Talk:Hummus/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Factual accuracy

Two things:

1. Hummus for breakfast? Growing up in a Lebanese family, and eating a great deal of Lebanese meals (including breakfast), I never once encountered hummus for breakfast. Does anyone have evidence for this (even anecdotal?)

I grew up in Jordan and my parents grew up in Palestine. Hummus is most definitely a breakfast item (esp. on non-school days, where there was no rush to get ready in the morning). If anything, I'd say my family had hummus for breakfast even less often than other families.--68.33.214.63 13:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

2. The picture of hummus here does not really look like hummus I've eaten or seen anywhere else -- I've almost never seen the whole-chickpea garnish, and the colors are sort of off (I blame the flash)

wdaher 01:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Picture from me. Lived in Lebanon for some time in 1963-64 and the use of whole chickpeas as garnish was relatively common. The color, I was not overjoyed with, and the flash may be the problem. As for hummus for breakfast, that is a new one to me also. --Dumarest 01:45, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

This picture looks more like what is widely known in Jordan and Palestine as "msabbaha مسَبّحة". It is not as common as hummus, but my understanding is that it basically has the same ingredients, except that the hummus beans are not made into a paste.hnassif 04:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Musabacha is a dish made of Humus with Humus and is served for breakfast. Musabach litterally means brakfast. Humus is also good with Ful. If you eat Humus with Ful for breakfast, you will need no other meals for the rest of the day. Abu ali 18:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I think we are talking about the same dish, what I call "msabbaha مسَبّحة", and I don't think it means breakfast, especially literally. The Arabic word for breakfast is "iftar إفطار" or "ftoor فطور". It has nothing to do with "msabbaha". I think you're thinking that "msabbaha" is a word derived from the Arabic root of the word "morning"; that root is "soboh صبح", but that cannot be true, because the "s" in "soboh" is not the same Arabic letter as the "s" in "msabbaha". The root of the word "msabbaha" can also be written as "soboh" in English alphabet, but in Arabic it's a completely different word. The root of the word "msabbaha" in Arabic is "سبح", the root of the word morning is "صبح". The root of the word "msabbaha" in Arabic is the root of the Arabic word for swimming. hnassif 04:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

3. Why is hummus attributed to Israel? There are alot of places in the world where hummus is widely eaten, not only israel. What is the point of mentioning that chef Solomonov went to Israel to inspect hummus? Probably to confuse readers of its origin. This goes to most of the arab middle eastern food on wikipedia. Emphasize more on Lebanon,Palestine and Syria when it comes to this food and if someone is to write about where it is eaten and popular, mention ALL places.

The article does not attribute hummus to Israel. However, it is widely consumed there and the article has a section on Israel for sourced information about this. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

What i meant is, hummus is widely consumed in many places around the world. If you mention one of those countries youre entering a vast and broader subject. Therefor you have to include other countries aswell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyrouthhh (talk • contribs) 18:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please feel free to add reliably sourced information about the preparation and consumption of Hummus into new country sections, or add to existing ones. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Okey i will, ill place the countries where it originally came from separately and then move Israel,Egypt and other countries to a smaller section with the headline, hummus around the world

IF you have a reliable source as to where hummus originally cam from, I would be interested to see it. As far as I can tell, it could have originated anywhere in an area from Turkey and Armenia in the |North, Iraq in the East and Egypt in the South and possibly the West.

No, please don't combine country sections. The consensus is to have a separate section for each country. If you wish to add information to a country section, please do so. If you wish to add a country section with sourced information, please feel free to do that, too. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation

I removed this pronunciation advice because I honestly couldn't say what it meant:

Pronounced "houm-os" or unusually "ho-mos"

Pekinensis 19:20, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Peanut Butter

Some Americans do indeed use peanut butter in their hummus (blech!). The primary perpetrator of this recipe is Alton Brown, who mentioned it on his show. (This is an interesting bit of trivia to my mind but it seems inappropriate for the article.) Collabi 09:22, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree that it seems inappropriate for the article. I don't think that this variation is widespread enough to even be included in the article. (As a side note, I have to say that it sounds horribly disgusting. Peanut butter and hummus are two of my favorite foods, but the two should never be combined. Yuck.) --burnt in effigy 01:24, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm an American who just got through preparing some homemade hummus (yum!). I think a comparison could be made to peanut butter in terms of how each is made and used and its regional popularity, but I wouldn't think of combining the two. Richard K. Carson 02:04, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

It's just bearable. My sister uses peanut butter as an alternative to tahini as she is allergic the seaseme seeds Acidsaturation 13:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Peanut butter is substituted for tahini in some cafes and restaurants in the US to keep costs down, because tahini is much more expensive. I find the thought disturbing, as I am munching on home made tahini/chick peas hummus as I type. nom nom--116.240.250.76 (talk) 03:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Palestine

Although this whole issue is too trivial, I take offense to those who complain that Palestinians don't recognize the right of Israel to exist and then blatantly point out that "Palestine" doesn't exist. I am here aren't I? I live in what I call Palestine, especially as Israelis don't call it Israel otherwise I'd be an Israeli citizen. Don't take personal opinions and ideologies and go so far as to have a war of words over HUMMOS - of all things!! Ramallite ^{[[User_talk--Amir E. Aharoni 22:48, 2 December 2005 (UTC):Ramallite|(talk)]]} 7 July 2005 19:03 (UTC)

No kidding - talk about hypocrisy. It reminds me of the thankfully long-dead slogan "Algérie Français". - Mustafaa 7 July 2005 21:51 (UTC)

"I live in what I call Palestine"... well, I live in what I call "Blargon-land", that doesn't mean that it actually exists or that I can put it in a Wikipedia article, even if I do make hummus. 63.239.132.5

A Palestinian Arab state (not counting Jordan since apparently demographics don't matter) doesn't exist and the territories do not belong to Palestinian Arabs. Offended or not, this is the reality.

"The territories do not belong to Palestinian Arabs" being reality as about as sound as the statement that "Tolstoy's "War and Peace" is the source for the script of the Hungarian movie version of 'The Incredible Hulk'" being reality. There is nothing in the word "Palestine" that refers to a state, in the sense Eretz Israel is technically not the name of a state either. We are talking about where hummos is eaten, not where governments are set up. And please don't bring up Jordan when referring to Palestine. Ramallite ^(talk) 7 July 2005 22:03 (UTC)

The article may be trivial, but it doesn't give anyone the right to insert pov information.

Deleting "Palestine" or 'Palestinian territories" is deleting neutrality in favor of POV. Ramallite ^(talk) 7 July 2005 22:03 (UTC)

Secondly, Palestinian territories is ambiguous as there are self governing areas given to the PA, but we are talking about everyone in the West Bank and Gaza, not just the areas the PA has official control, such as it is.

I'm not sure what that last sentence means, or how it has anything to do with Hummos. Besides, we make a mean Hummos, much better than anything I've tasted in Tel Aviv. Ramallite ^(talk) 7 July 2005 22:03 (UTC)

I just had to react on that - yes, Hummus in Arabic restaurants in Jerusalem and Abu-Gosh is better than in an average place in Tel-Aviv, but i can tell you about a place in Tel-Aviv where they make the meanest Hummus i ever tasted (but the cooks are still Arabs). I won't advertise it here, but whoever wants to know is welcome to look at my user page. And no, unfortunately i didn't taste Hummus in Ramallah, but i hope that a day will come soon when it will be possible to do it legally and peacefully. Sharing Hummus recipes is a good reason for peace :) --Amir E. Aharoni 22:48, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Hear hear!!!! --Dumarest 19:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I was going to agree, then I read Heraclius's reply below. Tewner 09:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Guy Montag 7 July 2005 21:58 (UTC)

Ramallite has a point. Israelis are amateurs when it comes to hummous-making.Heraclius 7 July 2005 22:27 (UTC)

Make hummus, not war!

Lets not start a war on this subject. Hummus is usually the only thing Palestinians and Israeli's agree upon. Let me conclude with the suggestion: "Make hummus, not war!" gidonb 19:14, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Man, I so want to go picket something right now... I can see the signs... "Give (chick) peas a chance!" "Make hummus, not war!" "Brotherhood through hummus!" "Peace, love, hummus."

"Hummus is thicker than blood!"

"Blood and hummus leave a stain... Choose the better tasting one!"

"Blood is neither kosher nor halal." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.75.181 (talk) 23:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hummus with mushrooms

I've never heard of mushrooms on hummus before, but I'll certainly accept that it has a prima facie legitimacy that isn't shared by peanut butter.

Are the mushrooms a garnish, like the olive you plonk in the middle, or are they actually enough of an element to qualify it as a different dish, like hummus bil-lahm or hummus beiruti? Palmiro | Talk 16:23, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

I've only seen it in the States, but it's properly mixed in. I wouldn't call it a different dish, though, just a variation. Roasted red-pepper is also a common additive; I've seen some others. Garlic, lemon. But I have to draw the line at some of these abominations. Honestly: dill? french onion? jalapeňo?!?! I'm not sure I should edit any section on additives, I don't think I can be NPOV. --Mgreenbe 22:21, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

In Israel, when Hummus is served with mushrooms, the Hummus is usually spread on the plate and a few spoons of hot fried mushrooms are then put in the middle of the plate. It is just one of the many ways to serve Hummus, just like a cheeseburger is one kind of hamburger. It is my favorite kind of Hummus plate, however, and my number 1 favorite kind of lunch overall, but that's POV of course, albeit a very tasty one.

Meat, usually ground or chopped, is often served with hummus too, but there's a distinction of whether it's "Hummus with meat" or "Meat (kebab, shawarma, etc.) with some hummus on the side. I prefer the first option - and without meat, 'cuz i'm vegetarian :)

<rant>And peanut butter? God, Americans shouldn't be allowed anywhere near kitchens.</rant>--Amir E. Aharoni 13:37, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Aha. Because in Syria and Lebanon, "Hummus with meat" (basically a plate of hummus with the addition of a small amount of fried mutton) or "hummus beiruti" (hummus with some sort of herbs chopped up and mixed through it) are considered separate dishes, and they're the only other ways commonly found of serving hummus.

I've never been in America, but it certainly doesn't sound very safe. [shudder]Palmiro | Talk 12:32, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I can attest to the American version- Meijers and Wal-Marts even carry "hummus with mushrooms" among their flavors. My favorites usually involve some combination of tomato, herb, and garlic- which seems more in line with traditional recipes anyway. But all of it is the same idea- something thoroughly blended with the chickpeas, and usually with tahini as well. In fact, it's usually marked "hommus tahini with (x)." gspawn 21:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hummus (allegedly) with beansprouts

I don't think this lump of greyish material is a good or accurate advertisment for hummus, and who eats hummus with beansprouts anyway? It was nice of the person to add an alternative picture, but the previous one looked much more like anything I've met in the way of hummus. And it showed it presented in a typical way, whereas this shows it with something it is not normally eaten with ASAIK. Palmiro | Talk 04:48, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Who should be credited with the creation of Hummus?

As far I'm concerned, Hummus is entirely an Arab dish, and the reason that Jews eat Hummus is because Jews from Arab lands introduced it to Israelis. This includes pita, cous cous (Moroccan), falafel and many other Arab dishes that Israelis try to take at least some credit for. Just because Japanese people eat hamburgers doesn't make it Japanese.

Have made some changes that go along with this thought --Dumarest 20:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Who cares? It's good either way.—BassBone (my talk · my contributions) 03:44, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Didn't the Jews and Arabs live together in many of the same areas? (Wallamoose (talk) 06:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC))

Reverted still more garbage

Yeah, make hummus, not war. Quite 16:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I've also removed this para:

[Connoisseurs can allegedly identify a family's lineage simply based on the household's daily hummus. For example, traditionally religious families are renowned for the high garlic content of their hummus, which, according to folklore, originated as a way to keep young men and women separated.]

Unless someone can back the above with references I'd treat this for the (troll/garbage) vandalism that it is.

Peanut butter

I've removed the sentence saying tahini is "occasionally" included, when it's a main ingredient, and that Americans sometimes substitute peanut butter, which I have never heard of and find hard to believe. Please supply a reference if you want to put it back. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

"Tahini is occasionally included in hummus or substituted for peanut butter by Americans, but the taste of that mixture is quite different from traditional Middle-Eastern hummus."

If peanut butter is used as an ingredient it could be called Elvis chickpeas mash (or something similar), it certainly wouldn't be hummus. --Bergerons 13:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I can attest to the peanut butter practice. In many parts of the US tahini is difficult to obtain and peanut butter is unfortunately the closest substitute. It's not terrific but the flavor is not as pronounced as one might think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.84.140 (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm an American and yes, I've used peanut butter before, mainly because finding tahini in the supermarket is nontrivial. I need to track down a whole foods store or something in my area and see if they carry it. — Xaonon (Talk) 21:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

My local markets (American) ONLY carry "hommus tahini" in a mixed state. Finding either chickpeas or tahini seperate are both issues.gspawn 21:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

"Hummus simplex"

Is "classic hummus simplex", in the picture caption, vandalism? It sounds unpleasantly like "herpes simplex", I've never heard it before (although it makes sense), and it doesn't have any hits on Google other than mirrors of this article. TomStuart 16:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

My simplex; living in Lebanon, this was the 'simplest' hummus - nothing added or gussied up. So, I called it 'simplex'.--Dumarest 19:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

allegory in the article

There's a lot of inference and/or allegory in the article, none of which is substantiated. I realize that sometimes it's hard to find sources on these, but I think the article is less credible in its current tone. To me, it reads as though somebody just wrote down a bunch of notes from family members (which are not, I might add, credible sources). If one is going to attribute acts to Saladin (hm, I could have sworn that was Salaheddin) or make societal comments (such as the "age of the recipe" or "connoisseurs can tell the family origin of hummus"), it is crucial to have a source for it so that the greater scope of the information can be assessed. ... aa:talk 02:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Wording

In Arabic and Hebrew, the word hummus is used to describe both the dish, the paste or the chickpea itself. However, in Arabic the term hummus bi tahina (Arabic: حُمُّص بطحينة‎) refers specifically to hummus.

The above is a direct quote from the article. Can someone explain to me how that makes sense? Rtcpenguin 04:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

 --In hebrew the term hummus be thina would mean hummus with tchina(sesame seed paste) while
   in arabic it still only refers to the humus

In Arabic, hummus bi tahina (Arabic: حُمُّص بطحينة‎) refers specifically to the dish (lit. hummus in tahini). I don't know what paste is being referred to, but hummus just means chickpeas, so can be used to refer to it prepared in any way. Alawi (talk) 21:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hummus recipe link

Please consider adding this authentic hummus recipe (which includes a photograph) as an external link: http://www.mediterrasian.com/delicious_recipes_hummus.htm. Thanks. Foudel 17:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Why I oppose adding a link to mediterrasian.com:

If there are recipe links at all, they should be to a site that has some claim to be a specialist in the topic, not a generalist in Mediterranean and Asian cuisine, which covers most of the population of the world.

Mediterrasian focuses on nutrition, not gastronomy

Their recipe seems fine, but you can find pretty much the same one at a gazillion other sites.

Their descriptive text is incorrect and unauthentic. It reads:

Hummus is a creamy puree of chickpeas and tahini (sesame seed paste) seasoned with lemon juice and garlic, and is a popular spread and dip in Greece and throughout the Middle East. Hummus can be served as part of a meze platter; with bread or vegetable crudités for dipping; as a spread or filling for pita, lavash or Turkish pide bread; or as a tasty, creamy alternative to butter in sandwiches. A spoonful or two can also be added to Middle Eastern or Greek-style pilafs and stews to add richness.

As current Wikipedia article correctly says (with sources), hummus bi tahina is specifically a Levantine dish, and is unknown in Greece. It is certainly eaten elsewhere in the Middle East where it has been brought by Lebanese restauranteurs (but is not a traditional part of, say, Yemeni or Persian cuisine) and apparently was introduced to England by Cypriot restauranteurs (hence the perception that it is Greek -- see article in Oxford Companion to Food). The suggestion to use it as a substitute for butter in sandwiches sounds delicious, but I don't see what it has to do with authenticity. The notion of adding it to "Greek-style pilaf" is, um, peculiar -- we (Greeks) might well add whole chickpeas to a pilaf, but hummus bi tahina?

In short, the existing information on the Wikipedia Hummus page is more reliable than their page, and I don't see what added value it offers. What's more, Mediterrasian's past misbehavior (adding external links to themselves on many many Wikipedia pages, against Wikipedia policy) leaves a bad taste.... --Macrakis 19:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Hummus is traditionally scooped up with flatbread (such as pita)

Your comment, xubz is just Arabic for bread - correct I guess. BUT as I lived in Lebanon, xubz was a specific bread, round, with the possibility of a pocket. Bread was in all groceries, loaves, and so on. Xubz was specific for what one used to dip hummus. --Dumarest 19:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

external link to hummus bros

I've added a link to Hummus Bros (hbros.co.uk) because I think it's quite a relavent example of how hummus has been integrated into modern western culture. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Totuck (talk • contribs) 18:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC).

wat iz xubz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.249.20 (talk) 07:32, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

msabbaha/Musabacha/مسَبّحة

This dish was mentioned in relation to one of the pictures in the article, I've not had it before but perhaps it should be added to the Popular Variations section of the article or it may deserve it's own page. (If I had more information I might do it myself.) Does anyone have any opinions? 24.124.29.130 11:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

but its origins are Greek..

