This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities
Close
You are an administrator, so you may disregard the message below
You are seeing this because of the limitations of {{If extended confirmed}} and {{If admin}}
You can hide this message box by adding the following to a new line of your common.css page:
.ECR-edit-request-warning{display:none;}
Stop: You may only use this page to create an edit request
You are not an extended-confirmed user, so you must not edit or discuss this topic anywhere on Wikipedia except to make an edit request. (Additional details are in the message box just below this one.)
The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:
All participants in formal discussions (RfCs, RMs, etc) within the area of conflict are urged to keep their comments concise, and are limited to 1,000 words per discussion. Citations and quotations (whether from sources, Wikipedia articles, Wikipedia discussions, or elsewhere) do not count toward the word limit.
You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours (except in limited circumstances)
Rebuilding the walls, building a cemetery, closing a gate
Since when is rebuilding the city walls anything to do with Islamization? Here is how a Jewish resident described it: "God aroused the spirit of Suleiman, king of Rumelia and Persia, and he set out to build the walls of Jerusalem, the holy city in the land of Judah. ... And his fame spread across the land for he wrought a great dead." (F.E. Peters, Jerusalem, p480). The walls had been repeatedly destroyed and repaired over the centuries and most recently they had been demolished in 1219 by another Muslim (I wonder if that was Islamization too). Zerotalk 02:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
I also can't see anything Islamization about building a Muslim cemetery, unless it displaced a Jewish or Christian cemetery. The book of Birnbaum doesn't read like a history book, more like some sort of personal essay on history that only has a few words on this subject. He doesn't have his facts right either. Pilgrim Arnold van Harff described the cemetery outside the Golden Gate at the end of the previous century, so Suleiman didn't build it (Peters, ibid, p.410–411). There are a large number of Islamic traditions about the gate (actually two adjacent gates in the eastern wall of the Haram, not in the city walls), not only Christian and Jewish traditions. Also Suleiman might have added stonework but he wasn't the one to seal it. Peters quotes a pilgrim from 1350 that the gate was permanently closed and that the Muslims had great reverence for it. Mujir ad-Din in 1496 wrote that the gate was impassible and probably that was for security reasons "in fear of an attack on the Haram and the city by the infidel enemy since the gates lead out into the countryside and there would be little use in leaving them open" (same source). All of these facts from a specialist historian with primary sources show that Birnbaum's narrative is below the bar. Zerotalk 02:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
The sealing of the gate and placing a cemetery in front of the gate which is considered by Chrisitan and Jewish tradition the gate through which Messiah should enter Jerusalem certainly has to do something with Islamization. As you likely know according to theJewish tradition Eliyahu who is supposed to enter through that gate before Messiah, can not pass through cemetery. I did not wanted to enlarge this section by quoting this. However your removal (beside maybe the dating of cemetery was unjustified) There are planty of sources regarding this question, are you claiming that all of them are unreliable?--Tritomex (talk) 23:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
"No other gate has been the subject of so many legends (Schiller, pp. 98-108)". I'm aware of the legend, but the gate was closed long before Suleiman's time (maybe 8th century though the Crusaders opened it twice per year) and the cemetery existed before his time too. There was a Christian cemetery there in Crusader times (Boas, Jerusalem in the time of the Crusades, p.182), so it may not have been Muslims who first put graves in the path. I don't know why we should repeat legends from tertiary sources when there are many competing legends and a contemporary historian's word that the real reason for the closure was security related. Zerotalk 07:59, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
As far as I see there are many reliable sources claiming that Suleiman closed the gate, however if different views exist on this subject it can be added in parallel to the article. I have nothing against this. Also, from reliable sources it is clear that the gate has special religious significance for Christians and Jews and that the sealing of the gate and the establishment of the Muslim cemetery happened during Islamic rule over Jerusalem. That is why it is connected to the subject.--Tritomex (talk) 08:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Personally I don't add stuff to Wikipedia that I know to be wrong, even if a "reliable source" claims it. That's just my vice. But anyway, your argument is WP:SYNTH. You can't yourself put together the closure and the traditions to make Islamization. You need a reliable source saying that the gate was closed because of the traditions. Zerotalk 12:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
It is not WP:SYNTH, please read the sources which claim religious reasons behind the sealing of gate and placing of the cemetery. Also read read the article Judaization of Jerusalem in almost all of sources Judaization is not directly mentioned by any source for any of concrete actions, but "logically concluded" --Tritomex (talk) 14:47, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
What sources? You only brought the useless Birnbaum book. Zerotalk 15:33, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
So now Tritomex ignores the strong contrary evidence by eminent scholars and reinserts not only the useless Birnbaum book but even adds such gems as a travel guide, a book in which a tourist recounts what the guide told him and a book by a philosopher. But my favorite is this book which features a skull and cross-bones and has such incredible insights as "Time is 2-dimensional. It always goes in 1 direction. It doesn't go backwards or sideways, only forward." It should be obvious that multiple violations of policy are involved here. This has gone on long enough, time to prepare the case for a topic ban. Zerotalk 23:39, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
In the earlier section, we also see Tritomex adding the reference "Kister, Traditions in praise of Jerusalem P.186". I challenge Tritomex to prove that he ever consulted such a source. Zerotalk 00:08, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Regarding the source Kister, Traditions in praise of Jerusalem P.186" I really made a mistake twisting footnote 61 instead of footnote 64 from Medieval Jerusalem and Islamic Worship: Holy Places, Ceremonies, Pilgrimage by Eldad page 162. The note 61 refers to "Kister, Traditions in praise of Jerusalem P.186". while the note 64 which I twisted by mistake refer to Ibn al Murajja for 25b. This was unintentional mistake as the names of the books cited from Google Books, can not be copy-pasted.--Tritomex (talk) 11:21, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Some notes
This is of course an attack article, taking an historical transformation of a city under new management in the distant past as somehow insidious. No one thinks of writing a The Christianization of Rome or Judaisation of Jebusite Rušalimum Since it is attacking Islam it should be documented from scholarly sources, and not from cheap polemical cant like the politically spun screed from Kedar, out of Ynet. Whatever Kedar had to say is already in the scholarly literature, as my edits show, without the hypocrisy of implying there is something anomalous or fake in Muslim attachment to a city they have lived in for 1,400 years, while taking as normal an identification process being engineered now by another people.Nishidani (talk) 15:51, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
Let me look into this matter. Leo1pard (talk) 06:32, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
Merger Discussion
The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A summary of the debate may be found at the bottom of the discussion.
Proposer's Rationale: The article to be merged is already discussed here and there seems to be no reason for an independent existence. In addition, the title is misleading as it stipulates a Jordanian occupation from 1948 to 1967, which is not the case.
