Talk:Silwan/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

"Geography" is completely empty

... and LOTS of confusion throughout the article is the result.

• Where are the boundaries? W/o this the whole article is built on (quick)sand and close to worthless.
• Can the Garden Gethsemane be seen as part of Silwan w/o far overstretching the term? Smb. smuggled in a picture of one of the olive trees there.
• We should introduce "Silwan (East)" for historical Silwan, and "Silwan (West)" for Wadi Hilweh (whose boundaries are...? The wadi itself, plus the City of David ridge, plus the "Givati parking lot" and how much more to the east? Pool of Siloam, King's Garden orchard, and how much more to the south?)
• Is there an admin. view of this (PA side, Israeli side), as opposed to a historical one (Ottoman, British land property deeds)?
• What's the relation to neighbouring Palestinian townships in terms of territory? Arminden (talk) 13:48, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps User:Onceinawhile could help? A map, like the one on Al-Zahiriyya al-Tahta could be helpful? Huldra (talk) 20:34, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Silwan in 1943

This is an excellent set of questions that would be good to nail down. I was actually editing on a similar topic earlier today see edit here – another example of the frequent confusion around Silwan.

The map to the right shows the boundaries in 1943, but this doesn’t help much because of the subsequent expansion during the Jordanian period.

Zero0000 might have some ideas here. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:25, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

It would be great to have a section on the development of the village borders during the 20-21th century, the boundaries in 1943 would of course be included, Huldra (talk) 22:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Also young Bolter, though on Saturday night he may have better things to do.Nishidani (talk) 22:43, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

South part of Silwan's lands in 1943

This second map shows the area south of the previous map in the same year 1943. You can trace the village boundary of Silwan by following the trail of black dots spanning the two maps. I will make a combined map with the boundary highlighted. Note that the land court did not get to the Jerusalem region during the mandate, which is why the boundary is marked as tentative. I also have 1945 and 1946 maps at twice the resolution showing the same boundary. I have a good 1961 map but it doesn't show Silwan boundaries. Was Silwan inside or outside the Jordanian municipal boundaries of Jerusalem? Zero^talk 05:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss: have you ever seen any official Jordanian government maps online? It would help a lot for this question, as well as for creating other articles such as Baqoura. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:27, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile: Not that I know of, no. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I only have some of too low a resolution for these purposes. Zero^talk 09:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Every Shabbat has a Motza'ei Shabbat. Started a geography section based on Govmap's borders and two Hebrew books I've found.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 05:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I was just writing to ask you if I was reading Govmap correctly. Perhaps a map showing old and new is in order. Zero^talk 05:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

As for Gethsemane, if that's the same as Gethermane it was (just) inside the village boundary in 1945. Zero^talk 06:37, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Boundaries of Silwan in 1943 and 2020.

The third map shows 1943–1946 and 2020 boundaries. Zero^talk 07:26, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Zero0000, this is excellent. Would you mind linking to the "Israeli municipal plan of Jerusalem" that you used for the blue line? The part of the puzzle that is still missing to my mind is the status of Wadi Hilweh. It is consistently referred to as part of Silwan, but in this map is outside the border. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

It is here, as Bolter noted in the article. Zero^talk 08:00, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Interesting, thanks. There is a button there which says "עסקאות נדל"ן" which seems to mean "real estate transactions". If you press it it shows a few properties within Silwan. I wonder if one of them is the Old Yemenite Synagogue (Silwan); I am struggling to see where it matches the photo in that article. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

The important thing to remember is that these municipal designations are historically fluid - the notion of boundaries at the simplest fellahin or other level is based on local land usage and customary clan title- and that one must therefore not slip into the perennial, ingrained habit of seeking a 'toponymic ontology', i.e., thinking that a placename must designate a permanent bounded reality, from the origins down to our day.Nishidani (talk) 07:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree. From the name alone it is clear that the Siloam tunnel and the Pool of Siloam were historically considered part of the area. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:46, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

According to this map, Silwan was inside the Jordanian boundaries of Jerusalem. However that map is not precise enough; does anyone know where a more detailed map is? Zero^talk 09:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I don’t think that map is very precise as it doesn’t even point out the Mount Scopus enclave. These maps are interesting but don’t show the municipal boundaries.