A recent edit put that phrase in, replacing 'unknown' by 'Greek' in the text. I greatly doubt this. Refer to an earlier item here [Hummus recipe link], where the dish is specifically said NOT to be of Greek origin, with references. --Dumarest 18:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

the photos you have here aren't really good, i'd think.. first of all, i've never seen humous that looks so pale, and then they're also a bit out of focus and with odd colours... you're welcome to use any of my humous photos from flickr (can be found here: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=humous&w=80017454%40N00), they're CC protected... 217.132.218.178 16:57, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Restored a new image of the Lebanese hummus. Also taken by me, and this is in my opinion a good picture, not suffering from the problems of the original. --Dumarest 23:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I basically grew up eating hummus, and have never seen it like in the picture with the pinenuts, that look like an entirely different dish. I removed it.--Beyrouthhh (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Recalls

Is it really encyclopedic that a couple of brands of hummus have been recalled over the years? Various brands of various foods get recalled for a variety of reasons (anything from a missing ingredient on the label to contamination with pathogens), and we don't mention this for most foods. Why hummus? --Macrakis 12:15, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree it seems a bit silly in this article, maybe the recall info could go in the articles for those brands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.29.130 (talk) 11:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think that section ought to go. Hermitage 03:56, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I do have to agree. I did not enter that material, but did expand and reference it, and recently restore after its removal, but will now unreinstall it. --Dumarest 11:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Hummus blog

I've rm'd it. WP:EL rather strongly deprecates blogs not written by a "recognized authority." While this blog does seem fun, somewhat authoritative and under someone's editorial control, its "about" page apparently gives no hint towards helping to understand if anything like a verifiable expert is behind these posts. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:46, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Alternate spelling: "homos"

Is this enough justification for adding "homos" as another alternate spelling? EAE (Holla!) 00:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

So many spellings! Note, the cite you provided clearly depicts this spelling as either a mistake or a typo made by the producer of the product, so no, I don't think it does support homos as an alt spelling. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:23, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Your interpretation of Engrish.com is completely wrong. This spelling may or may not have been a mistake or typo, but Engrish.com makes no claims about that. EAE (Holla!) 22:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Engrish.com makes very specific claims: "Engrish can be simply defined as the humorous English mistakes that appear in Japanese advertising and product design."[1] The link you provided (which points to a section about "Engrish," or mistaken English spellings, from other countries) cites homos as a humourously mistaken English spelling (which Engrish.com, and perhaps you, find funny because it has been accidently transliterated as the plural of the English slang word homo > homosexual). Moreover, the ingredients on the pictured package indicate the product was made from fava beans, which are much less nutritious. The manufacturer may have purposely used this odd spelling because the product isn't hummus at all, but a "fava bean dip." Gwen Gale (talk) 23:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hebrew/jewish/Israeli references

A couple of redlinked accounts have been repeatedly deleting both the Hebrew transliteration along with the jewish/Israeli category tags. Although I think the jewish cuisine cat may indeed be stretching things, is there a reason why hummus cannot be categorized as Israeli cuisine? Moreover, is there a reason why hummus should not be transliterated in hebrew along with the arabic in the article lead? Comments? Gwen Gale (talk) 18:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

• My decision to include it into "jewish cuisine" was based upon the observation that it often a food served in kosher jewish households outside of Israel. As for the deletions, one commonly finds Jewish and Israeli references removed from articles that also mention Arabs or Muslims -- especially if they are regarding topics that are considered highly identified with Arab/Muslim countries or lifestyle. Unfortunately some people find the inclusion of Israeli/Jewish information in such articles highly offensive and choose to remove the "offending" references. As an editor of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Judaism, I have been part of this debate many times on many articles, and its unfortunate that we all just can't get along. Also, if you check the edit history of the "redlinked accounts" in question, you will see that their edits are usually devoted to "maintaining" one or two particular articles. -- Nsaum75 (talk) 20:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought this was likely why the references were being removed and had been putting them back, but wanted to have some confirming input. I had also noticed the editing pattern of the redlinked users. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I have requested protection of this page and the article on Za'atar, because they seem to be hitting that one too. Nsaum75 (talk) 07:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Protection request of this article from vandalism by IP addresses and new accounts was denied by the Administrators. Seems that "there is not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection at this time" -- Nsaum75 (talk) 07:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the decision not to protect was fitting. Whatever disruption there may be seems to be low and it's not from IPs. I've been looking at some of the online sources and I do find overwhelming support for the Hebrew transliteration, since hummus is clearly very popular among Israelis. As for the categories, I think it's ok to include them too, since this food has indeed become a part of both Jewish and Israeli cuisine. It's controversial, however. Now, about the edits by redlinked users, these accounts seem to be WP:SPAs making very similar edits. Unless they participate in this talk page discussion, I don't think they need be given much heed. Gwen Gale (talk) 11:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I find it unfortunate that when an opinion that contradicts the few users who regularly edit this page, attempts are made to "protect" the article. It is truly shameful that an authentic Arabic dish that has been a staple of Arabs for centuries and only recently been adopted by Israelis has to be labeled as "Israeli" or "Jewish". As in most other things, the establishment of Israel on Palestinian lands led to the cultural plagiarism by Zionists against Arabs. This argument is a manifestation of this. Those with Zionist beliefs have shown themselves to be adept at revisionist history. Hummus is an Arabic word, has been part of Arabic food long before the establishment of the modern state of Israel. While I welcome integration of foods and cultures, to call hummus or any Arabic dish "Israeli" or "Jewish" is insulting since its aim to discredit Arab or Palestinian contributions to any modern aspect of life in Israel today. I for one, will continue to work to protect Arabic culture and customs from revisionist attacks in the name of truth. If you put an "Israel" or "Jewish" stub, you might as well put "American" or "French" too since I know many fine places in the US or France where they make a tasty hummus!

Regards.(jfws2890) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfws2890 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

You neglect to mention that Jews and the "children of Israel" have been in the middle east as long as their Arab brothers, and have shared in the development of foods and cuisines. Nsaum75 (talk) 04:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The Zionists have a history of pillaging everything in the lands they oppress and occupy, until Allah sees fit that the time has arrived to destroy the Zionist scourge. This is an ARAB food, NOT Israeli or Jewish. Do a simple GOOGLE search and you will find it the food shows up only as an ARAB food stuff. Please refrain from polluting Wikipedia with revisionist zionist propaganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.247.21.5 (talk) 08:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

First of all, I warn that my english isn't very good: There are some people who seem to don't understand that a culture didn't appear one day, just with its aspect that we can see know; it's the result of centuries and centuries of formation, and it's always tributary of other cultures who it has been in contact with. Arabic civilisation goes from Irak to Morocco then it's not a uniform culture: in Maghreb they eat couscous but not in Machrek. Why? Because the couscous was a dish that Berebers, the people who lives in Maghreb before the arrival of Arabs. Does it mean when can't consider it as part of arabic food? No. Maybe houmous isn't so "authentically" arabic and it has influences from another culture. In accordance with the reasoning that you have, there would be no culture in the world, because each one is tributary of other(s) one(s). Then, you say that there's a lot of places in France and US where they make good houmous, but (I'm french) these are either arabic (from Machrek, because they don't do houmous in Maghreb...) resstaurants or israeli ones. I agree that houmous can't be considered as a jewish dish, but yes as an israeli one, as well as libanese, palestinian, jordanian, sirian and egyptian (tell me if there're other countries). To end up: I'm interesting by knowing the origin of houmous. Does anyone know in which period it was created? If it's more than 2000 years ago, it means that the ancient Hebrews also used it, and particpated in its creation...

Amiel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.239.221.229 (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I am all for listing it as a Israeli food as well, but not as Jewish food. Jewish people come from all over the world and have different cuisines depending on where their ancesters came from. Israel is in Middle East so it is in the category on Middle East, but we can add an other category. But if we start adding countries we will need to add other countries besides Israel where hummos might have originated through tributaries. So the question is why Arab food is okay while Jewish food is not, Well most Arab people and civilizations are in Middle East but Jewish people live all over the world. Is it not better to leave this as is and not to have a flame war just because we want to atribute an ethnicity to a certain food? But if it will get a consense I am all for including category Israeli food. Igor Berger (talk) 23:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Please disregard the racist hate-mongers and simply describe this dish as what it is: An Eastern Mediterranean / Middle Eastern dish popular amongst Muslims, Jews, Christians and others. That it is a debated item and seen as symbolic for the cuisine of various countries and regions belongs in the article. Denying this dish its place in categories where it naturally belongs, like Mizrahi food or Lebanese/Israeli/Palestinian/Egyptian food, makes no sense in the NPOV setting that Wikipedia is supposed to provide. -- Olve (talk) 23:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:Cat warns us that "Restraint should be used as categories become less effective the more there are on any given article." Because hummus is a dish that knows no borders in the Middle Eastern area, then the issue, as far as I'm concerned, is more whether to remove Category:Arab cuisine rather than whether to add back the Lebanese, Israeli, Egyptian, Iraqi Turkish etc. ones. The reasons why I did not remove the Arab one in my first purge are that 1) other editors were saying to leave it and 2) that the name of the dish derives from an Arabic word. If people do the research on and write up a properly sourced version of the dish, then it will become clear whether the Arab category should be kept or not.--Peter cohen (talk) 11:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Being that the word Arab and the people are newer than origination of hummus it may not be a bad idea to remove it to keep neutrality and to avoid prejudice. This way Israeli people or other people will not feel ostracized. But I personally have no problem with leaving Arab cuisine in. When I think hummus I think Arab and Middle Eastern not Jewish cuisine. Igor Berger (talk) 11:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe Bedwins invented hummus and Ancient Egyptians, Arabs, and Hebrews learned from them. The Bedwins nomads been around as long as the desert. I say leave this thing as is and let's keep it a mystery. But a history line with which people eat hummus would be educational for Wikipedia learners. Igor Berger (talk) 11:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

So far, from the sources, the origins of hummus do seem to thread way back into the middle eastern mists of pre-classical history. I don't know if Sumerians were mashing chickpeas in Ur but I think it's getting rather clear, whoever did it first (never mind the possibility of more or less parallel invention) wasn't Arab, although Arabs later made it more or less their own. I think the sources strongly support saying the origins of hummus are unknown but middle eastern, stretching back thousands of years with one of the first recipes having been described by ancient Egyptians. Meanwhile one might keep in mind, both Arab and Jewish culture are semetic and the etymologies of the Arab and Hebrew words for hummus and vinegar (an early, pre-lemon juice ingredient of hummus) seem rather twined. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sound about correct. Maybe 10 million years ago some guy sitting in the desert stuck away from his oasis had some chick peas started feeling hungry and to preserve them he grounded them down with some sour grapes. Why don't we take the Arab cuisine category out to preserve NPOV and to make it generic of the region? Igor Berger (talk) 12:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, although I'd say (only for context) the very earliest possible date would have been about 12,000 years ago (which is likely too early), given our ancestors didn't stumble across the wonders of farming until about then. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sound great. Maybe we can do future article for hummus after we finish with it and wind up winning a Nobel peace prize for helping Arabs, Assyrians, and Hebrews make peace through hummus. People always say love and peace comes via stomach! We can have hummus summit and invite all countries' delegates and representatives to share and taste their hummus recipies. Lets start hummus history subsection and state while hummus is believed to be invented by a nomads dating back older than Ancient Egypt you can find it in the hieroglyphs of the pyramids. Later adopted as a basic staple by Hebrews, Babylonians, and Arabs hummus continued to be popular for all Middle Easter people. Introduced to Meditiranian coltures via Phoenician merchants hummus spread its popularity to Ancient Rome, Ancient Greece, and Ottoman Empire. Later becoming a popular staple of modern Mediterranean cultures. Igor Berger (talk) 13:10, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm adding a history section now although I don't think we have any support for concluding hummus was first whipped up by nomads: Chickpeas would need an argicultural base, for starters :) Gwen Gale (talk) 13:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

If you look at nomand histories of Amazon Indians, Indonesia tribes they slash and burned moving from one patch of land to another. So nomads have gardens also. But could it be chickpeas are a natural flower of a desert? Igor Berger (talk) 13:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Evidence of wild chickpeas associated with people has apparently been dated back about 8000 years (in Turkey and France), domestic chickpeas about 5,000 years ago (Greece, Palestine and Turkey). I'm not saying nomads weren't the first, only that we don't know, there's no support for such a conclusion in the sources I've seen. Origins seem most likely Greek to me, with late-neolythic diffusion into the Levant and Egypt but I'm only guessing. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Jericho is 9,000 BC and it is the oldest settelment in the region. Maybe the Palestinian people at that time, the nomads living in the region, where the original hummus inventors? The Jericho article talks about domestic cultavation. But if they cultivated they are no longer nomads. Igor Berger (talk) 16:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the article does say dometic chickpeas have been found in aceramic (neolythic) layers there but 11,000 years ago is a bit of a stretch and I'd want to see more confirmation of this. Either way, whilst one must be careful not to conflate the presence of chickpeas with mashing them into an early kind of hummus, the origin could be early classical or pre-classical Greek, pre-Hittite Anatolian or even neolythic Levant... long, long before the emergence of Arab or Jewish culture in the ME. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

We will never know who invented hummus, but we do know it comes from Middle Eastern and Mediterranean cultures. Igor Berger (talk) 16:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I also removed Arab cuisine category to keep it generic to the region not a group of people. This way we can be generic and avoid fighting. Igor Berger (talk) 13:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC) Gwen nice job on the history. Looks good. Igor Berger (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I re-added the Arab cuisine category aswell as Lebanese, Palestinian and Syrian cuisine. Hummus has originated from the arab region and was invented by the arabs. If chickpeas are mentioned in historical scriptures or something similar doesnt make hummus a universal dish belonging the whole entire world. Chickpeas is not equal to hummus. The dish hummus is known for being arabic, until you can prove something else then go ahead and attribute it to the whole region and even to europe while youre at it. This is becoming absurd. If this judgement and thinking applies to all the articles then i could change the pizza article and attribute it to the whole world, since it is today a common day meal in many countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyrouthhh (talk • contribs) 22:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

RfC

There is a dispute as to whether hummus can be categorized and characterized as Israeli/Jewish cuisine. Gwen Gale (talk) 08:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

My own take on the history of hummus and available sources is towards crediting hummus as an Arab food with a much later and notable Israeli version (and handling the article text to explain all this clearly, with supporting citations), along with kosher versions found in Jewish restaurants and households. I would be interested in seeing sources which discuss the history of hummus in middle eastern Jewish culture. Meanwhile I would ask that editors (of whatever PoV or perspective) not characterize good faith edits with which they disagree as vandalism. Gwen Gale (talk) 09:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

To label this an Israeli food or Jewish food is an insult to Allah and all Muslims & Arabs everywhere. There is no Israeli version, as Gwen Gale claims. There is only an Arab food that the Zionists have molested and perverted through their revisionist progroms. Its not an zionist food. Never was an zionist food. Any derivative of is still ONLY an arab food. Zionist occupiers have raped the land of Palestine and its people. whenever anyone tries to oppose them, they change the subject and try to exact pity by bringing up the fictional holocaust. stop trying to revise history with bias pro-zionist articles and information. / 209.247.21.5 (talk) 09:55, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

THIS IS AN ARAB FOOD ONLY. NOT ZIONIST OR JEWISH FOOD! Jewish food is dirt, they have to steal Arab cuisine just like they did the land they are illegally occupying! In the end, Allah will speak and strike down all the Zionists and their supporters. 172.132.0.31 (talk) 10:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The above arguments, apart from some violating WP:HATE or worse (I will leave it for another editor to delete the obscene hate against Jews and Zionists above) are very funny! Does one have to invoke Allah if Jews or Israelis have a falafel with hummus and tehina? Very sad. What is "Zionist" food? Since when do political ideologies have their own foods? Anyhow, to be serious: In most major Jewish population centers all over the world today, hummus (originally an Arab or Mediterranean food made from chick peas) has moved from being just Israeli to a Jewish food. This can be explained by:

1. The fact that since Israel's founding in 1948, about a million Israelis have moved overseas to other Jewish population centers popularizing all types of "Israeli" food like Falafel, pita, spicey pickles, tehina, all sorts of dips, (many also originally Arabic), juices and wines.
2. Most foodstores that sell kosher food to Jews sell Israeli foods side by side with so many other local brands that there are no boundaries between what is "Israeli" and what is "Jewish" and they are sometimes even getting into mainstream restaurants as in Manhattan where Israeli/Jewish foods get sold and incorporated into non-Jews' diets and menus.
3. Another reason, is that almost half the Jewish population of the world presently lives in Israel so that the boundary between what to call "Jewish" and what is "Israeli" often simply has gone, especially when it comes to foods (even though the secular and religious have a religious/cultural split, they still eat most of the same foods -- for the religious, only that which is kosher of course.)
4. Also, millions of Jewish tourists have gone to Israel over the decades and taken away the taste of "Israeli" foods and adopted and adapted it for themselves when they get back home, so that again results in a blurring of the lines between what is "Jewish" and what is "Israeli" cuisine.
5. Perhaps another point is that in recent times, as Jews have become more health conscious, the younger generation has moved away from the traditional Eastern European heavier foods based on beef and chicken and potatoes and moved on to the fresh salads, with hummus and tehina being VERY popular salad dressings and other dips that are so much part of Israeli/Mediterranean foods.
6. Most importantly! See Cuisine of the Sephardic Jews and Arab Jews. So that Hummus, like all "Arab" food is also the food of those Jews who lived in the same Arab lands as the Arabs did for millenia. These were truly Jewish foods way long before there was a modern Israel. Thus for the millions of Sephardi Jews, Mizrahi Jews, in the history of the Jews under Muslim rule Jewish and Arab/Muslim cuisine became indistinguishable. When Islam arose it borrowed from Judaism's dietary laws of Kashrut and introduced Halal. Judaism and Islam likewise forbid the eating of pork and both Sephardi Jews and Arabs have a fondness for goat and sheep meat, among many other cultural similarities.

