DRUSES, a people of Syria remarkable for the pertinacity and success with which they have defended their independence against the encroachments of Turkish supremacy, and for the profession of a form of religious belief, which, in the words of Dean Milman, is “one of the most extraordinary aberrations which ever extensively affected the mind of man.” The greater body, whom for the sake of convenience we shall distinguish as the Western Druses, occupy the mountainous region of the Lebanon and AntiLebanon; but there are also extensive settlements in the Hauran or Auranitis; a considerable colony exists at Safed, in Palestine proper, to the north-west of the Sea of Tiberias: and it is believed that a number of Crypto-Druses--Druses, however, by religion only, and not by race—still maintain themselves in the neighbourhood of Cairo. The Western Druses are found as far north as Beyrout, as far south as Sur or Tyre, and as far east as Damascus; in the north they are intermingled with Maronites, and in the south with Greeks and Melchites. They form the exclusive population of about 120 towns and villages, and share with the Christians the occupation of nearly 230 more; their total number, not reckoning women and children, has been calculated at from 60,000 to 65,000 men. The chief town of the district which they occupy, though not their most populous settlement, is Deir-el-Kamar—the Convent of the Moon—situated about 15 miles south-east of Beyrout, in the district of Manaasif; it was the seat of the powerful family of the Abu Nekads, and in its vicinity is the palace of Ebteddin, formerly occupied by the emir Beshir Shehaab. Ammatam and Bakhlin in the Lebanon, and Hasbeya and Rosheya in the Anti-Lebanon, rank as sacred cities, and serve as rallying-points in time of war.
The Eastern or Hauranitic Druses are less known, and preserve their ancient customs and characteristics perhaps more perfectly than their western brethren. The date at which they first settled in the district is not ascertained; but for many generations the Hauran has been the chosen refuge of rebels and malcontents from the west, and. has consequently increased its population at the expense of the Lebanon. The same process of emigration is still going on; and the Turkish Government has to be careful not to press too heavily on the defaulting Druse of the west, lest it needlessly augment the power of the more independent community. The number in the Hauran was stated by Cyril Graham at 7000 men in 1857; at present it must be much nearer 10,000. The principal town is Kunawat, the residence of the most influential of the Ockals.
In many respects the Druses are a mysterious people, and, in spite of the great additions made to our knowledge in the present century, many important questions in regard to them still await solution. Of their origin and ethnographical affinity no absolutely certain information has been obtained. Though they speak Arabic with a correctness that would do credit to the people of Mecca, and their feudal aristocracy refer to their Arab descent with feelings of pride, it is pretty generally agreed that, whatever may be true of certain families, the main body of the people does not belong to the Semitic family. Mr Cyril Graham regards them as of Indo-Teutonic race, and describes them as “fair-haired, of light complexion, strong and well-made, and often as tall as northern Europeans.” Their own tradition vaguely connects them with China, where they firmly believe that to this day there exist numerous adherents of their creed, and whence they expect the advent of their promised deliverer. The mere fact that they possess a knowledge of the Celestial Empire in such contrast to the geographical ignorance of the other Syrian races is in itself remarkable enough; though it would be rash to assert that it is practically significant. According to an opinion mentioned by Sandys, and pretty often to be met with in the older accounts, they derive their name from a count of Dreux, and are mainly the descendants of a band of the crusaders who were left behind, and finally forgot their country and language and creed; but this story is disproved by the fact that allusion is made to their existence at an earlier date by Benjamin of Tudela.
A more modern theory identifies them with one or other of the tribes introduced into Northern Syria by Esarhaddon in the 7th century b.c. If its generally but not universally received derivation from Ismael Darazi be accepted, their present name, which is properly Durus, dates no further back than about the 11th century, and throw»
no light on the question of affinity; and just as little is to be learned from the various explanations current among themselves—those put in possession (of the faith), from the Arabic verb dansa ; those who read the book of Hamze, as if from darasa; the clever ones, from Durs ; the shields, from Turs, and so on. It is well known, however, that the district which they now occupy has over and again received extraneous additions to its population; and, in the absence of more precise information, it seems at least certain that, whatever may have been the original nucleus of his race, the Druse of the present day carries in his veins the mingled blood of a various ancestry, in like manner as his religion combines the products of many different intellectual moments. The presence of a Kurdish element is undoubted, and its influence may probably be traced in the peculiar position granted to the women.
