Talk:Siege of Sidney Street/Archive 1

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

Bias[edit]

The article is biased against the anarchists.

First of all were they actually anarchists?

Second,is it really a given who their leaders were, or if they had any at all? Typically, the press as well as the police always need there to be a "leader" for the sake of a story.

I doubt I would be the 1st one posting this if we were talking about a "gang of christians" and "the christians" the did this or that.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.129.161.251 (talk) 2006-10-11T18:15:44

The article now correctly describes the burglars as Latvian revolutionaries. Several, if not all, were supporters of the Social Democrats, who at that time and in that place, were revolutionaries.
At the time of the Seige they were referred to as anarchists, I believe because of revolutionary literature discovered by police and because some frequented an anarchist club in the area. Marshall46 15:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biased against anarchists? is that meant to be a joke? These people were certainly anarchists, and for their actions they deserve no sympathy.

Did I understand it correctly, they were killed without being offered to surrender? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.35.137.89 (talk) 14:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Bentley[edit]

Robert Bentley was my great great (maybe great great great) Uncle, and this whole story absolutely fascinates me —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.33.16.99 (talk) 15:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Assessment[edit]

An excellent article, has everything for a B class except references! Needs footnotes, or specific reference links rather than external links, to get a B. Great work though, good images. SGGH speak! 16:58, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Information[edit]

There appears to be a confict in the information towards the end of the 'Hounsditch Murders' Section. In the second last paragraph is says that Tucker died almost instantly but a little further down it claims he died later that day in hospital. It could do with being researched a bit, or maybe rewritten for clarity?Violentbob (talk) 08:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the hospital reference should read "Bentley" rather than "Tucker" - I'll check my copy of Rumbelow when I get home tonight. Nick Cooper (talk) 12:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a similar conflict with Churchill's hat. One paragraph refers to newsreel footage of the bullet hitting it, the next states that never happened. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 03:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant propaganda removed[edit]

Tonight I removed meaningless and under-referenced statements about the death of a constable while on active duty, from the Siege of Sidney Street section of this article.

Specifically, these words and references:

(on his wedding anniversary — his wife had also given birth to a baby boy on the previous Wednesday).[1]

Get your facts straight and clear before you post, people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.65.180 (talk) 04:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity[edit]

Every source used in the article to mention the perpetrators' ethnicity states that they were Latvian. Not a single source asserts that they were Jews. Despite this, one recently-created account has repeatedly removed their description as "Latvian", adding an unsourced assertion that they were "Jewish immigrants". This has been accompanied with the edit summaries that "They were not Latvian" "Latvia did not yet exist", though it doesn't seem to occur to the editor that by the same logic they should not be described as Jews either. The editor's behaviour is more disturbing when it is noted that all of their other edits consist of reverting my own edits, and adding unsuppported or weakly-supported ascriptions of Jewish ethnicity to other historical figures. Can we please put a stop to this game of "Hunt the Jew", and stick with reliably-sourced information? RolandR (talk) 13:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In support of this note. There is no such thing as "Jewish Ethnicity". Judaism is e religion. There are European Jews, Chinese Jews, Indian Jews, Ethiopean Jews, Slavic Jews, Turkish Jews, Jews from Yemen (the Hadramaut was once a Jewish kingdom), Arabian Jews recorded in the Koran, Iraqi Jews, Persian Jews, Jews who are ethnic Uzbeks, Kazaks, Tats and much more. Historygypsy (talk) 23:38, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Irrespective of whether or not Judaism constitutes an ethnicity, Colin Rogers quotes contemporary sources as saying specifically that none of the gang was Jewish and the Met Police at the time was clearly of the same view. See Colin Rogers: The Battle of Stepney (Hale, London, 1981) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wessexboy (talk • contribs) 19:30, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In support of the above note the second time. What this whole "Background" part has got to do with the actual 'Siege of Sidney Street' case, and - wherefore - article? Why some people absolutely have to put the so called 'Jewish Question' in absolutely every article connected to late Russian Empire one way or the other? Anyway, with general anti-Jewish presentiment at the time, Jews would be blamed by press without anything to stop it - so, there there is absolutely no need to put irrelevant information in the article - unless someone's agenda asks for it. Sorry - in the bin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.163.103.234 (talk) 23:16, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, for you at least, there was a connection, as the section makes clear. Perhaps you should try reading it again with a slightly more open mind? – SchroCat (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Add this painting??[edit]

http://libcom.org/gallery/anarchist-art-flavio-costantini#

One of the paintings is of the siege. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudanotak (talk • contribs) 21:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Churchill, Mausers & anarchists[edit]

