Arthur Gilligan

Arthur Edward Robert Gilligan (23 December 1894 – 5 September 1976) was an English first-class cricketer who captained the England cricket team nine times in 1924 and 1925, winning four Test matches, losing four and drawing one. In first-class cricket, he played as an amateur, mainly for Cambridge University and Sussex, and captained the latter team between 1922 and 1929. A fast bowler and hard-hitting lower order batsman, Gilligan completed the double in 1923 and was one of Wisden's Cricketers of the Year for 1924. When his playing career ended, he held several important positions in cricket, including that of England selector and president of the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC). A popular figure within cricket, he was widely regarded as sporting and friendly.

Gilligan played cricket for Dulwich College before the First World War, then for Cambridge, twice winning his blue. He briefly played county cricket for Surrey but moved to Sussex in 1920. Following a slow start to his county career, he rapidly improved and in partnership with Maurice Tate established a formidable bowling reputation. First playing for England in 1922, he was appointed Test captain in 1924. In the latter year, Gilligan was at the height of his form when he suffered a blow to his heart while batting. The strain affected his bowling, which was never again as effective, but he still captained England in Australia during the 1924–25 season. The series was lost, but both he and his team were popular and respected. In following years, he played less frequently; he resigned as Sussex captain in 1929 and retired three years later. He subsequently became a writer, journalist and cricket commentator while maintaining his connections with Sussex.

As a captain, Gilligan was well-liked by players and commentators, although many did not believe he was an effective tactician. Nevertheless, under his leadership, Sussex became an attractive, competitive team. He encouraged the search for young talent, and the players consequently discovered became the backbone of the club into the 1930s. As a fielder, he inspired his teams to become good fielding sides. In addition, as MCC captain of a team which toured India in 1926–27, he encouraged Indians to take responsibility for their own cricket board instead of allowing white Englishmen to run Indian cricket, and lobbied the MCC to bestow Test match status on the Indian team. As MCC president, he played a part in the D'Oliveira affair in 1968.

During his playing days, Gilligan was a member of the British Fascists. He came to the notice of the Australian secret service during the 1924–25 MCC (England) tour, and it is possible he helped to establish small fascist groups in Australia. It is unknown how long he remained a member, but the organisation practically ceased to exist by 1926. Gilligan died in 1976, aged 81.

## Early life

Gilligan was born in Denmark Hill, an area of Camberwell in London. He was the second of four children born to Willie Austin Gilligan and Alice Eliza Kimpton; his brothers Frank and Harold also played high-level cricket. The family had a strong connection with Sussex; Gilligan followed Sussex County Cricket Club as a child, and later played club cricket there. After attending Fairfield School, he was educated at Dulwich College from 1906 until 1914 where he established a sporting reputation in athletics and cricket. In the latter sport, he played in the school first eleven, as did his brothers; in 1913, all three boys played in the team. Gilligan played in the eleven between 1911 and 1914 and captained the side in his final two years. In 1914, he topped the school's batting and bowling averages. Selected to play representative schools cricket at Lord's Cricket Ground in 1914, he took ten wickets in total and scored one fifty in the two matches. By the standards of school cricket, his pace was impressive, and Surrey invited him to play for their second eleven during the school holidays of 1913 and 1914; his father was a member of that county's committee, and Gilligan qualified to play through his London birth.

In 1914, Gilligan entered Pembroke College, Cambridge, but his life at the university was interrupted by the First World War. He fought in France with the Lancashire Fusiliers from 1915, serving as Captain in the 11th battalion. When the war ended, Gilligan returned to Pembroke and resumed his cricket career.

## Cricket at Cambridge

Following the war, Cambridge University suffered from a lack of quality bowling at the start of the 1919 cricket season. Consequently, Gilligan faced little competition for his place in the team and took 32 wickets at an average of under 27 in Cambridge matches, which critics considered a poor return. He made a bigger impression when, batting at number eleven in the order, he scored 101 against Sussex and shared a last-wicket partnership of 177 in 65 minutes with John Naumann. A few days later, Gilligan won his blue—the awarding of the Cambridge "colours" to sportsmen—by appearing in the University Match against Oxford. On the last day of the three-day match, he took five wickets for 16 runs in 57 deliveries to finish with bowling figures of six for 52 (six wickets taken for 52 runs conceded). According to Wisden Cricketers' Almanack, this was the best bowling performance in the University Match for many years, although Cambridge lost the match. Towards the end of the season, Gilligan played three first-class matches for Surrey and made a further appearance in a festival game, although he accomplished little with bat or ball. In all first-class games in 1919, he scored 231 runs at a batting average of 17.76 and took 35 wickets at 31.57. At the end of the season, he changed counties; his family connections in the area, and the presence of his brother Harold in the team, led him to register with Sussex.

Gilligan retained his position in the Cambridge team in 1920 and once more played against Oxford. In the University Match, he was ineffective with the ball as the damp conditions did not suit his style of bowling. At the end of the Cambridge term, Gilligan, playing as an amateur, made his Sussex debut. The Times later commented that in 1920, Gilligan was "known as a fast but unreliable bowler, a dashing and vulnerable batsman and a mid-off without his equal in England". Wisden commented on his 1920 performance: "[He] remained stationary, doing nothing out of the common either as bowler or batsman for Cambridge, and proving a decidedly expensive bowler for Sussex". In all first-class cricket, he scored 624 runs at an average of 17.33 and took 81 wickets at 23.55. Subsequently, Gilligan left Cambridge and joined Gilbert Kimpton & Co., a general produce merchant in London in which his father was a senior partner.

## Sussex cricketer

Gilligan played for Sussex throughout the 1921 season and according to Wisden "made a distinct advance". His batting record was similar to the previous season, although he increased his number of wickets in the season to 90 at an average of 30.64. Wisden notes that his bowling was not statistically good, but that his biggest impact came in fielding, which was "brilliant in the extreme. He was described on all hands as the best mid-off in England." In 1922, Gilligan assumed the Sussex captaincy from Herbert Wilson. The team's results were not impressive, but Wisden said that the team were attractive to watch and excelled in fielding, in which Gilligan led by example. Gilligan later recalled that he received great support from George Cox, the senior professional in the team. Personally, Gilligan had his best season to date with bat and ball; he scored 916 runs and took 135 wickets at an average of 18.75. Based on his good form, he was selected in the prestigious Gentlemen v Players match at Lord's. Appearing for the Gentlemen, a team of amateurs, his fielding in particular impressed commentators. He was selected in a further representative match, when he played for the "Rest of England" against Yorkshire, the County Champions. In the latter game, he took eight wickets in total. At the end of the season, Gilligan was included in the MCC team to tour South Africa and play a Test series.

On the tour of South Africa, MCC were led by Frank Mann. Gilligan was appointed as vice-captain in preference to Percy Fender, who was much admired as a captain but not popular with the cricket authorities. Gilligan played in two of the five Tests, the first and last. His Test debut came on 23 December 1922 in a match which England lost. The team were more successful during his second appearance; he took six wickets in the match, and his batting at a crucial stage of the match—he scored 39 not out in the second innings—was vital in a victory which gave the series to England 2–1. In total, Gilligan took nine Test wickets at 22.37, and in all first-class games, captured 26 wickets at an average of 22.03.

During 1923, after returning to England, Gilligan had his best season in county cricket. He took 163 wickets at 17.50 and scored 1,183 runs at an average of 21.12 to complete the double of 1,000 runs and 100 wickets in a season for the only time in his career. With Maurice Tate, whose emergence as a pace bowler was encouraged by Gilligan, he established a bowling partnership which proved effective over the following two seasons. Gilligan scored two centuries and nine times took five or more wickets in an innings. As a result of his performances, he was named as one of Wisden's Cricketers of the Year. The citation noted that he was now "among the leading amateur cricketers of the day", and was likely to play for England again. It concluded: "It is not claimed for Arthur Gilligan, by even his warmest admirers, that he can be classed among great fast bowlers, but he is a very good one, combining with the right temperament and tireless energy just the extra bit of pace that to many batsmen is so distasteful."

## England captain

Following heavy losses to Australia in two Test series immediately following the war, the England selectors needed to appoint a new captain. Frank Mann led the team during the tour of South Africa, the team's only Tests between 1921 and 1924. According to the cricket writer Alan Gibson, Mann was slightly too old to be a realistic candidate and his batting was not quite of the required standard. Other possibilities early in the season included Fender and Arthur Carr. Instead, the selectors appointed Gilligan as captain for the 1924 series against South Africa, in an attempt to assess whether he possessed the playing ability to justify his selection in the role. Cricket journalist E. W. Swanton writes that Gilligan was the favoured candidate of the influential Lord Harris, which may have assisted his appointment. Gibson describes Gilligan at the time as "29 years old, an attractive, smiling personality". Gilligan began the season very well. He and Tate, in the weeks approaching the first Test, established a reputation as the best opening bowlers in the world. At the time, the best batting teams in England were Surrey and Middlesex; in consecutive matches, Gilligan and Tate dismissed these sides for 53 and 41, respectively. In the latter game, Gilligan took eight for 25, and he and Tate bowled several county sides out for low scores. In the first Test match, on Gilligan's debut as England captain, the pair bowled South Africa out for 30 runs. Gilligan took six wickets for seven runs, and Wisden reported that, "He bowled very fast and with any amount of fire.". When South Africa followed-on, he took five for 83, to finish the game with 11 wickets. England won the second Test, like the first, by an innings; Gilligan took five wickets in the game, and by the end of June had 74 wickets in all first-class matches at an average of 15. At this stage, the press and public had great expectations of success for Gilligan and Tate on the forthcoming tour of Australia.

