The Battle at Shiloh

I live at Shiloh.

The original one

which is on the north of Beth-el, on the east side of the highway that goeth up from Beth-el to Shechem, and on the south of Lebonah

which was probably burnt and destroyed by the Philistines after the battle at Even-HaEzer.

but the one in Tenessee I am well-versed.

It was horrific. More than 13,000 of Grant’s and Buell’s approximately 62,000 troops were killed, wounded, captured or missing. Of 45,000 Confederates engaged, there were more than 10,000 casualties. 

From the autobiography of Henry Morton Stanley. Yes, this Stanley:

"Doctor Livingstone, I presume?"

The desperate character of this day's battle was now brought home to my mind in all its awful reality. While in the tumultuous advance, and occupied with a myriad of exciting incidents, it was only at brief intervals that I was conscious of wounds being given and received; but now, in the trail of pursuers and pursued, the ghastly relics appalled every sense. I felt curious as to who the fallen Greys were, and moved to one stretched straight out. It was the body of a stout English Sergeant of a neighbouring company, the members of which hailed principally from the Washita Valley. At the crossing of the Arkansas River this plump, ruddy-faced man had been conspicuous for his complexion, jovial features, and goodhumour, and had been nicknamed 'John Bull/ He was now lifeless, and lay with his eyes wide open, regardless of the scorching sun, and the tempestuous cannonade which sounded through the forest, and the musketry that crackled incessantly along the front.

Close by him was a young Lieutenant, who, judging by the new gloss on his uniform, must have been some father's darling. A clean bullet-hole through the centre of his forehead had instantly ended his career. A little further were Cambridge Core terms of use, available at some twenty bodies, lying in various postures, each by its own pool of viscous blood, which emitted a peculiar scent, which was new to me, but which I have since learned is inseparable from a battle-field. Beyond these, a still larger group lay, body overlying body, knees crooked, arms erect, or wide-stretched and rigid, according as the last spasm overtook them. The company opposed to them must have shot straight.Other details of that ghastly trail formed a mass of horrors that will always be remembered at the mention of Shiloh. I can never forget the impression those wide-open dead eyes made on me. Each seemed to be starting out of its socket, with a look similar to the fixed wondering gaze of an infant, as though the dying had viewed something appalling at the last moment.

^

I Got Intrigued (and did I!)

Getting intrigued, I think, is a special form of curiosity.

What happens when you read about three graves? To where is one led?

I read the following on page 179 of Volume 3 of Edward Robinsons (with Eli Smith) Biblical Researches in Palestine and the Adjacent Regions: A Journal of Travels in the Years 1838 and 1852 regarding their visit to a section of the Mt. Zion cemetery:

We now rode to the American cemetery...There are here but three graves of American; those of Dr Dodge and Mrs Thomson, missionaries ; and that of Prof. Fiske of Amherst College, who died here in May, 1847.

Who were they? What did they accomplish? 

And to where and who would this lead me?

I checked this 1872 book. According to this book, the Thomsons and Dodges arrived as missionaries in Beirut in 1833 and spent over a decade in Lebanon.

The Cyclopaedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, Volume 7, p. 583, Dodge and Thomson had proceeded to Jerusalem from the Lebanon in 1834 and Mrs. Thomson died of brain fever on July 22, 1834 following a siege of their residence. Dodge, who arrived in Jerusalem in early 1835, and founded the Jewish Mission in the city. He died there on June 28, 1835.

William McClure Thomson spent 25 years in Syria and Lebanon as a Protestant missionary, only the eighth American Protestant missionary to arrive in the area. We read that

At a Beirut Mission Meeting on 23 January 1862 he proposed the establishment of a college with Daniel Bliss as its President. The Syrian Protestant College was established in 1866 with 16 students. This college was to evolve into the American University of Beirut

He was one of the first outsiders to arrive at Tzfat after the terrible 1837 earthquake and extended assistance to the Jews there. His book, The Land and the Book, almost 800 pages in length, became quite popular, a bestseller, and over the next forty years it was only outsold by Uncle Tom's Cabin in America.

Being on the subject of missionaries and death, let us recall the events of 1859-1860 in Lebanon:

The events began in the Beit Miri section of Lebanon when a minor quarrel developed in the summer of 1859 between two boys, a Maronite and a Druse, over the ownership of a chicken...Feelings smoldered until the following April when there was another outbreak.Some contend that the Maronite clergy, who were mostly of peasant origin, were the instigators of the uprising. "Verbalmissiles" and rumor put the situation out of hand, with the Druse calling on their coreligionists in Hauran for help. The violence escalated and there was a tremendous loss of lives'? At Deir el Kamr, near the scene of the original quarrel, some 2,600 Maronite men were slaughtered within the church walls. Fighting swept from one mountain village to another. The fighting spread and now included attacks on and by all Christians. Indiscriminate killing and pillaging followed. Hardly a house in Zahleh remained standing.outrages were beyond even his expectations. International jealousies were partially to blame for the riot. The French wished to establish a beachhead in Lebanon by supporting Catholics in general and the Maronites in particular. The British viewed with disfavor France's moves and favored the Druse and Protestants. Russia, protector of the Roum (Orthodox), could still hope to take back Constantinople and maybe Turkey which was determined to crush the might of local chieftians in Lebanon. Muslims perceived of themselves in decline and under Christian European pressure...In Damascus...a city of about 110,000,Christians numbered about 25,000,15,000Jews..On Sunday, July 8, a series of insults were heard; on Monday the attacks began; and on Tuesday the terror mounted. By the time the news reached Beirut three days later the worst had happened. The estimated loss of lives in Damascus vary from 5,000 to 8,000 killed. The Ottoman soldiers stood by idly; the mobs ruled in anarchy.

