Talk:Ubeidiya, West Bank

1945 data
I wonder if it is this place which is mentioned as "Arab ibn Ubeid" under Jerusalem, in the 1945 census? Like on p. 58, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The (traditional) date of establishment, or: with friends like ARIJ, who needs foes?
"According to the Applied Research Institute–Jerusalem (ARIJ), Al-‘Ubeidiya was established in 1600."

ARIJ is, like always, a terribly poor source, which however deals with topics ignored by others, otherwise it should be forever shunned. It writes "in 1600", which a) must be according to some local tradition rather than a documented event, which should be made clear; and b) cannot possibly be taken at face value as such a precise date, which makes me interpret it as either 'the 16th century', or 'towards 1600' (I don't trust ARIJ to make the distinction between 16th century, towards 1600, 1600, and 1600s/17th century). Is there any reliable source out there? Arminden (talk) 15:13, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I actually totally agree with you; when it comes to history ARIJ is a terrible source. And when Ubeidiya appeared in the tax-records in 1596, then obviously people were there before 1600 AD. I suggest we cut out "1600 AD", and keep the rest (ie tradition about name; noting that it contradicts Palmer), Huldra (talk) 21:16, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * we cannot pick & choose once we do accept to massively use a certain source. You placed "according to ARIJ" in one place, let's place it next to this, too, but we definitely cannot discard the local tradition as not noteworthy. It might not serve a certain narrative, but that's exactly the point: we cannot pick & choose. The reliability of a 400-year-old tradition is quite high in the region. There are two possibilities: either it's correct, or the tribe "strategically" picked sides in the supposed "Yaman vs Qays" conflict, as was the custom among Palestinian tribes with very different origins. I have a big issue with ARIJ, but I am sure they correctly reproduce the local tradition, in a far-less-than-academic manner (w/o calling it a tradition, presenting "1600" as a fact instead of being more cautious or just indicating a century or the events the tradition connects the settlement to, like "in the times of..."), but tradition is a VERY important fact in the region. Unless we find a better source (I'm sure either Gustav Dalman, Arif el-Arif, Tawfiq Canaan, Meron Benvenisti, the PEF people or some other author wrote about their tradition), this must remain part of the article, no doubt about it, with the same cautious introduction, "according to ARIJ", as used elsewhere. Arminden (talk) 12:13, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * As you wish, althought I think it looks silly. We have the 1596 data; we really don't need this "local tradition" stuff, IMO, Huldra (talk) 20:59, 14 August 2021 (UTC)


 * 1) Self-definition is hugely important to anyone; to Bedouin tribes more than to most people. They are still going to their death over "local tradition stuff".
 * 2) Wikipedia encourages not to smooth over contradictions between different sources, as they might be hints to something over which researchers haven't yet reached a consensus. Here it can be that ARIJ was cavalier with numbers, just a few years before 1600 and it fits again. Or (much less likely, but who knows) maybe the taxed farmers of 1596 were a different population than the Ubaidiyeh tribe and who preceded them, maybe people from Bethlehem who only came to sow and harvest and went back home for the rest of the year; very common in Palestine. If that is the case, then the tribe adopted a pre-existing name, see "Dayr Bani 'Ubayd" from the 1596 Turkish tax register, and spun a legend around it. Clearly, less likely than the other option.
 * 3) Very significant: the fact that the tribe has quite likely arrived from Arabia in the late 16th century. This also connects to the tradition about the origin of their name, to which nobody protested, although it's part of the exact same story.
 * 4) Also, I have launched an invitation to look up in Dalman & Co. for a more academically formulated mention of the tradition.

