Talk:Damascus affair

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
His servant was Syrian (not Greek) and both of the men were found several days later, having been horribly mutilated, their arms broken, repeatedly stabbed, and their blood had been drained... Check the works of Dr. Arnold Leese...
 * Hello fellow Wikipedian! Personally I am opposed against using the works of Arnold Leese because of his anti-semitic convictions. To which work are you referring to here in particular? RafaëllaMES (talk) 10:15, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

More to add
There is more to add to this article.

First of all, there were riots all over the Turkish empire following the Damascus affair. Yossef Bodansky lists the major ones in "Islamic Anti-Semitism as a Political Instrument." I am adding them as I have them, later when I get his book I will rewrite that bit in more detail.

Second, there are more accusations regarding the Damascus blood libel in the Arab world. I am adding the ones I know 75.84.97.215 15:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that info. Please provide page numbers and editions. ←Humus sapiens ну? 20:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I will add page number for the quote from Bodansky's book when I get the book (I don't have it right now). Meanwhile, I added one more modern accusation for Syrian magazine Al-Usbu' Al-Adabi75.84.97.215 07:51, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I just found that someone changed what I wrote to "Occasional outbreaks of inter-communal violence occurred throughout this era between all the various religious groups. Between Jews and Muslims (usually exacerbated and encouraged by Christians seeking greater economic and political leverage over Jews)." This is outrageous! Jews were in no position to defend themselves, far less attack Muslims. These were purely one-sided massacres, not outbreaks of inter-communal violence. I have changed it to "Massacres of Jews by Muslims" 75.85.82.124 (talk) 13:18, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Rhodes blood libel
The FA Rhodes blood libel refers to the Damascus Affair as having occurred simultaneously, yet this article does not refer to the Rhodes events. Also, that article extensively references the Frankel book, which is in fact about the Damascus Affair, yet this article does not. The solution must be to include much from the the Frankel book here. I am going to leave a message on the Rhodes blood libel talk page to see if anyone can come over here to help. Itsmejudith 16:18, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Damascus Affair begining to end
Damascus Affair In February of 1840, the Jews of Damascus would be accused of a blood libel that would have ramifications in different areas of the Middle East, and throughout Europe. Though it was not the first accusation of a blood libel against the Jews it came in a period after the Enlightenment, and accusations of the sort seemed outlandish. It would come to be the most famous alleged blood libel of its time. After a long and painful investigation of the Jewish community of Damascus, no substantial evidence was procured, but only after intervention by wealthy and powerful Jews from Europe were the surviving prisoners freed, and the attacks on Jewish communities stopped. In the midst of a struggle for power and control of the Middle East, between Muhammad Ali, viceroy of Egypt, and the Ottoman Sultan Abdulhamid, political incentives would be important in the progressions of what came to be known as the Damascus Affair. Damascus was known to be a dangerous city especially for non-Muslims. The minorities, consisting mostly of Jews and Christians, had to live in specified quarters, surrounded by walls, locked gates, and watchmen at night to protect against Muslims. In years prior to Muhammad Ali’s conquest of Syria, Jews had government positions and considerable control in Syria. The clout that the Jews had was coveted by the Arab Christians, who constantly tried to gain more political sway than their rival minority group. The extent of Jewish opportunity for power went so far that Rafael Farhi was the head sarraf (chief accountant) in Damascus until 1831. In years leading up to 1840, the Arab Christians gained an upper hand over the Jews, under Sherif Pasha, and the Jews of Syria no longer had political sway. Sherif Pasha, the adopted son of Muhammad Ali, would prove to be an enemy of the Jews during the Damascus Affair. This would be very painful and unfortunate as the Damascus Affair unfolded. On Wednesday night of February 5, 1840 Father Thomas was expected for dinner with a group of European prelates, at the home of Dr. Massari, in the Christian quarter. He did not arrive at the dinner, and because he was known to be punctual, the guests sent out search parties after the dinner was over. He was said to have been seen in the Jewish quarter earlier that day, this immediately produced a rumor that the Jews had killed him. Father Thomas, also known as il cappuccino, resided in the Capuchin monastery for 32 years. He lived only with his servant Ibrahim Amara, who had been in the monastery since he was a child and was almost an assistant to the priest. Born in Sardinia, an island off the mainland of Europe, the friar had moved to Damascus as a missionary. He was known all over Damascus. He would walk around with a medicine bag, as a trained pharmacist, he would treat people of all religions, and was famous for his smallpox vaccinations. He did not charge for his treatments and would have fund raisers to collect money for expenses. Many people viewed Father Thomas as a saint, but some said enjoyed worldly goods more than most monks. It was also apparent that the monk and his servant were involved in “shady business.” After he was searched for in the Christian quarter they sent word to the French consulate, which had the authority under the capitulation treaties to protect the Capuchin missionaries, who were French protégé. The French consul then, Benoît Laurent François de Paul-Ulysse, Comte de Ratti-Menton, was new to his position. He relied heavily on his dragoman and chancellor, Jean-Baptiste Beaudin, who was more acquainted and integrated into the Damascus society.