And we meet Thomson again:

Events of the war were copiously detailed by eyewitnesses. American proteges trekked over rocks and hills to the safety of Mr. and Mrs. Daniel Bliss at Suk el-Gharb. Others were sheltered in school buildings. Abeih received its share of refugees. Looking over their shoulders, they saw columns of smoke envelop what once had been homes in their villages.  There is Mr. Bird's account of 30 Syrian Protestants rescued from Ain Zehalteh, neighboring Deir el Kamr and the saving of a "terrified Syrian pastor" just before Hauran Druse broke in on him. A thousand women and children had fled Merj Aiyun to Sidon where the Reverends Eddy and Ford, well-known workers in that community, took the refugees aboard English ships to Beirut. Dr. Thomson later remarked with dismay: "Brethren, the work of forty years is destroyed, and if we are spared, we must begin again."

Missionaries sometimes have amazing experiences:

Bliss (the above-mentioned Daniel)...(d)uring relief disbursements of money and clothing, the timely "whispered" plea of a woman who knew that in a nearby house was a mother and her two daughters without any clothing at all, led Bliss to take three dresses to the house. A bare arm "to the shoulder" reached out to grasp the needed garments. Later, as he rode away, he saw three women standing with uplifted hands. He heard them exclaim: "God bless the English and the Americans. God bless the missionaries."

Incidentally, Bliss’ granddaughter married a Cleveland Dodge who provided financial support for Woodrow Wilson. His one favor that he asked was in 1917, when war with Germany seemed inevitable. He requested of Wilson to keep the United States from declaring war on Turkey and Bulgaria. Later, the missionaries in Syria and Lebanon heavily influenced the King-Crane Commission against Zionism. But William Blackstone, acting at the 1916 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church at the behest of Louis Brandeis, proved an offset to that (p. 92 here) reissuing his 1891 Memorial.

The 1891 Blackstone Memorial read, in part:

Why shall not the powers which under the treaty of Berlin, in 1878, gave Bulgaria to the Bulgarians and Servia to the Servians now give Palestine back to the Jews?…These provinces, as well as Romania, Montenegro, and Greece, were wrested from the Turks and given to their natural owners. Does not Israel as rightfully belong to the Jews?

Later, in October that year, Blackstone stated that the general "law of dereliction" did not apply to the Jews in regard to Palestine:

for they never abandoned the land. They made no treaty; they did not even surrender. They simply succumbed, after the most desperate conflict, to the overwhelming power of the Romans

Once again, I express thanks to Christian Zionism.

^

Revenant. Demonym.

I had long ago championed the term of revenant instead of settler as in 

“he is a revenant resident of Judea and Samaria”.

Now it has been suggested to me to add

Demonym

A noun with a mid-19th century origin used to denote the natives or inhabitants of a particular country, state, city, etc.

It identifies a native of a certain geographical place or ethnic group. The term was resurrected in the 1990s as a descriptor of residency.

What say you?

^

De Blasio’s Tweet: Anti-Semitic? A Misspeak? Or What? (UPDATED Oct. 21/22)

UPDATED to include DeBlasio's statement Oct. 21.

See below.

On April 29, probably after being alerted by this tweet, and after shutting down a Satmar yeshiva a week earlier and a report that mikvaot will still operating despite a closure order on April 7, and a report on March 31 that some Jewish NYC funeral homes were overstacked with bodies, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio tweeted:

@NYCMayor
Something absolutely unacceptable happened in Williamsburg tonite: a large funeral gathering in the middle of this pandemic. When I heard, I went there myself to ensure the crowd was dispersed. And what I saw WILL NOT be tolerated so long as we are fighting the Coronavirus

Jewish funerals with hundreds and even thousands of Haredi particpants not practicing social-distancing or mask-wearing were all over the news (like that on April 2 of the Skulener Rebbe which also led to police being injured -

Photo: Todd Maisel

and another funeral here; and here; on April 5; and April 1; and one which led to contretemps and shouting at cops and an arrest). Not to mention this wedding or this one. 

In other words, these infractions of a dangerous nature (and defined as pikuach nefesh and those who practice such can be termed a rodef) were multiple, repeated, highlighted in the media including the Haredi press and web sites but with little, it would appear, or better, not enough, adequate enforcement either by the city institutions or by Jewish community leadership. In practice, the Aharon Teitelbaum Satmar Hassidic court on March 18 became strict 

but not, it would seem, in practice. They form the backdrop to what happened next.

A short while later, he tweeted out this

My message to the Jewish community, and all communities, is this simple: the time for warnings has passed. I have instructed the NYPD to proceed immediately to summons or even arrest those who gather in large groups. This is about stopping this disease and saving lives. Period.

While the first was liked some 6,600 times, the second, which explictly mentioned Jews, received some 34,100 likes (as of May 3).

His third tweet on the matter, again, that same day, after the uproar, was

We have lost so many these last two months + I understand the instinct to gather to mourn. But large gatherings will only lead to more deaths + more families in mourning. We will not allow this. I have instructed the NYPD to have one standard for this whole city: zero tolerance.

Did de Blasio purposefully employ Jewish community? Did he think there are several Jewish communities and the one closest to him, politically and financially, that is, the Hassidic/Haredi community, was the one that counts? Did he practice a double standard? Or what?

Was it an example of this perspective?

Select instances of noncompliance in Haredi communities, while certainly real, are given outsized attention in news media and internet discourse, creating a sensationalist public discourse that falsely suggests that Haredim, as a homogenous bloc, refuse to practice social distancing. The scapegoating of Haredim is increasing

For sure, there is some proof of anti-Jewish remarks stemming from that funeral. For example, Peter Bradley wrote:

If you watch the video, you will see a person barking orders. He is concerned that the people in the street aren’t wearing masks. In all likelihood, his concern is probably more based on the continuing negative publicity that this Hasidic funeral will generate from the media!

(I commented that that was: is a big guess, an assumption based on ??? Bias?)

This April 15 video was posted zeroing in on Williamsburg and Boro Park and it included a warning to stay at home and not attend synagogue services. On April 7 Naftuli Moser published his op-ed on Hassidic/Haredi behavior at weddings and funerals and linking that to connections with the political establishment, including the Satmar Rebbe`s March 16 prounouncement (with its problematic content):

 and after three Haredim were attacked as mosrim (here in another instance)

and an April 6 report on police crackdowns. Two days after the major Williamsburg incident, another crowd gathered for another funeral, this time in Boro Park.