At the beginning of July, Gilligan played for the Gentlemen against the Players at the Oval. In the first innings, he was struck heavily over his heart by a delivery from Frederick Pearson; it was obvious that he was hurt, and he was out shortly afterwards. Although the Gentlemen v Players match at the Oval was less prestigious than its Lord's counterpart, and generally mattered less to participants, Gilligan chose to bat the next day despite his injury and scored a century batting at number 10. Even so, the Gentlemen lost the game by six wickets. Gilligan was never again as effective a cricketer, and he later conceded that batting in the second innings was a mistake. It is likely that the strain of the innings did as much harm as the original blow, although Gibson later wrote that Gilligan's subsequent long life suggests that he was not too badly hurt, and that it is unlikely too much damage was done. Nevertheless, Gibson concludes "there is no doubt that he was badly shaken up, and whatever the reason, the magic departed".

Gilligan played in the next Test match, without much success, and for the Gentlemen at Lord's. The effects of the injury then forced him to rest in the following weeks, and he missed the fourth Test. When he returned for the final Test, he did not take any wickets and finished the Test series with 17 wickets at an average of 18.94, placing him second in the England bowling averages behind Tate. He batted just three times in the series, scoring 77 runs at 25.66. England won the series 3–0, and although South Africa had not proved to be a strong team, several England players—including Gilligan—had impressed commentators. Gilligan continued to take wickets in the latter stages of the season, but was less successful than before his injury. At the end of the season, he had 103 wickets at 19.36 and 864 runs at 21.07.

By mid-July, Gilligan had been named as captain of the MCC team to tour Australia at the end of the English cricket season and was expected to be one of the leading bowlers. He had, however, faced some criticism of his captaincy. After being underused in the first Test, Cec Parkin wrote an article highly critical of Gilligan which appeared in the press; Parkin never played for England again. Additionally, while Gilligan was generally popular for his cheerful and friendly approach, the press judged Fender to be the better captain. However, the cricket authorities at Lord's disapproved of Fender's unconventional tactics and approach. Journalists later revealed that, at some point in the season, the selectors had first asked Frank Mann to captain, but he was unable to accept the invitation.

## Tour of Australia

### On the field

Following his injury in 1924, Gilligan could no longer bowl fast and, as a player, had little influence on the 1924–25 tour of Australia; his performances were hampered by further injuries. His best bowling figures of four for 12 came in the opening match and his only century came in the second game; he passed fifty just once more on the tour. His leadership proved influential in one main respect. In previous series, Australia had been superior to England in the field, but according to Gibson, Gilligan "revolutionized the English fielding, a department in which they began to compare with Australia, for the first time since the war and possibly since the early 1900s. This had much effect on the England sides of the next few years". However an Australian newspaper estimated that England dropped 21 catches in the five Tests, which may have impacted on the series result; Australia won 4–1. Other aspects of Gilligan's leadership were less successful; his captaincy lacked tactical sophistication, and the Australian captain Herbie Collins proved superior in this respect. According to Gibson, critics claimed that Gilligan "was too easygoing on the finer points of law". In addition, his inexperience led to defeat in one warm-up match that the MCC could have drawn, and commentators dismissed him as naive and easy-going on the field. However, he was immensely popular with the Australian public and well-liked by his team. Gibson, writing in 1979, noted that Gilligan "was, and is, one of the most popular captains England have sent to Australia". During the tour, Gilligan was the focus of a great deal of publicity. The periodical Cricket described him as "'one of the most jovial personalities imaginable", while former Australian Test captain Monty Noble wrote that Gilligan was the "type of man who, in the most unostentatious way, can do more than all the politicians and statesmen to cement the relations between the Homeland and the Dominions". According to Noble, his sportsmanship, including his grace and cheerfulness in defeat, made him a perfect English gentleman and an "Empire builder".

After Australia won the first two Tests, Parkin, writing in England, once more criticised Gilligan's leadership in the press and provoked a minor controversy by suggesting that Jack Hobbs should assume the captaincy. The third Test was much closer, although England were severely hampered by injuries to three bowlers, including Gilligan himself. These injuries may have affected the outcome of the series. Australia won by the small margin of 11 runs, though Gilligan helped to take his team close to victory with a restrained innings of 31. England won the fourth Test, their first victory over Australia since the war but lost the final game. Critics judged that the team played well and did not suffer disgrace, despite the result. Gibson notes that the tour "was successful in everything but victory, and this was sensed by the English public, who assembled in large numbers to welcome the side home". In the Test series, Gilligan took 10 wickets at an average of 51.90 and scored 64 runs at 9.14. Gibson judges that most of his wickets were good batsmen, and many bowlers had poor figures in a series that produced a large number of runs, so this record is not as poor as it appears. In all first-class games on tour, Gilligan took 28 wickets at 38.39 and scored 357 runs at 17.85. He did not play in any more Tests.

### Political concerns

The MCC tour took place against a background of social disturbance in Australia. There were concerns within Australian society over the growing influence of communism and, according to the historian Andrew Moore, some commentators hoped that the tour would help to ease tension. It was expected that Gilligan's influence and popularity would further assist this process. However, during the tour, the Commonwealth Investigative Branch were informed by the London authorities that Gilligan and the MCC tour manager Frederick Toone were members of the British Fascists. Although the organisation never achieved the same level of influence in Britain as the British Union of Fascists, which formed in 1932, the British Fascists were popular for a short time during the mid-1920s. The primary focus of the organisation was to oppose communism, but MI5 considered its threat serious enough to warrant placing leading members under surveillance. In addition, the British Foreign Office were aware that the British Fascists had established some links overseas. Moore suggests that it is possible that Gilligan and Toone used the tour as an opportunity to establish links in Australia. The team visited many parts of Australia and attended many social events which presented an opportunity to discuss politics. Shortly after the tour's conclusion, the Commonwealth Investigative Branch uncovered evidence that the British Fascists had established chapters in several Australian cities, although they did not know how this had happened. Moore believes that "it may be totally coincidental that the Australian chapter of the British Fascists was established so soon after the MCC tour", but is more likely that Gilligan and Toone brought Fascist literature to Australia for distribution. However, Moore writes that "the British Fascists' Australian operations were small beer indeed" and of little consequence.

Gilligan gave further evidence of his political beliefs at the conclusion of the tour, when he wrote an article called "The Spirit of Fascism and Cricket Tours" for The Bulletin, a publication of the British Fascists. He wrote: "In ... cricket tours it is essential to work solely on the lines of Fascism, i.e. the team must be good friends and out for one thing, and one thing only, namely the good of the side, and not for any self-glory." Moore judges that the article was neither well written nor particularly persuasive, but notes that other writers at the time made the connection between sport, cricket, the ideology of the British Empire and Fascism.

There is no evidence to say how long Gilligan maintained his connection with the British Fascists after the tour, nor if he did so at all. By 1926, the organisation had split and faded from view.

## Remaining cricket career

### Restricted by injury

A recurrence of the effects of his injury in 1924 restricted Gilligan's cricket in 1925. Appearing in fewer games and bowling far less frequently than in previous seasons, he scored 542 runs at 15.05 and took only eight wickets. He bowled in the first four games of the season, but in his remaining seventeen appearances played only as a batsman. In 1926, he was more successful and his performances helped Sussex to rise from thirteenth to tenth in the County Championship. Playing more games, he scored 1,037 runs at 30.50, the highest seasonal batting average of his career, and took 75 wickets at 20.74. That season, although no longer considered for a place in the England team himself, Gilligan joined the panel of Test selectors, and as a consequence missed some cricket for Sussex. He published a book on that summer's tour by Australia called Collins's Men.