This shows some of the later changes in the municipal boundaries

On a related note, do you know if there was such a thing as Ottoman municipal boundaries? My guess is that the British administration (possibly as early as Samuel) added Wadi Hilweh into the Jerusalem boundaries at some point. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

The map of different boundaries on page 2 of that source is interesting. I hadn't noticed that the 1:20,000 maps show both "municipal boundary" and "urban boundary" for Jerusalem. The discussion in the source given (Kark & Oren-Nordheim, p149-150) says: "By the end of the Mandate there were three categories of Jerusalem's urban boundaries. The municipal boundary within the first boundary lines was smaller compared to that of 1924, and included only part of the neighborhoods encircling the city where the Jerusalem municipality could collect property taxes. The second was an administrative boundary delimited by the government tax authorities. It included all of the Jerusalem neighborhoods and most of the surrounding villages. The third boundary defined the area under the authority of the Jerusalem Town Planning and Building Commission." I have maps showing all these boundaries. On the same page there is mention of Ottoman boundaries cited to a chapter of Gideon Biger in a Hebrew book. No map is here but the text reads "Prior to the British occupation, Jerusalem's municipal boundaries included a relatively large area (about 13 sq. km.) surrounding the Old City's walls: from Shaikh Jarrah in the north, to the Sha'arei Tzedeq Hospital in the west, and the Baq'a neighborhood in the south. However, much of this area remained empty. Zero^talk 12:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

This publication by Ir Amim says: “To Palestinians, the name “Silwan” denotes the area of 2,194 dunams in southeast Jerusalem that is home to 31,000 people, most of whom are Palestinian. Silwan borders on the southern wall of the Old City and Mt. Zion to the north; the neighborhood of Abu Tor to the west, the Mount of Olives to the east, and the neighborhood of Jabel Mukaber to the south and southeast. The neighborhoods of Wadi Qadoum, Ras al-Amud, Wasat al-Balad, Kharat al-Tank, Bir Ayoub, al-Yaman, Ein al-Louzah, al-Bustan, and Wadi Hilweh are all considered parts of Silwan in terms of the familial and geographic links between their residents.”

Unfortunately they do not provide their underlying sources. The 2,194 dunums is very specific though. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

The small region shown as Silwan at Govmap is only about 350 dunams. Zero^talk 04:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Here is another definition from another NGO, the Civic Coalition for Palestinian Rights in Jerusalem: “Silwan village is an area of 5.64km2 (5,640 dunams, 1,410 acres). It includes the neighbourhoods of Wadi Qadoum, Ras Al-Amoud, Ein Al-Loza, Al-Thowri, Al-Shiyah, Wasat Al-Balad, Kharat Al-Tank, Bir Ayoub, Hart-Al-Yaman, Al-Bustan, Wadi Hilweh, and Wadi Yasul.“ Onceinawhile (talk) 06:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Bimkom's Survey of Palestinian Neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, funded by the Government of Denmark and the European Union, uses the term "Greater Silwan", which is split into four areas. The include maps and details of each of these:

• Wadi Qaddum: Population 11,000; Area 631 dunam: "stretches from Jericho Road in the north to the central channel of Wadi an- Nar in the south; and from the Separation Barrier and Jerusalem’s municipal boundary in the east to the Old Bethlehem Road in the west. The western border of the neighborhood was determined arbitrarily, since in effect the neighborhood is part of the built-up continuum stretching westward through the area of Ras al-Aamud to the center of Silwan. Wadi Qaddum developed spontaneously, without any planning infrastructure, from the early 1970s onward. Prior to this, the land was vacant, with the exception of a few structures."
• Ras al-Aamud: Population 14,500; Area 722 dunam: "The area of Ras al-Aamud is not generally defined as a separate neighborhood of East Jerusalem, but rather as part of the contiguous built-up area of Silwan. Ras al-Aamud borders on Silwan al-Wusta to the west, on the Mount of Olives to the north, on the Old Bethlehem Road and Wadi Qaddum to the east, and on Wadi an-Nar (the Qidron Valley) to the south... The sub-neighborhood of Ein al-Lawza is zoned as open scenic area"
• Silwan Center: Population 23,500; Area 678 dunam: "Bordering on the walls of the Old City and the outskirts of the Mount of Olives to the north, on Mount Zion and Abu Thor (ath-Thori) to the southwest, on Jabal al-Mokabber to the south, and on Ras al-Aamud to the east (where the border is least defined), Silwan Center is comprised of a number of sub-neighborhoods – Silwan al-Wusta, Wadi Hilwe, al-Bustan, and Batn al-Hawa... From the beginning of the 20th century, the population of the village grew, density increased significantly, and many inhabitants moved out to more distant village lands (today the abovementioned sub-neighborhoods, as well as the adjacent neighborhoods – Ras al-Aamud, Ein al-Lawza, Wadi Qaddum, ash-Shayah, Abu Thor, and Hayy al-Faruq)."
• Abu Thor: Population 15,500; Area 911 dunam: "Abu Thor (also known as ath-Thori), is located in central East Jerusalem, south of the Old City and southwest of Silwan. The parcel of land on which the neighborhood developed was given to Ahmad Ben Jamal ad-Din towards the end of the 12th century, by the noted conqueror, Salah ad-Din – a gift for helping conquer Jerusalem. Ahmad Ben Jamal ad-Din was renowned for being inseparable from his ox (in Arabic: Thor), and his epithet gave the place its name. The area began to develop during the last decades of the 19th century, attracting upper-class as well as working-class families of all faiths... the unrecognized sub-neighborhood of Wadi Yasool, located in the southeastern section of the neighborhood."

