So, Is Berber New Year January 12 or January 14?

Just when you thought the holidays were finally over, more are about to hit: Amazigh ("Berber") New Year, and also by coincidence this year the Prophet's Birthday, Mawlid al-Nabi, both in the next few days.

But in the case of Yannayer, the so-called Amazigh New Year, there's some disagreement about the date, with some in Algeria celebrating on January 12, and others insisting on January 14.

Now, as I've explained at greater length a couple of years ago, Yannayer is part genuine traditional observance, and part a modern creation, a product of the contemporary Berber Revival. North African farmers traditionally followed a solar calendar or planting, since the Islamic calendar,being purely lunar, moves around the seasons and cannot be used as a agricultural calendar. This is the practice throughout the Middle East: In the Levant the old Syrian months are used, and in Egypt the Coptic calendar. North African agriculturalists kept the nmes of the old Roman months and followed the Julian calendar; New Year's is called "Yannayer," from "January." The Julian calendar is currently 13 days behind the Gregorian calendar, so the Julian New Year falls on January 14 under the Gregorian calendar.

Amazigh Flag

But many of the trappings of the modern Berber celebration are what the late historian Eric Hobsbawm called the "Invention of Tradition," modern creations aimed at reviving national identity. This includes the fact that this new year will be 2964 in the Berber Calendar. This calendar was a creation of the Académie Berbère, a group of young intellectuals, mostly Algerian Kabyles, who introduced the common Berber flag often seen today and popularized he use of the ancient Tifinagh alphabet to write Tamazight; it was somewhat arbitrarily decided to date th Berber calendar from 950 BC, when Pharaoh Shoshenq I ascended the throne of Egypt. Shoshenq (or Sheshonq) was Libyan, and that was good enough to persuade the Académie Berbère to consider him the first Berber in history. So the era does not really date from 950 BC but from Paris around 1968 AD.

And apparently the tendency of many Algerian Amazigh to celebrate Yannayer on January 12 instead of 14 also dates from 1968, though it isn't clear why the two-day difference from the Julian calendar occurred; some accounts suggest a simple error in calculation, though as Eastern Christmas jusy reminded us, many religions and cultures retain the Julian calendar for some purposes. Maybe it was the political ferment in Paris in 1968, or something, but the January 12 date seems to have stuck for some Algerian Amazigh, while elsewhere the January 14 date is followed. Given the post-2011 revival of Amazigh identity in Tunisia and Libya, which last year held a big concert for Yannayer, they also obsrve the holiday formerly limited mostly to Morocco and Algeria.

A happy new year to Amazigh readers, on whichever date you prefer.

Punic Survival Part Five: Did Punic Influence Arabization and Maghrebi Darija?

 I'm on vacation. As I've done in recent years, I've prepared a number of posts on topics of historical and cultural interest ahead of time, posts unlikely to be overtaken by events. There will be one or more of these per day, and I may drop in to comment on current developments as required.

For four posts now we have examined the question of whether Punic, the Phoenician language of Ancient Carthage and its colonies, survived as a spoken language (presumably alongside Berber and Latin, throughout the life of Roman North Africa. Some have argued that the presence of a Semitic vernacular in North Africa actually made the adoption of Arabic smoother, and some Punic enthusiasts have even gone so far as to argue that Punic influence can still be found in the spoken dialects (darija) of North Africa, along with Maltese (which, though today considered a separate language, has a grammatical structure comparable to North African Arabic dialects, though its Semitic vocabulary includes many borrowings from Romance and from Greek). Let's look at each of these assertions in turn.

It has often been noted that while the Arab conquests swept as far east as India and Central Asia and as far west as southern France, Arabic did not become the spoken language in all of that vast area; though Iran, India, and Central Asia became permanently Muslim, they retained or soon regained their original Persian, Turkic, or Indic vernaculars, though with a large input of religious and legal terms from Arabic. (Even in areas that did not remain Muslim, Arabic had a lasting influence; consider the huge presence of Arabic-based words in Spanish, and the entire Maltese language.)  But neither did Arabic remain limited to the Arabian Peninsula: it became firmly established from the Strait of Gibraltar to the Persian/Arab Gulf.

As far back as the era of Ernest Renan the idea was floated that Arabic remained established in those areas which already spoke a closely related language. Renan was an early comparative Semiticist; today the Semitic languages are understood not as a separate language family but as a sub-family of closely-related languages within the broader "Afro-Asiatic" language family (comparable to the way the Romance or Germanic or Iranian languages are embraced within the broader Indo-European famiily).

Although non-Semitic languages have always existed in the Levant and Iraq (Sumerian, Hittite, Armenian), it is indisputable that for more than a millennium before Arabic spread outside the Arabian Peninsula, closely related Semitic languages were dominant: first Akkadian/Assyrian/Babylonian, and later Aramaic/Syriac. There is little doubt that the spread of Arabic was greatly aided by the prior presence of a closely related language in Aramaic/Syriac; the Nabatean script, for example, originally was used to write Aramaic but gradually adapted to Old North Arabian, the immediate ancestor of Classical Arabic.  And early Arabic was sometimes written in the Syriac alphabet, the texts known as Karshuni in Arabic (Garshuni in Syriac). Arabic simply supplanted (though to this day not completely, for we have discussed modern Aramaic here frequently) the older, closely related language. In Jewish communities across the Arab world, various forms of Judeo-Arabic supplanted or were established alongside Hebrew and Aramaic.