Oppose. This article is already very long, and covers several centuries worth of history. It has a section dealing with the Islamization of Jerusalem under the Jordanian occupation, but that section has a much more detailed treatment in the separate article. If we adda all that material here, it will create an undue weight issue, so per WP:SPINOFF, it is preferable and acceptable to treat this in its own article. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk)
Support This article is ~2,000 words long, the "under Jordan" article is ~600 words long with only ~200 of those not already being in this article, so a merger would mean this article becomes ~2,200 words. With so much duplication between the two articles, it would serve readers better to have this tidied up. Onceinawhile (talk) 16:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
800 out of 2200 words is more than a third, and would be clearly undue weight. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 17:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Don’t forget the huge amount of overlapping content! Onceinawhile (talk) 21:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Comment If what bothers you is the title of Islamization of East Jerusalem under Jordanian occupation then please don't propose a merge but a rename. If it is indeed a merge you propose, then there is no need to vent your feelings about the article title here. Debresser (talk) 18:07, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
One point (which I have clearly mentioned in my rationale for moving the page) is that the relevant section in this article is titled (correctly) "Third Islamization of Jerusalem under Jordanian rule" and does not improperly attempt to define an annex as an occupation. But the main point is the other article is simply unnecessary, it will be covered in here and can be covered in the article Jordanian annexation of the West Bank in addition which given the amount of interest in it is more than adequate I would have thought.Selfstudier (talk) 13:24, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Oppose unless you mean to transfer everything from the Jordanian period to here, which, as noted above, was already discussed but rejected at “Islamization of Jerusalem under Jordanian occupation” page. Zarcademan123456 (talk) 22:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Support - uh guys, we have criteria for when topics should be split. This article is 31 kb. That article is 13 kb. Even if one were to add the two together entirely, that would come out to 44kb. Less of readable prose. Per WP:SIZERULE this can be in one article, and if any of you actually cares about people, you know, reading the content you want included then you should consider how search terms work and how a titles length is directly related to its silliness and decreasing likelihood that anybody will ever look at it. For example, this article gets 5 times the page views as that one. Im guessing because nobody is including "under jordanian occupation" when looking up the Islamic history or Islamization of Jerusalem. Or, and feel free to continue with this option, continue toiling away on pet articles where the only people ever reading it are the editors bickering over it. nableezy - 23:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
Oppose Its just another attempt to circumvent move procedure and remove the word occupation. --Shrike (talk) 16:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
You could say I am giving you a choice? You say "another", I don't recall any prior attempt to do anything of the sort, remind me. And I don't want only to remove the word occupation, I want to replace it with the word rule, the same as it is in this article.Selfstudier (talk) 00:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Support The "Islamization of East Jerusalem under Jordanian rule" is mostly WP:SYNTH as an overall theme. I believe there is no WP:RS which says that East Jerusalem was systematically Islamized during that period. The facts can be better dealt with in this article. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
It is not customary to vote twice.GreyShark (dibra) 09:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Support The present article discusses 3 distinct periods, the Jordanian being the 3rd. Most of the content from the redundant fork Jordanian article overlaps with this one, and any additional information therein should be merged. This is true even though the fork seems to be older, but once the main article was written, the other became redundant. Havradim (talk) 01:30, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Support Regardless of the nominator's dubious motivations, these articles are doubtlessly one in content. Debresser (talk) 20:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Oppose - regardless of the content, Islamization of Jerusalem by Jordanians is a topic on its own right, a notable event in Jerusalem's history and one of several major Islamization events. Perhaps Alternative rename of Islamization of East Jerusalem under Jordanian occupation to Islamization of the West Bank during Jordanian annexation can resolve the issue.GreyShark (dibra) 09:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Support, Islamization under Jordanians seems to be a subset of Islamization in general and both articles are short enough to warrant a merger. The Islamization of East Jerusalem under Jordanian occupation page should redirect to the appropriate section on this page.VRtalk 14:55, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Photo
@Debresser: the caption is obviously wrong – the synagogue was destroyed in the middle of a battle. That is not what the photo shows. Could you please undo your revert, or replace it with another descriptive caption of your choice? Onceinawhile (talk) 11:39, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
The source given on Commons is this, which is obviously not reliable. On the other hand, I don't think "after the 1948 war" is reliable either. I propose removing the photo. Zerotalk 11:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
First of all I see no reason to remove this image, especially with this caption. Regarding the caption. I think "after the 1948 war" is obviously true. Furthermore, this is the consensus version since this image was added in 2012. Please show consensus to change the caption "An Arab Legion soldier in ruins of Tiferet Yisrael Synagogue." before you, or anybody else repeat this edit. Also please explain why think the source of the caption is "obviously not reliable". Debresser (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
@Debresser: To start with, you just broke 1RR on ARBPIA-related material so kindly self-revert. Zerotalk 15:07, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Done. Now you please self-revert for making a non-consensus edit to a consensus version. Debresser (talk) 15:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
There is no such rule. Zerotalk 15:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Of course there is. Debresser (talk) 00:37, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
I agree with Onceinawhile and Zero, and that while we accept in good faith what an uploader says about their own image that isnt true for historical events. Unless the uploader actually took the picture and uploaded their own recounting of it then we cant accept the commons description as though it were some authority here. Our article says the synagogue was blown up after midnight, which would make this caption manifestly untrue. Debresser, why are you edit-warring to return material that is untrue in an encyclopedia article? nableezy - 15:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
There is also a problem in that the source says "blowing up the..Hurva Synagogue", not "in the ruins of the Tiferet Yisrael Synagogue". The building in the background seems to be the Hurva but there is nothing in the image to suggest it is in the process of being blown up, nor that the rubble in the foreground is the Tiferet Yisrael Synagogue (though it might be). I was under the impression that the Hurva was more destroyed during the war than appears here, correct me if I'm wrong, which is why I think "after the 1948 war" may be incorrect. Zerotalk 15:48, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Even if the rubble in the foreground is TY, the caption is misleading because readers will assume the building in the background is what it being portrayed.Zerotalk 15:53, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
I have to take a break, but I'll just mention that I might have the two synagogues confused because I trusted drawings on an old Hebrew guide map. The building in the background seems to be Tiferet Yisrael. Prove me wrong (probably not hard). Zerotalk 16:33, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
This source also calls it "Destruction of the Tifere Yisrael Synagogue in 1948.". This source calls it "The Arab Legion in the process of destroying the Tiferes Yisrael Synagogue, May 25, 1948." Debresser (talk) 00:47, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Neither of those seem especially reliable. nableezy - 02:08, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
It is the Tiferet Yisrael Synagogue indeed. The photo shows the south-west corner and one can see that the south wall is missing. A few people can be seen standing or sitting on the rubble of the adjacent buildings. There has obviously been fierce fighting here, and it is well known that the synagogue was a major Hagana stronghold and that serious damage was sustained during the fighting. Otherwise, nothing in the photo indicates what the people visible are doing now. Sources like you found just copy the caption along with the photo and don't actually know anything. Locate the original source of the photo and how the photographer described it, then we will know something concrete. I found a clue that it might be the work of a photographer from Life magazine, but it did not appear in Life at the time. Zerotalk 03:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Evacuations and Destruction of Synagogues
@Tritomex: do you have any good sources detailing exactly what happened to the Jewish population and synagogues of the Old City in 1948? My understanding is that the population was evacuated and the remaining Jews were fighters who used the synagogues as military posts. So there was no expulsion because the civilian population had already left, and the destruction of the synagogues happened in the fighting, much like today Israel argues they can destroy any Gazan building they like if it has even a tenuous connection to Hamas.
