Jump to content

Talk:Holy Fire

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Revert

[edit]

This revert of information and terminology used by the source cited says merely "anachronism". Care to explain further? Tiamut (talk) 05:32, 31 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"an important element of the identity expression of the local Palestinian Christian"
The article linked is about Palestinians (the ethno-nationalist group) who are Christians, not about the history of Christianity in Palestine. I'm also confused by what "identity expression" means. The source is talking about Crusaders, and doesn't seem relevant. Did you find the source by searching for quotations?ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 01:16, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No. The source was provided by @User:Richard Nevell during a search for information on the article Palestinian identity here. As it discussed the Holy fire, I added material from it here, to expand upon later.
If your problem is simply with the fact that it links to Palestinian Christians and that group is today a part of the Palestinians whose identity has come to be defined in more national terms, I don't really know what to say. These are the same people. Christianity began in Palestine. Tiamut (talk) 04:16, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Is this a response written by ai?ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 13:36, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is the second time you baselessly accuse me of using AI. I don't use it, ever. Please engage the content we are discussing. Tiamut (talk) 13:47, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's not baseless, I'm basing it on the fact that you repeatedly don't address the arguments written. Instead you repeat your own perspective in a way that suggests it was an automated response. Would you like to put your writing through an AI detection app?ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 13:52, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and do that. Now stop avoiding the content discussion. On the basis of what Wikipedia policies are you excluding the info added in my edit? Tiamut (talk) 14:00, 1 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's an anarchronism.ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 12:44, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No it is not actually. And it is what the reliable source uses. Martyrs of Palestine is a 4th century text written by Eusebius who dedicated it to his countrymen who died for their faith. Tiamut (talk) 12:50, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that Eusebius dedicated the Martyrs to "THOSE Holy Martyrs of God, who loved our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ, and God supreme and sovereign of all, more than themselves and their own lives," not excluding martyrs unconnected to Palestine. I am not sure, for example, that Epiphanius of Salamis thought of himself as a "countryman" of Palestine; his countrymen were inhabitants of Salamis or, perhaps, of Constantinople. MarkBernstein (talk) 13:18, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is a good thing that we write articles according to how reliable sources present the subject, rather than your belief, as it happens to be wrong: The father of church history was Palestinian. Tiamut (talk) 14:31, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"I believe" is a polite and friendly expression in English. It is a fact that Eusebius dedicated the Martyrs to all "Holy Martyrs of God, who loved our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ." It is unlikely that Epiphanius of Salamis thought of himself as a 'countryman' of Palestine. It was fun to read Chance Bonar’s blog, but it's not a usable source and, you will note, says nothing about whether Eusebius looked on Palestine as a country, far less his country.
Your reply seems to have been calculated to increase tension. I believe that’s not what Holy Fire needs most. MarkBernstein (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Its an online journal and Bonar is a postdoctoral fellow.
The rest of your editorializing is irrelevant. And as ButterscotchBeluga points out below, the source being cited for the information I added to this article is indisputably reliable and uses "Palestinian Christian". The holy fire is a Palestinian liturgical practice. Tiamut (talk) 14:59, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Also a reminder to comment on content, not cast aspersions. Tiamut (talk) 15:00, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Palestine wasn't an established "country" by modern legal definitions, but historically "country" was a much broader term, roughly analogous to the idea of a "nation" or a general collective, similar to how "countryman" is a synonym for compatriot & doesn't inherently imply any officially shared state citizenry. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You linked to Palestinian Christians, which is about Christianity among the Palestinian people. While there is much debate about when Palestinians formed their national identity, the 9th century is obviously too early.ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 14:06, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
When they formed their national identity is irrelevant. The source uses Palestinian Christian, the article speaks about Palestinian Christians. Tiamut (talk) 14:32, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
While the national identity of Palestinians is more modern, Palestinian Christians is still the correct term, being Christians native to Palestine. Also Tiamut is correct in that we follow the sources, of which they clearly refer to them as Palestinian Christians. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
In the light of that source's "becoming a central element of Palestinian Christian identity at a time of relative isolation from Constantinople", I'm uncomfortable with both the recent descriptions in this article, "of the local Palestinian Christian community" and "the local Christian community". "Local" implies, or at least can very easily be read as implying, people in the immediate vicinity. The source doesn't use "local" and I can't see that we're justified in inserting it.