In his biography, "Young Titan, the making of Winston Churchill", Michael Shelden claims that the two anarchists used a "Mauser Magazine" pistol, which was a the time a revolutionary weapon that could be fitted to a stock and aimed like a small semi-automatic rifle. It was rapidly reloaded with a 10 round magazine, apparently new to a hand gun. Shelden further claims that it was able to be fired with great accuracy, making it very dangerous. Sheldon says that it was virtually unknown in the UK, but Churchill had used it to save his own life during the "Battle of Omdurman". It was Churchill's appreciation of the danger of this weapon that compelled him to order the police to pull back & forbade a frontal assault. London police were usually unarmed and not well trained in shooting, they would have been killed. The Scots Guards were shooting at an angle to the building, and were incapable of hitting the anarchists. Sheldon claims that this Mauser expertise of Churchill remained hidden for 100 years, and that he was unjustly targeted for abuse by his political opponents. Comments gratefully received.Historygypsy (talk) 23:15, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peters v Gardstein[edit]

The article states categorically that Jacob Peters murdered all 3 policemen in Exchange Buildings, which is the theory put forward by Rumbelow. However, Colin Rogers [2] is equally certain that Gardstein was responsible for at least one of the deaths. His argument is as compelling as Rumbelow's. The fact is, nobody knows for sure and one man's theory is as good as another's. I suggest the article is amended to reflect this. Wessexboy (talk) 19:40, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recent IP edits[edit]

An IP has recently made edits to the lead which I have reverted, although they have tried to force them back in again. This was the most recent edit, which introduces numerous factual and grammatical errors. IP, you claim in your edit summary that the current version "really isn't well written". Could you please explain to exactly which bits you refer, as this version has now been through a recent|Peer Review and is currently at FAC and the current version is one that meets the approval of all who have visited. - SchroCat (talk) 09:06, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are we trying to say they're Jews, or not?[edit]