Ratti-Menton waited for Beaudin before he took any action. Beaudin heard rumors that someone seeking to return a book to the father on Wednesday night found the monastery locked with no answer after knocks; it was assumed the father was on a trip or ill. Thursday Morning the door was latched when congregants came for mass, which was unusual, but still not suspicious. Thursday night Ratti-Menton and Beaudin searched the monastery but found nothing except table set for dinner, many valuables, and large sums of money. As they searched Christians screamed outside, accusing the Jews of murdering the priest. The Christians made up twelve percent of the one-hundred thousand people of Damascus, and they were divided into different sects. The Christian sects joined together, though they were usually adversaries, in the accusation of the Jews, and later in the persecution of the Jews. Unsure how to proceed, Ratti-Menton sought help from Sherif Pasha. On Saturday the Muslim taffeki-bashi (chief of police), and Francis Salina, a physician from Aleppo and assistant dragoman to the French consul, along with police, and soldiers, entered the Jewish quarter. They hoped to obtain evidence against the Jews, and searched every Jewish home, finding all the wealth that the Jews so diligently hid from the public eye. They also dug up fresh graves in search of the monk’s corpse, but only left with a sign the Father put up for a fund raiser, that hung over a barber shop, near the synagogue.

Sherif Pasha had prisoner Sa’id-Muhammad-al-Talli released, because as an old tax collector with connections to all in Damascus, he claimed he could help with the investigation. Two Greek Orthodox men were questioned, Mikha’il Kessab and Namah Kallam. They claimed to have seen the priest’s servant in the late afternoon, telling seven or eight men, with handkerchief covered faces, that he was there to take Father Thomas home. The soldiers and police returned to the Jewish quarter and arrested Solomon al-Hallaq, the barber. He was first questioned by Ratti-Menton. The Western interrogation methods proved to bring no confessions, so Ratti-Menton decided to turn him over to Sherif Pasha, who had harsher interrogation tactics. This would be the case with all the Jews that were arrested throughout the investigation. Meir Farhi, along with his brothers, the Harari brothers, and other wealthy merchants, attempted to bribe different officials to end the conflict, but it was to no avail.