The rise and progress of the religion which gives unity to the race can be stated with considerable precision. As a system of thought it may be traced back in some of its leading principles to the Shiite sect of the Batenians, or Batiniya, whose main doctrine was that “every outer has its inner, and every passage in the Koran an allegorical sense,” and to the Karamatians, or Karamita, who pushed this method to its furthest limits; as a creed it is somewhat more recent. In the year 386 a.h. (996 a.d.) Hakim Biamrillahi (i.e., he who judges by the command of God), the sixth of the Fatimite caliphs, began to reign; and during the next twenty-five years he indulged in a tyranny at once so terrible and so fantastic that little doubt can be entertained of his insanity. As madmen sometimes do, he believed that he held direct intercourse with the deity, or even that he was an incarnation of the divine intelligence; and in 407 a.h., or 1016 a.d., his claims were made known in the mosque at Cairo, and supported by the testimony of Ismael Darazi. The people showed such bitter hostility to the new gospel that Darazi was compelled to seek safety in flight; but even in absence he was faithful to his god, and succeeded in winning over the ignorant inhabitants of Lebanon. According to Druse authority this great conversion took place in the year 410 a.h. Meanwhile the endeavours of the caliph to get his divinity acknowledged by the people of Cairo continued. The advocacy of Hasan ben Haidara Fergani was without avail; but in 408 a.h. the new religion found a more successful apostle in the person of Hamze ben Ali ben Ahmed, a Persian mystic, feltmaker by trade, who became Hakim’s vizier, gave form and substance to his creed, and by his ingenious adaptation of its various dogmas to the prejudices of existing sects finally enlisted an extensive body of adherents. In 411 the caliph was assassinated by contrivance of his sister Sitt Almulk; but it was given out by Hamze that he had only withdrawn for a season, and his followers were encouraged to look forward with confidence to his triumphant return. Darazi, who had acted independently in his apostolate, was branded by Hamze as a heretic, and thus, by a curious anomaly, he is actually held in detestation by the very sect wh : ch probably bears his name. The propagation of the faith, in accordance with Hamze’s initiation, was undertaken by Ismael Ben Muhammed Temimi, Muhammed ben Wahab, Abulkhair Selarna ben Abdalwahab ben Samurri, and Moktana Bohaeddin, the last of whom was known by his writings from Constantinople to the borders of India. In two letters addressed to the emperor Constantine VIII. and Michael the Paphlagonian he endeavours to prove that the Christian Messiah reappeared in the person of Hamze.
The full exposition of the Drusian creed thus brought into existence, even in the somewhat imperfect state of
European knowledge in regard to many of its details, would require a volume of considerable size: the following is a summary of its main doctrines. The Muahhidin or Unitarians, as the Druses call themselves, believe that there is one and only one God, indefinable, incomprehensible, ineffable, passionless. He has made himself known to men by ten successive incarnations in the persons of Ali, Albar, Alya, Moill, Kaim, Moezz, Aziz, Abu Zechariah, Mansur, and Hakim. No further incarnation can take place: in Hakim a final appeal was made to mankind, and after the door of mercy had stood open to all for twenty-six years, it was finally and for ever closed. When the tribulation of the faithful has reached its height, Hakim will reappear to conquer the world and render his religion supreme. The first of the creatures of God is the Universal Intelligence, impersonated in Hamze at the time of the last incarnation; he is the creator of all subordinate beings, and he alone has immediate communion with the Deity. Next in rank to him, and along with him supporting the throne of the Almighty, are four archangels, the Soul, the Word, the Right Wing, and the Left Wing, who were embodied respectively in Ismael Darazi, Mohammed ben Wahab, Selarna ben Abdalwahal, and Bohaeddin; and beneath these again are spiritual agents of various ranks The number of human beings admits neither of increase nor of decrease, and a regular process of metempsychosis is maintained. The souls of the virtuous pass after death into the bodies of Chinese Druses; those of the wicked may be degraded to the level of camels or dogs. All previous religions are mere types of the true, and their sacred books and observances are to be interpreted allegorically. As the admission of converts is no longer permitted, the faithful are enjoined to keep their doctrines secret from the profane; and in order that their allegiance may not bring them into danger, they are allowed to make outward profession of whatever religion is dominant around them. To this latter indulgence is to be attributed the apparent indifferentism with which they join the Mahometan in his prayers and ablutions, or sprinkle themselves with holy water in the Maronite churches. Obedience is required to the seven great commandments of Hamze, the first and greatest of which enjoins truth in words (but only of Druse towards Druse); the second, watchfulness over the safety of the brethren; the third, absolute renunciation of every other religion; the fourth, complete separation from all who are in error; the fifth, recognition of the unity of “Our Lord” in all ages; the sixth, complete resignation to his will; and the seventh, complete obedience to his orders. Prayer, however, is regarded as an impertinent interference