French mandate-era landmarks fading from Lebanon’s collective memory

Sursock Palace, a typical example of mandate-period design. (Supplied)
Short Url
Updated 03 September 2020
Follow

French mandate-era landmarks fading from Lebanon’s collective memory

  • Beirut was once a link between the East and the West through its architecture among many other things
  • The devastasting August 4 explosion destroyed some the symbols of the city’s rich cultural heritage

BEIRUT: Lebanon is celebrating its centennial as a modern state with a fading recollection of the landmarks that stood a hundred years ago.

The exception is the Residence des Pins (Pine Residence), the home of the French ambassador in Beirut, which witnessed the establishment of Greater Lebanon on Sept. 1, 1920, and has remained steadfast against the country’s subsequent turmoil.

Other urban markers of that era either became extinct from natural factors and social development or were destroyed during the Lebanese Civil War. Whatever little was preserved perished in the explosion at the Port of Beirut less than a month before Lebanon’s centennial.

The houses of Beirut’s neighborhoods tell the stories of various epochs. During the first two decades of the 20th century, Beirut was a modest city centered around a tiny natural port, its inhabitants not exceeding 10,000 people.




A wrought iron gate on Mar Mikhael Street. (AN Photo/Najia Houssari)

The city was surrounded by a wall bearing many gates, which closed early each day. The names of these gates — such as Bab Idriss, Asour Gate, and Bab Al-Burj — still resonate, although the walls and gates are no longer standing.

“Beirut did not start to develop until the end of the third decade of the 20th century, when the West began showing an interest in cities on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea, including Alexandria, Haifa, Beirut, Mersin and other Ottoman ports that were ready to receive commodities,” said architect Rahif Fayad, 84.

The role of Beirut’s port quickly grew and resulted in the rise of a new mercantile class in the city and Mount Lebanon, Fayad explained.

“The city’s population boomed and had to expand beyond its walls to neighboring areas, which led to it becoming a modern, open city.”

Most buildings during that period were constructed with sandstone excavated from Beirut sand rocks. These old stones can still be seen in Spears Street, the wall of the American University of Beirut, and many of Beirut’s old houses that are still resisting the two forces of modernity and destruction.

The stones were covered with a layer of limestone or cement to protect them from seasonal climatic effects. Houses consisted of one or two floors and were surrounded by a garden, often overlooking the sea, so that family members could live safely, without coming into contact with the surrounding neighborhood.

The facade of these houses consisted of three arches, with a red-sloped brick roof. This style was widespread in Beirut and other coastal cities throughout the eastern Mediterranean and served specific social needs. The inner courtyard was covered with a roof and became known as “Al-Dar” (living room), which was surrounded by bedrooms, a kitchen, and a dining room. This was the typical house of Beirut’s rising mercantile bourgeois class.




A window with marble decorations in Susuk Palace. (AN Photo/Najia Houssari)

The houses were constructed by professionals — designers and construction workers educated in Europe and the US. The architecture was of the finest quality and fit in well with the surrounding environment, as local materials and expertise were used.

Italian architects were hired to design such places as the Sursock Palace, located on the eponymous street bearing the name of this aristocratic family.

With the large number of new arrivals, Beirut expanded and saw its port boom.

In 1920, with the declaration of Greater Lebanon and the beginning of the French Mandate era, colonialists introduced wide streets, modern transportation — such as tramways and cars — and an insatiable, consumerist lifestyle. They tried to fashion public places in the heart of historical Beirut, but some of these collided with the ancient churches and mosques present in the area.

Colonialists also introduced Haussmannian architecture, which entailed dividing the façade of a building into three vertical parts that would be adopted into contiguous buildings, forming the facade of a whole street. This design is best featured in Maarad, Foch, Allenby and Wegan Streets, and other orthogonal streets north of the Beirut Municipality Building.

This design can also be seen in areas relatively distant from the historical heart of Beirut, including Spears, Al-Kantari, May Ziadeh, Gemmayzeh, all the way to the Sursock area in Achrafieh.

“Beirut was the link between East and West, and this is depicted in its architecture since the French Mandate, which introduced new stylistic elements without relinquishing Islamic characteristics,” architect Fadlo Dagher said. “This blend of modern and Islamic elements is best expressed in the architecture of the Beirut Municipality building, which reflects both Ottoman and French architecture.

“This building was designed by the Greek-Lebanese engineer Youssef Aftimus (1866-1952), who began its construction during the Ottoman era and finished it during the French Mandate.”




A building in Jemaizi with marble balconies. (AN Photo/Najia Houssari)

Beirut’s architectural identity, in Dagher’s words, “reflects the city’s openness to everybody.”

How is it that some palaces and buildings are still standing after 100 years?

“Prior to the Mandate era, Ottoman construction depended on wood to build roofs,” Dagher said. “In 1925, cement was introduced, and brick claddings were replaced with iron, reinforced concrete, or cement.

“During the Ottoman period, balconies were made of marble, but during the Mandate era they were replaced with verandas with three walls, exposed on one side to winds blowing over Beirut. It is pleasant to spend the evening on them.”