Satmar came out and backed the Mayor:

We strongly denounce the vicious attacks against the Mayor, particularly those accusing him of anti-Semitism. The close relationship between Mr. De Blasio and our community go back close to two decades, during which time we have come to know, respect and appreciate his understanding and sensitivity to the unique needs of our community. We consider him a dear friend and pray for his success.

although that was attacked, some claiming it a reflection of Galut mentality. The clear message of the Novominsker Rebbe in early March, who later died of the disease, was ignored, even though there were community voices that decried the violations of the Corvid19 rules. As did a Rebbe.

One result, perhaps, is the appointment of a Frum Captain to serve as NYPD Jewish Community Liaison and another was the letter of Ted Cruz in which the Texas Senator wrote

it is especially dangerous to single out the Jewish community in a city that is experiencing a substantial rise in violent anti-Semitism.The Department of Justice should not hesitate to closely monitor New York City to ensure that the mayor’s rhetoric does not translate into constitutional violations

So, was De Blasio being anti-Semitic? With blood on his hands?

Or was this a one-off anti-Semitic incident? Can he really afford to be anti-Semitic? Did he scapegoat the Jews (even though he tweeted “My message to the Jewish community, and all communities”)? Is the city’s past pitiful response to anti-Semitic violence indicative of an anti-Semitic City Hall? Was he displaying underintelligence? Was he insensitive to the special circumstances that had developed in the situation of high-profile Jews perceived as purposefully and negligently flouting restrictions that could possibly affect other Jews and non-Jews and that his words would encourage anti-Semitism? When he tweeted the “Jewish community”, was he blind to the Jewish community at large or other Jewish communities or did he think, as perhaps Satmar assisted him to so think, that they are the real Jews and he just followed through?

One aspect stemming from the Satmar letters is one faces a tough choice: if you believe Satmar, no anti-Semitism by de Blasio. If you do not believe them, are you perhaps anti-Semitic?

According to Jacob Kornbluh, de Blasio is claiming to have spoke unintentionally, that he:

reached out to a number of Jewish community leaders in the last few days to clarify his tweet. He added: “I regret that I used words in the wrong way — in terms of giving the wrong impression, but I don’t regret sounding the alarm.”

Was the attack on de Blasio an attempt to cover for what has been described as a gross failure of leadership by Jews from all types of communities?

We may never know.

I would suggest that rules and regulations be followed if only to follow the instruction in the Ethics of the Fathers 3:2:

"Pray for the welfare of the government, for without the fear of it, man would swallow his fellow alive." 

Or was his outburst a cover-up for his incompetence?

P.S.

Here is a new summary article.

There is this feeling I have seen:

De Blasio repeatedly failed to act on a surge of antisemitic attacks in NYC, and sought to dismiss them as the work of the right and the fault of Donald J. Trump.De Blasio announced he had mixed feelings about the Trump Executive Order on campus antisemitism, because protecting Jews from campus antisemitism allegedly infringes on free speech rights.De Blasio’s own subordinates attacked De Blasio’s repeated attempts to whitewash African American antisemitism on the grounds that ALL antisemitism is right-wing.

And a Christian pro-Israel spokesperson Laurie Cardoza-Moore of PJTN wrote to her followers that:

Threatening to arrest “the Jewish community” for violation of social distancing by a minority faction, cast a further shadow that validated Jew-hatred and a backlash of antisemitic violence and response in America’s largest city. This is unacceptable and the Mayor needs to step down from his office as he is “unfit to serve” as the leader of a city that is home to the one million-plus Jewish community he was set in place to serve. “Rounding up” the Jewish community for arrest in the public forum speaks of a time we must never allow to re-emerge.

And now I see this:

Rabbi Gershon Edelstein, one of the heads of the Ponovezh yeshiva in Bnei Brak, gave a Torah class in which he explained why he believes most of those infected with coronavirus in Israel were from the haredi community.
"We need to understand something - in Israel and around the world, there are haredim who died of this plague more than anyone else," Kikar Hashabbat quoted Rabbi Edelstein as saying. "The Chazon Ish (Rabbi Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz - ed.) said that when people sin, it's by accident. A haredi who sins is doing it on purpose. Judgement is harsher for haredim."

_____________________

UPDATE  May 11, 2020

In a letter to Makor Rishon, Shmuel Pappenheim, himself who was sick with Corona, indicates that major sections of the Haredi community do have ideological problems with authority, and view governmental instructions with disdain:

UPDATE

Kahal Tolaas Yaakov threatened with closure for ongoing violations.

Previously violent couple use the Mayor’s  words to justify their anti-Semitic hate attack on May 11.

---------------------------

DeBlasio Update

“I look back now and understand there was just more dialogue that was needed,” de Blasio said during a press conference Tuesday. “I certainly got very frustrated at times when I saw large groups of people still out without masks but I think more dialogue would have been better so I certainly want to express my regret that I didn’t figure out how to do that better.”

“That one night in Williamsburg I let my frustration and concern get away with me and I should have been more careful in my language and I’ve expressed my apology for that before,” de Blasio said Tuesday. He added, “The No. 1 takeaway from the meeting is more dialogue. More communication is the way forward.”

Next day's Andrew Cuomo:

“No,” Cuomo simply said during an Albany press briefing when asked by a Post reporter whether he believes an apology is owed.

“I am sorry that they feel the disruption, I am sorry that they are disrupted, their religious ceremonies are disrupted, how many people they can have in a synagogue is disrupted, how many people they can have at a wedding is disrupted, the operation of their schools is disrupted. I am sorry for that,” said Cuomo.

The governor continued, “In the same way I’m sorry to the Catholic community and Muslim community and to all New Yorkers. I’m sorry that we are going through this. I’m sorry that people are dying. I’m sorry the state has to impose disruptions on your life. I’m sorry that we had to close your businesses which may mean you lose your business.”

^

James Joyce and Zionism

I have mentioned the Zionism theme that appears in Chapter Two of Joyce’s Ulysses previously. 

