Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 January 2009
Since the first printed books and newspapers, official censorship has been the norm, not the exception. Although we often regard freedom of the press as an integral part of Anglo-American law, the principle was only established after 1688. The English press did not completely escape such press control measures as seditious libel prosecutions and confiscatory taxes until the 1860s.1 Official censorship in the United States has been directed against left-wing agitation, alleged pornography, and most recently, exposure of national secrets. France and Germany have suffered various degrees of official censorship, including the most draconian. Russia has scarcely known any period in which both preand postpublication censorship was not practiced. In view of the universality of censorship, Ottoman censorship in Lebanon and Syria deserves close examination in its historical context instead of the unanimous condemnation accorded it heretofore.
Author's Note: A preliminary version of this paper was presented at the 8th annual meeting of the Middle East Studies Association, 8 November 1974, in Boston. Part of the research was done while the author held a Fuibright-Hays Dissertation Research Abroad Fellowship in 1973.Google Scholar
1 Siebert, Frederick S., Freedom of the Press in England, 1476–1776 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1952), pp. 5–12.Google Scholar
2 Several ephemeral French newspapers were published before 1831, but they were of little consequence. For a list of Turkish newspapers in the Ottoman Empire before 1881 see Gercek, Selim Nüzhet, Turk Gazetecilgˇi (Istanbul: Devlet Matbaasi, 1931), pp. 84–89.Google Scholar
3 Ubicini, Jean H. A., Letters on Turkey, trans. Lady, Easthope (a vols.; London: John Murray, 1856), 1, 250–251.Google Scholar
4 di Tarrāzī, Philippe, Tārīkh al-sihāfah al-'Arabīyah (4 vols.; Beirut: al-Matba'ah al-Adabīyah, 1913–1933), 1, 55 (hereafter Tarrāzī).Google Scholar
5 Bey, Gregoire Aristarchi, Législation ottomane (7 vols.; Istanbul: Journal Thraky, 1873–1888), 3, 318–319 (hereafter Aristarchi Bey).Google Scholar
6 al-Rifā'ī, Shams al-Dīn, Tārīkh al-sihāfah al-Sūrīyah (2 vols.; Cairo: Dār al-Ma'ārif, 1969), 1, 59–60 (hereafter al-Rifā'ī).Google Scholar
7 Aristarchi Bey, III, 326.Google Scholar
8 ‘Notification officielle concernante la presse locale (12 Mars 1867)’ as quoted in ibid. See also Lewis, Bernard, The Emergence of Modern Turkey (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), pp. 145–147.Google Scholar
9 In earlier times the mektūpçu had been the general secretary of the vali; in the nineteenth century, he was also the director of the official newspaper and printing press of the vilayet as well as the censor of all publications. He also handled any official contacts with foreign powers in the vilayet. 'Awad, 'Abd al-'Azīz, al-Idārah al-'Uthmānīyah fī wilāyat Sūrīyah, 1864–1914 (Cairo: Dār al-Ma'ārif, 1969), p. 91.Google Scholar
10 Tarrāzī, I, 58; al-Rifā'ī, I, 61–63.Google Scholar
11 For the details of the Reuters–Havas wire, see Storey, Graham, Reuters (New York: Crown Publishers, 1951), pp. 42, 94.Google Scholar For lists of newspapers and magazines founded in Syria and Lebanon, 1858–1929, see Tarrāzī, IV, 4–73, 107–141.Google Scholar
12 ‘Awwal` ta'tīl idārī fī al-sihāfah al-Bayrūtīyah yusību majallat al-Naāhlah,’ Awrāq Lubnāniyah, III, 2 (Feb 1957), 55–58.Google Scholar
13 Kanz al-raghā' ib fi muntakhabāt al-Jawā'ib (7 vols.; Istanbul: Matba'at al-Jawā'ib, 1871–1881), VI, 81.Google Scholar