There were both civilians and soldiers present when the Jewish fighters surrendered. The civilians were conducted in orderly fashion to Israeli lines and the soldiers became POWs. The relevance to this article is dubious. Some parts of this article are not in English. Zerotalk 13:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
@Onceinawhile:"Civilians being conducted in orderly fashion" (by soldiers from their homes) to one or another army lines cant be in the case of Ramla an expulsion, and in the case of Jewish quarter evacuation. The 56 synagogues of Old City were almost exclusively destroyed after the fighting.Tritomex (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Ramla civilians were not "conducted in an orderly fashion", your personal feeling that the two are equivalent is enlightening on a number of levels, but of little relevance to what our articles say. nableezy - 14:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Ok. I agree with you, and was the expulsion of Jewish civilians from their homes in Jewish quarter in 1948 conducted in orderly fashion?Tritomex (talk) 16:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
I am unaware of any source calling it a death march. So, again, the false equivalence you are trying to make here remains false. nableezy - 17:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Does anyone have any sources for:
There were... civilians... present when the Jewish fighters surrendered
The 56 synagogues of Old City were almost exclusively destroyed after the fighting
Actually Mark A. Tessler in "A history of Israeli-Palestinian conflict" documents 34 synagogues in Old City dynamited by the Jordanian army after the war
You have also a good source from John_Phillips Pictorial Record (Israel study volume 17, number 2
Among many other pictures a picture of 7 years old Rachel Levy trying to escape while the irregulars are burning surrounding houses. The whole article is full of pictures and documents of the expulsion of Jewish civilians from the Jewish quarter. It also gives a number of Jewish civilian on 16th of may as 1 700 and 150 fighters. The text details other important details, let me now not make quotes.Tritomex (talk) 20:47, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
I will try to get permission for some of this pictures. Tritomex (talk) 20:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
To editor Onceinawhile: The claim about the 34 (sometimes reported as 58) synagogues originated with an Israeli letter to the UN. For many years I have been looking for documentation that 34 synagogues even existed in the old city. Tritomex says that Tessler "documents" it, but all Tessler does is quote an 1972 "open letter" from a Catholic clergyman who repeats the Israeli assertion and doesn't claim to have been an eye-witness. I found a pre-1948 Hebrew map of the Old City that shows less than half 34 synagogues, and British maps that give an outline of every building and mark 14 synagogues, 11 mosques, 16 schools, and quite a lot of churches, monasteries. I bought a book on synagogues in the Old City but didn't find it there. I also found a 1967 Israeli map that shows 19 synagogues (if they had been destroyed they must have been rebuilt very quickly). My best lead was a reference to a source that promised a 1947 list. Davidbena very kindly tracked it down and summarised it. Note that a Beit Midrash is a place of learning which might be co-located with a synagogue but doesn't have to be. Altogether 24 places are listed but only a fraction are synagogues. A problem is that the source concentrates on Sephardi sites and may not list all Ashkenazi sites. Note David's report "The section in this article concludes by saying there used to be many more synagogues in the Old City but their worshippers abandoned them because of the outbreak of disturbances within the city, and some of which have since been taken over by the local, non-Jewish community living in the city." Since the book was published in 1947 the "disturbances" are not a reference to the 1948 war. Another matter is that quite a few sources reported that the Jewish Quarter was destroyed in the fighting (NYT May 28: "Most of the Jewish quarter is now a complete ruin."), which makes it more or less impossible that the synagogues were all destroyed later. The wiki-situation is unsatisfactory. Zerotalk 05:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Note that the Life article referenced by Tritomex (June 28, 1948) says that the Jewish Quarter was looted by irregulars and civilians despite an effort by the Arab Legion, including a curfew, to prevent it. This is the opposite of the Israeli claim that the Arab Legion was responsible for the destruction. Zerotalk 08:52, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
1936 Old City of Jerusalem map by Survey of Palestine. Only 14 synagogues are shown.
@Zero0000: thank you. This is a great read, and an exposition of a mystery which needs resolving. I presume this is the British map you mean? It is undoubtedly the most accurate map of the Old City pre-1948: Annual Report, 1936, of the Department of Land and Surveys, pages 368, 368: "In 1936 a complete map of the Old City of Jerusalem was published on the scale 1/2,500. The only previous map of the Old City was that made in 1865 by Sir Charles Wilson, previously mentioned. This map is apparently often called by writers the Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem! Anyhow, it proved itself worthy of the title, for Lieut-Col F. J. Salmon states that it was sufficiently accurate to be used as the framing of the new map. The old map showed no more than the streets and principal edifices; the new shows all the structures…
@Makeandtoss: have you ever seen this issue addressed by Jordanian sources? I would have thought that someone in the Jordanian administration would have felt the need to provide their side of the story to the Israeli claims made in the post-1948 period. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:10, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
@Onceinawhile: Note that the map shows revisions in 1945 and 1947. I have a few other versions of essentially the same map. One of the more interesting is in Hebrew from the Israeli Department of Surveys in 1967 in which the Maghrebi neighborhood has gone missing. Zerotalk 09:56, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm glad this is finally being addressed, and it should be a priority tracking down the precise figure. The '48 Jewish quarter extended over a spare 4-5 acres, and most of the beit midrash and synagogue infrastructure was concentrated in three complexes,(Rashid Khalidi,'The Future of Arab Jerusalem,'British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies Vol. 19, No. 2 (1992), pp.133-143 p.137) and certainly we are not dealing with 50+ synagogues, as the meme states. I n terms of deep Jerusalem history, it was the Sephardis whose centuries-old institutions were targeted, who suffered the greater loss. Further, as a side point, what happened in Jerusalem 48 is throughout our articles considered in terms of 'Jewish' vs.'Arab'(Muslim) property, and the fact that the Christian community had very large property holdings inside the city, which also suffered consderable damage, is rarely noted. According to the diary of the Greek Consul General, Constantine Mavridis, the Haganah certainly sent units to defend the three Hurva, Tiferet and Yochanan ben Zakai Synagogues. This last was one of 4 Sephardi rite synagogues, the others being Istanbuli, Eliahu Ha'navi and Emtsai. Many of the Greek Orthodox shrines were damaged, certainly by Jewish artillery and mortar strikes. After capturing the Notre Dame building, now known as the Chapel of Our Lady of Jerusalem, it concentrated much of its firepower from there into the Old City, and, after the fall of the Jewish quarter, according to Mavridis, Jewish artillery and mortar fire began to focus on the Holy Sepulchre Church area - whose dome tower suffered a direct hit - the premises of the Greek patriarchate and Central Monastery, St Vasileios, St Theodoros, the RC Casa Nova, the Greek chapel of the Archangel, and a number of other monasteries, shrines and chapels. The diary continues: 'One is almost forced to conclude that the Jewish bombardment was motivated by feeligs of revenge for the destruction of the old synagogues in the Jewish quarter of the Old City’. (P.J. Vatikiotis, 'The Siege of the Walled City of Jerusalem, 14 May-15 December 1948,'Middle Eastern Studies Vol. 31, No. 1 (Jan., 1995), pp. 139-145p.144.) The diarist also compares the plundering of Jewish property after the surrender to what had occurred, far more massively, to the mainly Christian properties of Westr Jerusalem earlier. All of these complexities are systematically annulled in competing victimization memes.Nishidani (talk) 11:21, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Zero0000, interesting thank you. This article: Vatikiotis, P. (1995). The Siege of the Walled City of Jerusalem, 14 May-15 December 1948. Middle Eastern Studies, 31(1), 139-145 suggests that all the destruction happened in the space of just one week or so, from about 21 May to their surrender on 28 May 1948. The diarist suggested that the destroyed Jewish synagogues were all modern with no historical importance, but was angry about the Jewish shelling of Christian holy places. He also says The diarist explains that before their destruction, Arab headquarters informed the Haganah Command via the International Red Cross that unless the Jewish forces withdrew, they will attack the Quarter. As there was no Jewish reply to the Arab ultimatum, the Synagogues were destroyed. Almost the whole of the Old City’s population seems to have left during the fighting, from 60,000 down to 10,000.
