden, 1998), pp. 1-39. 1 Cf. the recent publication by P. L. Münch-Heuber, Zwischen Konflikt und Koexistenz: Christentum und Islam im Libanon (München, 2002), pp. 11-32 (http:// www.hss.de/downloads/aktuelle_analysen_28.pdf 06.01.2003) 2 G. Graf, Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur, Studi e testi, 118.133.146.147.172 (Città del Vaticano, 1944-1953), I, pp. 94-102; K. S. Salibi, ‘The Traditional Historiogra- phy of the Maronites', in Historians of the , eds. B. Lewis, P.M. Holt, Historical Writing on the Peoples of Asia, 4 (London, 1962), pp. 212-225, here p. 213. 130 HARALD SUERMANN

The historiography of the Maronites that is documented starts in the fif- teenth century. It can be understood as an expression of national pride. The Maronite Church wrote its own history in order to retell its greatness and bravery. One major element of this historiography is political: the resistance against the Muslim dominance; and one is religious: a defense against the accusations of other churches. In the recent past, Maronite historiography has added an apolo- getic function: to ward off pan- claims by stressing the Phoenician ori- gins of Lebanese history as well as the unity of feudal . This defensive character can be found in nearly all the historiographical works written after the union with Rome. Against the charges and imputations of other churches the Maronites claimed ‘Eternal Orthodoxy'. The time of the foundation of the Maronite Church constitutes an essential part of this apolo- getic historiography. Many non-Maronite Church historians point out that the reason for the foundation of the Maronite Church was its Monothelite confession by which it separated itself from the Byzantine Church which was dyothelite. In reply, Maronite historians try to prove that Maronites had always been dyothelite. At most they admit that the Maronites, due to their isolation from the major churches ( and Rome) under Muslim rule, accepted the official doctrine only some years later. This apologetic task often prevented Maronite historians from consulting the sources in an objective way. They combed the sources in support for what they believed was true instead of being concerned about interpreting these sources in an objective way. , in his ground-breaking work on Maronite History, gives a fur- ther characteristic of Maronite historiography. As a rule, historians have been assiduously copying their predecessors, consciously eschewing any criticism. Thus many publications are mainly a repetition of older works, even though several of these historians were educated in the West (Rome). At the same time, we must keep in mind that most of these chronicles and histories were written for an exclusively into Maronite audience. Until today only a few Western scholars have investigated Maronite history. Non-Maronite scholars from Eastern churches have likewise been uncritical in their polemics and crit- icism of Maronite history and theology. Thus, Kamal Salibi accuses Maronite historiography of often naively replacing an interest in the facts with dogmatical suppositions.3 With these characteristics in mind we can now turn to a sur- vey of Maronite historiography.

3 Salibi, Historiography (see n. 2), pp. 215-217; id., Maronite Historians of Mediaeval Lebanon, Publications of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Oriental series, 34 (Beyruth, 1959), p. 15. MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 131

During the period of the Crusades the Maronites came into contact with Christianity. A formal union between the two churches was probably first concluded in the twelfth century, though some argue that it was only a reconfirmation of the union.4 This union had no major consequences until the Council of Florence in1439 when Rome again tried to conclude a union with all the Eastern churches. This intiative was a failure. The Maronite Church became the only Eastern church fully to be united with Rome. This special relationship was the reason for Rome to send a special counsellor to the Maronite immediately after the council. It was a Franciscan with the name Gryphon. His mission was quite successful: three young Maronites joined the Franciscan Order and one of them became quite famous later. Gibra'il Ibn al-Qula‘i, who died in 1515, can be called the founder of the new Maronite historiography. He first studied in Rome. After returning to Lebanon he became the counsellor to the Maronite patriarch before being elected to the bishopric of the Maronite diocese of . During his stay in Lebanon he witnessed the Jacobites attempting to proselytise Maronites, which had some success among lay people. Against this background Ibn al- Qula‘i wrote a number of works, two of which are significant for our pur- pose: Marun a†-†ubani (The blessed ) and In Praise of Mount Lebanon. These works had three aims: (1) to strengthen the union with Rome; (2) to refute the suspicion that the Maronites are Monothelites; and (3) to glorify Maronite history.5 In Marun a†-†ubani Ibn al-Qula‘i presents for the first time the theory of ‘eternal orthodoxy'. His arguments are largely based on testimonies of the church fathers in favour of Dyophysitism that were known to him in Syriac . As a matter of fact, however, these excerpts do not solve the ques- tion whether the Maronites had ever been Monothelites. He also cites Syr- iac church fathers who seemed to conform with Roman doctrine, but with- out admitting that these authors were not Maronites. As a third set of witnesses he refers to papal bulls from the thirteenth through the sixteenth centuries, texts that can hardly be used to document the earlier history.