14 Ibid., VII, 109–111, 183.
15 Thamarāt al-Funūn, no. 134 (22 Nov. 1877), p. 4 and no. 139 ( Dec. 1877), p. 3 (hereafter TF).Google Scholar
16 A detailed correspondence on this subject is in FO 78.4950, ‘Stoppage of Newspapers by British Post Offices in Turkey 1879–1884.’Google Scholar
17 Sarkis, Salīm, Kitāb gharā'ib al-maktūbjī (Cairo: Matba' at al-Salām, 1896) p. 11 (hereafter Sarkis);Google ScholarTarrāzī, I, 55–60, 102–105.Google Scholar
18 Sarkis, pp. 20–23.Google Scholar
19 FO 78.3130, Memorandum by J. Abcarius, enclosure in a letter from John Dickson (Acting Consul General, Beirut) by E. J. Goschen (Ambassador, Constantinople), 3 July 1880.Google Scholar
20 TF, no. 221 (24 March 1879), p. 3; no. 148 (28 Feb. 1878), p. 4; and no. 252 ( Oct. 1879), p. 1.Google Scholar
21 Sarkis, pp. 11–13.Google Scholar
22 Ibid., pp. 12–13. Sarkīs says that the incident happened in 1885, but it actually occurred in 1889.
23 Ibid., p. 47. 'Ali, Muhammad Kurd, Mudhakkirāt (2 vols.; Damascus: Matba 'at al-Taraqqā, 1948), 1, 51.Google Scholar
24 al-Bustānī, Sulaymān, 'Ibrah wa-dhikrā aw al-dawlah al- 'Uthmānīyah qabi al-dustūr (Cairo: By the author, 1908), pp. 27–34 (hereafter al-Bustānī);Google Scholar‘al-Inqilāb al-siyāsiyah al-'Uthmānīyah,’ al-Hilāl, 17, 1 (1 Oct. 1908), 32–34;Google Scholar‘a1-Alfāz wa ashyā' al-latī kānat mamnū'ah fī al-'asr al-Hamidi,’ al-Manār, 10, 1 (1912), 796–797.Google Scholar
25 Sarkīs, pp. 26, 29, 30, 33, 59;Google Scholaral-'Id al-mi'awī li-naql al-Matba'ah al-Amīrkānīyah ilā Bayrūt (Beirut: al-'Matba'ah al-Amīrkānīyah, 1934), p. 17;Google Scholar‘Ziyārat Amīr Zanjibār li-Dār al-Khilāfah a1-'Uzmā,’ TF, no. 1648 (18 Nov. 1907), p. 1.Google Scholar
26 Lewis, Emergence of Modern Turkey, pp. 183–184;Google ScholarPears, Edwin, Life of Abdul Hamid (New York: Henry Holt, 1917), p. 197;Google ScholarGercek, Turk Gazeteciligˇi, pp. 77–78.Google Scholar
27 al-Bustānī, p. 27.Google Scholar
28 Sarkis, pp. 30–38; TF, no. 984 (2 July 1894), pp. 3–4.Google Scholar
29 al-Bustānī, p. 32; TF, no. 1078 (11 May 1896), p. 1.Google Scholar
30 al-Bustānī, p. 32; TF, no. 1293 (6 Aug. 1900), p. 7.Google Scholar
31 ‘Maqtal Imbirāthr Rāsyā,’ TF, no. 323 (21 March 1881), p. 1; TF, no. 339 (29 July 1881), p. 2; no. 685 (11 June 1888), p. 2; no. 752 (7 Oct. 1889), p.3; ‘al-Imhirātārah al-mughtālah,’ TF, no. 199 (26 Sept. 1898), p. 8; no. 1293 (6 Aug; 1900), p. 7; no. 1347 (16 Sept 1901), p. 3; and no. 1436 (29 June 1903), p. 1.Google Scholar
32 General statements on the prohibition of these words are in ‘al-Alāfz… al-Hamīdī,’ al-Manār, p. 797; al-Bustānī, p. 28; and Sarkis, pp. 14, 21. Specific cases of censorship are in Sarkīs, pp. 30, 46.Google Scholar
33 TF, no. 546 (7 Sept. 1885), p. 4, and the following issues; Bayrūt, no. 164 (24 Oct. 1887), p. 2.Google Scholar
34 TF, no. 558 (7 Dec. 1885), p. 4, and no. 559 (1 Dec. 1885), p. 4. ‘Mas'alat Arminiyā,’ TF, no. 3007 (10 Dec. 1894), p. 1.Google Scholar
35 Pears, Life of Abdul Hamid, p. 197; Sarkis, p. 28; TF, nos. 500 (13 Oct. 1884) to 509 (15 Dec. 1884) contain many articles on Lord Northbrook's visit to Egypt and his subsequent report.Google Scholar
