Few of the Egyptian schoolboys who now memorize the principles of Arab socialism have heard of Farah Antûn,ShiblîShumayyil, or Niqûlâ Haddâd. Yet in the opening decades of the twentieth century this trio of Syrian Christians living in Egypt — along with the Coptic intellectual Salâmah Mûsâ — were among the foremost advocates of socialism in the Arab world. What was the connection between these Christian pioneers and the widespread but as yet ill-defined Arab socialism of today? The answer will fully emerge only as the roots of Arab socialism are probed. A beginning can be made by examining these writers themselves, why they were attracted to Western socialism, what they understood by it, and how they proposed to adapt and apply it to the Middle East. A correct evaluation of their positions depends to a considerable extent on understanding the precarious, but not entirely hopeless position, of the Christian minorities in a Muslim world which had long despised them.

^{page 177 note 1}Jaber,Kamel S. Abu,The Arab Ba'th Socialist Party (Syracuse, N.Y.,1966), pp.1–5Google Scholar, has some brief observations on early socialism in the Arab world. See alsoKerr,Malcolm, ‘Notes on the Background of Arab Socialist Thought’,Journal of Contemporary History, vol.III (1968), pp.145–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar I have not yet been able to see a copy ofHanna,Sami A. andGardner,George,Arab Socialism (Leiden,1969).Google Scholar ‘Syria’ in this study refers to geographical Syria, the area included in present-day Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.

^{page 177 note 2} On Ottoman careers seeItzkowitz,Norman, ‘Mebmed Raghib Pasha: The Making of an Ottoman Grand Vizier’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,Princeton University,1959), pp.15–17.Google Scholar

^{page 177 note 3} The various Middle Eastern nationalisms, which have received considerable attention, will not be treated here. The attractions of thelaissez faire ideology for Syrian Christians are discussed inReid,Donald M., ‘Syrian Christians, the Rags to Riches Story, and Free Enterprise’. The journalists Ya'qûb Sarrûf and Jurjî Zaydân were two of the leading advocates of free enterprise.Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 1} For similar reasons other minority groups – including Armenians, Jews, Kurds, Italians, and Greeks – have been prominent in socialist and communist movements in the Arab world. A language barrier as well as a religious barrier separates some of these groups from Muslim audiences, a problem the Syrian Christians did not have. On the role of these groups in the communist movements, seeLaqueur,Walter Z.,Communism and Nationalism in the Middle East (New York,1956), pp.221–35et passim. Laqueur does not comment on the role of the Copts in leftist movements.Google Scholar

^{page 178 note 2}Byrnes,Robert F.,Antisemitisin in Modern France (New Brunswick, N.J.,1950), vol.I, discusses the antisemitism of both the left and the right.Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 1} This approach to winning Muslim acceptance is also illustrated by Antûn's assistance to the Egyptian nationalist movement. SeeReid,Donald M., ‘Farah Antūn: The Life and Times of a Syrian Christian Journalist in Egypt’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,Princeton University,1968), pp.268–72.Google Scholar

^{page 179 note 2}‘Fasâd Madhab al-Ishtirâkîyîn’,al-Muqtataf, vol.XIV (1890), pp.361–4.Google ScholarAl-Hilâi also took up socialism in order to refute it; see, for example‘al-Ishtirâkîyûn’,al-Hilâl, vol.IX (1900), pp.20–1.Google Scholar The point on learning about socialism from its enemies is illustrated by Salâmah Mûsâ, one of Sarrûf's readers. Mûsâ first discovered Marx as an opponent, since he identified himself with Spencer's individualistic, free-enterprise school. Mûsâ, of course, soon changed his mind. SeeMūsā,Salāma,The Education of Salāmah Mūsā (trans.Schuman,L. O.,Leiden,1961), p.83.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 1}‘al-Ishtirâkîyûn wa al-Fawdawiyûn’,al-Muqtaf, vol.XVIII (1894), pp.721–9, 801–9.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 2} Antûn is discussed inHourani,Albert,Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age, 1798–1939 (London,1962), pp.253–9Google Scholar, andReid, ‘Farah Antūn’.Google Scholar