After being flogged 200 times al-Hallaq, gave a testimony that would be the basis for all subsequent arrests. He said that the day the monk disappeared David Harari’s servant, Murad al-Fatal came to his shop asking if al-Hallaq would accompany him to Harari’s residence. At the house he was brought to a chamber where the Father was constrained, had his mouth gauged and was surrounded by different prominent community members and Rabbis. Among those present he named, David Harari and his brothers Isaac and Aaron Harari, their uncles Rabbi Joseph Leniado and Joseph Harari, Rabbi Moses Abulafia and Rabbi Moses Saloncili. David asked al-Hallaq to slit the throat of the monk, but he refused. He then said that Aaron Harari had given him a poster to put above his shop and that David Harari promised him money, not to confess. The aforementioned Jewish suspects would be arrested, along with al-Fatal. Initially, all the Jews were released, after they refused to confess, but the release was only temporary. Al-Fatal was kept and tortured until he gave testimony, adding Meir Farhi, Aslan Farhi, Joseph Farhi, Aaron Stambouli, and Isaac Picciotto to the list of murders, claiming they were responsible for the death of the servant. The accusations against Picciotto were especially important because he was an Austrian citizen, and his arrest would lead to the eventual involvement of Austria, The United States and England. This was especially significant because England and other European nations had allied with the Ottomans against the Egyptians, whose only allies were the French.

