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.

Reading Response for Monday, Sept. 12

In chapters 1-4 of Karen Armstrong’s work Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths, Armstrong shows the reader the BCE history of Jerusalem and the region of Israel. These chapters helped explain the history in greater detail than I have ever been given. It was interesting to hear the Bible stories and hear about people in the Bible from her historical point of view.  Her account of the history seems very balanced, despite the fact that most of her evidence comes from the Bible. She does not claim that anything belongs to a certain group; Armstrong simply informs the audience on what evidence exists and what scholars have been able to determine.  I learned very much regarding the development of Jerusalem and the early stages of the creation of Israel and the progress of religion in the region. 

In chapter 1, Armstrong discusses the creation of sacredness to people. She points out that despite modern developments and rationalism, one thing in our existence that still hasn’t altered is the importance of sacred places. In her description, a place becomes sacred when it is tied to our identity in some way. Somehow, these places are different than any other places we have been, and even if a person is not religious, he or she still holds certain physical locations to a higher importance than others. In the creation of the sacredness of Jerusalem, Armstrong describes King David’s creation of Israel as a holy spot. David made Israel an important spot but claiming it his capital of the United Kingdom of Israel and Judah. Not only did he improve Jerusalem from its prior status, but he made it the center of the religion of Yahweh. According to Armstrong, the Covenant of the Ark was hidden and protected in another city. David decided that he wanted to transport the Ark from this location to Jerusalem. History claims that this physical representation of Yahweh would not move by human force; it decided where it would move. David successfully had it moved, and this therefore showed the people and the believers of Yahweh that Jerusalem would become a sacred spot because it became the resting place of the ark. For this reason, Jerusalem became the important Jewish city that it remains today. 

Throughout the chapters, Armstrong alludes to several events or beliefs that resonate with the ideas of today regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. For instance, in chapter 1 she cites “Terror in stories of Jerusalem,” the idea that there is always two opposing forces in the city. There is the sea and the desert and the stark contrast between the two strong ideas. It reminded me of the two opposing ideas that would challenge the peace of Jerusalem thousands of years later. In addition, Armstrong also describes the state of Jerusalem and the phenomenon that “War was waged for the sake of peace” (18). This idea also echoes in modern day.  And the section that stuck out to me the most was when on page 31 Armstrong states, “As always the new creation depended upon the destruction of others- a motif that would frequently recur in the future history of Jerusalem.” In the Pressman readings from last week, he highlights the fact that in the creation of Israel in the 1940s and 1950s, Israelis wanted to cleanse their land of Palestinians to create their homogenous nation-state. The concept of coexistence seems like a lofty goal.

Finally, the description of the way people used to think and conceptualize ideas is very different than today. I was surprised to realize that in the early days of Judaism, King David still worshiped many gods. In addition, his son Solomon created the Temple, yet he also allowed for other pagan gods to be worshipped there as well. In contrast from the way God is viewed today, I find it fascinating that the creation of a Temple was incredibly important because that was where a human could communicate with the divine. In present day, the common thought is that one can communicate with God no matter where he or she is or what he or she is doing. The temple that Solomon built on Mount Zion became a manifestation of the people’s religious beliefs in Yahweh, but is still extremely different than the way people worship today. Most interestingly, Armstrong concludes this thought with her statement that the “Temple was an act of conquest, a means of occupying the Promised Land with divine backing” (54). It was not enough for the people to claim that Yahweh wanted them to occupy this area; they legitimized the religion and their beliefs through a physical structure.

The readings allowed me to visualize the region more and understand the history from 1000s of years ago that still has relevance to today’s world.

Reading Response for Wednesday, Sept. 7

The readings for September 7^th, “Jerusalem: Then and Now,” by Mick Dumper, “The History of Jerusalem,” by Rashid Khaladi, “Jerusalem: The Holy City through the Ages,” by Rehav Rubin, and “A Brief History of the Arab-Israeli Conflict,” by Jeremy Pressman, all give detailed accounts of the historical context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the implications of that in today’s world. In the article, “Jerusalem: Then and Now,” Dumper gives a historical account of the different conquests of Jerusalem and the different religions that all revere Jerusalem. He notes that the popularity and sacredness of Jerusalem must come from religion, because it does not have natural resources or a good geographical location (5). As all the articles touch on, Jerusalem belonged to the Canaanites, then the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Egyptians, Maccabeans, Romans, Arabs, Crusaders, then back to Muslims, Ottomans, British, then Israelites. This long string of leadership and different ethnic and cultural groups that have ruled the city make it an important site for many people. Most news articles support the idea that Jerusalem’s original citizens were the Jewish people. However, from the perspective of Rashid Khalidi, an Arab, the Palestinian people are the descendants of the original people, not the Jewish people. Throughout his article he reinforces the idea that much of history has been taught wrongly, yet people do not question its validity because it has always been said or told in such a way. It is interesting that Khalidi would have this different perspective because he is Arab, and it reminds me of people having told me that they were raised to believe Israeli is “their land” because they are Jewish. Khalidi must have been taught the exact same thing. 

The readings also discuss the present day conflict, beginning in the early 20^th century with the Zionist movement gaining popularity. The different authors more or less relate the same story, however, the usage of different words and the framing of the story differs. For instance, Pressman, Khalidi and Dumper allude to the ‘uprooting’ of the Palestinian people, and although they discuss some of the attacks carried out by Palestinians, mostly focus on the wrongs of the Israeli state. In Khalidi’s eyes, Jersualem still remains a highly segregated city where confusion reigns, while Rubin states, “Jerusalem, with all its municipal and political complexities, became a united city where Jews and Muslims, some secular and some religious could live side by side” (5).  The author’s background and religion has a major impact on how he or she views Jerusalem. 

Finally, in “A Brief History of the Arab-Israeli Conflict,” Pressman gives detailed accounts of the modern-day struggle for autonomy and Israel’s fight for recognition. In regards to the value of this reading, I believe that it gave me a lot of insight and information on matters that had previously been confusing. As the author explained the years leading up to the creation of Israel and how Israel has had so much success, I understand the disorganization of the Palestinian people and the organization of the Jewish people. Through this article I was surprised to learn about the extent that Palestinians have suffered. Loss of freedom, lack of economic means, and lack of citizenship among refugees all show the plight of the uprooted people. However, his article rarely focuses on the struggles of the Jewish people in Israel. Pressman also touches on two very important effects that the struggle has had on both nations. He states, “Palestinians still lack a nation-state, the basic unit of international affairs. They are widely dispersed, and the original generation that lost their homes in 1948 is gradually dying off” (14). He also highlights the struggle that Israel has: “…lacks a sense of normalcy with its wider region. Recognition, legitimacy, and normalcy remain elusive objectives” (15). 

I was interested in learning the different perspectives of the authors and how their backgrounds affected the way they saw the problem. Through the readings I also gained a better understanding of what the creation of Israel meant for different groups. What was liberating for some was a death sentence for others.