So the bottom line is that, yes, that by now hummus is both Israeli and Jewish food, and it has even become American food in places like NYC and LA joining tacos (from Mexico) pizza (from Italy) apple danishes (from Austria) beer (from Britain and Germany) and curry and rice (from India) etc ... and more, as "American food" (what will Allah say now? Goodness gracious!) Welcome to the American Melting POT! IZAK (talk) 10:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Curry is historically Indian and hummus is historically Arab. Should the categories reflect only historical origins or include much later adaptations? Curry categorizes the later adaptations. Is a Hebrew transliteration in the lead helpful, or is it historically misleading? Gwen Gale (talk) 10:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

It is historically Arab, and all current and future forms will be Arab. Hebrew spelling and transliteration is not only unhelpful but insulting as it trivializes the importance of Arab culture and history in this food. 209.247.21.5 (talk) 10:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous (wish you'd get an account): Is this an argument about about a food or politics or language? Make up your mind and stop creating confusion. Food and culture cross the boundaries and barriers of politics and language. And how silly is it to "exclude" Jews from Arabic foods when the Sephardi Jews lived side by side with Arabs and Muslims for millenia, see Category:Judeo-Islamic topics and only recently was there a mass Jewish exodus from Arab lands and wherever those Jews went from there, they took with them their eating and cultural habits that they picked up from their surrounding Arab culture. As for Hebrew and Arabic, any serious scholar would be smart enough to know that both Hebrew and Arabic are sister Semitic languages that are very close and that Arabic, like Islam, has a debt of gratitude to the Hebrew Bible from which both Islam and Arabic are derived. So go easy on those insults please, as you are insulting the mother-religion and the mother-language. IZAK (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

In answer to Gwen Gale: There need not be Hebrew or Turkish or other names in the lead to clutter it up. The other names and the countries or people that use them should be in a "Other uses" or "Alternate names and uses" section. This should not be a problem. Food is not owned by any country or culture. Sure it comes from historical sources, everything does, but when it is widely used in other countries it becomes theirs too especially if it has gained wide use and popularity among many local people. IZAK (talk) 10:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment: I would have to agree with IZAK that the article needs no other names to "clutter" up the introductionary paragraph, but they should be listed elsewhere. The categories in question, Jewish Cuisine & Israeli Cuisine, IMHO, are relevant as no one particular country or culture has "exclusive ownership" or control over a food. Furthermore, since Jews have been in the middle east as long as their Arab brothers, they have undoubtedly had an influence on the original development of the food. -- Nsaum75 (talk) 11:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Administrators have been notified of the edit war and hopefully this will be resolved soon. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 11:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi all. I recently added some material to Falafel to rectify shortcomings that emphasized its centrality to the Israeli diet (without explicitly mentioning its centrality to the Arab diet) and without explaining how or why this came to be. I suggest the same thing be done here. I agree with IZAK that the name does not need to appear in Hebrew beside the first mention of the word in the article. I also agree that it can be placed in the cateogry Israeli cuisine, though I am less certain about placing it in the Jewish cuisine category. Do be aware that for many Arabs and Palestinian in particular, claiming Hummus and falafel as Israeli cuisine is viewed as cultural appropriation and is highly offensive (which accounts for, but does not excuse some of the comments here). There are reliable sources that discuss this issue and mention of those views should certainly be included in the article. I hope these ideas help to reach a compromise solution over the issues raised. Tiamut^talk 11:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• Hi Tiamut: Thank you for those insights. But there is really no problem to find a solution then as in any Wikipedia article, create a sub-section and call it "Differing cultural views" or "Disputes over cultural ownership" but it is really sad to see that even a harmless food has been politicized to such an extent. But we live and learn, and just as now an article about a minor food will have to allow for the expression of "the politicization of Hummus, Falafel, Pita and Tehina" and how some Arabs (Palestinians are Arabs too) may think of it, likewise others will have to learn to live with the fact that other people, belonging to other countries, cultures and faiths have adopted that food to the extent that they too consider it "theirs" and that indeed in almost every Jewish neighborhood falafel, in pitah and salad with hummus and tehina added (oh yes, Jews add some "German" sourkraut to that like to a hot dog and even throw in a slice of garlic-flavored sour pickle or pickled tomato or even a splash of coleslaw -- amazing how flexible a falafel's insides can be!) -- the hummus and tehina may be optional, they tend to make the pita soggy and fall apart, but they add excellent flavor, and sometimes it's just best to order a hummus or hummus-tehina combo plate with a few extra plain pitas or lafas for dipping at your local kosher pizza shop, and this is all sold and eaten almost exclusively as not just "Israeli" but as "Jewish" food as well because in many of those neighborhoods no-one else but Israelis and Jews eat Falafel, Pitah, (salad and sourkraut) Hummus and Tehina, etc with a few of hot peppers pickled in brine and an optional squeeze of shug for the brave. IZAK (talk) 13:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with IZAK; Hummus should be in the Jewish and Israeli cuisine categories, as it is as much a national dish as falafel or Shwarma. пﮟოьεԻ 57 11:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Za'atar has been hit as well the past few days with repeated removal of Israeli references. I hope this isn't a developing pattern. -- Nsaum75 (talk) 11:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

My take so far: Since Category:Middle Eastern cuisine, Category:Mediterranean cuisine and Category:Levantine cuisine rather much cover all the countries involved (which are subcats anyway), why not limit the categories to these three? As for the Jewish cuisine category I still think it's a stretch (for example, the French eat millions of hamburgers a day now but we don't cat hamburgers as French cuisine) although I'm ok with it either way. As for the Hebrew transliteration in the lead, I think it's misleading since Hummus is historically Arab. I would suggest carrying only the Arabic transliteration in the lead and perhaps putting other transliterations elsewhere in the article. Oh and as User:Tiamut suggests, I see nothing untowards about mentioning in the article narrative how hummus has appeared in other countries/cultures. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, following the proposal by User:Neil below, I also would support limiting the cats to Category:Middle Eastern cuisine and Category:Arab cuisine. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I feel this whole discussion is really sad actually. I would be happy if people just stated in the article that: Jew's in Israel have widely enjoyed many Arab foods that were native to the region before they established Israel, and continue to do so today. However, misconstruing the cultural heritage of these foods by calling it Israeli or Jewish cuisine is contrary to the desire to be honest and truthful. To Nsaum75, you are clearly one clouded by Zionist extremism from what you say, that precludes rational thought. I will, however agree with you: Jews have lived in Palestine throughout history. Prior to the establishment of Israel, however, they were an extreme minority in a majority Arab land. If I am Swedish, for example, living in Paris, and I enjoy French food, that does not make it Swedish food. EVEN if you belief that integration of foods lead to their assimilation, Israel has only been around for 60 years, so even if there is integration of Arabic foods into Israeli and Jewish culture, ownership (in terms of what to call it) should not be transfered as 60 years is a small timeframe in terms of history. Hummus, along with many other Arabic foods (BASED ON ARABIC Names) should not be classified as Jewish or Israeli. I find it very insulting are disrespectful to Arabs and Palestinians in general. I am not closed minded, however. As I said, I would be happy to see a sentence or two describing its intergration into Jewish and Israeli diets within the article, so long as ownership is not pirated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfws2890 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment: I agree with everything that IZAK has said. What the article should say is of secondary concern to me, although I agree with IZAK about that also. My primary concern is the degree of hatefulness that has been expressed over this subject. It is unbelievable. We have articles about wars, massacres, bombings etc. where the talk page discussion is more rational than this. This is an article about food. Please don't turn it into a political battleground. 6SJ7 (talk) 15:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Following up on this, I was startled to see an article about mashed chickpeas stir up such unwaivering and hateful talk. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:53, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. :-( SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:11, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Dear Gwen Gale: See my added point 6 above based on the similarities of cuisine of the Sephardic Jews and Arab Jews and the history of the Jews under Muslim rule. Therefore your comparison of how the French love of American-style hamburgers does not make it French food (actually hamburgers are German food, originally called a "Hamburg steak") because in the case of Hummus and all Arab food it was shared by the many Jews in their midst for thousands of years, not just in recent times. Arab food is Jewish food to Jews who lived in and come from Arabic lands. And it may well be that it was the Jews who introduced the Arabs to the foods they eat just as they introduced them to Monotheism and the ideas of the Koran that are derived from the Hebrew Bible. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 05:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you lead us to any sources on this? Gwen Gale (talk) 09:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gwen Gale: Step one is read the entire Cuisine of the Sephardic Jews, then look at the reference section at Cuisine of the Sephardic Jews#References. But it's logic really. It is a fact of history that it was the Jews who taught the Arabs Monotheism, see Muhamed and the Jews, so if they could teach them to believe in the one and only God, whom the Arabs call Allah, from the Hebrew Elohim which means "Lord", how hard would it have been to teach them to eat falafel etc? IZAK (talk) 16:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

User:IZAK I am sorry but you are being condescending by saying it is logic and the Jewish people taught Arab people about hommus because they taught Arab people about God. Please do not do that. Jewish people as well as the rest of civilization learned a lot from the Assyrians. Let's stick to facts not folklore. Igor Berger (talk) 17:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

To echo User:Igorberger, only verifiable sources having to do with hummus will have any sway. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Igorberger: The Israelite United Monarchy (also called the Kingdom of Israel) was around long before the Assyrians. But are you disputing the fact that Judaism is the mother religion of Islam (and Christianity)? None of this is "folklore" it's all verifiable and true, see Category:Judeo-Islamic topics (and Category:Judeo-Christian topics) and as I said it's most definitely not "folklore" and no-one is being condescending altho it may be shocking for some people, to read this and accept it if they have never heard this, it is nevertless factually and historically proven and true, and logical. Religion, culture and food all go together. And to invoke logic is not a crime because that is the basis of all intelligent human communication and discussion that makes sense. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Wayward logic can be invoked upon mistaken or over-generalized assumptions but this doesn't mean much here either way since any such conclusion is WP:OR. Without a reliable source which asserts Jewish origins for hummus, such an assertion won't last in the article. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:25, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ancient Egypt is even older than Kingdom of Israel so maybe we should be looking there. Let's please leave religion out of this. We do not pray to hummus! Igor Berger (talk) 18:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is and you know, the more I look at the sources, I'm finding support for neither an Arab nor a Jewish origin, but something earlier than both cultures, maybe in ancient Egypt, but most of the reliable-seeming sources straightforwardly say hummus has been known for thousands of years and the origin is unknown. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Proposed solution

As this whole discussion is lame, I suggest 1) putting it in Category:Middle Eastern cuisine and Category:Arab cuisine (Israeli, Levantine, Palestinian etc etc etc are all subcats of one or both of these) 2) start blocking anyone who continues to edit war over this of all things, and 3) finding something better to do. Neıl ☎ 14:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I would strongly support this. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Here in Britain, hummus is most associated with Turkish and Greek restaurants (in both cases often run by refugees from Cyprus). But one would expect to find it routinely also in Lebanese, Moroccan and Israeli restaurants and, of course, vegan and vegetarian ones. My copy of Madhur Jaffrey's Eastern Vegetarian Cooking describes it as "Middle Eastern". Clearly the dish was around throughout the Ottoman Empire, but I don't know from what part it originated. My suspicion is that it is such a simple dish that it has been around since ancient times. Food in Antiquity by Brothwell & Brothwell does mention that all four key ingredients were known to the Romans by the 4th century. There is a lack of historic discussion in the article. Producing that based on WP:reliable sources might actually solve this dispute.

I'm inclined to have hummus categorised as a generic Middle Eastern/Mediteranean food item and also as vegetarian/vegan, rather than nave hordes of national labels. I think that if there are going to be lots of labels, Israeli is more justified than Jewish. Hummus was not part of the Ashkhenazi diet in central and eastern Europe, but would have been part of the Sephardic one.--Peter cohen (talk) 14:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with the solution as someone looking in Category:Israeli cuisine would no longer find Hummus listed, and it is just pandering to the POV pushers. пﮟოьεԻ 57 15:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest, if consensus can't be reached on some spin of the wider cats suggested by User:Peter cohen, User:Neil and myself, that's ok, but this will never settle down unless the cat for each country and culture is supported by strong and unambiguous citations. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

It would appear that the only people disagreeing with the existing categorisation are a couple of IP addresses, one of which has been blocked for racism. пﮟოьεԻ 57 16:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Redlinked users User:Jfws2890, User:Jimfromla, User:Jfws2890 and User:Credd311 have also lately been removing the Israel/Jewish cats. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I would have to agree with пﮟოьεԻ, that someone looking in Category:Israeli cuisine would not find it listed and it would likely create POV issues. -- Nsaum75 (talk) 16:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I would request that Gwen Gale kindly disregard the comments from the above user Nsaum75. His position is clearly clouded by Zionist extremist ideals and therefore unable to effectively offer input into this rational dialog on this clearly Arab food. It is he who started this afterall, by trying to revise and rewrite history with anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian propaganda. 172.130.176.108 (talk) 16:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I think this extreme nationalistic talk over mashed chickpeas is unhelpful. We all know hummus is an historically Arab food. The question here is whether the categories should support its modern use in non-Arab cultures, like the article Curry reflects meaningful modern consumption in non-Indian contexts. Furthermore, I cannot help but notice that direct arguments/edits against including this article in the Israeli cuisine and Jewish cuisine categories are being made exclusively by IPs and redlinked, WP:SPA user accounts, which makes me wonder if this is about hummus at all and if it's not, whether WP:Disruption applies here. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Gwen Gale, I do not feel that what is occuring here is WP:Disruption. This is a RfC and therefore people are asked for their opinion on the inclusion of other categories, of which two - Israeli cuisine and Jewish cuisine - have been repeatedly added by members whose edit history shows their bias towards articles of a pro-Zionist nature. However, even if one considers those editors who support listing the food as only an Arab food & cuisine as having created some sort of WP:Disruption, one cannot deny that their efforts have not been in vain: they have created a RfC on a subject important to them, which has already led to some of the Zionist terms they find offensive being struck from the current version of the article. 172.130.47.88 (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Although I think the inclusion of a Hebrew transliteration in the lead was misleading as to this food's history (and there seems to be a consensus now, for sundry reasons, to leave that transliteration out of the lead), nationalist arguments have little sway on my thinking generally and have no sway on my thinking as an editor about a food article. Given the reasonings offered on this page, I tend to lean towards including the article in the Israeli and Jewish cuisine categories, backing this up with sourced narrative in the text along with something unambiguous about hummus' Arab origins. As a compromise, I would also be more than ok with listing only the general, non-country-specific cats suggested above. For me, this all comes down to whether food article categories should cover only origins, or both origins and modern adaptations. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Strongly Support listing as only an Arab cuisine and Middle Eastern cuisine per Gwen Gale and Neil. 172.130.224.139 (talk) 05:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

The one country cuisine on our list that doesn't seem to be included in either cat is Category:Turkish cuisine. Slightly curious as Category:Armenian cuisine is in Category:Middle Eastern cuisine but looking at Middle East, Turkey is described as Middle Eastern but Armenia isn't. Does anyone know if it is likely to rub anyone up the wrong way adding the Turkish cat to the Middle Eastern one?--Peter cohen (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank You to Gwen Gale for bringing about the DfC to help dispel the Zionist propaganda in this article. This serves as an example to all of our Arab brothers than Zionist propaganda in articles can be successfully challenged and removed. Now maybe more people will question the validity of Zionist propaganda references in articles and help to make Wikipedia articles more precise and creditable. 172.167.185.120 (talk) 16:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not condone propoganda or WP:POINT and we do not engage in WP:NPA. We do however build articles on notability and reference. If information can be made notable it will be added to an article and if it cannot it will not be able to be added to an article. This is irrelevent from how a person or a group of people feel about this information unless we are dealing with WP:BLP. Wikipedia is not a place for one to push one's political views or biases. Igor Berger (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Copied from my talk page, where a similar message of thanks was posted

IP, I think calling edits to an article about mashed chickpeas Zionist propaganda is very unhelpful and hateful. Most cultures tend to be a bit centric, it's human nature. I'm only doing what I can to apply Wikipedia sourcing policy to the article, mostly WP:V. I think including the article in category:Israeli cuisine and category:Jewish cuisine would be ok and is supported by the sources I've seen. Meanwhile the history of hummus along with its Arab origins should be much more thoroughly sourced. I've supported the notion of using wider, non-country-specific cats only as a way to stabilize the article. It's quite possible, even likely, that Jewish people in the middle east have been eating hummus for centuries, maybe even back to Roman times, I don't know. I do know that both Jewish and Arab culture have long and deeply intertwined histories in the middle east. Can the earliest origins of hummus even be documented? Are you aware that Judaism has influenced Arab culture since long before Islamic times? I'm happy to encourage your Arab brothers to scrutinize articles for factual correctness, but I would also very much like to encourage your Arab sisters to edit Wikipedia, following the sources as they see fit. Please, let's not enable any bickering over something as yummy, healthful and wholesome as hummus. Instead, let the sources have sway and all the best to you! Gwen Gale (talk) 16:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

My attempts ot look for the history of hummus online indicate that while the name is definitely Arabic, the origins of the dish are unclear.[2] Various other sites claim it ws invented for Saladin, that it dated by the Egypt of the pharoahs or that Plato and Aristole praised it. As I said above, all four ingredients had reached Rome by the 4th century but it isn't clear in my source whether the Romans or the countries from which they acquired these ingredients actually made hummus. Someone with access to more resources on food history needs to look at it properly before any claims more specific than the dish being Middle Eastern can be justified.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

This about.com article asserts hummus was known in ancient Egypt. This answers.com article says the origins are unknown but are "hotly debated" in the middle east. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

From my personal experience I do not recall hummus being a Jewish food. When I was growing up in Israel as a little boy we did not have hummus on Shabat meals. But now when I attend Shabat in a synagogue in Thailand we eat hummus. Maybe it depends where Jewish people originated from? Are they European or Middle Eastern Jews. I know hummus is an Israeli food because it is eatten everywhere in Israel so that falls under Middle Eastern sub category, but hummus as a Jewish food I would like to see verifiable notability. Which I believe can be found by someone if they look for it. As far as who invented hummus Arab or Jewish people that probably will be very hard to do. Common knowledge states it is the Arab people, if proper references can be found that would be greatly appreciated. Igor Berger (talk) 18:14, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

eddybles.com says the origin of hummus is unknown but has been a Mediterranean staple "for thousands of years." The text says Plato and Socrates wrote about it. Truth be told, I'm not finding any sources which assert Arab or Jewish origins for hummus. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Looking at lemon, it seems that lemon juice can't have been around in either the Egypt of the pharoah's or the Greece of Plato and Socrates. No doubt chickpea-based spreads have been around for "thousands of years", but hummus as we define it in the article can't, unless its origins are closer to the Ganges than to the Mediterranean. An Arab or Turkish origin looks quite likely.--Peter cohen (talk) 19:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

The sources seem to indicate hummus existed for a at least 2-3 thousand years without added lemon juice. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I found reference to hummus to Ancient Egypt. Looks like there are some references to paintings which would be hieroglyphics http://www.ancientnile.co.uk/recipes.php Igor Berger (talk) 19:09, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes and note the recipe has wine vinegar instead of lemon juice. Gwen Gale (talk) 19:11, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I remember the first restaurant I saw when I came out Giza pyramid was KFC and hummus place. We know KFC is not Egyptian..:) Igor Berger (talk) 19:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

KFC? Oh, I thought everyone knew that's Meiji :) Gwen Gale (talk) 19:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I did not know Japanese company owns KFC now. I hope they do not buy rights to hummus..:) Igor Berger (talk) 19:37, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe how Colonel Sanders invented fried chicken like Saladin invented hummus? :) Gwen Gale (talk) 19:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Need to append WP:LAME with this fact. Igor Berger (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Erm, done :) Gwen Gale (talk) 19:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

At this rate, I wonder how long it will take someone to "revise" the Hummus entry on WP:LAME to read "They eat it in Israel Palestine" -- Nsaum75 (talk) 20:58, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

As a Wikipedia talk page discussion of hummus grows longer, the probability of it degenerating into an Arab/ Israeli priority fight approaches one.