with the Creator; while at the same time, instead of the fatalistic predestination cf Mahometanism, the freedom of the human will is distinctly maintained. Not only is the charge of secrecy rigidly obeyed in regard to th≥ alien world, but full initiation into the deeper mysteries of the creed is permitted only to a special class designated Ockals or Akals—probably from the Arabic Λkl, intelligence—in contradistinction from whom all other members of the Druse community, whatever may be their position or attainments, are called Djahel or Ignorant. About 15 per cent, of the adult population belong to this order. Admission is granted to any Druse of either sex who expresses willingness to conform to the laws of the society, and during a year of probation gives sufficient proof of sincerity and stability of purpose. There appears to be no formal distinction of rank among the various members; and though the emir Beshir Shehaab used to appoint a sheik of the Ockals, the person thus distinguished obtained no primacy over his fellows. Exceptional influence depends on exceptional sanctity or ability. All are required to abstain from tobacco and wine; the women are to wear neither gold nor silver, nor silk, nor brocade; and although neither celibacy nor retirement from the affairs of the world is either imperative or customary, unusual respect is shown to those who voluntarily submit themselves to ascetic discipline. While the Ockals mingle frankly with the common people, and are remarkably free from what in Europe would be called clerical pretension, they are none the less careful to maintain their privileges. They are distinguished by the wearing of a white turban, emblematic of the purity of their life. Their food must be purchased with money lawfully acquired; and lest they should unwittingly partake of any that is ceremonially unclean, they require those djahels whose hospitality they share to supply their wants from a store set apart for their exclusive use. The ideal Ockal is grave, calm, and dignified, with an infinite capacity of keeping a secret, and a devotion that knows no limits to the interests of his creed. On Thursday evening, the commencement of the weekly day of rest, the members of the order meet together in the various districts, probably for the reading of their sacred books and consultation on matters of ecclesiastical or political importance. Their meeting-houses, holowês, halwes, or khalwas, are plain, unornamented edifices, usually built in secluded spots, and not unfrequently on isolated eminences. “All have property attached to them, the revenues of which are consecrated to the relief of the poor and the demands of hospitality. In one at Necha, in the Shoof, a lamp is kept burning night and day.” Even while the Ockals are assembled, strangers are readily enough admitted to the holowês; but as long as they are present the ordinary ceremonies are neglected, and the Koran takes the place of the Drusian scriptures. In has been frequently asserted that the image of a calf is kept in a niche, and traces of phallic and gynaecocratic worship have been vaguely suspected; but there is no authentic information in support of either statement. The calf, if calf there be, is probably a symbol of the execrable heresy of Darazi, who is frequently styled the calf by his orthodox opponents. Ignorance is the mother of suspicion as well as of devotion; and accordingly the Christian inhabitants of the Lebanon have long been persuaded that the Druses in their secret assemblies are guilty of the most nefarious practices. Of this allegation, so frequently repeated by European writers, there seems to be little evidence; and it is certain that the sacred books of the religion inculcate what is on the whole a high-toned morality. Colonel Churchill, in his last volume, asserts that while the majority of the people follow the pure teaching of Bohaeddin, there still exists a party which indulges in the “dark and unscrupulous libertinism of Darazi.”
The Druses, like the Arabs, have a high reputation for hospitality, and they give special welcome to the English, whom they regard as their particular friends and allies. Whoever presents himself at their door in the quality of a suppliant or passenger is sure of being entertained with food and lodging in the most generous manner. Volney often saw the lowest peasants give their last morsel of bread to the hungry traveller; and their only answer to the accusation of imprudence was, “God is great and liberal, and all men are brethren.” Beggary at the same time is altogether unknown among the common people, and the Ockals are not a mendicant order. It would be easy to illustrate by many a striking incident the fidelity with which they keep inviolate the pledge tacitly given to the guest who has eaten of their bread and salt. Nor is their hospitality unassociated with other virtues. “There was nothing,” snys Lord Carnarvon, “which surprised me more than the self-possession, the delicate appreciation of wishes and feelings, the social ease, and to a great extent the refinement which distinguished the conversation and manners of those amongst the Druse chiefs whom I then met, and on which no drawing-room of London or Paris could have conferred an additional polish;” and a similar testimony is borne by Mr Chasseaud, who was brought up in the city of Beyrout, and had abundant opportunities of observation. There is a darker side, indeed, to the picture; though, after all, while his merits are in the main peculiarly his own, the Druse only gives additional intensity to the ruthlessness and revengefulness of so many of the Eastern nations.
