Armstrong 16-18

As the events in these chapters come closer and closer to present day, we see the heightening of tensions and disputes (as if there weren’t enough already…). However, the difference between previous disputes and the ones discussed in these chapters is that now Jerusalem must deal with the ever-present influential and pressuring ‘west’ to tell it how to be. I was really amazed in these chapters about the increasing development of Zionism and the political push in Europe of these ideas. Furthermore, I was glad that Armstrong discussed in detail the events leading up to 1948. Somehow it was a blur in my head. Usually textbooks and discussions focus on everything after that state of Israel, but for me is was just as interesting to understand the mindset and the parties involved prior to Israel.  There is so much rich information in these chapters it is hard to pick a few things to discuss. 

In chapter 16 Armstrong foreshadows the increasing violence by stating that, “Almost every new development in Jerusalem seemed doomed to increase the sectarianism and rivalry that now seemed endemic to the city” (351). Speaking of rivalries, I was again annoyed with the Christians and the conflicts among different sects. How can we expect different religions to get along when different groups within the same religion can’t even see eye to eye? It is another disappointing example of how human will has tainted religion. The best example of this pettiness is when the fire damaged the Holy Sepulcher church. All of the groups fought over who would rebuild it and so on, and it even led to fights and riots (348).  In addition, Armstrong describes on page 355 the way the clash between sects of Christianity also affected different states in Europe. A rift between the Greek and Latin clergy led to “a clash between France and Russian, the “protectors” of the two communities…This quarrel gave Britain and France the pretext they needed to declare war on Russian in order to stop any further Russian advance into Ottoman territory” (355). How amazing that these people were so affected by religion in an area most of them had probably never visited! 

While I maybe shouldn’t say this, sometimes when I’m reading about this current conflict my mind rests at the thought that this is just a little bump in the road. In other words, Jerusalem will always be disputed, it always has been disputed, it is just that the conflict took an extra turn with the development of statehood and nationalism in Europe. Hundreds of years from now, are people going to look at what we called the “Israeli-Palestinian Conflict” just as we are looking at the Franks in Jerusalem or the Ottomans in Jerusalem? That they were just one of the strings of rulers and the land will never be at peace? There will always be a threat, always and outsider and always a group that is marginalized?  Will it change hands again and again? Will the Christians take over again someday? I hope that soon there will be an end to the constant invasions, but I can’t help but think about the possibility of the never-ending struggle.

Reflections on conference with Salim Tamari

I was really intrigued by the readings and conversations we had today with Salim Tamari. The topic of Arab nationalism that arose in the 1920s and 1930s was fascinating. I had no idea that this nationalism was not directly connected with religion- and now days so often we examine the conflict in terms of either Muslim or Jewish; at one point, it was not defined by those labels. People wanted to be free of Ottoman rule and the Arabs could be Christian, Jewish, Muslim; it didn't make a difference. They were defined by their ethnic culture. Furthermore, I was really interested to learn that there are people who believe/believed that Jews, Christians and Muslims did indeed spring from the same people, some just 'changed their label' as Tamari mentioned today, and it was  the Jewish people in the Zionist movement who decided to separate themselves from the Arabs as an ethnic group.

In addition, it was interesting to hear that Tamari thinks that a two state solutions is unlikely. Do most people believe in a two state solution? I would like to learn more about how he and other members of the Living Jerusalem project arrived at this conclusion. Speaking on current opinions on the topic, someone I'm friends with on facebook posted this to his wall:

Something to think about as we continue to discuss the conflict. I enjoy hearing and listening to everyone's take on the topic.

Reading Response for Wednesday, Sept. 28

In chapters 14 and 15 in Karen Armstrong’s book, the reader again sees the replacement of more groups and the changing leadership of a city. Again, the changing ideology caught my eye. We see the shift from Jews still behaving as if the Temple was there to the increased importance of the western wall (327) to at the end of Chapter 15 being influenced by the Scientific Revolution in Europe and changing their minds about what a “holy place” really means (340). In addition, the two chapters focus on several leaders that all made significant impacts to the city. I was impressed by Saladin, Frederick and Suleiman the Magnificent and all of their contributions to history. 

As Armstrong described Saladin’s reign in Jerusalem, I admire him a lot for what he attempted to do. Although he obviously favored his own group, he showed great respect for other groups in Jerusalem and behaved with honor. Armstrong says, “Saladin had conducted his jihad in accordance with the Qur’anic ideal: he had always granted a truce when the Crusaders had asked for one; he had, for the most part, treated his prisoners fairly and kindly” (295). He “muslim-ified” the city, yet he also did the grunt work and manual labor. As I’m reading these pages, (I’m sure people would disagree with me) he found a middle ground between the religions. It seems as though he did what he needed to do to keep his support base but also lived morally by allowing Christians and Jews to revere their holy spots and maintain their place in the city. Even when the Crusaders made the Jews leave, Saladin allowed them to return (298)! 