Leopold Bloom, returning home from a non-kosher Jewish butcher shop where he purchased pork, he reviews a loose page he had picked up off the counter where paper was kept in which to wrap the meat. The page is from an illustrated Zionist advertising prospectus, and Bloom reads “Agendath Netaim: planters’ company.” He ponders over what he is reading:

To purchase vast sandy tracts from Turkish government and plant with eucalyptus trees. Excellent for shade, fuel, and construction. Orangegroves and immense melonfields north of Jaffa. You pay eight marks and they plant a dunam of land for you with olives, oranges, almonds, or citrons. . . . Your name entered as owner in the book of the union. Can pay ten down and the balance in yearly installments. Bleibtreustrasse 34, Berlin, W.15. 

There are scholarly articles on the subject (here; here; and here)

I have now seen this here

one could break up the work into “agen-dath.” “Agen” could mean “again,” as in the English, and “dath” could refer to the Hebrew word “da’ath.” “Da’ath” shares a root with the Hebrew word for "to know." Colloquially, however, this form translates as “religion” or “faith.”

Da’ath is spelled in Hebrew דעת whereas religion is דת. Almost the same sound in its pronunciation but not quite. 

Joyce is not bad a Hebrew:

BLOOM: (Uncloaks impressively, revealing obesity, unrolls a paper and reads solemnly.) Aleph Beth Ghimel Daleth Hagadah Tephilim Kosher Yom Kippur Hanukah Roschaschana Beni Brith Bar Mitzvah Mazzoth Askenazim Meshuggah Talith.

Or Gematria:

Bloom in turn wrote the Hebrew characters ghimel, aleph, daleth and (in the absence of mem) a substituted qoph, explaining their arithmetical values as ordinal and cardinal numbers, videlicet 3, 1, 4, and 100.

In fact, that Agendath Netaim appears here as well:

HORNBLOWER: (In ephod and huntingcap, announces.) And he shall carry the sins of the people to Azazel, the spirit which is in the wilderness, and to Lilith, the nighthag. And they shall stone him and defile him, yea, all from Agendath Netaim and from Mizraim, the land of Ham.

^

Why Did England Turn to the UN in 1947?

Einat Wilf, together with Adi Schwartz, has just had a new book published.  Entitled The War of  Return, it seeks to explain, as its subtitle reads: How Western Indulgence of the Palestinian Dream Has Obstructed the Path to Peace. It seems to be an important contribution to the pushback against the maliciousness and malignant misrepresentations of Arab propaganda.

An excerpt can be found here.

There is a typo which caught my eye which reads that

the Mandate, which was given to Britain in 1920 by the newly created League of Nations

That should be, arguably, 1922. True, the Mandate was decided upon in 1920 by a decision of the Supreme Council of the League of Nations at its conference in San Remo but it was phrased in general language, that “a Mandatory” be responsible for putting the Balfour Declaration into effect but without formally naming Great Britain. It was only in 1922 that the British Mandate, with all its 25 Articles, came into force voted upon by the full plenum of the League of 50 countries.  There is even an opinion that it was only in 1923 that the mandates administrating the countries evolving from the vanquished Turkish Ottoman empire came into force. 

But what caught my brain was this

The violent intercommunal struggle between Jews and Arabs, which started almost at the outset of British rule in the 1920s, eventually exhausted Britain, which decided to refer the question of Palestine to the United Nations 

That surely is wrong.

Between August 1939 and August 1947, there was no “intercommunal conflict” between Jews and Arabs. The Arabs had already gained their political goals in 1939 with the publication in May of the infamous White Paper which unilaterally altered the terms of the 1922 Mandate from reconstituting a Jewish National Home to establishing a state in Palestine, restricted land purchaces and severely curtailed Jewish immigration.

As stated therein:

Palestine was not to be converted into a Jewish State...His Majesty's Government...objective is self government, and to see established ultimately an independent Palestine State. It should be a State in which the two peoples in Palestine, Arabs and Jews, share authority in government in such a way that the essential interests of each are shared. 

There was, of course, normative Arab acts of murder, rape, theft and property damage against Jews but not in any organized fashion nor as part of acts conducted at the direction of a political command.  

The May 15, 1948 British White Paper is clear on who caused them to turn to the United Nations in early 1947:

a campaign of terrorism waged by highly organized Jewish forces equipped with all the weapons of the modern infantryman. Since the war, 338 British subjects had been killed in Palestine, while the military forces there had cost the British taxpayer 100 million pounds. 

That is, the underground war declared by Yair and the Lechi beginning in 1940, the revolt of the Irgun declared by Menachem Begin in 1944 and the United Resistance Movement of the Palmach and Hagana when they joined the Irgun and Lechi during 1945-1946.

I look forward to reading the book in its entirety.

^

On the Anti-Zionist Crusades’ Crusade

Reading Emma Kellman’s 2014 paper, Politicized Historiography and the Zionist- Crusader Analogy, one may assume, mistakenly, that the attempt of Arab propagandists and their Jewish supporters to apply an anology, that Zionism is like the Crusades and will be ended as a foreign colonialist phenomenon, are from the post-1967 period and relate only to the territories Israel assumed administration over as a result of the Six Days War.

It is not that she doesn’t provide evidence otherwise but you might miss the brief mentions.

So here are three.

In his book, The Origins of Israeli Mythology: Neither Canaanites Nor Crusaders, David Ohana notes two pre-state sources for the Arab comparison of Zionism with the fate of the Crusaders.

The first is from the introduction of Said Ali el-Hariri`s Arabic “El-Ahbar el-Sniyeh Pi el-Harub el-Tzliviyeh” (The Cautionary Tale of the Crusader Wars), Cairo 1899, p. 6 when he observes that the aggressiveness of the European rulers toward the Ottoman rulers 

“bears an amazing resemblance to the actions of the crusaders in the past.” 

A second is just prior to the 1948 War of Independence, in a book published in Damascus, Vadia Talhok, “Al-Tslivia al-Jedira Pi Falestin” (The New Crusaders in Palestine), Damascus 1948 which contains a comparison of the Christian colonialism of the Middle Ages with the Anglo-French and Zionist colonialism. His conclusion is that 

“we shall cleanse Palestine of the star of David just as we cleansed it of the crusades.” 

