text:
Talk:John of Damascus

potential bias in criticism of islam
The section on his criticism of islam uses phrases like "he claimed to speak to muslims." I am not sure if this constitutes unnecessary doubt; the style guide I read said you should not add unnecessary phrases that might be seen as passing judgement. However I am not sure so I have not edited it, but if more experienced person knows if it is wrong, please fix it.nKewlkha (talk) 17:27, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

2008 Comments
This is singularly inept biography. I imagine that it needs to be totally rewritten.

One matter that I can contribute to is his family even though what I say is, in fact, original research in the sense that I made the deductions. Nevertheless surely someone else has made the same deductions and published them in referencible form. His father's name is said to be Mansur. This, of course, needs a reference. His father is also said to be that Sargun ibn Mansur who was Mu'awiya's chief administrator. The time span between Sargun and John is too long. Hence Sargun was his grandfather and Mansur ibn Sargun his father. Unless we have evidence to the contrary it seems necessary to assume that the family lost all their caliphate offices when Abd al-Malik Arabized the government (AH 70-75) which is probably before John was born.

In any case, this article is in desperate need of better references. I cleaned up the ones that were there. 66.234.194.83 (talk) 20:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

First to condemn Muhammad?
It is also notable that he may have been the first Christian to condemn Muhammad in writing (in De haeresibus), calling him "the forerunner of the Antichrist"(podromos tou antichristou) and a false prophet (pseudoprophetes). (PG, XCIV, 764A, 764B). The Jade Knight 05:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

 * quite right, John has clear and concise criticism of Islam, which make sense textually, they are not here nor on the page of criticism of Islam. That is not true encyclopedia, it is nonsensical 92.24.223.232 (talk) 16:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

 * they should be here, but only listed by footnote 30 2.98.148.209 (talk) 17:25, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Barlaam...
... was almost certainly not written by John. See R. Volk, ed., Historia animae utilis de Barlaam et Ioasaph (Walter de Gruyter, 2006), brief summary here. Altering article accordingly, --Javits2000 13:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the Pictures
I'm considering a change in the picture used, as it's a little choppy (both are, but I'm more concerned with the top image). Can anyone give me an opinion regarding the following images? Forgive that I'm not so familiar with the image policy, so if there could be a conflict with the rules, let me know. Here are the images: I could also attempt to photograph the icon of him at my church when I get the chance, if the above images are unavailable for use. Please let me know which would work best. --C.Logan 14:42, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Arabic, but good quality.
 * Rough edges, could be cropped.
 * Used on OrthodoxWiki, and better than the second picture (which is hopelessly grainy).
 * A bit wide, but very clear.
 * Not my favorite, but a good size.
 * Upload them all. FunkMonk (talk) 09:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ethnicity

 * Sorry C.Logan if I misunderstood you. I agree with the version now. Thanks--Aziz1005 12:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Yahya Ibn Mansur?
The correct name of St John was Yahya ibn Sarjun. His father was Sarjun b. Mansur. His grandfather Mansur ibn Sarjun. --Cloj 18:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've found one source to this effect; all other sources, while not listing his Arabic name as such, state his family name as "Mansur/Monsur". The translation of his full name being "John Mansur" is almost universally excepted, and the Catholic Encyclopedia states "Mansur was probably the name of John's father". Do you have any reliable sources to support your argument?--C.Logan 19:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Class Rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Assumption of Mary???
It is cited in the article that saint John has written about the Assumption of Mary, but in fact the doctrine of the Assumption had not yet been defined in the church. In the Eastern Orthodox Church in fact the doctrine that is held is about the Dormition of Mary, not the Assumption, and the position held by Eastern Orthodox is that saint John Damascene has written about Her Dormition. Should this be corrected in the first paragraph of the article? --K kokkinos (talk) 21:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

 * It doesn't matter that it wasn't defined; all the more likely people talked about what the Church didn't clarify. 98.176.10.168 (talk) 06:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Oriental Orthodox saint?
Which Oriental Orthodox church venerates John of Damascus? Deusveritasest (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Strange conclusions
What I meant bythat was that your edit Rafy strung togetherd tidbits from Sahas that seem to indicate John of Damascus was not an Arab, when even Sahas himself entertains the strong possibility that he was. For eg, you write his name does not necessarily indicate an Arab background, while omitting info that it is not Greek and is popular throughout the Islamic world. There is undue focus on determining whether he is racially Arab, when this is irrelevant given that he is culturally and linguistically Arab and that suffices to be counted as Arab by most. Anyway, rather than go specifically into what was wrong with your edits, why don't you tell me what you think should be restored that I have removed or altered? I've also made some additions of my own, as you can see.  T i a m u t talk 18:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Please also note additional sources say:
 * "of Arab origin" p.28 of The great Arab conquests: how the spread of Islam changed the world we live in By Hugh N. Kennedy
 * and there are others in the article and which can be produced if required. This is pretty uncontroversial stuff and undue highlighting of a speculation that he is not arab sn't reflective of the scholarship here.  T i a m u t talk 18:33, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

 * These are general sources not specialised ones. If a book dedicated to his life and works couldn't make a conclusion regarding his origin why should the article emphasise on him being Arab then? It is indicated throughout the book that he was nether culturally nor linguistically Arab, as all his writings and correspondences were either in Greek or Syriac. He probably was able to communicate in Arabic as a second language though. I don't see how his origin can be drawn from the fact that modern "Christian Arabs" consider him one of them, this is after all a historical debate not a nationalistic one.--  R a f y  talk

 * You are privleging the non-conclusion of one book from 1972 over many other more recent books by specialists in the area and period which do make unequivocal conclusions that he was an Arab. These re not nationalistic Christian Arab sources ... and not everyone has to write a biography dedicated to the man to be able to be used as an RS on his origins. It suffices to be an area, period, or theme specialist.  T i a m u t talk 18:53, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Afaik this is also the only book which discusses his origin with such details, it is still cited despite being written 40 years ago. You will find sources calling him Arab, you will also find others counting him as a Greek.--  R a f y  talk 19:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Irfan Shahid discusses his life in detail as his arab origins in one of his works mentioned in a footnote on the page i just linked to to add info on his perfection of the kanun. what source says he i greek? his writings are in greek, none of his earlier arabic writings survived, but im not aware of rs saying his family origin is greek. could you provide some?  T i a m u t talk 19:58, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * There are no writings in Arabic because he simply didn't write any. Irfan Shahidd doesn't make any argument attesting his Arabic origin and simply refers to another reference. Brown doesn't his mention him being "Taghlibi" where did his full name come from?
 * Here are some references calling him Greek:
 * Of the Tractate of John of Damascus on Islam
 * The monks of Palestine and the growth of Christian literature in Arabic
 * St. John Damascene: Barlaam and Ioasaph: With an English Translation
 * It is also noteworthy that he never described himself as an Arab, his writing are pretty critical of the Ishmaelites in general, the name by which the Arabs were known to Levantines.--  R a f y  talk 22:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Rafy, can you read inside those sources? I cannot, but from what I can see they are not saying he is of Greek origin. The first says he was Greek Orthodox, which as you know is a sect of Christianity that does not denote an ethnic identification (I am Greek Orthodox and Greek Catholic Melkite but Palestinian Arab, not Greek). The second says he was a Greek writer, but this is probably referring to how he wrote in Greek. Indeed, all his religious writings were in Greek; however, he did write in Arabic when in the employment of the caliphate before becoming a monk. I also don't believe the third source is saying he is of Greek origin but because I cannot see the full sentence, I cannot be sure. Can you provide full quotes please?
 * About Taghlibi, I believe that name was added by someone else. I have no problem removing it if its not in the sources cited, and restoring information about his possible affiliation with the Taghlib sourced to Sahas. Sahas, by the way, says he was of "Semitic ancestry" (according to another source which I will add to the article shortly). Shahid's work of his Arab origins is available and I will find a copy online tonight if possible. . Your speculation that his writings on the Ishamelites were about Arabs is interesting but unless sources to an RS, irrelevant. And nowhere in the article do we currently say he was Arab, but only of Arab ancestry, which is what the sources say. How he self-identified is not discussed by the sources I have read thus far.  T i a m u t talk 12:36, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately I as well have no access to the full text of those references. This sources shows that Syriac writers called Arabs "Ishmaelites" before Islam. To summarise the background section on the light of most sources which discuss his ancestry is that: "he was culturally and linguistically Hellenic, nonetheless, based on what we have, no clear conclusion can be made regarding his descent, one possibility is that he hails from Arab Taghlibis or Kalbids." How do you find this?--  R a f y  talk 22:20, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Without access to the full text, I can't consider those sources as supporting your argument that John was Greek. The sources we have do not say that he was culturally and linguistic Hellenistic either. Did you read the Vila essay cited in the article? Pages 454 and 455 here say quite clearly that he came from a prominent Arab Christian family, he undertook both a Muslim and Greek education, was situated firmly in the Arab/Muslim milieu, and that he was bicultural and bilingual. So no, I cannot agree to your proposal, as I don't see it as borne out by what sources I do have access to have to say.  T i a m u t talk 15:50, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Again, most sources say he a native speaker of Greek, a major source (Sahas) is questioning his Arab origin in details, another one mentions that "Arab Christians (you being one ) try to highlight his Arab connections, although there are scholars who doubt he ever even spoke Arabic", his most renowned work was a critique of the heresy of the Ishmaelites (i.e. Arabs), and yet you still refuse to include any think that question his Arabian ancestry. I have requested a third opinion since I think we have reached a dead end here.--  R a f y  talk 00:30, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm a native speaker of English, that does not make me any less Arab. Sahas, who wrote his book 40 years ago, is not the authoritative source on John but even he says he was of semitic ancestry. I'm not citing my personal opinions to make conclusions about his ancestry, but rather scholars who are not Arab Christians. The link you gave is to page 20 of a work by Thomas which does not say what you claim it does, and in fact says that John did belong to world of the arabs and Islam. I welcome hearing other opinions ... I hope they take the time to read the sources linked to in the article.  T i a m u t talk 11:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I looked at the Thomas text again, and I see what you were referring to on page 21 where it says that there are scholars who doubt that he spoke Arabic. He lists one such person, listed in another scholar's work. He, however, doesn't seem to subscribe to that theory and places John of Damascus as comfortable in both the Arab society and in contributing to the Hellenistic ecclesiastical milieu.I'm not against introducing more information about his biculturality, which is already mentioned, but I do not think the idea that he was not Arab is held by a significant minority of scholars. I'm open to bring proved wrong, and eilling to include information that is supported by reliable secondary sources. I'm not willing to make synth conclusions like, "he was linguistically and culturally Hellenistic", when multiple sources indicate that's only half the truth. Remember he undertook a traditional "Saracen" or Arab education before being expised to Greek traditions according to multiple biograpers. This is hy multiple scholars, including Thomas, place him as spanning two traditions, both Arab and Hellenistic.  T i a m u t talk 16:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Here are some more references disputing his Arab origin:John of Damascus and the Church in Syria in the Umayyad Era ("probably Aramaean, possibly Arab"), Antioch and Syriac Christianity ("Melkite Syriac"), A short history of the Middle East: from the rise of Islam to modern times (Syriac Christian). Many other sources call him "Syrian" which is usually synonymous of "Syriac".--  R a f y  talk 20:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I looked at the links you provided and cannot find where they say he was of Syriac origin. Could you provide exact quotes please? Syrian may also mean Arab, and its best not todraw conclusions about what writer means by Syrian ourselves.  T i a m u t talk 21:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