4 K. S. Salibi, ‘The Maronite Church in the Middle Ages and Its Union with Rome', Oriens Christianus, 42 (1958), pp. 92-104. 5 Graf, Geschichte (see n. 3), III, pp. 309-333; H. , Un théologien maronite Gibra'il ibn al-Qula‘i. Évêque et moine franciscain, Bibliothèque de l'Université - Esprit, 31 (Kaslik, 1993), pp. 167-192 and passim; H. Lammens, ‘Frère Gryphon et le Liban au XVIe siècle', Revue de l'Orient Chrétien, 4 (1899), pp. 68-104, here pp. 87-89. 132 HARALD SUERMANN

In In Praise of Mount Lebanon Ibn al-Qula‘i pays particular attention to , the first patriarch. He relates the attack of the emir of Baskinta on the Plain of Bekaa and his fight against the troops of the caliphe ‘Abdalma- lik ibn Marwan (685-705). According to this account the emir's nephew was a friend of Gregorius al-Îalati who became Patriarch in 1130. There are more historical anachronisms, many of which seem to originate from the author's imagination. In Salibi's opinion Ibn al-Qula‘i occasionally makes use of historical sources from different periods, but he did not write history.6 J.-B. Chabot has done research on the origin of the transmission of the Vita of John Maron. He came to the conclusion that there are no reliable traces of John Maron in before the Middle Ages. The Vita of John Maron is a legend. It must have been writ- ten in Cyprus and was circulated by Ibn al-Qula‘i in 1495, though I do not think he created the Vita out of nothing.7 The next influential author to be mentioned is Ibrahim al-Îaqilani, bet- ter known under his Latin name Abraham Ecchellensis. He was born in 1600 in Îaqil, or Ecchel (hence his surname), a village in Mount Lebanon, and died 1664 in Rome. He was a contemporary of the famous emir FaÌr ad- Din II. Ma‘n (1572-1635), who governed the region during a period of rel- ative independence and in close cooperation with the Maronites. Abraham Ecchelensis began his career as a politician, but soon gave this up in order to study at the Maronite College in Rome. He published a grammar of Syr- iac (1628) and taught Syriac and Arabic at the College of the Propaganda. In 1630 he began teaching at the Collège Royal in Paris, while working with Gabriel Sionita on the Syriac and Arabic texts and their Latin for the edition of Le Jay's ‘ ’. However, the cooperation was a dif- ficult one. In 1642 Abraham resumed his teaching in Rome only to return to Paris in 1645. Eight years later he went back to Rome, where he remained until his death. He published a number of works and he certainly was quite familiar with oriental theology and history from his translation work on ori- ental manuscripts. He never wrote a historical work, but he makes some

6 Salibi, Historians (see n. 3), pp. 33-35. 7 J.-B. Chabot, ‘Les origines de la légende de saint Jean Maron', Mémoires de l'Institut National de France. Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 43,2 (1951), pp. 1-19; Suer- mann, Gründungsgeschichte (see n. *), pp. 277-278. MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 133 occasional remarks concerning the origin of the Maronites. In one of his let- ters he describes the content of the Kitab al-huda; in another he deals with the monastic origins of the Maronite Church and the concept of ‘eternal orthodoxy', and he also includes there a short biography of John Maron. Most important, however, is his work on some manuscripts containing the writings of John Maron or such works which have often been ascribed to him.8 Traditionally the following works have been attributed to John Maron: Liturgia, Libellus Fidei,9 Adversus Monophysitas,10 Adversus Nestorianos,11 Epis- tola de trishagion, De Sacerdotio,12 and a Commentarium in Liturgiam S. Jacobi. The only known manuscript of the Liturgia is Vat. Syr. 29. It was written in 1536 in Cyprus and once belonged to Abraham Ecchellensis. Two other man- uscripts with works by John Maron that are of about the same period, Vat. Syr. 31 (1564) and Vat. Syr. 28 (fifteenth century), do not contain the Liturgy. The Libellus Fidei was originally written by a Monothelete against the Monophysites. Assemani ascribed it to Thomas of Kfar†ab, and he is fol- lowed in this by Chabot, but not by Graf. Thomas is well known for his Treaty on Ten Chapters, a description of the Monothelete faith dating from the eleventh century. The Libellus Fidei is transmitted in two manuscripts (Vat. Syr. 146 and Paris. Syr. 203). The first manuscript contains some correc- tions: originally it stated that the work had been written against Maximus the Confessor's theory of the double will in Christ. This was corrected later: the work was said to have been written against Anthimos, who confessed one will. The first statement corresponds exactly with the opinion of Thomas of Kfar†ab; the corrections reflect the sixteenth-century Maronite confession. Nearly identical corrections are found in the manuscript of the Bibliothèque Nationale de Paris.

8 Graf, Geschichte (see n. 2), III, 354-359; N. Gemayel, Les échanges culturels entre les Maronites et l'Europe. Du Collège Maronite de Rome (1584) au Collège de Ayn-Warqa (1789) (Beyruth, 1984), II, pp. 387-400 and index. 9 Jean Maron, Exposé de la foi et autres opuscules, ed. M. Breydy, CSCO, 497. Script. Syri, 209 (Leuven, 1988), pp. 52-112; transl. CSCO, 498. Script. Syri, 210 (Leuven, 1988), pp. 17-60. 10 Exposé, pp. 112-118 (transl. pp. 60-64). 11 Ibid., pp. 119-125 (transl. pp. 64-69). 12 M. Breydy, La doctrine syro-antiochienne sur le sacerdoce dans sa version maronite (Jou- nieh, 1977). 134 HARALD SUERMANN