### MCC tour of India

During the winter of 1926–27, with other candidates unavailable, Gilligan was chosen to captain an MCC team which toured India; the side was not fully representative and did not play Test matches. In first-class games, he scored three fifties and, bowling infrequently, took ten wickets on the tour. The team, the first to tour India under the colours of the MCC, was very successful. Gilligan left most of the day-to-day organisation to his vice-captain, Raleigh Chichester-Constable, and did not take his speech-making duties particularly seriously. He nevertheless had to deal with several issues. One of the team, Jack Parsons, refused for religious reasons to take part in matches that included Sunday play; Gilligan threatened to send him home but in the end he agreed to play on condition that he could leave early on a Sunday to attend religious services. Parsons was also openly critical of racial and social discrimination that he saw. Gilligan himself intervened at one point when the MCC professionals were excluded from some invitations in Calcutta; he told their hosts that no-one would attend the functions if the professionals were not included. Both the sporting and social programmes for the tour were demanding, and Gilligan chose to attend most functions for fear of offending their hosts. The players were left exhausted, necessitating the use of reinforcements to their number, including the occasional use of English cricketers who were coaching in India and, in several matches, the Maharajah of Patiala, who was a member of the MCC and entitled to play for the team.

The tour was originally conceived to encourage cricket-playing Europeans living in India. But as the team was financed by the Maharajah of Patiala, it played Indian sides, rather than the European sides envisaged by the tour's organisers. Gilligan, in contrast to many Englishmen, was happy to play Indian teams and actively encouraged Indians to organise their own cricket rather than leave it up to white Englishmen. According to the cricket writer Mihir Bose, Gilligan, unlike others, "met Indians on terms of perfect equality". He successfully encouraged the Indians to form their own cricket board and promised to make a case with the Lord's authorities for India to become a Test playing team. He did so, and in 1929 India became a member of the Imperial Cricket Conference. Bose points out that Gilligan's positive attitude towards Indians, and that of the MCC when granting India Test status, was markedly different from that of most Englishmen. In terms of the advancement of Indian cricket, Bose writes that "Gilligan's influence was immense".

### Final years as a cricketer

Gilligan continued to play for Sussex until 1932. In 1927, he scored 828 runs at 27.60 but did not bowl in the first half of the season and took just 29 wickets at 24.65. The following season, he scored 942 runs at 26.91, including his last first-class century, and took 76 wickets at 26.27. In 1929, his final season as captain, he played only 12 times; he did not score a fifty, averaged 7.22 with the bat and took four wickets. He was frequently affected by injury; his brother Harold captained Sussex in his absence and assumed the role full time in 1930. Harold also took over as captain of an MCC team which toured New Zealand in the winter of 1929–30 when Gilligan withdrew owing to illness. Over the next three seasons, Gilligan appeared intermittently for Sussex and the MCC but scored only one fifty and took just five wickets in total in that time. His last first-class appearance was for H. D. G. Leveson Gower's team against Oxford in 1932. He played several charity games during the Second World War, including some for Sussex and the Royal Air Force. In all first-class cricket, Gilligan scored 9,140 runs at an average of 20.08 and took 868 wickets at 23.30. In 11 Test matches, he scored 209 runs at an average of 16.07 and took 36 wickets at 29.05, although 26 of these wickets came in the five Tests he played before his injury. As captain in nine Tests, he won four matches and lost four; the remaining game was drawn.

## Style and technique

At the peak of his career, Gilligan was a fast bowler. He bowled with his arm quite low, but was very accurate; his usual strategy was to aim at the stumps or to try to induce the batsmen to edge the ball to be caught in the slips. According to his Wisden obituary, he "regarded it as a cardinal sin to bowl short". Following his injury, he could not reach his former speed and was reduced to medium pace. In this style, he continued to have some success at county level. His batting was based mainly around driving the ball. He batted low in the order, and tried to score quickly, particularly against fast bowling. Several of his centuries were scored against the most successful teams, and often in difficult situations. He excelled as a fielder; his Wisden obituary stated: "At mid-off he has had few rivals".

As a captain, Gilligan was not tactically sophisticated but was adept at inspiring his players. His Sussex teams were not consistent but became attractive to watch; under Gilligan's direction the team ranked among the best fielding sides in England. The off side fielders were nicknamed the "ring of iron". His Wisden obituary stated: "In two or three seasons by his insistence on fielding and on attacking cricket and by his own superb example he raised Sussex from being nothing in particular to one of the biggest draws in England." According to The Times, Gilligan's captaincy laid the foundations for the county's relative success in the 1930s. In the official history of Sussex, writer Christopher Lee suggests: "The ten years from 1920 to the end of Gilligan's captaincy in 1930 saw the blooding of some of the most famous names in Sussex and England cricket. Gilligan himself was a mixture of amateur brilliance and professional thoroughness which inevitably brought about criticism."

Gilligan also extensively coached and lectured around the county, spending time in the English winters raising the team's profile. He encouraged the search for promising young cricketers, and most of the club's professional cricketers during its successful years in the 1930s were discovered during Gilligan's drive for new talent. Percy Fender believed that Gilligan allowed the team's professionals a greater say in Sussex's affairs than previously permitted. Fender wrote that Gilligan's teams enjoyed playing under him and that he was one of the most popular captains in county cricket. Cricket writer R. C. Robertson-Glasgow said: "With him there was no sharpnesses, no petty restraints, no mathematical cricket. He won or lost plumb straight". Swanton wrote that "Gilligan was essentially a friendly man, hail-fellow-well-met, and it is hard to think that in the world of sport he ever made an enemy."

## Personal life

Gilligan married his first wife, Cecilia Mary Matthews, in April 1921, but she successfully filed for divorce in October 1933 on the grounds of her husband's infidelity. He married again in 1934; he met his second wife, Katharine Margaret Fox, on a skiing trip.

Following his retirement from cricket, Gilligan began to work in journalism. He wrote several cricket books, including a history of Sussex cricket in 1932. He became one of the first radio cricket commentators, broadcasting in Australia on the 1932–33 Ashes series and covering subsequent visits of MCC teams to Australia for the Australian Broadcasting Commission. A popular and respected commentator, he established an on-air partnership with former Australian batman Vic Richardson. In Gilligan's obituary, Wisden observed "Gilligan was, as may be imagined, a master of the diplomatic comment if any tiresome incident occurred". He was also a member of the BBC radio commentary team for Tests between 1947 and 1954. In 1955, he wrote a book, The Urn Returns, about the 1954–55 Ashes series, won by England. In England, he wrote about cricket for the News Chronicle. During the Second World War, Gilligan served in the Royal Air Force as a welfare officer; he was commissioned a pilot officer and rose to the rank of squadron leader.

When his cricket career ended, Gilligan maintained his connection with Sussex, of which he was later made an Honorary Life Member. He served as chairman, patron and president of the county and assisted many local clubs in the area. He gained a good reputation as a speaker and lecturer, and also developed an interest in golf in later years: he was president of the English Golf Union in 1959, captain of the County Cricketers' Golfing Society from 1952 until 1972, and president of the latter organisation until his death.

An Honorary Life Member of the MCC, Gilligan served as MCC president from 1967 to 1968. During his tenure, the MCC was involved in controversy over the non-selection of Basil D'Oliveira to tour South Africa. The South African government did not want D'Oliveira in the England team on the grounds of his colour. Gilligan, in his capacity as MCC president, was aware of this having seen a private letter which communicated the explicit threat from the South African prime minister B. J. Vorster that the forthcoming tour would be cancelled if D'Oliveira were selected. However, he and the others who saw the letter, G. O. B. Allen and Billy Griffith, respectively the MCC treasurer and secretary, kept this information to themselves. When the English selectors met to choose the team, Gilligan, Allen and Griffith were present to represent the MCC. A BBC programme in 2004 claimed that Gilligan pressured the selectors to leave out D'Oliveira, but D'Oliveira's biographer Peter Oborne suggests that Allen carried far more influence at the meeting. He writes of Gilligan's part in the affair: "It would be wrong to make too much of Gilligan's embarrassing past. Given that presidents are appointed for only a year, it was a very strong president indeed who could impose his personality on the permanent MCC secretariat of Griffith and Allen, and Gilligan was not a strong president." Initially D'Oliveira was left out of the team, but when a player withdrew with an injury, the selectors added him as a replacement; the South African government barred D'Oliveira from taking part and the MCC cancelled the tour.

In 1971, a stand named after Gilligan was opened at Hove Cricket Ground, but this was demolished in 2010 as part of a redevelopment. Gilligan died in Pulborough, Sussex, on 5 September 1976, aged 81.

English cricketer

Cricketers from the London Borough of Southwark

Marylebone Cricket Club Australian Touring Team cricketers

Presidents of the Marylebone Cricket Club

Royal Air Force personnel of World War II


Dunning–Kruger effect

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people with limited competence in a particular domain overestimate their abilities. Some researchers also include the opposite effect for high performers: their tendency to underestimate their skills. In popular culture, the Dunning–Kruger effect is often misunderstood as a claim about general overconfidence of people with low intelligence instead of specific overconfidence of people unskilled at a particular task.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is usually measured by comparing self-assessment with objective performance. For example, participants may take a quiz and estimate their performance afterward, which is then compared to their actual results. The initial study was published by David Dunning and Justin Kruger in 1999. It focused on logical reasoning, grammar, and social skills. Since then other studies have been conducted across a wide range of tasks. They include skills from fields such as business, politics, medicine, driving, aviation, spatial memory, examinations in school, and literacy.