sources on his origins

 * Damascus: A History (2007) pp. 99, 105: "The Byzantine senior official in Damascus, Mansur ibn Sarjun, an Arab by origin [...] remained at his post and gave rise to a line of Christian officials and councillors. The most illustrious of these was his grandson, Saint Joh of Damascus [...] His life illustrated the manner in which prominent Damascene Arabs were increasingly stranded between two worlds."  T i a m u t talk 08:31, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The great Arab conquests: how the spread of Islam changed the world we live in (2007) p. 28: " The most famous of these was John of Damascus, the most important Greek Orthodox theologian of the eighth century. He came from a family of bureaucrats of Arab origin who worked for the Umayyad administration in Damascus in the same way that their ancestors had worked for the Byzantines."  T i a m u t talk 08:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Parade of Faith: A Biographical History of the Christian Church (2011): "The churchman most known for his cogent defense of icons in Eastern Orthodoxy is John of Damascus (c. 676-749), a Syrian monk and priest considered "the last of the Fathers." John grew up in a wealthy Arab Christian home, the son of an official in the court of the Muslim caliph."  T i a m u t talk 08:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The rise of Western Christendom: triumph and diversity (2003), p. 307: "Long before the Arab conquests, Damascus had a large population of settled Arabs. A leading Arab Christian, Mansur, had been responsible for the taxes of the region under Heraclius. Mansur's son, Sarjun (Sergius: like so many Arabs he was named from the great saint of Resafa), served the Umayyad Califs. Only in A.D. 700 did Sergius' son - Mansur bar Sarjun - leave court. A typical member of a pious East Roman family devoted to public service who had turned to religion, Mansur, like Gregory the Great in Rome, abandoned the "cares" of office to become a learned monk. He is known under his monastic name John: John of Damascus - John Damascene - a prolific writer in Greek and a founding father of the medieval Orthodox tradition."  T i a m u t talk 08:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Religions of late antiquity in practice (2000), p. 454: "Yuhanna b. Mansur b. Sarjun (ca. 655 - 749 CE), better known as John of Damascus, lived through the cultural transition from Late Antiquity to Early Islam [...] John's family is traceable to at least two generations of promineont Arab Christians. "  T i a m u t talk 09:01, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Mary for earth and heaven: papers on Mary and ecumenism given at international congresses of the Ecumenical Society of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Leeds (1998) and Oxford (2000) and conferences at Woldingham (1997) and Maynooth (2001), p. 355: "Little is known for certain about the life of St John of Damascus. According to the generally accepted account, he was born in Damascus within a wealthy family of Christian Arabs, the Mansur."  T i a m u t talk 08:13, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Greek thought, Arabic culture: the Graeco-Arabic translation movement in Baghdad and early ʻAbbāsid society (2nd-4th/8th-10th centuries) (1998), pp. 17-18:"John of Damascus, finally, is perhaps the most famous of Greek-speaking Arabs in Umayyad circles." Please note, this source has detailed information on his religious background calling his grandfather Melkite, and him Arab Orthodox or Greek Orthodox. There is no contradiction between these identites and an Arab one.  T i a m u t talk 20:47, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Rafy, please feel free to add sources here, in the same format I have, that make different conclusions about his ancestry.  T i a m u t talk 09:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not going to search the internet looking for references as I'm busy these days. There are two dedicated sources above questioning his Arab ancestry. More sources simply describe him as "Syrian Christian" or "Melkite". BTW did you know that "Sargon" (rendered "سرجون" Sarjun in Arabic) is a typical Syriac name? All I ask is to --  R a f y  talk 19:17, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * When you decide you the time to participate by providing sources then we will have something further to discuss. I'm pressed for time too, but took the time to present evidence, not my opinion, on how reliable sources discuss his origin. the sources you have linked to often do not say what you claim they do or else I have missed the reference which is why I initiated ths format to eliminate any confusion. Perhaps later then?  T i a m u t talk 20:10, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Why don't we just leave it to a third party to decide whether or not to include informations about his possible non-Arab origin. There are a couple of links above which are easily identifiable and accessible.--  R a f y  talk 21:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * As I said, I would be happy to hear the opinions of others on the matter following their review of the sources. I don't think any one person's opinion is going to be decisive in this matter, but I'd like to hear what other people think about how we should present the material in question.  T i a m u t talk 08:13, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