Eli Kavon notes a third instance:

In September 1947, Jewish officials pleaded with the leaders of the Arab League to make peace with the emerging State of Israel. The League rebuffed the offer, claiming the Arabs would eject the Jews of Palestine as the Muslims had thrown the Crusaders out of the Middle East centuries before.

In fact, Ohana references several Israeli scholars debating the relevancy of the comparison in the 1950s. He also quotes from a 1955 interview with Arnold Toynbee with Uri Avneri which appeared under the title “Don’t Repeat the Mistakes of the Philistines and the Crusaders.” Toynbee had considered Zionism as a modern form of colonialism. He requested Israelis not to rely of rifles and bayonets and noted: 

“You have to learn the history of the country and even that of the crusaders, for example, for it belongs to you.” 

So, the imagery is old and it applies to Israel in any geographical configuration.

^

My San Remo Conference Decision Timeline

Nov. 9, 1914 -  "ultimate destiny of Palestine" is deliberated at British Cabinet.

Jan. 28, 1915 - "Future of Palestine" Memorandum to Prime Minister Asquith to establish a Jewish centre in Palestine

Nov. 2, 1917 - Balfour Declaration

Feb. 2, 1919 - Zionist delegation submits proposal Paris Peace Conference "to reconstitute the Jewish National Home " in Palestine.

Apr. 25, 1920 - San Remo Conference decides a Mandate of Palestine be awarded to Gt. Britain.

Jul. 22, 1922 - League of Nations appoints Gt. Britain as the Mandatory Power over Palestine.

Sep. 29, 1923 - Palestine Mandate formally takes effect.

_________

P.S.  While Article 95 of the Treaty of Sèvres was the next international contractual agreement to follow San Remo, signed on August 10, 1920, adopted the main principles of the British Balfour Declaration regarding Palestine as fixed in the San Remo Agreement, that the High Contracting Parties agree to entrust the administration of Palestine to a Mandatory to be selected by the said Powers; that the Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the Balfour Declaration in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, it was never ratified by Turkey as Mustafa Kemal had led a revolt to replace the Turkish government. A new treaty was arranged, the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne. By that time, the League of Nations had awarded Gt. Britan the Mandate over Palestine.

_______________

Colin Shindler.

A paraellel version.

^

1920 - The Year The `Conflict` Commenced

The Arabs` conflict with Israel and Zionism did not begin with a supposed conquest and occupation in 1967 nor was it in 1948, the year of the creation of the state of Israel its start. Neither was it 1929 as claimed by Hillel Cohen, for example, when three weeks of murderous riots swept the Palestine Mandate and Arabs killed and raped hundreds of Jews. And by `conflict` I mean not only an ideological confrontation which the PLO Charter marks as the year 1917 when the Balfour Declaration was issued or the first instances of violence over property and land purchaes, as in Jerusalem in 1851 or at Petah Tikva in 1886, among many cases of clashes which led to the murder or injuring of Jews some I have listed here.  My intention is the critical moment when the aspirations of Jews, the intentions of the British and the wishes of the Arabs came together and the result made it quite obvious that from this moment on there would be continued tensions of a political, economic, diplomatic and security character with only one winner.

The conflict commenced in 1920 when the three main actors, the Jews, the Arabs and the British clashed during the Passover holiday in the streets and alleyways of Jerusalem. Present were British military government commanders such as Ronald Storrs and Louis Bols; Arabs such as the future Mufti Amin Al-Husseini and Zionists including Pinchas Rutenberg and Ze`ev Jabotinsky.

While the claim is heard that the McMahon-Hussei Correspondence that began in July 1915, pointed to a British willingness to allot the area of Palestine to become part of a grand Arab State, the fact is that already at the end of June, British policy as contained in the De Bunsen Report was firm that Palestine was a special case and needed to be treated as a separate issue as regards post-War negotiations if Turkey would be defeated. In fact, Gt. Britain needed to retain Palestine in its sphere.

On December 1917, a month after the publication of the Balfour Declaration and the establishment of the Jewish Legion, General Edmund Allenby entered Jerusalem, ending four centuries of Moslem Ottoman Empire rule, although military actions continued into September including in the area of Transjordan in which Jabotinsky and the Jewish Legion participated when they captured E-Salt. A Military Government, "Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (South)", was set up. In mid-April 1918, the seven members of the Zionist Commission arrives in the country determined to assure that the country follow the British policy decision to reconstitute the historic Jewish homeland.

By early May, Jaffa Arabs established a Muslim-Christian Association (MCA) established in Jaffa and their anti-Zionist activity was set about in earnest. The lines of the conflict-to-come were being drawn. In fact, the occasion of the marking of the first anniversary of the Balfour Declaration by processions of Jewish school children on November 2, 1918 developed into scenes of Arab ruffians, encouraged by the Arab Mayor and other officials, assaulting them. Jabotinsky wrote that there was a pogrom atmosphere and decried the lack of essential British security personnel.

In June 1918, representing the Zionist Commission, Weizmann traveled to southern Transjordan there to meet Faisal, a move originally suggested by General Gilbert Clayton already in February 1918. The intention was to create a mutual understanding that would result in an agreement between the two whereby both an Arab Kingdom and Jewish settlement in Palestine could proceed. That was followed in October with a meeting between Nahum Sokolov and Faisal and the talks then culminated in January 1919. 

At the June 4 meeting, Weizmann, true to his overly moderate position, let Faisal know that the Jews did not wish to establish a Jewish State in Palestine, but were willing to live under the suzerainty of Great Britain, and there was no intention of ousting anybody out of the country. For his part, Faisal stated that he quite realized the value of the Jews to Palestine, and that he himself was quite sympathetic to Jewish national aspirations. Despite the future January 3, 1919 agreement which was based on a two-state solution, an Arab state to include the entire area of Syria, Lebanon, Transjordan, Iraq and Saudi Arabia or as Faisal described it: as stretching north of Alexandretta until the shores of the Indian Ocean in the south, and a Jewish Palestine, Faisal`s future removal from his Damascus throne in 1920 dashed those hopes.  