Read about Abu Ghosh, they have two versions for their name & origin, Hijaz and Caucasus. When the Chechen president came waving with dollar bundles, they quickly opted for the Chechen version - and now own a brand-new, Chechen-style mosque. So you see, this stuff matters in more than one way. Arminden (talk) 00:33, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

"Palestine ethnographers" category needed
Btw (see above), I see there's no category for people who worked on the ethnography of Palestine, and it's needed. One obstacle might be the name, as many if not most were not Palestinians, so you cannot call the cat. "Palestinian ethnographers" like you have "German ethnographers". I suggest "Palestine ethnographers". Less good, as it would include the science, not just the researchers, would be "Ethnography of Palestine"; that would be a very wide category. Anyone interested in creating it? Maybe even both? Pls ping all the other "usual suspects" I might have left out. Thanks, Arminden (talk) 12:15, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

PS: from the post further up, here the names coming to my mind (I hope they all qualify to a strict definition distinguishing ethnographers from historians, explorers, etc.): Gustav Dalman, Arif el-Arif, Tawfiq Canaan, Meron Benvenisti, plus the entire early bunch (several of the PEF people, maybe Edward Robinson and Conrad Schick, etc.).

A few more names I found:
 * Chiara De Cesari
 * Robert Lachmann (ethnomusicology)
 * Lydia Einsler (Schick's daughter, PEF contributing author for 40 years; wrote about potters in the Ramallah region (see Albert E. Glock, Ceramic Ethno-techniculture); also wrote a book titled Mosaik aus dem heiligen Lande. Schilderung einiger Gebräuche und Anschauungen der arabischen Bevölkerung Palästinas. [lit. 'A mosaic (as in: variety of topics) from the Holy Land: description of some customs and views/attitudes of the Arab population of Palestine'], 1898)
 * John Winter Crowfoot & Grace Crowfoot wrote on pottery and other crafts comparing contemporary techniques to archaeologically relevant ones (see again Albert E. Glock).
 * Leonhard Bauer - see at deWiki, with an illustrated book about Arab Palestinians, 2nd ed. from 1903 at archive.org. Good luck, it's in German & printed in Kurrent script :))

Collections of proverbs (in Arabic with German translation):
 * lots of essential titles, analysed and listed here; includes the following authors and many more.
 * Lydia Einsler again
 * Eberhard Baumann: Dschirius Jūsif [the man who collected the proverbs] and Eberhard Baumann, "Volksweisheit aus Palästina", lit. 'Popular Wisdom from Palestine', pp. 153-260 in Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins (1878-1945), Vol. 39, No. 3/4, 1916.
 * Paul E. Kahle, again in cooperation with Dschirius Jusif of Jerusalem (Jirius Abu Jusif, a teacher at the Evangelical School in the city, but was from Bir Zeit in S Samaria), 1918.
 * Leonhard Bauer again

Authors who wrote dictionaries, glossaries and manuals of Palestinian Arabic (in German or English):
 * Leonhard Bauer again (dictionary) - see "Schriften" (works) at https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonhard_Bauer_(Missionslehrer)
 * Hans Henry Spoer & Elias Nasrallah Haddad: Manual of Palestinean Arabic for self-instruction, Jerusalem 1909 (printed or reprinted in Berlin, 1910) at archive.org
 * Aharon Geva Kleinberger (dialectologist, department head Arabic Language & Literature, Haifa U.).

Collections of folk tales: Arminden (talk) 15:26, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Raphael Patai: Arab folktales from Palestine and Israel, 1998, teaser at archive.org (full text only via "free account" - what's that? The only offer I can find is to "purchase options".)
 * Hilma Granqvist, Suad Amiry(?), Salim Tamari, Huldra (talk) 22:12, 14 August 2021 (UTC)


 * You can create an account at archive.org for free, then some books that are subject to copyright can be "borrowed" for short periods of time. Patai can be borrowed for an hour and there is probably a strong limit on how many people can borrow it at the same time. Zerotalk 12:47, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I guessed so, but I couldn't find the button for borrowing/opening a "free account", only one for purchasing, which is very visible. Arminden (talk) 13:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