As these balconies were roofed, Dagher added, people would be protected from the sun during summer and rain during winter.

“It is noteworthy that terraces were always built on the northern side, in order to not be exposed to the sun,” he said. “They were usually ornamented with oriental and Western designs.”

The Mandate period witnessed a shift from single-family homes to multi-story buildings for commercial investment, Dagher explained.

“With the introduction of cement, buildings became five stories high, with each floor divided into two apartments, while the ground floors were left for shops,” he said. “New social groups came to live in these buildings, adopting the Western economic, social and cultural lifestyle, away from the independent houses surrounded by gardens.”

Lebanon’s independence in 1943 led to the further growth of Beirut. The city adopted modern, vertical architecture and the international style. Later, this would lead to uneven development, and the “Beiruti bourgeois house” would become engulfed by asymmetric iron and cement buildings and towers. Beirut’s ties to the sea withered away.

With the explosion that shook the city on Aug. 4, the Lebanese discovered how fragile and easily damaged their city was. They were also disappointed to discover that the city was not easy to evacuate in case of natural or man-made disasters.

According to a survey by specialized committees, 360 heritage buildings dating back to the period between 1860 and 1930 were partially or fully damaged by the explosion at the port.

“The restoration of these buildings, with their wooden ceilings, renowned decorations, marble balconies and carved windows, primarily requires a political decision to preserve the architectural memory of the city,” Dagher said.

“These are two or three-story buildings and palaces, while the building system in Beirut allows the construction of buildings as high as 13 stories. Many investors are showing interest in buying these damaged, forgotten buildings in order to replace them with tall ones and erase our heritage.”

Twitter: @najiahoussari


Sweeping US defense bill passes Congress, including real of Syria sanctions

Updated 8 sec ago
Follow

Sweeping US defense bill passes Congress, including real of Syria sanctions

WASHINGTON: The US Senate voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to advance a $901 billion bill setting policy for the Pentagon, sending the massive piece of legislation to the White House, which has said President Donald Trump will sign it into law. The fiscal 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, is a compromise between separate measures passed earlier this year in the House of Representatives and Senate. It authorizes a record $901 billion in annual military spending, with a 4 percent pay raise for the troops. It also authorizes reforms to the system for acquiring military equipment and includes efforts to boost competitiveness with US archrivals China and Russia.
The Senate backed the bill by 77 to 20, with strong support from both parties. Two of the “no” votes were from Republican senators Mike Lee and Rand Paul.
“This will be the 65th year in a row, the 65th consecutive year, that Congress has come together across the aisle and across two chambers to send the president a bill designed to sustain and strengthen the national defense,” said Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the Republican Senate Armed Services Committee chairman. The House passed the bill last week, by 312 to 112, also with broad bipartisan support. In a break with Trump, whose fellow Republicans hold majorities in both the House and Senate, this year’s NDAA includes several provisions to boost security in Europe, despite Trump’s release earlier this month of a National Security Strategy seen as friendly to Russia and a reassessment of the US relationship with Europe.
The fiscal 2026 NDAA provides $800 million for Ukraine — $400 million in each of the next two years — as part of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which pays US companies for weapons for Ukraine’s military.
It also authorizes the Baltic Security Initiative and provides $175 million to support Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia’s defense. And it limits the Department of Defense’s ability to drop the number of US forces in Europe to fewer than 76,000 and bars the US European Commander from giving up the title of NATO Supreme Commander.

WINS FOR BOTH PARTIES
Members of Congress take great pride in having passed the NDAA every year for more than six decades.
The measure’s record price tag is $8 billion more than Trump had requested. This month a handful of Republicans and Democrats called for the addition of a provision to strengthen military helicopter safety rules, following a fatal crash between an Army Black Hawk and an American Airlines passenger jet that killed 67 people.
Anger over that issue was not strong enough to derail the NDAA. Senate leaders have promised to address it in upcoming legislation. The NDAA also repeals the tough “Caesar” sanctions imposed on Syria under its former leader Bashar Assad. And it has a provision to withhold a chunk of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s travel budget if he does not provide Congress with unedited videos of military strikes on boats in the southern Caribbean and eastern Pacific. The Trump administration has said the strikes are directed at Venezuelan drug-traffickers. The Senate vote came a day after Trump ordered a blockade of all sanctioned oil tankers entering and leaving Venezuela, his latest move to increase pressure on Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s government.
It repeals the 1991 and 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs) against Iraq, an attempt to reassert Congress’ role in deciding to send troops into combat.
During his first term, Trump said the 2002 AUMF provided legal authority for the 2020 killing in Iraq of senior Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani.
The NDAA does not include funding to change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War, an idea championed by Trump but a change that cannot be formalized without congressional approval.
However, it includes some of the “culture war” efforts popular with politicians on the US right. One measure bars transgender women from participating in athletic programs designated for women at US military academies.
It also codifies into law executive orders by Trump ending diversity, equity and inclusion efforts at the Pentagon.