I would like to give my humble "third party" opinion.
 * John of Damascus was part of the local population of Damascus. His family was a local high-class family who served first the Greek Byzantines, and later the Arab Caliphs, who both came from far countries. The local population of Damascus in such age spoke Syriac, a semitic language similar to Arabic but anyway a separate language. The high-class local population in the town spoke also Greek due its historical relations with the Byzantine. So for sure the young John spoke as mother languages both Syriac and Greek. It is also probable that he learnt also Arabic, the imported language of the new conquerors, but only as a foreign language.
 * The term "Arab" used in such historical context refers only to original Arabic populations, i.e. population coming from the Arabic Peninsula and speaking their own language mother language, the Arabic. Under this strict point of view, the ethnicity of John was not "Arabic", but the more proper term would be "Syriac". In a broad sense, the term "Arabic" is sometime used to cover all semitic populations in the area because these populations were later subject to a "arabization", in the mother language, in the culture and in the religion. Many not-specialized sources say, imprecisely, that John was "Arabic" simply to point out that he was from the local semitic population (and not ethnically a Greek). However John of Damascus is one of the last example of Syriac pre-Arab culture and population.
 * The article contains many other little mistakes, for example, surely he studied the Muslim culture of the conquerors of his town, but he was never raised as a Muslim: he and his family were always and only Christian, and he never converted to Christianity. His name was "Yuhanna b. Mansur b. Sarjun", and Yuhanna is the Syriac for John, so he did not had an Arab name and a Christian name, at least he could have a baptism name and a religious name (as a monk), both Christian even if originally in Syriac. Or he could not be under the influence of Western Scholastic though, because the Scholastic arose 400 years later. That is the problem to use not specialized sourced randomly from internet. A ntv (talk) 12:48, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your opinion, but you did not discuss the sources provided, nor have you provided any of your own. Could you indicate which of the sources above are not "specialized" enough to count as a reliable source for this article so that we can discuss that issue at RSN? And could you provide "specialized" sources that say he is Syriac, as you claim above? Please note that the sources above do not say he was "Arabic"' but rather that he was of "Arab origin" or that his family was "Arab Christian".  T i a m u t talk 15:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * a serious and specialized source is Daniel J. Sahas John of Damascus on Islam here. At page 7 it clearly states that we we cannot determine if the ancestors of John were of Arabic descent or simply they came from the local Syrian population. Thus I suggest that in the wiki Article we simply state that he was not Greek but that he belonged to the local population. As I repeat the today use of the term Arab cannot be used for the 7th and 8th century in Syria, as unfortunately many easy-going source make. A ntv (talk) 16:16, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * So the Sahas book, published in 1972, is a reliable source on his origins, but none of the other sources listed above are? and the criteria to determine reliability in this case is what? Whether or not the source agrees with your understanding of ethnicity and Arabness in 7th and 8th century Syria? In The rise of Western Christendom: triumph and diversity (2003), p. 307, it says: "Long before the Arab conquests, Damascus had a large population of settled Arabs." Clearly, there are scholars who disagree with you and Sahas, whose work was published 40 years ago. I will open a discussion at RSN about this, based on your response, so please indicate if all the sources above are unacceptable, so that I know whether to list all them or not. Thanks.  T i a m u t talk 17:02, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I opened a discussion at RSN here: Reliable sources/Noticeboard.  T i a m u t talk
 * I've not said that the Brown is not reliable, but it is however a general manual which covers 1000 years. On the contrary the Sahas is a specific study on the cultural background of John of Damascus, which IMHO is more appropriate to answer such specific issue.
 * About this issue, none doubts that Damascus in the 7th century had a large group of settled Arabs, i.e. of foreign population which came from the South, while most of the population was Syriac. The issue is if John's family belonged to this Arabic group or to the Syriac majority. IMHO all issues about ethnicity shall stay out of Wiki, but you want a answer the Sahas examines seriously the problem and states that we have no enough elements to give a sure judgment. A ntv (talk) 18:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay then, let's say I accept your argument that Sahas is a better source than the six sources above because he did a specific study on the cultural background of John of Damascus. did you know that Sahas revisted the subject in a paper he wrote in 1984? and that work appears to have concluded that John of Damascus was of Arab origin. See Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century: pt. 1, Toponymy, monuments, historical geography, and frontier studies p. 269 in the footnote 256, where Irfan Shahid, the author, writes: "His grandfather's name was Mansur, and such a name in pre-Islamic times can only imply he was an Arab. The Greek vita is more explicit on the saint's Arab origin; see D. Sahas, "John of Damascus on Islam Revisited" in Abr-Nahrain 23 (1984-85), 105-118 ..." So it seems that Sahas ultimately agreewith the other sources listed above. Is there any other source that contests his Arab origin? Or was he it?  T i a m u t talk 19:21, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The Greek vita (life) is the ancient text perhaps legendary about his life, used and checked by scholars. About the Sahas' Article in the Ancient Near Eastern Studies n. 23, the library of my town lacks the years before the 1990, so I cannot check if Sahas changed his mind. However you can write in the article something like: "JoD was surely part of the not-Greek population of Damascus, and according to the the vita (a 10th-century biography of JoD) his family belonged to the Arabs who settled in Damascus" adding as a reference the Sahas. However the Wiki Article should point out that he acted in the Syriac and Greek cultural environment. Thanks for the new point. A ntv (talk) 20:00, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for providing an example text that you think represents the best scholarship on the issue. As I go through more and more sources, it is quite clear that there is a general consensus that he was Arab. Some more description of his Greek cultural participation would entich the article and a new source I just found and listed above might help with that. About his relationship to Syriac culture, I have yet to find anything. Can you suggest a resource?  T i a m u t talk 20:55, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You can look at the recent St John Damascene: tradition and originality in Byzantine theology by Andrew Louth (2005) here, a whole text about JoD, at pag 5 states "John's family was Semitic, probably Syrian rather than Arab, but whatever their racial background,..., they are like to have been throughly Hellenized." This book has also a very good and updated bibliography which can be used in case you need further investigations. A ntv (talk) 21:43, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Obviously the Arabic origin claim enjoys considerable support within some general sources. However, more in-depth sources refute this claim. Could you rephrase the section accordingly to reflect all these views? Also, should we keep the Category:Arab Christians cat or replace it with the ambiguous Category:Syrian Christians, or would you rather suggest keeping them both.--  R a f y  talk 15:32, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see a refutation of his Arab origins in either Louth or Sahas. both still entertain the possibility he was Arab, and do not propose an alternate semitic identity. The feedback t RSN indicated the sources cited above were reliable. They are not o be discounted. One of them says clearly that his being an Arab Christan isa generally accepted fact. If you want to add one line anout how Louth says he was possibly Arab but more probably zsyrian and he Sahas says he was of Semitic ancestry, without specifying which etnicity exactly, that eould be fine with me, but no more than that should be added given the broad consensus in the seven sources cited above.  T i a m u t talk 16:00, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe "refutation" is an exaggerated word, but I think both views should be represented.--  R a f y  talk 19:25, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with adding the info but with faithful representation of the sources. Th sources do not preclude the possibility he was Arab and neither one offers a specific alt identity. Its not clear what Louth means by Syrian, some Syrians were Arab and most are today.  T i a m u t talk 17:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * We know that Louth mentioned that he was Semitic (non-Greek) and not Arab, that doesn't leave much for speculation does it? The fact Syrian is synonymous to Syriac does settle this issue. Regarding his ethnic identity, you had absolutely no problem with putting him in the same category with Muhammad and Ali, why do you subject on calling him Syriac then?--  R a f y  talk 18:37, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Please note that both Arab and Syrian are Semitic people (and both are Semitic language). At JoD time with the term Arab were considered the population who came from the Arabic peninsula and spoke Arabic. At that time the Arabs were not confused with Syriacs (or with the Palestinians), only later the arabization superseded (almost completely) the previous ethnicities, languages and religions. A ntv (talk) 19:54, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The issue is that Tiamut wikilinks Arab Christians and insists on removing the wikilink to Syriacs.--  R a f y  talk 20:24, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I've read Sahas. What he says is that Mansur is not a Greek name, but is common among the "Syrian Christians of Arab descent", and that there is other late evidence that John's grandfather was an Arab; however, the name is not proof of an Arab background, since it could be given to non-Arabs. That valid doubt is not sufficient for us to assert that John was Syriac, but the reasoning is worth noting. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

birth year
There are three different years I've seen given so far: 645, 655(see page 454), and 676. Anyone have any insight on how to deal with this discrepancy?  T i a m u t talk 20:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * See Alexander Hamilton. It should be easier here, especially if all of those are modern estimates; say c. 650 and add a footnote. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:43, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll add an ppoximation. Perhaps we could use a section discussing the discrepancy which is covered in some sources.  T i a m u t talk 17:26, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Revert
I reverted this edit because it repeats information discussed in the subsection directly above it, but incorrectly. The 11th century biography is based on an earlier 9th century text. His being named Mansur is mentioned explicitly and deduced by other sources based on descriptions of his grandfather. And Syrian does not always equal Syriac. At least one source excerpted in the sections above uses Syrian while also identifying John as Arab. There were Syrian Arabs, Syrian Syriacs, Syrian Romans, Syrian Greeks, etc. Unless the source specifically uses Syriac, we should not be assuming that is what they meant.  T i a m u t talk 07:23, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

 * So if he is a Semite Syrian (which is most frequently used to describe Syriac Christians), how could he be Greek or Roman then? Mainstream scholars think the latter two are Indo-Europeans, i.e. non-Semites, you know.--  R a f y  talk 13:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

 * A Semitic Syrian could be Arab, Hebrew, Syriac, or other. As I said, its best not to introduce conclusions not made by the source. Syrian Is a broad geographical descriptor and can encompass many different sub identities at that time. The sources are being vague not precise about possible alternate idenities to Arab and use language that can include Arabs, who as you know are also Semites). We should follow their lead and not forge paths of our own.  T i a m u t talk 16:51, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

 * I appreciate your ref formatting efforts, but you reintroduced a link to Syriac even though its not borne out by the sources cited. Coulyou please revert your reintroduction of this material? Should we request an Rfc?  T i a m u t talk 16:55, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Please go ahead.--  R a f y  talk 14:22, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Could you please revert your reintroduction of this material?  T i a m u t talk 19:06, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

