If I forget thee, O Jerusalem: archaeology, religious commemoration and nationalism in a disputed city, 1801–2001

Abstract

The pace and agenda of archaeology in Jerusalem has always been influenced by unspoken ideological and political factors. This article attempts to trace the ideological and political contexts in which archaeological exploration and interpretation has been carried out during the last 200 years. Beginning with a brief description of the Solomonic obsessions of the late antique and medieval rulers of Jerusalem, the article describes how, over the centuries, the identification of certain monuments with the biblical events and personalities had far‐reaching effects on the character of subsequent archaeological work. The article then traces the course of modern archaeological exploration in the city from the Late Ottoman Period through the end of the twentieth century. The article concludes with an examination and analysis of the politics of archaeology in Jerusalem in the current Israeli–Palestinian conflict over Jerusalem's presumed final status in a peace settlement.

Tourism, Religion and Religiosity: A Holy Mess

“…Evidence for the importance of Jerusalem as a tourist attraction dates back to 333 BC when the oldest known guidebook was published, entitled Itinerary from Bordeaux to Jerusalem (Sigaux, 1966). The Wailing Wall itself is located in Jerusalem and is considered to be the only remaining part of the Temple destroyed in 70 AD after the encounter between Jewish rebels and Roman siege forces, which explains its importance for Jewish people today (Silberman, 2001).…”

Heritage Interpretation as Public Discourse

“…Tilden's six principles of interpretation fail to address adequately the challenge of definitively interpreting conflicting perspectives. Among the many examples that could be cited are the contested history of Jerusalem (Silberman, 2001), the political controversies over the Kasubi tombs in Uganda (Kigongo and Reid, 2007), the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan (Colwell-Chanthaphonh, 2003), the cultural affinities and territorial significance of the Preah Vihear temple on the border of Thailand and Cambodia (Meyer, 2009), or the conflict between Hindus and Muslims over religious primacy at Ayodhya in India (Bernbeck and Pollock, 1996). These are only the most famous examples of interpretive conflict, for in our era of "place branding," identity politics, territorial disputes, and tourism-based economics, the control of heritage sites and objects has become a bone of contention between regions, localities, diasporic communities, and nation-states all over the world.…”

Arqueologia bíblica

“…Se, no entanto, não se tratou de uma invenção do PEF, o Fundo a adotou, ao optar pelos nomes bíblicos na produção do mapa que apresentaria a Palestina moderna aos olhos ocidentais. Por meio dessa opção, perpetuada nos mapas, foi possível marcar os sinais de continuidade, materializar um passado histórico ajustado à paisagem moderna (Abu El-Haj, 2001, p. 25;Silberman, 1989;Silberman, 2001). Como consequência, os nomes árabes foram excluídos dos mapas, desligados desse passado.…”