"Palestinologists" category: meaning and usefullness

 * , shalom. I think that your suggestion is a good one. Bear in mind, however, that there is already a category entitled "Category:Palestinologists", which, mind you, is not exactly the same as "Palestine ethnographers," but which category does seem to incorporate within its name anything that has to do with Palestine - whether its people or geography. Perhaps, then, "Palestine ethnographers" can be a sub-category of "Palestinologists."---Davidbena (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , hi. Thanks, I wasn't aware of the term & category. However, it doesn't seem to fit. I looked up Palestinology - and was redirected to Biblical archaeology. So no, what I meant was the study of modern-period and contemporary language, customs and traditions, not archaeology. The Crowfoots were forced by their archaeological work to study pottery and basketry in Palestine as a term of comparison, so they fit both categories, but the rest don't. Of all the names suggested here, I see only Dalman is listed as a Palestinologist, but even in his case I'm not sure that wasn't a mistake; I'll check on it. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 10:20, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , I don't know who made the Redirect, but from a pure etymological perspective, "Palestinology" means simply "the study of Palestine," which would be consistent with all that Gustaf Dalman has done, among others, in Palestine prior to 1948. FYI: The Category itself describes "Palestinologist" as "an academic or scholar who specializes in the study of the region known as Palestine, in any aspect (history, nature, etc.)." Davidbena (talk) 21:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I've looked into the term "Palestinology". It seems to me that it first appeared in German in connection with Titus Tobler's exploration trips to the country in the 1830s-50s, and in English was applied to his contemporary, Edward Robinson, called "the father of Palestinology". In 1925, R.A.S. Macalister uses the term in relation to the early exploration and tell archaeology with a clear academic disgust for the term: "... what is uncouthly called "Palestinology"..." (A Century of Excavation in Palestine, p. 21). Robinson is credited with giving the impulse "to study each biblical site under historical aspects, in order to discern its former importance", which makes him the "founder of modern Palestinology" - says a German author in regard to early US researchers (Die Mission des American Board in Syrien im 19. Jahrhundert, p. 122). Somebody was attributing the creation of the term to the need of geographically defining the area of study of those researching under non-religious historical aspects what those interested strictly in the Bible called the Holy Land. In Germany, the field of expanded during the 19th c., but I don't know how far, because Google Books only allows me to read this far :) In 1936, Patai writes "Water: A Study in Palestinology and Palestinian Folklore in the Biblical and Mishnaic Periods" - so making a clear distinction between Palestinology, and a folklore that was probably Jewish, maybe also Samaritan, but most certainly not "Palestinian" in the modern Arab use of the term. The Jewish Palestine Exploration Society, the precursor of the Israel Exploration Society, also had a journal titled "Library of Palestinology", I believe focused mainly on archaeology. Now in Israel the terms used for the wider study of the country/land are "Israel studies" and "Eretz Israel studies", avoiding the old terms containing "Palestine". It seems to me that on the Palestinian side there are some attempts at claiming and reviving the old term for their own purposes, and this is probably why the Web has the same entry over and over again defining Palestinology as "The academic study of the culture and genealogy of Palestinians", but I couldn't find a single academic source for this definition.
 * As a conclusion, Palestinology & Palestinologist seem to be very ambiguous terms, with multiple and changing meanings, which hardly ever appear on the Web in a context less than 70 years old. Not useful to us. Therefore:

PS: Titus Tobler is described as "having dedicated his entire life to "Palestinology"" (quotation marks from the original text, not mine), him "striving to establish the Palestine science [my literal translation of "Palästina-Wissenschaft"; "Palestine studies" would be the better English term] as an autonomous and equally respected branch of the study of Graeco-Roman antiquity." (Stefan Schröder (2010), Zwischen Christentum und Islam: Kulturelle Grenzen in den spätmittelalterlichen Pilgerberichten des Felix Fabri, p. 33). The same author introduces Tobler as the "Nestor [German for founder or venerable leading scientist of a certain field of research] of medieval travelogues", so focusing on the Middle Ages, not even the classical antiquity, which again shows the elasticity of the term. Arminden (talk) 12:57, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) I am not sure that Palestinology/Palestinologist should be allowed as a category. If you agree, who is willing to remove it?
 * 2) The redirect to "biblical archaeology" is very controversial, as it limits the meaning. Given how vague and ever-changing the meaning was, this leads to confusion, as seen in the case of Dalman, who - apart from collecting the odd archaeological artifact, which is almost inevitable - was anything but a "biblical archaeologist". I suggest the redrect should be removed, unless there is a way to explain within that article, biblical archaeology, that Palestinology is only sometimes synonymous with the term at hand, and only partially, as it usually tends to cover a slightly different and growing domain.
 * 3) I don't think Dalman fits the current Wiki definition, so I'll remove the category from his article. Arminden (talk) 12:24, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no real opinion, one way or the other, about the necessity of having the category "Palestinologists," but perhaps we'll need to get a wider view of opinions from other contributing editors, such as from User:Huldra who has worked tirelessly on articles relating to this field. As I said, "Palestine ethnographers" seems to be a good and needed category, but a "sub-category" if we maintain the prime category which is broad in scope. If I might add one thing: The word "Palestinologist" implies the study of Palestine - whether it involves historical, geographical, or cultural aspects of the country, including ethnographical study of the same. However, the specific category "Palestine ethnographers" is only a limited scope of study. Therefore, it would seem to me that both categories are necessary. Davidbena (talk) 21:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