The establishment of Arabic in Egypt and North Africa raises other questions, though. Last August my vacation postings examined why Coptic, which once was more entrenched than Aramaic, had died out as a spoken language while Aramaic has not. There are multiple reasons, but clearly Egypt is an Arabic-speaking country with only small pockets of Nubian and Siwi Berber speakers. If Arabic only took hold where Semitic languages were spoken, Egypt would seem to be a huge exception. And so would the rest of North Africa, though the survival of the Amazigh or Berber languages in the Maghreb show that Arabic is not as thoroughly entrenched as it is in Egypt. To this Maghrebists such as Georges and William Marçais and others have pointed to the survival of Punic as a factor facilitating the adoption of Arabic. But Punic was never spoken in Egypt, so what about Egypt?

Ancient Egyptian, and its later form Coptic, are not unrelated to Semitic; like the Berber languages and some other Saharan languages they are part of the broader Afro-Asiatic family, so one could say that Arabic took root because the languages were still related; that could also apply to the Berber languages of North Africa, regardless of any Punic survival. The Berber languages, while Afro-Asiatic, are much farther removed from the Semitic group than is Egyptian. Though not itself considered part of the Semitic sub-family, Egyptian has features that seem more Semitic than other Afro-Asiatic languages outside the Semitic group. Some basic vocabulary (including numerals an pronouns) are closely kin, as are some triliteral roots.

This question of whether Arabic put down deeper roots where Semitic languages were already spoken underlies much of the debate about the survival of Punic, and you can find, for example, an online discussion of some of the issues here.

But the question of Punic does not end with whether its survival made the adoption of Arabic easier. There are those who argue that a Punic substratum can still be identified in the colloquial dialects of North Africa (plus Maltese).  At first glance this seems extreme, but there is definitely a detectable Coptic substratum in colloquial Egyptian, and plenty of Berber loan-words in North African Arabic; could there be a Punic substratum as well? This argument today is primarily identified with the Algerian-born linguist Abdou Elimam, who is a strong advocate of treating the darija of the Maghreb as languages independent of if related to Standard Arabic.

At least one of Elimam's articles on Punic influence on Maghrebi can be found online: Du Punique au Maghribi: Trajectoires d’une langue sémito-méditerranéenne, published in Synergies Tunisie No. 1, 2009, pp. 29-38. The article (obviously) is in French, and while I believe he has written more extensively on this subject, I presume this summarizes his arguments.

Now Elimam is a Sorbonne-trained linguist and I certainly am neither, nor do I find anything impossible about the idea of an identifiable substratum of Punic in Maghrebi dialects of Arabic, but I am struck by several things. First, there is the rather tiny corpus of actual Punic texts, most of which tend to be tombstones, funerary inscriptions, and the like; Punic is a form of Phoenician but the total corpus of Phoenician texts is not great either, and the fact that we know as much as we do about either language is based in part on their extremely close resemblance to Hebrew. And all of these language are themselves relatively close to Arabic.

At the end of his article, Elimam presents a table showing vocabulary in common between Punic and Maghribi. These include Ab for father, Um for mother, bny for build, and so on. But wait: those are all good Arabic as well as good Canaanite (though modern Hebrew pronounces the first as Av today). For life he notes the similarity between Punic hayim and "Maghribi" hayat, but the latter is of course perfectly good Arabic as well. (To be fair, not all his examples are this obviously equivalent to Standard Arabic, but most are.) I have to say that this particular article doesn't completely convince me, but perhaps if I read more of his work I'd be persuaded.

UPDATE: By happy coincidence,  Lameen Souag just addressed Elimam's claims as well, as he notes in a comment below, though the blogpost is in darija.

I know this long discussion of Punic and Arabic may not have been everybody's cup of tea; on to other subjects in my remaining vacation posts, and back to normal blogging on Monday.

North African and Middle Eastern Popes, Part II: The Past

In yesterday's discussion of the (remote, at least this year) chances the Catholic College of Cardinals might elect a Middle Eastern Pope, I noted that it has happened in the past, mostly the very distant past. In this Part II of my post, I thought I'd review the Syrian, Palestinian, and North African Popes of the past. (There were also a number of Greek Popes, including Greeks from Anatolia, but I'm leaving them out.)

Catholics hold Saint Peter to have been the first Pope, installed by Jesus himself, and consider every Bishop of Rome after Peter to be a Pope, though of course the modern institution did not emerge until after the end of the Roman persecutions and the legalization of Christianity. Peter himself, of course, was a Middle Easterner himself, a Galilean fisherman; archaeologists in Capharnaum have excavated an ancient church built over what tradition says was his house. So the earliest Middle Eastern Pope., in Catholic tradition, is Saint Peter himself.

We're hearing talk about the possibility of an African Pope. That's happened before.  As the prominence of Saint Augustine and other early North African theologians in Church history remind us, North African Christianity had close ties with Rome and often provided intellectuals, theologians, and on a few occasions, Popes, to the Roman Church. Though some claim these men were black African, it is generally assumed that these early Popes were ethnically Berber/Amazigh, though some may have been Punic, also arguably the case with Saint Augustine, who understood some Punic. (But that's another post.)

In the traditional order, and after Peter, here are the Middle Eastern and North African Popes. (Most data based on The Catholic Encyclopedia online and Wikipedia.)

Pope Saint Evaristus, the fifth Pope, is said to have come from a family of Hellenized Jews and to have been born in Bethlehem.  He reigned about 99-107 AD during the reign of the Emperors Domitian and Trajan.

Pope Saint Anicetus. The 11th Pope; reigned either 150-167 or 153-168. He was born in Emesa (modern Homs) in Syria.

Pope Saint Victor I (189?-199?): The 14th Pope, still in the period of pagan rule. was Victor I. He is described as African and he may have been born at Leptis Magna in what is now Libya. His dates are often given as 189-199 AD, though some start his reign in 186 or extend it to 201.