The two short treatises against the Monophysites and against the Nestori- ans follow in both manuscripts the Libellus Fidei. They are not expressis ver- bis attributed to John Maron. Both seem to be translations from the Greek. The Epistola de Trishagion records a controversy between a Greek and a Syrian. Although Paris. Syr. 203 mentions no author, the Epistle immediately follows the other works of John Maron. In Vat. Syr. 146, John Maron is explicitly mentioned as the author. The text is written on three pages which have been inserted in place of three excised ones. We know that these three excised pages contained the opening sections of a work on the same subject by David, son of Paul (end of the eighth century). This manuscript also once belonged to Abraham Ecchellensis. As Assemani already pointed out, De Sacerdotio cannot have been written by John Maron. Assemani thought it the work of John of Dara (first half of the ninth century). The Commentary on the Liturgy of St. James attributed to John Maron is nearly the same as the one by Dionysios bar ∑alibi (+1171). Some chapters were displaced and some passages were rearranged to make the text more compatible with Maronite liturgy after the union with Rome. Chabot labels the work attributed to John Maron a plagiarism. The work was copied by Abraham Ecchellensis in 1660.13 The results of the investigations of Chabot are persuasive, even if some modern Maronite scholars tend to ignore them. In his edition Breydy merely assumed that all these works had really been written by John Maron. All of the oldest manuscripts have been in the possession of Abraham Ecchellensis. Some of them are even from his hand. Chabot has demonstrated that Abra- ham Ecchellensis was largely responsible for the collection and identification of the writings of John Maron. Either he invented these or he borrowed them from other sources. Biographical details on John Maron are sketchy. Never- theless there is some evidence already before Ibn al-Qula‘i that a person with the name John Maron or Maron John was an important figure in the his- tory of the Maronite church.

Abraham Ecchelensis has paved the way for two other eminent apologetics: Faustus Naironus and Stephan ad-Duwaihi. Faustus Naironus or Murhig ibn

13 Chabot, ‘Origines’ (see n. 7), pp. 13-18. MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 135

Nimrun or Nairun lived from 1625 to 1712. He wrote the famous Disserta- tio de origine, nomine ac religione Maronitarum as an introduction to an Index virorum illustrium Maronitarum (Rome, 1679). He knew and used much of the basic literature relevant to the history of the Maronite Church.14 After careful study he concluded that there is good evidence to back the claim that the Maronites have their origin in the monastery of St. Maron, that their first patriarch was John Maron, and that they are identical with the . According to Naironus, the Maronites had always been Catholic. The pro- ceedings of the Fifth (553) show that they played a lead- ing role. The letters of the emperor Justinian, of the Patriarch Menas, and of Hormisdas all give witness of the Catholicity of the Maronites. Naironus was the first to argue that Eutychios, who claimed that the Maronites were Monothelites and condemned at the Sixth Ecumenical Council (681), was untrustworthy. He denies that the Maronites were ever Monothelites. At the same time, and probably because in a great number of works the Maronites were accused of Monotheletism, he admits that they conceivably could have been adherents of a kind of moral Monotheletism. This would mean that the Maronites did not deny the existence of two natural wills, but that they denied that the two wills could have been in contradiction: morally there could be only one will.15 Stephan ad-Duwaihi, who was born around 1630 and died in 1704, came to Rome when he was only eleven years old. He studied at the Collegium Maronitum for fourteen years. In 1655 he was ordained a priest in Lebanon and sent to in order to help the Syrian-Catholic in his mis- sionary work among the Jacobites. After eight months he came back to Lebanon and stayed in the monastery of Mar Ya‘qub al-Îabbas for five years. In 1668 he became bishop of Cyprus; two short years later he was elected Patriarch. He is called ‘the Father of Maronite historiography'. Duwaihi indeed was the first Maronite to write a comprehensive and systematic his- tory of the Maronites.16 For the earliest period he follows the concept of Ibn

14 Graf, Geschichte (see n. 3), III, pp. 359-361. 15 Faustus Naironus, Dissertatio, pp. 1-99. 16 Graf, Geschichte (see n. 2), III, pp. 361-377; Salibi, Historians (see n. 2), pp. 89-160; and the latest biography with an extensive bibliography: Nasser Gemayel, Al-ba†riyark Is†ifan al-Duwaihi. Îayatuhu wa-mu'allafatuhu (Beyruth, 1991). 136 HARALD SUERMANN al-Qula‘i. He tries to prove the ‘eternal orthodoxy' of the Maronites and to refute all charges of Monotheletism. He deviates, however, from Ibn al-Qula‘i on some crucial points. Duwaihi knew that relations between the Muslims and the Maronites had not always been hostile. Ibn al-Qula‘i thought that during the Muslim persecution around 900 many Maronites fled into the mountains of Lebanon. But Duwaihi was convinced that this flight took place already in 685 as a result of persecution by the Byzantines. Duwaihi also further developed an argument which first had been mentioned by Naironus. According to Duwaihi the Maronites descended from the Mar- daites (or in Arabic Garagimah). We do not know much about the Mardaites. It seems that they had been of Armenian stock and that they had been settled by the Byzantines in the mountains in the north-west of Syria in the early Islamic period as a buffer against the Umayyads. Duwaihi could have bor- rowed this information from the Byzantine historian Theophanes Homologetes. The three major historical works of Duwaihi, none of which has as yet been edited, are Ta ' r iÌ a†-†a'ifa al-maruniya; Ta ' r iÌ al-azmina; Silsila ba†arika a†-†a'ifa al-maruniya. The best known work is his Ta ' r iÌ a†-†a'ifa al-maruniya. It is directly addressed to the Maronites and wants to increase the Maronites' pride with respect to their orthodoxy while simultaneaously dissipating the doubts of other Christians in the West and in the East. In the introduction the author writes:

‘As I saw that some historians assume contrary views on the origin of the Maronite nation and propose different theories, I was caught by enthusi- asm to write this short work, in which the truth about the origin of the nation is elaborated on the basis of valid historical dates and shown by means of convincing proves. By this I do not search to gain praise for this nation or to demonstrate their virtue and to make known the honour of their first leaders. My real aim is to deliver them from accusations which are forwarded against them (…) Most of the foreigners who wrote on the Maronite nation were dependent on hearsay and on writings of some of our ene- mies. They had not checked their information in order to distinguish the right from wrong. (…) So, how can their witness resist us, if they do not enter into anyone of our learned men, nor speak with our leaders, nor know our language so that they could familiarise themselves with our books and draw from them our history' (p. 1). MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 137

From this excerpt it is clear that the author does not want to inform as much as to reconfirm the self-image of the Maronites. For the church's history prior to the quarrels about Christ's will, Duwaihi relies on the works of Ibn al-Qula‘i: the first book starts with the story of St. Maron as recorded by Theodoretos. Next he discusses the various , monasteries and churches that bear the name Maron. Then follows an inquiry into the persecution of monks because of their adherence to the Ecumenical Councils. In the following chapter Duwaihi deals with the person of John Maron. It is here that he seems to depart from the historical documents. He summarises the story of John Maron as follows:

‘The summary of what we have mentioned in this part is that the Maronite nation was not named after the name of a heretical , because there is not the slightest hint for it in the church books, but that this nation is called Maronite according to the monastery Mar Maron, according to YuÌanna as-Sarumi who was the first who gave orders there [in this monastery] and finally looked for refuge in it as he was persecuted by Jus- tinian because he had gone to Rome and received the title of Patriarch from the hand of Sergius, whose creed he accepted' (pp. 95-96).

In the second book he refutes all those who deny the ‘eternal orthodoxy' of the Maronites. The first five chapters deal with Eutychios (877-940) who is regarded as the one who has introduced all errors handed down until that time. The next person Duwaihi deals with is Thomas of Kfar†ab, who is depicted as a Jacobite who falsified the Kitab al-huda. Duwaihi could not accept that this Thomas was a true Maronite since he publicly claimed to be a Monothelite. Turning then to Western scholars, he polemicises against William of Tyre. The main point of disagreement is William's assertion that the Maronites had been heretics prior to the union with Rome.17 The third book of this work is of less interest to us as it deals with contemporary charges.18 The Ta'riÌ al-azmina does not begin with St. Maron, but with the Arab conquest. It follows the traditional form of Arabic chronicles and records as far as the year 1703. The main source for the early period again is Ibn

17 Graf, Geschichte (see n. 2), III, pp. 365-368; Salibi, Historians (see n. 3), pp. 96-97. 18 Graf, Geschichte, III, pp. 368-369. 138 HARALD SUERMANN al-Qula‘i. The approach and concept of history is basically the same as in the Ta'riÌ a†-†a'ifa al-maruniya. In his third work, the Silsila ba†arika a†-†a'ifa al-maruniya,19 Duwaihi pre- sents the Maronite Patriarchs since the time of John Maron, the first Patri- arch. According to Duwaihi, John had been of Frankish origin and had defended Roman Orthodoxy against the heretical Monotheletism of the patri- archs and emperors. He had travelled to Rome and had been nominated Patriarch of by the Pope after the condemnation of Macarios at the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680/1). His appointment generated much dis- pleasure in the East. As a result of the persecution that was started by the emperor Justinian II he could not take possession of his see and was forced to flee to Lebanon.20 Duwaihi also discusses other aspects of the origins of the Maronites. As oth- ers before him he assumes that the Maronites who entered the Lebanon under John Maron were identical with the Mardaites who pillaged Northern Syria between 666 and 685. When the Byzantines and the Muslims signed a treaty, the Mardaites had to withdraw. Justinian II fervently persecuted the Mardaites (and Maronites). Ibrahim, the nephew of John Maron, made sure that the Patriarch could escape to Lebanon. By identifying the Maronites with the Mar- daites Duwaihi could explain why the Maronites were so different from the other Christians of the East in comparison with the and the Jaco- bites: they were ethnically different! Duwaihi's work marks another period in the history of Maronite historio- graphy. He consults various sources, including Western chronicles and papal documents, and he is thoroughly familiar with the traditional arguments, but he consequently uses them to prove that the tradition is true about the origins and the faith of the Maronites.