In the meantime, between June 10 and July 21, 1919, the King-Crane Commission, sponsored by the American Administration, was visiting the area of Palestine, Lebanon and Syria. Its report, delivered to the Paris Peace Conference, was quite negative to Zionism and buoyed Arab aspirations of ending what they viewed as Zionist encroachment in Palestine.

Early on during his 1918 visit, Weizmann needed to offset Arab propaganda, both locally and in a meeting with the Sultan of Egypt. The charge was that the Zionists were planning to replace the Dome of the Rock with a Temple. This potential religious-activated fuse that could lead to an explosion was deeply imbedded in the Moslem distrust of Jewish designs. The British brought in to Jerusalem from Egypt a special all Moslem unit, mainly of Indian soldiers serving in the Expeditionary Force, to guard the Temple Mount. As Robert Mazza footnotes, according to PRO FO 371/3061 War Office to Headquarters Cairo, London, 21 November 1917, the Prime Minister  instructed Allenby that in his first announcement regarding the ‘occupation of Jerusalem in House of Commons...(that) you entered Holy
City on foot…That Mosque of Omar and area around it has been placed under exclusive Moslem control.’  Thus, the issue of the holy sites and their status quo was already a high profile matter.  Weizmann did, however, propose to the British in May that the Zionists be permitted to purchase the Western Wall and its forecourt. That request was rejected by Gilbert F. Clayton, first Chief Administrator of Palestine, in June.

The scheme was taken up again in 1918, but again opposition arose and again it was abandoned. After the April 1920 Riots, the matter was discussed by the Palin Commission as just at that time, Moslems had been engaged in repairing the upper courses of the wall. That led to complaints by the Jewish community. The Zionist Commission protested to Colonel Storrs in a May 16 letter that the act of repairing the wall by the Moslems is a 'sacrilege'. Some six weeks after the riots, on May 30, Rabbi Kook wrote that the Temple area and the whole of the Mount are "bound in the end to revert to us" and asks the Government to entrust the Wailing Wall "to the care and control of the Representatives of Jewry: and any reparations that shall be required we shall carry out ourselves". 

The Jerusalem Rabbinate also wrote to Storrs on June 2 that the "The Holy Wall, the Wailing Wall is the property of Israel as far as the heavens and no other person or persons is allowed to touch it...At the same time we beg to declare our right to recognize the sacredness of the whole Moriah and Temple area; we are sure that the day will come and God will deliver his people; and our Holy Temple will be rebuilt in its glory as in the days of old...". For the British, all this was quite suspicious. They took the view, however, that as regards the Western Wall, Jews, while claiming it as their possession, they have no claim in law for the wall together with the rest of the Haram is the property of the Sultan of Turkey. For the Moslems the Jewish attitude regarding the Temple Mount quite an affront.

In addition to the above-mentioned MCA, Amin al-Husseini had opened a branch of the Syrian-based 'Arab Club' (El-Nadi al-Arabi) in Jerusalem on November 18 which was countered by the Nashashibi-clan`s 'Literary Club' (Al-Muntada al-Adabi). There were four other societies in Jerusalem alone. The self-inflicted internal dissension and rivalry was thus born, despite a Supreme Committee of the Arab Societies in Palestine being established in November 1919 in Haifa, which proved fatal for Arab Palestinian unity throughout the Mandate years and leading to assassinations and internal terror over the next two decades and more. Moreover, during this time and into the 1920s, the Arab claim was that Palestine was but the region of Southern Syria and the demand was for Palestine to be rejoined with Syria and not become itself independent.

In late December 1918, an Eretz Yisrael Conference was convened in Jaffa with the participation of 114 delegates and produced a scheme for a provisional government for the country. Notably, it adopted the principle of national community autonomy and the equality of the Hebrew and Arabic languages. On the other side of the divide, the first Palestine Arab Congress was held in Jerusalem at the end of January and the first week of February 1919. Its resolutions confirmed the Syrian orientation: 

"We consider Palestine nothing but part of Arab Syria and it has never been separated from it at any stage…tied to it by national, religious, linguistic, moral, economic, and geographic bounds…Our district Southern Syria or Palestine should be not separated from the Independent Arab Syrian Government and be free from all foreign influence".

All during 1918 and throughout 1919, the Jewish Yishuv was also organizing itself and reestablishing various representative bodies such as City Councils (Va`ad HaIr), parties, teachers` unions and trade labor assemblies. In Jerusalem in April a Rabbinical Assembly was founded. On July 24, 1918, a foundation-stone laying ceremony was conducted on Mount Scopus for the future Hebrew University. On the eve of Succot, Zichron Yaakov was liberated. The Third Wave of Aliyah began in 1919, with approximately 40,000 Jews coming to Palestine over the following four years.

In Versailles outside Paris, the Peace Conference took place from mid-January and on February 27, the Zionist delegation made its proposals. The Land of Israel borders were to reach to the Litani River in the north, in the south, a line from a point near Akaba to El Arish and to the east, just west of the Hejaz Railway. But those were not to be. The Balfour Declaration would be implemented through the High Contracting Parties recognizing the historic title of the Jewish people to Palestine and the right of the Jews to reconstitute in Palestine their national home and that the sovereign possession of Palestine shall be vested in the League of Nations and the Government entrusted to Great Britain as Mandatory of the League. 

Faisal, in correspondence with Felix Frankfurter, continued to express a sympathy with Zionist aims. It was becoming apparent, however, that Faisal`s political aims, upon which he had stipulated his agreement to accept Zionist goals, were being stymied and that would ultimately lead to a collapse of nascent Jewish-Arab cooperation.

On July 2, 1919, the Syrian Congress, representing prominent Arab families in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine, adopted a resolution rejecting French rights to Syria, claiming Lebanon and Palestine as inseparable parts of Syria, and opposed Jewish immigration. This began to influence events in British-occupied Palestine. Earlier, at the end of March, British authorities in Palestine had denied Arabs a permit to demonstrate against Zionism. On October 25, 1919, a public statement by the MCA spoke of their opposition to giving their land to Zionist emigrants wishing to appropriate their land. 