I came here to check the spelling. I think I've lost the last of my faith in humanity. Mashed chickpeas. Deary deary me. Jamrifis (talk) 18:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

And just to rub it in, I've just reverted an edit bu a pro-Greek anti-Turk vandal who has also been at it in other food articles.--Peter cohen (talk) 19:37, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I suppose if tedious legal prohibitions prevent you from actually going out and killing members of a group of people, then you have to make do with misattributing the invention of their foodstuffs. This is a kind of progress. Jamrifis (talk) 10:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Hummus protected from editing?

I cannot believe you guys had hummus protected from editing because of some anons POINT pushers of their political agenda. Yes hummus is Arabic and will always be Arabic but it has been adopted by Israelies and makes it an Israeli food as well because of regional location of the ethnicity of the people. We should be protecting Wikipedia against alternative agenda pushers not curtailing free speech and knowledge. Anyone coming here to scream this or that and telling Wikipedians how we should behave just block them and delete their HATE comments. Now enjoy some hummus. Old Cairo has great hummus. 17:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

History of hummus

Maybe time to add a history of hummus section. Where it originated and where did it go from there. Also would be nice to add which people and what regions consider the food its basic staple. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Igorberger (talk • contribs) 19:17, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Have some hummus and some tea

Just as Odysseus traveled around the Mediterranean we invite you to do the same. As you travel and learn about the different ethnic people please have some hummus and some tea. I caution you not to become sick from the adventures of learning. Igor Berger (talk) 14:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Support :) Gwen Gale (talk) 14:42, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

disputed source

User:Gilabrand removed the answers.com citation which supported the text:

Hummus has long been a staple food in Syria and Lebanon. The dish later became popular in Jordan and Israel and has become increasingly available in America and Europe.

Hence, I've rm'd this text from the article since I don't think the history section should have any unsupported text. Is answers.com (this page, it's long, scroll way down for content) an acceptable source? Note that the content on the answers.com page is itself cited. Comments? Gwen Gale (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Taking citation of sources on face value is regarded as bad practice in the academic world. As we don't regard answers.com as a WP:Reliable source I can see four options

1. Answers.com atribute that section text to a source that I've not heard of. (Mid East & North Africa Encyclopedia.) If someone knows it to be a WP:RS we can cite that.
2. If someone has access to the cited source, then they can confirm the citation.

1. There's always a chance of another WP:RS having the same information.
2. No RS is identified and we leave the info out.

--Peter cohen (talk) 21:59, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Just find another source. I am sure tons around as to where hummus is from. Add one for each country you include if you cannot find all desired countries on one website. Igor Berger (talk) 22:02, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, sounds to me like WP:V worries so I'm ok with deleting the source and text. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at this http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mhummus.html Igor Berger (talk) 22:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

answers.com gives a link to the "Mid East & North Africa Encyclopedia"; following this shows that the contents page for Hekmatyar, Golbuddin (1940 - ) to Husayn - McMahon Correspondence (1915 - 1916) does not even mention hummus. The answers.com entry suggests that the encyclopaedia sources this to a book I have (and highly recommend), Arto der Hartoiunian's Vegetarian Dishes from the Middle East. So I checked Hartounian's entry; on page 33, he writes "This is a traditional dip -- a must on any mezzeh table; it is one of the most popular and best-known of all Syrian dishes, and in recent years has become equally popular throughout Europe and America". No mention of Lebanon, Israel, Jordan or Palestine. RolandR (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for looking it up. Does show why academics like people to chase up the citations to their sources. As a veggie, I might take up your suggestion on getting the book. (Refactored this to make my earlier post whole)--Peter cohen (talk) 19:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

My understanding is that hummus is more linked with Syria than any other ME country. Something else to keep in mind, Syria and the Lebanon share very close cultural links. Gwen Gale (talk) 00:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I added information on Israel sourced from articles on the Houston Chronicle's website (and I cited it as such) and it was removed by an IP address as "Zionist propaganda" and I was told to take my "pro-zionist agenda elsewhere". -- Nsaum75 (talk) 03:06, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Please disregard the racist remarks they where inappropriate. I looked at your edit it does not rely fit in with the format of the paragraph because no external references are made there but just generic habots of eating humus. So while the revert by IP was correct the racist remarks where not and where insulting. Igor Berger (talk) 03:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

We can use a reference link to a Website that would describe all or many different eating habits of hummus. This way it will be more general than POV. Igor Berger (talk) 03:21, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I was looking at the wrong area, I see Gwen fixed it, thanks for the reference. Igor Berger (talk) 10:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Note, the source which supports the text about use in Israel specifically characterizes hummus as Middle Eastern. Gwen Gale (talk) 10:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone please point out

that state called palestine and the development of that dish in it's history? thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.178.64.225 (talk) 08:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The article is still growing. Can you help out with some citations about hummus in Palestine? Gwen Gale (talk) 11:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Part of the issue is whether that is doubling up Jordan, since the majority of the original Mandate of Palestine was parceled into Transjordan (now simply called Jordan).

Also, the claimed source for the "Palestine" reference (google cache here since the sf chronicle is taking forever to load) says nothing about pine nuts being "traditional." The article doesn't quote any food historians or cultural historians either, it appears to be simply a puff piece which happens to include one family's personal recipe. I don't know that I can say this article qualifies for verifiability's sake on the claims made by whoever inserted the "Palestine" section and on that basis I am removing it. M1rth (talk) 07:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

That's ok. The source you removed was added in May 2007 by User:Dumarest. Two weeks ago, to save these mostly unsourced variations of hummus, I broke the text out into country (or region) specific "recipe" sections, based only on the existing text, whilst adding sources to the remaining body of the text. So if you think the Palestine section was unsupported by the source, let's wait for a source. Gwen Gale (talk) 13:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a source has shown up. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:02, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I am uncomfortable with that source; it appears to fail Wikipedia:Verifiability#Questionable_sources as Wikipedia:Rs#Extremist_sources. (see also: Institute_for_Middle_East_Understanding). M1rth (talk) 22:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the source meets WP:V, PoV and all. If you would like to introduce sources with other PoVs into the article, please do. It also might be helpful to start a section in this article about the nationalist debates about this food item. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe you're misreading policy. It's not a free-for-all to stick as many dubious sources into an article as you can, it's finding sources that actually meet criteria and representing them in an NPOV way. The source simply doesn't meet criteria. M1rth (talk) 23:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the source is dubious. Hummus is consumed all over the Middle East, by Syrians, Lebanese, Israelis, Palestinians, Jordanians, Egyptians and many others. This said, do you dispute that Palestinians consume hummus? Gwen Gale (talk) 00:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

All the rubbish from Israel propaganda sources such as the Israeli Defense Forces Cookbook fails the test of NPOV completely. M1rth, wikipedia is not a forum for theft of cultures or denial of the existense of people, their homeland, and their food at the expense of your biased beliefs. So please give up trying to cry foul when something that you apparently dont believe in is cited. (You're quite good at that BTW). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Felsner2art (talk • contribs) 01:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course I believe Palestinians eat Hummus, but I don't know where it is necessary to have a special section for each country/nationality/ethnicity that eats it. Additionally, the sourcing is still from a source that fails the extremist sources section of WP:RS. Surely you can find a better source! M1rth (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The separate sections are for national/regional/ethnic recipes, not nationalistic discussions about "propaganda" and "extremists." This is an article about food. Please calm down. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be helpful to cite both the Palestinian article and that source which mentions the Israeli Defense Forces Cookbook. After all, both Palestinians and Israelis eat hummus. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The pushing of wording like "due to Arab cultural influence" isn't about recipes. And you still haven't said why you think the source is valid, it's pretty clearly an extremist source. M1rth (talk) 05:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The source is covered by WP:V, which also notes, All articles must adhere to Wikipedia's neutrality policy, fairly representing all majority and significant-minority viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in rough proportion to the prominence of each view. Tiny-minority views and fringe theories need not be included, except in articles devoted to them. This means different viewpoints are not only acceptable in the article, but encouraged: Verifiable Israeli sources and verifiable Palestinian sources, among others, are all helpful. If there is a public debate about this food and sources can be had to describe it, this also should be noted in the article. As for "fringe" theories or "extremist" sources, I don't think the notion that hummus is consumed throughout the Middle East, across most ethnic and religious lines, is a fringe theory and I don't think an advocacy group for Palestinians is in itself "extremist" or "racist," nor do I think an Israeli publication which distributes an article about the consumption of hummus in Israel is by any stretch a tool of "Zionist propaganda." I find all such characterizations (from either side of this debate about mashed chickpeas) hateful, disruptive and thoroughly unhelpful. If the Israeli army notes mashed chickpeas in the Israeli diet, put it in the article. If a Palestinian advocacy group publishes how mashed chickpeas are prepared and presented among Palestinians, put it in the article. As for "due to Arab cultural influence," the sources rather strongly show that mashed chickpeas predate both Arab and Jewish culture (although Arab influence in the Levant may have had some sway on the adaptation of hummus among modern Israelis, I don't know). Overall however, I find this so very sad. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I see that Gabi is now trying to delete the Wikipedia article on that source. The amount of hate that people stir up in themselves about chickpea paste is ridiculous.--Peter cohen (talk) 11:20, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we should just nominate this article for deletion and let all parties involved have a proper debate, maybe per AfD keep they will find content and stop arguing one with each other. It is really sad what is being done on this article, and Gwen being so civil and level headed mediating the artcle. Igor Berger (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

While I understand the good faith and helpfulness behind your suggestion, the topic hummus is clearly notable and encyclopedic. AfD is not a forum for resolving article content. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

How about RfC, clearly we need to do something. Igor Berger (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

One has been filed already (see above) but it never showed up on the list (it seems nothing new has shown up on the list). Gwen Gale (talk) 14:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Well if you ever get tired watching this abysmal thing, just AfD it, maybe it will get deleted, and they will have nothing to argue about and go edit some articles! Igor Berger (talk) 14:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

As for characterizing the (small) Institute_for_Middle_East_Understanding as "extremist" or "racist" while this is clearly a Palestinian advocacy group, its beliefs page says: All human beings should be treated equally, regardless of gender, faith or national origin - whether they reside in the United States, Palestine, Israel or anywhere else in the world and Violence is abhorrent -- whether perpetrated by individuals or by states -- and must be repudiated in all its forms. It appears to have been founded by former Microsoft and Amazon.com executives, Palestinian-Americans (thanks to User:Peter cohen for finding the above link). Gwen Gale (talk) 16:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Another interesting source is this one which explains that the Israeli educational curriculum teaches Arab children that Arab dishes like falafel and hummus are Israeli national dishes. The perception among Arabs that hummus and other Arabic foods have been appropriated by Israel is relevant to this article, and a subject of much scholarship. I hope that people can respect that NPOV means representing all significant viewpoints on a subject, not ignoring them simply because they are contentious or offensive to some. Tiamut^talk 18:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

wow, a whole collection of essays by anti-semites in one bound volume... what WILL they think of next. Why don't you go straight for Mein Kampf? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.7.146.168 (talk) 21:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

IP, I don't see how the horrific genocide of the holocaust links up with mashed chickpeas. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Meanwhile, so with chickpeas, Jews Are The Genetic Brothers Of Palestinians, Syrians, And Lebanese, Science Daily, 9 May 2000. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

History Section

As has been noted repeatedly here, the origins of hummus are a thorny issue. Chickpeas have been in wide use for a very long time, but where and when the first true hummus was made is both a matter of speculation, and a question of definition. The history section is in bad need of editing, but since many of the things I want to change are cited, I need to bring it up here first. The text in question currently reads:

Plato and Socrates both noted the nourishing benefits of hummus (hommos in Greek), which has been a part of Greek culture at least since classical times.** An ancient Egyptian recipe calls for wine vinegar instead of lemon juice, which did not arrive in the Middle East until about the 8th century CE.*

(I have replaced the ref tags with asterisks, to show where they were without having to worry about the coding.)

Here are the problems as I see them:

• The closest I can find to a reference to hummus in Plato (and hence Socrates) is in The Republic 372c, where Socrates proposes chickpeas (as well as figs and fava beans) as dessert items for his utopian society. (I used the TLG, so can be reasonably but not completely certain that this is all there is. Can anyone find a similar claim that gives a more specific reference?)
• The phrasing as it stands implies that hommos was a word used by Plato and Socrates, when in fact, whether or not the dish existed in Europe at that time, the word certainly did not. The reference cited for this sentence, eddybles.com, does not even seem to be making this claim, as far as I can tell, rather they are given hommos as the word used by the Greeks today.
• The Ancient Egyptian recipe is speculative. The page it comes from doesn't make this totally clear, but a careful reading shows that they are offering hypothetical recipes based both on the modern cuisine, and on what evidence we have for the ancient cuisine. It is entirely plausible the Egyptians did make hummus, and if they did they would surely have used vinegar instead of lemon juice, but that's about all we can say for certain. (The same applies to the Greeks too of course)

--Iustinus (talk) 06:26, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Latest edits expunging all reference of Palestine

Gilabrand has made a series of edits [3] that in toto, expunge all references to Palestine. He has also deleted the breakdown by place for discussing regional variations, sections that are small now, but are to be expanded. Could others please contribute their opinions regarding these edits? He and I just seem to end up at loggerheads at every article we edit and I don't feel like getting into an endless back and forth with him that leads to no compromises. Thanks. Tiamut^talk 15:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

The individual sections can come back later if and when more regional recipes and serving methods show up and meanwhile, the scant mention of Israel and Palestine looks very WP:NPOV to me. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Please read it again. "Israel" is mentioned three times (Gilabrand added one new mention is his last series of edits), and all references to "Palestine" has been removed. "Palestinian territories" is mentioned once instead and in only in conjunction with one of the uses of "Israel". I'm not trying to be nitpicky here, but you seem to be overlooking what just happened. What just happened isn't very NPOV at all. Tiamut^talk 16:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, my mistake. The article was given a strong bias towards one particular country and I have reverted the edits because they were not discussed here first. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the individual country sections should come back, they make the article look better. And we just need to learn to agree even if we disagree. One source over another is not a cause to fret! Igor Berger (talk) 21:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, putting back separate sections for countries/regions would be helpful and likely stir editors to add hummus recipes and serving methods for each area. I think this would also help stabilize the article and its neutrality. For example, the section on Israel could go on at (sourced) length about hummus in modern Israel without any worries about neutrality or undue PoV/weight. Gwen Gale (talk) 22:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I have watched this article come full circle several tiems over the past few MONTHS. First some editors had issues with mentioning Israel, so country references were expanded so that Arab/Israeli information would be kept separate and each individual country/territory could state how prevalent these poor little mashed chickpeas/garbanzos were used in the aforementioned area. Then country specific references were deemed unacceptable and removed, which led to the removal of Israeli information sourced from major third party news publications. Then the term Palestine was removed and replaced with Israel. That specific edit was reverted, rightly so, but then additional Israeli sourced information was removed. Now there is discussion of re-adding country specific sections so that information about Israel, which seems to have become considered WP:POV, can be re-added. I fully support re-adding country-specific sections, however care needs to be taken that this "circular" process does not continue. It gets old and tiresome and makes editors like myself decide that its not worth the time and energy to contribute. --Nsaum75 (talk) 03:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. With four editors now expressing support for separate country/region sections, I have restored them (but removed the bit about "chickpeas off the vine" which was questioned earlier). Might I suggest that editors now focus on whatever country/region sections which interest them and stop trying to spin nationalist outlooks (of whatever kind) into this article about mashed chickpeas? Gwen Gale (talk) 04:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Plato and Socrates?!

The article currently reads "hummus, which has been a part of Greek culture at least since classical times", mentioning Plato and Socrates and a pseudo-Greek name hommos. This sounds like nonsense, and the sources given are random Web pages not written by recognized authorities (cf. WP:RS). Various pulses including chickpeas were clearly eaten by the ancient Greeks, but I don't see any evidence of anything like hummus. Next we'll be calling split-pea soup a variety of hummus. Unless someone can find good sources, I'll be removing this claim. --Macrakis (talk) 22:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Good catch. I have not been able to find anything about the Greek usage of the dish, but I'm still looking. I did find this which briefly mentions the history of chickpea usage.

In keeping with their [chickpeas] 7,000 year history, beginning in Egypt, however, there are some classic chickpea dishes, such as Middle Eastern hummus, that are also current favourites.