On page 299, Armstrong comments on the effect that living under Saladin’s rule had on the Jewish people that returned.  She explains that although Jews were glad to be able to live there, it was not the same. They did not have control over their sacred spots and had to live under the constant reminder that this was no longer their city. I had never thought about it in these terms.  Living in a mostly Christian dominated country, I cannot even fathom not having everything geared towards my group; I always assume that we will not have school during Christmas and that I will be able to celebrate Easter with my family. It is hard for me to put myself in their place and imagine how a lot of people feel all the time. At least Saladin was respectful of their wishes, but I am beginning to understand the plight they must have felt during this time.

Reading Response for Monday, Sept. 26

Chapter 11-13 of Armstrong’s book were again very enlightening. I have used the term ‘interesting’ way too much, so I have to say they were fascinating. Armstrong’s story of the Muslim conquering of Jerusalem up until the Crusades is eye-opening and I feel like I am learning so much. Throughout these chapters, the Christians are presented in a very negative light- she mentions on several occasions the greed and the wealth some would accumulate and not share with their fellow Christians. This concept was very foreign to other groups in the city- especially the Muslims. Her comments reminded me of the discussion we had in class on Wednesday; many people commented that it is much easier to criticize your own culture than others. Although Armstrong gives a critical eye to all involved parties, the text makes it seem like the Christians were horrible people!

Speaking of being horrible people, I was very disturbed by the Crusades. Similar to almost everything in the book thus far, I had learned about them but did not go into much detail. I was taught it was more of a revival of Christian beliefs, and I had no understanding of the bloodshed and culture that continued once the Christians took control of the city. Armstrong tells us, “[the] Crusaders systematically slaughtered about 30,000 of the inhabitants of Jerusalem” and that “Muslims and Jews were cleared out of the city like vermin” (274). What ever happened to the rule about the people of the book? The Christians seem to have forgotten that at one point the Muslim rule allowed them to live with religious freedom! The powerful imagery of the other groups being pushed out like rats makes me cringe. The concept of a “holy war” continues to baffle me no matter how much I hear it. The manipulation of Jesus’s teachings for political gains is incredible. Aside from my complaints, I was also very interested in the life of the Franks after the Christians took control of the city. It seems as though this was one of the few times in the book Armstrong describes the Christians struggling with cultural identity and the temptation of assimilation. While the Christians reconstructed several holy cities throughout the city, some of them were very similar to the Muslims that surrounded them. Armstrong reports that some of the Christian even women wore a veil, something that I think a lot of American Christians would be surprised to know (289).

Nevertheless, although I continue to complain about the destruction the Christians forced upon people and the complete lack of respect, I should remind myself that this has happened numerous times throughout history and it is not something new. At some point, everyone has been marginalized and someone has been the bully. But does that justify their actions?

Weblog Journal Assignment 3: Class Blog Image

Although the class blog image isn't up yet, I remember the conversation that we had in class regarding the image.

At the end we decided to include a picture of Jerusalem with the dome of the rock in the background and across the top of the page have a series of different pictures from around Jerusalem. These pictures will be historical sights, and hopefully there will be an equal number of Jewish, Christian, and  Muslim sights. I really like this idea especially because at this point in the class we are focusing on the history of Jerusalem.

However, it seems more appropriate that we include something more realistic, such as the conflict. Although we are doing the history, there is no history without conflict. Despite this, I wouldn't want to include this because people have enough conflict in their daily lives to include it on the blog.

Reading Response Wed. Sept. 21

In chapters 8-10, Armstrong describes the beginning of the ‘new Jerusalem’ after the destruction of the temple, the changing religions and empires and leadership of the city, and finally ends with the foreshadowing of Islam entering the city. Although they were full of great detail and descriptions, these chapters were more confusing than previous ones.  Armstrong did a lot of name dropping and there are so many people involved in these parts of history that I found myself re-reading several sections to try to understand who was connected to who and who was in charge of what and who believed what doctrine and so on. The politics involved in these chapters was overwhelming; sometimes the Christians were ahead, sometimes the Jews were ahead. As we mentioned in class on Wednesday, the history of Jerusalem also, sadly, conjures up feelings of disappointment. As a Christian/Jew/Muslim, one expects their ancestors/forefathers to be people of good intentions and act in good faith. It is disheartening to understand the nitty-gritty aspects of creating a religious empire and the ungodly things that people sometimes do. I also was upset at the continuing theme of hypocrisy and the beginnings of anti-Semitism in these chapters. I counted maybe four or more instances of Armstrong saying something along the lines of ‘and an edict was passed and the Jews were again banned from Israel’. I had never really learned about the hate and violence between Jews and Christians; instruction usually focuses on the conflict between Jews and Muslims. I was also surprised by the bloodshed that accompanied these types of politics. When Eudokia allowed Jews to return to Jerusalem and celebrate Sukkoth, the Jews surrounded the Temple. Armstrong tells us, “they were attacked by a miraculous shower of stones which rained down upon them from heaven. Many Jews were killed on the mount; others died as they tried to escape, and their bodies filled the streets and courtyards of the city” (206). Those strong images show a bit of the ongoing battles that ensued as a result of changing leadership and the vengeance that both sides unleashed on each other. 