Pope Saint Miltiades (or Melchiades) (311-314). The 32nd Pope. Though there is even some doubt about this Pope's exact name, he was Pope at the time of the Edict of Milan in 313, when Constantine legalized Christianity. He is said to be from Africa; the Roman province of Africa included Tunisia, parts of eastern Algeria and western Libya.

Pope Saint Gelasius I (492-496). The 49th Pope. A prolific writer and defender of Orthodoxy during the so called Acacian Schism. Also said to be North African, and the last of the African Popes.

The remaining Syrian Popes served in a period known as the "Byzantine Papacy," when, after the reconquest of the Italian Peninsula by the Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian, the Eastern Emperors had the power to choose or at least approve the choice of Pope (later delegated to the exarch of Ravenna, the Imperial seat in Italy). Most in this period were Greek,Syrian or Sicilian (Greek-speaking at the time).

Pope John V,  the 82nd Pope, reigned 695-686. Said to have been a Syrian and the son of one Cyriacus.

Pope Sergius I. the 84th Pope, 687-701, was born in Antioch but raised in Sicily; he struggled over doctrine with the Byzantine Emperor.

Pope Sisinnius, the 87th Pope, reigned for only 20 days in January-February 708. His date of birth 8s uncertain; if after the 630s he may have been born in Syria after the Islamic conquest.

Pope Constantine I. the 88th Pope, reigned 708-715; succeeded Sisinnius; like him, he is described as a Syrian with a father named John, and may have been Sisinnius' brother. Fought with several Byzantine Emperors over doctrinal issues.

Pope Saint Gregory III, 90th Pope, reigned 731-741. A Syrian, birth date unknown but perhaps born after the Islamic conquest; chosen by acclamation but approved by the Imperial Exarch at Ravenna, he struggled with the Emperor Leo III over the Iconoclastic controversy. His last years were spent in warrs with the Lombards.

Gregory III was the last of the Syrian Popes; his successor, Pope Saint Zachary, a Greek from Calabria, was the last of the "Byzantine" Popes. Syria and North Africa were now under Islam, and Italy was passing out of Byzantine control with the Lombard conquests.

The Syrian popes were: Evaristus (107), Anicetus (168), John V (687), Serguis I (701), Sisinnius (708), Constantine I (715), and Gregory III (732). I shall give brief biographical sketches of the Eastern popes among these who distinguished themselves in the government of the universal Church.
St. Anicetus (155-166) was an inhabitant of Hims, Syria and most likely was martyred under Marcus Aurelius. He is particularly noted for his efforts against the heresies of Valentine and Marcion. It was during his pontificate that St. Polycarp, the great Bishop of Smyrna, came to Rome in connection with the controversy about the date of Easter. His relics are kept now in the chapel of the Pontifical Spanish Institute and are venerated publicly with great ceremony on his annual feast day, April 17th.
John V (685-686), before his election, was the representative of the pope at Constantinople. He was a peacemaker and obtained tax exemption for the Roman domains of Sicily and Calabria from the Emperor of Constantinople.
Sergius I (687-701) came from a Syrian family, which had settled at Palermo, Sicily. Leo II appointed him the titular priest of the Church of St. Suzanna (he was responsible for its restoration). He championed the prerogatives of St. Peter against the Byzantine emperor Justinian II. As pope, he encouraged missionary work in France, England and Ireland. (He baptized the King of Wessex— Caedwalla.) He introduced into the Latin Liturgy, the prayer "Agnus Dei" at the moment of the breaking of the bread; he also solemnized the celebration of the four principal feasts of the Blessed Virgin: The Nativity, the Purification, the Annunciation, and the Dormition.
John VII (705-707) was a patron of the arts, responsible for the early mosaics of St. Peter's Basilica and the frescoes at St. Mary Antiqua, the finest extant examples of the art of his time.
Constantine I (708-715) was a champion of papal rights against the tyranny of the Byzantine emperors and against the Monothelite heresy, which taught that there was only one will in Christ. He was the first to wear the Tiara of Eastern origin. Most likely the lozenge shaped Greek "Epigonation" was adopted at this time. The pope alone among Western bishops wears it.
Gregory III (731-741) was a Benedictine of Syrian origin. He was noted for his linguistic abilities and his subtle sense of humor. A great missionary pope, he organized the religious structure of Germany under St. Boniface as Metropolitan. In 732, he condemned the Iconoclastic heresy and proclaimed his veneration for the holy images and relics by building a beautiful oratory, dedicated to all the saints, at Rome. It was he who obtained the political sovereignty of Rome (with himself as temporal ruler) from Pepin the Short. This sovereignty existed until 1870.
Zacharias (741-752) was last but not least of the great Eastern popes. He was a mild, meek man of great diplomacy and administration. An accomplished linguist, he translated into Greek the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Great. He was also a peacemaker with the emperor and furthered the work of St. Boniface in the final conversion of Germany.
- See more at: http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2741#sthash.TzcWDiKh.dpuf

