Talk:Qal'at Ja'bar

Untitled

A lot of this page is not about the actual castle, but about the grave of Suleyman Shah. As this grave is now not anymore in the castle, but has been relocated, doesn't it make sense to make a new page for this grave, and just mention it as part of the history of the castle, and then link to the new page? Zoeperkoe (talk) 20:57, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The page The tomb of Suleyman Shah is virtually the same as this page, with only 'Jaabar Castle' being replaced for 'The tomb of...'. I would suggest that both articles undergo major rewriting in order to make clear the differences between these two, and that Jaabar Castle is no longer the location of that tomb. Zoeperkoe (talk) 11:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of already starting this rewriting of Qal'at Ja'bar. Zoeperkoe (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Suggestions

Some comments further to request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Fortifications task force.

• It is helpful to explain who individuals or groups are, for the general reader, and brief background information on their actions. For instance, who is Malik Shah? Who is Zengi, and why was he besieging the castle? The reader should be given some information without having to read the whole Malik Shah I and Zengi articles.
• The article does not make clear where the tomb is, I gather from the above comments on the talk page that it is not in the castle, but used to be. This could be clarified.
• When did the "restoration works by the Syrian Directorate General of Antiquities and Museums" take place?
• Was any part of the castle or defences lost when the valley was flooded? It seems oddly convenient that the lake comes to just below the castle walls. Did the location of the castle dictate the water level?
• More detail on the layout, or even better, a plan. How many towers is "several"?
• There are not many incoming links from other articles.

Hope the above suggestions are helpful, it is a good start to an article. Regards, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 11:49, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Qal'at Ja'bar Turkish soil inside Syria

Qal'at Ja'bar (after the Ottoman rule in Syria) is considered as Turkish sovergnity since 1921. In agreement in Alepo in 1956 it was agreed that the site will be guared by a Turkish military detachment, which rotates on the 7th and 20th of each month (part of 20th Mechanised Brigade, 3rd Border Regiment, 2nd Border Battalion). Due to the construction of the Tabka damn in 1973 it was agreed between Turkey and Syria to move the tomb of Süleyman Bin Kaya Alp to vicinity of Karakozak village, the reason given was that the Qal'at Ja'bar will submerge under the waters of the Tabka damn. Since the castle is still standing (expected to go under water after a new Syrian damn project) there might be confusion if it still falls under Turkish sovergnity. Images of the site http://www.panoramio.com/photo/32641462 regards Hittit (talk) 20:02, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

The tomb is no longer in the castle, as you can read in the article, and which is supported by WP:RS. Please compare the satellite image (and the coordinates) in your panoramio link of the tomb with the satellite image of Qal'at Ja'bar (here) and you will see that they are two different places. The tomb was moved up north and is still Turkish territory. Qal'at Ja'bar is not. I have actually visited the castle and I can assure you, there is no Turkish soldier there and it is considered Syrian soil (and I can also confirm from own observation that the tomb at its new location is still Turkish). And just for your information; Qal'at Ja'bar was never intended to be flooded, and it won't be flooded in the future. Hope this clarifies things!--Zoeperkoe (talk) 20:50, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

EDIT, also, as you can read in the Treaty of Ankara (linked in the article) it was not Qal'at Ja'bar that was considered Turkish, but the tomb itself. So it makes sense that if the tomb moved, Qal'at Ja'bar is no longer Turkish. Also, I couldn't find anywhere a source that said whether the tomb was actually located in the castle, or only closeby. The latter would make more sense, since the tomb was moved to prevent flooding, and the castle is not flooded.--Zoeperkoe (talk) 21:06, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

We are talking about the same thing, the tomb is now located in the vicinity of Karakozak village (north from Qal'at Ja'bar on the banks of the Euphrates), the images are from that location not from the Qal'at Ja'bar. My point being, the only reason it was moved from Qal'at Ja'bar is that according to the Syrian authorities they intended to sumberge the whole struture due to the damn construction and tomb needed to be saved ref: 1973 protocole between Turkey and Syria. If the castle will be preserved then this is a good thing, since it holds significant historical significance for Arabs and Turks. This information can be either included in this article or start a new article e.g., "The Tomb of Süleyman Bin Kaya Alp" Hittit (talk) 15:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

In fact that page already exists, and there is a link to that page in the section on the tomb in the Qal'at Ja'bar page. See Tomb of Suleyman Shah. Although the tomb seems to be surrounded with a lot of uncertainty; the sources I could find indicate that it is not clear who is actually buried there, even though tradition says it is Suleyman.--Zoeperkoe (talk) 16:01, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the link Hittit (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)