Historical Revisionism on the Temple Mount

Last week, clashes on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem provided a Fatah spokesman, Dmitri Dilani, another opportunity to reaffirm the Palestinian Authority's denial of any Christian or Jewish historical connection to the Temple Mount. "Do not call it the Temple Mount," Dilani corrected an American interviewer. "No one can find any trace of the Temple. The area you refer to is only a Muslim holy site."

It seems Iranian President Ahmadinejad's holocaust denial is not the only historical revisionism taking root in Middle Eastern politics. The assertion that no Judeo-Christian history ever happened in Jerusalem is fast becoming a central tenet of Palestinian nationalism.

Last month, the top religious official in the Palestinian Authority, Sheik Tamimi, issued a more sweeping denial of any ancient Hebraic or early Christian presence in Jerusalem, saying all excavated artifacts proving those traditions' historical link to the Mount are "forgeries." In Jerusalem, archaeology has long been politics, but this open rejection of a Judeo-Christian connection to Jerusalem has become -- like a weed slowly swallowing an ancient ruin -- a growing force that may permanently endanger Jerusalem's ancient and modern past.

During the research for my recent novel, The Last Ember, I saw the physical consequences of this revisionism. The Waqf Authority -- the Islamic land trust that has administered the Temple Mount since the 12th century -- has used bulldozers to destroy Judeo-Christian ruins beneath the Mount. I toured the rubble firsthand and saw the crushed Herodian-era glass, Temple pottery, and smashed Templar crosses. The Israeli archaeologists sifted through the piles like medics surveying a battlefield with no survivors.

The Supreme Court of Israel has declared that the Waqf Authority violated antiquities laws on 35 occasions by removing more than twenty thousands of tons of archaeologically rich soil, and dumping them in the adjacent Kidron Valley. Because of the touchy international jurisdiction of the Mount, neither UNESCO officials nor Israeli archaeologists can enforce archaeological supervision. The Waqf carefully regulates the entrance of non-Muslims like Manchu priests guarding the forbidden city. Christians and Jews may enter only four hours daily, and no non-Muslim prayer is permitted on the sacred site.

In 2007, a U.S. Congressional bill was introduced "condemning the Waqf's digging activities at the Temple Mount site and deploring the destruction of artifacts vitally important to Jewish, Christian and Muslim faiths."

Sadly, the media response to this pandemic of physical revisionism on the Temple Mount has been silence. The UN World Heritage Sites Committee has not pressured the Waqf to permit supervision of its construction of subterranean mosques beneath the Temple Mount.

Before the UN last week, Netanyahu responded to Ahmadinejad's modern revisionism by holding up a photocopy of a Nazi memo that outlined the extermination of the Jewish race. But he combated the ancient revisionism, too. He quoted the inscription on a UN building near where he stood. "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation," he told the other UN delegates, reminding them that those words were written by the Jewish prophet Isiah in Jerusalem nearly 3000 years before. "We are not strangers to that land."

Ancient historical revisionism has consequences beyond the history books, as special U.N. envoy George Mitchell's failure last month to bridge gaps between Israel and the Palestinian negotiators reminds us. Why should the international community be able to assist building the region's future when it won't commit to protecting the last ember of its ancient past?

 

 

Comments

[YMedad]

Thanks for the review. At Camp David II in 2000, even Pres. Clinton was taken aback when Arafat delivered a Temple Mount denial diatribe. But one of the best responses came from Ehud Barak: "when Jesus came to overturn the tables of the moneychangers, he didn't see a mosque." And I enjoyed the suggestion once made that there be split-level sovereignty.

[Mahmoud B]

As a muslim i need to express this: Mosques for us are houses of God; in that sense chruches and synagogues are mosques since God is being whorshiped there. The main rationale of building the Aqsa mosque was an hommage to Jerusalem and Solomon's temple as David, Solomon, Moses are all holy prophets in Islam. Denying a jewish character to Jerusalem is as wrong and inacurate as denying its christian or muslim character.

[califlefty]

The Palestinians have been systematically attacking archaeological Jewish sites throughout the West Bank, including Joseph's tomb and the Temple Mount. These are crimes against world cultural heritage, not just historical Jewish heritage. I blame the Israeli government for not forcefully protecting these sites for fear of bad PR. The result of Israeli weakness, emboldening the PA to up the ante and allow the lie of no Jewish presence in Jerusalem to spread. I refute this lie by by touching the Western Wall when I visit. I refute the lie by seeing the same stones at Hebron and countless sites throughout Israel.

The Temple Mount should first and foremost be protected and RESTORED for it's cultural heritage, and only secondly used as a religious site under strict guidelines that protect it from further outrages.

[misaacm]

Radical Muslims refer to Jews as "sons of pigs and monkeys". Since they view Jews as a lower life-form, we should not be surprised that they seek to exclude Jews and Christians from the Temple Mount. Since liberating Jerusalem, the Israeli government has bent over backward to allow Muslims their freedom of religion. Of course all that they have received in return is abuse (stones thrown at Jewish worshipers at the Wailing wall below), and archeological destruction as described in this article.

