Talk:Motza

Source

There is quite a lot on the early history of Motza in Kark and Oren-Nordheim, Jerusalem and its Environs, Magnes Press 2001. Zero^talk 14:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Motza. 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/20071214021103/http://www.archaeology.org.il/newsticker.asp?id=25 to http://www.archaeology.org.il/newsticker.asp?id=25
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.feeljerusalem.com/videos/modern_pilgrimage.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070609035459/http://www.myjewishlearning.com/holidays/Tu_Bishvat/TO_Tu_Practices/Trees_604/Herzl_Israel_869.htm to http://www.myjewishlearning.com/holidays/Tu_Bishvat/TO_Tu_Practices/Trees_604/Herzl_Israel_869.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.02net.co.il/Site/templates/inPage.asp?catID=5&subID=453&docID=30476
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050201074529/http://zippori.org.il/Index.asp?ArticleID=321&CategoryID=135&Page=1 to http://www.zippori.org.il/Index.asp?ArticleID=321&CategoryID=135&Page=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928064100/http://www.mevaseret.net/motza%20valley.htm to http://www.mevaseret.net/motza%20valley.htm

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:55, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Motza is a village

Rather than a neighborhood. It’s definitely not suburban as it isn’t a part of any city. It’s council is “Mate Yehuda” (Judea district) rather than the Jerusalem municipality, also in charge of other rural settlements in the region. Perhaps a rural settlement will be a better definition. Especially concerning Motza Illit (upper motza) where all the original houses had 1.5 dunams (about half an acre) of land. 79.183.0.213 (talk) 21:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

I believe you are mistaken, but clearly this article needs more details. According to the Hebrew wiki, Motza was added to Jerusalem in 1993. Also, the Israeli CBS does not list Motza separately from Jerusalem in its population statistics. Motza Illit, on the other hand, is listed separately which indicates it is not within Jerusalem. Zero^talk 04:02, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

To editor Number 57: can probably help with a source. Zero^talk 04:03, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Mateh Yehuda has a map of settlements covered by the council, and if you zoom in on that map, it actually shows the border of Mateh Yehuda and Jerusalem municipalities, and you can see Motza is on the Jerusalem side (the border is at the end of Ramat Motza street in Motza, and it shows a small number of buildings in Motza Illit as sitting on the border itself). Cheers, Number 57 11:21, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

https://www.govmap.gov.il/?c=215783.24,633568.86&z=7&lay=REGIONAL_AUTHORITIES - this is the map that shows that Motza Illit is a part of Mateh Yehuda, while the original Moshava, now called Ramat Motza, is a neighborhood of Jerusalem. Motza Illit was never a part of Motza. Agmonsnir (talk) 11:32, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

NPOV history section

I've split material on the nearby archaeological site of Tel Motza to its own article following our usual convention of treating archaeological sites and modern settlements separately (e.g. Jericho and Tell es-Sultan; Megiddo, Israel and Tel Megiddo). We can keep #Antiquity as a summary-style precis of that article.

In doing so I noticed that #History is really POV. We currently have:

1. Nothing on pre-Iron Age settlement
2. One and a half sections on the Iron Age Israelite settlement
3. Almost nothing on period 73 CE to 1854; that's all shunted to Qalunya (why is this a separate article?)
4. A section on the Ottoman period, but focusing only on the village's Jewish inhabitants
5. A section on the Mandate period, but focusing only on the village's Jewish inhabitants

It's not hard to spot which historical episodes are being given undue weight... – Joe (talk) 09:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

I notice a confusion the location of various places. "Motza" as founded in 1933 was in the place now called Motza Illit, as shown on multiple maps from 1934 to 1948. Motza moved about 600m to the east some time between 1948 and 1961, then to its present location another 600m to the east by 1970. The latter two moves were facilitated by the depopulation of Qaluniya. The 1933 location was named Motza Illit by 1950. Zero^talk 13:03, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

User:Joe Roe, User:Zero0000; Yeah, this article is really a mess. To start cleaning up: is there any reason everything under "Antiquity" and "Second Temple period" isn't in the Tel Motza-article (and only there; not copied into this article as well)? Huldra (talk) 22:15, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Section reworking

There was:

Motza was identified as the Emmaus of Luke in 1881 by William F. Birch (1840–1916) of the Palestine Exploration Fund, and again in 1893 by Paulo Savi. Excavations in 2001–2003, headed by Professor Carsten Peter Thiede let him conclude that Khirbet Mizza/Tel Moza was the only credible candidate for the Emmaus of the New Testament.

To start at the end, "Tel Mizza/Tel Moza" makes no sense, since they are different locations. Tel Mizza, which is shown on earlier maps as Khirbet Beit Mizza and current maps as Horbat Motza, is about 1.8km to the north of Tel Motza at 1651/1349. Birch calls it "Brit Muzza" (typo for Beit Muzza?) and places it one mile north of Qaluniya, exactly where Khirbet Beit Mizza is. Savi says that Emmaus was somewhere in the circle centered at Khirbet Beit Mizza, reaching as far as Qalunya and Qubeiba which is not quite large enough to contain Tel Motza. So neither of these authors placed Emmaus at the site of present day Motza. Thiede, however, identifies Emmaus as Colonia, whose name is preserved as Qalunya, and his description of the excavations clearly refers to Tel Motza which is on the southern edge of Qalunya. Zero^talk 04:02, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

References