Now, it's not clear to me if the author is suggesting that the prepared hummus dish in 7,000 years old or if the use of chickpeas only is 7,000 years old. Anyway, I thought I would throw this out here while I look for more so we can put together a better history section for the article. Tiamut^talk 09:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

This source also point to an Egyptian origin for chickpea use in general, citing faience models of chickpeas found in Pharonictombs of the New Kingdom. It also says however, that it is not clear how the chickpeas were prepared at that time - they may simply have been roasted and salted and eaten as is. Tiamut^talk 09:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I think that all we can say is that the origins of the dish are lost in the mists of time. We know that all ingredients had reached Rome by the 4th century (Brothwell & Brothwell) but not whether the Romans or civilisations they were in contact with made hummus and we can say that Tiamat's source is one that substitutes vinegar for lemon juice in a speculative (re-)creation of Ancient Egyptian cooking but acknowledges that they don't actually know whether the Egyptians mashed their chickpeas. And we know that the modern name of the dish comes from the Arabic for chickpea and that the dish is common everywhere from around the Eastern mediteranean to beyond the Tigris--Peter cohen (talk) 12:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. So far as I can tell, nobody knows. For context, these sourced items were put in the article during an edit war over Arab-Israeli origins, to at least show hummus likely predates both cultures. Only guessing, I'd say folks in the Middle East have been mashing chickpeas for thousands of years but the earliest reference I've seen to the mashing bit is still that very hazy Saladin polemic/legend from 700 years ago. I've changed the text following this current helpful discussion. Peter's thoughts about the difference between ingredients and what's done with them are worth heeding. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Nevertheless, I don't think the indiscriminate removal of sourced content from this article is helpful. Instead, let's characterize these food-oriented sources if need be. There are plenty of hints the history of this food goes back thousands of years, there is no need for the article to imply nothing at all is known. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:35, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

There was no "indiscriminate" removal of content. I removed things that were speculative, based on poor sources, or irrelevant, based also on what seemed like a consensus in the comments above. Specifically:

• The business about "dietary staple...for thousands of years" is sourced to eddybles.com, a non-authoritative cooking blog which itself cites no sources.
• The claim that "Hummus is one of the oldest known prepared foods and has been used ... for thousands of years" is sourced to an about.com page which again cites no sources itself, and which apparently is basing the claim for the antiquity of hummus on ancient use of chickpeas.
• The "ancient Egyptian" hummus recipe comes from a random Web site, ancientnile.co.uk.
• The New Scientist article is about chickpeas, not about hummus.

If we can find reliable sources for the ancient origins, fine. But random Web pages and blogs are useless. --Macrakis (talk) 15:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd already changed the text supported bythe New Scientist cite. Is eddybles.com a blog? Food sourcing is often hard to do. As I said, let's characterize these sources. Sorry if the word indiscriminate was a bit harsh. I think sweeping would have been closer to what I meant. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

The title of eddybles.com (look in your browser's title bar) is "Eddybles: A Food Blog - Daily Sauce". Its Alexa traffic rank is 4,552,013 (!) and its About page says "Eddybles is written by Jody Eddy, a chef and food writer based in New York City." Yes, it is hard to find good information about food history, and easy to find nonsense. That doesn't mean we should settle for the nonsense.

As for "Researchers say the nutritional benefits of chickpeas may have led to the early rise of civilization there.", what the article is really about is artificial selection of chickpea varieties for nutritional value, and the lead author of the article quips that this may have to do with the rise of civilization (hardly a scholarly consensus). All fine and good, but what does it have to do with hummus? --Macrakis (talk) 15:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Hummus is made from chickpeas and we simply don't know when people started mashing them, but mashed chickpeas have clearly been around for a very long time. I wouldn't characterize all these sources as "nonsense." I think they carry through the uncertainty about the origins of this food item, whilst acknowledging it has a very long history. Meanwhile, I'd like to hear what other editors have to say about this. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

How can we "acknowledge" the "very long history" of hummus bi tahini (as opposed to chickpeas) when we don't have a single reliable source for it? Cookbooks, random web pages, blogs, etc. are terrible sources. For my part, I've looked at Sami Zubaida and Richard Tapper, A Taste of Thyme: Culinary Cultures of the Middle East ISBN 1860646034, The Oxford Companion to Food, and Claudia Roden's The Book of Middle Eastern Food (which, though a cookbook, includes much valuable reporting of medieval Arabic sources especially), and haven't (yet) found any good evidence for the age or origin of hummus bi tahini. Saying it has a "very long history" with no good sources is just original research. --Macrakis (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I think Tiamat's source [4] is better for the speculative recipe than the current source. It's a text book, albeit aimed at schoolchildren not university students.

The source itself clearly says that how the ancient Egyptians prepared chickpeas is unknown. There are lots of preparations of chickpeas that are nothing like hummus bi tahini -- stews with and without meat, soups, plain boiled chickpeas dressed with oil and lemon, roasted, chickpea-balls in stew, deep-fried chickpea balls (like falafel), used instead of flour in various recipes (see Gram flour), etc. A textbook's imaginative recipe is not a source for the history of hummus. --Macrakis (talk) 17:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I've drafted a paragraph over at User:Peter cohen/sandbox on the availability of the ingredients in the ancient world but lack of clear evidence on origins of the dish. Comments?--Peter cohen (talk) 17:41, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

It's more helpful in describing what the cited sources say and putting things in context. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:53, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks good, though I'd keep it simpler; after all, the history of chick peas etc. is a wikilink away. And I don't see the point of including the completely speculative ancient Egyptian recipe. After all, hummus is thought of as a Levantine dish, the way falafel/ta'amia is thought of as an Egyptian dish. I would stay simple: "Though the main ingredients of hummus, chickpeas and tahini, have a long documented history, the dish of hummus bi tahini is not mentioned in any ancient sources." It would be nice if we had at least one terminus ante quem so we could add "and is first documented n 1111". --Macrakis (talk) 17:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I think the length is ok, maybe it can be tweaked to read more simply. Ok by me to say first known documentation of hummus was in 1111 or something like it. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

(undent) Well, has anyone found evidence of how old hummus bi tahini is? I still haven't seen a single RS. Certainly in the Levant it is considered a 'traditional' dish, but then baguettes are considered a traditional Parisian bread, but were invented less than 200 years ago. --Macrakis (talk) 15:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Whilst you claim it as a Levantine dish, it is interesting to note that the Turkish Wikipedia classifies it as a Turkish dish. So the are from which it might have originated extends further than the Levant.

Anyone know who these people are? [5] They at least say the origin is unknown.--Peter cohen (talk) 13:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Another food source, which likely makes it somewhat but not wholly reliable. Enough sources say its origins go back thousands of years that I think this should be mentioned, but the reliabilty of the sources can/should also be mentioned in the text. For what it's worth, I ignore terms like traditional when dealing with historical mysteries like this and I don't think it's too meaningful to compare hummus with baguettes for long, since nobody is claiming baguettes have been around for thousands of years. Gwen Gale (talk) 13:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Choice is the Australian consumer magazine. The article you point to is mostly about commercially-prepared hummus, and it says ridiculous things like "There are lots of versions, ‘invented’ in lots of places, which explains why you’ll find many different spellings (hoummos, hommos, hommus, homous, humos". It is not a reliable source. I don't care that many poor sources claim origins going back thousands of years when we have not found a single reliable source backing it up. Poor sources simply copy each other, so it is easy for nonsense to be widespread. --Macrakis (talk) 14:53, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I disagree these food article sources are wholly unreliable, while agreeing with you that much care should be taken with them so as not to mislead readers with unqualified assertions. I'd like to hear from other editors as to what they think about how these sources should be handled. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I went through the sources one by one above. Where do you disagree? Where do you see a single reputable scholarly source for the antiquity of hummus bi tahini (I use the full name to emphasize that we're not talking about chickpeas, but the dish)? Where's the evidence that it has been eaten for centuries? -- I agree that that's plausible, but let's get some solid sources. Where's the evidence that it has been historically eaten "throughout the Middle Eastern world"? -- my impression, but I don't have good sources for this, either, is that it is a specialty of the Levant/Greater Syria, and not of other parts of the Middle East such as Egypt, Arabia, and western Anatolia, where it is a fairly recent import.

On another point, it is called a staple, which also doesn't seem right except in the loosest sense of "a common food" rather than the accurate sense of "a basic food". --Macrakis (talk) 17:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

All of these assertions in the text have been gleaned from the food article sources. I agree they're not wholly reliable, I agree the wording should reflect this, I do not agree these sources and text should be removed altogether from the article. Scholarly sources for many food items are far and few between. I'm still waiting for input from other editors. This is not an emergency, with time and discussion I think we'll be able to find stronger sources and skive off at least some of these ambiguities. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, good sources for food history are often hard to find; conversely there is a lot of speculation and myth-making around. Sources get used loosely. So, for example, I've seen the claim that feta cheese was known to Homer. Wow! But wait! This is apparently based on a reference to (unspecified) cheese in Homer, and Andrew Dalby, who knows these sources quite well, doesn't find any positive indication of feta before the 15th century.... That doesn't mean it didn't exist; but we don't have any evidence for it.

Back to hummus bi tahini, we do have some sources for medieval Arabic cookery, notably al-Baghdadi, and apparently "I've seen all the major INGREDIENTS of hummus, tabbouleh, and kibbeh in medieval Arabic sources, but those particular dishes are conspicuously absent." Not a WP:RS, and lack of evidence proves little, but.... --Macrakis (talk) 19:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

You know, it sounds like we more or less agree, or can find a way to agree, on the source worries. Maybe what we have to deal with is my wild glark that folks have been mashing chickpeas for 30-40 centuries, and your wild glark this maybe has only been going on for about 10 :) Gwen Gale (talk) 19:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

(undent)

A friend recently read Everyday Life and Consumer Culture in Eighteenth-Century Damascus (ISBN 029598676X) and tells me that the author reports that in the 18th century, hummus bi tahini is well-documented in Damascus, but not found elsewhere. I'll try to track down the exact reference. --Macrakis (talk) 02:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted this edit as original research. A reference to hummus in Damascus three centuries ago does not support an assertion that hummus originated there at that time. Dozens, if not hundreds of references can be found which date hummus back at least 1000 years and many sources assert this food could be much, much older. Yes, most of these are food sources, but although they must be approached more carefully, there is no evidence they can be ignored. Please bring any discussion to this talk page before making significant changes to this potentially controversial article, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Huh?? You yourself say "Scholarly sources for many food items are far and few between." but when I bring one to the article, you remove it and call it "original research"?? I did bring discussion to the talk page multiple times, and didn't see any refutation of my criticisms of the silly sources (random Web pages!).

I also removed content that is not relevant to this article (about the chick pea); why do you think it belongs here? We have a full article on chick peas. --Macrakis (talk) 01:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The statement above "the author reports that in the 18th century, hummus bi tahini is well-documented in Damascus, but not found elsewhere" does not agree with the interpretation you edited into the article, Hummus seems to have originated sometime around the 18th century in Damascus, and only later spread to other parts of the Middle East. Your apparent use of the source in this way is called spanning, which is a form of original research. From what you have presented about this source, it does not support an assertion that hummus originated in Damascus during the 18th century. Either way, I have asked you to discuss major changes here on the talk page before making them but instead, you have reverted and seem to be ignoring my comments about the other sources (which clearly represent more than "web pages" a phrase which you have edited into the article). Please put the article back to its previous state so that we can discuss your source here first, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

As for the information on the early history of chickpeas, I see nothing untowards about briefly providing sourced information about hummus' main ingredient in an encyclopedia article about hummus (noted, you kept the historical reference to chickpeas this time around). Gwen Gale (talk) 02:01, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I am even more confused about your position here. You reasonably object that I am over-interpreting the one good source we have (and I have edited the text in response), yet you seem to want to include content from utterly unreliable sources, simply because they say something explicitly. If you're going to argue "scholarly standards", then let's just drop the rubbishy sources completely.

I left in the references to the history of chickpeas to avoid dealing with two issues at once. I do still believe they don't belong here. Should the article about coq au vin talk about when chicken was domesticated and when wine was first made? Should the article about the croissant (whose principal ingredient is wheat flour) talk about the historical importance of the domestication of wheat? --Macrakis (talk) 03:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Scholarly sources are wonderful, when they can be had. Meanwhile WP:V and WP:RS talk about reliable sources. I don't think a single source such as the one you've provided can support a sweeping assertion that hummus was unknown throughout the ME outside Damascus when there are so many food articles to be had which assert hummus has been prepared in the mideast at least since classical times. As I've said before, food sources must be approached with care but they are by no means codswallop. Gwen Gale (talk) 03:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

What on earth do you mean by "food sources"? It appears you mean "low-quality food sources" (a.k.a. codswallop) like blogs, about.com, and some Web page about ancient Egypt. Not one of the sources used to support the antiquity of hummus bi tahini in this article would be usable as a source in any reputable "food source" such as Gastronomica or the Oxford Companion to Food. The fact that many low-quality sources agree is not terribly interesting.

I have reworded the well-sourced claim to say simply "An early reference to hummus comes from 18th-century Damascus, at which time it appears to have been unknown elsewhere in the Middle East." Do you have an earlier reference? By "reference", I mean something supported by contemporary documents or other evidence, not just assertions with no supporting evidence. --Macrakis (talk) 12:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

You can't pick and choose only the references you agree with. What worries me the most though, is you tried to use that single source to assert that hummus originated in Damascus less than three centuries ago, an assertion which is widely unsupported, even by the source you cited. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Gwen Gale here. There is evidence that Hummus is a very old dish. Claiming that it originated in Damascus in the 18th century based on one source (which doesn't even say that) is inappropriate. I found a link to a book which I wish I had full access to here. Entitled Arabic Recipes & History For Medieval Feasts, it lists Hummus among the vegetable dishes covered. The synopsis says:

200+ Arabic Recipes (with variations) and Histories on food origins. Represented by every major Mediterranean Arabic culture. The time-frame spans from the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans to approximately 1600’s A.D. with the introduction and cultivation by the Old World of the food-stuffs from the New World (N. & S. Americas). Other "Histories" include referances to 4 medieval Arabic writers; Koran referances concerning foods (forbidden and acceptable); and the observances for the month of Ramadam (21 recipes for traditional foods included).

We can't make any definitive conclusions without seeing what the entry for Hummus says, but it's clear that it is older than the 18th century (since the book stops at the 1600s) and that it is not confined to Damascus. Tiamut^talk 14:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, check out this source which discusses where the chickpea originated and how the Arabs travelled with it everywhere they went, introducing it to other cultures. True, it says nothing about when the recpie for Hummus emerged, but considering that Hummus means "chickpea" in Arabic, the history of the chickpea in brief, is relevant here. Tiamut^talk 14:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Another interesting piece of information comes from this book which discusses hummus within the context of meze dishes and food customs of the Arabs which were spread by them throughout Eruope (e.g. in the Spanish custom of tapas). We need more information about the cultural context surrounding the dish. Anyway, just adding things others may want to add themselves. If not, I'll try to do it myself in the days to come. Tiamut^talk 14:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference. This looks like a good cookbook, though I'm not sure it's particularly reliable for food history. It doesn't include a bibliography or references to other works, not even mentioning al-Baghdadi, who seems pretty fundamental for any discussion of the history of Middle Eastern food.

As for the text you refer to on page 22, it says simply that maza "range from simply presented olives or cheese to ... eggplant puree and hummus" (notice the use of the present tense here). Then two paragraphs later, it says "The serving of these tidbits of food is believed to have been carried by the Arabs to the Iberian Peninsula during the 900 years the Arabs were in that part of Europe." That is, the custom of serving maza was spread. It does not say or imply that hummus was one of the maza that the Arabs brought to Iberia -- in fact, as far as I know hummus isn't a traditional Iberian dish.

So I don't think we can conclude anything at all about the history of hummus from this source. --Macrakis (talk) 23:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Also note the old "Saladin did it" legends, which I glark are rather much like saying Colonel Sanders invented fried chicken. We have a long way to go on this, let's please give it some time. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I take it "glark" is some sort of slang for "guess" or "speculate"? It might be better to stick to standard English. --Macrakis (talk) 23:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

glark [6][7][8][9] Gwen Gale (talk) 06:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I still think it is perverse to place any credence at all in the random Web pages (with no primary sources, no secondary sources, nothing!) that are being cited for the history of hummus, but if we're going to use them, let's at least put them after the general statement that the history of hummus is unknown! Let's also make clear that Grehan has documentary evidence for Damascus. The negative part (no evidence elsewhere) is harder.... --Macrakis (talk) 02:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Please stop removing sourced information from this article. I don't think you understand Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. Either way, you can't exclude food sources from an article about food and over time, you will not be able to edit war this article into saying that hummus mashed chickpeas have existed for less than three centuries. Gwen Gale (talk) 05:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Gwen, I removed nothing from the article -- I left in all the poor sources -- but I did reorganize the paragraph to start with the big picture that its origin is not known, which seems like a good place to start. You, on the other hand, just reverted my attempts at good-faith improvement of the article, which is very unwikipedialike. I also don't understand what your complaint about verifiability is. I refer to a published book, which is the core of verifiability. Surely you're not suggesting that only material found on the Web is verifiable -- if so, you should review WP:V.

I understand Wikipedia's policies quite well, having made thousands of edits over several years, on among other things, food-related subjects. For example, with other editors, we managed to remove the low-quality references claiming that baklava was ancient Greek or whatever and base its history section on good sources (even if my fellow-Greeks are unhappy about it). Now I see that you have added yet another low-quality source on the history of hummus, from an Australian consumer magazine. Piling on low-quality sources does not improve articles. Next we'll be citing the National Enquirer for civil war history.

You keep referring to your low-quality sources as "food sources", which seems to indicate that you're unaware that there is in fact an extensive literature on food history. I cited a few good-quality sources above, and noted that alas they had nothing to say about hummus.

You have also, in your latest comment, shifted the discussion from hummus bi tahini, the subject of this article — a quite specific dish involving not just chickpeas but also, well, tahini (as well as lemon juice and garlic), to "mashed chickpeas". This reminds me of the editor over at doner kebab who tried to redefine it as roast meat in general! --Macrakis (talk) 12:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

There is no evidence mashed chickpeas first showed up in Damascus less than 300 years ago, which is what your edit would more or less imply to the casual reader. I strongly suggest we wait for input from other editors now. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

There is far less evidence that hummus bi tahini (the subject of this article, not generic "mashed chickpeas") existed in ancient Egypt.