This came after a meeting between Menachem Ussishkin and Musa Kazim al-Huseini, effectively the mayor of Jerusalem, on October 8, when al-Husseini was bluntly told that Palestine would be separated from Syria and under British protection to which he replied: "We demand no separation from Syria".  Throughout 1919, the pan-Syrian national theme was the only political goal of the Arabs of Palestine. The slogan at that time was "Unity, Unity, From the Taurus [Mountains] to Rafah [in Gaza], Unity, Unity."

Colonel Richard Meinertzhagen, then still on active military duty, foresaw in March 1919, as he wrote to Lloyd George, that the Jews and Arabs would clash in the future and suggested investing British trust in the loyalty of the Jews. He also advised that "the Palestine Administration must be purged of those elements hostile to Zionism." These opinions got him appointed Chief Political Officer in August 1919. By this time, the population of the territory, not including Transjordan was estimated to be 639,000 of which 512,090 were Moslems, 61,000 Christians and 66,100 Jews. Samaritans residing in Nablus numbered 153. There was a Jewish majority in Jerusalem since the 1860s.

By late 1919, the reports of agents engaged in intelligence work for the Zionists were indicating a rise in the active hostility developing among the Arab population. Even a letter which used the phrase to describe Zionist intentions as a Jewish State "as Jewish as England is English" written by a Joseph Cohen in a letter to The Times of September 19th, 1919 was later noted as a contributory factor in the increase of Arab anger. On November 27, 1919, a protest against Zionism was sent to the U.S. Consulate offices in Haifa which including a direct threat of violence: ‘We hereby declare that we are not responsible for any trouble or disorder that may occur in this country as a consequence of the obvious general excitement and dissatisfaction.’ Jabotinsky was requested by Weizmann, who had returned to the country in October, to begin efforts to raise a self-defense unit as he had done in Odessa in 1905, and based on his military service in the Legion. On December 22, Tel Hai was attacked by marauding Bedouins who were rebelling against the French forces and Schneur Shapushnik was killed. On February 2, in another attack on Tel Hai, Aharon Sher was killed. In January 1920, at a meeting held at Nablus, the Supreme Committee of Arab Societies, decided to boycott economic Jewish activities (Islamic–Christian Conference to American Representative, Nablus, Jan. 16, 1920)

The French pressure to oppose Faisal`s promoted reign in Damascus began to affect the pro-Syrian elements in Palestine as did the non-publication of the King-Crane Commission report of the previous summer. The Damascus Congress in March had declared independence, naming Faisal as King of Syria and Palestine (and his brother Abdullah as King of Mesopotamia). Parallel to these developments, in Palestine itself, on February 27, non-violent demonstrations took place in Jerusalem, Jaffa and Haifa. Shops closed down and the British district officials were presented with petitions. In Jerusalem, an estimated one thousand protesters marched, carrying banners with slogans such as "Stop Zionist Immigration" and "Our Country For Us".

The Palin Report at Paragraph 49 described it so: The demonstration which was attended by between two and three thousand persons, passed off quietly and the police kept the people well in hand, in spite of a provocative incident by the Jews in starting the Hatikva, the Jewish National Anthem as the procession was passing the Jewish Blind School.

On March 1, Tel Hai in the Upper Galilee, which did not receive promised reinforcements, was overrun, a casualty of the Franco-Syrian War. Joseph Trumpeldor was killed as he defended the settlement along with five others that day. On March 8, a day after Faisal was proclaimed king of the Arab Kingdom of Syria in Damascus, a second demonstration occurred in Jerusalem, this time a more event while, in the midst of this, on March 6 (or 26) Yehoshua Hankin met with a group of Syrian nationalists in Jerusalem led by Najib Sfeir and obtains an understanding that Palestine will become a Jewish national home.

A Zionist intelligence report detailed the route of the demonstrators as exiting the Haram courtyard. Then being joined by Bethlehem Christians, they left the Old City through the Damascus Gate to the Augusta Victoria Hospice where the offices of the Military Governor were, located on the Mount of Olives, and then back down passing in front of foreign consulates. Coming back to the municipality building, speeches were made. Jewish passers-byes were attacked and five were injured five before the Arabs being dispersed. The slogans shouted out were "Death to Jews" or "Palestine is our land and the Jews are our dogs!"

The speeches were described as of a violently political character and there was a good deal of shouting against the Jews, and the temper of the mob was "decidedly nasty". There was some stone throwing. Even the Palin Report concludes that `there is no doubt that the attitude of the mob on this occasion was seditious and extremely threatening. The Chief Administrator issued a prohibition on further demonstrations on March 11. The newly-founded Haaretz daily was reporting on what was being published in the Arabic press and so the political intentions of the Arabs was clear for all. On March 24, Haaretz reported that at a meeting of the Vaad Hair (the Jewish town council) the previous night, it was noted that Arabs had been attacking Jews going to the Western Wall as well as Jewish passersby on Hebron Street.

The Jewish self-defence force, now overseen both by Jabotinsky and Pinchas Rutenberg, increased recruitment, training and obtaining of arms during March. By the end of the month, 600 volunteers had been absorbed. Rudimentary training was carried out at the Lemel School and exercises in military-style movement was conducted on the slope of Mt. Scopus in a purposeful attempt to goad the British into taking a more serious attitude to the question of Jewish security.  However, the elections, set for April 19, for the first Asefat Nivcharim (Representative Assembly] and especially women`ssuffrage was the main focus of attention (over which Jabotinsky got into an argument with Rabbi A.Y. Kook as Jabotinsky argued for full representation of women in the electoral process whereas Rabbi Kook opposed women participating in the elections).

The first week of April brought together three holidays and a festival: Passover, Easter and Nebi Mussa. April 2 was Good Friday. For the Jews, Passover began Friday evening. The Moslems would mark Nebi Mussa. Jerusalem was as a magnet; all congregating into the city. The Nebi Mussa procession, with band and banners and marches was conducted on the Friday and Saturday without any violence. However, Sunday developed into a day of blood.