^{page 180 note 3} Zaydân's experience is mentioned inReid,, ‘Syrian Christians, the Rags-to-Riches Story, and Free Enterprise’,IJMES, vol.I, no.4 (101970), pp.361–2.Google Scholar

^{page 181 note 1}A few years later Antûn's stay in America provided him with first hand experience of the English-speaking world and a modern capitalist economy, an experience which confirmed his preference for socialism. By this time, however, he had already written his most important works.Google Scholar

^{page 181 note 2}al-Dîn wa al-'Ilm wa al-Mâl: al-Mudun al-Thalâth (Alexandria,1904).Google Scholar

^{page 181 note 3}Elsewhere Antûn specifically links individualism and free enterprise with the names of Darwin, Spencer, and Nietzsche. For example,al-Jâmi'ah al-Usbû'îyah, 31 October1908, p. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 1}al-Dîn, Introduction.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 2}‘Ūrûshlîm al-Jadîdah wa Ârâ' al-Rusafâ'’,al-Jâmi'ah, vol.IV (1904),371–4.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 3}‘al-Tarbîyah al-Thâlithah (al-Ijtimâ'îyah)’,al-Jâmi'ah, vol.I (1900), p.575.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 4}‘Ibrah Aghniyâ’ al-Sharq wa al-Gharb’,al-Jâmi'ah, vol.III (1901), p.314.Google Scholar

^{page 182 note 5}ûrûshlîm al-Jadîdah (Alexandria,1904).Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 1} For al-Afghânî's ideas on socialism seeHanna,Sami, ‘Al-Afghānī: A Pioneerof Islamic Socialism’,The Muslim World, vol.LVII (1967), pp.24–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Al-Kawâkibî's socialism is treated inal-Husry,Khaldun S.,Three Reformers: A Study in Modern Arab Political Thought (Beirut,1966.), pp.74–8.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 2} The following analysis ofShumayyil's socialism is partially based on Hourani,Arabic Thought, pp. 248–53.Google ScholarLecerf,Jean, ‘Šibli Šumayyil, métaphysicien et moraliste contemporaine’,Bulletin d'études orientales, Vol.I (1931), pp.153–86Google Scholar, is a useful study, although it overrates his influence and does not mention his socialism. Lecerf's reasons for placingShumayyil's birth about 1850 instead of the generally accepted 1860 seem convincing. See pages 156, 173. A bibliography of Shumayyil's works is included inDâghir,Yûsuf As'ad,Masâdir al-Dirâsat al-Adabîah (Beirut,1955), vol.II, pp.497–500.Google Scholar His scattered writings are brought together inFalsafah al-Nussh' wa al-Irtiqâ' (Cairo,1910)Google Scholar andMajmû'ah al-DuktûrShiblîShumayyil (Cairo,1910).Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 3}Shumayyil,Shiblî, ‘al-Ishtir^kîyah al-Sahîhah’,al-Muqtataf, vol.XLII (1913), pp.9–16.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 1} On AmînShumayyil seeLecerf,,Bulletin d'études orientales, vol.I (1931), pp.153–86Google Scholar, andZaydân,Jurjî,Tatâjim Mashâhâhîr al-Sharq (2nd ed.,Cairo,1922), vol.II, pp.169–71.Google Scholar On RashidShumayyil andal-Basîr seeZiriklî,Khayr al-Dîn,al-A'lâm (Cairo,1954–1959), vol.III, pp.48–9Google Scholar, and‘The Native Press of Egypt’,The Moslem World, vol.VII (1917), p.418.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 2} Lecerf,ibid. pp. 168 ff.

