I see this not just where people talk, but in newspapers and in official government speeches.
We’ve had plenty of villains over time, but we never call them by just their first names. In fact, it seems we go more by last names because it makes them less human in someway.
I’ve heard that it may be a result of different naming conventions in the Arab world, but I never hear Yasser Arafat called just “Yasser” or Hosni Mubarak called just “Hosni.” Or is this some Sunni/Shi’ite thing that I’m not aware of? (Sorry, I can’t remember which countries are which).
Anyway, answering will get you the undying gratitude of everyone here where I work. If anyone can point to a Web site that explains it, that would be even more appreciated.
I think pravnik’s right. At the time that Saddam Hussein first came to the attention of the American public, Hussein I was still King of Jordan, and simply calling Saddam “Hussein” would be confusing, especially since the U.S. wasn’t involved in hostilities with Jordan at the time.
I always thought Saddam was his family (last) name. I don’t know why I thought that, though. Maybe I’m confused by the chinese naming system.
Peace,
mangeorge
I did not know that! Chalk one up for George Bush Sr. who never failed to call him Saddam, with the accent on the first syllable. I had always thought it was a nice touch by GRB, ie not given the guy his full name.
Saddam Hussein has no family name. He was actually given only one name at birth, “Hussein,” and he later granted himself the honourific “Saddam.” As to why the news media in serious news articles refers to him by his first name, it is a bit of an anomaly. Standard U.S. journalistic practice is full name on first reference and then family name or second name subsequently.
From a journalistic point of view, there is no reason to worry about confusion with King Hussein of Jordan, because American journalistic style dictates a full name on first reference. Also it would usually be clear from the context of a story whether one was referring to the ruler of Iraq or Jordan. If they were both being discussed, then the writer would make it clear each time which person was being referred to. However, in no case would one solve the problem by referring to one of them by his or her given name or first name (exception, of course, for monarchs like King Hussein).
There are a few possibilities that might explain how the practice of referring to Saddam Hussein by his first name became established. One is the nature of Arabic names themselves. Most Arabs do not have family names so the practice of referring to an Arab by second name only in the model of people who do have family names is a bit arbitrary. I believe that it has a lot to do with President George H. W. Bush. He always referred to Hussein as “Saddam” with a very contemptuous tone of voice and a (possibly purposeful) mispronunciation. I think this was picked up by the news media. If this is the case, I personally don’t think it reflects very well on us. Sure, Hussein is a bad, bad man, but our personal opinions of him should not be reflected in the way we refer to him in a serious news article.
Full name: Saddam bin Hussein at-Takriti, a reference to his place of birth. “Saddam” is an epithet roughly translated as “The Crusher,” though I don’t recall where I learned this. So there you go – Hussein the Crusher. Which doesn’t excuse the press from referring to him like Mr. Terrible (as in Ivan).
Thanks, both of you. I really didn’t know. Live and learn.
And I agree that it’s silly and a bit childish for a politician to “make fun” of the guy’s name. Reminds me of jr. high school.
Come to think of it, conservatives (Republicans) seem to be fond of the practice.
Just a recollection, though. I don’t know if I can back it up.
Perhaps one of our Middle Eastern-knowledgeable posters can clarify, but I’m under the impression that Saddam Hussein rather likes to be referred to as “Saddam”. (Though not, presumably, if it’s mispronounced.) There is, for example, a Saddam International Airport, and a Saddam University (complete with Saddam College of Law and Saddam College of Medicine), and I’ve also seen references to “Saddam Hospitals” in various cities. These are, as far as I can tell, the official titles of those institutions.
I wonder if perhaps he likes it because it sounds more monarchical. Mere civil magistrates in republics go by their last name or family name, the same as anyone else, but kings and emperors (including self-appointed ones) tend to go by first names only–e.g., Napoleon. Of course, officially Saddam Hussein is “President” of the “Republic” of Iraq, but from what I’ve read of him, he basically fancies himself the new Hammurabi, and the heir to the Mesopotamian kings of old.
Of course, if all this is true, we could most piss him off by referring to him as “Mr. Hussein”, the way the British during the Napoleonic Wars called His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of the French by the moniker “Bonaparte”.
Somethin’ don’t add up here. The page cited by TheeGrumpy says his full name is Saddam bin Hussein at-Takriti which implies Saddam is a given name and Hussein family name (bin or ben means “son of”). Hussein is a fairly common Arab (Muslim?) family name. It looks to me Saddam was the name he was given at birth.
(a) Sadaam (sad dal aliph mim) is the habitual doer form of sdm - to crush/smash etc. I guess Crusher is a good enough translation.
(b) I am unaware of the legal birth name, but it appears to me that the Sadaam bin Hussien at-Takriti is probably correct in traditional usage (Sadam son of Hussien the Takriti or of Takrit). The modern usage, based on modern European usage, and what is used in Arabic press is Sadaam Hussien.
This strikes me as complete rubbish. If it were true I would have certainly heard of it previously - indeed I know a few people who knew Sadaam in Cairo in his student days. None ever mentioned he had “given” himself an appelation (and in general one does not do so in Arab usage), and that was not for a lack of having stories about the man.
Again, rubbish.
Traditional Arabic usage of course used the X bin Y followed by regional or clan or other designators. However, in most of the Arab world, government’s bureaucratic desire for record keeping etc., social pressures, etc. established the Europeanesque usage of first and some family name. Egyptians, for example, are required to have three names by law. (e.g. Mahmoud Mohammed Saalih.) I got into an ugly argument with an Egyptian postal official when addressing a letter to a Moroccan friend - where typically one uses but two names, first and last - about the requirement for “Arabs” to have 3 names. Under Egyptian law. The official was sincerely put out to learn the rest of the Arab world did not follow Egyptian rules.
Finally
strikes me as incorrect. Saadim, the only form which strikes me as approaching “stressing the first syllable” doesn’t mean street urchin to my knowledge. Of course, slang and dialect are endlessly varied in the Arab world so I would not pretend that I can give final comment here.
Does anyone besides me think that eliminating his first name in American journalistic speech is a (not-so) subtle attempt to show disrespect? I mean, really, are Americans in general so clueless that we would confuse him with the Jordanians, in context?
You guys, listen to Collounsbury. Not all Arabs have family names. Some do, some don’t. It isn’t a slamdunk to have a family name the way it is in European cultures (outside Iceland, where family names also don’t exist.) It’s often typical for an Arab to have a given name followed by the father’s given name. This is called a patronymic. The term ibn or bin (son of) or bint (daughter of) in between the given name and the father’s given name is often ommitted. After that may come a tribal name (if the person is tribal), or else a name derived from a place. The tribal/place name may turn into a genuine family name, but then again it may not.
In this case, Saddam is the given name, Hussein is his father’s given name, and al-Takriti is derived from the name of his birthplace, but it is not a family name. Just a place name descriptor.
So the answer to the question is: Saddam has no last name. He just has a first name and that’s it. It’s not quite correct to call him “Mr. Hussein” because Hussein is his dad’s first name.
I don’t listen to people who don’t proofread for the SDMB.
I often see the print media use both names. At least in the headlines. I don’t know about tv, though.