There are disagreements about what causes the Dunning–Kruger effect. According to the metacognitive explanation, poor performers misjudge their abilities because they fail to recognize the qualitative difference between their performances and the performances of others. The statistical model explains the empirical findings as a statistical effect in combination with the general tendency to think that one is better than average. The rational model holds that overly positive prior beliefs about one's skills are the source of false self-assessment. Another explanation claims that self-assessment is more difficult and error-prone for low performers because many of them have very similar skill levels.

There are disagreements about the Dunning–Kruger effect's magnitude and practical consequences. Inaccurate self-assessment can lead people to make bad decisions, such as choosing a career for which they are unfit or engaging in dangerous behavior. It may also inhibit the affected from addressing their shortcomings to improve themselves.

## Definition

The Dunning–Kruger effect is defined as the tendency of people with low ability in a specific area to give overly positive assessments of this ability. This is often seen as a cognitive bias, i.e. as a systematic tendency to engage in erroneous forms of thinking and judging. In the case of the Dunning–Kruger effect, this applies mainly to people with low skill in a specific area trying to evaluate their competence within this area. The systematic error concerns their tendency to greatly overestimate their competence, i.e. to see themselves as more skilled than they are.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is usually defined specifically for the self-assessments of people with a low level of competence. But some theorists do not restrict it to the bias of people with low skill, also discussing the reverse effect, i.e., the tendency of highly skilled people to underestimate their abilities relative to the abilities of others. In this case, the source of the error may not be the self-assessment of one's skills, but an overly positive assessment of the skills of others. This phenomenon can be understood as a form of the false-consensus effect, i.e., the tendency to "overestimate the extent to which other people share one's beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours".

Some researchers include a metacognitive component in their definition. In this view, the Dunning–Kruger effect is the thesis that those who are incompetent in a given area tend to be ignorant of their incompetence, i.e., they lack the metacognitive ability to become aware of their incompetence. This definition lends itself to a simple explanation of the effect: incompetence often includes being unable to tell the difference between competence and incompetence. For this reason, it is difficult for the incompetent to recognize their incompetence. This is sometimes termed the "dual-burden" account, since low performers are affected by two burdens: they lack a skill and they are unaware of this deficiency. Other definitions focus on the tendency to overestimate one's ability and see the relation to metacognition as a possible explanation that is not part of the definition. This contrast is relevant since the metacognitive explanation is controversial. Many criticisms of the Dunning–Kruger effect target this explanation but accept the empirical findings that low performers tend to overestimate their skills.

Among laypeople, the Dunning–Kruger effect is often misunderstood as the claim that people with low intelligence are more confident in their knowledge and skills than people with high intelligence. According to psychologist Robert D. McIntosh and his colleagues, it is sometimes understood in popular culture as the claim that "stupid people are too stupid to know they are stupid". But the Dunning–Kruger effect applies not to intelligence in general but to skills in specific tasks. Nor does it claim that people lacking a given skill are as confident as high performers. Rather, low performers overestimate themselves but their confidence level is still below that of high performers.

## Measurement, analysis, and investigated tasks

The most common approach to measuring the Dunning–Kruger effect is to compare self-assessment with objective performance. The self-assessment is sometimes called subjective ability in contrast to the objective ability corresponding to the actual performance. The self-assessment may be done before or after the performance. If done afterward, the participants receive no independent clues during the performance as to how well they did. Thus, if the activity involves answering quiz questions, no feedback is given as to whether a given answer was correct. The measurement of the subjective and the objective abilities can be in absolute or relative terms. When done in absolute terms, self-assessment and performance are measured according to objective standards, e.g. concerning how many quiz questions were answered correctly. When done in relative terms, the results are compared with a peer group. In this case, participants are asked to assess their performances in relation to the other participants, for example in the form of estimating the percentage of peers they outperformed. The Dunning–Kruger effect is present in both cases, but tends to be significantly more pronounced when done in relative terms. This means that people are usually more accurate when predicting their raw score than when assessing how well they did relative to their peer group.

The main point of interest for researchers is usually the correlation between subjective and objective ability. To provide a simplified form of analysis of the measurements, objective performances are often divided into four groups. They start from the bottom quartile of low performers and proceed to the top quartile of high performers. The strongest effect is seen for the participants in the bottom quartile, who tend to see themselves as being part of the top two quartiles when measured in relative terms.

The initial study by David Dunning and Justin Kruger examined the performance and self-assessment of undergraduate students in the fields of inductive, deductive, and abductive logical reasoning, English grammar, and appreciation of humor. Across four studies, the research indicates that the participants who scored in the bottom quartile overestimated their test performance and their abilities. Their test scores placed them in the 12th percentile but they ranked themselves in the 62nd percentile. Other studies focus on how a person's self-view causes inaccurate self-assessments. Some studies indicate that the extent of the inaccuracy depends on the type of task and can be improved by becoming a better performer.

Overall, the Dunning–Kruger effect has been studied across a wide range of tasks. They include fields like business, politics, medicine, driving skills, aviation, spatial memory, literacy, debating skills, and chess. Many studies focus on students, for example as they self-assess their performance after completing an exam. In some cases, these studies gather and compare data from different countries. Studies are often conducted in laboratories, but the effect has also been examined in other settings. Examples include assessing the knowledge hunters have of firearms and large-scale online surveys.

## Explanations

Various theorists have tried to provide models to explain the Dunning–Kruger effect's underlying causes. The original explanation by Dunning and Kruger holds that a lack of metacognitive abilities is responsible. This interpretation is not universally accepted, and many alternative explanations are discussed in the academic literature. Some of them focus only on one specific factor, while others see a combination of various factors as the cause.

### Metacognitive

The metacognitive explanation rests on the idea that part of acquiring a skill consists in learning to distinguish between good and bad performances of the skill. It assumes that people of low skill level are unable to properly assess their performance because they have not yet acquired the discriminatory ability to do so. This leads them to believe that they are better than they actually are because they do not see the qualitative difference between their performance and that of others. In this regard, they lack the metacognitive ability to recognize their incompetence. This model has also been called the "dual-burden account" or the "double-burden of incompetence", since the burden of regular incompetence is paired with the burden of metacognitive incompetence. The metacognitive lack may hinder some people from becoming better by hiding their flaws from them. This can then be used to explain how self-confidence is sometimes higher for unskilled people than for people with an average skill: only the latter are aware of their flaws.

Some attempts have been made to measure metacognitive abilities directly to examine this hypothesis. Some findings suggest that poor performers have reduced metacognitive sensitivity, but it is not clear that its extent is sufficient to explain the Dunning–Kruger effect. Another study concluded that unskilled people lack information but that their metacognitive processes have the same quality as those of skilled people. An indirect argument for the metacognitive model is based on the observation that training people in logical reasoning helps them make more accurate self-assessments. Many criticisms of the metacognitive model hold that it has insufficient empirical evidence and that alternative models offer a better explanation.

### Statistical

A different interpretation is further removed from the psychological level and sees the Dunning–Kruger effect as mainly a statistical artifact. It is based on the idea that the statistical effect known as regression toward the mean explains the empirical findings. This effect happens when two variables are not perfectly correlated: if one picks a sample that has an extreme value for one variable, it tends to show a less extreme value for the other variable. For the Dunning–Kruger effect, the two variables are actual performance and self-assessed performance. If a person with low actual performance is selected, their self-assessed performance tends to be higher.

Most researchers acknowledge that regression toward the mean is a relevant statistical effect that must be taken into account when interpreting the empirical findings. This can be achieved by various methods. Some theorists, like Gilles Gignac and Marcin Zajenkowski, go further and argue that regression toward the mean in combination with other cognitive biases, like the better-than-average effect, can explain most of the empirical findings. This type of explanation is sometimes called "noise plus bias".

According to the better-than-average effect, people generally tend to rate their abilities, attributes, and personality traits as better than average. For example, the average IQ is 100, but people on average think their IQ is 115. The better-than-average effect differs from the Dunning–Kruger effect since it does not track how the overly positive outlook relates to skill. The Dunning–Kruger effect, on the other hand, focuses on how this type of misjudgment happens for poor performers. When the better-than-average effect is paired with regression toward the mean, it shows a similar tendency. This way, it can explain both that unskilled people greatly overestimate their competence and that the reverse effect for highly skilled people is much less pronounced. This can be shown using simulated experiments that have almost the same correlation between objective and self-assessed ability as actual experiments. Some critics of this model have argued that it can explain the Dunning–Kruger effect only when assessing one's ability relative to one's peer group. But it may not be able to explain self-assessment relative to an objective standard. A further objection claims that seeing the Dunning–Kruger effect as a regression toward the mean is only a form of relabeling the problem and does not explain what mechanism causes the regression.