^{page 184 note 3}Onal-Shifâ' see Reid, ‘Farah Antûn’.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 4} For a perceptive study of social Darwinism in America, seeHofstadter,Richard,Social Darwinism in American Thought (Boston,1955).Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 5}Shumayyil,,al-Muqtaaf, vol.XLII (1913), pp.15–16.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note 1} For the positive and negative reactions toShumayyi1's Darwinism seeLecerf,,Bulletin d'études orientales, vol.I (1931), esp. p.159Google Scholar, andSafran,Nadav,Egypt in Search of Political Community (Cambridge, Mass.,1961), pp.281–2, n. 56.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note 2} Haddâd is treated inDâghir,Masddir, vol. II, pp. 304–9Google Scholar andReid, ‘Farah Antûn’, p. 101.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 1}‘al-Hubb wa al-Zawāj’,al-J^nzi'ah, vol.III (1902), pp.275–7.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 2}The magazine had been started by Farah Antûn and his sister under the titleal-Sayyidât. wa al-Banât in 1903. Haddâd had later assisted Rûzâ until the magazine was discontinued in 1906. When they revived it in 1921, the Haddâds called it simplyal-Sayyidât. From 1924 until its disappearance in 1930 it was published asal-Sayyidât wa al-Rijâl.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 3}Gibb,H. A. R., ‘Studies in Contemporary Arabic Literature’,Studies on the Civilization of Islam (London,1962), p.300.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 4} Haddâd's earlier articles on related subjects are inal-Jâmi'ah, vols. v and VI (1906–1909)Google Scholar, andal-Jâmi'ah al-Usbû'îyah (1907–1909).Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 5} For a brief summary of Henry George's life and ideas seeHeilbronner,Robert L.,The Worldly Philosophers (2nd ed.,New York,1961), pp.156–63.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 6} See the comments onShumayyil's socialism inHourani,Arabic Thought, pp. 252–3Google Scholar, andKerr,,Journal of Contemporary History, vol.III (1968), p.151.Google Scholar It does not seem quite accurate to say, with Kerr, thatShumayyil's socialism was devoid of economic content for it did involve guaranteed employment by the state and state guarantees of equal wages.

^{page 187 note 1}Haddâd,Niqûlâ,al-Ishtirâkîyah (Cairo,1920)Google Scholar, reprinted inJâbir,Kâmil Abû (ed.),Judhûr al-Ishtirâk^yah (Beirut,1964), pp.153–76.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 2}Ibid. pp. 147–52.

^{page 187 note 3}Ibid. pp. 164–5.

^{page 187 note 4}Ibid. pp. 129–38.

^{page 187 note 5}Ibid. p. 179.

^{page 187 note 6}Ibid. pp. 183–4.

^{page 187 note 7}Ibid. pp. 175–6.

^{page 187 note 8}Ibid. pp. 181–2.

^{page 187 note 9}Ibid. pp. 304–5.

^{page 187 note 10}Ibid. pp. 57, 142.

^{page 18 note 1}Gibb,Studies, p. 300.Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 2} The best source on Mûsâ is his autobiography,Education. His socialism is analysed inJaber,Kamel S. Abu, ‘Salāmah Mūsā: Precursor of Arab Socialism’,The Middle East Journal, vol.xx (1966), pp.196–206.Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 3}His reactions toal-Muqtataf and Sarrûf are discussed in Mûsâ,Education, pp. 36–8, 155.Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 4}Ibid. pp. 153–5.

^{page 188 note 5}Ibid. p. 83, says he was first a disciple of free enterprise, and it seems likely that this was due to Sarrûf's influence.

^{page 189 note 1} For Mûsâ's comments onShumayyil, seeibid. pp. 36, 125.

^{page 189 note 2}Ibid. pp. 37–44, 127, 154.

^{page 189 note 3}Ibid. p. 153.