Polygamy is not permitted. Among the old feudal families intermarriage is often restricted to one or two houses; and the daughter of a sheik will rather remain a virgin than bring disgrace on her blood by a mesalliance. The marriage of near relations is naturally the consequence; but, whatever may have been formerly the case, it no longer appears to be the custom for brother and sister to wed. All prenuptial arrangements on the part of the woman are conducted by the father, who cannot act, however, without her consent. On the wedding day a number of Ockals and a few of the bridegroom’s relations go to the bride’s house; the marriage contract is drawn up and read; and the bride, completely enveloped in a veil, is led off on horseback to her husband, accompanied by her friends, both male and female. As she approaches her future home, the bridegroom’s party sallies forth, and a mock contest, with blank cartridge, ensues. Ultimately the bride is successful; shouts of welcome follow her into the harem, where she is received and caressed by the women of her husband’s family. After a little she is left alone; the bridegroom enters, lifts her veil, takes his first glance at his wife, replaces it, and withdraws. The revels continue for several days. Divorce is freely allowed; but when once obtained it cannot be cancelled, though either party is free to marry again. Births are rarely celebrated with any public or private jubilation. When a sheik dies, all the sheiks in the mountain are at once informed. Next day they assemble, and the dead body is borne forth in an open coffin to meet all those whom it is especially wished to honour. All day long the mourners walk up and down tho medan, or tilt-yard, in parties of fifty and sixty, singing or reciting eulogy or dirge; and every now and then a number rush into the “lichroom” and kiss the dead man’s hands and face and beard. A little before sunset the burial takes place. The women watch afar off, while the men follow silently to the grave. A few passages from the Koran are read by the Ockals, and the ceremony is over. The family mausoleums are built without doorways, and the wall has to be broken down to admit each new tenant. Those who die in the odour of sanctity are buried in their own houses: the tomb is in the form of an altar, and stands east and west, and the body is laid on its side with the face looking to the south.
Education, according to Eastern ideas, receives considerable attention among the Druses; and all their ladies, in contrast to the majority of their countrywomen, can both read and write. The defence and the diffusion of their religion were originally undertaken in great measure by means of little books or treatises; and from an early period several of the wealthier sheiks have prided themselves on their collection of manuscripts. For a people so small in number, their literature, though almost purely theological, is remarkably extensive—a fact which may probably be ascribed to the influence of the Semitic element. In spite of the excessive care with which their manuscripts have been guarded (and they are enjoined if need be to kill any alien found in possession of their sacred books), a considerable number, undoubtedly genuine, have found their way to Europe. A copy of the Book of the Testimonies io the Mysteries of the Unity, consisting of seventy treatises in four folio volumes, was found in the house of the chief Ockal at Bakhlin, and presentedin 1700 to Louis XIV. by Nusralla Ibn Gilda, a Syrian doctor. Other manuscripts are to be found at Rome in the Vatican, at Oxford in the Bodleian, at Vienna, at Leyden, at Upsala, and at Munich; and Dr Porter got possession of the seven standard works of Druse theology while at Damascus. The Munich collection was presented to the king of Bavaria by Clotbey, the chief physician in the Egyptian army during its occupation of Syria; and for a number of the other manuscripts we are indebted to the elder Niebuhr. A history of the Druse nationality by the emir Haider Shehaab is quoted by Urquhart.
