Talk:'Ajjur

Image

There is a new image of an old Arab house in the Hebrew wiki of Agur, Israel.Tushyk (talk) 11:47, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Identification

Modern sources do not give an ancient identification for this place. For example, the standard catalogue of Tsafrir, Tabula Imperii Romani Iudaea Palaestina lists it without identification. Cohen and Kliot, Place names in Israel's ideological struggle over the administered territories, Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 82(4), 1992, pp. 653-680, explicitly says that Yagur has no modern identification. Ran Zadok, A Preliminary Analysis of Ancient Survivals in Modern Palestinian Toponymy, Mediterranean Language Review, Vol. 9 (1995-1997), pp. 93-171, says that the Arabic name of this place is a type of cucumber that was common across the region. Zero^talk 03:17, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Another suggestion for the location of Yagur of Josh 15:23 was made by Abel in 1938: Tel 'Ira in the Beersheva valley. It has no modern support that I can see. A more modern suggestion by Avi Yonah ca. 1990 is al-Jura at 107/119 (not the al-Jura near Jerusalem). Both these are far south of Ajjur. This 1980 article also places it far south of Ajjur , without suggesting a specific location. Zero^talk 05:52, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Zero0000, thanks for your input, and, as usual, it is always very pertinent. As for the identification of the biblical town "Yagur" (English: Jagur), it is fair to say that great minds have tackled the subject, those, mind you, who are very qualified archaeologists or men of academic standing simply interested in the historical geography of the country. It is no secret that scholars are often in dispute as to the identification of old biblical sites, seeing that much is based on a certain amount of guess-work and speculation, based on similar sounding phonemes in Arabic place names. Still, we can rest assured that many of their identifications have proven to be accurate, such as Saelon being the biblical Shiloh; Khirbet Shifat being Jotapata (Heb. Yudfat), Saffuriya being Sepphoris, etc., etc. Benjamin Maisler, also known as Benjamin Mazar (1906-1995), is not a "light-weight" when it comes to historical geography, especially when nearly ALL of his findings are still supported today by modern archaeologists. Take for example his work on Beit Shearim, Ein Gedi, the Ophel in Jerusalem, etc. He can be called the "father of archaeology" in Israel. Now, when you take his credentials, along with the names of the other great scholars mentioned in the article I used as a source, names such as Samuel Klein, Yeshayahu Press (on him, see the Hebrew Wikipedia: [1]), Dr. A.J. Brawer (1884-1975) (on him, see [2]) and Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, you are left with a formidable group of minds that have considered the evidence available to them and have reached their conclusions that Jagur is to be identified with 'Ajjur, a frontier village near the places where Esau's progeny had come to settle. Even if they should have been mistaken, their view is still a legitimate view, and as good as any other, and, in fact, better than those who have no view at all. As to the reasons why I'd support their identification of Jagur with 'Ajjur is very simple. Josephus, in his "Antiquities" and "Jewish War," often mentions the settlements of the Idumaeans in his day, or what was then known as Upper Idumea. A quick examination reveals that these same Idumaean villages, lo and behold, all happen to be villages located directly south and southwest of Jerusalem, such as Hebron (Wars 4.9.7), Halhul, in Greek called Alurus (Wars 4.9.6), Marissa (Antiq. 13.9.1, Wars 1.2.5), Dura (Adorayim) (Antiq. 13.9.1, Wars 1.2.5), Caphethra (Wars 4.9.9), Bethletephon (Wars 4.8.1), and others. You may also wish to see 1 Maccabees 13:20. The Book of Joshua (15:21) says explicitly that Jagur was a village belonging to the Tribe of Judah, but bordered on the frontier with Edom (Idumea). The evidence, therefore, is quite conclusive that Jagur could have easily been a village near to these aforementioned sites, and, indeed, which it is. They (the said archaeologists) would have never said that Jagur in Joshua 15:21 is to be identified with 'Ajjur had it not been for the fact that Bronze-Age potsherds and artifacts found on the site support this view.Davidbena (talk) 16:05, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Davidbena: On reflection, I don't think that your 1932 identifications list should be cited at all. From what I can tell, it was primarily a list compiled for political purposes, to impress and pressure the mandatory government. Because of that, there would have been an irresistible motive to include as many locations as possible and no motive to distinguish between solid identifications and speculative identifications. Moreover, we don't need it as there is a large literature of better-informed opinion by modern experts. As I have shown, the modern opinion is that Yagur was further south. Incidentally, I have ordered a book with a chapter on Ajjur and will report here if it has anything interesting. Ajjur was first excavated in 1957/8 and it will be interesting to know what the findings were. Zero^talk 07:11, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Incidentally, the identifications you mentioned were all made in the 19th century. Zero^talk 07:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Zero0000, on the contrary, if I wanted to impress a foreign government about making name changes in a country, I would not seek to over-burden them with a long, seemingly endless and burdensome list of names hardly known to them, but would only select a handful at the most, and those that were the most well-known in the list - names that were known even among the non-Jews who serve in governmental positions (e.g. Hebron instead of al-Khalil). Here, by bringing down the entire list of place names, their intent was mostly to instruct other Jews serving in positions of authority within the British Mandate Government that whenever they refer in writing to such places, they should strive to make use only of the traditional Jewish names of these places. Their second point, of course, was to publish the findings in their days about these same towns and villages, and to show in a systematic manner how that the Arab names are often "corruptions" of older Hebrew names, and which, too, is knowledge that should not be lost, but preserved in our Jewish legacy. After all said and done, I have considered your earlier statements about the identity of this place, and whether or not 'Ajjur is to be identified with the biblical Yagur. I agree with your assertion that we must be extremely careful about asserting things as fact, when they may be, in actuality, in the realm of speculation, and especially whenever the thing in question is disputed. So, in a spirit of comradery and compromise (such that would be expected from cordial collaborative editing), can we both agree on the following edit?