So to solve the mystery the questions are really;
(1) How many synagogues were destroyed between 21-28 May 1948 [surely this is properly documented somewhere]
(2) How many synagogues were left standing as at 28 May 1948 [presumably this is more difficult to find]
There are many reliable sources that confirms that 34 synagogue's in Old City were destroyed by Jordanians. Like Haaretz . Jewish virtual library, Isaiah L. Kenen, Near East Report, Volumes 18-20 1974 - Jewish-Arab relations, Page 47 Probably not all of them were in use, as the number of Jews in Old city declined tenfold in 20th century. According to all of this sources there were 35 synagogues in Old City of whom 34 were destroyed by Jordanians, after the capture of Old City.Tritomex (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
One of the longstanding I/P problems has been that many texts that formally qualify as RS report and repeat information that, because it is recycled, doesn't stand scrutiny. Those who apply themselves diligently to the topic area collaborate (and here we are particularly indebted to Davidbena) in order to ascertain the facts beneath the rubble of hearsay figures. First you cited 56, and now it's 35. The probable figure is around half of that. In any case, this is an encyclopedia based on rigorous checking, and it would be of great interest to actually establish the number and their respective names, of the synagogues which actually stood, and were subsequently destroyed in the fighting or razed afterwards. This will take time, so be patient. In my counting (adding a 'Beit Ya'akov synagogue' from David's list) we have at least 8, most of which would have had at least one beit midrash, an institution which is not interchangeable with 'synagogue' as far as my understanding goes. Nishidani (talk) 14:40, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
"There are many reliable sources that confirms"...no, there are many reliable sources that repeats. So far no source has been found to confirm the claim, which means to establish the truth of the claim by primary sources or otherwise (such as compiling a list). Also, the mere fact that the claim varies wildly (in official Israeli pronouncements from 34 to 58) proves the unreliability. Then we have the statement of the Chief Rabbi that there were 27 synagogues and 22 were destroyed . It's all over the place. Incidentally, in 1936 the mandate government compiled a list of names of Jerusalem buildings, gates, roads, etc etc and sent them to the various organizations and communities for approval. I have a copy of their hand-written replies (which often added extra names) and the resulting accumulated list of 168 items. There are 17 synagogues in the list. I doubt there is a more definitive source for 1936. Zerotalk 15:18, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Well, that newspaper was published on june 8 1948 and referred to a statement of an Ashkenazi rabbi, made likely much earlier. No details were given. I dont think that all synagogues were destroyed on one day, on may 27-28th. No reflection on Haaretz article? It gives lot of details about the destruction of Old City 34 synagogue's. Yet I didnt saw a one RS claiming that the Old City synagogues were not destroyed by Jordanian army after the fighting.Tritomex (talk) 15:28, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
News articles generally arent good sources for historical events. nableezy - 17:00, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Figure 2 shows the religious institutions in the Old City at c.1800 (4 synagogues in total, including one Karaite). Explained on p.256: "The third reason was the concentration in previous centuries around three consecrated sites: the synagogue of the Ramban, a Jewish rabbi and scholar who arrived in Jerusalem in the thirteenth century and renovated the local Jewish community; the complex of the four Sephardim synagogues, also hundreds of years old; and the Hurva (ruins) of Rabbi Yehuda Hassid, where an attempt to build an important synagogue had been made in the eighteenth century." [Footnote: B. Z. Gat, The Jewish Community in Palestine During the Years 1840-1880 Jerusalem; Rehavia School, 1963), pp. 193-95; and M. Ish-Shalom, Christian Travels in the Holy Land: Description & Sources on the History of the Jews in Palestine (Tel-Aviv; Am Oved, 1965), pp. 154-58.]
Figure 4 shows the new religious institutions in the Old City at c.1914 (28 new synagogues). Explained on p.262: "Residential expansion was accompanied by the construction of a large number of synagogues and other religious institutions. Repairs were made on the ancient Sephardim synagogues, the largest synagogue of the Prooshim sect of the Ashkenazim congregation was built on the site of the Hurva, and a large Hassidim synagogue was built east of it. Two of the Yeshivas (religious academies) were even built inside the Muslim area which had been invaded by the Jews. The Jews also started to build hospitals, orphanages, old-age homes, and even modern schools, which they later transferred to the new city that was growing outside of the walls." [Footnote: S. Avitzur, "The Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem," in Chapters in the History of the Jewish Community in Jerusalem (Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi, 1973), pp. 9-43; and Gat, op. cit., footnote 10, pp. 126-58.]
This source includes a list, but being published by the "International Forum for a United Jerusalem" is not WP:RS: Eliyahu Tal (1994). "The 58 Synagogues Destroyed in 1948 by the Jordanians". Whose Jerusalem?. International Forum for a United Jerusalem. ISBN978-965-229-123-3.. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:05, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
@Onceinawhile: Can you see the list? I can see some snippets and one might be instructive. Number 30 is Beit Aharon Synagogue. It was founded in 1927 and there are 1986 photos here. The address 42 Ha'im Uzar St. is in West Jerusalem (in Google Maps use the spelling Khayim Ozer). I can't see it on street view and now there is a modern Beit Aharon Synagogue at another place in West Jerusalem. I couldn't find any history. Perhaps(??) they are counting all synagogues damaged in 1948 and not only those in the Old City. Zerotalk 01:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
@Onceinawhile: I will have this book within a few weeks but don't have high hopes for it. Meanwhile I see a snippet from page 133: "..the 58 synagogues located in the Old City, 36 were destroyed by indiscriminate shelling and burning..". I don't know what follows. And on page 114: "..indiscriminate fire from artillery, armored and infantry units.." Of course the "indiscriminate" claim is just bluster but there may well be an admission here that much of the destruction occurred during the fighting. Zerotalk 02:31, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Table of sites from "International Forum for a United Jerusalem"
@Zero0000: I have managed to extract it. See below. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:46, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
More information Synagogue in International Forum for a United Jerusalem list, Other name(s) ...