36 ‘Islāhāt fī al-Anādūl,’ TF, no. 1078 (11 May 1896), p. 1;Google Scholar‘Hubb al-watan,’ Riyād Tarāblus al-Shām, I (1892–1893), 16;Google Scholar‘Ilm al-ijtimā' al-basharī,’ TF, no. 1284 (4 June 1900), p. 3, and many following issues. For ‘Turk,’ see TF, no. 1450 (5 Oct. 1903), p. 2. See also ‘al-Ittihād al-watanī,’ TF, no. 669 (13 Feb. 1888), p. 2;Google Scholar‘al-Junūn Funūn,’ TF, no. 1002 (29 Oct. 1894), p. 4, and the following issues.Google Scholar
37 Sarkis mentions the publication of a book of popular proverbs and a narrative poem about two lovers, both of which might be considered popular literature (Sarkis, pp. pp. 38–43). Zaydān may have been referring to his own novels, some of which were excluded from the Ottoman Empire. ‘al-Baqīyah ta'tī’ was used throughout ‘Abdül Hamid's reign. A late example is at the end of ‘Niziām al-Būlīs al-Jadid,’ TF, no. 1660 (17 Feb. 1908), p. 7.Google Scholar
38 There were several articles in the newspaper Tarāblus al-Shām, for instance, on women's receptiveness to education. Some were reprinted in Riyād Tarāblus al-Shām, I (1892–1893), 805, 117.Google Scholar
39 Sarkis, pp. 45, See the appendix for examples of warnings for changing words, adding sentences and ignoring the sensor's deletions.Google Scholar
40 The language used in the warning issued to al-Ahwāl on 14 Otober 1900 indicates that ‘violation of the basic principles of the Press Law’ meant that the editor had not submitted something for censorship (see the appendix.)Google Scholar
41 Farag, Nadia, ‘The Lewis Affair and the Fortunes of al-Muqtataf,’ Middle Eastern Studies, 8, 1 (01 1972), 73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42 Reid, Donald discusses the reasons for the emigration of Syrians in his Odyssey of Farah Antun (Chicago: Bibliotheca Islamic, 1975), pp. 20–23, 47.Google Scholar See also Jabr, Jamil, ‘Hawla ma katabahu al-Lubnāniyūn fī al-mahjar,’ al-Mashriq, 64, 4–5 (07–10 1970), 549–552.Google Scholar
43 FO 78.3986, ‘French Press in Egypt, Suppression of the Bosphore Ègyptienne, Press Law in Egypt, 28 January–23 April 1885' contains the correspondence on the applicability of the Egyptian Press Law to foreign nationals. Of particular interest is Enclosure VIII to a letter from Lord Cromer to Lord Granville dated 24 April 1885, entitled ‘ÉEtat des arrêtes concernant imprimeries et la presse étrangères.’ Cromer made it clear that the Bosphore Égyptienne was suspended at his request in a letter to Granville dated 28 January 1885.Google ScholarGalal, Kamal el-Din, Entstehung und Entwicklung der Tagespresse in Aegypten (Limburg: Limber Vereinsdruckerei G.m.b.H., 1939), p. 121.Google Scholar For a discussion of the Egyptian Press Law and its application see Fouad, Mahmoud, Le regime de la presse en Egypte (Paris: Soc. de Recueil Sirey, 1912), pp. 13–15, 24, 49, 59–60;Google Scholar also, Sābāt, Khalīl, 'Aziz, Sāmi, and Rizq, Yunān Labib, Hurrīyat al-sihāfah fī Misr, 1898–1924 (Cairo: Maktabat al-Wa'ī al-'Arabī, 1972).Google Scholar
44 TF, no. 1696 (a Nov. 1908), p. 1.Google Scholar