earlier.  The  Jewish  soldiers  failed  to  reach  the  village  and  were  fiercely  attacked  by  the village  fighters,  their  position  was  surrounded  from  three  directions  and  they  hastily retreated, leaving behind two dead men and taking back with them nine wounded. The Israeli officer who  documented the  event concluded by saying, amongst other observations,  that “the enemy was quick to get oriented and attack, well commanded with an offensive spirit and tendency to assault.”³¹ On the 10th of July Etkes was released and on the 16th of July, Kupershtock was released as well.³² THE LOCAL VERSUS THE NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE Whereas the local picture evolves rather coherently from the documents and oral accounts, there are some discrepancies between the “local world” (as it is described by the villagers and the army documents) and the public and popular images of 1948 that evolved through the years. One of the ongoing debates regarding 1948 surrounds the role of the “external forces”—be they the Arab Alliance Forces (Iraqi, Jordanian, Syrian and so on) or Palestinian mobilized forces such as those organized by ’Abd al-Qa¯der al-H usseini¯ of Jerusalem or Muh ammad as -S affu¯ri¯ of S affu¯ri¯yyeh. The villagers noted that they were reluctant to allow the foreign forces  to  settle within  the village.  In  an  IDFA  intelligence  report,  dated  12  March,  1948 (before the major war escalation), we are told that an informer, named “The Lawyer,” says that Muh ammad as -S affu¯ri¯’s band left the village of Ijzim and is now in a house near Shari¯f’s orchard. They also moved their ammunition and arms. Outside the house people stand guard with Canary rifles.³³  “The lawyer,” who is, most likely, Shari¯f himself (as he was the only lawyer  in  Ijzim  at  the  time),  gave  more  information  to  the  Jews  a  few  days  later:  a  re- enforcement of 30 men in addition to as -S affu¯ri¯’s men had been sent to Ijzim with a Turkish officer, probably associated with “The Arab Liberation Army.” They said that they had been sent by ’Abd al-Qa¯der al-H usseini¯, the leader of the fighting forces in the Jerusalem District. The  officer  and  as -S affu¯ri¯ were  in  conflict  since  the  Turk  was  subordinate  to  S affu ¯ri¯ but thought Saffu¯ri¯ knew nothing of military issues. The Turk drew sketches of the areas of the nearby Jewish settlements and with his men dug pits for mines between the Arab village of Fredi¯s and the Jewish  settlement of Zikhron Ya’aqov (a few kilometers  south of Ijzim).³⁴ From both sources we learn that forces from outside came and went, stayed near the village, and seem to have had problems in communicating amongst themselves and with the villagers. Following the fall of Haifa, the district’s villagers were isolated. As they were prevented from   entering   the   city   during   the   months   of   May,   June   and   July,   they   used   Druze intermediaries to transfer and sell their agricultural products in the city.³⁵ Another route out of the siege led to the Iraqi Forces based in Jeni¯n, twenty kilometers south of Ijzim. The Iraqis entered Palestine with the other Arab Alliance forces on 15 May 1948. It is still debated whether  the  foreign  armies  really  participated  actively,  as  the  Israeli  chronicle  tends  to emphasize, or whether their presence was partially symbolic and misleading for the local Palestinians who relied mistakenly on their help, as the Palestinian sources often present it. In Ijzim, as we shall see, the foreign forces played a minor role, especially when they were most needed. Even though the official Iraqi rhetoric was strongly pro-Palestinian, in actuality, the Iraqi involvement in the war was limited. The Iraqis were accused, both within the Arab League and by the local Palestinians, for having “no orders” (ma¯ku¯  awa¯mer in the Iraqi colloquial Arabic)  and  lacking  a  clear  policy.³⁶  As  a  result  of  these  lacks,  Iraqi  officers  at  certain localities took personal initiatives. We find correspondence between the local Iraqi and local Israeli  officers  to  settle  a  dispute  concerning  the  usage  of  a  certain  plot  of  land  on  the ANTHROPOLOGICAL HISTORIES OF A PALESTINIAN VILLAGE 19