David, sorry, but this time you are very, VERY wrong. Language is not a function of logic or etymology, but of actual use. And the way Palestinology is used has little to do with your assumed etymology. It's called "popular etymology" and regularly leads to mistakes. And to some funny jokes. I'll add only one word: Egyptology. I hope you get the point. Reality beats any assumption. I'll have to re-revert at Dalman. I hope you see now why. Arminden (talk) 01:18, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

It's not up to me, you, Huldra, or the spirit of Yassir Arafat. It's about what the words mean according to reliable sources, RS. Btw, this one is hardly ever used anymore. I've wasted a lot of time I don't have to do a thorough research. Did you? Did you read what I wrote and follow up on it, i.e. do your own research, if you felt unconvinced? Nothing else counts. Arminden (talk) 01:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * My friend, if I am proven wrong, I will definitely admit to my mistake. Are you saying that Gustaf Dalman who wrote extensively about the climate and growing seasons in Palestine does not belong in the category "Palestinologists"? And what about all of Dalman's research in the historical and geographical aspects of Palestine? Are you saying that he doesn't belong in the category of "Palestinologists"? If so, then how will you explain the wiki definition of "Palestinology" here? Notwithstanding, if it will make it any easier on you, I have just now created the the Wikipedia category "Category:Palestine ethnographers." I have already added a few persons in your list here. It is now a sub-category of "Palestinologists". Be well.Davidbena (talk) 14:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I see the cat is made; but I really don't see how useful it it? What does Raphael Patai (whose The Arab Mind I have seen described as pure racism) have in commons with, say Tawfiq Canaan? Very little, I would say, Huldra (talk) 20:43, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I know absolutely nothing about him. I added his name only after Arminden suggested him. Perhaps we can delete the category from his name.Davidbena (talk) 21:30, 17 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Folks, we are expected to work in an academic manner. That supposes first and foremost to start from clear definitions. I tried to find a definition for Palestinology/Palestinologist, and have summed up what I found: not a useful term or concept, it never had a clear definition, whatever definition it might have had has evolved into something quite amorphous between the 1830s and 1930s, R.A.S. Macalister called the term "uncouth" in 1925 (!), and all the recent explanations showing up as Google hits lead to unsupported definitions based on nothing and with a radically different meaning from the oldest one. This is to sum up what I have written already, quite systematically and, I would believe, easy to read. This is not a base for using it as the title of a Wiki category. Even so, check who is listed in this cat already: only people who fit 100% into the oldest definition: that of biblical archaeologist from the early decades of this discipline, when the word first came up. Nobody else. And then, all of a sudden, Dalman, who was anything but. David, as I have already written: even if Dalman had done nothing else for 100 years than study Arab Palestinians, he'd still not qualify as a "Palestinologist" by the definition, unacceptably poor as it is, but obviously used here: he never was a biblical archaeologist. I have given you the hint to think at Egyptology/Egyptologist. Nasser doesn't qualify, Napoleon doesn't, neither does Naguib Mahfouz or Omar Sharif, unseparable as they seem from the country, Egypt. Even scholars who have studied Egypt as a country and civilisation focusing on its last 16 (!) centuries of history and evolution don't qualify as Egyptologists. That's the power of a word's meaning, in other words - of a definition. Fighting it is either quixotic, or Orwellian.


