Talk:Jordaan

Origen of the name
The third theory would be that before Hitler's misdeeds this was a predominantly Jewish neighbourhood. Peter Horn User talk 00:52, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * According to whom? Jvhertum (talk) 12:57, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * My late father, who was born and raised in Amsterdam (1903-04-21 or 22 to 1990-05-27 in Mill Bay, British Columbia), often referred to this as such, a jewish neighbourhood. Peter Horn User talk 18:11, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The article Jodenbreestraat would appear to point in that direction. (quote) "The street was originally part of the Sint Antoniesbreestraat. In the 17th century, many Jewish emigrants from Portugal and Spain settled in the neighbourhood, and in the second half of the century, the southern section of the Sint Antoniesbreestraat came to be known as Jodenbreestraat ("Jewish Broad Street")." May be my brother Michiel Horn, professor emeritus of York University (Glendon College) can help. I'd have to e-mail him. Peter Horn User talk 18:47, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The Jordaan was not the Jewish neighbourhood of Amsterdam. This area was located further east. The Jodenbreestraat is not in the Jordaan but in the former Jewish quarter. Jvhertum (talk) 11:45, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * There is a good explanation of the name in the Dutch wikipedia nl:Jordaan (Amsterdam). The name was first mentioned in 1718 in a poem "Lof der Jenever" ("In Praise of Gin") by Robert Hennebo. With "Jordaan" he then meant the "Prinsengracht" (originally called 'Het Nieuwe Werck' -  "The new construction"). From 1733 on, the term "Jordaan" referred also to the area around the Prinsengracht.  As a less likely theory the name "Jordaan" was given by French Huguenots at the end of the 17th century, referring to the French word "jardin" (garden) because many streets in the area had the name of flowers. This is not supported by any publication. Another possibility was that is was named after the river Jordanne in the Massif Central in France, where a number of immigrants originated. There was also an alley called "Jordaensgang" (I presume after the painter Jacob Jordaens). Still another possibility is the referral to a baptist congregation in the neighbourhood that performed baptism in the way John the Baptist did in the Jordan. A last possibility is a corruption of the word  "Jurisdictie" (jurisdiction) (as the area was called before the Prinsengracht was dug) to "Jordiks" (and from there to "Jordaan"). The first explanation is probably the most likely. In the Dutch wikipedia there is no referral to a Jewish origin. JoJan (talk) 18:58, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * JoJan has been enlightening. So, as the saying goes, the real origen of the name "Jordaan" "has been lost in the mist of time". Peter Horn User talk 16:20, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Any body care to undertake the translation of nl:Jordaan (Amsterdam)? I may copy and paste it into one of my sandboxes or into a "Document WordPad" and take a shot at it there. Peter Horn User talk 16:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 16:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * That section, although interesting, is missing references, so we cannot verify whether the information is correct. Jvhertum (talk) 08:16, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

‘Traditionally leftwing’
It’s not worth a quibble, but I think the ‘traditionally’ part is not accurate. In the 19th century, Jordanezen were a conservative lot who felt strongly attached to monarchy and royalty. The street called Willemsstraat (formerly Fransche Pad and Goudsbloemgracht; the s after Willem looks somewhat strange to Dutch eyes) was named for King William I (1772-1843) in 1857, at the request of the local population (J.A. Wiersma, De naam van onze straat). Enthusiastic support for the House of Orange, often with an alcoholic tinge, endured into the 20th century. GdB (talk) 09:29, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Beyond (something — in this case. the river) referents must be specified ** from or relative to some other specific thing**
Betweenness has at least one rigorous geometric definition, in at least my SMSG-designed geometry text, and I expect that the logical — but (for me) only half-baked — conception of a corresponding "opposite sides", or "beyond”, geom. concept surely is capable of similarly formal definition, and that logically following from it (when a direction relative to the entity marking the implicit direction is specified) a geometrically rigorous definition of beyondness is similarly feasible. Thus I argue that being “beyond” a boundary between two regions is meaningless in the absence of clear Hey specifications of which region is across from the other. In this case, mere prior mention of features belonging only to one abuses the common insinuation that the first mentioned region becomes effectively “here”, fixing the next to be effectively “there”. In spontaneous live verbalization (where dynamic disambiguation is likely to be feasible)), sure, as a matter of course; in cases where clarifying questions effectively must be forgone in favor of painstaking analysis unguided by the nonverbal cues lost in written works, writers must bear the burden of Humpty Dumpty’s “getting ones money’s worth” out of every word’s “wages”, whence my slogan “Smash sloppy speech, and wring out the full relevant meaning of every word you hire.” (As Lenin may have put it, rational speech ruthlessly ekes out both deep and shallow meanings, with the benefit to the reading classes as its lodestar.” Anyway, “How weary, stale, flat and unprophetable.... Hey wait, this’s kin’a cool!” —2601:199:C201:FD70:416A:7D95:79B4:710F (talk) (ex-User:Jerzy, ex-User:JerzyA), 07:53, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Elevation
I vaguely recall reading about the district's history, and specifically about its elevation being kept at polder level, which is why all of the original connections to the Prinsengracht and Lijnbaansgracht were controlled by locks. Because the land was not raised before being developed, waterways in and bordering the Jordaan had to be kept lower than in the canals in the rest of the city, particularly the old city. Can anyone find any Dutch sources to cite in the article stating this? It's a fairly important fact and a significant reason not discussed in the article about why the district was impoverished for so long. Because the water level was at or perhaps even lower than the IJ, it made it very difficult to refresh/flush the canals of the Jordaan, which made it particularly unattractive to the middle and wealthy classes for a long time. After the completion of the Oranje Locks, the city was no longer subject to the tides, so they could equalize the water level in all the canals.

Anyway, a paragraph or two on the topography and water management of the district would be both interesting and necessary to describe why and how this area developed as it did. And not being fluent in Dutch, I'd hope some of you could find the proper sourcing for this important information. Was the area ever raised after the completion of the Oranjesluizen? What water level was the city set at after the completion of the Oranjesluizen? If the Jordaan was never raised, then it'd have to be that they lowered the water levels in the other canals as opposed to raising the water level in the Jordaan canals since that would have flooded out the area. Criticalthinker (talk) 01:00, 2 July 2023 (UTC)


 * So, apparently, the water levels in the Jordaan were raised to meet those of the old city levels, and this required the raising of the quays (and perhaps the streets and areas around the buildings? Of that I am unsure.) along the canals of the neighborhood. Lowering water levels in the rest of the city to match those of the Jordaan wasn't an option because the water was protecting building foundations and such from rot.
 * When and how exactly this occurred, I've not been able to find any sourcing for this. So, I' appreciate it if someone could find some Dutch sources for this. Criticalthinker (talk) 06:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)