### Rational

The rational model of the Dunning–Kruger effect explains the observed regression toward the mean not as a statistical artifact but as the result of prior beliefs. If low performers expect to perform well, this can cause them to give an overly positive self-assessment. This model uses a psychological interpretation that differs from the metacognitive explanation. It holds that the error is caused by overly positive prior beliefs and not by the inability to correctly assess oneself. For example, after answering a ten-question quiz, a low performer with only four correct answers may believe they got two questions right and five questions wrong, while they are unsure about the remaining three. Because of their positive prior beliefs, they will automatically assume that they got these three remaining questions right and thereby overestimate their performance.

### Distribution of high and low performers

Another model sees the way high and low performers are distributed as the source of erroneous self-assessment. It is based on the assumption that many low performers' skill levels are very similar, i.e., that "many people [are] piled up at the bottom rungs of skill level". This would make it much more difficult for them to accurately assess their skills in relation to their peers. According to this model, the reason for the increased tendency to give false self-assessments is not a lack of metacognitive ability but a more challenging situation in which this ability is applied. One criticism of this interpretation is directed against the assumption that this type of distribution of skill levels can always be used as an explanation. While it can be found in various fields where the Dunning–Kruger effect has been researched, it is not present in all of them. Another criticism holds that this model can explain the Dunning–Kruger effect only when the self-assessment is measured relative to one's peer group. But it may fail when it is measured relative to absolute standards.

### Lack of incentive

A further explanation, sometimes given by theorists with an economic background, focuses on the fact that participants in the corresponding studies lack incentive to give accurate self-assessments. In such cases, intellectual laziness or a desire to look good to the experimenter may motivate participants to give overly positive self-assessments. For this reason, some studies were conducted with additional incentives to be accurate. One study gave participants a monetary reward based on how accurate their self-assessments were. These studies failed to show any significant increase in accuracy for the incentive group in contrast to the control group.

## Practical significance

There are disagreements about the Dunning–Kruger effect's magnitude and practical consequences as compared to other psychological effects. Claims about its significance often focus on how it causes affected people to make decisions that have bad outcomes for them or others. For example, according to Gilles E. Gignac and Marcin Zajenkowski, it can have long-term consequences by leading poor performers into careers for which they are unfit. High performers underestimating their skills, though, may forgo viable career opportunities matching their skills in favor of less promising ones that are below their skill level. In other cases, the wrong decisions can also have short-term effects. For example, Pavel et al. hold that overconfidence can lead pilots to operate a new aircraft for which they lack adequate training or to engage in flight maneuvers that exceed their proficiency.

Emergency medicine is another area where the correct assessment of one's skills and the risks of treatment matters. According to Lisa TenEyck, the tendencies of physicians in training to be overconfident must be considered to ensure the appropriate degree of supervision and feedback. Schlösser et al. hold that the Dunning–Kruger effect can also affect economic activities negatively. This is the case, for example, when the price of a good, such as a used car, is lowered by the buyers' uncertainty about its quality. An overconfident buyer unaware of their lack of knowledge may be willing to pay a much higher price because they do not take into account all the potential flaws and risks relevant to the price.

Another implication concerns fields in which researchers rely on people's self-assessments to evaluate their skills. This is common, for example, in vocational counseling or to estimate students' and professionals' information literacy skills. According to Khalid Mahmood, the Dunning–Kruger effect indicates that such self-assessments often do not correspond to the underlying skills. It implies that they are unreliable as a method for gathering this type of data. Regardless of the field in question, the metacognitive ignorance often linked to the Dunning–Kruger effect may inhibit low performers from improving themselves. Since they are unaware of many of their flaws, they may have little motivation to address and overcome them.

Not all accounts of the Dunning–Kruger effect focus on its negative sides. Some also concentrate on its positive sides, e.g. that ignorance is sometimes bliss. In this sense, optimism can lead people to experience their situation more positively, and overconfidence may help them achieve even unrealistic goals. To distinguish the negative from the positive sides, two important phases have been suggested to be relevant for realizing a goal: preparatory planning and the execution of the plan. According to Dunning, overconfidence may be beneficial in the execution phase by increasing motivation and energy. But it can be detrimental in the planning phase since the agent may ignore bad odds, take unnecessary risks, or fail to prepare for contingencies. For example, being overconfident may be advantageous for a general on the day of battle because of the additional inspiration passed on to his troops. But it can be disadvantageous in the weeks before by ignoring the need for reserve troops or additional protective gear.

In 2000, Kruger and Dunning were awarded the satirical Ig Nobel Prize in recognition of the scientific work recorded in "their modest report".

## See also

- – Passing judgment beyond one's expertise

Cognitive bias about one's own skill


Bani Zeid al-Gharbia

Bani Zeid (Arabic: بني زيد) is a Palestinian town in the Ramallah and al-Bireh Governorate in the north-central West Bank, located 27 kilometers (17 mi) northwest of Ramallah, about 45 kilometers northwest of Jerusalem and about 6 kilometers (3.7 mi) southwest of Salfit. A town of over 5,500 inhabitants, Bani Zeid was founded when the villages of Deir Ghassaneh and Beit Rima merged to form a municipality in 1966 during the Jordanian rule.

Bani Zeid owes its name to the Arab tribe that was granted the area as a fief by the Ayyubid sultan Saladin in the 12th century for having served in the Muslim army during the first Crusades. It was settled by members of the tribe alongside the native fellahin ("peasantry") during the reign of Mamluk sultan Baibars in the mid-13th century. During Ottoman rule, the area of Bani Zeid served as a sheikdom with some administrative capacity. It consisted of several villages with Deir Ghassaneh as its center. During that time, the Barghouti family dominated the sheikdom.

During the 1936–39 Arab revolt against British Mandate rule, Deir Ghassaneh primarily served as the scene of rebel gatherings and British military raids. In 1967, Bani Zeid was occupied by Israel during the Six-Day War, but was later transferred to full Palestinian security and administrative control in 2000. The next year it became the first Palestinian-controlled town to be known as the site of major operation by Israeli forces during the Second Intifada. When Fathiya Barghouti Rheime was elected mayor in 2005, Bani Zeid became the first Palestinian locality with a woman as head of the municipality, in concurrence with nearby Ramallah.

Historically, Bani Zeid's economy was dependent on the olive crop, which was supplied to soap factories in Nablus. Until the present day, olive trees cover most of the town's cultivable land. However, the residents of Bani Zeid today largely derive their income from employment in the civil service and private business. There are a number of archaeological sites in Bani Zeid, including the old town of Deir Ghassaneh, the manor of Sheikh Salih al-Barghouti and the maqam ("saintly person's tomb") of Sheikh al-Khawwas.

## History

### Habitation periods

In Beit Rima, sherds from the Iron Age I and IA II, Persian, Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, Crusader/Ayyubid, Mamluk and Early Ottoman remains have been found.

In Deir Ghassaneh, sherds from all of the same periods, except Persian, have also been found. Small fragments of a marble column were found in Deir Ghassaneh.

According to Sharon, there is no mention of Deir Ghassaneh or Beit Rima in early Arabic sources.

### Biblical reference

Deir Ghassaneh has been identified as the ancient Saredah (also spelled Zeredah), hometown of Jeroboam. According to some sources, it was settled by the Ghassanids, an Arab Christian tribal confederation, after it was abandoned by the Israelites.

### Roman period

In the compendium of Jewish oral law known as the Mishnah (compiled in 189 CE), Beit Rima is mentioned as a place where they formerly produced a high-quality grape wine, and which was brought as an oblation (contribution) to the Temple in Jerusalem.

### Byzantine period

English orientalist Edward Henry Palmer (1840–1882) thought the name meant "The monastery of the Ghassaneh", better known today as Ghassanids. However, according to Moshe Sharon (b. 1937), Israeli professor of Islamic history and civilisation, this claim has been dismissed by a number of researchers since the Ghassanids did not have a history of settlement in Samaria, the modern-day northern West Bank. Sharon suggests that the name of the village is related to the Arabic word ghassaneh, which means "very handsome" or suggests "youth and beauty". Casanowicz argues for its identification with Arimathea (Greek: Αριμαθεα) or Arimathaea (Ἀριμαθαία, Arimathaía), the reported home of Joseph of Arimathea, although others identify it with Ramla.

Byzantine ceramics have been found in Deir Ghassaneh, and on the north side of Beit Rima.

### Ayyubid period: Bani Zeid tribe in Palestine

The modern town of Bani Zeid receives its name from the Arab tribe of Bani Zeid, who settled in Palestine during the Ayyubid period in the late 12th century. They formed part of the Bedouin units of Saladin's army that hailed from the Hejaz. After the siege of Jerusalem in 1187, Saladin's forces captured the city and the Ayyubid army was garrisoned there. The Bani Zeid temporarily resided in Jerusalem and a street, located near the present-day al-Sa'idia Street, was named after them, but has since been renamed.