This adds up to 2,942 dunums. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:39, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

In the Israeli sense, "Silwan" is what the source above called "Silwan al-Wusta" (Central Silwan), which is listed inside of "Silwan Central" which makes it quite weird. I think based on the sources mentioned above, there is no way to really have a clear picture of what is included within Silwan. I think as for now, the article should only talk about central Silwan, which according to maps, was the only cluster of inhabitants in the area from the 16th to 19th centuries.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 12:12, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Almost all media reports about Silwan seem to refer to “Greater Silwan”. See for example the recent media stories about the Old Yemeni Synagogue (defined as the area Hart-Al-Yaman) or Al Bustan demolitions or the City of David. All consistently referred to as “Silwan”. To my mind it is no different to the Old City of Hebron vs Hebron or the Old City of Jerusalem vs Jerusalem. Onceinawhile (talk) 14:10, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Bolter21: it seems that the 2000 Jerusalem Master Plan (he:תוכנית מתאר מקומית 2000 ירושלים) included the concept of “Greater Silwan”. See Figure 1 on page 66 of this document. Onceinawhile (talk) 16:23, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

It seems too complicated for my patience right now but I'll give you these remarks. I don't know if there is a direct definition of "neighborhood". The website of Jerusalem does not treat Jabel Mukaber, Abu Tur or Ras el Amud as parts of Silwan. These neighborhoods have developed mostly after 1948 as far as I know and didn't expand directly from Silwan. Obviously, Silwan is in the immediate vicinity of these villages, seconded by the walls of Jerusalem. Since Israel depopulated the Arab neighborhoods to the west and there was a de facto national border there, they might technically be its daughters, but as far as it seems, they are completely different neighborhoods. "Greater Silwan" is still not "Silwan". I suppose there is a family connection between the residents of "greater Silwan", especially as most of it was under a single village municipality during British times. And whatever you sent are planning districts, not neighborhoods.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 18:44, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Was there a Silwan village in the Late Roman, Byzantine, Early Muslim periods?

All we have so far is only referring to the Gihon Spring and the Souteastern Hill/Ridge, today known as the City of David. The fact that the SPRING or POOLS are called Shiloah-Siloam-Silwan says NOTHING about a village. If such a village existed, I would be tempted to look for it on the hill EAST of the Kiron Valley, where the village is located since at least the 19th century, not west of it, where the spring & pools are. If the village did start west of the Kidron and later moved along with the name, that must be PROVEN. The name is neither proof for continuous habitation, nor for any kind of connection.

One sentence in the article now reads "In 985 [Muqaddasi] noted that the village in the outskirts of Jerusalem and south of the village was ′Ain Sulwan ("Spring of Siloam") which provided "fairly good water" that irrigated the large gardens..." This is such a piece of nonsense like no other. a) "the village south of the village"?! Clearly a mistake. South of the city maybe? b) Only the spring is south of the southeastern CORNER of the walled Old City (S of the Temple Mount at most). The Silwan village we know of today is east and southeast of the spring, and definitely rather E or SE than S of Jerusalem. So, what village? Again, did the village or the name move and cross the Kidron? Or is this a mistranslation and it shouldn't read "south"? Even worse: in the quote Muqaddasi only speaks of the SPRING, he doesn't say a word about any village. If he does mention a village, pls quote the right passage. For now, in this whole paragraph (Early Muslim period) we only have one sentence about a group of people living in the Silwan necropolis that does fit in, all else & the previous paragraph (Roman period) do not even belong here, since they're about anything EXCEPT a village, and their topics (spring, King's Garden, Pool of Siloam, stepped street) are all on the wrong hill. Arminden (talk) 18:07, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Arminden, I read this post only after writing my response to your other post above. It sounds like we are more in agreement than I thought. So if there is no source for a historical village of Siloam, what is our article Siloam based on? Onceinawhile (talk) 20:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