Seeing that the Jews were adamant in their refusal to confess, Soldiers were sent to a Jewish Hebrew school, and all 63 students were taken captive. The children were kept in overcrowded cells, with not hygienic resources, and given very little food and water. The pleas of the mothers to release the children, who feared the spread of disease, were ignored. Sherif Pasha hoped that the fathers of the children would confess if he had their children. One child made a confession, claiming to know where the blood was, but it was found to be a lie. The barber was the pushed to strengthen his confession, because the evidence they had now was not strong enough to execute any of the Jewish suspects. Al-Hallaq admitted to being involved in the blood libel, and gave specific details of what had transpired and everyone’s involvement. With this new testimony Sherif Pasha again arrested the aforementioned Jews. The men, who were now proven to be guilty, were then tortured in order to try and obtain a confession from each of them. All the men were harshly tortured, but had different outcomes. Isaac Harari, Aaron Harari, Aslan Farhi, Meir Farhi and Rabbi Moses Abulafia confessed. Joseph Harari and Rabbi Joseph Leniado were flogged to death. Rabbi Moses Abulafia after testifying and confirming the use of Christian blood for Jewish rituals, converted to Islam. With bones that had been found in the sewers and the new confessions it seemed certain that the Jews were guilty. At this point all the European consuls in Damascus were at agreement about the guilt of the Jews, and began sending reports to their respective countries. Bones found in a sewer in the Jewish quarter were confirmed to be human by all physicians asked, with the exception of one Dr. Lograsso who was sure they were of another species. His request to have the bones examined at a European University was denied. The bones were buried and until today the tomb stone reads “Here lie the bones of Father Thomas of Sardinia, Apostolic Capuchin Missionary, assassinated by the Jews, the 5th of February of the year 1840.” The investigation and accusation of the Jews in Damascus also led to violent Muslim and Christian mob activity, not only in Damascus but in other cities were Jews lived. In Europe the media was very critical of the Jews, in support of the accusations of the Blood Libel. Articles were written about the Jews as a people, different myths, their unusual barbaric practices, and the evil that was taught in the Talmud. The media in France was especially anti-Semitic. It could be said that in a time when there was political unrest not only within France, but also in France’s International affairs, the attack of the Jews as a people was a projection of anxieties in French society. It was even apparent through the art in France during the affair. Jews and Jewesses were being depicted as sensual carnal creatures, furthering and illustrating the anti-Semitism that sprung forth from the alleged blood libel. In March, Elders of the Jewish Community of Damascus wrote to their coreligionist in Constantinople, explaining in detail the allegations, torture, and persecution – asking for support in any fashion. There would also be a cry for help, to all Jews worldwide; it had a tremendous response of lobbying, and political schemes to assist those in Damascus and clear the names of all Jews. Israel Bak, a Jew from Alexandria, was the first of many foreign Jews who attempted to stop any further tragedy from occurring. Other Jews from around the world followed suit, contesting the unlawful treatment of the Jews in Damascus. Anton Laurin, A Jew from Alexandria, had to struggle to persuade Muhammad Ali to override Sherif Pasha’ authority and end the investigation and the cruel treatment of the Jews that came with it. He was successful on April 25, convincing Ali to order an end to the torture of the Jews apprehended, but the charges for the murders would lie on the Jews until a firman was ordered. Other powerful Jews were instrumental in the persuading Ali to end the madness in Damascus. They included Moses Montefiore, Louis Loewe, Adolphe Cremieux and Solomon Munk James De Rothschild, Solomon Rothschild. (Because the Rothschild family was powerful in many European countries they were very involved from different angles) As the rest of the world began to see how empty the case was against the Jews the French stayed strong in support of their consul. Adolphe Theirs the prime minister and foreign minister of France at the time strongly supported Ratti-Menton until the end, even when reports came out all over Europe that there was no evidence against the Jews. His support seemed to have come to please the Catholics of the French Church, and in order that his foreign ambassador would not stand alone under the scrutiny of the world. Theirs’s lack of opposition to the Jews was made apparent from the Montel Affair. An unpublicized event in which the Church confiscated a Jewish baby, claiming it was baptized and could no longer live in a Jewish home. Theirs was the prime politician who assisted the Jews in retrieving their newborn. On May 3, an order was sent to Damascus to protect the Jews from violence. Later on August 28, the imprisoned Jews who hadn’t died were freed, but they were not declared innocent. Montefiore and his delegation would not stop applying pressure until it was clearly stated that the blood libel was a myth, and that no further charges would be brought against the Jews on that ground. Finally, after Montefiore had put much pressure on the sultan in Constantinople a firman was issued that cleared the name of the Jews in Damascus, declared blood libels erroneous, and banned the prosecution of Jews based on charges of the sort. After the Damascus Affair there was an international Jewish realization of the importance of cooperating to protect human rights of Jews worldwide. Adolphe Cremieux founded the Alliance Israelite Universelle. References Brawer, Abraham J. and Frankel, Jonathan. (2007). Damascus affair. Encyclopedia Judaica., 5, 399-3. Florence, R. (2004). Blood libel: The damacus affair of 1840. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press. Frankel, J. (1997). The damascus affair: "ritual murder," politics, and the jews in 1840. New York, NY: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. Kalman, J. (2007). Sensuality, depravity, and ritual murder: The damascus blood libel and jews in france. Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, Society, 13(3), 35-24. Kertzer, D. I. (2002). The montel affair: Vatican jewish policy and french diplomacy under the july monarchy. French Historical Studies, 25(2), 265-28. Menddes-Flohr, Paul Reinharz, Jehuda. (1995). The damascus affair (1840). The jew in the modern world A documentary history (Second Edition ed., pp. 313-2). New York, New York: Oxford University Press. Philipp, T. (1984). The farhi family amd the changing position of the jews in syria, 1750-1860. Middle Eastern Studies, 20(4), 37-15. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjm54 (talk • contribs) 04:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Bernard Lewis
According to Bernard Lewis, this event marked pretty much the first real importation of European Christian-style antisemitism (with odium theologicum plus scapegoating as a pernicious foreign alien group) into the middle east. Previously there had been a certain degree of generalized low-level Muslim contempt towards Jews as being a militarily weak community and blind followers of an obviously "superseded religion", but there was nothing like the blood libel, accusations of being Christ-killers, etc. etc. until Europeans imported it there... AnonMoos (talk) 08:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Remember Christians, both Protestant and Hebrew, were among the first to alert the public in London to this affair and to express outrage about it. Cpsoper (talk) 08:56, 21 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm sure that's true, but it doesn't change the fact that forms of Jew-hatred which became very important in the middle east in the 20th century were basically imported from Europe... AnonMoos (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Massacres of Jews by Muslims
The section lists many massacres of Jews by Muslims, supposedly as a result of the Damascus affair. I tried to get information about these alleged massacres and found no record of them ever taking place. In fact, it appears that Jews did not experience violence at the hands of Muslims during this period, in contrast to the Christians and Druze of Syria. The source cited in this section is by a biased author who apparently has no qualifications as an historian. I suggest that alternative sources be used if indeed these events took place, otherwise the passage ought to be removed entirely.--84.108.213.97 (talk) 10:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * They can for sure be sourced from elsewhere, but I think such a section does not belong here. Chesdovi (talk) 00:37, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Bribes?
Why is there no mention of the bribes paid to the local magistrate to secure the release and to the Sultan to ban further accusations?

