“Arab unity is a madman's notion - for this century or next, probably” Thomas Edward Lawrence, (Friedman, 2011).
The myths and realities of any history is what motivates great minds to endeavour and search for the accurate version of any historical event, and the modern Middle Eastern history is no exception. What is so-called ‘Great Arab Revolt’ during the First World War, is still casting its shadows on the Arabs history and generating many debates. However, the historiography of the events and the different roles that each figure had played and his/her significance became somewhat taken for granted among history readers according to their unverified views. In order to differentiate between the historical and mythical accounts of the “Arab awakening” as it is romanticised, this reflection is going to discuss the role of one of the British imperialists, T. E. Lawrence in that ‘national awakening’, and how much truth is there in his portrayal.
From the ashes of the Ottoman empire, many nation-states arose and were established by different European imperial powers schemes, namely Great Britain and France (Friedman, 2011). Many historians are of the opinion that it was the dawn of an Arab Era, and the beginning of Arab nationalism and pan-Arabism, while the others dismiss this as an assumption and argue that the Arabs were still tribally, regionally and religiously divided among themselves (Karash & Karash , 1997). During the year 1916, many French and British officers to assist the Hejaz revolt against the Ottomans, and among the British officers was T. E. Lawrence. However, many historians portray the last as the sole significant figure to serve the allied interests in Arabia, and the one who negotiated the Arab chiefs to bring ...
... middle of paper ...
...at Lawrence role cannot be overlooked by any critical observer and reader of the Arabs history.
Conclusively, T. E. Lawrence had played a central role in the Arab revolts which ended decades of the sick man of Europe, the Ottomans, governance of the Arab’s regions. There are many accounts of the events, and there is no objective method to verify Lawrence’s actual significance and role because queries of accountability for the Arab national awakening are fundamentally subjective (Tabachnick, 2012). The Arabian revolt historiography is debated between the historians and the other guilt-ridden intellectual imperialists as T.E. Lawrence. There are many claims which are accepted as the orthodoxy of Western historiography of the modern Middle East. However, these claim are challenged by handful of critical scholars like Mousa and Edward Said (Ashcroft & Ahluwalia, 2008).
The French occupation is a confrontation between exported modernity and an old regime: the French revolutionaries and their dominance over the Ottoman social order that is markedly different in contrast; and, al-Jabarti reports on how it transfers cross-culturally. Levels of contestation, open and/or secretive acceptances give way to losses and gains driven by high emotion – even for this writer. He “describes very carefully every step in the negotiation of the organization of society, from administration to inheritance, from property to charity or from justice to deliberation.”
Benjamin Chavis Muhammad is an African American civil rights leader. He was born on 22 January, 1948 in Oxford, North Carolina. He has taken his last name Muhammad sometime later in his life. His parents were Benjamin Chavis Sr. and Elisabeth Chavis. He was the only son of his parents among his three siblings. He did his schooling from the orphanage of colored people in North Carolina, where his mother worked as a teacher. Chavis became the member of National Association for Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) at the age of twelve. Chavis is married to Martha Rivera Chavis and has eight children.
Joyce, James. “Araby”. The Norton Anthology of Short Fiction. Eds. R.V. Cassill and Richard Bausch. Shorter Sixth Edition. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2000. 427 - 431.
When thinking about World War I, most do not think about the Ottoman Empire. However, many important actions and decisions occurred in this region. A man named T. E. Lawrence was a huge liability toward the Ottoman Empire from 1916 until the end of World War I. Thomas Edward Lawrence was born on August 16, 1888. He was the son of Sir Thomas Chapman and Sarah Junner. The couple never married, but instead they took the name of Lawrence. The family decided to settle in Oxford. This is where Thomas Edward grew up, went to school, and eventually attended university. At Oxford, Lawrence decided to study history, and he also wanted to do his undergraduate thesis on medieval castles in the Turkish- held area of Syria and Palestine.
This marked the beginning of the Palestine armed conflict, one of its kinds to be witnessed in centuries since the fall of the Ottoman Empire and World War 1. Characterized by a chronology of endless confrontations, this conflict has since affected not only the Middle East relations, but also the gl...