As for Muqaddasi, see here. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

????Armiden, I don't understand your problem with Muqaddasi? To me it is obvious; there is a village (=Silwan) and below the village is a spring (which isn't properly a spring, but is called it (=Ain), anyway, as Onceinawhile pointed out): Ain Sulwan. And below that spring is another, "Jobs' well". Here is another version: p. 49. I don't understand you when you say that Muqaddasi "doesn't say a word about any village"??? Huldra (talk) 22:00, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

In the misconstrued "quote" there wasn't anything about a village. I went to the source after writing my comment here, which source by the way is a very old translation, found the reference to a "place" called Sulwan, not just its spring, and put the full quote back in. Then I discovered that Gil is putting the location of the Sulwan spring of the 10th-13th centuries into question, being sure that Muqaddasi & Co. meant a Bir Ayyub which, since we're talking about so many centuries full of earthquakes etc. ago, might well have been elsewhere than the modern mosque. You can't take a modern name and project it 100s or 1000s of years into the past, thinking that you'll still be right about the location. Even physical geography changes (slightly), tribes and nations even more, and place names travel, sometimes for kilometres. A Rashidun or Umayyad Sulwan might have had close to nothing in common with the location and population of today's Silwan. The same goes to the Jewish settlers who count David as their grandpa, preferably on their mother's side, and feel like moving back into the old family home when they go to the City of David. Nationalism is based on fairy tales, little wonder the Grimm brothers were German ultranationalists. I love fairy tales including Hollywood, but not here. Arminden (talk) 22:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Arminden, I like and agree with what you are saying, particularly the last three sentences. Unfortunately the vast majority of modern Biblical Geography has it foundations in 19th century assessments of comparative toponymy. We can’t throw the whole thing out with nothing to replace it, but we can make the tenuous nature of these judgements clear. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:55, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I have no problem with what you write here, but, I had a problem with you saying that Muqaddasi said there was no village here, when my 2 sources of Muqaddasi clearly said it was. And if sources ~1000years ago give 1) a village 2)a spring beneath it, 3) a spring beneath that, again ...and we find the same today, I think it would be not unreasonable to think they were the same. Huldra (talk) 22:53, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

The SE ridge ("City of David") was part of Jerusalem, so inside the walls, until 70 CE, then again once Eudocia rebuilt the walls, and Moshe Gil has a nice discussion (footnote 11, see reference list) about when this wall was or wasn't destroyed and/or rebuilt. The Fatimids definitely rebuilt the walls farther up the slope. So no possibility of a "village" there for quite a while, just of a city neighbourhood. In between - revolts, burnt earth, ruins and empty hills. In the Kidron Valley and the hills to the east you have Byzantine monasteries, hermits living in burial caves and monuments, then the Persians and their Jewish allies finish them off. There is a mention of Muslims living in the Silwan necropolis early on. Only Allah knows where they came from and how long they managed to hang on. Think of Abbasid-Fatimid-Ilkhanid-... wars, AND then the Crusaders. Then read Gil. Then there's nothing in the 1300s, says an Arab chronicle. And so on. It's not like Rome, never to disappear and more or less in one place from the beginning till today. Arminden (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Siloam and Silwan#Iron Age / Silwan#Roman period cover exactly the same scope. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. It seems to me that it is best to have two separate articles, as one deals mainly with the Arab village of Silwan, while the other article deals more with the historical site, known in other sources as Siloam in Roman times. While both articles speak about the same place, the emphasis is different in both articles.Davidbena (talk) 15:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Davidbena: An interesting point has been raised below – that there do not seem to be any sources for an ancient settlement of “Siloam”. The Hebrew Bible mentions the Pool of Siloam and the tunnel, and the New Testament mentions the Tower of Siloam, but neither mention a settlement. Looking closer at our article Siloam, it now seems to be WP:SYNTH. Could you shed any further light on this? Onceinawhile (talk) 21:03, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile: As is known, the Hebrew name for this place is שילוח = "Shiloach", where there is a natural spring (fountain) of fresh water. It was used by the people who settled in the city of Jerusalem. The English translation for "Shiloach" is Siloam. I have no information on its etymology. My understanding is that the Arab village "Silwan" is named after the nearby spring. The spring (fountain) is also called "Silwan," or 'Ain Silwan. To my knowledge, the settled area around the spring was not originally called "Silwan," but rather Accra (חקרא) during the Second-Temple period, which is merely a suburb of Jerusalem. The other suburb and which corresponds to the Upper City was called by Jews in the Second Temple period by the name of שוק עליון = "the Upper Marketplace." All this has been explained by Josephus. The name of the suburb, "Shuq 'eliyon" (= Upper Marketplace) is retained in the Mishnah.Davidbena (talk) 22:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Davidbena, thank you, that is clear. Are you saying that our article Siloam should be about the spring? I seem to recall reading that Ein Rogel / Gihon Spring were considered the spring of Siloam. If so, then our article Siloam seems to serve no purpose? Onceinawhile (talk) 22:23, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