The Syrian popes were: Evaristus (107), Anicetus (168), John V (687), Serguis I (701), Sisinnius (708), Constantine I (715), and Gregory III (732). I shall give brief biographical sketches of the Eastern popes among these who distinguished themselves in the government of the universal Church.
St. Anicetus (155-166) was an inhabitant of Hims, Syria and most likely was martyred under Marcus Aurelius. He is particularly noted for his efforts against the heresies of Valentine and Marcion. It was during his pontificate that St. Polycarp, the great Bishop of Smyrna, came to Rome in connection with the controversy about the date of Easter. His relics are kept now in the chapel of the Pontifical Spanish Institute and are venerated publicly with great ceremony on his annual feast day, April 17th.
John V (685-686), before his election, was the representative of the pope at Constantinople. He was a peacemaker and obtained tax exemption for the Roman domains of Sicily and Calabria from the Emperor of Constantinople.
Sergius I (687-701) came from a Syrian family, which had settled at Palermo, Sicily. Leo II appointed him the titular priest of the Church of St. Suzanna (he was responsible for its restoration). He championed the prerogatives of St. Peter against the Byzantine emperor Justinian II. As pope, he encouraged missionary work in France, England and Ireland. (He baptized the King of Wessex— Caedwalla.) He introduced into the Latin Liturgy, the prayer "Agnus Dei" at the moment of the breaking of the bread; he also solemnized the celebration of the four principal feasts of the Blessed Virgin: The Nativity, the Purification, the Annunciation, and the Dormition.
John VII (705-707) was a patron of the arts, responsible for the early mosaics of St. Peter's Basilica and the frescoes at St. Mary Antiqua, the finest extant examples of the art of his time.
Constantine I (708-715) was a champion of papal rights against the tyranny of the Byzantine emperors and against the Monothelite heresy, which taught that there was only one will in Christ. He was the first to wear the Tiara of Eastern origin. Most likely the lozenge shaped Greek "Epigonation" was adopted at this time. The pope alone among Western bishops wears it.
Gregory III (731-741) was a Benedictine of Syrian origin. He was noted for his linguistic abilities and his subtle sense of humor. A great missionary pope, he organized the religious structure of Germany under St. Boniface as Metropolitan. In 732, he condemned the Iconoclastic heresy and proclaimed his veneration for the holy images and relics by building a beautiful oratory, dedicated to all the saints, at Rome. It was he who obtained the political sovereignty of Rome (with himself as temporal ruler) from Pepin the Short. This sovereignty existed until 1870.
Zacharias (741-752) was last but not least of the great Eastern popes. He was a mild, meek man of great diplomacy and administration. An accomplished linguist, he translated into Greek the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Great. He was also a peacemaker with the emperor and furthered the work of St. Boniface in the final conversion of Germany.
- See more at: http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2741#sthash.TzcWDiKh.dpuf

The Syrian popes were: Evaristus (107), Anicetus (168), John V (687), Serguis I (701), Sisinnius (708), Constantine I (715), and Gregory III (732). I shall give brief biographical sketches of the Eastern popes among these who distinguished themselves in the government of the universal Church.
St. Anicetus (155-166) was an inhabitant of Hims, Syria and most likely was martyred under Marcus Aurelius. He is particularly noted for his efforts against the heresies of Valentine and Marcion. It was during his pontificate that St. Polycarp, the great Bishop of Smyrna, came to Rome in connection with the controversy about the date of Easter. His relics are kept now in the chapel of the Pontifical Spanish Institute and are venerated publicly with great ceremony on his annual feast day, April 17th.
John V (685-686), before his election, was the representative of the pope at Constantinople. He was a peacemaker and obtained tax exemption for the Roman domains of Sicily and Calabria from the Emperor of Constantinople.
Sergius I (687-701) came from a Syrian family, which had settled at Palermo, Sicily. Leo II appointed him the titular priest of the Church of St. Suzanna (he was responsible for its restoration). He championed the prerogatives of St. Peter against the Byzantine emperor Justinian II. As pope, he encouraged missionary work in France, England and Ireland. (He baptized the King of Wessex— Caedwalla.) He introduced into the Latin Liturgy, the prayer "Agnus Dei" at the moment of the breaking of the bread; he also solemnized the celebration of the four principal feasts of the Blessed Virgin: The Nativity, the Purification, the Annunciation, and the Dormition.
John VII (705-707) was a patron of the arts, responsible for the early mosaics of St. Peter's Basilica and the frescoes at St. Mary Antiqua, the finest extant examples of the art of his time.
Constantine I (708-715) was a champion of papal rights against the tyranny of the Byzantine emperors and against the Monothelite heresy, which taught that there was only one will in Christ. He was the first to wear the Tiara of Eastern origin. Most likely the lozenge shaped Greek "Epigonation" was adopted at this time. The pope alone among Western bishops wears it.
Gregory III (731-741) was a Benedictine of Syrian origin. He was noted for his linguistic abilities and his subtle sense of humor. A great missionary pope, he organized the religious structure of Germany under St. Boniface as Metropolitan. In 732, he condemned the Iconoclastic heresy and proclaimed his veneration for the holy images and relics by building a beautiful oratory, dedicated to all the saints, at Rome. It was he who obtained the political sovereignty of Rome (with himself as temporal ruler) from Pepin the Short. This sovereignty existed until 1870.
Zacharias (741-752) was last but not least of the great Eastern popes. He was a mild, meek man of great diplomacy and administration. An accomplished linguist, he translated into Greek the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Great. He was also a peacemaker with the emperor and furthered the work of St. Boniface in the final conversion of Germany.
- See more at: http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2741#sthash.TzcWDiKh.dpuf