 * I gave you a valid reason, "Syrian" is used synonymously with "Syriac", just consult any book with reference to Syrian Christians. Even if we follow your argument that Syrian might as well denote Arabs, Greeks and Romans, the fact that the references claim he was of Semitic and probably non-Arabic background doesn't leave any other interpretation to the word.
 * We have already had a third opinion from a very knowledgeable user in the field of Oriental Christianity. Your denial shows that you are only interested in spreading you nationalist views.--  R a f y  talk 20:24, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Can John of Damascus be described as being of Syriac origin based on the information provided in this source?  T i a m u t talk 21:06, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * please also review the related subsection above Talk:John of Damascus for more background information.  T i a m u t talk 21:56, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Comment: I don't really get the distinction between Syrian and Syriac, but from the source provided, it looks like Syriac is the language??? Also, the argument that "Syrian is used synonymously with Syriac" is not a valid. Unless the source specifically says he was Syriac, then we're looking at a case of WP:SYNTH. – Adjwilley (talk)  22:37, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

 * The term "Syriac" in English is a modern rendition of "Syrian" probably under influence from French. Syriac (ܣܘܪܝܐ), Greek (συριακή) and even Latin (Syriaca), however, make no distinction between Syriac and Syrian, Arabic use Suryani (سرياني) for Syriac, the name Syria (سوريا) doesn't appear in pre 19th century Arab literature except in Christian religious or when referring to Byzantine texts, the Arab instead used Bilad al-Sham (بلاد الشام).
 * Going back to the term "Syrian" appears in Greek sources in reference to Aramaic speaking peoples of the Levant and northern Mesopotamia (See ), their language appears to have transformed from Aramaic to Syrian. Those were later split to Eastern Syrians (Nestorians) and Western Syrians (Jacobites, Maronites and Jacobites). The Melkites (such as Tiamut) were however so Arabised and they stopped identfying as "Syrians" in the early centuries of Islam, the Maronites followed suit some centuries later.
 * As for references, probably the most authoritative biography on his life is written by Andrew Louth, there he describes John as "Syrian rather than Arab" (p.5) and as "Syrian Melkite" (p.12). To confirm that he meant Syriac by Syrian he describes Bardaisan as Syrian as well (p.62), and on p287 he re-afferms this when he asserts his "Hellenised Syrian stock" and affinity with "Syriac Christian tradition".--  R a f y  talk 00:09, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Rafy, Louth says "probably Syrian rather than Arab" and never uses Syriac as a descriptor for John of Damascus, even though he does use the term elsewhere. If he meant Syriac, he would have used it. Also he cites this statement to Sahas, who as we know says John was of Semitic ancestry, term that is too broad to make specific conclusions about but which also does not discount Arab. Seven sources above say he was of Arab origin and Louth and Sahas don't discount the possibility that he was Arab, offering another non-Arab Semitic identity that is not specified as the alternative. The sources simply do not say Syriac or offer Syriac origin as a possibility. Its your interpretation of them only.  T i a m u t talk 19:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, just ask anyone with a basic knowledge on oriental Christianity what a "Syrian race" might be. I'm not discounting the possibility of him being Arab, major specialised sources have their doubts and this must reflect on the article accordingly.--  R a f y  talk 20:27, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The author doesn't use the term "race", that's your interpretation. He may be using Syrian as a geographical descriptor or a cultural one. Its not clear. Considering other sources bove describe John as Syrian and Arab, its clear that there is more than one meaning for the word and that the to are not mutually exclusive. The possibility that he may not be Arab is now included in the article. The problem is you have edit warred to include his origin as Syriac, when not a single source actually says that.  T i a m u t talk 09:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * He mentions that he is of "Syriac stock", a quick look at webster reveals the following:

Stock
 * a  : the original (as a person, race, or language) from which others derive : source
 * b (1)   : the descendants of one individual : family, lineage    (2)   : a compound organism
 * c  : an infraspecific group usually having unity of descent
 * d (1)   : a related group of languages   (2)   : a language family.--  R a f y  talk 10:08, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, he says his family was "doubtless of Syrian stock", not Syriac stock. Considering that he himself is unsure of whether or not John was Arab, he would not be using this in a racial sense.  T i a m u t talk 10:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have removed Syriac from the article, as it is pure synth. if and when a source stating Syriac is provided, it may be readded.  T i a m u t talk 10:57, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Inching forward
Hi Rafy. This edit introduces a couple of problems. First, by replacing Semitic with Syrian and removing mention of Arab, the source is being misrepresented a bit. Louth doesn't discount the possibility John was Arab, and his phrasing indicates that he does not view Syrian and Arab to be mutually exclusive. He also cites Sahas as his source for his position of John's ancestry (along with Cox). We know Sahas uses "Semitic" and that's what Louth uses in the footnote (if I recall properly). Inany case, I'd like to change it back to what it said before, unless you have another suggestion on hrasing you would like to consider.

About John's Arabic name ... the source cited does say in a footnote that Yanah is an older form of Yuhanna, so thats not synth in any way. Both those names mean "John". iyanis is an English transliteration of the arabic transliteration of the Greek form of John. i retained the Qurin of Coptic writers in a footnote. I'm not sure that was a first name for him though (rather than say a title). All that material on his name needs more work and a more thorough review of the sources.  T i a m u t talk 19:52, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that he suggests that "Yana" is an older form of "Yuhanna" since the first is Syriacised Hebrew and the second a Hellenised one. What I understood is that his name according to Agapius was "Yana" in older manuscripts mention and this turned to "Yuhanna" in later ones.

 * Sources say 1) he might or might not be Arab (Sahas) 2) he is probably Syrian rather than Arab (Louth). The only problem is that you refuse to insert any word that suggest could link to a non-Arab article.--  R a f y  talk 20:57, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Comment 2: I forgot to put the article on my watchlist, but I've read the above discussion, and it's way beyond my expertise. It sounds like Rafy has a good knowledge of the languages involved, while Tiamut is more familiar with Wikipedia policies. I can't tell if the discussion has been resolved, but I get the feeling there's some underlying issue fueling the debate. Anyway, the best of luck to you both. ~Adjwilley (talk) 02:13, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your opinion. I will leave this issue now until a better definition is found for those included by Category:Syrian Christians.--  R a f y  talk 14:38, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Discussion on the subject of what to be included in the category has been started at Category talk:Syrian Christians. Any and all input is more than welcome. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 00:23, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Taghlib and Banu Kalb
It states that he could have descended from the Promenent Christian Arab Tribes of Taghlib and Banu Kalb. Neither of thosr tribes are (mostly) Christians - most of those tribes today are Muslim, and were wuite early to convert to Islam. This the description that they are Christian Arab is misleading, and so I removed it. Furthermore, as far back as the Islamic Conquests, "Arab" has been used as a linguistic term as opposed to an ethnic term. It was used to describe people with no descent from the Bedouin Tribes of the Syrian Desert and the North Arabian Desert. In the possibility that John of Damascus was descended from those tribes, his ethnicity would be more accurately described as "Bedouin". Thus that is what I have replaced "Christian Arab" with. Please reply and discuss before editting, or I will automatically revert. Peace. SaSH172 (talk) 15:42, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Career?
Clearly, this article needs substantial work, which I too don't have the time to perform, so I'm setting forth my thoughts here. I'm not at all interested in disputing his ethnicity, per all the comments on this page, and the substantial intro. First, I think the article should explicate his other title, Chrysorrhoas (Golden Speaker). Was he an eremetical priest-monk, or one who went out into the world, per Golden Speaker rather than Golden Writer?

Most importantly, the legend about John's hand being cut off either fascinates or puzzles me, especially in connection with the tradition that high level civil servants could retire to (or be confined in) monasteries, as well as Byzantine scheming. Clearly, it shouldn't be prefaced as improbable or legendary--only the reattachment seems to deserve that, and I'm not sure from this as written even what era of hagiographic bios from long after his death gave rise to that implausibility. Of course, Byzantines were known for treachery, and leaking forged letters has been done many times in history. Was John in fact adjudged by his caliph, punished and later vindicated? Was the controversy over treason, forgery or something else? I'm pretty sure treason was a capitol offense, and maiming was used for a wide variety of crimes, probably also garden variety corruption. Thus, losing a hand for suspected collusion with the Byzantines in Constantinople seems inappropriate, but a monk or priest missing a hand (or with an artificial limb) certainly would be memorable. I also noted the sentence that Muslim sources only mention his father's retirement. Was John blackballed and intentionally forgotten, or did he lose his nepotistic patron? If the Caliph really trusted and protected John from the Byzantine iconoclasts, why did he move to a monastery in Jerusalem, which probably had more Byzantine pilgrims (even if smaller and less prosperous)? The article says John was an administrator before his ordination, and I presumed that was in Damascus proper, but maybe it was elsewhere. Did John prepare all or some of his iconodule writings while also functioning as a civil servant in the Muslim government (moonlighting)? Seems more likely that he had more incentive to write after ordination, and time to write if confined in the monastery, but that if his faith told him to speak, he could have chosen Jerusalem as a platform. Just my 2 cents (or drachma, or dinar!)... Jweaver28 (talk) 14:29, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Doctor of the Church - 1890 not 1883
I've changed the date 1883 to 1890. This is the correct date - the decretum "Urbis et Orbis" of Aug 19, 1890 says: "Ecclesiam ita concedi posse censuit, nimirum ut de S. Ioanne Damasceno Confessore fiat die XXVII Martii sub ritu duplici minori, addita Doctoris qualitate." This can be confirmed in several sources, such as Vacant-Mangenot, "Dictionnaire de Theologie Catholique" VIII.1 p. 695. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tirachinas (talk • contribs) 05:47, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

A Syriac family called Mansour ?
Why was this article vandalized ? The only way you could be called Mansour in this time was if you were of Arabian background. GoulGoul1 (talk) 19:23, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Medjay
Is "John of Damascus" really a Medjay?

10:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)10:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)\\\\\\\\\\\\\10:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)43.242.178.206 (talk) 10:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\10:16, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Not just or even especially Lutheranism
The article says John wrote hymns which are still used not only in Eastern Orthodoxy but also, at Easter, in "western Lutheranism". In actuality, the use of hymns by John of Damascus – in particular, two of them, "Come, Ye Faithful, Raise the Strain" and "The Day of Resurrection" – in connection with Easter is widespread across most of Western Christianity where the singing of older texts is maintained. Looking just at those two hymns, far and away his most popular outside Eastern Orthodoxy, and looking just at the hymnals published since 1979 and indexed in the Hymnary.org database, there are 130 instances of those two hymns, if I counted correctly, and they break down denominationally as

29 Anglican (11 of "The Day of Resurrection" + 18 instances of "Come, Ye Faithful, Raise the Strain")

26 Calvinist (12 + 14)

11 Catholic (2 + 9)

14 Lutheran (6 + 8)

9 Methodist (6 + 3)

21 Nondenominational (15 + 6)

20 Protestant (Other) (11 + 9)

Obviously there is nothing particularly Lutheran-leaning there. I'm not sure what the best way to redo this is, and since these stats are actually original research on my part, I'm not supposed to be the one to correct it. But there you go. --Haruo (talk) 00:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:John of Damascus


text:
Henri Désiré Landru

Henri Désiré Landru (12 April 1869 – 25 February 1922) was a French serial killer, nicknamed the Bluebeard of Gambais. He murdered at least seven women in the village of Gambais between December 1915 and January 1919. Landru also killed at least three other women and a young man in the house he rented from December 1914 to August 1915 in the town of Vernouillet, a town 35 km northwest of Paris. The true number of Landru's victims is suspected to be higher.

Landru was arrested on 12 April 1919 at an apartment near Paris's Gare du Nord, which he shared with his 24-year-old mistress Fernande Segret. The police eventually concluded that Landru had met or been in romantic correspondence with 283 women during the First World War. Seventy-two were never traced. In December 1919, Landru's wife Marie-Catherine, 51, and his eldest son Maurice, 25, were arrested on suspicion of complicity in Landru's thefts from his victims. Both denied any knowledge of Landru's criminal activities. Marie-Catherine was released without charge in July 1920 for health reasons. Maurice was released on the same day because the authorities could not establish his guilt.

Landru continued to protest his innocence during the yearlong investigation. He was charged with the murders at Vernouillet and Gambais. This included the murders of ten women and his first victim's teenage son. Landru's trial in November 1921 at Versailles was attended by leading French celebrities, including the novelist Colette, and the actor and singer Maurice Chevalier. On 30 November, Landru was found guilty by a majority verdict of all eleven murders and sentenced to death. He was executed by guillotine on 25 February 1922.

Early life
Henri Landru was born in Paris, the son of a furnace stoker and a laundress, who were both ardent Catholics. He was educated by monks at a Catholic school on the Île Saint-Louis, serving as an altar boy at the adjacent church, where his parents and elder sister worshipped. By his late teens, Landru had graduated to sub-deacon, a secular post that involved lighting candles and helping a priest with his vestments. According to his future wife Marie-Catherine, she first set eyes on the young Landru at Mass one Sunday in 1887. "We got talking as we were leaving the church and so my love story began."

Landru and Marie-Catherine's first child, Marie, was born illegitimately in 1891, shortly after Landru began three years' obligatory military service in the northern French town of Saint-Quentin, rising from private to the position of deputy quartermaster. In the autumn of 1893, he returned to Paris and married Marie-Catherine, who was already pregnant with their second child, Maurice. The couple had two more children: Suzanne, born in 1896, and Charles, born in 1900.

During the 1890s while his wife worked as a laundress, Landru drifted from one job to the next. He was employed for short periods in Paris as a plumber's accountant, a furniture salesman and an assistant to a toy maker. In a later newspaper interview, Marie-Catherine described Landru as a "model husband" and father in the early years of their marriage, even though she also told police that he was a "skirt chaser" from the very beginning.

Crime
Landru's drift into crime and possible insanity seems to have been associated with his ambition to become a famous inventor. In 1898 he designed a primitive motorbike, which he called "The Landru", and then deceived several potential investors into giving him money to build a factory to manufacture it. Having pocketed the money, Landru vanished. Other projects that Landru began in the late 1890s and early 1900s included a plan for a new suburban railway line west of Paris and an automated children's toy. Meanwhile, he was constantly on the run from the police, seeing little of his family and lying low for a year in Le Havre.

In 1904 Landru was finally arrested in Paris after falling in the street, as he was running away from a bank he had tried to defraud. He was remanded in custody at the Santé prison where he made what appears to have been a fake suicide attempt, slipping his head through a noose made from his bed sheet just as a guard was entering his cell. Landru was examined by Dr Charles Vallon, one of France's leading criminal psychiatrists, who concluded that Landru was "on the frontiers of madness" but was not yet insane and was still responsible for his actions. Vallon's diagnosis was confirmed by two other psychiatrists. Yet Vallon was sufficiently concerned by Landru's behaviour that he warned Marie-Catherine to be on guard in the future.

Landru was tried and sentenced to two years in jail in the town of Fresnes, south of Paris. He was in and out of prison for the next decade. During this period, Landru's wife and four children lived in a series of cheap rented apartments in and around Paris. In 1909 Landru attempted to swindle an affluent widow in the northern city of Lille by posing as a wealthy, single businessman and persuading her to hand over her savings in a pre-marital contract. He was arrested while trying to cash in her investment certificates and sentenced to three years in prison at Loos, near Lille. While he was in jail, his widowed father committed suicide in April 1912 by hanging himself from a tree in the Bois de Boulogne. Landru's wife subsequently claimed that her father-in-law had killed himself partly in despair at her husband's criminal career. She also said that in the autumn of 1912, as soon as he was released from prison, Landru stole around 12,000 francs (approximately $40,000 in modern money) that his father had pointedly left for her and the four children, rather than him.

In the winter of 1913–14, Landru executed easily the most successful swindle of his career, duping more than a dozen individuals into giving him a total of 35,600 francs to "invest" in building a fictitious automobile factory. He went on the run in April 1914 with all this money, plus most of his father's inheritance, just before the police came to arrest him. In late July 1914, he was tried and convicted in absentia for the fraud. Taking his previous convictions into account, the court sentenced Landru to four years of hard labour followed by exile for life on the French Pacific island of New Caledonia.

Jeanne and André Cuchet (January or February 1915)
Landru had escaped to a village near the town of Chantilly, 50 km north of Paris, in the company of Jeanne Cuchet, a pretty, 39-year-old Parisian seamstress who had been widowed in 1909. She knew him at this stage as "Raymond Diard", an industrialist from northern France, who had promised to marry her and had persuaded her to give up her job making lingerie for a dress shop in Paris. Cuchet appears to have hoped that Landru, alias Diard, would provide a respectable home for her and her only son André, 17, who was illegitimate.

The balance of Cuchet's relationship with Landru changed completely in early August 1914 when Germany declared war on France. Landru failed to make a rendezvous with Cuchet, who had returned to Paris to be with André, still living in her old apartment. In despair, Cuchet went back to the house near Chantilly, accompanied by André and her brother-in-law, hoping to find the man she still knew as "Diard". The house was empty, but she found Landru's identity papers inside a chest, along with various fake documents. The next day, Cuchet visited Landru's abandoned apartment in southern Paris where she discovered that he was a criminal on the run who should have been deported to New Caledonia.