Also why are the accused assumed innocent today? The actual firman found them to be guilty but to be released. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.199.113 (talk) 10:04, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * They're presumed innocent because there's no valid evidence that Jews have practiced human sacrifice since the semi-mythological incident of the daughter of Jephthah 3,000 years ago... AnonMoos (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2020 (UTC)


 * There is some confusion here (and in our article too). The prisoners were released (after British and Austrian pressure) by order of Muhammad Ali of Egypt, whose domain included Damascus at that time. However Ali refused to declare them innocent. It was only months later that the Turkish sultan issued the firman declaring the blood libel to be a calumny and commanding the protection of all Jewish subjects. The firman can definitely be taken as a declaration of innocence of the accused Jews of Damascus.  On the subject of bribes, I'm highly skeptical that either of these two exceedingly rich men could be bribed (at least, by money) but it is appropriate for inclusion if supported by a sufficiently strong source. Zerotalk 08:44, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

G W Pieritz
Have added a short reference to the role of Pieritz, who's acerbic reports, according to Frankel, 'proved a most effective weapon in the battles of words raging in Europe... [the] accuracy [of which] can be confirmed today by comparison with the diplomatic reports' to which Pieritz had no access, cited in Lewis. Cpsoper (talk) 10:44, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Damascus affair. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060907233552/http://www.wisc.edu/wisconsinpress/books/2849.htm to http://www.wisc.edu/wisconsinpress/books/2849.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:43, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Damascus affair
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Damascus affair's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "eleven": From Antisemitism in Turkey:  From 1941 Odessa massacre:  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:00, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion for sources
Hi all! I came across the following sources which might be of interest to anyone wishing to improve this article. I hope they can be of help.


 * Tsur, Y. (2020). Who Introduced Liberalism into the Damascus Affair (1840)? Center, Periphery and Networks in the Jewish Response to the Blood Libel. In Jews, Liberalism, Antisemitism (pp. 263-287). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
 * Calabrese, J. (2005). Blood Libel: The Damascus Affair of 1840. The Middle East Journal, 59(3), 518.
 * Gerber, N. S. (2020). Can Damascus 1840 be Re-oriented? From Shami historical memory to Sephardi and Mizrahi agency. Journal of Modern Jewish Studies, 1-22.
 * Elger, Ralf. (2017). Damascus Affairs. Egyptian Rule in Syria through the Eyes of an Anonymous Damascene Chronicler, 1831-1841, written by Johann Büssow and Khaled Safi, 2013. Welt Des Islams, 57(1), 104-107.
 * Green, Abigail. (2015). The Damascus Affair. In Moses Montefiore (pp. 133-157). Cambridge, MA and London, England: Harvard University Press.
 * Frankel, J. (1997). "Ritual Murder" in the Modern Era: The Damascus Affair of 1840. Jewish Social Studies, 3(2), new series, 1-16.
 * Cohen, R. (2001). The Damascus Affair and the Beginning of Modern Anti-Semitism. Archives Juives, 1(1), 114-124.
 * Feldman, D. (2014-11-01). The Damascus Affair and the Debate on Ritual Murder in Early Victorian Britain. In Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Collaboration and Conflict in the Age of Diaspora. : Hong Kong University Press.

RafaëllaMES (talk) 16:09, 2 March 2021 (UTC)