Whether we would best capture and communicate our source's meaning by "of the Palestinian Christian community", "of Palestinian Christians", "of Palestinian Christians" (if permiited by MOS:OLINK) or "of Christians in Palestine" is another matter. NebY (talk) 16:54, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hello NebY. I added "local" because the Franks became/referred to themselves as "Palestinian" (see Palestinian identity for an example) and I wanted to make clear the reference was not to them but instead to the Christian Melkites (and Syriacs) in Jerusalem and the wider region of Palestine. People like Sulayman al-Ghazzi and Michael Synkellos. Tiamut (talk) 17:17, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Rouxpetel, our secondary source, doesn't say the Franks became/referred to themselves as "Palestinian" and feels no need to make your distinction. He does quote a primary source, Fulcher, whose rhetorical flourishes ("reflect on how in our time God has turned the West into the East. For we who were once Westerners have now been turned into Easterners. He who was a Roman or a Frank has been transformed on this earth into a Galilean or a Palestinian") can't be a source for saying the Franks became or referred to themselves as "Easterners" or "Palestinians" and more importantly, don't impose on us any need to insert "local" contra our secondary source. Making one immediate implication to avoid the remote risk of another one is a cure worse than the disease.
Palestinian identity merely uses that same passage of Fulcher, taking it from and citing this same work by Rouxpetel. NebY (talk) 17:44, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I added the passage there (and there are several other sources that speak of Fulcher's statement and even analyze it in terms of national identity discourses in the Middle Ages here for example.
I don't have a problem with removing "local" though, I was just explaining the reasoning behind its addition. Tiamut (talk) 18:08, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Would you be okay with saying "the Christians of Palestine" instead of Palestinian Christians?ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 03:06, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What would that achieve? Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 03:09, 13 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@User:Ancient Greek Scribe has made an edit to that effect here. I appreciate the attempt at diffusing the tension, but remain concerned that Palestinian Christians should be written out of an article on a liturgical practice that continues in their holy city today. The fact that they now form part of a national Palestinian identity, rather than a merely geographic one, as eas the case at that time, does not change that they are basically the same people, carrying on the same tradition. It should not provoke such ire to wikilink to them. Sad really. Tiamut (talk) 09:25, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Your own opinions on nationalism shouldn't be leaking into articles.ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 09:32, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My opinions on nationalism are unknown to you and irrelevant here actually. For the umpteenth time, comment on content, not contributors.
The fact that an article on the Holy Fire, a longstanding custom in Jerusalem, commemorated by Palestinian Christians for more than a millennium without interruption does not include even one wikilink to that community is an example of systemic bias. Tiamut (talk) 09:35, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can you understand that including the hyperlink is anachronistic?ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 10:31, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's not anachronistic though, as I already explained above. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 11:38, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The source does not support that claim. It uses Palestinian Christians to mean Christians in Palestine. We're talking about over a thousand years ago, there was no nation states yet.ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 11:56, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is a bit surprising there might be no other such wikilink or place for one in the article, but the article seems to have the structural problems of incremental growth. For history since the Crusades, we have only one crowd crush and one scuffle in which a candle was blown out and a shoe taken. Do we not have reliable sources for the history and significance of the Holy Fire in the last 900 years? They might, and thus we might, mention whatever continuing significance it had and/or has for Palestinian Christians. NebY (talk) 12:20, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is of major significance to Palestinian Christians both historically and today. And I will try to make time to work on improving and expanding this article to make that clearer.
I would like to note though, that the broad consensus expressed here (and even by the editor who most recently introduced "Christians in Palestine" as a compromise , is that the sources do support using Palestinian Christian. And the fact that the only interest one editor has in this article is obstructing its use does not encourage me to undertake even more work just to get it added elsewhere. Tiamut (talk) 12:28, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For the first part, good! For the second, the issue is that the meaning of "Palestinian Christian" in our article Palestinian Christians may not be the meaning intended in our source, which can reasonably be read as expressing nothing more than "Christians in Palestine" or "Christian community in Palestine", and that it might therefore be inappropriate to link the phrase to that article. Of course, this being Wikipedia, where novice editors are encouraged to wikilink and often do so without any grasp of MOS:OVERLINK let alone issues such as this, deliberately not linking "Palestinian Christian" would be a fragile solution even if you and others found it acceptable. NebY (talk) 12:49, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Are you familiar with the history of Palestinian Christians? It is the same group of people, who were Aramaic or Arabic speakers (some of them Jewish before converting, others pagan), who were Hellenized and then Arabized. Some of this history is discussed in the article on this community. So I don't really understand how it might