You suggest we "wait for input from other editors", but only after adding yet another poor-quality source and moving the general statement (which is perhaps the only thing we all agree on here) that the origins of hummus are not known. Nice. --Macrakis (talk) 21:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Macrakis asked me for my input, so here it is. From what I can tell, the sources provided for the sentence "Many cuisine-related sources describe Hummus as one of the oldest known prepared foods" are anything but scholarly. They all are articles that mainly focus on how to prepare to hummus, and then list small sidenotes on its "history". The first one is by someone named "Saad Fayed", who describes himself as "a restauranteur with an avid interest in preparing Middle Eastern cuisine." IMO, he has no authority in the history of the food. He cites no sources, in addition to the second source (choice.com.au). Ironically, the third source does include footnotes, but the footnote says "Information obtained from Wikipedia"! (see [10]) Gwen Gale, I would feel much more comfortable with including this sentence or anything similar if you can prove to me that most mainstream scholars hold this view, as it is our job as Wikipedians to reflect that. When you're citing something about history, cookbooks aren't always the best way to go. Khoikhoi 18:40, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing worries (continued)

Thanks for commenting about this. Could you please define "mainstream [food] scholars"? Could you name some? Meanwhile, as I have said before, one must be wary of cookbooks and food articles but this does not mean they cannot be cited (or ignored out of hand). Moreover, the article clearly states that the origins of hummus are unknown and qualifies any language used to assert how long this food might have been around. If you can find any scholarly or otherwise reliable sources which describe the history of hummus, please let us know about them, thanks. This article has a long way to go. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Gwen, I have already mentioned several mainstream food scholars above. For more, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/sources (which I wrote -- I just added some more info there). --Macrakis (talk) 03:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

It would be wonderful to find some which describe the history of hummus, with sources. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. But your comment above implied that you were skeptical that there was such a thing as "mainstream food scholars". I have now pointed you at some. Feel free to consult them. --Macrakis (talk) 23:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

http://insidehookah.com/site/content/view/28/ clearly cites Wikipedia, within quotes, only for a comment having to do with folklore about garlic in hummus being used to keep men and women separated. I've never seen any assertion like that in this article, they maybe got it from another one. Either way, based on punctuation and placement of the footnote mark, I don't think the source is citing Wikipedia for any assertion about the age of Hummus. Gwen Gale (talk) 18:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, that is what the Wikipedia foodnote is for. So what is the source of the rest of their claims? None, as far as I can see. --Macrakis (talk) 03:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Which is why the article text already says Many cuisine-related sources describe hummus as one of the oldest known prepared foods rather than saying authoritatively that this is so. I must say again, this article has far to go, we need more reliable sources for the history of this food. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

(undent) The fact that lots of Web articles on food claim (without any evidence or sources) that hummus is very old is mildly interesting, just as it is mildly interesting that many Web articles on Osama bin Laden claim that he was a playboy as a young man, that many Web articles repeat the story that the croissant is connected to the Ottoman siege of Vienna/Budapest (take your pick), that many Web articles on health assert that vaccines containing thimerosal cause autism, etc. etc. The fact that there are many such poor sources doesn't make them any more reliable as sources. They might be interesting to report on as folklore, though.

I suggest wording similar to what we have in the baklava article:

The history of baklava is not well-documented; but although it has been claimed by many ethnic groups, the best evidence is...

something like

The history of hummus is not well-documented; but although it is often claimed to be very ancient, the earliest evidence for it is in the Levant in the 18th century.

This does not say that it isn't older, only that we don't have any evidence for its being older. Then again, it's not as though medieval Middle Eastern cooking is undocumented. There's al-Baghdadi (13th century), Ibn Sayyar al-Warraq (10th century), etc. (nice bibliography at [11]). You'd think that someone would have written down the recipe or mentioned the dish.... And of course if and when we find evidence for earlier origins, we revise the article.

I certainly agree that it would be nice to have more and better sources for the history of the dish, but the fact that we only have one good source so far doesn't mean that we should treat poor sources as though they were good sources. Please re-read WP:V and WP:RS and you'll see that WP policy and guidelines instruct us to stick to good sources. --Macrakis (talk) 23:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Please keep in mind, there is a tradition in the ME that hummus dates back at least to Saladin (a thousand years back but please see my following note about folklore) and the article doesn't even mention this yet. I do not think the sources in any way support the statement the earliest evidence for it is in the Levant in the 18th century. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that hummus is much older and it would be highly misleading to readers to say otherwise. Gwen Gale (talk) 09:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I think characterizing the cookbook histories as folklore is very helpful to readers and I have done so in the narrative. Thanks for suggesting that. Gwen Gale (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I sort of differ from that. The folklore addition in the article leaves me with the impression that all that food source stuff is a myth or should be looked on as a myth, sort of like using a Grimm reference in an article on wells on hills. I think the meaning of folklore in the hummus article needs a bit more explanatory length. --Dumarest (talk) 11:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Folklore is not myth, nor is it fairy tales for kids. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

In the Bible? Come off it!

I have just removed the claim that hummus is mentioned in the Bible. I've looked at the links recommended at Book of Ruth and both the Jewish and the Christian translations are agreed that bread (not pita) is being dipped in vinegar (not hummus). The reference is either eccentric or humorous; it certainly does not point to a mainstream interpretation for that verse.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

"Whether such food is indeed Lebanese is up to debate, though, with Egyptian laying claim to falafel and Syria to tabouleh. Some cookbooks attribute the origin of hummus to Saladin with one of the earliest descriptions coming from 18th century Damascus.

"The Hummus Blog, dedicated to all things related to the chickpea dip, reports that hummus was even mentioned in the Bible.

Abboud, however, was optimistic that Israel would lose its battle in international courts and accordingly be prevented from “stealing” such products and passing them off as authentically Israeli". http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=hummus+in+the+bible&type=facebook&fr=vmn&u=www.alarabiya.tv/articles/2008/10/07/57845.html&w=hummus+bible+bibles&d=ek2yWkLURo-u&icp=1&.intl=us

Clearly this isn't a settled matter. (Wallamoose (talk) 06:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC))

Palestine (term)

What shall we call Palestine?

• Palestine (the historic geographical/cultural region)
• Occupied Palestinian Territories (the "UN term" for the Israeli-occupied territories)
• Palestinian territories (same as OPT/IOT, but duplicated in another Wikipedia article)

Please share your thoughts, thanks. Gwen Gale (talk) 13:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

As I noted on your talk page, we should try to avoid using the term "Palestine" in articles unless referring to pre-1948 entities. As I noted in the edit summary, modern day usage of the term can be seen as POV, as it suggests recognition of the State of Palestine. Plus, even if it wasn't POV, the area described by the term Palestine includes Israel which is featured in a separate section in the article, so we need to be specific about which part of the region we're referring to (i.e. the territories). Ergo Palestinian territories is the best option. пﮟოьεԻ 57 13:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

However, the article section isn't describing use of this food in the area limited by Occupied Palestinian Territories. I'm going to try Among Palestinian people. Please let me have your thoughts. Gwen Gale (talk) 13:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Depends where you are referring to - the Syrian section has a bit on its disapora - would this be the same kind of thing? I wouldn't really have any objections with Palestinian people, though I think it looks a bit odd when listed amongst countries. пﮟოьεԻ 57 14:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes but wouldn't you think any reader who is at all familiar with these controversies would understand? Also, my thinking is, this is a cultural reference having to do with food, not geopolitics. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree with the omission of the term Palestine. This is a cultural food article and I do not believe there is an implication of a state or country when saying Palestine. It is indisputable that the region of Israel and the occupied territories was called Palestine before the establishment of the state of Israel. The remaining territories are recognized as the region of modern day Palestine. Note I said region, not state. I feel there is nothing POV about calling these areas of which the majority of their inhabitants and the world understand is the area of Palestine. Calling it "Palestinian Territories" refers to discussions about states, note about a geographic region. On a brief tangent: even Facebook allows users in these areas to refer to their location as Palestine. It is a legimate and valid statement of a geographic region. Please do not attempt to make this political. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeaceinPalestine (talk • contribs) 17:11, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Hummus history - again

I have made an attempt to sort of redo the entire section. And per Gwen, I have the material in a sandbox for discussion. Note that the material is referenced, and the references will be put into Wiki form if a decision is to put it on the page. --Dumarest (talk) 16:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Houmous

Houmous is most definitely the most common, indeed almost universal, spelling in the UK. This is I suppose in accord with British English using 'ou' where US English uses 'u' eg color vs colour. The sentence beginning "The three most common spellings for the word as transliterated into English" should ideally be rewritten to give the most common spellings in the different dialects of English. But sources are needed. 128.232.228.174 (talk) 18:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC) PS: this talk page is too long, text entry is lagging horrendously on my system. Can someone please archive?

The OED's main entry is under hummus The citations in the current CD-ROM edition are as follows

1955 E. David Bk. Mediterranean Food 158 Hummus.+ Cook the chick peas+pound them, [etc.]. 1967 Guardian 8 Dec. 6/4 Order the paste of ground chick peas, oil, and lemon which is called hummus. 1969 M. J. Philippou 101 Arabian Delights 48 Hoummos ib bandora. Chick peas in tomato sauce.+ Hoummos ib Taheeneh. Chick peas in Taheeneh. 1970 Simon & Howe Dict. Gastron. 223/1 Hummus bi Tahina, a widely known, traditional+Arab dish of cooked, puréed chick peas.+ It is served as a mezze or appetizer in Arab countries. 1973 Nation Rev. (Melbourne) III. 31 Aug. 1460/4 Passing up the usual hummus as a starter.

So suggested spelling is not supported in a major UK dictionary.

The 1970 citation is worth noting for the debate on origins. --Peter cohen (talk) 23:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Hummus history - again again

I have made an attempt to sort of redo the entire section. And per Gwen, I have the material in a sandbox for discussion. Note that the material is referenced, and the references will be put into Wiki form if a decision is to put it on the page. --Dumarest (talk) 23:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

So where is this sandbox? --Peter cohen (talk) 13:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Dumarest forgot, it's at User:Dumarest\Sandbox. Gwen Gale (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Olive oil

Isn't Olive oil another ingredient in hummus that should be mentioned in the intro? I don't recall seeing a recipe that uses any other type of oil.--Peter cohen (talk) 15:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

But but - olive oil is mentioned, as the olive is noted, from what as I remember I used from material you had written on this topic. --Dumarest (talk) 00:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It is mentioned in the article. But not in the lead para. I was aware that the article listed only four main ingredients as opposed to the five listed by one of the sites we reference. I had in my head it was garlic that was missing, but then I noticed yesterday that it was the oil. Hence my addition of the sentence about garlic.--Peter cohen (talk) 10:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Blanket revert of my edits

OK, you blanket reverted by edits, which were aimed at improving the English, claiming I removed "sourced" material. That is hogwash, but I get the hint. You are in control, so I will say toodleloo and allow this article to continue on its merry, pidgin English way. --Gilabrand (talk) 09:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The English is not "pigden" or "crappy" (as you wrote in your edit summary) and moreover, you indeed removed sourced content from an article which has now settled down after months of edit warring and controversy. Gwen Gale (talk) 09:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Show me where.--Gilabrand (talk) 10:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Show you what? Gwen Gale (talk) 10:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Where I deleted sourced material. "Two principal ingredients is more widely understood" - since when are ingredients "understood," widely or otherwise. Hummus is not a "food item" but a "food" or a "dietary staple." Where is the source that proves those three spellings are the "most common." Etc. etc. I stand by my claim that this article is badly written.--Gilabrand (talk) 10:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Spellings, ingredients, statements of historical uncertainty as to its unknown origins. As for the writing, I'm afraid I think you're mistaken. Gwen Gale (talk) 10:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The only statements I removed were the "Wikipedian analysis" tacked on to the end of sentences - not the claims themselves or any reference material. If mangled English is your thing, t'fadal. --Gilabrand (talk) 10:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

(undent)

The reason I have stopped contributing to this article is precisely what Gilabrand is saying, that Gwen Gale is "in control" and doesn't seem to tolerate collaborative editing. She has been defending the very poor-quality sources (insidehookah.com!) used to prove questionable points (that "hummus [is] one of the oldest known prepared foods"); and has interpreted a source that explicity says that its origin is unknown (poetically expressed as "the origin is lost in antiquity") to support the notion that its history "stretches back to antiquity". For some reason, she seems to be attached to the idea that hummus bi tahini is very ancient (see discussion in this Talk page). This will remain a poor-quality article until it becomes founded in high-quality sources, honestly interpreted. --Macrakis (talk) 16:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Gilabrand's edits implied that hummus is thousands of years old, meanwhile you seem to think hummus is only a few hundred years old. Gildabrand's remarks about the article's English being "pigden" and "crappy" were both mistaken and disruptive and I should say, most of the text was written by other editors, not me. So far as I can tell, you can't put up with any interpretation of this topic other than your own without ridiculing other editors. Both of these complaints have strong emotional tones and seem to be stirred up by strong nationalistic/cultural biases which, before this article settled down in the past few months, were its bane. I'd be very happy to see the article carry more about the origins of hummus but so far, the sources (both reliable and less so) have aught to say about that. I've told you before, Macrakis, that the sources on hummus are altogether very thin and I think if we shared the same PoV on this you wouldn't be complaining about me at all. So, if you would like to contribute to this article, I would humbly suggest you stop attacking me and find some reliable sources on the topic (not an easy task). If either of you are truly worried about the sourcing, wording and/or PoV of this article, I strongly suggest an RFC on the topic, which could hopefully bring a few uninvolved editors and helpful comments into the discussion. Gwen Gale (talk) 16:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Gwen Gale - My remarks are neither mistaken nor disruptive, and I have as much right to edit the article as anyone else. Correcting non-native English and removing unsourced analysis is not POV and has nothing to do with "emotions" or "nationalism." --Gilabrand (talk) 17:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

We'll have to disagree on your interpretation of this article's English text. This is not to say the article can't be improved. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no a prioris on this subject, neither nationalistic nor anything else. As is obvious from my name, I am Greek, and hummus is simply not part of Greek culinary tradition (though nowadays it is served in Greek restaurants). I have in fact taken the trouble to find reliable sources, which have been marginalized because you and other editors find it hard to believe the evidence that hummus bi tahini is only a few hundred years old, and we continue to have material about the antiquity of chick-peas and of sesame as though those were relevant. The main emotion I have about all this is frustration that we are tolerating such a poor article based on such poor sources. --Macrakis (talk) 17:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Gildabrand's edits heightened the emphasis on the "the antiquity of chick-peas and of sesame as though those were relevant." I don't know and could care less if hummus bi tahini is 4000 or 400 years old. To be straighforward about it with you, if I had to guess, I'd say it goes back about a thousand years and that folks have been mashing chickpeas for thousands of years but I do not know if this is true and I have yet to see a reliable source which asserts an origin. The one or two sources you found note that hummus bi tahini was observed a few centuries ago and you've tried to span this into an interpretation that it originated only a few centuries ago. Maybe it did, but I have yet to see any source which asserts this. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Gwen, thanks for your recent edits. They're a big improvement. --Macrakis (talk) 03:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Quotation of Simon & Howe

There is a strange passage in the current version of the article:

Hummus is noted in a source cited by the OED as a traditional Arab dish.

The fact that the OED uses a source does not make the source reliable; the OED is simply reporting word usage. And it is a bad idea to quote second-hand like this, since the surrounding context may be useful. As it happens, I have a copy of André Simon's Dictionary of Gastronomy, and alas it is not a very good source for anything but traditional French cooking; certainly not a useful source for the history of Levantine cuisine. Still, I certainly don't disagree with the sentiment that Hummus bi tahina is a widely-known, traditional Arab dish. But we know that, and it adds nothing to the History section. "Traditional" could mean that it dates to 1930 or to 1700 or even to 700 AD. That is why this passage should be removed.

When I did remove it for all the good-faith reasons mentioned above, with an informative edit comment ("The fact that the OED uses a source does not make it more (or less) reliable; anyway, this source doesn't add anything here; we know hummus is a traditional Arab dish"), User:Gwen Gale restored it with the rather snippy comment "rs reliably sourced content, please don't do that again", as though somehow her editorial judgement was automatically superior to mine. At worst, this is a disagreement about whether the source is "reliable", so I see no reason that she should decide unilaterally that I "shouldn't do that again", as though she owned the article; I ask that she be more respectful of other editors' judgement. --macrakis (talk) 22:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I find it odd that you would remove sourced content from an article because "we know that." Who is we, for starters? Gwen Gale (talk) 22:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

You have a point there. Though it is clear from the whole article that the word is Arabic and that there are lots of Arab relations, for some reason the article doesn't clearly say in its opening paragraph that this is a typically Levantine dish. I will add -- with a truly reliable source. --macrakis (talk) 23:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful! Gwen Gale (talk) 23:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Can we get rid of the OED/André Simon thing now, please? --macrakis (talk) 23:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

NPOV Israel vs Palestine

Section is written solely using sources that appear in publications which are genenerally supportive of the Israeli State. Although this is English Wikipedia, and a by its very nature has a bias towards viewpoints from english speaking countries (US/UK etc), it fails to faithfully represent viewpoints of Arab and Muslim countries in regards to the Israeli adoption of Hummus. Perhaps someone should consult the Arabic or Farsi versions of Wikipedia to help balance out the information presented here; or at the VERY LEAST consult and INCLUDE some middle-eastern (non Israel) based sources for the Israel & Palestine sections. Avayaricoh (talk) 22:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the categories at the bottom of the article, you will also see that we classify the dish as Arabic and Levantine. The main people fighting for the status quo, such as Gwen Gale and myself have repeatedly reverted any direct categorisation of this food item as Israeli.