Overall, these chapters surprised me. As a Christian, it was extremely interesting to learn about the early church and the beginnings of Jerusalem as a holy spot for Christians. It was especially interesting for me to understand how the religion and the doctrine have changed so much from when they first began. Jerusalem doesn’t mean much more to me than understanding the geographical occurrences of bible stories; however, it was interesting that it began to become as sacred as the temple was for the Jews. Christians began to venerate these locations as if it would bring them closer to God, something that they had previously judged the Jews for. The tables turn often, and there is always a group that is the underdog.

Weblog Journal Assignment 2: This is Who I Am

 The above jewelry is my 'collection'. It is mostly all from Forever 21, but it shows my organized disorganization. It all looks like a mess but I know exactly where everything is!

 The Middle Eastern Dance hip scarves demonstrate my love of dance and curiosity different types of dance. I may not be good at it, but I try and I love it. I also have papel picado, showing my love of anything that seems 'international'.

 Most of my books explain my academic endeavors. I love learning anything new!

 Lots of cereal. Yummy.

 Living room and kitchen with our 'breakfast' picture. In our shared area my four roommate and I get a big kick out of it in the way it looks like a face.

 The food in the refrigerator is a symbol of something very important for me, healthy and fresh eating.

Finally, my London posters, poster of the world and Kuna Mola from Panama come from some of my most fun travels and experiences. In society we like to keep things from the past to be nostalgic about things that we enjoyed. My British friend gave me those posters the last time she visited me. I got the Kuna Mola when I went to Panama for a dance-oriented service trip when volunteers received dance lessons from the Kuna, one of the indigenous groups in that country.

Reading Response for Wed. Sept. 14

In Armstrong’s chapters 5-7 from the book Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths, there is a plethora of new information that both helps to understand the history and complicate it even more. Starting from the exile in Babylon, Armstrong describes the solidification of Jerusalem as the Jewish homeland and continues to describe the changing city as more and more ethnic groups and invaders come and go, and finishes with the destruction of the Temple and the diaspora of the Jewish people. 

In Chapter 6, as Armstrong recalls the Greek influence of Alexander the Great in Jerusalem, I was very interested to understand the influence that that time period had on the Jewish society. At the same time as some Jews embraced the new changes, some recoiled in the cultural differences and clung even more tightly to their Jewish law. For those that admired the Greeks, they took part in the idea of “Gymnasia” or physical fitness. Armstrong describes that all layers of Jewish society, be them priests or merchants, would take part in the male physical sports. In addition, the Jewish people adopted the Greek system of education and even gave their children Greek names. However, no matter how much some of the Jews respected the Greeks, their temple was still the most important for them, especially in the description of the Hasmoneans. Armstrong points out that their city was like a Greek city, but their temple was still the focus point of their lives. No matter how many times an invader or ruler came in and ruined their temple, they always rebuilt it and continued to hold on to their practices. 

Aside from the Hellenistic period in Jerusalem, I also found Armstrong’s description of Jerusalem with Herod as the ruler particularly interesting. Unlike some of the previous rulers or some of the Jewish people, Herod was ready to support all different faiths. Perhaps he only did it for political reasons, but nevertheless Armstrong claims he was “respected in the pagan world” (128). During his reign, there were over 120,000 residents in Jerusalem. Despite the fact he allowed for many different temples and religions, the Jewish religion continued to transform. In Armstrong’s report of the temples during this time, being in the temple was likened to being transformed into another being (132). The things that they considered “impure” could not be close to the temple: death, childbirth, and sex. I had known before about the impurity of sex, but I was not aware that childbirth had been considered sinful at some point. I feel very terrible for those women who had be looked down upon and judged for something as natural as giving human life. 

Armstrong gives great detail in these chapters and helps to further understand the implications of history and why they are relevant today. I was shocked by some of the information that she told, especially the section about Jesus; it was told in a way that I had never been explained to before. It is amazing that Armstrong can take herself out of the book and purely tell the historical evidence that is available.