From an early period, the internal organization of the Dnιses has been constructed after a patriarcho-feudal type, which, as usual, has placed a large amount of arbitrary power in the hands of the chiefs or sheiks, and given rise to an endless succession of petty feuds and confederations between the various clans or families. Into the picturesque confusion of the resulting history, complicated as it is by Turkish encroachments and intrigue, it would be useless to enter; and the curiosity of the reader may easily be gratified by turning to Colonel Churchill’s interesting, if somewhat diffuse and desultory, volumes. The following, however, may be mentioned as among the most important of the clans, which at one period or other have acquired an influential position in the Lebanon :— The Tnoohs or Tanuchs, now extinct, who had their seat at Abeigh or Obeah, in the Shahaar, a short distance to the S. of the Bahr Beyrout; the Taihook family, originally the Beni Hazamm, one branch of which has its principal residence at Heittat, and the other at Allaye, about nine and ten miles respectively S.E. of Beyrout; the Abdelmeliks with their seat at Ebtater, about four miles E. of Heittat; the Cadis of Bisoor, nearly two miles to S. of Heittat, an offshoot of the Tnoohs; the house of Raslan with its seat at Shwyfat, seven miles S. of Beyrout; Aminadins, now settled at Abeigh, remarkable for their attention to religion; the house of Jumblatt or Djembelat with its splendid mansion at Muc-tara on the eastern bank of the Nahr-el-Awleh, the Abu-Nekads, formerly the feudal lords of Deir-el-Kamar; tho house of Abu-Harmoosh, the Amads, and the Eids.
The Dnιses first attained to pre-eminence in the Lebanon under the presidency of the Arab family of the Tnoohs, which had adopted the doctrines of Hamze. For a long time they continued to be tolerated as serviceable allies by the orthodox Mahometans, and the Tnoohs even obtained possession of Beyrout; but about 1300, after Malek Ashraf had expelled the Christians from Syria, he turned his attention to the Lebanon and ordered the Druses to erect mosques throughout their territory. They refused, and prepared to defend themselves; but their forces were defeated at Ain-Sofar, about halfway between Beyrout and the Bekaa. A long period of peace ensued, and while acknowledging the supremacy of the Sultan of Egypt, the Druses attained considerable importance. An impetus was given to their religion by the emir Jemaladin Said Abdallah Tnooh (d. 1480), whose shrine at Abeigh is still visited by pious pilgrims.
On the defeat of the Egyptian sultan by the Ottoman invader Selim I., in 1517, the Dnιses were obliged to submit to the new dynasty, which bestowed the chief power in the Lebanon on Fakaradin-Maan, a member of a Mohametan family originally known as the Beni-Rabua, who had immigrated from the Nahrain about 1145. The family of the Tnoohs which had already been destroyed by internal feuds, was thrown into the shade and never recovered its position. In the early part of the 17th century, the interest of European nations was excited in the fate of the emir Fakaradin Maan IL, who on the failure of his plans sought refuge for a time with the grand duke of Tuscany and the king of Naples, but ultimately perished by the bow-string in the city of the sultans. His family died out in the beginning of the 18th century, and the position of Grand Emir was bestowed on a member of the house of Shehaab, originally a branch of the Beni Koreish of Mecca. In 1713 the emir Haider Shehaab, having routed the Turkish forces at Aindara with the assistance of the sheiks of the Cadis, Abu-Nekads, Abl-el-Meliks, and Taihooks, immediately afterwards divided the whole of the southern Lebanon into territorial districts, and bestowed the administration on the chiefs to whom he had been principally indebted. Each macaatayee thus created had full power of taxation and punishment over the district entrusted to him by his macaata or contract; and the system thus instituted continued in force till its abolition by Fuad Pasha in 1860. The events of the next hundred years—full as those years were of revolutions and counter-revolutions in which the Druses had ample share—belong rather to the general history of the Lebanon than to the special history of the Druses. The latter part of the period is occupied by the life of the emir Beshir Shehaab, undoubtedly one of the most remarkable men who ever fought and intrigued in Syria. In 1799, along with many of the Druses, he accepted the advances of Sir Sidney Smith, and swore perpetual hostility against the French, who were, however, soon after driven back to Egypt without his assistance; and in 1823 his co-operation, though only supported by the half-hearted acquiescence of most of the sheiks, was of the greatest sendee to the cause of Ibrahim Pasha against the Turks. Not long after the restoration of the authority of the Porte, which in spite of their emir had been considerably