be "inappropriate". People can read the article and learn more about them. Its not like modern Palestinian Christians are imposters or something.Tiamut (talk) 13:00, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Our source, Rouxpetel's Nam qui fuimus Occidentales, nunc facti sumus Orientales. Baldwin of Boulogne: to conquer and rule,[1] focuses in part on "a group of Palestinian Christians, the spoudaioi". "Spoudaioi were Palestinian monks in charge of the Easter liturgy and more particularly of the nightly offices of the Anastasis", he writes. He provides some history of two spoudaioi, both from Cappadocia. He also identifies the Melkites with the spoudaioi (it's not clear to me whether that's in a one-to-one correspondence) and describes the Melkites as "the indigenous Chalcedonian Christians". Melkites can certainly be described as indigenous in the sense of communities or identities forming in that region, but it would be a reach to consider them a single ethnicity and it would be a reach on our part to assume Rouxpetel is going that far. Rouxpetel's use of the term "Palestinian monks" and "Palestinian Christian" in that paper to include Cappadocians and Melkites doesn't allow us to assume he means the people described in our Palestinian Christians" article as "united by a common ethnic and Christian identity". NebY (talk) 16:19, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
One of those Melkites in the monastery of spoudaioi, adjacent to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem was Michael Synkellos, born in Jerusalem and an Arab monk and later bishop who went to Constantinople where he died. Several Cappadocian born Christians did move to Jerusalem, lived and died there, and are called Palestinian in reliable sources, and even included in categories like Palestinian monks here at Wikipedia. The early Christian community in Palestine was (and still is in many ways) "ethnically" diverse. You will notice the wikilinks at the Palestinian Christian page link to Palestinian identity (and Arab identity) to reflect this ethnic ambiguity whereby the links between people are based not on racial ties, but shared languages, cultures and histories.
I think you are hair splitting far beyond what is necessary. And I think linking to our article on Palestinian Christians, which needs some work, is still better than not, in terms of information it provides and the avenues it opens to new ways of thinking and understanding about history related to this rite and the place it is located in. We don't need to protect anyone from that page. Nor do we need to assume that the writer using "Palestinian Christian" did not mean exactly this same community as it existed long ago. There is cultural and religious continuity in them, even if it has evolved into something else in time. Tiamut (talk) 17:07, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a reply @User:NebY? I am thinking of taking this to WP:DRN. Because the idea that Palestinian Christian cannot be used, even when a source uses it explicitly, for anything prior to the emergence of Palestinian nationalism is a disturbing, WP:OR and POV notion in my opinion. Tiamut (talk) 17:47, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have indicated a way forward for you and sought to explain the problem to you in a different way, but you've accused me of hair splitting and suggested someone (myself? other editors here?) might want to "protect anyone from that page". I saw no point in replying – it was already clear that you haven't built consensus. NebY (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Is saying you are hair splitting an accusation? Sorry, neither comment you have taken offense to was meant to be a personal commentary, simply a deconstruction of the argument. I have not moved to restore the edit I originally made and am suggesting dispute resolution as an option. Are you uninterested in participating? Tiamut (talk) 18:12, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think any of us should be interested in going to DRN when there are better ways available to you of achieving your singular aim of having a link to Palestinian Christians, ways which would be a better use of everyone's Wikipedia time and would make a better article too. NebY (talk) 18:24, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see where you indicated a way forward & I don't find your argument for why the term "Palestinian Christians" is inappropriate here very convincing.
The term Palestinian Christians doesn't exclusively refer to any one denomination, but to the Christian population of Palestine in general. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 18:29, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
So what is wrong with saying Christians of Palestine?ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 20:08, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Because Palestinian Christians is the common term & how the source directly refers to them, as you should be well aware as Sean.hoyland quoted the passage directly almost a week ago. Butterscotch Beluga (talk) 20:20, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"a central element of Palestinian Christian identity at a time of relative isolation from Constantinople" is referring to Orthodox Christians living in Palestine, over a thousand years ago. The purpose of sources is not to find a specific wording that suits an agenda.ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen (talk) 20:40, 16 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
ItsRainingCatsAndDogsAndMen, just to be clear, can you confirm that you checked the source, saw that it said 'The liturgy of the Holy Fire began to develop in the eighth century, becoming a central element of Palestinian Christian identity at a time of relative isolation from Constantinople' in the section 'Baldwin in Jerusalem: an alliance with a group of Palestinian Christians at the foundation of the Hierosolymitan kingship? Miracle of the Holy Fire, Easter 1101', decided that the term was an 'anachronism', and reverted on that basis? Sean.hoyland (talk) 15:01, 11 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
He is still erasing it, while accusing me pushing "Palestinian nationalism", simply for using the exact term used by the source and wikilinking to our article on Palestinian Christians. Tiamut (talk) 09:01, 14 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sources to expand the article