Synagogue in International Forum for a United Jerusalem list
Great work,chaps, and a lesson to all. Here one chases information down, wherever it ends up, i.e., here the figure that looked rubbery turns out to have a solid basis. Method and tenacity always trump POV finangling. I've checked a dozen by googling with no results, so I suspect only googling them in Hebrew will turn up physical details. Arminden?Nishidani (talk) 08:14, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
This is progress, but a list in an unreliable source is not yet a solid basis. I showed above that the first one I investigated was in West Jerusalem. Zerotalk 10:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Many of these don't bear the formal name, and this causes confusion. Take no.18 'Aleppo Jews Synagogue'.
The Aleppo Jews's core synagogue in Jerusalem was the Ades Synagogue, located in Nachlaot, outside of the old city stricto sensu. It was damaged according to its article in '47-48, one that also tells us that Nachlaot had the highest concentration of synagogues in the world. The distinction required is for synagogues within the area taken over by Jordan, no further.Nishidani (talk) 10:51, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Which of the above corresponds to the Ohel Yitzchak Synagogue in the Muslim quarter, which was also partially destroyed?Nishidani (talk) 11:25, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
The area of the Ohel Yitzchak Synagogue (not highlighted) in 1936-47. The Madrasah al-Tankiziya is labelled 12).
@Nishidani: I have been searching high and low for this, but with no luck. It may be because it was abandoned in 1936-39. The SoP map to the right shows the location - but it is not highlighted. I wonder if it is because it was not really a synagogue, but just a yeshiva with a couple of small prayer rooms. There is a reasonable chance that the hasbara around the recent rebuilding of this structure has distorted its history. Onceinawhile (talk) 17:18, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
It's an interesting chase because of the high emotional content in the figures, and the ambiguity of languages. Technically might I say that my library is a church because a solemn mass was once celebrated there? What do we mean by mosque, church, synagogue? The words evoke impressive structures. Many mosques or prayer halls in Rome are underground garages, etc. It will take a long time to sort this out, but meantime, thanks for all the hard yakka.Nishidani (talk) 20:04, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Nuseibeh: And here there is talk about us desecrating Israeli Jewish Holy Places. It was in the course of that street fighting that not only synagogues but churches and mosques, including the Al-Aqsa Mosque, were damaged. That is a fact of history, and there are many people alive today who bore witness and can testify to it. We have never desecrated any Jewish places in all our history because, as I said, we would not be good Muslims if we did.
Blum: In flagrant violation of the Israel-Jordan General Armistice Agreement of 1949, Jordan barred access by Jews to their Holy Places and cultural institutions. Further, the Jordanian Government began systematically to eliminate every trace of Jerusalem’s Jewish past. Fifty-eight synagogues, some of great antiquity, like the 700-year-old Hurva Synagogue, were wantonly destroyed and desecrated. Those that were not razed to the ground were converted into toilets, stables and hen houses filled with dung heaps, garbage and carcasses. In the process, hundreds of holy Torah scrolls and books reverently preserved for generations were plundered and burned to ashes. On the Mount of Olives, a hallowed spot for Jews for centuries, 38,000 of the 50,000 tombstones in the ancient Jewish burial ground were torn up, profaned, broken into pieces and used as flagstones, steps and building materials for public latrines and Jordanian army barracks. Large areas of the cemetery were levelled and converted into parking areas and gas stations. Through the devastated remains of the graves, the Jordanian Government cut an asphalt road to provide a short cut to a new hotel, built irreverently on the top of the Mount of Olives.
Nuseibeh: The representative of Israel, along with all the representatives of Israel over the past several years that I have been here, have always gradually inflated the number of synagogues in the small Jewish quarter in Jerusalem. If anyone from the Old City of Jerusalem is asked, he will answer that there were four synagogues - two important ones, Al-Kanis Al-Kabir or the Greater Synagogue and Al-Kanis Al-Soghir or the Lesser Synagogue. Unless Mr. Blum regards every Jewish household as a synagogue, it is unclear how he could possibly come up with that figure of 58 syna- gogues. Once in the past the figure 48 was mentioned. And yet everybody knows that there were four synagogues in the Old City and, as I stated, if we had wanted to desecrate any of those Holy Places, we could have done so over the period of 1,400 years. However, not a single stone was touched over those 14 centuries. It was the Israelis who infiltrated some of their worst elements from the Stern and Irgun gangs, in an attempt to bombard the Holy City of Jerusalem from the outside, from the Jaffa Gate, as well as from the Jewish quarter. Heaven knows what would have happened to the 90,000 unarmed citizens whose few rifles had become sticks once the few bullets in their possession had been exhausted. They used to pay a whole shilling for a bullet on the open market, because nobody was supplying us as the Israelis were supplied with money and arms.
Blum: We have been told by Ambassador Nuseibeh that “only” four synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians in 1948. That would seem to imply that the destruction of four synagogues is regarded as permissible by him. However, Ambassador Nuseibeh has unwittingly supplied us here today with yet another example of his notoriously low credibility rating. Let me therefore give the Council the full list of those 58 synagogues: (1) Bikur Holim; (2) Or Ha-Haim; (3) Ha-At-i Ha-Kadosh; (4) Sukkat Shalom; (5) Hesed El; (6/7) Habad (two synagogues); (8) Shoneh Halachot; (9) Beit Hillel; (10) Menahem Zion; (11) Ahavat Ha-Torah Veha-Shalom; (12) Ha-Ramban; (13) Rabbi Baruch; (14) Rabbi Yehuda Ha-Hasid (the “Hurva” Synagogue); (15) Warsaw; (16/17) Adot Ha-Ma’arav (two synagogues); (18) Beit-El Synagogue of the Kabbalists; (19) Rabbi Yohanan Ben Zakkai; (20) Ha-Emtza’i; (21) Istanbul; (22) Eliahu Ha-Navi; (23) Beit Aharon; (24) Sha’arei Shamayim; (25) Yehu-’dei Sepharad; (26) Yemenite; (27) Ohel Avraham; (28) Beit Meir; (29) Or Olam; (30) Karaite; (31) Tiferet Yisrael; (32) Ohel Moshe; (33) Kurdish; (34) Porat Yosef; (35) Hayei Olam; (36) Ha-Kotel Ha-Ma’aravi; (37) Sukkat David; (38) Rabbi Meir Ba’al Ha-Nes; (39) Georgian Jews; (40) Ohel Ya’acov; (41) Zion; (42) Dubno; (43) Sdeh-Hemed; (44) Ahavat Zion; (45) Biderman; (46) G’milut Hasadim; (47) Moshav- Z’kainim Ha-Yashan; (48) Michael Rutman; (49) Torat Ha-Cohanim; (50) Aleppo Jews; (51) K’tav Torah; (52) Or Zorai’ah; (53) Persian Jews; (54) Chassidei Vizhnitz; (55) Chassidei Bratzlav; (56) Chassidei Tzortkov; (57) Kollel Horodno; (58) Rabbi Pinhasel.