Joseph-Simon Assemani (1687-1768) is known above all for his work at the Vatican Library. He stems from a well-known and well-educated Maronite

19 Edited by Rasid as-Sartuni, in Al-Machriq, 1 (1898), pp. 247-252.308-313.347- 353.390-396. Cf. Graf, Geschichte (see n. 3), III, p. 371. French translation by , Pentalogie antiochienne/domaine Maronite. Livre d'histoire. Écrits fondateurs et textes à l'appui (Beyruth, 1984), I,1, pp. 7-16. Salibi, Historians (see n. 3), pp. 99-100. 20 Moubarac, Pentalogie, I,1, pp. 7-8; Salibi, Historiography (see n. 2), p. 221. MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 139 family.21 For his views on the early period he largely depends upon Duwaihi. He is critical of Ibn al-Qula‘i's account of John Maron. According to Asse- mani, Ibn al-Qula‘i did not distinguish between John Maron and the Patri- arch Irmia al-Amsiti, who traveled to Rome between 1215 and 1216 in order to proclaim his communion with the faith. While in Rome he took part in the Lateran Council. Assemani provides the first really crit- ical investigation into the tradition of John Maron by a Maronite.22 In the next century we should mention Nicolas Murad (+1862) who authored a work on the origins of the Maronites. It contains nothing that is new. His main concern is to prove that the following thesis is true:

‘If there is in the Orient one nation that could be glorified for having always and everywhere confessed of unanimous opinion and of unshake- able resoluteness the holy orthodox creed and for never having deviated from the true discipline, it is without any doubt the Maronite nation'.23

The last years of the Ottoman empire saw many political changes. At the begin- ning of the twentieth century a conflict arose between those who wanted to limit the power and influence of the Patriarch in favour of a more civil and secular society and those who preferred the old system. It was a rivalry between confessionally orientated Maronites and the secular Ottoman forces. In this rivalry historiography was used to strengthen the position of the former. This period also saw the implementation of the decrees of the First Vatican Coun- cil. A sort of ‘Catholic reform' took place. This also produced conflicts among the various Catholic churches in the East with respect to their place in his- tory and their importance. Around the turn of the twentieth century, Euro- pean influence in the Orient increased substantially. European theologians

21 K. Rizk, Assémani, -Simon, in Encyclopédie Maronite, 1 (Kaslik, 1992), cc. 440- 444. 22 J.S. Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana (Rome, 1719), I, pp. 496- 507 and 596 ff.; Italicae Historiae Scriptores ex Bibliotheca Vaticana aliarumque insignium Bibliothecarum manuscriptis codicibus collegit et praefationibus notisque illustravit (Rome, 1751-1753), II, pp. 93-94; Bibliotheca juris orientalis canonici et civilis (Rome, 1762- 1766), IV, p. 20. 23 N. Murad, Notice historique sur l'origine de la Nation Maronite et sur ses rapports avec la France, sur la Nation et sur les diverses populations du Mont Liban (Paris, 18442), p. 5. 140 HARALD SUERMANN became more and more interested in the history and doctrine of the Eastern churches. A work by the Chorepiscopos Joseph David of Mosul (1829-1890)24 of the Syrian- posed a problem and challenge to the Maronite community. While in Rome for the First Vatican Council he was asked by the head of the Propaganda Fidei to write a short treatise about the primacy of Peter and his successors according to the old Syro-Chaldean tradition.25 At the end he wrote about the different patriarchates of Antiochia. He con- tended that the Maronites had been Monothelites until the beginning of the thirteenth century and that union came about at the initiative of Rome as it was the case also for the Chaldean Church. This was a real challenge to Maronite claims and Elias Debs (1833-1907) responded by writing a Summa confutationum contra assertiones sacerdotis Josephi David.26 Debs replied that David's arguments were mainly taken from Eutychios of Alexandria and William of Tyre, both of whom had little credibility in Maronite circles. The dispute went on for some time and even an intervention of the Propaganda Fide failed to put an end to it. Finally David published his Recueil de docu- ments et de preuves contre la prétendue Orthodoxie Perpétuelle des Maronites (…) d'après deux manuscrits originaux écrits en 1873 (Cairo-Leipzig, 1873). David argued that the Maronites had been Monothelites before their union with Rome. While he did not deny the historicity of John Maron, he rejected all the traditional stories about him and his writings. He also rejected the iden- tification of the Maronites with the Mardaites. In short, this was an attack on the core elements of Maronite identity. Years later, in 1905, Debs answered with the Perpétuelle orthodoxie des Maronites (in Arabic) in order to reconfirm the true identity of the Maronites for the local population. The apologetic character of the work is revealed by the fact that he did not only demonstrate and argue for the Maronites' catholicity and the doctrine of the ‘eternal ortho- doxy', but also defended the historical rights of the Maronites in Lebanon.