There is no question in my mind that Siloam / Shiloach is a spring. I have actually immersed in it. Whether or not it also bore the name 'Ein Rogel is unbeknownst to me. Needs more research.Davidbena (talk) 22:28, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Davidbena, do you mean the Gihon Spring? If so, then should Siloam be merged with that article? @Arminden: what do you think? Onceinawhile (talk) 22:40, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Onceinawhile, I am not familiar with the relationship between Gihon Spring and the Pool of Siloam. I immersed in the Pool of Siloam, or what is also called in Arabic 'Ain Silwan. There are several photographs of the place in Wikimedia Commons, which I'll post here for you to see. Some photographs are, obviously, old, and the place has since been renovated:

• Ain Silwan
• Outlet from Hezekiah's Tunnel
• Pool of Siloam / Ain Silwan
• Shiloach Pool / Pool of Siloam
• Pool of Siloam, after renovation
• Pool of Siloam
• Siloam
• Spring of Shiloach

I hope that this was helpful.Davidbena (talk) 22:56, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Davidbena, thank you, that is clear. Those are great images – I uploaded the first one myself a few months ago, and put it at Pool of Siloam, along with the clarifying map at the top of that article. The others could be added to a gallery there.

So should we merge the articles Siloam and Pool of Siloam? Onceinawhile (talk) 23:03, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that seems to be the logical step. They are the same place, and which is all about the spring of water.Davidbena (talk) 23:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Are you saying articles on places in Palestine/Israel should be split according to resident ethnicity, a kind of toponymic apartheid?Nishidani (talk) 15:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Please don't engage in this language and tone Nish. With that said, Right now I support the merge or rather the deletion of the Siloam article, which is poorly written and is just another biblical archaeology piece written as if to a religious audience. I might take a look at that too see if a new article about the archaeological site can be written. As of now, there is no reason to have two articles for Siloam and Silwan. This is what I don't !vote yet.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 15:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nishidani:, No, Nick. I am talking only about ancient toponyms that carry different meanings in different times. We have on Wikipedia many double-articles treating on the same place. Take, for example, Shechem and Nablus, both referring to the same place, as they are universally agreed to be the same inhabited place during and before Roman times. Or take, for example, Yibna and Yavne which sites refer to the same place. Or, if you'd like, you can take Battir, which site corresponds with Betar (fortress). The common denominator between all of these double-articles is that, while they refer to the same site, their scope is slightly different. And there are many, many more here.Davidbena (talk) 12:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Nablus is 2 kilometres west of the site identified as Shechem, so that is not an example of toponymic imbrication. Why Yibna and Yavne are distinguished is obscure, unless the desire was to separate the strong Jewish associations of Yavne with the 'grand coalition' of ca.73,- which laid the grounds for Judaism, - from the Islamic associations of Yibna. They overlap and, as I said, in my view, this is a case of discursive apartheid. There is no logic governing article creation in Wikipedia, and these distinctions or conflations are purely aleatory, due to the whims of editors, as far as I can see.Nishidani (talk) 14:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

The point is that Shechem was also called Nablus.Davidbena (talk) 16:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

By whom?Nishidani (talk) 16:43, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Actually there are many sources. You may wish to see Josephus, in The Jewish War (4.8.1.), where he calls Nablus by its Greco-Roman name, Neapolis, saying that it is Shechem (Sichem), or, if you read Hebrew, you can see this identification in the article Shechem in Hebrew, here. Rabbi Saadia Gaon, when mentioning Shechem in his Judeo-Arabic translation of the Torah, writes for Shechem in Genesis 12:6 the word "Nablus" (Judeo-Arabic: נאבלוס). I hope that this was helpful.Davidbena (talk) 18:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I always like reading Josephus, and he confirms that Shechem is never mentioned as interchangeable with Nablus. You were misled by the gloss William Whiston naughtily intruded into the text for his predominantly Christian readership alòmost 3 centuries ago. I.e. the Greek runs:

ὅθεν διὰ τῆς Σαμαρείτιδος καὶ παρὰ τὴν Νέαν πόλιν καλουμένην, Μαβαρθὰ δ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν ἐπιχωρίων, The Jewish War (4.8.1.), from where he passed through the region of Samaria, close by the town they called New(town), but which is called Mabartha by the local inhabitants. Bellum Judaicum 4.8.1. Nishidani (talk) 18:59, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

The usual problem: ideology is driving the issue. Not the topic at hand. WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT, what is the topic here? Names travel, Shiloakh-Siloam-Silwan sounds seamless, but it's not. Now from memory, needs to be checked: The Hebrew Bible is dealing mainly with the Gihon Spring, the Hezekiah Tunnel and the pool(s). So are Josephus and the Gospels. All these features are connected to the ridge between Wadi Hilweh (a segment of Josephus' Tyropoeon) and the Kidron Valley, therefore west of the Kidron Valley. The ridge is known in archaeology as the "City of David" or the Southeastern Hill/Ridge. The Arab village is east of that, on the continuation of the Mount of Olives, east of the said Kidron Valley. Silwan only started "growing" westwards (if at all; what's sure is that its name was expanded to include other newly inhabited areas outside the Old City walls) only in the modern period. I don't know if the Arab inhabitants of the neighbourhoods west of the Kidron Valley are related or not to the older Silwanites or were just incorporated into that village by various authorities, to a large degree by the Jordanians. Currently, the Geography paragraph of the Silwan article states that Silwan "is bounded by the "City of David" (Wadi Hilweh)... to the west", stopping this whole argument dead in its tracks - but that's from an Israeli government source, might not be acceptable to all.
The way I see it, for now we have at least two separate GEOGRAPHICAL entities: Silwan, or if you like historical Silwan, or Silwan (East), east of the Kidron; and to the west, on the Southeastern Hill and stretching onto the Western Hill/Mount Zion, plus the valley between them (Central Valley, Tyropoeon, Hilweh), at least one more entity (City of David, and the Wadi Hilweh 'hood west of that, with the fmr Givati parking lot). How do you want to deal with that? The Kidron has always been a separating feature. Canaanite and Israelite Jerusalem have never really crossed it. The Judahite Kingdom only had tombs and high places east of it. Until today, it's a clearly visible physical boundary. Do you intend to ignore that? Weld together Silwan (east) with what's south of the Old City walls? Only by going according to (which?) modern administrative boundaries? If someone can prove that the population of Silwan has organically expanded over the Kidron onto the area west of it, that would be the start of a discussion. But not the end of it - at least some of the residents of the Moroccan Quarter evacuated to Wadi Hilweh during the 1948 war.
The fact that the Christian missionaries who took care of the Yemenite Jews startled the established Jerusalem Jews into action and they of course called the housing project which they quickly built, Kfar haShiloah, Siloam Village, is only natural, considering a) the Arabic name of the village there, and b) the messianic obsession of both the donors and the new immigrants from the Yemen. That's not an argument for anything re. our topic here.
Silwan did use the water from 'Ain Sitty Maryam/Gihon Spring, but they also used Bir Ayoub as a water source. In history, the waters of the Gihon were used for the Temple and for long strethces of time the spring was inside Jerusalem's city walls. Apart from that, fetching water from a reasonable distance was a common practice. Not a decisive argument for putting the spring, which is slightly west of the Kidron, inside Silwan.
So the more I think of it, the less I see a reason to more then link Silwan & Siloam, which has been done already.
We shouldn't be dealing with things theoretically, but rather look at the reality on the ground. I don't know if anyone will start interviewing the Arab residents of Wadi Hilweh about how Silwanite they feel or don't, so... Arminden (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the excellent expositions. I don't consider the comments here ideologically-impelled. Virtually all over the I/P topology one finds immense name confusion in the ancient primary sources, as I think we discussed some years back re the Negev. The other week, looking at sources for Talmudic accounts of Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, I noted that one group of anecdotes refers to a place called Kfar Sikhnin, Kfar Sama, Kfar Sisi, Sakhnia, and commentaries every since have identified this with Sakhnin, or differentiated them into unknown localities nearby. A large number of the sources editors are asked to draw on, ancient and modern, are sloppy with toponymy and in these cases, one can only get over the mess if one is lucky to find a scholarly article or book that cuts to the chase through the blurry thickets of slipshod usage to tease out the various meanings as stratified in successive epochs. You'd have to have more arse than Jessie the elephant to cop one that can certify what very close readers like yourself, Zero, Once and Bolter might twig to through personal research, but cannot harvest because of our R(at)S(hit) rules. Go (dis)figure. Nishidani (talk) 19:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Arminden: thanks for your thoughtful post. I was most struck by your statements: ”The Hebrew Bible is dealing mainly with the Gihon Spring, the Hezekiah Tunnel and the pool(s). So are Josephus and the Gospels. All these features are connected to the ridge between Wadi Hilweh (a segment of Josephus' Tyropoeon) and the Kidron Valley, therefore west of the Kidron Valley. The ridge is known in archaeology as the "City of David" or the Southeastern Hill/Ridge.”