furthered by the Druse sheiks, the peaceful relations which from time immemorial had existed between the Druses and the Maronites gradually gave place to the bitterest hostility. Under the patronage of the next emir, Beshir el Kassim (himself a proselyte to their religion), and instigated by their patriarch and priest, the Maronites began to assert their independence of the Druse sheiks under whose feudal authority they were placed. Civil war broke out in 1841, and raged for three years. In January 1842 the Turkish Government appointed Omar Pasha as administrator of the Druses and Maronites, with a council of four chiefs from each party; but the pasha attempting to effect a disarming, was in November besieged in the castle of Beit-ed-din by the Druses under Shibli-el-Arrian. At the instigation of the European powers he was recalled in December, and the Dnιses and Maronites were placed under separate kaimakams or governors. Disturbances again broke out in 1845: the Maronites flew to arms, but -with the assistance of the Turks their opponents carried the day. A superficial pacification effected by Shekib Effendi, the Ottoman commissioner, lasted only till his departure; andthe Porte was obliged to dispatch a force of 12,000 men to the Lebanon. Forty of the sheiks were seized and the people nominally disarmed; and in 1846 a new constitution was inaugurated by which the kaima-kam was to be assisted by two Druses, two Maronites, four Greeks, two Turks, and one Metuali. All, however, was in vain: the conflict was continued through 1858, 1859, and I860; the Druses plundered and massacred, and the Turkish soldiers looked on or even assisted in the bloody work. At Damascus even the Christians were slain in thousands, and the remnant was only saved by Abdel-Kader’s magnanimous protection. The European powers now determined to interfere; and by a protocol of the 3d of May it was decided that the Lebanon should be occupied by a force of 20,000 men, of whom the half were to be French A body of troops was accordingly landed on the 16th of August under General Beaufort d’Hautpoul; and Fuad Pasha, who had been appointed Turkish commissioner with full powers, proceeded to bring the leaders of the massacres to justice. An international commission met at Beyrout on the 5th October; but the Turks connived at the escape of culprits, the members could not come to agreement, and the proceedings were practically stultified. The French occupation continued till 5th June 1861, andthe French and English squadrons cruised on the coast for several months after. In accordance with the recommendation of the European powers the Porte determined to appoint a Christian governor not belonging to the district, and independent of the pasha of Beyrout, to hold office for three years. The choice fell on Daud Pasha, a Catholic Armenian, who was installed on 4th of July. In spite of many difficulties, and especially the ambitious conduct of the Maronite Jussuf Karam, he succeeded in restoring order; and by the formation of a military force from the inhabitants of the Lebanon he rendered unnecessary the presence of the Turkish soldiery. He was reappointed for five years at the close of his first term; and his administration seems to have effected a permanent pacification.
Literature:—Adler. “Druse Catechism," in Museum Cujlcum Bοrgιanυm, 1782; Eichhorn’s edition and version of the same in Repertorium für bibl. und morgenl. Lit.; venture, “Historical Memoir on the Druses,” appended to Memoirsof Baron de Τotte, London, 1786; J. G. V τ orbs, Geschichte und Peschreibung des Landes der Drusen in Syrien, Görl. 1799; Silvestre de Sacy, Exposé de la Religion des Druses, 1828—still one of the chief authorities on its subject, with which may be compared the same author’s contributions to the Mémoires de ΓInstitut Royal, 1818, und the Mémoires de l’ Académie des Inscriptions, 1831,1832; Hammer Purgstall, in Journal Asiatique, 1837; Jos. Μ. Muller on the Munich MSS. in Gel. Anz d ki>n. bayr. Akad. v. Wissenschaften, 1842; Ph. wolff, Reise in das gelobte Land, and Die Drusen und ihre Vorläufer, 1842; Churchill,· Ten Years' Residence in Mount Lebanon, 3 vols., 1853; A. G. Hoffmann’s article on the religion, in Herzog’s Real-Encyklopädie ; Chasseaud, The Druses of th’. Lebanon. 1855; Cyril Graham, “Explor. of the Desert East of the Hauran," in Journ, of Roy. Geog. Soc. 1858— with which compare his paper in Cambridge Essays, 1858; Urquhart, The Lebanon 2 vols., 1860; Petermann, Reisen im orient, 1860; E G. Key, Voyage dans le IIaouran. exécuté pendant les années 1857 et 1858; Earl of Carnarvon. Recollections of the. Druses of the Lebanon, 1860; Wildenbruch. Ein Blick auf den Lebanon, 1860; Churchill, The Druses and Maronites under the Turkish Rule from 1840 to 1860 London, 1862; II. Guys. La Théogonie des Druses, traduite de Γ Arabe, 1863; and La Nation Druse. 1864; G. d'Alaux, “LeLiban et Daud Pasha,” in Revue des Deux Mondes, July 1865 and May 1866.