1936 British Mandate detailed list of Jewish places, as submitted by various Jewish authorities (as mentioned by Zero in comments above):
Jewish buildings (circled blue) in the map in Old City of Jerusalem Name List 1936Jewish buildings (circled blue) in the Old City of Jerusalem map by Survey of Palestine map 1-2,500 (cropped)
106 Synagogue, Beth Meir “Weohel Iizchak Bothe Machseh”
120 Hospital, Beth-Cholim Mitnavnim although a hospital not a synagogue
I am ticking off the ones confirmed in the table above. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:23, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Genesis of the "58 synagogues"
Jewish Telegraphic Agency (November 2, 1967). "Cabinet Report Says Jordan Destroyed 56 Old City Synagogues, Desecrated Cemetery". A shocking record of destruction and desecration of Jewish holy places in and around Old Jerusalem during 19 years of Jordanian rule was documented today in the report of an inter-ministerial committee that was appointed after the Six-Day War to determine the state of Jewish shrines in Jordan held territory. The findings of the committee were summarized by Zerach Warhaftig, Minister of Religious Affairs, at a press conference here. As examples of the wanton disregard of the religious rights of others, Mr. Warhaftig noted the destruction of all but two of the 58 synagogues in the Jewish quarter of the Old City and the almost total destruction of the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives which has been in continuous use for more than 2,000 years.
Without foruming, that outrage at Jordanian contempt for Jewish heritage, expressed on the 1/2 November, comes quickly in the wake of the June 10th demolishing of two mosques Sheikh Eid and al-Buraq in the Moroccan Quarter. So of course, this is not about cultural shock, since both behaved in exactly the same fashion.Nishidani (talk) 17:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Nishidani, the statement was also made on the 50th anniversary of the Balfour Declaration. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Hirst, David. “Rush to Annexation: Israel in Jerusalem.” Journal of Palestine Studies, vol. 3, no. 4, 1974, pp. 3–31: "The Israelis lost no time in demonstrating that. In the Jewish Quarter, 34 synagogues - or 58, for the Israeli propagandists gaily alternate between these two equally definitive figures - were destroyed or desecrated by the Arabs... In Jerusalem, the Israelis frequently appear to work on the principle that the bigger the lie the better. They count - and with considerable success - on the partisan gullibility of supposedly responsible newsmen to substantiate the lie in the outside world. A little research would expose the glibly disseminated "facts" about desecration in the Jewish Quarter for the brazen nonsense they are. For one thing there were only three or four structural synagogues proper. The rest were no more than rooms set aside for prayer, in the devout Jewish fashion, in houses that were mainly rented from Arabs. For another the real damage was brought about by the Jews themselves. As Glubb Pasha, the commander of the Arab Legion, recalls, Jewish snipers used synagogues, with their domes that overlooked the whole quarter, as strongholds in the war of 1948. The local Arab commander tried to spare them; he warned the snipers that unless they desisted his men would return their fire; after the passage of forty-eight hours without a reply, they did so."
Scott, Michael (1968). "Desecration in the Holy City". Mid. East Newsletter. 2 (7): 6–8. ...are intended to convince the public that Israeli destruction and expulsion were somehow justified. Since these accusations have been repeated so often just for such a purpose… It all began last November when Dr. Zerah Warhaftig, Israeli Minister of Religious Affairs , held a press conference to decry the profanation of Jewish graves on the Mount of Olives and the destruction of synagogues in the Old City — actions carried out, presumably, with the tacit permission of the Jordanian government and church leaders. Local papers carried the story and Israel released a White Paper detailing the charges in Hebrew, French, Spanish and English editions.
@Zero0000 and Nishidani: I think we are almost there. This letter to the UN Secretary General by Yosef Tekoah dated 5 March 1968 states: "In the Jewish Quarter all but one of the thirty-five Jewish houses of worship that graced the Old City of Jerusalem were found to have been wantonly destroyed. The synagogues had been razed or pillaged and stripped and their interiors used as hen-houses and stables... These acts of desecration have been described fully in a document published by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in Jerusalem in November 1967, a copy of which is attached to this letter."
This is certainly the same document referred to at the top of this thread, which referred to 56 out of 58; yet the letter refers to 34 out of 35. So the two sets of figures must be connected, and all originally sourced to this same November 1967 document (sometimes described as a "White Paper"). So to solve this mystery we just need to find this document, which we know was released widely, and submitted formally to the United Nations. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:58, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Don't be so quick, we cannot confirm 34 or 56/58 by this route, which I have followed before. Go to https://documents.un.org/prod/ods.nsf/home.xsp and search for symbol "S/8439/ADD.1". You will find it. It is very propagandistic and only a handful of synagogues are featured, one of which is in Hebron. Also most of the "before and after" photos clearly are not. Incidentally, the final link you get to download the document usually won't work for long in isolation; you have to get to it from the search page. Zerotalk 06:08, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Zero0000, this is superb, thank you. I have added the evidence from the document to the table above. It proves that three synagogues were destroyed, the same three that were already clear from the photos we already have in addition to the documentation showing that the destruction took place during the 1948 war. The Jordanians clearly did not "Islamize" these synagogues; they left the ruins as they were.
It then shows two synagogues that were not destroyed but with their contents gone; presumably to looters and to the natural elements due to two decades of no maintenance.
Of the remaining 30 of out 35 (or out of 58, with respect to which it says nothing), it is silent.
Regarding the Mount of Olives, I have a far better source which is the report of an internal inquiry. In Hebrew, naturally. Zerotalk 06:11, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
In the long term (yeah Keynes's quip, sure), all this should be contextualized in a larger article.Destruction of Sacred Sites in Israel/Palestine, so that we don't feed the grievance pitch intrinsic to all this. Anyone who has read up will recall numerous reports of mosques being turned into animal pens, or allowed to decay by neglect all over the landscape -the dunam by dunam nibbling at Mamilla is ongoing and I think the Nazareth based Arab Association for Human Rights once claimed that some 250 Christian and Muslim sites had been destroyed or converted into bars, barns, nightclubs or just razed for rebuilding since 1948. Contempt for any other heritage than one's own seems to be a constant since 48.Nishidani (talk) 07:15, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
To editor Onceinawhile: What is the evidence that Beit Aharon Synagogue is Karlin-Stolin synagogue? The photo you posted of Karlin-Stolin looks nothing like the photo I posted of Beit Aharon Synagogue (and note that my photo says "Beit Aharon" on the sign over the gate and also on the sign on the door). Also, Nachlaot is in West Jerusalem which is a problem for this one and two others. Zerotalk 10:20, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
To add to the confusion, note that 105 of the 1936 name list (I have put the map above for convenience) shows "105 Synagogue, Beth Medrash Hasidei Karlin". Onceinawhile (talk) 11:51, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Zero's snapshot is of Beit Aharon synagogue on Ha'im Uzar Street (which I can't find). The ref from Biale is of a yeshivah by the same name. There's an apparent problem in the conflation of yeshivah/synagogue/beit nidrash for many of these, apart from the geography.Nishidani (talk) 12:19, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
"Uzar" is bad transliteration. Search on Google Maps for "Khayim Ozer" and ye shall find. Also, that one is Iraqi while the one in Once's book is Ashkenazi. Zerotalk 12:25, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Nachlaot is in West Jerusalem on the Israeli side of the Green Line. It wasn't occupied by Jordan. So, any identifications with a synagogue in Nachlaot need to be reassessed. There are a number of possible solutions, such as a synagogue of the same name, or a synagogue that was rebuilt in West Jerusalem after one in the Old City became inaccessible. In any case, it can't stand without explanation. Zerotalk 12:39, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
As duly noted. Rambam in the list is a good example of a double built in West Jerusalem after 48.Nishidani (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Book of Ben-Elizer
Onceinawhile mentioned the book "Destruction and Renewal: The Synagogues of the Jewish Quarter" by Shimon Ben-Eliezer (self-published, Jerusalem, 1973). I own a hard copy of this attractive little book and I'll try to summarize it. First, there is a Forward by another person that refers without detail to 56 "resurrected" synagogues. Then there are 11 chapters giving the history of the major synagogues, and some photos.