24 Graf, Geschichte (see n. 2), IV, pp. 73-80; J.-M. Vosté, ‘Clément-Joseph David, Archevêque syrien de Damas', Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 14 (1948), pp. 219-275, esp. pp. 236-244. 25 Antiqua Ecclesiae Syro-Chaldaicae traditio circa Petri Apostoli eiusque successorum Romanorum Pontificum divinum primatum (Rome, 1870). 26 Excerpts in Moubarac, Pentalogie (see n. 18), I, pp. 171-193. MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 141

The opposition, including the more secular Maronites, reacted sharply. In sev- eral publications they called for the ‘arabisation' of the Christians to sustain true national identity with the Muslims. Their larger agenda was to unite all the Oriental Catholic churches into one Arab Catholic Church. The various denominations should be abolished. Against this position, and in order to strengthen the ethnic denominational ideology of the Patriarchate, Maronite historiography was used. Among Debs' opponents was Siméon Vailhé. He was a French Assumptionist living in Istanbul. His research aimed at a deeper understanding of the East- ern schism. The results, which were published in the Échos d'Orient and in encyclopaedias, firmly contrasted with traditional Maronite views. In 1902 both authors presented their positions in the Échos d'Orient.27 The main sub- jects of the dispute were Eutychios and John Maron. Vailhé rejected the tra- dition of John Maron and accepted the witness of Eutychios. He believed that John Maron indeed had been a Monothelete. Debs on the other hand placed no faith in Eutychios. Some years later Vailhé again published an article on the origins of the Maronites based on newly accessible documents.28 He now claimed that the Maronites had been Chalcedonians up to the time of the emperor Heraclius, but then accepted Monothelism in line with Heraclius' politics to promote religious unity in the empire. Since Rome did not send a delegation to Antiochia between 649 and 681 Vailhé concluded that in this period the Melkites had (mostly) been Monotheletes. In his opinion, the reason why the Maronites founded a church of their own can no longer be recovered.

At the beginning of the twentieth century Bernard Gubaira al-Gaziri wrote his pro-Maronite apologetics. He followed the traditional presentation of Maronite history. However, he gave a new interpretation to texts which speak of the Monothelism of the Maronites. He believed that there had been two churches which were both called Maronite. The one which was Monothelete was founded by Maron of Edessa. The other church, which had always been

27 ‘Origines Religieuses des Maronites', Échos d'Orient, 5 (1902), pp. 281-289. 28 S. Vailhé, ‘L'Église maronite du Ve au Xe siècle', Échos d'Orient, 9 (1906), pp. 248-268.344-351. 142 HARALD SUERMANN orthodox, was founded by the monk Maron and the Patriarch John Maron. This new interpretation could easily explain all of the evidence without giv- ing up the concept of ‘eternal orthodoxy' of the Maronite Church which is held until today. In 1928 the Maronite bishop Boutros Dib published the article on the Maronite Church in the famous Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique.29 The disciples of St Maron constituted the core of the Maronite Church. They founded the monastery of St Maron on the river Orontes. This monastery was important for two reasons: 350 of its monks has been martyred and it had been mentioned in the proceedings of the council of 536. In the Maronite mind, it symbolizes both orthodoxy and the fight against Monophysism. Dib was chiefly concerned with the former. He opined that the Maronites could not have been Monothelites. In his Chronicle Michael the Syrian, according to the interpretation of Dib, relates that Monothelism came to Syria only in 727. Prior to this date the decrees of the council of 680 were unknown. In fact Michael the Syrian reports exactly the opposite: the Dyothelites began persecuting the Monothelites in 727, which means that there must have been Monothelites in Syria before this date. During the several works on the origin of the Maronites were published. In 1977 Boutros Daou published an History of the Maronites in five volumes (in Arabic). He also wrote an article on the Maronites, their origin and nationality, in the famous revue al-Manara in 1985. And he did a thorough investigation into the search for the site of the famous monastery of Mar Maron. The results were published in the revue Parole de l'Orient.30 Daou begins with the thesis that the Maronites descend from the Phoenicians. This was a quite popular view during the war since it lent support to their claim for an autonomous Maronite Lebanon. Obviously, this Lebanon could not be regarded as a part of the Arabic world. According to Daou the

29 P. Dib, ‘Maronite (Église)', in DThC, 10 (Paris, 1928), cc. 1-142. On Dib see the contri- butions by Ignace Ziadé and M. Nédoncelle in Melto, 3 (1967), pp. 1-23.25-33.33-38. 30 The book is translated into English (Religious, Cultural and Political History of the Maronites, 1984) and into French (Histoire religieuse, culturelle et politique des Maronites, 1985); id., ‘Le site du convent principal de S. Maron en Syrie', Parole de l'Orient, 3 (1972), pp. 145-152; id., ‘Les Maronites: Origine et nationalité', al-Manara, 26 (1985), pp. 27-36. MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 143 history of the Maronite Christians begins with Mar Maron whose disciples converted the original inhabitants of Lebanon to Christianity. Daou does not hesitate to count many famous Church fathers as Maronites. Subsequent history largely is a struggle for liberation from the Byzantines and the . The most famous group of freedom fighters were the Mardaites with their leader John Maron. Here again, Daou follows traditional Maronite views. A new element is Daou's interest in Maronite art and architecture which had not yet been studied for themselves. Daou's history demonstrates a certain political and cultural independence. His aim was the moral strengthening of the Maronites during the war. The theological or ecclesiological development of the Maronites receives no attention in the (much shorter) English and French translation. Michel Breydy is probably the most prolific contemporary author on Maronite history.31 In contrast to Boutros Daou his interest concerns mainly Church history rather than the political or cultural history of the Maronites. In his Geschichte der Syro-Arabischen Literatur der Maroniten vom VII. bis XVI. Jahrhundert (1985) he offers a synthesis of his views on the origins of the Maronites. By his own admission, this work is a revision and a supplement to the Geschichte der christlichen arabischen Literatur of . His account of the Church's origins comprises eight sections: the ‘popular church’ (i.e., the church of the common people), the ‘church of the monks’, the dis- pute concerning Monothelism, the meaning of the word Melkite, the forgotten Monothelites of a certain Maron of Edessa, the beginnings of the mission in , the role of the Syrian in the seventh and eighth centuries, and finally some avoidable pitfalls in past and current research. The Maronite church has its origins in the wish of the popular church for its own patriarch. Breydy writes: ‘Taken care of by the monks of the Holy Maron,