I have not seen a source today which calls the City of David “Siloam”. I have seen many sources which says that Siloam is today known as Silwan.

Are you sure that scholarship considers that “Siloam” was on the City of David / Ophel ridge? I had always assumed that was not possible, as how could ancient Siloam be the same place as ancient Jerusalem? If Siloam was on the western ridge is would not have had the independent history that it has had.

I have always assumed that the Pool of Siloam and the Siloam Tunnel are so named as being the “Pool next to Siloam” and the “Tunnel between Jerusalem and Siloam”. After all, Jerusalem’s Damascus Gate is not in Damascus. Onceinawhile (talk) 20:47, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile: I must have kept it too short, although I've written so much :) What I mean is, based on mainstream theories, not the fringe ones: Jebus included the Gihon Spring within its walls, via a fortified corridor and a spring tower, which the Israelites inherited. Hezekiah built his tunnel from the spring at the NE edge of the city (which stood on the SE ridge; the spring is on the W side of the Kidron, so on the City of David side), to the southernmost point of the city. There are two Pools of Siloam, the story is complicated - where the tunnel ends there used to be one, now greatly diminished, and a short distance downhill there is a 2nd one, which must be the NT pool. Both were within the walls of the City of David, and the tunnel zigzagged underneath the E part of the city. There is an older, Canaanite "Siloam Tunnel", which runs slightly east of Hezekiah's, but still inside the ridge and along its eastern slope. So everything is WEST of the Kidron Valley.

It's interesting to see what Moshe Gil made of the descriptions of Muqaddasi (985), Khusraw (1047), and Yaqut (1225) - I've added it at Silwan#Early Muslim period, although Yaqut is later: Gil is certain that in those days "the spring of Silwan" was the name for Bir 'Ayyub, since they seem to describe a location too far south from Jerusalem's walls as to fit the Gihon Spring. Go figure. Or go and read Le Strange's pages 220-223. Gil probably used the original Arabic, otherwise it would be hard to follow his argument based on that translation. Anyway, you can see how in the 14th century the village at Bir 'Ayyub was no more. No continuity. That's why I'm skeptical about mergers. And yes, continuity, as a way of projection, is always the favourite argument for nationalists of any colour. No matter the facts. That's why I'd be very careful offering any of them ready-made, because not thoroughly enough researched, arguments. Just look at what we have: the Siloam article is heavy on the religious side and light on historical logic, and Silwan is put together as if Palestinian Arabs had always inhabited all the slopes east and south of Jerrusalem, calling them all "Silwan". No boundaries, no distinction made between several historical periods. These two you want to merge? To get what? PS: I have it from Palestinians - many of the Palestinian Arabs living in this area are originally from Hebron and other places south of Jerusalem. Like any big city, it too has a certain pull. And people build w/o waiting for master plans and zoning. Arminden (talk) 22:22, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

And many recent Silwanites hail from Yemen, or Brooklyn. No one is originally from anywhere.: )22:32, 24 August 2020 (UTC)Nishidani (talk)