Cuchet insisted to her sister and brother-in-law that her engagement with Landru was over, but when he reappeared in late August 1914 she resumed their relationship. Meanwhile, she kept a close watch on her patriotic son André, who was desperate to join the army and fight the Germans, even though he was too young to volunteer. In late November 1914, Cuchet suddenly pulled André out of his job at an automobile factory in northwest Paris. At the start of December, Cuchet, Landru (posing as "Monsieur Cuchet") and André moved to a house in Vernouillet, a small town by the Seine, 35 km northwest of Paris. Over Christmas, Cuchet wrote to a woman friend in Paris, explaining that it would not be convenient to visit her in Vernouillet because of the poor weather: "at the moment the place is rather muddy". In mid-January, André learned to his joy that his scheduled recruitment to the army had been brought forward two years to the summer of 1915. He wrote to a friend in the army on 20 January, reporting his good news, and another to an uncle a week later. Then Cuchet and André disappeared without a trace. No one ever saw them again.

Subsequent murders (June 1915 – January 1919)
Landru's subsequent murders between 1915 and 1919 were presented chronologically at his trial, creating the false impression that he had met the women in the order in which he killed them. In fact, one of his known victims had been "engaged" to the married Landru for more than two years before he murdered her, a period during which he killed at least five other women; another victim had known him for more than a year and a half before she disappeared; while his last known victim, a prostitute, may have first encountered Landru as early as 1914.

It was also taken for granted by the police and the prosecution that he had recorded the total number of his victims in a list of 11 names and code names he had written at the back of a little black notebook (known in French as a carnet) which was discovered immediately after his arrest. This is questionable for several reasons. Landru did not acquire the carnet until the spring of 1915, more than a year after he first met Jeanne Cuchet, his first known victim. He did not begin to keep detailed notes in the carnet until the summer of 1916, and even then, statements by various witnesses proved beyond doubt that Landru did not record all his planned and impromptu encounters with women in the later years of the war. Landru claimed at his trial that the list was simply an aide-mémoire to remind him of clients from whom he had bought furniture as a second-hand dealer. He was certainly lying, but based on witness testimony and forensic evidence, it is also almost certain that other unknown victims were not recorded by Landru on the list.

Landru's nine known victims after Jeanne and André Cuchet all lived in Paris. In order of the presumed date of their murder, they were:

Thérèse Laborde-Line, 46 (Vernouillet, June 1915)
Born in Argentina, Thérèse Laborde-Line was a divorced, unemployed widow who was estranged from her only son, a postal clerk, and her daughter-in-law. She met Landru either through a lonely-hearts advertisement he placed on 1 May 1915 in Le Journal, a mass-circulation daily, or through a notice applying for a position as a lady's companion which she placed in another newspaper.

Marie-Angélique Guillin, 52 (Vernouillet, August 1915)
She was a widowed, retired housekeeper, living near Paris's Gare de Lyon, who had inherited a substantial sum from her last employer. Guillin answered Landru's 1 May 1915 lonely-hearts advertisement and believed his story about being the next Consul-General to Australia, in need of a wife to host diplomatic receptions.

Berthe Héon, 55 (Gambais, December 1915)
Originally from Le Havre, Berthe Héon scraped a living as a cleaning woman and had suffered multiple bereavements, losing in turn her husband, her long-term lover, her two legitimate children and her beloved illegitimate daughter in childbirth. She met Landru in the summer of 1915, probably via a second lonely-hearts advertisement he placed in Le Journal. Posing as a businessman, Landru pretended he was in search of a wife to join him in the "pretty colony" of Tunisia.

Anna Collomb, 44 (Gambais, December 1916)
Anna Collomb was a clever, attractive widow who worked as a typist at an insurance company in Paris and had had a string of lovers since the death of her alcoholic, bankrupt husband a decade earlier. Her motive for answering Landru's 1 May 1915 lonely-hearts advertisement was probably that she wanted a stepfather for her illegitimate young daughter, whom she had reportedly placed in the care of nuns in Italy. The little girl was never traced by the police.

Andrée Babelay, 19 (Gambais, April 1917)
Chatty and vivacious, Andrée Babelay was a nanny and possibly a casual prostitute whom Landru picked up one evening while riding on the Paris metro. Babelay spent the next ten days living with Landru (whom she called 'Lulu') in a room he rented near Paris's Gare du Nord, and then a further fortnight at his rented house near Gambais, where she was seen by a local game warden learning to ride a bicycle.

Célestine Buisson, 47 (Gambais, September 1917)
Homely, trusting and semi-literate, Célestine Buisson was yet another woman who answered Landru's 1 May 1915 lonely-hearts advertisement in Le Journal. Born in southwest France, Buisson was a widow who worked as a housekeeper and was lonely after the mobilization of her only son, who was illegitimate. Landru, alias Georges Frémyet, became "engaged" to Buisson immediately, but then put off their marriage for more than two years, pleading lost identity documents and long "business trips" abroad.

Louise Jaume, 38 (Gambais, November 1917)

She was a devout Catholic, working as a dress shop assistant, who answered a lonely-hearts advertisement Landru placed in a conservative newspaper after deciding to divorce her estranged husband. Jaume initially refused to sleep with Landru, alias "Lucien Guillet", a refugee from the German-occupied Ardennes region. He broke her resistance and then took her to Gambais on a one-way train ticket after celebrating Mass with her at the basilica of Sacré Cœur in Paris.

Anne-Marie ('Annette') Pascal, 37 (Gambais, April 1918)
On account of her wide-brimmed hats, Annette Pascal was nicknamed "Mme Sombrero" by her neighbours on the street near the Père Lachaise cemetery where she lived and worked, making dresses for a Paris fashion house. Pascal was divorced and childless, following the death of her only son in infancy, and was looking for a so-called "vieux monsieur" ("sugar daddy") in September 1916 when she spotted Landru's lonely-hearts advertisement in the Paris evening daily, La Presse.

Marie-Thérèse Marchadier, 37 (Gambais, January 1919)
Born in Bordeaux, Marie-Thérèse Marchadier was a career prostitute and a familiar sight on the street outside her apartment on Paris's Rue Saint-Jacques, where she liked to walk her two beloved Belgian griffon dogs. At Landru's trial, the prosecution claimed that he first met the heavily indebted Marchadier in October 1918 after she advertised to sell her furniture. Circumstantial evidence suggests that he may have encountered her several years earlier in the port of Le Havre or the provincial town of Beauvais.

Pursuit and arrest
Landru was able to avoid capture during the war for three main reasons. One was the war itself, which denuded France's civilian police force, as officers of military age were mobilized and sent to the front. In Vernouillet, where Landru rented his first house from December 1914 to August 1915, there was just one constable for the whole town. In Gambais, where Landru rented his second house from December 1915 until his arrest, there was one constable in his early seventies, stationed in the village, and a single mounted gendarme in the market town of Houdan, four miles (6.4 km) away.

Secondly, Landru's wife and four children knew his whereabouts throughout the war but shielded him from the police. Landru's youngest son Charles, born in 1900, worked as his self-styled "apprentice", helping Landru remove furniture and other possessions from at least five of his known victims' apartments and latterly acting as his father's chauffeur. His eldest son Maurice, born in 1894, was mobilized in the summer of 1915 and arrested soon afterwards for various frauds and thefts, including the receipt and sale of valuables from Landru that had belonged to his first known victim, Jeanne Cuchet. Following his release from prison, Maurice helped Landru concoct a cover story to explain the disappearance of his sixth known victim, Anna Collomb, to one of Anna's friends. Meanwhile, Landru's wife lived for most of the war in the northwestern Paris suburb of Clichy under the false name "Frémyet" (one of Landru's aliases) in an apartment where he was seen coming and going at regular intervals. Landru's wife forged the signature of his eighth known victim, Célestine Buisson, so he could gain access to Célestine's bank account, and impersonated his ninth known victim, Louise Jaume, for the same purpose.

Lastly, Landru benefited from the indifference of police officers and village officials to the fate of the women, at a time when hundreds of thousands of young men were losing their lives at the front. Indeed, it is arguable that Landru might never have been arrested without the persistence of another woman who forced the authorities to investigate the suspicious man who rented the Villa Tric outside Gambais: Marie Lacoste.

Marie Lacoste's pursuit of Landru
Marie Lacoste, the younger half-sister of Célestine Buisson, was an unmarried housemaid who disliked Landru, alias George Frémyet, from the moment she first met him at Buisson's apartment in the summer of 1915. Over the next two years, Lacoste began to suspect that Buisson's fiancé was a marriage swindler, out to get his hands on the naive Buisson's savings. Lacoste's suspicion was confirmed during a visit with Buisson to the Villa Tric in August 1917, when Buisson admitted that "Frémyet" had taken charge of her investments. Buisson refused to take Lacoste's advice to end her engagement to "Frémyet" and the two siblings were scarcely on speaking terms when they returned to Paris. A day later, Landru took Buisson back to Gambais, travelling on a one-way train ticket. She was never seen again.