Ramban Synagogue. "Even under the British Mandate sheep were kept on the premises, with the minaret serving as a police station." Was it used as a synagogue before 1948? The book doesn't say, nor does it mention destruction.
Four Sephardi synagogues (Yohannan ben Zakkai, Prophet Elijah, Middle Synagogue, Kehal Istanbul). There is no mention of 1948-67 fate, but there is a post-1967 photo of ben Zakkai showing an intact dome with rubble inside and caption "used for temporary housing (1948-1967)", which indicates that it was not destroyed.
Churva synagogue and two adjoining buildings. Photo of ruins in 1967. "As fate would have it, all that remained of the Churva 'Ruin' on June 7, 1967, was a heap of rubble."
Beit El Synagogue. Photo of intact domed roof with caption "a view of desolation".
Baal Or-Hachaim's Synagogue. No information about 1948-1967.
Misgav Ladach Hospital's Synagogue. No information about 1948-1967.
Tiferet Israel (Nissim Bak) Synagogue. Photo of ruins. "It also had the privilege of serving as one of the last positions in the forlorn defence of the Jewish Quarter in May 1948."
Beit Menachem (Habad). Post-1967 photo of intact domed roof and another of some guys "rebuilding an archway". Here we have the only statement from Ben-Eliezer about the synagogues in general: "Alone, among synagogues of the Jewish Quarter, Beit Menachem, though callously desecrated, survived nineteen years of Jordanian depredations in a state which allowed its prompt restoration." (This is a weaker statement than saying that the others had to be rebuilt.)
Ohel Yitzhak and Beit Joseph Synagogues. No information about 1948-1967.
Porat Joseph Yeshiva. "Towards the end of the Mandate it was occupied by British forces. In 1948, on the heals of the departing troops, the Jews again took possession of this strategic post. They became the immediate target for an overwhelming bombardment but held onto the crumbling building until their retreat to the adjoining Batei Machse compound. Even after the fall of the Jewish Quarter the Jordanian Legion and civilian population continued to wreck the scant remains of Porat Joseph, turning it into an utter ruin." (This the only explicit claim in the book about destruction after the fighting.)
Karaite Synagogue. The first few sentences are interesting: "Thirty-six from among the synagogues of the Old City are described, in varying detail, in a symposium published by the Ministry of Religious Affairs of the State of Israel in 1955. But not so much as mention is made of the existence of the most ancient of all—that of the Karaites." Destroyed in 1948, no detail given.
@Zero0000: thank you very much for this. It is enlightening, and confirming, in equal measure. With all the available tools to confirm the 56, only six years after Israeli control of the area began, the author was unable to confirm more than three actual structural destructions, and those are the three which are known to have happened during the war. This adds a good level of certainty that all the 53 others remained structurally intact; if not it is highly likely that the author of this work would have said so.
I am sure in the minds of the Israeli spokespeople they convinced themselves that "using the term destroyed is not lying because the insides were looted / not maintained", the way it was used in context was certainly dishonest and manipulative and the fifty years' worth of journalists and authors who repeated it without checking should be ashamed.
Having said which, I would still like to be able to prove this in a firmer way than just an argument from silence.
Well, this is the usual numbers game in a propaganda battle, so the inflation was to be expected. Still, this should be regarded as work in progress, and no definite conclusions not in sources can be drawn. Patience.Nishidani (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
This looks like a very important book, but alas I don't see a way to get it short of paying at least $100. I can see the list of Islamic sites and part of the Christian list, but not the full Jewish list. I can see page 117, which has this: "Active Synagogues. After 1967 Israel prepared a list of seventy synagogues in the Old City, of which thirty had been operating at the end of the British Mandate." Zerotalk 02:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Did anyone question that Hurva was blown up by Jordanian army? "Benny Morris "A History of the First Arab-Israeli War. Yale University Press. p. 218. ISBN 978-0-300-14524-3. "The Legionnaires took the Hurvat Israel (or "Hurva") Synagogue, the quarter's largest and most sacred building, and then, without reason, blew it up. "This affair will rankle for generations in the heart of world Jewry," predicted one Foreign Office official. The destruction of the synagogue shook Jewish morale."Tritomex (talk) 09:07, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Tritomex. Don't whine about one side. You raised a point: it takes minutes to do so from one or two sources. Two editors thereafter have devoted probably together a day's hard archival work to ferret out the facts from a huge motherlode of repetitious claims behind what you alluded to. Every narrative has benefited- Jewish and Arab, because, in the former case, clarity was lacking and now light is being shed on a mystery. As for the hot air of grievance, no one here has stubbornly challenged the facts easily ascertainable about Hurva. If that is where your upset lies, consider that the destruction of the Moroccan Quarter and its mosques and madrassas, -waqf religious property for some 800 years - the massive ethnic cleansing of contiguous properties and seizure of assets within Jerusalem to enlarge the Jewish quarter no doubt 'shocked Arab morale' and will rankle for generations. As editors we try to ignore that though. Partisan sentiments are not germane to grasping what actually occurred, regardless of who was affected. It was an Arab historian who destroyed the endless repetition of the figure fo 250 for Palestinian deaths at Deir Yassin, by close work over years that got it down to 112-120 or so. He didn't think:'Oh. I mustn't publish this, because it makes an enemy's massacre look more 'moderate'. So, as readers, like me, let's be grateful that some here actually work their arses off to clarify obscure details of history that merit attention, and correct misleading statements in numerous books. Nishidani (talk) 09:39, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
The Jewish fighters cared so much about the Hurva that they used it as a major stronghold. It was badly damaged during the effort of the Arab Legion to take it. After the capture, the Arab Legion blew up whatever remained. This was not after the fall of the Old City but while fighting was continuing. Morris thinks it was "without reason"; did he seek out the military commanders to ask? Zerotalk 11:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
So if the Arab Legion dynamited the Hurva synagogue a day before the Jewish fighters of Old City surrendered (Hurva was destroyed on 27th of may, while Jewish fighters surrendered a day after) while the fighting was continuing (as noted by Zero) I guess it had no military value by then, it was useless by Jordanians or/and possibly the destruction of the synagogue was seen as a way to speed up the surrender.Tritomex (talk) 15:57, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