31 Not counting the many articles in Parole de l'Orient, al-Manara, or Oriens Christianus, mention should be made above all of the following books: La doctrine syro-antiochienne sur le sacerdoce dans sa version maronite (, 1977); Geschichte der Syro-Arabischen Literatur der Maroniten vom VII. bis XVI. Jahrhundert, Forschungsberichte des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, 3194 (Opladen, 1985); Études sur Sa‘id ibn Ba†riq et ses sources, CSCO, 450. Subs., 69 (Leuven, 1983); Das Annalenwerk des Eutychios von Alexandrien. Ausgewählte Geschichten und Legenden kompiliert von Sa‘id ibn Ba†riq um 935 A.D., ed. Michel Breydy, CSCO, 471-472. Script. Arab., 44-45 (Leuven, 1985); Études maronites, Orientalia Biblica et Christiana, 2 (Glückstadt, 1991); Exposé (see n. 2). 144 HARALD SUERMANN the faithful in Syria Secunda and in the Mountains of Phoenicia decided, together with these monks and the own indigenous clergy, to acclaim a Patri- arch of their own, … to replace for good the who had fled'.32 According to Breydy there were still two other groups in Syria. One were the who were called ‘Romaioi'. The others were the Syriac speaking subjects of the Byzantine emperor also known as the Melkites. In addition to the Melkites, who had become Monothelites during the time of Hera- clius, there existed other Monothelite sects such as the Harmasites and the sect of Maron of Edessa. Errors arise when anonymous Syriac manuscripts, which have a Monothelite character and are not attached to a specific com- munity, are merely regarded as of Maronite origin. Breydy refers explicitly to the manuscripts which were published by Sebastian Brock.33 Breydy is convinced that the first Patriarch was John Maron. The proofs for his existence are the texts traditionally attributed to him: the anaphora, the explication of the faith, the two polemical writings against the Nestori- ans and the Monophysites which, according to Breydy, resulted from John's participation in the controversy between the Jacobites and the Maronites before Muawiya in 659. Only some time after this quarrel John became the first Patriarch.34 At times Breydy takes a somewhat peculiar if not idiosyncratic view on Maronite history. In essence, his view is Maronite tradition in a radicalised form: the true adherents of the Chalcedonian Council, made orphans through the politically inspired Monotheletism of Byzantium and the subsequent Arab conquest, assembled themselves around the monastery of Mar Maron and chose John of Maron as their patriarch. Often Breydy shows little concern for alternative interpretations and seems to conduct a general attack against the use of historical-critical methods in doing church history. As he sees it, the history of a church is not only written down in documents and does not consist of dates only. He presents his approach as a middle position between conservatism and hypercriticism.35

32 Breydy, Geschichte, p. 31. 33 Ibid., pp. 44-52. 34 Ibid., pp. 77-83. 35 Ibid., pp. 75-76. MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 145

In his Les Maronites. Qui sont-ils?Que veulent-ils,36 Michel Awit, the secre- tary of the Maronite Patriarchate in Bkirki, describes with great pathos the vocation of the Maronites as a unique people. Of the same genre is the Pré- cis d'histoire de l'Église maronite by Joseph Mahfouz, member of the Maronite Lebanese Order.37 He often uses the concept of ‘maronité' to signify the essence of the history and the culture of the Maronites. The history of the ‘maronité' is equivalent to the history of Lebanon. The heroism of the Maronites is bound to the mountains of the Lebanon.38 Tanyos F. Nujaym's three volumes on the history of the Maronites are largely based on the works of Duwaihi.39 All these works were written against the background of (the outcome of) the war. They play an important part in the struggle for sur- vival and for influence. Their main task is to consolidate Maronite identity. When translated into political concepts it may signify the aspiration towards creating a small but homogeneous state in the mountains of Lebanon domi- nated by the Maronites and their culture. Some called this small state of their dreams ‘Maronistan'. A life in ‘splendid isolation'. This political dream reflects the essence of Maronite historiography. It wards off all those ‘foreign' ideas and texts which do not correspond to the traditional concept of Maronite his- tory. The war was just another era in the long Maronite history of resistance and refusal. In fact, the aftermath of the war brought about some dramatic changes in politics and in society. Although they did not loose too much of their political power, the Maronites were forced to recognise that others deter- mine the destiny of Lebanon. They have become just one of the players in the political game,… and they have become aware of this fact. The new polit- ical context will inevitably change the way of writing Maronite historiogra- phy, and I see several indications. First, few works on Maronite history have been written since the end of the war. This may signify that a period of reflection has begun in order to accomodate to the new challenges and new contexts. Of course a new approach

