A widely accepted and oft repeated narrative of the drafting of the constitution of the Lebanese Republic in 1926 has placed the onus for its confessional articles on the French Mandate authorities who were allegedly acting to preserve Christian, and more particularly Maronite, predominance. This historiography tends to resonate well with the thesis of a number of scholars who identify the European colonial project as the chief culprit of sectarianism. Closer inspection of the critical period of the drafting of the constitutive 1926 document however reveals a more complex bargaining process amongst the Lebanese Christian and Muslim members of the constitutional committee vying for prerogatives on the one hand, and the French mandatory powers on the other. This paper analyzes the competing – and often contradictory - loyalties prior, during and after the debate between key contributors to this drafting process. Relying on the minutes of the meetings, this paper contextualizes the explicit references to the French, Swiss and Belgian constitutions which were discussed as a possible paradigm for the Lebanese multi-confessional society. Such a push to emulate or even carbon copy European blueprints was resisted by a “pull” of arguments centering on the oft-regretted alleged “exceptionalism” of Lebanese confessional pluralism. At the end of their deliberations, the deputies conceded to a mid-way compromise solution between the secular, republican ideal most espoused emotively and the “inveterate” communal reality they were confronted with on the ground. Yet the debate on confessional quotas and personal status guarantees instituted in Lebanon’s “consociational democracy” then continued to echo during the major revision of the constitution at Taif in 1989 and present day reform discussions. This paper provides the historical, political and demographic backdrop necessary to understand the divergent arguments and ultimate outcome of the current constitutional framework in Lebanon.