Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWilson, C
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-21T08:46:13Z
dc.date.issued2018-07-20
dc.description.abstractThis article draws on a collection of petitions by Palestinian Arabs and Jews to explore how families negotiated the admission of mentally ill relatives into government mental institutions under the British mandate between 1930 and 1948. In contrast to the conclusions of the existing literature, which focuses largely on the development of parallel Jewish institutions as establishing the foundations of the Israeli health system, these petitions reveal that the trajectories of both Arab and Jewish mentally ill were complex, traversing domestic, private, and government contexts in highly contingent ways. The second part of this article examines the petitions themselves as dense moments of engagement by Palestinian Arabs and Jews with the British mandate, in which the anxieties and priorities of the mandate were strategically re-deployed in order to secure admission into chronically underfunded and overcrowded institutions. Petitioners also sought to mobilize other actors, often within the state itself, as intercessors, a strategy which attempted to thread together state and society in a meaningful and advantageous way at a time when both seemed to be unravelling. Taken together, these pathways and petitions foreground the space of interaction between the British mandate and its subjects, thereby offering new perspectives on both.en_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 62 (2), pp. 451 - 471en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/s0018246x18000092
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/127162
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherCambridge University Pressen_GB
dc.rightsCopyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 This version is available under the Creative Commons Non-Commerical Non-Derivatives licenceen_GB
dc.titlePetitions and pathways to the asylum in British mandate Palestine, 1930–1948en_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2021-09-21T08:46:13Z
dc.identifier.issn0018-246X
dc.descriptionThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Cambridge University Press via the DOI in this record.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalThe Historical Journalen_GB
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/  en_GB
rioxxterms.versionAMen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-07-20
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2021-09-21T08:44:37Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2021-09-21T08:46:46Z
refterms.panelDen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 This version is available under the Creative Commons Non-Commerical Non-Derivatives licence
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 This version is available under the Creative Commons Non-Commerical Non-Derivatives licence