 * I have looked up people who have collected material and published works on the Palestinian Arabic dialect, folklore and other ethnographic aspects. Patai has published a collection of Palestinian folk tales, in a scholarly form and with authentic, previously unpublished material. This qualifies him as a "Palestine ethnographer". Whether his other books make him a good guy or bad guy from a Palestinian perspective (or any other) is neither here nor there. Btw, it's people like Dalman, but also like Patai, why I chose "Palestine ethnographer", as Dalman was Swiss German and Patai was "Palestinian" only in a very narrow sense. As opposed to my less formal conversation, I am usually choosing my words carefully when suggesting something for publication/online posting. Arminden (talk) 00:13, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

David, now I see what you mean (Category:Palestinologists and Category:Palestinianists). The definition from Category:Palestinologists is taken out of thin air. Next would be somebody defining an Egyptologist as someone who studies Egypt. Wikipedia cannot make such calls, it lacks the authority, and that's why it's forbidden by its own rules. Arminden (talk) 00:32, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , the suffix "...logy" is derived from the Greek logia (λογία, 'utterances, sayings, oracles')—the latter word relating to Greek logos (λόγος, 'word, discourse, account, reasoning'), or, in common parlance can mean "the study of". That, when combined with "Palestine," simply means the study of Palestine. If you think that wiktionary (here) has erred and got it all wrong, why not open a discussion about that term on that wiktionary page. As it is now, we are adhering to Wikipedia protocol by not inventing a new meaning of this word. If I were you, I'd leave it. As for R.A.S. Macalister he's entitled to his opinion. To follow along "blindly" with him, for that we'll need a consensus. Again, personally speaking, I have no objection to removing the category "Palestinologists," but, so long as it exists, I think that we should use it.Davidbena (talk) 00:38, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Clarify territory pls!
Ubeidiya apparently stretches both (1) along the main road from Bethlehem to St. Theodosius Monastery (which then continues down Wadi Naar), and (2) sideways along the relatively narrow, winding street towards Mar Saba, branching out from the main road below St. Theodosius, with some lanes & houses further fanning out through the desert.

Must be clarified. Google Maps fails to even show it at all. Arminden (talk) 10:06, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

What tribes?
It appears listed among the at-Ta'mira villages, as part of the so-called "'Arab al-Ta'mira village cluster" (mainly) east of Bethlehem. But the Ta'mira seem to have become sedentary in the 19th-20th centuries, and the article mentions an earlier settlement, AND fellaheen, so either there was a switch at some point (if not twice, see ARIJ 1600 issue) as part of the tribal wars or due to other causes, or there is more than one tribe living there, with different settlement dates. Never ignore the khirba phenomenon in the desert fringe areas - population fluctuation, including switches of the same clan or tribe between sedentary and nomadic lifestyles due to external pressures or, conversely, to encouraging developments. Arminden (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)


 * The 1600 (ish, I'd say) reference (ARIJ) speaks of people of the tribe of Shammar coming from the Arabian Peninsula and settling there, so in my words Banu Ibn 'Obeid of the Shammar tribe. These can't be the same as the Ta'amireh if (!) the Ta'amireh are indeed indigenous as converted Jews, or at least with roots far older than ≈1600. Two tribes in one village is nothing special, but then counting this village as part of the 'arab at-Ta'amireh village cluster w/o qualifying that this concerns only part of the inhabitants, becomes less than accurate. Or maybe it's totally wrong and a misunderstanding. Are there any good studies on the tribal map of the Judaean Mountains & Desert? Arminden (talk) 14:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Mapcarta.com has:
 * ‘Arab Ibn ‘Ubayd is a tribal area...
 * It's blacklisted by Wiki, so here the URL taken apart: https://  mapcarta[dot com]   /12915494
 * But they use the term 'tribal area' for small areas, which might correspond to units (much?) smaller than a tribe, just surf through their links and see. Not RS, but offering info not otherwise easy to get in English. Arminden (talk) 14:43, 5 March 2024 (UTC)