In order for Saladin to persuade the Hejazi Arab tribes that joined his army to remain in Palestine, he offered each tribe a cluster of villages captured from the Crusaders as iqta''' (fiefs) to settle in and control. The Bani Zeid were granted the villages of Deir Ghassaneh and Beit Rima, as well as the nearby towns of Kafr Ein and Qarawa. However, the Bani Zeid tribe only settled there after another century.

### Mamluk period

It was not until 1293, after the Bahri Mamluks under Sultan Baibars conquered the coastal strip of Palestine and expelled the last of the Crusaders, that the Bani Zeid tribe settled in the villages offered to them a century earlier by Saladin.

It is known that Deir Ghassaneh was inhabited during the Mamluk period due to the many houses there that have preserved elements of Mamluk architecture. Specific examples include the use of the ablaq technique of alternating stones of different colors, particularly red and white, that decorate the facades and gates of some houses.

A Mamluk-era (1260–1516) stone inscription belonging to an unidentified building in Deir Ghassaneh dating from 1330 describes a two-story "felicitous palace" with a garden. The palace was apparently an asset of the Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad and was inspected by Isa Muhammad al-Qaymari, a low-ranking emir from the Mosul region in charge of overseeing the personal assets of the sultan. In 1480 Deir Ghassaneh-based tribesmen from the Bani Zeid attacked Jerusalem as retaliation for the governor's execution of some of its members who had been accused of revolting against the Burji Mamluk authorities.

### Early Ottoman period

During the Ottoman era in Palestine, the area where the Bani Zeid tribe settled became the nahiya (subdistrict) of Bani Zeid, part of the larger sanjak (district) of Quds (Jerusalem). The nahiya contained over 20 towns and villages and had jurisdiction over a part of Salfit. While these villages were registered and organized like other villages in the Jerusalem Sanjak, they were also treated as a group. Each village was led by a ra'is (local chief) and the entire Bani Zeid Nahiya was headed by a sheikh (paramount chief). The Bani Zeid sheikdom would serve as a political-administrative unit for the purposes of tax collection and army mobilization.

In 1556 the sheikdom was led by Sheikh Abu Rayyan bin Sheikh Manna, who was succeeded by Sheikh Muhammad Abu Rabban in 1560. Olive oil was the primary commodity that Bani Zeid Nahiya produced and the product was sold to local Ottoman officials and soap factories in Nablus. The Ottomans imposed taxes on olive oil, wheat and barley, and the sheikh was responsible for paying the revenues of collected taxes to the Ottoman authorities. In addition, Bani Zeid was required to finance a waqf (religious endowment) to the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron. In 1596 both Deir Ghassaneh and Beit Rima appeared in Ottoman tax registers and both villages paid taxes on wheat, barley, olive trees, fruit trees, vineyards, goats and/or beehives. Deir Ghassaneh had a population of 76 households, all Muslim, while Beit Rima had 54 Muslim households and 14 Christian households. During the course of the 16th century, most of Beit Rima's Christian inhabitants had emigrated from the village to Jerusalem, Ramla and Gaza, although the Christian population that remained continued to grow.

### Nineteenth century

In the 19th century Bani Zeid was one of 21 sheikdoms in the central highlands of Palestine. While its exact borders varied from time to time, it was generally marked by the Wadi al-Dilb stream to the south, which separated it from the Bani Harith al-Shamali sheikdom, and the Wadi Nattif stream to the north that separated it from Bilad Jamma'in. The Bani Zeid sheikdom contained the highest slopes and the largest concentration of mountain faults of all the highland sheikdoms. About two-thirds of its villages were situated on relatively wide hilltops while the remainder were built along slopes. None were located in the valleys or the foothills. In 1838 English biblical scholars Edward Robinson and Eli Smith noted that the Bani Zeid Nahiya consisted of 18 inhabited localities and four khirbas (abandoned or ruined villages). They classified Deir Ghassaneh and Beit Rima as inhabited by Muslims.

In the early 19th century, the paramount sheikhs of Bani Zeid were Sheikh Marif al-Barghouti and Sheikh 'Asi al-Rabbah Barghouti. They belonged to the wealthy noble family of al-Barghouti, a sub-clan of the Bani Zeid tribe that traditionally provided the leaders of the sheikdom. Its members were generally referred to as Baraghithah and the clan consisted of nine branches whose collective power extended beyond the Bani Zeid sheikdom to the coastal plain of Palestine. During the period of Khedivate Egyptian rule in the Levant (1832–1840), Sheikh 'Abd al-Jabir al-Barghouti, a nephew of Sheikh Marif, served as the chief of the Bani Zeid. Sheikh 'Abd al-Jabir belonged to the al-Zahir branch of the family which was based in Deir Ghassaneh. Deir Ghassaneh served as the sheikdom's qaryat al-kursi (throne village or capital). During the early part of Egyptian rule, Governor Ibrahim Pasha had Sheikh 'Abd al-Jabir executed. He was succeeded by Sheikh Ali al-Rabbah, another leading Barghouti sheikh and a son of Sheikh Asi. The latter was also subsequently executed on the orders of Ibrahim Pasha. Both sheikhs and their peasant fighters had fought against Egyptian rule during the 1834 Peasants' Revolt that spread throughout Palestine. During the last years of Egyptian control, Sheikh Musa Ahmad al-Sahwil of Abwein became the paramount sheikh of the Bani Zeid and continued to exercise great influence over the sheikdom when the Egyptian military withdrew from Palestine in 1841.

In the second half of the 19th century Bani Zeid was officially ruled by Sheikh Salih al-Barghouti, although he struggled to maintain full authority over the sheikdom, having to contend with his Abwein-based rival Sheikh Musa and his family, al-Sahwil. The latter controlled seven villages in the eastern part of the sheikdom, while the Barghouti maintained control over twelve villages in the western part. The two domains were separated by a wadi (seasonal stream). Nonetheless, Sheikh Salih enjoyed high political and social status, holding the official title of sheikh al-nahiya (chief of the subdistrict) and was also referred to locally as sheikh al-mashayikh (chief of the chieftains). The title ceased to be recognized by the Istanbul-based central government in 1864, but locally the title continued to demonstrate the guise of official authority. As sheikh al-nahiya, Sheikh Salih was tasked with the nomination and dismissal of makhatir (village headmen) and maintaining order through local custom. He also served as the multazim (tax collector) of the Bani Zeid sheikdom on behalf of the Ottoman authorities, despite the ban on tax-farming in 1853. This role in particular enabled the Barghouti clan to acquire vast wealth and property either forcefully or through legal transfer. During previous inter-family disputes, members of the clan had begun to settle in the surrounding villages of Beit Rima, Kobar and Deir Nidham.

As members of the Qais tribo-political faction, in opposition to the Yaman faction, the Barghouti aligned themselves with Qaisi-affiliated Bedouin tribes and other prominent families, including the Khalidi clan of Jerusalem, the 'Amr, 'Azza and 'Amla clans of the Hebron area and the Samhan clan of the Bani Harith nahiya to the north. In 1855–1856 tensions between Sheikh Salih and the leading families of Nablus broke out into fierce clashes. Sheikh Salih was eventually able to compel the Ottoman authorities to take the local rulers of Nablus to task. The restive sheikhs of the Jerusalem and Hebron regions were called to Damascus to conclude a lasting peace, but all were condemned to exile in Trabzon, northern Anatolia, with the exception of Sheikh Salih who apparently impressed the governor and was allowed to return to Deir Ghassaneh. The Barghouti clan would later support the Dar Hammad tribe against the Dar Hamid, both of which were engaged in a feud in nearby Silwad. In one day of fighting, 20 men were killed, prompting Sureya Pasha, the governor of Jerusalem, to personally intervene with a detachment of Ottoman troops which forced both factions to withdraw.

French explorer Victor Guérin visited both Deir Ghassaneh and Beit Rima in 1863. He noted that the former had a population of roughly 900 and was built on a mountain overlooking hills filled with "magnificent" olive groves. Beit Rima had a smaller population of 350, and was situated on a high plateau covered with olive and fig groves. The houses of both villages were constructed from red and white stone masonry and the mosque in Deir Ghassaneh, which Guérin regarded as noteworthy, was built from black and white stone. The home of Deir Ghassaneh's sheikh, who maintained a level of sovereignty over about 15 villages and hamlets in the area, and the members of his family, were particularly large and sturdily built. According to Sharon, the sheikh Guérin had referred to was Sheikh Salih. It was around this time, in the late 1860s, that the prominent al-Husayni clan of Jerusalem unsuccessfully attempted to form an alliance with the Barghouti clan, initially through diplomatic means. Afterward, they commissioned their allies in Istanbul to launch a propaganda campaign against the Barghouti clan, accusing them of undermining the sultan. This allegation was evidenced by the disruption of Jerusalem's water supply by the peasant fighters of the Bani Zeid led by Sheikh Salih, who closed off the aqueduct from Solomon's Pools to the south of Bethlehem.