During the autumn of 1917, Landru became increasingly worried that Lacoste might suspect him of Buisson's murder. He tried to reassure Lacoste that her half-sister was still alive by sending her two fake postcards from Gambais, purportedly signed by "Célestine". Lacoste instantly realized the signatures were forgeries, but having concluded that Landru was just a con man, did not take any other action. Still worried, Landru turned up alone on several occasions at Lacoste's workplace to invite her to dinner with Buisson at Buisson's apartment in Paris. Landru knew the apartment was empty and almost certainly intended to kill Lacoste there. Each time, Lacoste refused, eventually telling Landru to get lost and not to come back.

For the next year, Lacoste mentally washed her hands of Buisson, deciding that her half-sister was too ashamed about falling into the clutches of a crook to want any further contact between them. Then in December 1918, Lacoste received a letter which stirred her into action. Buisson's son had been blinded during the war and from his home in southwest France, had tried to contact Buisson to borrow money, following what he called a "serious accident". She had not replied, prompting the son to ask Lacoste if she could intervene with Buisson on his behalf. Lacoste visited Buisson's old apartment, where the concierge told her that Buisson had last been seen there in the summer of 1917 and that at least one other woman had subsequently spent the night at the address with "Frémyet" before he paid off the lease. Thoroughly alarmed, Lacoste concluded that Landru had probably killed Buisson and had been planning to kill her when he invited her to the apartment.

She rapidly compiled a dossier for the police, noting Landru's physical appearance, his known movements with Buisson since 1915, the location and design of his house near Gambais, his thefts from Buisson's bank accounts, the forged postcards after her disappearance and his phony invitations to dinner. On 11 January 1919, Lacoste took her dossier to her local police station in Paris, accompanied by a fellow maid called Laure Bonhoure who had seen Landru when he had visited the house where they worked. At the station, a police officer told Lacoste that she needed to contact the authorities in Gambais, where Buisson had vanished. The next day, Lacoste wrote to the mayor of Gambais in her best formal French, forgetting her full stops as she raced on:

"You have in your commune a house at about 100 meters from the church, which is called the Maison Tric, the name of the owner, I do not know him, but the house was rented in 1917, to a gentleman around 40 years old, who had a long brown beard and who has as his name Monsieur Frémyet. Therefore this gentleman lived in this house for a good part of the summer of 1917 with a woman of about 45 to 50, or more exactly 47, with blue eyes and chestnut hair, medium height."

The mayor denied any knowledge of Célestine Buisson or a man called Frémyet living at the Maison (or Villa) Tric. This claim was well short of the truth because the mayor recognized the man described accurately by Lacoste as another of Landru's aliases: "Raoul Dupont". The mayor did, however, put Lacoste in touch with Victorine Pellat, the younger sister of Landru's sixth known victim Anna Collomb, who had made an identical inquiry about Collomb in 1917.

Lacoste contacted Pellat and after conferring about their separate investigations, they filed two missing person complaints with the prosecutor's office in the department of Seine-et-Oise, where Gambais was located. By a desultory route, the cases finally wound their way back to Inspector Jules Belin of the Paris flying squad (brigade mobile).

Belin interviewed Pellat and Lacoste and then plagiarized most of the latter's research for an internal police report in which he falsely took the credit for Landru's arrest. In reality, Landru's capture was entirely due to a chance sighting of him on 11 April 1919 by Lacoste's friend Laure Bonhoure as he was shopping with his mistress Fernande Segret in a crockery shop on Rue de Rivoli. Bonhoure tried to follow Landru after he left the shop, but fearing he had recognized her, she ran home to tell Lacoste, who phoned Belin with the news. Belin retrieved the business card that Landru, alias "Lucien Guillet", had given to a shop assistant and visited the address indicated: 76 Rue de Rochechouart, near the Gare du Nord. However, Belin only had an arrest warrant for a man called "Frémyet", so decided to go home for the night.

On 12 April, at around midday, Belin returned with two fellow officers and a newly drafted warrant and arrested Landru, who had just returned from accosting a woman on the metro.

Investigation (April 1919 – November 1921)
From the moment of his arrest, when he refused to confirm his identity, Landru was a formidably obdurate suspect. During multiple interrogations in 1919 and 1920, he repeatedly protested his innocence, demanding to know why he would have killed the women when they were his "friends".

The investigating magistrate Gabriel Bonin was initially confident that he could wrap up the case in a matter of days, following the discovery on 29 April 1919 of some tiny fragments of charred human bone debris beneath a pile of leaves in Landru's back garden at Gambais. However, this material was more problematic than it first appeared. Gradually, Bonin's inquiry was enmeshed in a series of interlocking, seemingly insoluble puzzles.

Evidence of murder
In the weeks after Landru's arrest, the police gathered overwhelming proof that Landru had stolen the financial assets and possessions of the 10 missing women on the list in his carnet. Landru had kept the booty he had not sold at a garage in Clichy and various storage depots around Paris, along with files on dozens of women he had contacted during the war via lonely hearts advertisements and matrimonial agencies.

What the police lacked was direct evidence of murder, apart from the charred bone debris discovered at Gambais; and under the microscope, these fragments turned out to be "a veritable puzzle", according to Dr Charles Paul, the director of the Paris police laboratory. Paul and his colleagues were only able to establish that the debris had come from three or more skeletons. They did not know if the skeletons were female, because there were no pelvic bones; nor could the forensic scientists confirm that the fragments came from three or more of the women who were known to have vanished at Gambais.

Although Paul avoided speculation in his report on the debris, it was possible that the fragments came from the burnt skeletons of other unknown victims whom Landru had killed at the Villa Tric. This possibility was reinforced by the evidence of one witness in particular, an army doctor who had seen Landru dumping a heavy package in a pond near Gambais in the late spring or early summer of 1916. The doctor did not testify at Landru's trial, pleading illness, but the prosecution acknowledged that his sighting did not fit the timeline of the known disappearances; about six months after the presumed murder of Landru's fifth known fiancée and six months before the death of the next victim on the charge sheet.

Complicity of Landru's family
To varying degrees, Landru's wife and four children were all complicit in shielding him from the police during the war and in abetting his thefts from the missing women. The unanswered question is whether any, some or all of them were also complicit in his murders.

His youngest son Charles, acted as his self-styled "apprentice" from 1914 to 1919, helping Landru to clear five of the women's apartments after they vanished. Two days after Landru's arrest, Charles also admitted assisting his father with unexplained "gardening work" at Landru's house in Vernouillet in early 1915, around the time that Jeanne and André Cuchet disappeared.

Landru's eldest son Maurice (born in 1894) was arrested for swindling and thefts in the autumn of 1915, shortly after his mobilization, and tried by court-martial. Among the valuables in Maurice's possession was jewellery belonging to Jeanne Cuchet which Landru had given him. Maurice later disclaimed any knowledge of the jewellery's provenance. In January 1917, following his release from a military prison, Maurice assisted his father in creating a cover story to explain the disappearance of the sixth missing woman, Anna Collomb.

Landru's wife Marie Catherine forged at least one of the missing women's signatures so Landru could gain access to his victim's bank savings. Under interrogation, Marie Catherine initially protested her innocence, claiming her only crime had been "to love my husband too much". She eventually confessed, while insisting that she had had no idea why Landru had asked her to commit the forgery.

The complicity of Landru's two daughters, Marie (born 1891) and Suzanne (born 1896), was less certain. Marie disclaimed any knowledge of his activities during the war, even though in August 1917 she had bid unsuccessfully at a property auction in Gambais on Landru's behalf for a house in which he was interested. Suzanne moved out of the family's apartment in 1916 when she became engaged, but still saw Landru at intervals on her visits back home.

In December 1919 the investigating magistrate Bonin ordered the arrest of Landru's wife and Maurice Landru on suspicion of complicity in Landru's thefts and frauds. However, Bonin never formally charged them and in July 1920 they were released from custody – in Marie-Catherine's case on medical grounds (she had a bad back) and in Maurice's case because according to Bonin, his continuing detention was not helpful to the investigation. It appears more likely that Bonin decided a jury would struggle to believe that Marie-Catherine and Maurice had known nothing about the murders, given their clear involvement in Landru's thefts. This is also the most plausible explanation for why Bonin never arrested Landru's youngest son and "apprentice" Charles.

Trial (7 – 30 November 1921)

Landru was eventually brought to trial in Versailles in November 1921, after exhausting his appeals against previous convictions. The location was a compromise between the authorities in the department of Seine-et-Oise (now Yvelines), where Landru had allegedly committed the murders, and the judiciary in Paris, where his victims had lived. Versailles was chosen as the venue as the largest town in Seine-et-Oise, while the presiding judge, Maurice Gilbert, was from the Paris judiciary. Gilbert allowed photographers to take pictures during each session, a decision which helped to stoke the sensational atmosphere surrounding the long-awaited trial of the "Bluebeard of Gambais". Every day, the newspapers gave saturation coverage of the proceedings and as the trial progressed, and the possibility of Landru's acquittal on the murder charges seemed to increase, the proceedings attracted trainloads of spectators from Paris. Celebrities who came to watch Landru included the reigning queen of French musical theatre, Mistinguett, the actors Maurice Chevalier and Sacha Guitry, the writer Rudyard Kipling (in Paris to receive an honorary degree) and the novelist Colette (who covered the first session for the newspaper Le Matin). By the end of the trial, Gilbert had lost all control of the audience, with as many as 500 spectators crammed inside, double the courtroom's capacity.