Spielvogel, Jackson J. "The Muslim Empires: The Ottoman Empire.” Glencoe World History. New York, NY: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, 2005. p.484-489. Print.
The internal view of Muslim historians was that God supported the Islamic faith and aided in its spread. The external, especially European, view was that the Muslim concept of jihad, or struggle, was the key element. Today, few historians emphasize religious zeal alone but rather point to a combination of the Arab’s military advantages and the political weaknesses of their opponents. Equally important are the military strength and tactics of the Arabs. For example, rather than scattering as landlords of peasant farmers over conquered lands, Arab soldiers remained together in garrison cities, where their Arab ethnicity, tribal organization, religion, and military success set them
“One Arab nation from Gulf to the Ocean,” gives meaning to the term “Pan-Arabism” in the Middle East. A notion where Arab nations transcend their state boundaries to form political mergers with other states and achieve an ‘Arab unity.’ The existence of Arab states had been tumultuous throughout the decline of the Muslim order, the end of the Ottoman Empire, the Palestinian defeat, Six Day War and Arab-Israeli war in 1973. This essay will critically examine Foud Ajami’s case for a raison d’état in the Middle East and his claim that there were six broad trends leading to the alteration of the balance of power away from Pan-Arabism and towards the state. It will be argued that Pan-Arabism was a romantic ideology that Arab states found convenient to support, all in advancement of their nationalistic state agendas. It was never a realistic endeavor that was physically undertaken by the Arab states and was thus never alive in a tangible sense. However, Pan-Arabism as an ideology had a place in the Middle East and was thus alive in an ideological sense.
Joyce, James. “Araby.” The Norton Introduction to Literature, Shorter Eighth Edition. Eds. Jerome Beaty, Alison Booth, J. Paul Hunter, and Kelly J. Mays. New York: W.W.Norton.
Critics have already begun a heated debate over the success of the book that has addressed both its strengths and weaknesses. The debate may rage for a few years but it will eventually fizzle out as the success of the novel sustains. The characters, plot, emotional appeal, and easily relatable situations are too strong for this book to crumble. The internal characteristics have provided a strong base to withstand the petty attacks on underdeveloped metaphors and transparent descriptions. The novel does not need confrontations with the Middle East to remain a staple in modern reading, it can hold its own based on its life lessons that anyone can use.
Andersen, Roy, Robert F. Seibert, and Jon G. Wagner. Politics and change in the Middle East: sources of conflict and accommodation. 9th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1982. Print.
Joyce, James. "Araby." 1914. Literature and Ourselves. Henderson, Gloria, ed. Boston, Longman Press. 2009. 984-988.
Anderson takes advantage of the “Notes” section at the end of each chapter to add credibility to any information that she did not receive directly: “Half a century ago, H. A. H. Gibb ventured a brief but cogent definition of the Arab. ‘All those are Arabs,’ he wrote, ‘for whom the central fact of history is the mission of Muhammad and the memory of the Arab Empire… (88)”. At the end of the chapter, Anderson cites this in the Notes section as “Bernard, Lewis, The Arabs in History, 9 (London: Hutchinson and Co., 1950). (105)”. This information not only adds credibly to the author, but it doesn’t overwhelm the reader with a lot of material at once, allowing them to enjoy the content.
After a wave of Arab nationalism swept through the region, the authority of the Ottoman Empire was undermined. Thus, various ethnic groups under the empire began to secede and form their own nations. Syria was one of them. In 1919, the Syrian and Arabian nationalist wanted to set up an independent nation with Fasial, who was the son of Sharif Hussein, the leader of Mecca in the Arabian Peninsula as their king. Instead, in 1920, the San Remo Conference put Syria under French control. This was later recognized by the League of Nations in 1922 where the French were given an official mandate to rule the country until it could stand on its own.
Perhaps the main reason I liked this book was the unfaltering courage of the author in the face of such torture as hurts one even to read, let alone have to experience first-hand. Where men give in, this woman perseveres, and, eventually, emerges a stronger person, if that is even possible. The book’s main appeal is emotional, although sound logical arguments are also used. This book is also interesting as it shows us another face of Nasir – the so-called “champion of Arab nationalism” – who is also the enemy of pan-Islamism. The book is also proof of history repeating itself in modern-day Egypt.