In the 1887 census the Bani Zeid sheikdom consisted of 24 villages with an estimated collective population of 7,700, including 400 Christians. According to the census, Deir Ghassaneh had 1,200 inhabitants living in 196 households, making it significantly larger than the surrounding localities. There were nine elite households, each of whose family head was recognized by the census as a sheikh. The local imam, Muhammad Shams al-Din al-Shaykh Hanafi, was Egyptian and one of five men in Deir Ghassaneh born outside the village. The PEF's Survey of Western Palestine (SWP) in the late 19th century stated Deir Ghassaneh was "a village on a ridge, with springs in the valley below. It is of moderate size, built of stone and has olives beneath it." The SWP described Beit Rima as "a small village on the summit of a ridge with wells to the west".

### British Mandate

Sheikh Salih was succeeded by his son Umar Salih al-Barghouti, who aligned Bani Zeid with the Nashashibi clan of Jerusalem against the al-Husayni clan in the contest for political dominance in Palestine during the British Mandate period. In 1936, during the Arab revolt in Palestine, the British Air Force struck a group of 400 local militiamen gathered outside of Deir Ghassaneh, killing about 130 of the fighters. Later, in September 1938, the local rebel leadership held a meeting in the village where it was decided that Abd al-Rahim al-Hajj Muhammad and Arif Abd al-Raziq would each serve as general commander of the revolt on a rotational basis. Deir Ghassaneh was subsequently attacked by British forces backed by fighter planes when they were informed of the conference. A rebel commander, Muhammad al-Salih, was killed in the ensuing firefight. The British Mandate Antiquities Authority noted in a January 1947 report that Deir Ghassaneh was "built on a medieval site", and on a hill 500 meters (1,600 ft) west of the village was a two-domed shrine dedicated to a Sheikh Khawas.

### Jordanian period

Deir Ghassaneh and Beit Rima were merged and granted municipal status in February 1966 during Jordanian rule, partially due to the efforts of Kassim al-Rimawi, the rural affairs minister at the time and a native of Beit Rima. Its first mayor, Adib Mohammed Rimawi, was appointed by King Hussein. The municipality building is located in Beit Rima.

### From 1967 until today

In June 1967 Israel occupied the West Bank after defeating Arab forces in the Six-Day War. In 1972 the first municipal polls were held and Fa'eq Ali Rimawi was elected. In 1978 Bani Zeid was one of several Palestinian localities to append its municipal seal to the Memorandum from the masses and the institutions of the West Bank to the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization in a display of unity with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The memorandum was a rejection of any solution, regardless of its origin, not containing a clear recognition of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to establishing an independent Palestinian national state. In 2000 Bani Zeid was incorporated into Area A giving the Palestinian National Authority (PNA), the Palestinian governing body established after the Oslo Agreements with Israel in 1993, full control over security and civilian affairs in the town.

#### Second Intifada

In the late night hours of 24 October 2001, during the Second Intifada, the Israeli Army (IDF) launched an incursion into Beit Rima in what became the first major Israeli military raid into Palestinian-controlled territory, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW). The IDF stated the intent of the raid was to capture the alleged killers of Israeli Tourism Minister Rehavam Ze'evi, who was shot dead by members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) in retaliation for Israel's assassination of the party's leader Mustafa Zibri (Abu Ali Mustafa) in August. About 50 people from Beit Rima were detained and brought to the Israeli settlement of Halamish for interrogation. Most were released before the day's end, but eleven men remained in Israeli custody, two of whom Israel alleged to be directly involved in Ze'evi's assassination. In the course of the raid, Israeli forces killed six Palestinians, including three members of the Palestinian National Security Forces and two officers from the Civil Police, and wounded seven others. The Palestinian authorities in Beit Rima stated they had not received prior warning from the IDF and their slain men had been resting in an olive grove near the local police station, while Israeli military officials stated all those killed had either fired on Israeli forces or approached them threateningly and all were members of various armed groups. The HRW stated that the Red Crescent was prevented from treating the injured men until 7:00 am, a delay that resulted in the death of two of the police officers. Israeli forces also demolished three homes in the town, alleging that they belonged to family members of Ze'evi's killers.

## Geography

Bani Zeid is situated in the central highlands of the West Bank, off the southwestern cliffs of the mountainous spine that runs from the Hebron Hills to Jenin. It has an average elevation of 510 meters (1,670 ft) above sea level. The northern part of the town (Deir Ghassaneh) is built on a hilltop with an elevation of roughly 450 meters above sea level. It overlooks the Wadi al-Saredah stream 1 kilometer (0.62 mi) to the north. Bani Zeid is located 17.5 kilometers (10.9 mi) north of Ramallah and less than 45 kilometers (28 mi) northwest of Jerusalem. Nearby localities include Kafr ad-Dik and Bruqin to the north, Qarawat Bani Zeid to the northeast, Kafr Ein to the east, Nabi Salih to the southeast, Deir Nidham and the Israeli settlement of Halamish to the south, Aboud to the southwest, al-Lubban al-Gharbi and the settlement of Beit Aryeh to the west and the settlement of Peduel to the northwest.

Bani Zeid had a total land area of 22,249 dunams in 1945, of which 90 dunams were classified as built-up areas (Deir Ghassaneh was larger than Beit Rima) and 8,400 dunams were planted with olive or fig groves. Today the Bani Zeid municipality has a jurisdiction of over 21,979 dunams, of which 80.6% is cultivable land. today Beit Rima is the larger village. The built-up areas of the town constitute 918 dunams, 832 of which is geared towards residential areas while the remaining 86 is used for commercial, industrial and transportation purposes. The town is surrounded by olive groves, which Bani Zeid is well known for, and 14,505 dunams are planted with olive trees. The old village center of Deir Ghassaneh consists of three quarters: Harat al-Barghouti (Harat al-Fauqa), Harat al-Shu'aibi and Harat al-Tahtani.

The average annual rainfall in the town is 592.9 millimeters (23.34 in) and average annual humidity is roughly 62%. Average temperature is 17.4 °C (63.3 °F).

### Climate

Note

## Demographics

Ottoman village statistics from 1870 showed that "Der Ghassana" had 164 houses and a population of 559, while "Bet Rima" had 60 houses and a population of 220, though in both cases the population count included only men. In the Ottoman census of 1887, Deir Ghassaneh's population of 196 households (roughly 1,200 people) was homogeneous, everyone being Muslim, and with the exception of five individuals, all the males had been born in the village. The estimated 9% of the inhabitants who were born outside the village were almost exclusively women, with one fifth of all females hailing primarily from other villages in the Bani Zeid nahiya such as Beit Rima, Abwein, Kobar and Kafr Ein and about 14 women originating from other parts of Palestine, particularly al-Majdal Ascalon. Several men from Deir Ghassaneh settled in the surrounding villages, namely Beit Rima, Deir Nidham and Nabi Salih. In 1896 the population of Der Ghisane was estimated to be 1,341, while Bet Rima had an estimated 480 inhabitants.

In the 1922 census of Palestine, conducted by the British Mandatory authorities, "Dair Ghassaneh" had a population of 625, while "Bait Rema" had a population of 555, all Muslims. In the 1931 census Deir Ghassaneh had 181 occupied houses and a population of 753, while Beit Rima had had 175 occupied houses and a population of 746, still all Muslim. In a land and population survey by Sami Hadawi in 1945 both villages had a total population of 1,810. Beit Rima had a slightly larger population, but Deir Ghassaneh had a larger land area. In a 1961 census by Jordanian authorities, Deir Ghassaneh's population reached 1,461, but it declined drastically after more than half of the residents fled during the Six-Day War in June 1967. In 1982 there were 892 inhabitants in the town. Beit Rima had 2,165 inhabitants in 1961 and unlike Deir Ghassaneh, the population continued to grow, reaching 3,451 in 1987.

In the first census taken by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) in 1997, Bani Zeid had a population of 4,351 inhabitants. The gender make-up was 51.8% male and 49.2% female. More than half of the population was under the age of 20 (51.1%), while 27.7% were between the ages of 20 and 39, 15% between the ages of 40 and 64, and the remainder of the population being 65 or older (6%). Palestinian refugees made up 6.8% of the residents in 1997.

According to the PCBS census of 2007, Bani Zeid had a population of 5,515, of which 49% were males and 51% females. There were 1,176 housing units and the average size of a household was five family members. The town's principal clans are al-Rimawi, al-Barghouti, al-Shu'aibi, al-Ramahi and Mashaal, although there are also a number of smaller families. Today, there are three mosques in the town, the Bani Zeid Mosque, the Abu Bakr al-Siddiq Mosque and the Omar ibn al-Khattab Mosque.