[edit]

Recent annual celebrations

[edit]

Tiamut (talk) 05:08, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wider social context

[edit]
  • The Social Fabric of Jerusalem: Memories in the Wake of Christian Exodus Tiamut (talk) 05:14, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Origin of Massoth and the Massoth-Festival: on connections to ancient agricultural harvest traditions: "this is no forced nor improbable hypothesis is proved by the fact that two rites of strikingly similar nature are still observed in connection with, or as preparatory to, the celebration of Easter in the present-day Christian church of Palestine. Bliss tells that 'on this same Thursday (Maundy Thursday) the Maronite patriarch at his seat, with two or three bishops, consecrates the oil of baptism, oil for extreme unction, and the holy chrism (the meiruin), all three kinds of oil to be distributed by the bishops among the Maronite churches for use during the coming year. Oil remaining from the year before is burned."' And it is a well-known and oft-described practice that preparatory to the descent of the sacred fire in the Church of the Sepulcher at Jerusalem on the Saturday afternoon preceding Easter Sunday, all fires are extinguished in the Christian homes, monasteries, and churches of Palestine. Runners bearing the sacred brands or tapers kindled from the new holy fire hasten from the Church of the Sepulcher, carrying the precious burden to all parts of the country, and with these the new fires are once more kindled.3 This rite too reminds us strongly of the ritual of the Creek green-corn fest." Tiamut (talk) 05:45, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  • Formation des identités palestiniennes chrétiennes: Églises, espace et nation: There is some discussion here on the organization of the rite between the different Palestinian Christian sects and in the wider context of the Israeli occupation. Tiamut (talk) 05:52, 17 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Historical

[edit]

Spiritual reflections

[edit]

This book listed in the external links section contains mamy descriptions about the ceremony and its practice and the changes that developed over time. It also collects notable descriptions from between the 9th and 16th century. It should be used in the article. Tiamut (talk) 05:39, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone have access to the full text of Skarlakdis' book? This excerpt from the section on the Crusades includes much information not readily available elsewhere and I am interested in seeing the descriptions of the contemporaneous chroniclers of the 1101 non-appearance of the fire that he mentions. Tiamut (talk) 07:24, 18 June 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Holy_Fire&oldid=1359951626"