The defence and prosecution cases
Landru's 43-year-old defence attorney Vincent de Moro Giafferri, widely regarded as the most famous trial lawyer in France, privately despised his client and thought he was insane. However, Moro was also a passionate opponent of the death penalty and did not believe that the prosecution could remotely prove that Landru had certainly killed the 10 women and one young man on the murder charge sheet. Moro therefore proposed to offer the jury a bargain. The defence would not contest the multiple charges of theft and fraud (even though Landru denied them), which would be enough to send Landru for the rest of his life into exile with hard labour in French Guiana – an ordeal which would probably kill him before long, given Landru's poor physical health.

In constructing this defence, Moro's chief difficulty was keeping Landru under control and preferably silent. Under examination, Landru repeatedly made clear that he knew more about the fate of the women than he was prepared to reveal, ostensibly because he had had a "sacred compact" with them which swore him to silence. Adding to the impression of his guilt, Landru argued ludicrously that he had pursued the women via lonely hearts advertisements as a means to gain access to their furniture, which he had wanted to sell. He denied that any of them had been his mistresses and insisted that the incriminating list of names in his notebook was merely a record of his clients.

Moro's best chance of saving Landru from the guillotine lay in the overall weakness of the murder case. As Moro argued, none of the 157 witnesses on the prosecution's list (about 120 of whom were called) had any direct evidence of murder. All the mothers, sisters and female friends of the missing women could produce was proof of Landru's trickery of their loved ones, which the defence did not dispute. Moro ridiculed the incompetence of the police, who had failed to seal Landru's property at Gambais after their first search of the house and gardens when they had not discovered the bone debris. In Moro's view, it was possible that the debris had been planted by persons unknown before the second search, in order to incriminate Landru.

The chief prosecuting attorney Robert Godefroy, a plodding government barrister, struggled from the start of the trial to make any headway with Landru or prevent Moro from undermining the credibility of the police and forensic witnesses. Gilbert, the judge, effectively took over the examination of Landru, as he was entitled to do under the French judicial system. Yet while Gilbert scored some palpable hits against Landru – in particular, regarding the records in his notebook – the consensus among reporters covering the trial was that the outcome would depend on the closing speeches by Godefroy and Moro.

Godefroy was suffering from flu, forcing him to break off his marathon address on the first day and complete it the following afternoon. He itemized eight "proofs" which in his view demonstrated Landru's guilt beyond all doubt, from the one-way train tickets Landru had bought the women on their last known journey to Gambais to the killer's tell-tale noting of the hour they disappeared – "the hour of the execution".

In a brilliant tour de force, Moro set about demolishing every shred of supposed certainty in the case. Yet even Moro could not explain away the sinister fact that none of the women had surfaced following Landru's arrest. Instead, Moro fell back on a lurid scenario where Landru had been a pimp who had dispatched the women abroad into the "white slave trade". To support his argument, Moro claimed that all the women had been in some sense estranged from their families, an allegation that was demonstrably untrue in several cases, and arguable in several others.

Moro also tried to demonstrate that there was no certainty that the women were actually dead. During his pleading, he affirmed that victims had been found and were going to come and appear before the court. The public and the jurors turned their heads towards the door that Moro had then designated, and after letting the suspense hang, he underlined the fact that all those who had turned their heads towards the exit had thus demonstrated their lack of certainty concerning the reality of the assassinations attributed to his client, highlighting the absence of formal evidence against Landru, since no corpse had been found. The attorney general retorted straight away that Landru had not turned his head towards the door.

The verdict
The jury's verdict, delivered on the evening of 30 November 1921 after three hours deliberation, was not straightforward. By a majority of nine to three, they found Landru guilty of all 11 murders on the charge sheet. Separately, the jury unanimously convicted Landru of all the counts of theft and fraud, apart from those concerning a teenage girl who had been destitute. In the mayhem that followed the verdict, Moro instantly added to the confusion by persuading all twelve jurors to sign Landru's pre-drafted appeal for clemency. If the appeal was successful, the sentence would be commuted to transportation with hard labour. However, Landru refused to sign the document on the grounds that he was entirely innocent. "The tribunal has made a mistake", he told the court before being led back to his cell. "I have never killed anyone. This is my final protest."

Execution and aftermath
Landru was eventually persuaded by Moro to sign his clemency appeal, which was rejected by President Alexandre Millerand. Just before his execution, his final request was for a foot bath. He was executed by guillotine just before dawn on 25 February 1922 outside the gates of the Prison Saint-Pierre in Versailles. The whole procedure from Landru walking out of prison to his beheading took approximately 20 seconds. Landru's corpse was then buried in a marked grave in the nearby Cimetière des Gonards. Five years later his remains were disinterred and reburied in an unmarked grave in the same cemetery when his family declined to renew the lease on the burial site.

In the 1930s Landru's house at Gambais was converted into a restaurant which traded on his notoriety. The house still stands and in 2017 was put up for sale. Landru's notorious oven, in which he allegedly burnt the remains of his victims, was sold at auction in 1923 to a businessman who wanted to put it on display in the Italian city of Turin, beyond French jurisdiction. The Turin authorities banned the exhibition and the oven disappeared from public view, possibly acquired by another private collector. In 1968 a sketch of the oven that Landru had drawn during the trial and entrusted to Moro's deputy counsel was produced by the lawyer's daughter. Beside the oven, Landru had written: "One can burn anything one wants in there", a remark attributed to him by a woman who had survived a visit to the house. On the back of the sketch, Landru had written: "This demonstrates the stupidity of the witnesses. Nothing happened in front of the wall but in the house." The meaning of Landru's statement is unclear.

In fiction
The two most famous films that are based on Landru bear little relation to the original case. In 1947, Charlie Chaplin played the title role in Monsieur Verdoux, a black comedy about a bank clerk who loses his job and murders 14 affluent women to support his family. Chaplin adapted an original script by Orson Welles about Landru, which Chaplin then bought.

Claude Chabrol's French-language Landru (1963), from a script by the novelist Françoise Sagan, ignored the first four murders at Vernouillet and recast the remaining women as fashionable and attractive. Chabrol was sued for defamation by Landru's last mistress Fernande Segret, who disapproved of her portrayal in the film by the actress Stéphane Audran. Segret received modest damages and retired to a care home in the town of Flers, where she committed suicide in 1968.

In 1963, in The Twilight Zone episode "The New Exhibit", Landru is depicted as a wax figure who commits murder. He is portrayed by the American actor Milton Parsons.

Select bibliography

 * Bardens, Dennis, The Ladykiller: The Crimes of Landru, the French Bluebeard, P. Davies, London, 1972.
 * Belin, J., Commissaire Belin. Trente Ans de Sûreté Nationale, Bibliothèque FranceSoir, Paris, 1950.
 * Béraud, Henri, Bourcier, Emmanuel & Salmon, André, L'Affaire Landru, Albin Michel, Paris, 1924.
 * Bernède, Arthur, Landru, Jules Tallandier, Paris, 1931.
 * Biagi-Chai, Francesca, Le cas Landru à la lumière de la psychoanalyse, Imago, Paris, 2007.
 * Darmon, Pierre, Landru, Plon, Paris, 1994.
 * González, Christian, Monsieur Landru, Scènes de Crimes, Paris, 2007.
 * Jaeger, Gérard, Landru: bourreau des cœurs, L'Archipel, Paris, 2005.
 * Lanzalavi, Dominique, Vincent de Moro Giafferri: Défendre l'homme, toujours, Ajaccio, Albiana, 2011.
 * Le Queux, William, Landru: His Secret Love Affairs, Stanley Paul & Co., London, 1922.
 * Mackenzie, F.A. (editor), Landru, Geoffrey Bles, London, 1928.
 * Masson, René, Landru, le Barbe-Bleue de Gambais, N'Avouez Jamais, Paris, 1974.
 * Michal, Bernard, Les Monstres, Bibliomnibus, Paris, 2014.
 * Sagnier, Christine, L'Affaire Landru, Editions de Vecchi, Paris, 1999.
 * Tomlinson, Richard, Landru's Secret: The Deadly Seductions of France's Lonely Hearts Serial Killer, Pen & Sword, Yorkshire and Philadelphia, 2018.
 * Wakefield, Herbert Russell, Landru, The French Bluebeard, Duckworth, London, 1936.
 * Yung, Eric, Landru: 6h 10 Temps Clair, Editions Télémaque, Paris, 2013.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Henri Désiré Landru