This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Israel, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Israel on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IsraelWikipedia:WikiProject IsraelTemplate:WikiProject IsraelIsrael-related articles
The Haaretz article mentions the erasing of a Georgian inscription at the St. Nicholas church in Jerusalem. There is no article on this church on Wikipedia yet, so I'll leave a note here. The erasing was documented when it occured. A named Greek Orthodox priest did it (I think he was even photographed doing it) but nothing seems to survive online about it. Interestingly, this inscription appears to have been the one mentioned in passing in "Archaeological researches in Palestine during the years 1873-1874". After mentioning a cufic inscription stored in a nearby church, the author writes "There is, I once was informed, an ancient Georgian inscription in the garden of the Greek convent of Mar Nikoli. It is said to be the epitaph of a queen of Georgia. I suspect that it is our Cufic inscription that is meant, which, being illegible for those who saw it, had received this imaginary interpretation". True to the arrogance of archaeologists everywhere, he did not bother to make the short journey to actually look at the inscription, dismissed the opinion of those who had seen it, and relied instead on his "expert" pre-formed opinion. Meowy21:49, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article text is very poorly written in this section, and appears to be completely unsourced: "In the 1970s and 1980s, the Georgian inscriptions were painted over and replaced by Greek ones. In a 1901 photograph showing the mural of the Council of Archangels, there are Georgian inscriptions, but 1960[*] photographs show the inscriptions had been changed to Greek; after cleaning the paintings the Georgian inscriptions emerged again.[**] The same happened in the case of the Christ Anapeson, the "reclining Jesus".(SOURCE)[***] In many places (e.g. near the figures of St. Luke and St. Prochore) the outline of Georgian letters are clearly visible under the recently added Greek inscriptions.[citation needed]
[*] 1960 is not "1970s and 1980s"! Is it known when it happened? Sometime between 1901 and 1960? That's a very long time.
[**] Not clear: has the damage been undone and the inscriptions restored? Seems so, but needs to be stated explicitly, as the last, unsourced sentence of the paragraph, throws it again into doubt - maybe there was a second act of vandalism after the restoration, or not all inscriptions were restored.
[***] The source offered was presented in a very sloppy manner. Clearly not by a very knowledgeable editor, which raises questions about reliability. On top of that, it's now behind a paywall and impossible to verify. It probably only refers to the term "Christ Anapeson" and nothing more, in which case nothing in this section is sourced. Alternatively, it might have been used for original research if it happens to contain the old image (editor compared two photos and wrote the comment), as the source, The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, seems to deal with the general concept of Christ Anapeson and is unlikely to diverge into issues of Greek anti-Georgian vandalism. Better source, or a source, period, is needed. I removed the "quote", since it was totally superfluous in this context. Here it is, in case somebody can figure out why it was there: "Christ Anapeson (ἀναπεσών, lit. "the reclining one"), the image of Christ asleep, awaiting resurrection." Maybe the Anapeson mural as such is exceptional? Then it belongs in another section, "History" or "Description", but is it? All the other murals aren't mentioned. See Georgian Wiki for much more (but it's not written in a user-friendly manner, I gave up).
No sources! For last sentence anyway, but more likely for entire section (the Oxford source probably only explains what "anapeson" means). Arminden (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