^{page 189 note 4}Morison,Samuel Eliot andCommager,Henry Steele,The Growth of the American Republic (New York,1950), vol.II, p.368.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 5}‘Ta'rîkh al-Ishtirâkîyah f^ Ingilterâ’,al-Hilâl, vol.XVIII (1910), pp.335–8Google Scholar, andal-Ishtirâkîyah (Cairo,1913), reprinted in Abû Jâbir, Judhûr.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 6}‘Haqîqah al-Ni^m al-Bulshifîki’,al-Hilâl, vol.XXIX (1920), pp.24–32Google Scholar, and‘Rûsiyâ Bulshifîkîyah’,al-Hilâl, vol.XXIX (1920), pp.776–81Google Scholar, andMûsâ,Salâmah, ‘al-Harakah al-Ta'âwunîyah’,al-Hilâl, vol.XXXI (1923), pp.598–600, and vol. XXXII (1924), pp. 726–7.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 7}Haddâd,al-Ishtirâkîyah, p. 53.Google Scholar

^{page 190 note 1} This point is made in connection with Salâmah Mûsâ byJaber,Abu,The Middle East Journal, vol.XX (1966), pp.203–5.Google Scholar

^{page 190 note 2}Antûn,,al-Jâmi'ah, vol.IV (1904), pp.368–9.Google Scholar

^{page 190 note 3}‘Fasâd’,al-Muqtataf, vol.XIV (1890), pp.361Google Scholar, andHanna,,The Muslim World, vol.LVII (1967), p.24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 190 note 4}‘al-Ijtimâ'^iyah wa al-Ishtirâkîyah’,al-Hilâl, vol.XVI (1908), pp.265–82.Google Scholar Mûsâ, says that he also favored the use ofijtimâ'îyah as a better rendition of ‘socialism’.Mûsâ,Education, p. 124.Google ScholarKhadduri,Majid,Indepeident Iraq 1932–1958: A Study in Iraqi Politics (2nd ed.,London,1960), pp.70–1Google Scholar, says the al-Ahâlî group in Iraq in the 1930s usedsha'bîyah to describe their socialist doctrines because the labelishtirâkîyah was still so shocking.

^{page 191 note 1}‘Karl Marks’,al-Hilâl, vol.XXIX (1921), pp.642–8.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 2}‘al-Musâwâh fî Rûsiyâ’,al-Muqtataf, vol.LXI (1922), p.9Google Scholar, and‘Mawqif al Ishtirâkîyah al-Yawm’,al-Hilâl, vol.XXXI (1923), pp.360, 363. One wonders if it is coincidental thatshuyû'īyah is taken from the same root asSh'ah.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 3}Kerr,,Journal of Contemporary History, vol.III (1968), p.158;Google ScholarKerr,Malcolm, ‘Arab Radical Notions of Democracy’,St Anthony's Papers, vol.XVI (1963), pp.9–40;Google Scholar andHairn,Sylvia (ed.),Arab Nationalism: An Anthology (Berkeley,1964), pp.67–9.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 1}Abdel-Malek,Anouar,Egypt: Military Society (trans.Markmann,Charles Lam,New York,1968), esp. pp.365–6.Google ScholarKerr,,Journal of Contemporary History, vol.III, p.150, discusses the liberal tendencies of Egyptian Marxism.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 2}Mûtsâ,al-Ishtirâkîyah, pp. 40–1.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 3}Haykal,, ‘Nahnû wa al-Shuyû’îyah’,al-Ahr^m, 4081961Google Scholar,quoted in Abdel-Malek,Egypt, pp. 292–4.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 4} For example, Antûn is seen as an early socialist byal-Jundi,Anwar,al-Muhafazah wa al-Tajdîd fî al-Nathr al'Arabî al-Mu'âsir fî Mi'ah 'Am — 1840–1940 (Cairo,1961), pp.264–9;Google ScholarNajm,Muhammad Yūsuf in his essay inal-Adab al-'Arabî fî Âthâr al-Dârisîn (Beirut,1661), p.372;Google Scholar andBadr,'Abd al-Muhsin Tâhâ,Tatawwur al-Riwâyah al'Arabîyah al-Hadîthah fî Misr, 1870–1938 (Cairo,1963), pp.84–7.Google Scholar Mûsâ's and Haddâd's books on socialism, as we have seen, have recently been reprinted.

^{page 193 note 1}On ‘Aflaq and the Ba'th see Abu Jaber, Ba'th.Google Scholar