The Syrian popes were: Evaristus (107), Anicetus (168), John V (687), Serguis I (701), Sisinnius (708), Constantine I (715), and Gregory III (732). I shall give brief biographical sketches of the Eastern popes among these who distinguished themselves in the government of the universal Church.
St. Anicetus (155-166) was an inhabitant of Hims, Syria and most likely was martyred under Marcus Aurelius. He is particularly noted for his efforts against the heresies of Valentine and Marcion. It was during his pontificate that St. Polycarp, the great Bishop of Smyrna, came to Rome in connection with the controversy about the date of Easter. His relics are kept now in the chapel of the Pontifical Spanish Institute and are venerated publicly with great ceremony on his annual feast day, April 17th.
John V (685-686), before his election, was the representative of the pope at Constantinople. He was a peacemaker and obtained tax exemption for the Roman domains of Sicily and Calabria from the Emperor of Constantinople.
Sergius I (687-701) came from a Syrian family, which had settled at Palermo, Sicily. Leo II appointed him the titular priest of the Church of St. Suzanna (he was responsible for its restoration). He championed the prerogatives of St. Peter against the Byzantine emperor Justinian II. As pope, he encouraged missionary work in France, England and Ireland. (He baptized the King of Wessex— Caedwalla.) He introduced into the Latin Liturgy, the prayer "Agnus Dei" at the moment of the breaking of the bread; he also solemnized the celebration of the four principal feasts of the Blessed Virgin: The Nativity, the Purification, the Annunciation, and the Dormition.
John VII (705-707) was a patron of the arts, responsible for the early mosaics of St. Peter's Basilica and the frescoes at St. Mary Antiqua, the finest extant examples of the art of his time.
Constantine I (708-715) was a champion of papal rights against the tyranny of the Byzantine emperors and against the Monothelite heresy, which taught that there was only one will in Christ. He was the first to wear the Tiara of Eastern origin. Most likely the lozenge shaped Greek "Epigonation" was adopted at this time. The pope alone among Western bishops wears it.
Gregory III (731-741) was a Benedictine of Syrian origin. He was noted for his linguistic abilities and his subtle sense of humor. A great missionary pope, he organized the religious structure of Germany under St. Boniface as Metropolitan. In 732, he condemned the Iconoclastic heresy and proclaimed his veneration for the holy images and relics by building a beautiful oratory, dedicated to all the saints, at Rome. It was he who obtained the political sovereignty of Rome (with himself as temporal ruler) from Pepin the Short. This sovereignty existed until 1870.
Zacharias (741-752) was last but not least of the great Eastern popes. He was a mild, meek man of great diplomacy and administration. An accomplished linguist, he translated into Greek the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Great. He was also a peacemaker with the emperor and furthered the work of St. Boniface in the final conversion of Germany.
- See more at: http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=2741#sthash.TzcWDiKh.dpuf

Some Good Stuff on Mali and Timbuktu

The war in Mali has produced a great deal of opinion, most of it rather ill-informed.  Here are several very different readings (two from the modern policy world and two more historical) that may help clarify matters:

Laura Seay, Mali is Not a Stan, at Foreign Policy, argues that comparisons to Afghanistan (in addition to some fairly obvious topographical differences) misreads the situation; the French were invited in, know the country well, and are not plunging into a quagmire.

Marc Lynch, at Foreign Policy's Middle East Channel, asked his readers, Is Mali Part of the Middle East?  The conclusion is no, but certainly the events in Mali have resonances in the Maghreb, as the Algerian gas plant attack showed.  My on approach on this blog is to be as inclusive as possible; when Mali affects events in North Africa, we can look at it, though that doesn't make it part of the Middle East. But historically, it is part of the greater trading area for North Africa (as the Indian Ocean is for the Gulf), and will occasionally demand attention.

On more cultural issues, the African and Berber linguistics blogger Lameen Souag, at his Jabal al-Lughat blog, knows the territory well (one of his specialties is Songhay, the language group which includes the dominant language in Timbuktu). has two useful posts: "On Book-Burning in Timbuktu", and "Languages of Timbuktu," the latter of which seeks to clear up some confusion about the ethnicities and languages in the city.


http://lughat.blogspot.com/2013/01/languages-of-timbuktu.html

Timbuktu's Lost Libraries

All wars lead to some destruction of parts of the world's cultural heritage, but the deliberate burning of books and the destruction of works of art seems a particularly barbarous event. It is especially outrageous when it is done in the name of the very religion that created the books and art. Yet the Jihadis who burned the Ahmed Baba Institute in Timbuktu (having already destroyed most of the Sufi shrines in the area) have almost certainly burned far more Qur'ans than Western Islamophobes have ever dreamt of doing. When the Taliban destroyed the Buddhas of Bamiyan it was equally appalling, but at least they could claim to be destroying idols; in Timbuktu, the modern Vandals destroyed some of the most precious treasures of Islamic culture.

European Image of Mansa Musa

The golden age of Timbuktu was golden indeed, and the wealth of the 14th Century Emperor Mansa Musa was so vast that even the European map at left considered him one of the main points of interest in all of Africa.

The news is not all bad; locals managed to preserve at least some of the thousands of ancient manuscripts, though just how bad the losses are may take some time to appreciate. But the losses are certain to be profound, however much mitigated.

The Moroccans at the Casablanca Conference: the Sultan Dines with FDR and Churchill: Did FDR Support Moroccan Independence?

In my post yesterday on the 70th anniversary of the Casablanca Conference, I said that it was "in, but not of" Morocco, and that Moroccans were excluded from the  bubble in which it took place. That was not of course, 100% true: Morocco was a French Protectorate, not a colony, and its ruler was technically Sultan (later King) Mohammed V (Muhammad V). (I've posted previously about General George S. Patton's impressions of the Sultan.) Ceremonially speaking, at least, he was the host of the Conference (though not involved in the negotiations), and on January 22, President Franklin Roosevelt hosted a banquet in honor of the nominal host. (But read on: there's some evidence FDR was sending an anti-colonial message to the French by hosting the Sultan) Photos of this event seem few and far between, and this is the only one I could find, but it shows most of the key players and offers a good introduction to talking about the banquet.

On the couch: Sultan Mohammed V, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Back row from left: Gen. George S. Patton (US Military Commander in Morocco), Robert Murphy (US diplomatic representative in French North Africa), Harry Hopkins (Roosevelt aide and personal friend), Moroccan Crown Prince Moulay Hassan (future King Hassan II, then 13), General Charles Noguès (French Governor-General of Morocco), the Moroccan Chief of Protocol, the Moroccan Grand Vizier, Lt. Col. Elliott Roosevelt (the President's son), Roosevelt's Naval Aide Captain John L. McCrea.