"Although not conclusive, Israeli historian and biblical archaeologist Benjamin Mazar identified the site with "Jagur" mentioned in the Book of Joshua (15:21), and which once lay on the frontier of Edom. Others place Jagur further south."

Of course, this would require of us to slightly alter the wording further along in the same paragraph, which reads: "The village of 'Ajjur itself was built during early Fatimid rule in the region in the early twelfth century CE." The sentence should rather be changed to read: "`Ajjur was a thriving village during the early Fatimid rule, in the early twelfth century CE." (It is not yet clear if the Arab inhabitants built their village upon the site of a then deserted Jewish-Idumaean village, or whether it had been consecutively occupied by tenants - Roman or otherwise - before the Muslim conquest of Palestine).Davidbena (talk) 13:57, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Zero0000:, I have given this subject more thought over this past Sabbath. While perusing through Joshua chapter 15, it became evident to me that there are four distinct regions of the country that are discussed in that chapter and which belong to the Tribe of Judah: (a) "the uttermost cities" (Josh. 15:21-32), of which cities Jagur is included; (b) "[the cities] in the valley" (Josh. 15:33-47), and which has been explained to mean from the foothills of the mountains to the coastal plains; (c) "[the cities] in the mountains" (Josh. 15:48-60); (d) "[the cities] in the wilderness" (Josh. 15:61-62). Now, as anyone can tell you who knows about the identified cities of Eshtaol, Zoreah, Zanoah, Adullam and Socoh (Josh. 15:33-35), and which cities are mentioned as being in "the valley", we can conclude from here that the Arab village of 'Ajjur (which is located very close to these same cities in "the valley") cannot be the "Jagur" in the Book of Joshua, since he places it among "the uttermost cities." I now retract my statement that the Jagur of Joshua may have been the village Ajjur, since it obviously does not fit in the same category of those villages, which were presumably further south. It seems that the border of Edom was, at the time of Joshua (i.e in ca. 13th-century BCE), much further south than Hebron, yet by the time the 1st century CE came along (when Josephus wrote his Antiquities) the Idumaeans had already migrated further north and had reached Hebron and the adjoining regions, for which reason Josephus mentions them as occupying the region directly south and southwest of Jerusalem where is now located Ajjur. I commend you over your intuition and reluctance to accept Jagur as the place that it was proposed to be, without sufficient evidence. Indeed, as editors of this worthy venue, Wikipedia, we ought to strive for pinpoint accuracy, whenever that is possible.Davidbena (talk) 19:33, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

old Church, is it on 'Ajjur land?

Byzantine Mosaic, "Horbat Midras"

A church with magnificent Byzantine mosaics have been excavated at what the Israelis call "Horbat Midras":

• Ganor, Amir; Klein, Alon; Avner, Rina; Zissu, Boaz (2012-02-09). "Horbat Midras" (124). Hadashot Arkheologiyot – Excavations and Surveys in Israel. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
• grid = 1437/1184
• Kh ed Druseh on SWP 20,
• SWPIII, p. 280
• Palmer, p.370, "he ruin of obliterated paths"
• named Durusya on 1940s maps
• apparently greatly damaged in the 749 Galilee earthquake
• Pictures on commons:
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Hirbat_Midras (See especially the "Hirbat Midras mosaic‎")

The HA article says this is close to Moshav Zafririm, Khalidi tells me that this is on 'Ajjur land (the site is 3-4 km south of 'Ajjur site), presently part of the Adullam-France Park?? or Adullam Grove Nature Reserve??? Strange, none of those articles mentions anything about a church.

My question; is Kh ed Druseh/Horbat Midras on what was 'Ajjur land?

Also; the Ganor et al 2012 article says that: "In the Byzantine period, particularly in the fifth–sixth centuries CE, a small Christian community was residing at the site, which had a church in its northern part". I find this difficult to believe; look at those mosaics! If a "small" community could afford this, then it must have been a "small" community ...of fifth–sixth centuries billionaires. Also: "In March 2011, in the aftermath of the excavation, unknown individuals vandalized parts of the church’s mosaic floor that was exposed in the excavation". Who the hell does such a thing? Baboons? And I am so not impressed with the authorities leaving these magnificent mosaics open and exposed to vandalism. :(

See also https://www.biblewalks.com/midras; they parrot Ganor et al "small community".

I would greatly appreciate any comments here; cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)