## Economy and education

Historically, Deir Ghassaneh depended primarily on olive cultivation, and until the present day most of Bani Zeid's cultivable land is covered by olive orchards. The cultivation of other fruit trees is significantly lower, with almonds being a distant second at 240 dunams. Other crops grown include grains which cover 135 dunams and onions, dry legumes and fodder to a lesser degree. Only 1% of the town's residents own livestock and according to the Palestinian Ministry of Agriculture, there were 1,880 goats, 268 sheep, 12 cows and 281 beehives in Bani Zeid in 2009. Agriculture currently accounts for 10% of labor in the town.

Today, employment by the Palestinian government and private businesses is the dominant economic activity in Bani Zeid, making up around 70% of the town's workforce. The trade sector accounts for 10% of the labor force, followed by the industrial sector which makes up 8%. Work in the Israeli labor market employs around 2% of the working population. Unemployment in the town was at 20% in 2011. According to the Bani Zeid Municipality, there are 26 grocery stores, 26 public service venues, 11 workshops, a bakery, a butchery and two olive oil presses in the town.

A school was founded in Deir Ghassaneh in 1925. Prior to the British Mandate period, boys would normally receive education in a kuttab, an elementary-type school with Islamic law and tradition having a major influence on the curriculum. Today, there is one elementary school (Bani Zeid Elementary School) and one secondary school (Bashir al-Barghouti Secondary School) in the town of Bani Zeid, both run by the government. According to the Palestinian Ministry of Education and Higher Education, in the 2010-2011 academic year there were 26 classes occupied by 691 students, both male and female. There was 45 teaching staff. There are no kindergartens in Bani Zeid. The closest institution for higher learning is Birzeit University in the village of Bir Zeit to the southeast.

According to the PCBS, in 2007 94.5% of the population over the age of 10 was literate. Of that demographic segment, 21.7% received elementary education, 24.8% received primary education and 20.2% had secondary education. Over 15% had completed some form of higher education (617 persons), with 248 attaining associate degrees, 324 attaining bachelor's degrees and 45 obtaining higher diplomas.

## Governance

Bani Zeid is governed by a municipal council of 13 members, including the chairman (mayor) and vice-chairman, under the name Municipality of West Bani Zaid. In normal circumstances the town holds election every four years. In the 2005 elections, the Hamas-affiliated party won five municipal seats, including the post of mayor, which was won by a female candidate Fathiya Barghouti Rheime who, along with Janet Mikhail of Ramallah, became the first woman to hold the post of a Palestinian municipality head. The Fatah list won five seats, the Palestinian People's Party (PPP) list won one, and a socialist party won the remaining seat.

During an Israeli raid in Bani Zeid in 2007, two Hamas party members in the municipal council were arrested by Israeli authorities along with dozens of other Palestinian mayors, parliament members and ministers belonging to Hamas throughout the West Bank.

In the most recent polls in 2012, Abdel Karim Abu Aql was elected mayor on a leftist alliance list as were the other 12 people elected to the council. The elections were boycotted by Hamas. Bani Zeid has had six mayors since the establishment of the municipality in 1966.

The municipal council takes part in the international town twinning scheme, and have twinned with Bezons in France.

## Religious sites

One of the notable characteristics of Deir Ghassaneh was the concentration of 16 local Muslim shrines or saintly-person tombs (maqam, pl. maqamat) in its vicinity which served as visitation sites for the pre-20th-century Palestinian community. According to author and ethnographer Johann Bussow, their locations near Jerusalem also "contributed to the image of an Islamic Holy Land," which brought further prosperity to the inhabitants of the villages of Bani Zeid who benefited from providing services to pilgrims. The Barghouti family served as patrons for the various religious sheikhs who oversaw the shrines. The maqamat were dedicated either to prophets (anbah) recognized by the Qur'an or saintly-persons known as welys, whom locals believed had been "close to God." The veneration of the wely's tombs, a common feature in peasant life, did not derive from the orthodox Islam which was practiced more strictly in the urban centers, and was rooted in local pre-Islamic, including Christian, tradition.

All the maqamat of Bani Zeid were designed differently, with some being rustic tombstones and others built more elaborately. The latter types consisted of a domed mausoleum known as a qubba, a shelter known as a makan nawm, a garden, a well and either a distinguishable olive or oak tree. Most of the upkeep of the buildings was provided by awqaf ("religious endowments"). One of the shrines was considered by the local peasantry to be a place to safeguard firewood and outside the reach of potential thieves. The maqamat were also divided by status, with some bearing significance only to an individual village or clan and some collectively revered by the residents of the sheikhdom. Of all the sites in the Bani Zeid sheikhdom, the most venerated shrine was that of Nabi Salih, dedicated to the prophet (nabi) Salih, which held special significance beyond Bani Zeid.

### Maqam al-Khawwas

One of the notable maqamat close to the modern town of Bani Zeid is Maqam al-Khawwas (var. Khawassi, Khawwas and Kawas), a double-domed building situated on a hilltop 500 meters west of Deir Ghassaneh, in an isolated area. Along with the maqamat of al-Rifa'i or al-Majdoub, Maqam al-Khawwas was a shrine of major importance for the Bani Zeid villages, collectively. The maqam honored what was locally considered to be the meditation site of al-Khawass, believed to be a Sufi holy man (wely) from Egypt who often visited the residents of the area.

It contained a mihrab ("niche indicating direction towards Mecca.") The maqam was noted by Guérin in 1863. Its eastern dome was constructed by the residents of Deir Ghassaneh, while local legend holds the western dome was completed by angels. The interior of the domes were simple and typical of most maqamat domes, lacking cross-vault roofing which was a common feature for most of Deir Ghassaneh's buildings. The sanctuary had a two-door entrance on its northern end. The interior walls were whitewashed, reflecting the Muslim tradition of heavenly light and spirit in the color white. A few verses from the Qur'an were written on parts of the walls. The tomb of al-Khawwas was covered in white cloth. A small niche on the western wall was fitted for an oil lamp.

An important feature that distinguished Maqam al-Khawwas from the Deir Ghassaneh mosque was that it acted primarily as a women's domain whereas the mosque had largely been a male domain. In the pre-British Mandate era, it was frequented by women on a daily basis and during a seasonal pilgrimage for women known as mawsim al-banat. During this pilgrimage, which coincided with the Nabi Salih pilgrimage, a largely male affair, large groups of women and children from the villages of Bani Zeid would visit the Khawwas mausoleum to celebrate festivities, socialize with other women and pray. According to Palestinian architecture expert Suad Amiry, Maqam al-Khawwas's isolation and the ritual of having to travel uphill to reach the sanctuary added to the tranquil feeling of the visit.

## Manor of Salih al-Barghouti

The late 19th-century chief of the Bani Zeid sheikhdom, Sheikh Salih al-Barghouti, resided in a large palace-like manor in Deir Ghassaneh. The first floor and portions of the second floor were originally built in 1602. In 1862-63 Sheikh Salih renovated the manor which became known locally as "Saraya al-Sheikh Salih al-Barghouti" and built the remainder of the second floor. The building was divided into three main components, namely the salamlek, the khazeen and the haramlek. The salamlek included a reception area, dining halls and a guesthouse while the khazeen consisted of workshops, food depots and horse stables. The haramlek, on the second floor, served as the living quarters for women and servants. Above the living quarters hung the sheikh's retreat and leisure area from which he could view his estates.

According to Amiry, Sheikh Salih's manor, along with other Barghouti family palace compounds, "was strongly influenced by urban architecture" in light of its "majestic scale, ornate fine stone work and the introverted spatial organisation." The manor, which has a rectangular ground plan, roughly measures 23 meters by 34 meters. An open courtyard occupied the central position of the manor. The courtyard was mostly enclosed by four partially open arcades known as riwaqs which either serves as stables or storage.

The main gate of the palace consists of two arches, with one being built within the other. According to Sharon, while this gate structure was common among village manors in the area, the gate of Sheikh Salih's palace was "particularly monumental" as the arch was pointed and contained one keystone. The entire arch was constructed in the ablaq'' style with alternating black and white stone. A large, heavy and decorated wooden door is fitted into the gate and it was used to receive vehicles or large loads while a smaller door for personal use was built in the center of the larger door. A smaller secondary entrance was located at the building's northern side, vertically parallel of the main entrance.

## Notable people

Members of the Barghouti clan come from the Ramallah and al-Bireh Governorate, which includes Bani Zeid; notable members of the clan include Bashir Barghouti, a Palestinian Communist leader and journalist; Abdullah Barghouti, a convicted Hamas bomber, and Mourid Barghouti a poet and writer. Other notable people born in Bani Zeid include Abdullah Rimawi, head of the Ba'ath Party in Jordan in the 1950s, Kassim al-Rimawi, prime minister of Jordan in 1980, and Mahmoud al-Rimawi, a journalist and author. Asaad Barghouti (1934-2009), PLO activist and member of parliament, and Mohammad Abdulsalam Barghouti, general secretary of the Arab Bank (1944-1952) are two more notables.

Municipalities of the State of Palestine