General Patton's diary offers one memory of the evening:

At dinner  . . .  President, Sultan, Protocol, self, Crown Prince. Elliott Roosevelt, Nogues, Hopkins, Murphy. Grand Vizier, Churchill. No wine, only orange juice and water. Churchill was very rude, the President was great, talking volubly in bad French and really doing his stuff. After dinner we had [motion] pictures and more talk . . .

I rode with Sultan and Grand Vizier to house of latter. On way Sultan said, "Truly your President is a very great man and a great friend of myself and of my people. He shines by comparison with the other one."[presumably Churchill] . . .

Nogues was delighted that the P.M. was such a boor. [The Patton Papers. Vol. II. p. 158]

General Noguès, by the way, was a Vichy holdover who had vacillated so much in negotiation with the Americans that General Eisenhower reportedly referred to him as "General No-Yes."

Harry Hopkins' notes add some color:

The Sultan arrived at 7:40, which caused me to put on my black tie for the first time on this trip. He had expressed a desire to see the President alone prior to Churchill's arrival at eight, and he came loaded with presents — a gold dagger for the President, and some gold bracelets for Mrs Roosevelt, and a gold tiara which looked to me like the kind the gals wear in the circus, riding on white horses. I can just see Mrs. Roosevelt when she takes a look at this. The Sultan wore white silk robes. Apparently the etiquette prohibits the drinking of liquor publicly, so we had nothing alcoholic either before, during, or after dinner. I fortified myself an hour earlier, however.

Also, no part of a pig may be eaten, and the Sultan didn't smoke. He had a young son there with a red fez on, which he kept on while eating. He was a kid about thirteen who seemed quite bright. [Moulay Hassan: the future King Hassan II, reigned 1961-1999.]

. . . Churchill was glum at dinner and seemed to be real bored. . .The President gave the Sultan his picture in a handsome silver frame.  and a good time seemed to be had by all, except the Prime Minister. [Robert Sherwood, Roosevelt and Hopkins, 689-690]

Churchill had apparently just met with de Gaulle; that, combined with the absence of alcohol and tobacco (which Churchill normally considered essentials at dinner), might explain his mood, as our next quote also suggests.Though Churchill's massive six volume memoir of the war is far more extensive than other memoirs, I find no mention in it of the dinner at all.

The Patton and Hopkins anecdotes give us lots of color and Orientalist exoticism. Robert Murphy, writing many years later in his 1964 memoir,  Diplomat Among Warriors,  offers a very different, anti-colonialist spin:

The evening of the day De Gaulle arrived in Casablanca, just before he and Roosevelt were to meet with each other for the first time, the President gave a dinner in honor of the Sultan of Morocco. This affair was entirely Roosevelt's own idea. He had not forgotten the reluctance of General Nogues to deliver his letter to the Sultan at the time of the landings, and one of the first things the President asked me to do was to arrange an intimate little dinner at his villa. The Sultan was accompanied by his eldest son, and the other guests were Nogues — who was invited as the Sultan's Foreign Minister under the French Protectorate — Churchill, Macmillan, Marshall, Patton, Hopkins, Elliott Roosevelt, and me. [Other memoirs don't mention George C. Marshall's or Macmillan's presence, nor is he in the photo. Harold Macmillan might have been left out but it's unlikely Marshall would not have been in the photo when his subordinate Patton was, nor can I find any evidence in his biographies that he attended.] In deference to the Sultan's Moslem code of behavior, no alcoholic beverages of any kind were served before, during, or after the dinner. Perhaps it was this rare abstinence which caused the British Prime Minister to be unnaturally glum throughout the evening, or perhaps he remained silent because he regarded the whole occasion as deliberately provocative.

The President began the serious conversation by expressing sympathy with colonial aspirations for independence, and soon he was proposing to the Sultan that arrangements should be made after the war for American-Moroccan economic co-operation. Nogues, who had devoted his career to fortifying the French position in Morocco, could not conceal his outraged feelings. Hopkins observed that Nogues seemed to be uneasy "because he knows we may throw him out any minute." I suggested to Hopkins, "Perhaps the President’s approaches to the Sultan also aggravate Nogues’s fears about American designs on the French Empire. From the point of view of any imperialist — including De Gaulle and Churchill— the President’s conversation with the Sultan could seem subversive." With an impatient shrug, Hopkins changed the subject.

Of course, De Gaulle's informants told him about the President's overtures to the Sultan. and this increased the General's distrust of Roosevelt. Although it was De Gaulle, and not the Americans, who eventually threw Nogues out of his position in Morocco, De Gaulle saw eye to eye with Nogues on what De Gaulle has described as Roosevelt's "insinuations" to the Sultan. De Gaulle recorded in his memoirs that the Sultan remained loyal to France in spite of Roosevelt's interference . . . (Diplomat Among Warriors, 172-173)

The Sultan would be deposed later, not by de Gaulle. and then returned to power and be elevated to King on Moroccan independence. Though ignored by diarists at the time, Roosevelt's probing the Sultan for future post-colonial relations is characteristic of his known attitudes.

[An editorial addendum since I'm an editor and all: I've kept all spellings as in the original. None of the Americans put the accent on Noguès (though the "General No-Yes" joke only makes sense if you pronounce it Noguès), and Murphy insists on "De Gaulle" rather than the more correct "de Gaulle."]

New Year's Eve, 1942/43: FDR's North African Inside Joke

Seventy years ago today, December 31, 1942, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt prepared to celebrate New Year's Eve in the White House with a gathering of family and close friends. The festivities included the showing of a new film that had had its premiere but was not yet in general release, so few would have known of it beforehand.