If you looked properly, you would see that the Palestinian section sources the Institute for Middle East Understanding who would be very surprised to hear that they are pro-Israeli. Also, if you look at the rest of the article, you will see that the earliest documented source we could find for hummus places it in Damascus and that we say that the dish in Israel is associated with the Arab (i.e Palestinian) or Mizrahi (i.e. Arabic Jews) population. We don't have a section on the politics of hummus, but we certaily do not support any claim that teh dish is qunitessentially Israeli.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:26, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

In fact our first centre says its Levantine Arab.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Page structure

Agreeing with Gwen Gale that "this article is about the food item hummus, it's not about nationalistic disputes", I have reverted the last two edits. The article was organized by countries, plus the Palestinian Authority, listed alphabetically, and not by "regions". That seems a logical enough scheme. Let's not politicize the food or the page, or the latter will see-saw back and forth and never stabilize. Count me as part of a consensus (hopefully growing) to keep the current Serving methods subsection names & sequence. Hertz1888 (talk) 23:15, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I strongly object to this type of editing. You seemingly have ended discussion or debate on this as if you have consenses on this, which is incorrect. If you search through the discussion of the term Palestine, you will see that while the term "palstinian territories" is used by United States and Israeli political figures (to make clear it is not a state yet for geopolitical reasons) the world in general acknowledges the area of historic Palestine (that is not part of Israel proper) as "Palestine". There was a team from "Palestine", not the "Palestinian Territories" in the 2008 Olympic opening ceremony reflected the world acceptance of this term. You are right, keep the politics out of it. Palestine is not a country but acknowledge to be a semi-autonomous region that will eventually become one. More important, Palestinians and the rest of the world refer to their homeland as "Palestine". These pages should acknowledge respect for people and the truth. Finally, your argument for your last edit is that it is a listing of countries. Since neither "Palestine" nor the "Palestinian Territories" is a country, that argument cannot endorse either term. I would ask that this entry be reverted to "Palestine" as it had been for so long before this page came under attack from political fanatics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth-mn (talk • contribs) 10:32, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

As an editor I do support the term Palestine as the most neutral, likewise as I support the term Israel and not the politically loaded term State of Israel. However I'm here mostly as a mediator/admin, so as such I support editor consensus and hence, I'm neutral as to whether these cultural sections would be called Palestine/Palestinian Territories or Israel/State of Israel. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

A feature of Palestine is that it is ambiguous. We have used Palestine in the history section to indicate the region in which various ingredients were known to be grown in pre-history. It is now being used to describe the political area that consists of those parts of historical Palestine that are not recognised as parts of Israel. The borders are essetially arbitrary - where the tanks and troops happened to be at the time of the armistice. There might be an advantage on considering Israel and Palestine together. The same variant of hummus is described in both sections - indicating a continutity of culture between "Palestinians" in the territories and "Arab-Israelis" in Israel. Similarly, there are many Israeli settlements in the territories where hummus is likely to adhere to Israeli models. It might make some sense to discuss how there are traditional Palestinian versions of hummus that are popular in both Israel and the territories; some versions associated with the Mizrahi which might for all I know either be distinctive to Mizrahi culture or may actually be variants imported from Iraq etc and there might also be "fusion" versions which developed in Israel (or even in Palestine under the mandate) influenced by Ashkhenazi cuisine.--Peter cohen (talk) 13:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

This makes me think perhaps a straight narrative, with no subsection headers, could make it easier to write about the many and sundry cultural intermixings in presentation. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:07, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Truth-mn, when you say, "I strongly object to this type of editing", I hope that does not mean that you object to collaborative editing. One of the mainstays of WP is to seek consensus where controversy exists. I was advocating a certain position and hoping for others to join me, but was also expecting discussion. I am glad to see that developing. Pending the outcome I thought it best to leave in place one of the least political versions. I believe the place names ultimately used should reflect the official names of the countries or jurisdictions involved, but I recognize that agreement on those may be difficult. As a suggestion, might we switch to a listing of cultures ("Lebanese culture", "Turkish culture", "Israeli culture", etc.)? That would immediately remove geopolitical boundaries (& maybe the associated issues) from the picture. Isn't the important thing to be able to focus on a wonderful food item shared by many peoples, worldwide, and the variations encountered? Hertz1888 (talk) 14:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Calling each sub-section by adjective, Egyptian, Lebanese, Israeli, Palestinian and so on fits the cultural pith of these descriptions, would end any worries of mine and might get a broader consensus (no need to put culture at the end of each, by the bye). Gwen Gale (talk) 15:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

The suggestions are interesting, but it would sound a little strange to label each heading that way, but if you think that would be best, I have no other objections. I just don't know why all the fuss exists about the word "Palestine". It is really unfounded. Perhaps as a header for the whole section we can put "preparations by country/region" and that way, perhaps, there would be no objections to reinstating "Palestine". I benefit of this header would be to open the door (hopefully) for more entries into preparations that are truly regional (within a particular country or across many). There are so many different types of preparations, even within the already-mentioned countries that I feel further elaboration is inevitable. Hertz1888, what I meant when I stated my objection was nothing personal or angry. I just felt that there was no conclusive discussion prior to removing the word "Palestine", even though it was the consensus page for quite some time. If anything, much of the discussion on this page shows argument against removing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth-mn (talk • contribs) 17:25, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I would go along comfortably with Gwen Gale's latest proposal, using the adjective forms in section headings. Let's see what others have to say about their preference. In the meantime, please let's not make any changes unilaterally. Truth-mn, a consensus should be clear and explicit, not inferred; on that basis I will be reverting your reversion for now. Thanks for understanding. By the way, please sign your posts. Hertz1888 (talk) 14:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay Hertz1888. FYI though, the history of this page shows that "Palestine" was used as the name for several months based on what was discussed above as the most appropriate descriptor. All of a sudden, people changed it to "Palestinian Territories" without explanation and any reversion of this becomes labeled unilateral as opposed to the initial change. All I ask of anyone on this board is the following: What is so offensive about labeling the header "Palestine" when the section is titled "country/region"? I can think of many things offensive about denying the existance of a region called "Palestine". The argument of defending facts: "there is no country of Palestine" is not applicable when you are admittedly refering to a region. But what is the point, no matter how many arguments I make, and how much lack of argument there is for the opposing veiwpoint? It seems like I'm fighting an uphill battle for the truth, against dare I say, censorship without reason.Truth-mn (talk) 18:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Truth-mn, I don't think your proposal is unreasonable, other than that it relies on mixing country names and a non-country name. But, whatever is done in terms of the two main alternatives (your version and the other) will have drawbacks for some and look meritorious to others. We now have the opportunity for a de-politicizing third way, a structuring that might not offend anyone. Why don't we just allow time for others to weigh in on this? In the meantime the section is just back the way it was 1-2 weeks ago. For my part, this page should be about a food item, and anything that might focus energy on political controversy is a distraction. Hertz1888 (talk) 20:06, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

(undent)

Is it in fact true that styles of hummus vary by country and not by region? Is the hummus in Damascus systematically different from that in Beirut or Nablus? For that matter, is the hummus in Damascus more similar to that in Aleppo than it is to that in Beirut? Or for that matter is it possible that there is a great deal of individual variation in the preparation and garnishing of hummus such that the regional or national differences are not terribly significant? I honestly don't know the answer, but this may have some relevance to labelling the variants. --macrakis (talk) 21:24, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

To follow up on Macrakis' thoughts, perhaps the "Serving methods" section has by happenstance fallen into a format which needlessly stirs up what some editors and readers may take as nationalistic slights whilst not even giving a helpfully verifiable take on serving variations. I'm leaning ever more towards thinking a wholly unsectioned narrative would better fit this section. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:35, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I am in favor of re-writing the section with verifiable and non-bias sourced material. Much of the information that is sourced elsewhere in the article is from sources that typically write from a "Pro-USA" and "Pro-Israel" stance. To-date, the section on "serving methods" has been slanted with un-sourced information inserted by pro-zionist editors who have an agenda to make sure that this historically, culturally and ethnically ARAB food is also accredited to the zionist regime that currently occupies Palestine. This is unacceptable, and yet over the past few years, any attempt to correct this blatantly pro-zionist stance has been rebuffed and rebuked by western sympathizers.

If you truly mean to take this article down to the "bare bones" and remove all nationalistic concerns, you *will* have to remove any and all references to the zionist state, who continually attempt to re-write history through the perversion of facts, evidence, and yes, food. ***Bufort2000 (talk) 04:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

PMDrive1061 deleted the above post from Bufort2000 while I was responding to it. I have restored the comment -- even if we disagree with someone's remarks, even finding them distasteful, we shouldn't delete them. They remain relevant to the conversation as a whole.

I agree with Gwen Gale that the section should be rewritten as a unsectioned narrative. I'm not sure if it will help with the constant battle over terminology, however we must remain all inclusive. No one society, race, ethnicity, region or country owns a food. If an area (geographic, country, continent..planet.. etc. etc.) displays specific contribution to a food or has widespread adoption of a food or cuisine, then its probably worthy of mention. This is especially true if the information can be sourced. --Nsaum75 (talk) 05:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I've have tried, with an open mind, to carefully think about the many issues and proposed solutions to this. However, irrespective of the agreed upon solution, you cannot avoid the issue. The end product will have to allude to the style of hummus that Palestinians serve and eat in.... not "Canada", not "Brazil" and not "the Pacific Northwest". No, it will have to refer to the style in "???". The question then arises, what is wrong with refering to a region: "Palestine"? Especially since "Israel" is listed separately? To me, it is like someone telling you that the sky is not blue, even though it is a clear sunny day. How can you respond to such denial? The West Bank and Gaza are home to 4 million people who live in a region they, and most of the world, calls "Palestine". Can we stop making this an issue? To me, trying to reorganize the whole section to exclude regional divisions is a whole lot of work in an effort to appease a small few who are somehow "offended" by the existance of Palestinians altogether (IMO). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truth-mn (talk • contribs) 17:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Truth-mn. It should say "Palestine", because that is what both sources say. —Ashley Y 01:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

The terminology is unhelpful and confusing, since it overlaps with Israel. We don't have a section for Middle East or Levant or North Africa or Barbary coast, because that would overlap with existing designation. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Jayjg. As of right now we don't have sections for "regional differences", but only countries. Also, the land of Palestine not only overlaps with Israel but also Jordan -- though this is often omitted or forgotten. Anyhow, I thought it had been agreed upon, at least in the interim, to be stated as Palestinian Territories. If thats not the case, then other established editors had at least been giving the illusion of a temporary stalemate, since they had been unchallenged in reverting it everytime a IP/SPA/NEWBIE changed it to "Palestine". This warring is going to continue until the section is rewritten...and even then, it probably won't stop -- unfortunately. --Nsaum75 (talk) 02:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

We can't say "Palestinian Territories", because that's not what the sources say. They say "Palestine". If the sources said "Levant", we'd have to put that. We shouldn't misrepresent the sources just to fit them in with some "by country" scheme. —Ashley Y 05:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, they say "Palestine and Jordan", and referring to them as the Palestinian territories is in no way inaccurate. Jayjg ^(talk) 06:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

"Palestine and Jordan" is correct. —Ashley Y 07:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

The sources say Palestine. The sources do not support Palestinian Territories. Gwen Gale (talk) 08:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Precisely. Tiamut^talk 15:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

However, the cookbook in question doesn't clarify what it means by "Palestine"; does it mean the region called Palestine, or the British Mandate of Palestine, or the Palestinian territories, or some other area? It's a very iffy mention from a cookbook author that will have to be clarified in some way. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

National sections

Part of the problem is that the sections on serving methods by country are largely unreferenced. I suspect this is due to editors "adding what they know" rather than adding what they have reliable sources for. This is unfortunate.

Regarding "Palestinian Territories": both sources (the page in Salloum and Peters can be read on Amazon) say "Palestine" rather than "Palestinian Territories". Thus we must too: anything else is synthesis. In particular, we don't know whether "Palestine" refers to the territories, or all of Palestine including Israel. For that reason, it may be worth grouping Israel and Palestine together. And indeed, Salloum and Peters say "Palestine and Jordan", so we might even consider grouping Israel, Palestine and Jordan together, if the sources suggest commonalities of hummus serving in this region.

In general, the best approach is to consider all the sources, and see what they tend to suggest about methods by country or by region or whatever. —Ashley Y 03:45, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I've been bold because I've been rather at a loss as to how one might come up with a way to stop all this unhappy back and forth between good faith editors. I've skived off all unsourced content from the serving section (but for the wholly generic opening) and have flowed it into a single narrative with no country/region/whatever sections. Gwen Gale (talk) 09:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Good, the sources didn't really support country sections anyway. —Ashley Y 09:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Great idea Gwen Gale. The new format enjoys improved readability and better reflects the contents of the sources cited. Well done. Tiamut^talk 15:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Introduction

In the intro it explains that that Hummus is very popular throughout the Middle Eastern world, can we add that it is also quite popular these days in the United States? I know in SoCal there was usually a Middle Eastern place on any strip, and here in the Phoenix Metro area you can't go more than 3 or 5 miles in any direction without hitting a place where you can get great hummus (Pita Pit, Pita Jungle, Phoenicia Cafe, My Big Fat Greek Restaurant, and Sabuddy, to name a few). It is obviously a function of immigrant entrepreneurs bringing their cuisine...I imagine, but don't know, that hummus may also be quite popular in Europe. Rafajs77 (talk) 22:49, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for this. My view is that there is a distinction between where it is eaten and what geographical cuisines it is embedded into. I'm not familiar with the restaurant chains you mention but there are two geographical references in that list to the Middle East or estern Mediterranean. Hummus was a food item of the Ottoman Empire. It looks, from what we could have found, that it may have originated in modern Syria, but it spread far enough through the empire that whether you now go to a Greek restaurant or an Armenian, Turkish, Lebanese, Israeli or even one from the Maghreb, you're likely to have hummus on the menu. I you go to a French restaurant or a Chinese or a Cajun one, you won't get it. All these cuisines are popular bejond their original homelands but their main geographical home is clear(-ish - I know that Foo Yung and Tikka Massala may actualy be dishes developed in the West). Maybe "popular" is the wrong word to use but we need to identify the cuisines hummus belongs to. We coudl say that it has become popular more widely.--Peter cohen (talk) 11:58, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I think Rafajs77 makes a good point actually. Hummus has become a popluar food worldwide. I disagree with you Peter Cohen about the use of Hummus in Israel, which has nothing to do with the Ottoman empire, since Israel was not around when the empire was extant. I think if we are going to include information about the use of hummus in Israel (where it is not an originally Israeli dish) then we should include more its use in other parts of the world (and how it got there - re: diaspora populations bringing it there). We do mention hummus being eaten with tortilla chips, but I think we could use more on its dissemination around the world and I don' see the problem with including a sentence about this in the lead, after we add sourced information to the body. Tiamut^talk 14:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Israel may not have existed as a name in the Ottoman Empire, but it was part of it, being part of Palestine. The earliest Zionist settlers arrived under the Ottomans, the great-grandparents of "Arab Israelis" lived under the Ottomans, and so did the "Arab Jews" who moved from Mesopotamia and other Arab lands to Israel as part of the population displcements that happened when Israel was being founded. There is a continuity of hummus being part of the cuisine in the place now called Israel and among a significant portion of the family lines of people who are now Israeli, which doesn't apply to countries where the Middle Easstern and Meditterranean diaspora is a much smaller part of the population.--Peter cohen (talk) 01:52, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I suppose that's one way of looking at it. I tend to think of it in similar but slightly different terms, but I don't want to create too many suds.

I still think it would be good to discuss the dissemination of hummus worldwide, the role of the Arab diaspora (and even Israeli expats) in bringing it to North America and other places. I remember seeing sources for this somewhere. If I bring them here, (and they are reliable and relevant) will they be used? Tiamut^talk 02:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Massad calumny

My attempts to remove political and anti-Israel remarks by Massad have been reverted twice. Massad is known for anti-Israel speeches and writing and not a food expert. His comments about "cultural theft" are weasel terms. Why do we need to turn a food article into a vehicle for anti-Israel propaganda and counter arguments? The subsequent quote from the cookbook is taken out of context, its meaning in the book is that hummus is not a modern Israeli invention, it does not deny that hummus is part of Israeli cuisine, but that is the impression the quotation makes if read out of context. I'm finding it very hard to believe that the Massad quote and the quote from the cookbook were added in good faith and suggest that they should be removed. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 20:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

KG, your comment here violates WP:BLP. Please retract the problematic parts. Otherwise someoen will be along in a minute to retract them on your behalf.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

This is a talk page not an article, I'll call a spade a spade. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 01:39, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:BLP goes for talk pages too. Please remove the unsourced negative attacks from this page and your talk page. Gwen Gale (talk) 01:46, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Since I cannot read your mind I don't really know which terms you consider negative attacks. Here for example is a source characterizing Massad as an anti-Israel propagandist [12]. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 02:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

That source does not characterize Massad as an "anti-Israel propagandist" (much less as a as "racist"). Please remove the unsourced negative attacks from this page and your talk page. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

My understanding of the article is that it does. It does not use those exact words but goes into explicit details of remarks he made which accoriding to my understanding are correctly described an anti-Israel propaganda. Here is another source on him [13]. You are not being helpful or constructive. Your request has an appearance of attempting to silence debate. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 02:20, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

The exact words are indeed needed. That second source doesn't call him a propagandist or racist either. Please remove the unsourced negative attacks now. Gwen Gale (talk) 02:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I never called him racist I called the phrases such as "cultural theft" racist. I have edited the comments to say that he is known for anti-Israel speeches and writing which is reasonable description of what the sources say. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 02:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia reports on the world as it is, not as we would like it to be. If there is in fact a notable critique of Israeli "appropriation" of Arab cultural items (including cuisine), whether we think it is valid or not, we should report it. --macrakis (talk) 05:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

The point is that it is not particularly notable, not factually accurate as the food has been around in the region for millenia, and out of place in a food article. If it belongs anywhere it would be in the article on Massad or in an article on rhetoric within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

1. The question of the "appropriation" of Arab foods as Israeli is notable enough that there have been articles about it in a variety of places. For example, Yael Raviv (who I am guessing is Israeli) wrote about the similar case of falafel in Gastronomica (see falafel).
2. I have not seen any evidence that hummus bi tahini "has been around in the region for millenia [sic]". Of course, chickpeas have, but after some years of discussion on this article, no one has produced evidence for its existence before the 18th century. In any case, I am not sure what the relevance of its antiquity is.
3. Yes, I suppose a mention of this also belongs in an article on "rhetoric within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict". That does not preclude mentioning it here.