As described in the Palin Report, the Nebi Mussa procession halted in the Jaffa road outside the Jaffa Gate to hear speeches delivered by Sheikh Aref al-Aref. He was the editor of the Suriya al-Janubiya (Southern Syria) newspaper, the organ of the al-Nadi al-'Arabi. After the events, he was arrested and charged with incitement, but taking advantage of being let out on bail, he escaped to Syria together with his fellow conspirator Haj Amin al-Husseini. The crowd then halted further up the road and heard more speeches of a political character delivered from the balconies of the municipality and the Nadi el Arabi Club by the Mayor and other prominent Moslems, culminating in the portrait of Emir Feisal being displayed. Shouts of "King of Syria and Palestine" went up. The portrait was then carried in the procession with the flags.

By this time, the crowd had gotten itself into a highly self-inflamed condition and were being whipped up towards a frenzy. They moved off to the Jaffa Gate, the police moving them along. Someone had been filming opposite the Amdursky Hotel (inside the Jaffa Gate) with groups dancing with sword play.

The violence seems to have exploded, literally, when, at a point outside the gate somewhere between Christaki's Pharmacy and the Credit Lyonnais Bank, something was set off. The exact incident which caused the explosion has not been clearly ascertained but on the evidence of Messrs. Russell and Perrott, the report points to the origin of the affair as being an attack by a Moslem on some person in the crowd whose part was then taken by a Jewish soldier.

Here is what Khalil al-Sakakini recalled watching:

[A] riot broke out, the people began to run about and stones were thrown at the Jews…there were screams…I saw one Hebronite approach a Jewish shoeshine boy, who hid behind a sack in one of the wall’s comers next to Jaffa Gate, and take his box and beat him over the head. He screamed and began to run…The riot reached its zenith. All shouted, ‘Muhammad’s religion was born with the sword’ … my soul is nauseated and depressed.

The understaffed police forces proved to be very ineffective. After an hour and a half, troops were brought in. Another two hours would pass before calm was restored.

Jabotinsky and 19 other members of the Hagana were arrested, tried and sentenced to jail terms, with Jabotinsky receiving no less than 15 years as he was convicted of possessing arms. Arrested on April 7, Jabotinsky spent the rest of April, all of May and June in Acco Prison with his fellow self-defense activists. After protest, they were released on July 7. Aref and al-Husseini were charged with inciting the Arab crowds with an inflammatory speech and sentenced by military court held in camera to ten years imprisonment in absentia, since he had already violated his bail by fleeing to Transjordan to avoid arrest.

Beyond the immediate loss of life and property, the threat to the essential Zionist project became apparent. In an April 12 letter to Allenby, Bols, seeking to deflect harsh criticism of his conduct, suggested that the Zionist Commission be dissolved and called it an `irritant to the native (Arab) population`. It had become a quasi-government, he asserted, mirroring the departments of the Military Administration. Zionists were `being privileged and all the way were complaining of British prejudice and bias towards them`. Lieutenant-Colonel L.R. Waters-Taylor, the Military Administration`s finance advisor, was proven to have been also an advisor to Amin el Husseini. 

Within just two months, matters turned around. Herbert Samuel arrived to assume the position of High Commissioner and on April 24, the San Remo Conference decision confirmed Britain`s Mandate over Palestine. Nevertheless, the administration he inherited was far from being apro-Zionist and Balfour Declaration-supporting. 

One odd conclusion of these events culminating in the Riots is that of Mazza:

With the creation of political organisations on both sides - the Zionists with the Zionist Commission, later to become the Jewish Agency, and the formation of Muslim-Christian associations and later Arab societies - and the absence of political institutions, violence became a tool for political communication. 

In the first place Arab violence responding to Jewish national actions, such as purchasing property and farming preceded 1920 by almost 70 years. In the second, Jews built up a very complex political structure in Mandate Palestine. The Arabs did not, leaving political mainly to the Mufti although there were political parties if ineffective due to rivalries of the noble/notable families and clans.

Although the Military Administration ended on June 30, 1920, the direction taken by Samuel and subsequent officials was to prove inherently corrosive. 

In the June 25, 1920 issue the The Sentinel, based on a report of the J.C.B. (Jewish Correspondence Bureau forerunner of the JTA), Menachem Ussishkin presumed this is what would happen

M. M. Ussishkin, the noted Russian Zionist leader who has just returned from an extended stay in Palestine, declares that the situation there is steadily improving. The English government and the Zionists have arrived at the following program with regard to the future of Palestine : Immigration will be carried on, on a broad scale and will be controlled by the Zionists. The purchase of land will be centralized by the Zionists through their acquirement of istateland. All inhabitants will have complete internal cultural and judicial autonomy. The boundaries will extend to the Litany river and the Hedjas railway. A great national loan will have to be raised and the budget for next year will amount to 300,000 pounds. The regular transportation of immigrants at the rate of 3,000 monthly will commence in autumn and will be gradually increased. The Jewish Assembly in Palestine which will soon open will be made the supreme legislative body.

In reality, Transjordan was separated from the territory of the Jewish National Home, anti-Zionist officials remained (such as ET Richmond), a second round of riots broke out in May 1921 and in Jerusalem in November 1921 and in June 1922, the Churchill White Paper was published which indicated that

it is the intention of His Majesty's government to foster the establishment of a full measure of self government in Palestine. But they are of the opinion that, in the special circumstances of that country, this should be accomplished by gradual stages and not suddenly.

and as for Jewish arrivals, 

immigration cannot be so great in volume as to exceed whatever may be the economic capacity of the country at the time to absorb new arrivals. 

Moreover, it starkly declared that

what is meant by the development of the Jewish National Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community

and furthermore

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'

The path further on to the November 1928 Status Quo White Paper, the 1929 pogroms, the 1930 Passfield White Paper and the 1939 White Paper was thus set.


Another earlier complementary version of this appears here.

^