OK, so? Then what's the definition of a merged Silwan/Siloam? What should the article be about? The location of the 19th century Silwan most would think of? Oh, can't be, then there's no connection whatsoever to Shiloah-Siloam. Then maybe the SE ridge/CoD? No good, that's not Silwan. Or is it? Or isn't it? What about Wadi Hilweh, actually W and maybe S of the CoD? There are houses going up a good part of the slope of the Western Hill-Mt Zion. The Jordanians wanted Hilweh in, as part of Silwan. Dizzy? I am. So put Brooklyn & Sana'a into the stew and we write an article about the brotherhood of men & all are happy. No...? Ah, Eretz Yisroel & Shiloah, Falastin & Kufr Silwan... Still up for a merger? Arminden (talk) 23:08, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Arminden, see above Davidbena’s comments re merging Siloam into Pool of Siloam. Then perhaps Siloam becomes a disambiguation page, with Pool of Siloam and Silwan being the two primary targets, and the Tower and Tunnel being subordinate targets. What do you think? Onceinawhile (talk) 23:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Onceinawhile, that sounds fine for me. That leaves the heavy lifting to those who're working on Silwan, to figure out what they'r writing about. Don't forget the older tunnel, I think the name they use at the City of David (not that I'm too fond of them) is Siloam Channel; I prefer 'the Canaanite tunnel'. Anyway, it's also a 'Siloam' item. But these are all parts of the old Canaanite Yebus and Israelite 'City of David', so there are other merger requests ahead. And the 'Wadi Hilweh' fan club is just around the corner :) Arminden (talk) 00:04, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Maps

Archaeology seems to be the way forward here and there have been a number of excavations to look up. Also, I wonder if any of the maps of Jerusalem made during the Crusader period show Silwan. Zero^talk 04:35, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Zero0000, I looked through Cartography of Jerusalem, but all the pre-19thC maps don’t show any detail outside the city walls – just other notable places mentioned in the bible.

The earliest I can see is the first scientific map of the city from 1818, which shows a well developed area of Silwan built up along a stream flowing through the Kidron valley. Onceinawhile (talk) 05:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile: I have a 1632 map that shows a large number of buildings in the right place. It has no name, but the valley is "Valee de Siloe". Zero^talk 06:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Zero0000, there is one from 1590 here called the “monk’s map”, from the NLI, which shows a group of buildings where Silwan would be. Would be good to add these maps to Cartography of Jerusalem if we can get hi res versions and can find WP:RS describing them. Onceinawhile (talk) 06:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile:, that "1590" map appears at NLI as "179?". Not sure if this link will work. It doesn't display for me, and I didn't manage to download it. Zero^talk 09:35, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Zero0000, that link doesn't work for me either. I just added a map to the article - is that the same one you were referring to? Onceinawhile (talk) 11:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile: you added a part of the same map. I didn't keep the url from which I downloaded it long ago, but it was given as 1632. Could be just a different edition. I can see now that I misread the map (shameful!) and missed "Vilage Siloe" written there. Incidentally, this 1628 book mentions "Village Siloé" twice. Zero^talk 12:05, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Zero0000, thank you. FYI I have added it to Cartography of Jerusalem with a description and source. Onceinawhile (talk) 12:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile: I uploaded a higher resolution version. Zero^talk 13:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile and Zero0000: You can get a hi-res picture via Pinterest here. All sources I could find (not many, not academic, incl. JVL, but they've got their info from the National Library) say 1590. "179-?" seems to be a typo. I'd put "1590s" in the description, that's probably what they meant, it's also mentioned as "1590s" or "end of the 16th century" somewhere. I would have said to trust the lady quoted at the Ynet source, but the article puts in her mouth the words "Mamluk period", and that one had been over by some 70 years by the time the Italian monk drew his map. Mind that its' a manuscript, not printed, that is a relevant detail. Sorry for maybe showing up too late, I got lost in Google space and I see that Zero has already uploaded the map. Arminden (talk) 14:58, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

It is a different map that Once uploaded and I uploaded again. Zero^talk 02:10, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

To editor Oncenawhile:To editor Arminden: "Monk's map": I'm not convinced that "179?" is a typo. If it is, then it is a double typo. The notes at NLI say "Probably drawn by an Italian monk, end of the 18th century. The red line may show the Franciscan route to the Holy Places." Since the map curators at NLI are undoubted experts on Jerusalem maps, a similarly expert source should be required to contradict their judgement. Is there one? A possibility is that NLI reassessed the map based on feedback generated by the Ynet article, or Ynet might have misreported. Zero^talk 03:59, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

We have articles on this map in German de:Gerusalemme (Kartenwerk) and Hebrew he: ג'רוזלמה. Unfortunately neither have meaningful sources. Onceinawhile (talk) 13:14, 26 August 2020 (UTC)