It was dictated primarily by military considerations, unlike the destruction of 135 waqf properties, included mosques, in East Jerusalem in 1967. Nishidani (talk) 16:32, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Do you have any sources that the destruction of Hurva (and other synagogues) was dictated by military considerations? It looks a little strange that a huge dominant building already in the hands of Arab legion was dynamited for military reason, after its takeover, if not for psychological impacts that such act had on Jerusalem Jews, as mentioned by Morris.Tritomex (talk) 17:00, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Excuse me. Psychological demoralization of the enemy is written all over the human history of warfare, and was fundamental in 48, if you actually read the histories of that period, which document thoroughly this 'strategic aspect' of demoralization. That is what Deir Yassin was also about. I continue to note with curiosity that whenever something similar is reported of Israeli actions against Palestinian mosques and sacred sites, you just read past it and keep returning to what 'we' suffered. That is why the conflict will never end. Enough of this nonsense. Your original query - coming from unfamiliarity with the topic -has, through scruple got several people doing work which any editor, if interested rather than, partisan, could do for themselves out of consideration for others' time. I won't be replying. Nishidani (talk) 17:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
So there are no sources that the destruction of Old City synagogue's was dictated primarily by military considerations? The topic here are the destructions of Old City synagogues, not Deir Yassin, nor Kfar Etzion massacre, nor Hadassah Medical convoy etc. I cant reflect on issues that have little to do with this subject. I have no personal or partisan interests to Arab-Israeli conflict, I am Serbian and Hungarian citizen. Anyway, we agree that "Psychological demoralization of the enemy" was the key word when it comes to destruction of Old City synagogues and this is a huge step forward.Tritomex (talk) 17:33, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
You have completely misunderstood what I wrote and ignored the evidence placed before you. If you want to ascertain the motivation behind the decision to blow up the Hurva, you or any source you consult, must produce documentary evidence from Jordanian archives, or postwar comments by the 'actors' who decided to do what they did. All the rest is speculation, and not appropriate here. Don't ask other editors to undertake once more time-consuming research you don't appear ready to engage in yourself.Nishidani (talk) 20:12, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
In order to demoralise the Jewish garrison into surrendering, in order to not devote troops to defending it against Jewish recapture, both of these are military reasons. In order to erase the Jewish presence in the Old City would be a non-military reason. We actually don't know which of these motivations played a part in the decision. What did the Transjordan commander say? It must be recorded somewhere. Israeli polemic claims like Morris' "without reason" are the most useless sources. Zerotalk 02:19, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Schwarz in the 1840s
Joseph Schwarz, pronounced by the Jewish Encyclopedia as "the greatest Jewish authority on Palestinian matters since Estori Farḥi" has a good list of synagogues and related buildings in Jerusalem from the mid-nineteenth century. He describes the Ramban Synagogue and the Four Sephardic Synagogues as the only large and old ones in the city, and states that in addition to these: there are a great many smaller and private ones, which have been founded quite recently, and public and private schools
and colleges, by which are understood public libraries, large collections of nearly all the accessible Hebrew books of modem and (more especially) of more
ancient times, and manuscripts likewise, where every one is permitted to enter and make use of the literary treasures. He then gives a list of the principal Yeshiboth and Bathe Hammidrash in Jerusalem, together with the Hebrew version of the name:
I propose to start a new article focused on this topic which can fit nicely in this navbox. I propose to call it: List of heritage sites in Jerusalem damaged during the Israel–Palestine conflict.
Please could everyone suggest some good "core" sources from which to start?
We certainly have enough detail (thanks) to make a major article, but perhaps first one should consider an article specifically on the Jewish synagogue destruction claims since we have two sources that specifically contest it as an undocumented political meme restarted with Wahrhaftig?Nishidani (talk) 13:38, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
David Tal, Spencer C. Tucker, 'Arab-Israeli Conflict:Overview, in Spencer C. Tucker et., al., The Encyclopedia of Middle East Wars,ABC-CLIO, vol.1 A-D ISBN978-1-851-09947-4 pp.124-136 p.128.
The book of Eliyahu Tal
The big table above is based on Eliyahu Tal (1994). "The 58 Synagogues Destroyed in 1948 by the Jordanians". Whose Jerusalem?. International Forum for a United Jerusalem. ISBN 978-965-229-123-3. Now I have a copy of that book. The author is described as a former IDF commander and a pioneer of Israel's advertising industry, which is appropriate for this compilation of the best and worst of Israeli propaganda. Here we can learn that people were killed at Deir Yassin because they pretended to surrender and then opened fire when the brave Irgun fighters approached. Regarding the list of 58 synagogues (p160), apart from mention of some of the main synagogues in the text there is no source and no explanation of how the list came about. Zerotalk 10:13, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for finding this. I imagine that the list was produced in Hebrew by the Israeli government in The Ministry of Truth, and was translated separately by Blum and Tal hence the difference in spelling and order. Presumably it was never published by the government, in the same way as details were avoided in their original 1967 press dossier. Onceinawhile (talk) 11:08, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Masjid Al-Adna
In The life of Muhammad (1) on page 113 it mentions bait al maqdis which refers to Solomons temple which is located in Jerusalem.
The Quranic reference to masjid al-aqṣā originally referred to one of two sanctuaries at al-Juʽranah near Mecca, with the other being masjid al-adnā(2)
Why is only Quranic evidence and modern evidence being used while ignoring hadith that directly mentions the location of the place?
(1) The life of Muhammad (PBUH) Delhi, India: Adam Publishers & Distributors, 1994 Siddiqui, Abdul Hameed
(2) Grabar, Oleg (1959). "The Umayyad Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem". Ars Orientalis. 3: 33–62. ISSN 0571-1371. JSTOR 4629098. Ibijon (talk) 01:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
The reason is that this is a popular book by an unknown journalist, and given the large number of available sources written by acknowledged experts this is the type of source we should avoid. The book is also almost 50 years old so it cannot represent modern scholarship. KronosAlight put it back in with the edit summary "You lack the authority to unilaterally remove cited sources. If you believe the source is unreliable, make a case for it in Talk." This betrays lack of knowledge of policy. In fact, every editor in good standing is entitled to remove unsuitable sources, and per WP:ONUS it is the editor who wants to insert things who has the obligation to justify them. Zerotalk 02:46, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Fully accepted, though I didn’t insert a source, I reversed your deletion without justification. I accept the justification you’ve now given.
Sources 30, 41, 47 and 60 and the claims made on their basis also need to be removed on the same basis as your accepted deletion.
Either someone else can do this or I’ll do it in the morning when I have more time. KronosAlight (talk) 19:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_in_the_Old_City_of_Jerusalem_map_by_Survey_of_Palestine_map_1-2,500_(cropped).jpg)
_in_the_map_in_Old_City_of_Jerusalem_Name_List_1936_(page_2_crop)_(cropped).jpg)
_in_the_Old_City_of_Jerusalem_map_by_Survey_of_Palestine_map_1-2,500_(cropped).jpg)