Meanwhile, in the previous week plans had been firmed up for what had to be one of the closest-held secrets of the war: in the coming weeks Roosevelt was to leave on his first wartime trip outside North America. He was planning to travel secretly in a roundabout way by seaplane and aircraft to recently liberated North Africa, Winston Churchill would also be there, as would the US and British Chiefs of Staff. Security of the secret summit, code-named SYMBOL, had to be absolute. Germany would love to intercept either of the two men.

General Eisenhower, the Allied Commander in North Africa, had been asked to find a suitably secure place (in territory held by Vichy only weeks before). Two days before New Year's Eve, Eisenhower reported to General Marshall:

Reconnaissance by Churchill's secretary and [Gen. Bedell] Smith's representative have found a very suitable site for operation "Symbol." It consists of a hotel surrounded by a group of excellent villas situated five miles south of Casablanca and one mile inland. Area is detached and lends itself to segregation and can be guarded easily. Airfield is two miles away and is suitable  for B-24s except in very rainy weather . . .

The site, at a resort area known as Anfa, was chosen, and thus once it became public, SYMBOL would be better known as the Casablanca Conference.

Roosevelt, of course, could not reveal any of this to most of his New Year's Eve guests. Some did notice that his New Year's Eve toast, usually "To the United States of America," added the phrase, "and the United Nations" [that is, the Allies]. Some guests may have noted this, but few of them could have been aware of his little inside joke. The new film he screened that night, not yet in general release, was a wartime romance with Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman. It was called Casablanca. You may have heard of it.

For D-Day: Remembering a Decorated Moroccan Regiment in the Liberation of France

Emblem, 1er Spahis Marocains

Today is the 68th Anniversary of the D-Day Landings in Normandy. Usually when we talk of World War II, even the North African campaigns, the fighting in Syria and Lebanon, the interventions in Iraq and Iran, we picture Europeans fighting in Middle Eastern countries, and rarely think of Middle Easterners unless it is Anwar Sadat being arrested for links to a German spy, or Moshe Dayan losing an eye fighting against Vichy in Lebanon. Not only do we forget the many French colonials who fought in the Free French Forces, but so do their countrymen today, since having fought for the colonial power is often, But North Africans fought and died not only in North Africa and the Middle East, but also in the liberation of Italy and of France itself. That they fought under a colonial flag has dimmed their memory at home. I thought a suitable D-Day commemoration might be to remember one of them.

None seem to have actually landed at Normandy on June 6, but many were already on French soil, having landed with the Dragoon landings in the South of France. (The only Free French engaged on D-Day were paratroops.) But General Leclerc's Second Armored Division, consisting of many North African, West African, and Equatorial African units (not all of indigenous troops: the Chasseurs d'Afrique were largely Algerian pieds noirs, French and other European colonials, and the Foreign Legion units of course were international, but French-officered). Leclerc's troops famously took the lead (with Allied consent) in the liberation of Paris. I thought for D-Day I'd note a Moroccan unit that had a distinguished career. The 1er Regiment de Marche de Spahis Marocains not only fought well in Europe but in other theaters as well. The regiment holds the Croi de Guerre and the Liberation Cross. When the last Spahi (native cavalry) units were disbanded in 1962 with Algerian independence, the 1st Regiment of Spahis (no longer Marocains) was retained, and continues as the inheritor of the tradition of all the Spahi units. For the current unit and its history, see here (official page, in French). For its history, there is an English Wikipedia page,  and a more detailed account in French here

The regiment was created in 1914 as a light cavalry unit by General (later Marshal) Lyautey, and served on the Marne and then on the Greek front. It then was deployed to Syria and Lebanon when France occupied its mandates there. Like all Spahi units, the officers were French.

At the time of the fall of France it was stationed in Syria. At the Fall of France part of the force crossed into Transjordan and Palestine to join British forces, and became part of the Free French forces, The still-Vichy part of the force later fought against the Allies in Morocco. The Free French unit was mechanized (it had been horse cavalry up till then) and the personnel came to include more French, though it remained a Moroccan unit. It fought with the British in Eritrea and in the North African campaign, and joined Leclerc's Second Armored Division as a reconnaissance unit. It landed at Normandy August 1 with Leclerc, took part in the Liberation of Paris, and sustained heavy casualties in fighting in France and Germany, and took part in the capture of Hitler's retreat at Berchtesgaden.

After the war it served for a time in the occupation of Germany, and also saw action in the French Indochina War. Its successor unit in the French Army saw action in  Operation Desert Storm in 1991.

The regimental campaign flag:

The Moor on MUJWA

Kal at The Moor Next Door has a lengthy piece on the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa (MUJWA), which has been playing a role in the events in northern Mali and whose exact relationship with Al-Qa‘ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is still a bit murky. An important piece I think for anyone interested in jihadist movements, the Maghreb, Sahara, or Sahel, etc.

And a reminder that his blog is a good resource for North Africa generally but especially for Algeria and Mauritania, as well as, increasingly, the whole Azawad separatist conflict.

For Memorial Day: the US Military Cemetery, Carthage, Tunisia

US Battle Monuments Commission Photo

Twenty years ago or so, an airline check-in agent in Washington, noting my ticket was to Frankfurt and Tunis, asked me if Tunis was in Germany. Many hours later, taxiing into town from Tunis-Carthage airport, I saw the sign for the turnoff to the US Military Cemetery at Carthage, where 2,841 American military personnel lie fallen, victims of a somewhat forgotten campaign, buried near a city which at least one airline employee had not heard of.  The juxtaposition of events stuck in my mind. Of the 24 officially-maintained US Military Cemeteries overseas, there is only one in the Middle East and North Africa, the one at Carthage, Tunisia, for the dead of the North Africa campaign. As the American Battle Monuments Commission website notes:

At the 27-acre North Africa American Cemetery and Memorial in Tunisia rest 2,841 of our military dead, their headstones set in straight lines subdivided into nine rectangular plots by wide paths, with decorative pools at their intersections. Along the southeast edge of the burial area, bordering the tree-lined terrace leading to the memorial is the Wall of the Missing. On this wall 3,724 names are engraved. Rosettes mark the names of those since recovered and identified. Most honored here lost their lives in World War II in military activities ranging from North Africa to the Persian Gulf.