--macrakis (talk) 17:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm basing my statement on the fact that the oldest mention of hummus is from Plato's writings plus the standard claim that it was brought to Greece from the Levant by the Phoenicians. I don't know what the basis for the Phoenician claim is. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 18:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

If you go through the archive of this page, you'll find an attempt to source the historu of hummus with the essential ingredients we have given of chickpeas, tahini, lemon juice, olive oil and garlic. The earliest dating in reliable source we found was the Syrian nineteenth century one. The Plato association is definitely wrong as Lemons had not reached the Mediterranean in his life time. Anyway this is all irrelevant to the BLP issue.--Peter cohen (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

The problem with this approach is it misses the point that the recipe evolved. Surely mashed chickpeas is the essential ingredient? Besides Plato there is the book of Ruth (which might even be earlier than Plato) which mentions a dip with a name ḥomeṣ that is almost the same as the modern Arabic form and would have been the Levantine term from which Plato's word derived. The name implies something sour, if not lemon juice then some other sour ingredient was being added already back then. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 19:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

And additionally the Hebrew word for chick peas is the related form ḥimṣa. Seems we have Hebrew and Greek versions of hummus (even if they were not the modern recipe) well before any Arab mention. One may wonder who really did the cultural stealing. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 20:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Someone did a long time ago edit the article suggesting that the Book of Ruth had a description of dipping pita in hummus. However, when I looked at transations linked from Book of Ruth, both the Jewish and Christian ones had this as dipping bread in vinegar. But all this is hand-waving. You'll see in the thread bove this that I've said that the dish is one associated with the cuisines of the whole Ottoman Empire, including what is now Israel. So I don't accept the attempts of the Lebanese group to limit who can make it. But this should wait. You're still not addressing the BLP issue.--Peter cohen (talk) 20:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Peter please feel free to delete any remaining comments I made which you feel are a personal attack on a living person as opposed to a simple description of the facts, I'm not seeing what is still bothering you. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 00:43, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the r-word.--Peter cohen (talk) 09:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

KG, you don't have a single Reliable Source for the claim that the ancient Greeks or the ancient Hebrews prepared hummus bi tahini, and you claim that mashed chickpeas are synonymous with hummus bi tahini. Next, I suppose we'll discover that Aristotle loved Buffalo chicken wings -- after all, he mentions chicken, and the ancient Greeks had cheese. --macrakis (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

That comparison is just plain silly, Plato and the book of Ruth use words that are related to "hummus" and describe a similar dish even though the recipe has changed over the centuries. The translation vinegar in KJV and translations that take its lead does not make sense in the context of dipping bread. Other translation one sees are "sauce" and "herbed vinegar" but the fact remains the original text says ḥomeṣ. If I have time I will try look into some good sources that discuss this as opposed to the Hummus Blog. Obviously nothing should be added to the article without such references. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 00:43, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

The reliable source, at least for Ruth, that you seek, is a paper Translation Problems in the Book of Ruth by W.L. Reed, College of the Bible Quarterly, 41/2(1964), 8-10. and further supporting remarks in the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament published by Eerdmans. No they don't say that the recipe is identical to modern hummus bi tahini but they do make the equation with hummus and point out the lack of sensibility of the translation as vinegar. I will look for a scholarly reference for Plato as well. This sort of information definitely belongs in the article as its part of the history of the evolution of hummus, and of course the inclusion should be without any misrepresentation that they say that the recipes were identical to modern hummus. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

If you can compile some of this information, then I will be interested in it being added. As the Arabic word hummus means chickpeas, might there be lexicons or other lingustic textbooks on ancient semitic languages that can show the age of the root as referring to chickpeas?--Peter cohen (talk) 09:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Will look. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 12:37, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, we're making progress. What exactly do the W.L. Reed paper and the O.T. Dict'y say? Are they talking about chickpeas (mashed or otherwise), or about hummus bi tahini? As for Plato, we still have zero sources. --macrakis (talk) 15:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Massad is not alone - other sources

• Daniel Barenboim puts it more postively to be sure (more along the lines of a cultural "adaptation" that bodes positively for the future if applied in other areans), but he basically says the same thing: "...all Israelis eat hummus and falafel, and all the other delicacies of the Arab world. They have adapted their eating habits, while continuing to eat gefilte fish and other typically Jewish food. It ought to be possible to bring about the same kind of adaptation of cultural and political values." (in A Life in Music, page 106)
• Rebecca Torstick, author of Culture and Customs in Israel states of Israeli food on page 105, the following: "While the traditional foods of native Palestinians, falafel (fried spiced chickpea balls) and hummus (chickpea and sesame paste) have become famous as Israel's national dishes, one would be hard put to define uniquely Israeli dishes. According to one Israeli food writer, 'the great majority of local food writers and chefs agree that Israel has not developed a national cuisine.' Instead, it is the sheer diversity of foods one could be served that distinguishes Israeli food."
• Shoshana Feher, writing of the eating habits of Messainic Jews, remarks on page 80 of her book that: "At parties, however, Believers feast on falafel and hummus - not traditional Jewish foods at all, and certainly not found anywhere in Orthodox Jewish cuisine. These foods are recent imports to secular Jews via Israel's mid-Eastern neighbours."

Whether one characterizes it as "adaptation" or "appropriation", "import" or "theft", the basic idea remains the same. Hummus is an Arab dish. It was adopted by Israelis as their national dish, after they learned about it from the Palestinians. I don't see what's wrong about informing the reader of this evolution. I do see something wrong with denying them this information. Wikipedia is not censored. Tiamut^talk 22:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Tiamut, Jews and many of the people comprising modern Israel, have lived along side of Arabs for centuries. They no doubt had a hand in the development of what is considered Arab cuisine and foods. I will agree, it is wrong to label the food as an Israeli invention, but it is no more an Israeli invention than, say, a Lebanese invention -- as Lebanon has existed only a few years longer than the modern state of Israel. The palestinian people, too, have existed as long as the Jews. So you can't say the Jews or Israelis (some who have lived in modern israel since Antiquity) stole it from the palestinians (if you do say that, then you could also say the Lebanese stole it from the palestinians too)... Same logic... Everything in the world is taken and developed by a number of people, not just one people..this is even more true when the people live side-by-side. Nsaum75 (talk) 05:05, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Of course the modern popularity of hummus in Israeli cuisine is from Arab influence and I have no problem using neutral terms such as "influence", "adaptation", "borrowing", "import" etc but "theft" is pejorative and "appropriation" also has negative connotations. Thats why I have a problem with the quote from Massad being used when there are so many better neutral sources that could be used to make the point. To illustrate what I am getting at, one would never describe Africans as having "stolen" shirts and trousers from Europeans, capisc? Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 00:43, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

KG, first there is the issue of where hummus bi tahini comes from. All the evidence indicates that it is borrowed from Levantine Arab cuisine; we have not seen a single Reliable Source indicating otherwise. And of course that is a perfectly normal and unremarkable historical event: cultures borrow things from each other all the time. What is not so normal is the attempt to deny its Arab origins, by talking about the "modern" popularity of hummus (as though there was an earlier popularity) or talking about "influence" of Arab cuisine, or attributing it to Yemeni Jewish immigrants (but hummus is not part of Yemeni cuisine (Arab or Jewish) as far as I know!), or what Raviv calls "an erasure of these sources". This denial is of course galling to Levantine Arabs. Both the denial and the reaction to the denial are real events in the world, not inventions of Wikipedia. To some extent, the discussion should be centralized in Israeli cuisine (where there is in fact already some discussion of it), since it also applies to falafel, etc. But if hummus in particular has been at issue (which it has), the hummus article should cover it. As for whether Massad is the most noteworthy exponent of the Arab reaction, I don't know. --macrakis (talk) 02:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

And if you read what I said, no one is denying modern Israeli popularity of these dishes is directly from Arab influence, the very fact that the Arabic forms of the names are used (despite Hebrew cognates such as homes and pol existing) shows this. My problem is with the use of pejorrative and politically loaded terminology such as "cultural theft" without balance and the concern that attempting to expand the section to present a balanced view turns the article into a mud ... or hummus ... slinging contest. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 12:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

You might also be interested in the article "National Identity on a Plate", by Yael Raviv, Palestine-Israel Journal 8:4. For example:

The adoption of certain practices from the Palestinian population is done not only without acknowledging their source, but is actually implemented through an erasure of these sources. Because of the ambivalent attitude toward the products of the Arab population and culture, these products must be divorced from their Palestinian heritage if they are to play an important role in Jewish-Israeli culture.

Since falafel became such an emblem of Israeli cuisine the tendency to erase its Arab ancestry grew. A recent Israeli government publication, a booklet of recipes distributed in the United States by the Israeli Embassy, described the falafel as a dish that became popular in Israel with the growing immigration from Yemen.

full text, my emphasis above

Happy reading. --macrakis (talk) 22:22, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

And my point which you miss is that such articles give one side of this political debate, a balance is needed by including the other side. Unfortunately doing full justice to the debate turns a food article into a political squabble and makes the article seem "unencylopedic". Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that source Macrakis. I've heard the claim about Yemenite immigration before (Indeed, I believe we repeat that line in our own Falafel article). I look forward to reading the full text to see what else I can learn. Thanks again. Tiamut^talk 22:29, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I've been reading the most current debate over Hummus the past couple of days and have avoided chiming in. It is going to be impossible to have sourced information which isn't found to be offensive or objectionable by both sides of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Those who are outside of the conflict, cannot truly understand the passion and deep held personal feelings that are evoked.

In the interest of neutrality and to create an article that isn't constantly being battled over, may I suggest we avoid creating sections which are critical of one side or the other? The article had stabilized after Gwen Gale removed the nation-specific sections; however a user once again injected nationalistic concerns with the current section about "israeli appropriation". In the best interest of Wikipedia and this article, I feel we should focus on the postives of this food in the lands it is enjoyed.

To do otherwise, will keep us sinking down the bottomless vortex that is the Arab-Israeli conflict. --Nsaum75 (talk) 04:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Nsaum75, I understand what you are trying to say and feel some sympathy with the position. But really, if we did not include sourced information into the articles they discuss simply because they might offend someone, we would have hardly anything that we could write about it (in the Arab-Isaeli arena that is).

Everything is in contention when it comes to Israel and Palestine. It's fact of life. Food items and their history are a subject of ongoing debate. If we ignore that debate because it offends some people's sensibilities, we are not doing Wikipedia any kind of service. I suggest we try to look for ways to accomodate all sourced and relevant viewpoints and not exclude any one of them on the basis that the information may not be viewed positively by some. Tiamut^talk 11:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Sources on earliest mention of hummus

Although the research on the mention in Ruth is bearing fruit it seems that the Plato claim is groundless. One finds mention of the Plato / Socrates / Socrates' wife claim in numerous hummus recipe articles but I cannot find any evidence of the alleged Greek form "hommos" in Plato (and certainly not modern Greek "choumous") only the usual Greek for chickpeas - erebinthos. Does anyone know where the Plato claim originates? Is it merely based on the mention of erebinthos as an opson? Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 23:22, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Let us see what we can find out about the ḥōmeṣ mentioned in the Book of Ruth 2:14. Hubbard says:

Less certain, however, is the nature of the item rendered sour wine (ḥōmeṣ...). On the one hand, the word normally means "vinegar".... On the other hand, ḥōmeṣ also denotes a refreshing, albeit sour drink.... Here presumably it was either a refreshing sour drink or a vinegar-based sauce into which bread was customarily dipped.
--Robert L. Hubbard, The Book of Ruth, full text at Google Books

Hubbard footnotes Reed at this point:

W. Reed ("Translation Problems in the Book of Ruth," College of the Bible Quarterly 41/2 [1964] 8-10) compared it to the popular chick-pea paste of Palestine into which bread is dipped. As Dalman notes, however, comparisons to other modern Arab drinks or sauces are doubtful (Arbeit und Sitte, III:18).

Alas, I don't have access to the full text of W. Reed's article to see what he actually says. And I suspect you don't either, but simply saw the same footnote, and simply chose to ignore Hubbard (who disagrees with you) and mention Reed (who appears to support you -- but what exactly does he say?). So what do we have here? A word which apparently normally means "vinegar" (the Septuagint renders the passage as βάψεις τὸν ψωμόν σου ἐν τῷ ὄξει) or "wine" or "sour beverage" with no reason to believe that it refers to chickpeas, let alone hummus bi tahini. This is not evidence for the ancient origins of hummus bi tahini.

If you actually have read Reed's original article, let us know what it actually says. --macrakis (talk) 03:35, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

As for the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament full text at Google Books, it does indeed cite the same Reed, saying "...there are no linguistic objections [to connecting ḥōmeṣ and ḥummuṣ], and no knowledgeable person would hesitate if given the choice of dipping his bread in vinegar or in chummuts." This sounds to me as though the author is having fun with the idea, not endorsing it seriously, and in any case this is only one of several interpretations, most referring to a sort of sour wine-based beverage similar to posca. In other words, there is no serious evidence that it does refer to hummus. --macrakis (talk) 04:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Tsk, I'm not familiar with Hubbard, just the dictionary and its references to Reeds paper. I agree that nothing said proves that it was hummus it only shows it to be a good possibility. Mentioning Reeds views are certainly relevant to a section on the origins of hummus, particularly as his view ended up paraphrased in numerous hummus articles. This article would be a good place to set the record straight about what is really known regarding the term in Ruth. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 13:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

BTW, chummuts in the dictionary entry is just a bizarre choice of spelling hummus based on Hebrew transliteration applied to Arabic, it isn't talking about something other than hummus, the more usual transliteration ḥummuṣ is also given in the entry. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 14:36, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

13th century Arab recipe for Hummus Kasa, possible predecessor to Hummus bi Tahina

It's mentioned on the website [14] and attributed to the book Medieval Arab cookery page 383:

HUMMUS KASA ['chickpea blanket'; kasa is the name of a coarse woolen fabric]. Take chickpeas and pound them fine after boiling them. Then take vinegar, oil, tahineh, pepper, atraf tib, mint, parsley, the refuse of dry thyme, walnuts, hazelnuts, almonds, pistachios, Ceylon cinnmon, toasted caraway, dry coriander, salt, salted lemons and olives. Stir it and roll it out flat and leave it overnight and take it up.

The author of the book is Charles Perry, who was interviewed for this article [15] on the legal claim to Hummus being put forward by Lebanon. He says that because there are no Arab recipe books from the 14th to 20th centuries, and Hummus bi Tahina was a humble everyday food, no recipes recording its early ingredients have been found. However, he does say that

The nearest medieval recipe to any of these dishes is hummus kasa, which appears in the anonymous 13th-century cookbook Kitab Wasf al-Atima al-Mutada.

Tiamut^talk 12:24, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

What caught my eye there was the reference to tahini. If sesame paste was around then, it helps with one of the historical facts we were wondering about. In fact it would also be orth a mention at tahini.--Peter cohen (talk) 13:24, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Also interesting is that vinegar is used instead of lemon juice. I assume this is because lemons did not make their way to the region until a little later. But it's certainly worth mentioning here that an expert in Arab medieval cooking thinks that Hummus Kasa could be a predecessor recipe for Hummus bi Tahina, and that that recipe is recorded in a 13th century cookbook. Tiamut^talk 13:39, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

This too would fit in nicely in a section on the origins of hummus. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 13:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

If anyone can find some good scholarly sources discussing whether the root of the word refers to vinegar/sourness or merely to something mashed, it would be appreciated. Ancient cultures and languages are my real passion not modern politics :) Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 14:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Heh, etymology, this warms my heart :) The trick is, although many of us may think hummus goes back at least a thousand years and mashed chickpeas much further, we have yet to reliably source it. Moreover, it's indeed likely (but again, as yet not reliably sourced) that Hummus bi Tahina is only the latest, Arab take in a long line of mashed chick pea dishes in the levant and the eastern Mediterranean. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:34, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

why do israel insist on stealing arab food? there is no question this is arab food. i am glad that some leaders here support removal of information that be extremely bias toward israel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fajadsoodeen1 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

For people who are actually interested in reality not rhetoric: Commonality between Israeli and Arab cuisine arose via several mechanisms, firstly the pre-Zionist Jewish community, the "Old Yishuv", was culturaly Arab and their lifestyle was emulated by Jews returning from the Diaspora, secondly Israel has a significant Arab population who identify themselves as "Israeli Arabs" (not Palestinians) and whose cuisine played an important role in the development of Israeli cuisine particulary via contact between Israeli Jews and Israeli Arabs in the Israeli army, thirdly many Israelis are descended from Mizrahi Jews who are culturally Arab, some arguably descendants of Arab converts to Judaism in late antiquity. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

About your above post, Kuratowski's Ghost, if it was meant for anyone else other than Fajadsoodeen1...

• For people who are actually interested in reality not rhetoric is utterly unhelpful and edges on a widely targeted personal attack along with a worrisome lack of an assumption of good faith. Please don't do that.
• You don't offer any reliable sources.
• You don't say anything about hummus (much less offer any new sources). Gwen Gale (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Gwen, this is a talk page. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 22:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Gwen, part of the problem I have tried to bring up, over and over, is that many editors have failed to take into account that Jews have lived along side Arabs in the middle east for generations -- thousands of years -- and by virtue of living there have had an impact on traditionally Arab foods (and other cultural items); yet many editors here seem to not take that into account. Editors seem to forget that there are Arab Jews, Arab Christians and Arab Israelis.

However, I think that is exactly what Kuratowski's Ghost was trying to address in response to the comment by Fajadsoodeen1.

Keep in mind, it is hard to find sourced infomation about a group of people who historically have been repressed by the majority. History has proven, over and over again, that the views and virtues of the majority almost always edge out the contributions of a minority. I'm not saying sources don't exist, but I would like to remind editors that they should least keep this in mind when editing this article. We should also keep in mind that Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Israel etc..etc have all existed in their present form for about the same amount of time. So its improper to say one country stole it from another, when in fact, all of the countries in the region are about the same age. -- Nsaum75 (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree that referring the origins of hummus to a specific modern state of the Levant is anachronistic and pointless, because the modern political and the cultural borders do not correspond to the historical categories. It makes much more sense to refer to culture regions like the Levant. On the other hand, we have good sources for the proposition that the adoption of hummus/falafel/etc. in Israel is not rooted in some timeless tradition, but instead was a conscious borrowing from the local (Arab) population followed by what Raviv calls "an erasure of the sources" and their replacement with legends about Yemeni Jews and tendentious readings of the Book of Ruth. See Raviv above. --macrakis (talk) 18:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that Raviv provides only one point of view, one that is heavily biased towards the outlook of the political left and is thus questionable as a reliabe source. Kuratowski's Ghost (talk) 22:21, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Do you have Reliable Sources for other positions? She did after all write a PhD on this topic at a reputable university.... --macrakis (talk) 03:51, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I have added other sourced information about the methodical recasting of arab foods as israeli foods by the "zionists" during establishment of israeli state.