Miska, Tulkarm

Miska, spelled “Miskeh” in the 1882 Survey of Western Palestine, was listed as an inhabited village on the survey's Sheet X. The survey placed it among eight inhabited places in the district of Beni Sab, then under the Mudir of Nablus, and described it as “a mud village of small size, with olives to the north and south, and a well to the south.”[1]

A 2024 historical account in The Jerusalem Post identifies Miska as lying just east of Ramat Ha-Kovesh.[2] Ramat Ha-Kovesh itself is northeast of Kefar Sava in the southern Sharon, placing Miska in the same general area.[3]

The 1882 survey provides an early description of Miskeh as an inhabited mud-built village with gardens, olive trees, and a well.[1] During the 1936–39 Arab riots, a secondary account published by CAMERA links residents of Miska to attacks against nearby Jewish communities, particularly Ramat Ha-Kovesh.[4]

The same account states that armed activity involving Miska residents continued during the War of Independence.[4] A June 30, 1948 Haganah intelligence document separately recorded that everyone in the village left on April 15, 1948, “On orders of the Haganah,” and that the village was occupied by Haganah forces.[5]

The 1882 survey reported that Victor Guérin gave Miskeh's population as approximately 300.[1] A Haganah intelligence report compiled in June 1948 listed Miska's population during normal times as 650.[5] These figures concern different periods and do not constitute a direct contradiction.

The 1948 report cautioned generally that contemporary population statistics were deficient and that its estimates required a margin of error of approximately 10 to 15 percent.[5]

The nineteenth-century survey offers a limited picture of Miskeh's agricultural life. Olive trees stood to the north and south of the village, while gardens around its mud-built houses were planted principally with fig trees, among which occasional palm trees grew.[1] These details indicate that household gardens and tree cultivation formed visible parts of the village landscape, although the cited sources provide no broader commercial or occupational profile.

The 1882 survey recorded a well south of Miskeh and noted a column and marble architectural capital in the courtyard of the village's medhajeh. The objects were described as apparently Byzantine work, although the survey did not provide a precise date or a broader archaeological interpretation of them.[1]

CAMERA characterizes Miska as having been involved in attacks against Jewish communities in the Sharon area during the 1936–39 Arab riots. It reports that the Hebrew newspaper Davar stated in 1936 that Miska residents uprooted an orchard containing 400 trees. CAMERA further states that, after two months of repeated failed attacks, the Hebrew press referred to the village as “the murderers' den.”[4]

The account particularly connects the hostilities with Kibbutz Ramat Ha-Kovesh. Founded in 1932 northeast of Kefar Sava, Ramat Ha-Kovesh was the easternmost outpost of Jewish settlement in the southern Sharon during the riots. It suffered attacks and lost 15 of its members.[3]

CAMERA states that armed activity involving Miska residents continued during the War of Independence. It quotes historian Benny Morris as writing that “Miska's militiamen and irregulars had for weeks sniped at, and skirmished with, the Jewish settlement of Ramat Hakovesh.”[4] The Jewish Virtual Library similarly records that Ramat Ha-Kovesh was again on the front line during the war and suffered further losses.[3]

A Haganah intelligence document dated June 30, 1948 listed Miska's normal-time population as 650 and recorded that everyone left on April 15, 1948, “On orders of the Haganah.” The entry listed Tira and Qalqiliyah under evacuation trajectory and comments and stated that Miska had been occupied by Haganah forces.[5]

The Haganah intelligence table explicitly gives Haganah orders as the recorded cause of Miska's complete evacuation on April 15, 1948.[5] Because the entry is a concise table rather than a narrative account, however, it does not by itself explain how the order was communicated or enforced, the immediate military circumstances, or the precise sequence between the residents' departure and the village's occupation. Broader interpretations should therefore distinguish the table's documented wording from conclusions not established by that document alone.