Jerusalem is a minor city in Muslim theology, it hardly rates a mention in the Koran. The reason they want to rule it is because the Jews currently do. According to Dennis Ross, when Pres. Clinton asked Arafat for a counter proposal to Barak's at Camp David in 2000, Arafat responded not with a counter offer but a declaration that Jerusalem never had any Jewish significance. I can't see how you can make peace with people who deny your connection to the land. It shows that the Arabs want land for war, not for peace.

[Mahmoud B]

Fear, ignorance and insecurity can only lead to the protectionnist attitude allegedly adopted by the Waqf. In face of Israel and the world's -not too- implicit denial of Muslim's right to the Haram Sharif (ever since the crusades), there is little chance of Muslims accepting Jerusalem's (what you call) Judeo-christian heritage. only by an unequivocal acceptance of the place Jerusalem has for muslims around the world and in Palestine can this acceptance be reached; Otherwise it is just a waste of words and time. I definetely think that Jerusalem and mount Zion (or Sion as the case may be) must be recognized officially and finally as belonging to Muslims, Jews and Christians; excluding any one of these religious groups will simply not work.

[StCuthbert]

Israel has allowed Muslims unrestricted access to the Haram Sharif, so your accusation of "implicit denial of Muslim right" is completely false. It is only when Muslims use that access to become violent and attack Jews does Israel increase the restriction.

Only Jews and Christians are at the moment excluded.

[Mahmoud B]

"Israel has allowed Muslims unrestricted access to the Haram Sharif" This statement in itself evidences the implicit attitude i have been talking about. How can you "allow" someone access to his own house? The term allow does not come into play here unless you do not really believe that it is his. Moreover haven't there been voices from within and without Israel calling for the removal of the Haram for purposes of restoring the temple?
In any case i am not debatting Chrisitan or Jews' rights regarding Jerusalem, all I am saying is when debatting issues such as Jerusalem and the temple mount we need to take a closer more objective look at history to determine the rationale behind the current atittudes and thoughts. Muslims' fear over the Haram is a culmination of the events of hundreds of years. Accordingly to solve this issue we need to have this background extremely clear before us.

[Daniel Levin - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks Mahmoud B- well, transparancy is the key. Problem is that we've found 20,000 tons of archaeologically rich soil dumped into the Valley of Kidron beside the Mount. The systematic campaign of historical destruction by the Waqf certainly isn't the answer either. We need to protect the past, before we can even address the politics of the present.

[Mahmoud B]

Daniel

Thank you very much for your article and your comments (I will definetely read the last ember). I agree that we need to protect the past but i would add that this protection must not exclude any of the protagonists. Unfortunately the politics of the present evidences that Jerusalem is seen as an exclusive Judeo-Christian zone; All i am saying is that the Muslim fears and insecurities must be extinguished first; I might be wrong but i believe this is the only way to restore the Muslims' appreciation of other cultures and religions which was present at a certain point of History (when Muslims did not suffer from a state of weakness and perpetual fear). I believe you would agree that save for a few exceptions Muslim treatment of Jewish and Christian holy sites was far better than the Crusader's treatment of Muslim and Jewish holy sites. So there is light at the end of the tunnel.

[erica162]

Historical revisionism with words is one thing, but to have all evidence of an ancient past destroyed is even more horrifying. I read Daniel Levin's novel, The Last Ember and it not only kept me riveted, but left me thinking about this ongoing destruction of sacred territory. I'm happy to see the coverage of this topic on a news blog, but I hope this message will get through to those reading Daniel's novel for a suspense, getaway read.

[StCuthbert]

Great article, Mr. Levin. It is extremely unfortunate that the Palestinian Muslims are actively trying to prevent other religions from coming and worshiping at a place that is spiritually important to all of them. Instead of taking a place and turning it into a starting point for understanding and cooperation, it has become yet another point of conflict.

[Daniel Levin - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks, StCubert. . . And you're right: neither Christians or Jews can pray on the Temple Mount, due to the rules of the Islamic land trust - the Waqf - that has been in control of the Mount since the 12th century A.D., when Islamic warriors expelled the Crusaders led by Richard the Lionheart. The problem, of course, is that over the centuries the Mount has become a Bermuda Triangle of jurisdiction - and how tightly the Waqf controls the Mount, and the secrets they maintain, is something I explore at length in my recent novel, The Last Ember.

[lbsaltzman]

I don't think the situation will improve until Israel stops it's war crimes against the Palestinians and stops stealing their land and engaging in ethnic cleansing. There is not a reason in the world why Palestinians should be cooperative with their oppressors.

[StCuthbert]

Indeed, a solution needs to be found that allows everyone unrestricted access to the Temple Mount. I'll have to check out your book.

[phute]

........."Jewish villages were built in the place of Arav villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yuhushua in the place of Tal Al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population"..........

David Ben Gurion......quoted on page 99 of Nahum Goldman's - The Jewish Paradox.

How about that as an aid for the revisionists Mr Levin, and no geography books too.