There are many names involved in this article, many of whom appear distinctly non-jewish. This, of course, is no guarantee, but the article goes through all of this jewish demography without explicitly applying it to the perpetrators. Why? Is there actual evidence, other than associations of neighborhood or country of origin? Were all Latvian immigrants to the UK in that period Jews? I think either the connection ought to be directly and outrightly made or the background demography should be removed. Comments? Jyg (talk) 02:57, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Russian Empire's oppression of Jews, particularly after the assassination of Tsar Alexander II in 1881 and the failed revolution of 1905, was the main driver of East European migration to Britain. Apart from the frequent pogroms, Jews were denied state employment -- in the civil service, on the railways or in any state industries -- except for the army, and as Rumbelow notes (Houndsditch Murders, p.33), 'Jewish men and young boys could be conscripted into the army at any age between twelve and twenty-five and compelled to serve the colours for a term of thirty-one years before release.' (The actor David Suchet, for instance, has said that his family migrated to South Africa and then England quite largely because of this appalling threat of conscription.) For these reasons, a great many revolutionary communists were Jewish. Rumbelow goes on (p.36), 'Russian pogroms and barbaric treatment of political prisoners were a world scandal and one of the reasons why Great Britain had such lenient alien laws... In the three decades up to 1914 about three million Jews passed through Britain with about 120,000 of them finally deciding to settle, the biggest settlement being in London's East End.'
Some of the Leninist Houndsditch / Sidney Street gang were Jewish, some weren't and some we don't know about because their real identities remain obscure. Gardstein was probably Jewish. Betsy Gershon, Sokoloff's mistress, arrested by police at 100 Sidney Street, was Jewish and so probably was Sokoloff aka 'Joseph', one of the gunmen killed at Sidney Street. Luba Milstein, Svaars's pregnant mistress (Svaars was the other gunman killed at Sidney Street) was certainly Jewish. Svaars may or may not have been. Milstein later moved to the United States and lived with, but was never married to, 'Hoffmann' (real name Alfred Dzircol), who wasn't Jewish, though Milstein may have pretended to her Latvian Jewish family that he was (Rumbelow p.200). Sara Trassjonsky was Jewish. Nina Vassilieva probably not. John Rosen was Jewish and so was Max Smoller. Yourka Dubof, having been 'flogged by the Cossacks,' was probably Jewish. Jacob 'Peters' came from a poor farming family in Latvia, and farming was not a very Jewish vocation, but he first got into trouble as a revolutionary agitator in the Russian army, suggesting he was an unwilling conscript, and Yakov or Jacob is of course a Biblical name. His real surname seems to be obscure. It's not known why he was purged and shot in 1938 despite his place on the Soviet Central Committee and his reputation as Dzerzhinsky's right-hand man in the Twenties, but any suggestion of Jewishness would set off Stalin's paranoia. 'Svaars' was supposedly Peters' cousin. Khamba Tendal (talk) 18:52, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Right. It seems that Jacob Peters certainly wasn't Jewish. Rumbelow 1988 p.177:- 'In November 1910 Peters had joined an LCC [London County Council] evening class for English but left it because most of the pupils were Jews, and he had learnt more Yiddish than English.' Rumbelow is paraphrasing Peters' own evidence in court at the Old Bailey in May 1911. The four gunmen present in Exchange Buildings the night of the murders, in Rumbelow's view, were Gardstein, Peters, Smoller and Dubof. Gardstein aka Murontzeff had a Leesma (Lettish anarchist) party card in the Jewish name Grunberg but it may not have been his own card and his real identity has never been known. Peters, the probable killer of the three police officers, wasn't Jewish. Max Smoller used the Jewish alias 'Joe Levi' when renting 11 Exchange Buildings and the landlords said he looked very Jewish, so he probably was. Yourka Dubof told police his real surname was Laiwin, which appears to be a characteristic Edwardian phonetic rendering of the Jewish surname Levin.
The two gunmen killed at Sidney Street were Fritz Svaars, Peters' cousin, and William Sokoloff aka 'Yoska' or 'Joseph.' Svaars was not Jewish; Sokolov (as we would now spell it) probably was, since that is a Russian-Jewish surname and he was known by a Jewish first name. Of the three women involved with the group, Sara Trassjonsky was Jewish and so was Svaars' pregnant mistress Luba Milstein. Neither of those two knew anything about the robbery until afterwards. The only one present in Exchange Buildings on the night of the murders, Gardstein's mistress Nina Vassilieva, was probably not Jewish.
The group moved in an East London world that was largely Jewish, and the robbery was planned to take place on Friday night and Saturday morning because the whole district would be shut down for Shabbat. Harris the jeweller, whose safe was to be raided, may not have been Jewish, but he still didn't open on Saturdays because there wouldn't be any custom. However, the terrorist group itself was only partly Jewish, and the murderer, Peters (the only one answering the description given by PC Strongman of the man who shot Sgt Tucker, the same man whose 7.65 Dreyse bullets killed Sgt Bentley and PC Choate -- 'age about 30, height 5' 6" or 7", pale thin face, dark curly hair and dark moustache, dress dark jacket suit, no hat' -- which, contrary to what was claimed in court, can't be Gardstein because Gardstein was wearing an overcoat, proven by the fact that his overcoat was found with a bullethole in it made by Max Smoller's Browning; same 7.65 ammunition as the Dreyse but different rifling-groove pattern), wasn't Jewish. See Rumbelow 1988 pp.155-162. Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:19, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A Guardian article on the centenary of the siege, though full of mistakes, mentions the coroner declaring 'in justice and fairness to the Jewish community' that Gardstein was uncircumcised, so, whoever he was, he clearly wasn't Jewish. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/jan/02/sidney-street-siege-100-years Philip Ruff, after searching the archives in Latvia, has identified 'Peter Piatkow' aka 'Peter the Painter' as Janis Zhaklis, who wasn't Jewish either. https://libcom.org/library/portrait-artist-wanted-man-philip-ruff-s-search-peter-painter The Latvian police mugshot of Zhaklis on the cover of Ruff's book does look eerily like a younger version of the 'Peter Piatkow' whose picture the French police supplied for the famous 'wanted' posters in London. Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:18, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on Siege of Sidney Street. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:32, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ The Houndsditch Atrocity: The Late Police Sergeant Bentley 24 December 1910 in the genealogical records of the Goddard family. The Folkestone local newspaper from which the material is drawn is not identified. The details are also recounted in The First Birthday. Baby Who Was Born A Few Days After His Father Was Shot, in the Daily Mirror on the first anniversary of the incident.
  2. ^ 0709191464
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Siege_of_Sidney_Street/Archive_1&oldid=936568298"