36 Without place and without year. The preface is undersigned with: “Michel Awit, Bkerké, le 18 février 1989”; Biography: G. Haroun, ‘Awit, Michel ‘Aql, in Encyclopédie Maronite, 1 (Kaslik, 1992), pp. 105-106. 37 Kaslik, 1985. 38 Mahfouz, Précis, pp. 17-26. 39 T.F. Nujaym, La maronité chez Estéfan Duwayhi, Bibliothèque de l'Université Saint- Esprit, 20 (Kaslik, 1990). 146 HARALD SUERMANN to Maronite history did not start at the moment the war ended. There are some precursors though, such as Michel Hayek. Already in the 1960's he gave his view of Maronite history in his introduction to Maronite liturgy.40 He was the first Maronite scholar to make a distinction between oral and writ- ten tradition. Hayek relies on written tradition in presenting Maronite his- tory. According to him, the emperor Marcianus did not found the monastery of Mar Maron, but he only enlarged it. Heraclius used Monothelism as a means to unite the Church and the Maronites were affected by this theology and politics. Hayek was also the first Maronite to accept the (correct) interpreta- tion of the passage from Michael the Syrian stating that it was Dyothelism and not Monothelism that was introduced in Syria in 727. He admits that all we know of John Maron comes from oral tradition, yet he does not rule out that John did exist. Besides his work on Maronite history and liturgy Hayek also wrote extensively on Islamic history. Paul Naaman's book on the origin of the Maronites deals exclusively with the foundation of the monastery of Mar Maron and with Theodoretos of .41 With good reason this work can be called the first monograph on Maronite history which satisfies modern scholar standards. In contrast Paul Rouhana briefly presents the four basic views on the origin of the Maronite Church42: 1. The Maronite Church came into existence with the union with Rome. The history before that date is not clear. 2. The Maronite church is of a monastic Monotheletic origin (sources are Eutychios and William of Tyre). 3. The Maronite church is of a monastic Chalcedonian origin as the Monastery of Mar Maron was founded on the eve of Chalcedon. 4. The Maronite Church is of an apostolic-Antiochene origin, while all the other churches from this tradition became heretical.

40 M. Hayek, Liturgie maronite. Histoire et textes eucharistiques (Paris, 1964), pp. 3-60; id., ‘Maronite (Église)', in Dictionnaire de Spiritualité, 10 (Paris, 1980), cc. 631-644. 41 Théodoret de Cyr et le monastère de Saint Maroun. Les origines des Maronites. Essai d'his- toire et de géographie, Bibliothèque de l'Université Saint-Esprit, 3 (Beyruth, 1971). 42 P. Rouhana, ‘Identité ecclésiale Maronite. Des origines à la veille du Synode libanais', in Parole de l'Orient 15 (1988-89), pp. 215-259. MARONITE HISTORIOGRAPHY AND IDEOLOGY 147

In 1992 the director of the Encyclopédie Maronite, Karam Rizk published in his preface an introduction to the history of the Maronite Church. He calls Maron the spiritual father of the Maronites. He mentions the foundation of the monastery of Mar Maron and the martyrdom of the Maronites in 517. According to him the ecclesiastical structure has its beginnings in the time of the discussion in front of Muawiya. Though he discusses in some detail the question whether the Maronites have been Monothelites, he does not give a definite answer. The preface is not intended to promote innovating views, but as the Encyclopaedia is published by the University of Kaslik it can be regarded as representative in some way, and it shows that some of the tradi- tional positions at least are open for discussion. It may be the starting point for a new era of Maronite historiography. In his Recherches sur les Mardaïtes-Garagima43 of 1999 G. Chalhoub exam- ines the various traditions concerning the Mardaites. The result differs from the traditional position which identifies the Mardaites and the Maronites. Chal- houb argues that the latter belonged, like the Maronites, to those who hoped for a new Heraclius and for the liberation from Muslim domination. This hope was destroyed by Justininan II when he concluded a peace treaty with the Arabs. In an article of 2001 with the title ‘Quelques réflexions à propos de l'histoire ancienne de l'Église maronite'44 Mariam De Ghantuz Cubbe studies some writ- ings from before the thirteenth century. She does not try to confirm the tra- ditional story of the Maronites. The outcome is a fascinating early history of the Maronite church. I will just point to two aspects. Concerning the ques- tion whether the Maronites had once been Monothelites she argues that the Maronites merely followed Heraclius, as did all those who had put their hopes on the emperor in the battle against Muslim domination. When Jus- tinian II concluded a peace treaty with Abd el Malek in 689, the new doc- trine of the two wills, as defined by the council of 680/681, was associated with the end of the Byzantine resistance to the Arab conquest. But the Maronites continued their resistance. The second item is the tradition of John Maron which was known at least since the time between Eutychios and Masudi.

43 Bibliothèque de l'Université Saint-Esprit, 35 (Kaslik, 1999). 44 Parole de l'Orient, 26 (2001), pp. 3-69. 148 HARALD SUERMANN

To conclude: the post-war political climate of Lebanon seems to mark the beginning of a new era in Maronite historiography. Several Maronite schol- ars have become aware of the fact that the history of their people is much more complicated (and more fascinating!) than many had thought before. Maybe one day Maronite history will be a part of our common Church his- tory, without polemics and apologetics.