Though it is the only US military cemetery in the Middle East, the North Africa campaign of World War II was sadly neither our first war in the region ("...to the shores of Tripoli") nor our last, obviously. But on this day when Americans venerate their fallen of all wars, it seems an appropriate, if little-known, place to remember. Perhaps we do not remember the fighting in Tunisia because our first battle there, at Kasserine, was a disaster. Aside from the 1970 film Patton, Tunisia is little discussed.

 Here is the video from the American Battle Monuments Commission:


Added: Erik Churchill's Kefteji blog visits the Memorial Day ceremonies. 

For Memorial Day, for the fallen of all wars, Taps. Memorial Day began as a US holiday to remember what is still our bloodiest and most uncivil war, the Civil War, so I've always felt it appropriate to remember the fallen of both sides in war.

The Moor on Mali

Now that Mali has intruded itself into our consciousness (the Algerians, Mauritanians etc. were already quite aware of it) and multiple and rival revolutionary groups have been appearing, it's hard to tell the players without a scorecard. To help interpret the mysteries of MUJWA and other groups, The Moor Next Door offers a primer of sorts.

"Azawad": Will Algeria be Drawn Into the Mali Conflict?

The proclamation of an independent "Azawad" by Tuaregs who, with their Islamist allies (or rivals?) have taken northern Mali in the wake of the coup in Bamako (where the coup-makers are now standing down) has raised concerns throughout the Maghreb, but most intensely in Algeria. Seven Algerian diplomats were reportedly kidnapped in Gao, but now have reportedly been released. The kidnappers were supposedly from the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa (MUJWA in its English acronym, MUJAO in its French), an offshoot that broke from Al-Qa‘ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). Though the diplomats are now said to be free, Algeria is talking tough and saying it cannot accept the breakup of Mali, and there is growing concern that the northern extension of Mali could become a new rogue state aiming at destabilizing the region. Algeria has already had to face raids by AQIM from across its southern border. There were reports even before the kidnappings that Algerian special forces might intervene in Mali (report is in French).

But unsurprisingly, it's kal at The Moor Next Door who has a lot more about the Algerian buildup and the possibility of Algerian intervention. His article, quoting various Algerian reports, seems to suggest that Algeria might intervene in cooperation with the MNLA, the Tuareg force that initially won the north and then found its Islamist rivals pushing it out of the cities. But Algeria is also pledged to the unity of Mali, and cooperation with the MNLA might seem to contradict that goal. Kal's analysis was written before the diplomats' release, so the likelihood of an immediate Algerian intervention may now be much reduced.

There is still considerable confusion about the roles of the Tuareg MNLA, the Islamist Ansar Eddine, and MUJWA in the occupation of the north but they clearly have fallen out among themselves. Al-Jazeera English did score an unusual first with a report on the Ansar Eddine from Timbuktu (and where did they get the tanks?):

MEI Poetry Reading by Nomi Stone

Back in April some of you may recall my linking to a Jerusalem Post report in my post "Article About One of Our Own," both dealing with Nomi Stone, anthropologist and poet who was, until summer 2008, Assistant Editor of The Middle East Journal. She's currently pursuing her doctorate at Columbia.

Nomi was one of the best editors I've ever worked with, but she's also a published poet and a Ph.D. candidate in anthropology. Her Oxford MA was earned for her work studying the Jewish community in Djerba, Tunisia, but she has also published a book of poetry based on the experiences of an Arabic-speaking American Jewish woman (daughter of a Reform rabbi, no less) living in one of the few flourishing Jewish communities surviving in North Africa. Her book of poetry, Stranger's Notebook, takes its name, in part at least, from the name of the ancient and famous synagogue on Djerba, the Ghriba (stranger).

Nomi will be giving a reading from her poetic work on Friday, June 19, from 6 to 8 at MEI. I probably won't be able to make it, but wanted to strongly urge others to try to do so:

Friday, June 19, 2009
6:00-8:00 PM
MEI’s Islamic Garden
1761 N Street NW
Washington, DC 20036

Refreshments will be served.
Please RSVP to kdavies@mei.edu.

For D-Day: Remembering North Africans in the Liberation of Europe in WW II

Tomorrow we'll be hearing a lot about the 65th Anniversary of D-Day. One forgotten aspect of World War II is that, while most people familiar with the war are well aware of the fighting in Egypt and North Africa (and buffs will also know about the fighting in the Levant and Iraq), the role of Middle Easterners in the liberation of Europe is easily forgotten. Yet Free French units in Sicily and Italy, and General Leclerc's Second Free French Division in France from August 1, 1944, and Free French Forces pushing up from southern France in Operation Dragoon, all included Moroccan and Algerian (though this includes pieds noirs), and some Tunisian, units. Thus North Africans in French uniform participated in all the major campaigns of the Western Front, including the liberation of Paris.

In this post-colonial era, the record of colonial troops fighting for the colonial mother country is often forgotten. But a look at some of the units in the Free French order of battle shows a substantial number of rank-and-file North Africans fighting in Europe from Sicily onward. Though only special forces of Fighting France went ashore on D-Day proper, there were plenty of North African troops in Europe already. Perhaps French celebrations of liberation should include a crescent as well as the Cross of Lorraine.