Last Class

History of Jerusalem is over, and I must say I enjoyed it very much. I love learning Jewish history, and since I already have a foundation of it, learning more is just easy and fun. And learning more about Islamic rule over Jerusalem and the Crusades was also a lot of fun, and very important.

I was a little disappointed in the last class. I think the professor got off on some long tangents and we weren't able to ask him enough questions about his views and stuff. And then all the views were like 'Centrist. Pro-peace. I love everyone." Like Professor Cargill said about the news, blood makes the news. It would have been more fun to hear Cargill take one side over another just for the controversy of it, but like most people, I am pro-peace. I am pro-Israel first, but the Palestinians like every other legitimate people in the world deserve their own state if they so wish. I don't know if I have talked about my views explicitly in this blog, but here is how I like to frame it.

There are two legitimate groups of people, with legitimate claims to the same peace of land, who have shown they can't coexist with one another. OK, lets break it down.

2 legit groups of people: I don't know anyone with an education who would say the Jews aren't a legit group. They share a common history, religion, cultural traits, holidays, much more so than Muslims and Christians. No need to waste time agreeing with everyone here. Palestinians on the other hand are much more complicated. We have Arabs who are the broad ethnic group over the region of Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, and other countries. The Palestinians are one type of Arab who have, over the past couple centuries, become their own distinct group of people through geography and shared experience. Arguing that the Palestinians are not a distinct group of people is fruitless and will only upset people, because they are and they are convinced of it themselves. We can't convince Palestinians that they aren't Palestinians, and we can only work towards peace if we accept that they are a legitimate group of people.

Legit claims: Jews trace their historical roots back to Jerusalem and the land of Israel. Jewish literautre, and canon tells us this, as does archaeology. Jews also as a group of people deserve their own coutnry to escape the persecution they have faced historically. Why has anti-semitism fallen since the creation of the State of Israel? Not because people are scared of another Holocaust, because there are only Jews in a few places. Israel has about 40% of the world's Jews. America, which historically has low anti-semitism, has another 40%, and then 20% dispresed in Canada, England, France, South Africa, Argentina and other countries. I believe there basically aren't enough Jews in most of the world for people to hate the Jews, and this has a lot to do with the creation of the State of Israel. Since there are few Jews in most places now compatred to 1939 and thus there is less anti-semitism. So basically the creation of Israel has cut down persecution of Jews, which is one of its goals and reasons it should exist. That point got lost somewhere in all that. Palestinian claims can be traced back over the last couple centuries. It is acknowledged in the Balfour Declaration, in the Israeli Declaration of Indenepence, in (many biased) UN declarations, by countries around the world. So Palestinian claims to the land. the problem is that these claims developed over different times and in different places. Zionism was born in Europe, Palestinian claims in Palestine. Israeli claims go back thousands of years, Palestinians only a few centuries. But who is to say who is more convinced and who is more deserving. The Israelis won the wars, many started by the Arabs, but that doesn't delegitamize the Palestinian claims. The land of Israel is still their homeland.

More often than not that they can't coexist: Let me clarify, the Israelis and Palestinians have coexisted in many places for many years. But Israeli history is marked by peace negotiations. Why? Because there is no true peace. There is cohabitation, but no real peace.

This is problem as I see it and its difficult. Its complicated. Things contradict one another. People don't get along. Not everyone on each side agrees. But such are people and such is the conflict.

I don't want to end my blog only speaking on the conflict because I don't believe the class was a giant context to the conflict. Jerusalem is much more today than a conflict. It is the center of Judaism. It is the home to hundreds of thousands of people. It is many ways a modern city, not like Tel Aviv, but still modern with universities, and companies, and McDonald's. I really don't know how to end not on a sappy note about Jerusalem being everything to everyone and we can hope for the future peace and all that and thats not how I want to end a blog.

So, the class was fun. I love history. I love Israel. I look forward to taking another class like this while at UCLA.

Joey

PS-I'm definitely happy to be mentioning UCLA as a way to close.

Modern Jerusalem

It's crazy how quickly we went from the Crusades to basically 1966 in like two classes. But Modern Jerusalem is a super exciting time from a historical perspective and obviously I'm biased so I enjoy it even more.

One thing I want to clear up. Professor Cargill made it sound like Zionism started with Yehuda Halevi (whose name can mean Jew of my heart which is kind of funny), and with Spaniards in the 12th century. That is not the way I have ever heard it. Those events had little effect on the greater Jewish population and their movement to Jerusalem. Not until the late 1800s do we really see Zionism taking root. I think Cargill could have done a better job explaining Zionism, what it is, how it varies, and different people involved in it. We have Herzl who wrote and "founded modern Zionism" like everyone always says. But Zionism existed long before Herzl. Zionism is really a much more Eastern European idea, created by Jewish who were bearing the real hardships of anti-semitism at the time. It was created for Russian, Polish, Lithuanian, Ukranian Jews. Herzl was a westerner by all accounts, born in Vienna, barely self identified as a Jew, journalist in Paris, didn't speak Yiddish-Western. As Chaim Weizman, the future first president of Israel, wrote about Herzl was really more of a glue, of a leader of Zionism that westernized and legitimized it, but he was by no means the founder. In many ways he moved Zionism away from it's roots, with the Uganda plan. It essentially took the 'Zion' out of Zionism. And it was greatly opposed and eventually rejected the Zionist congress. But all this was really happening in Europe and not in Israel. Israeli history sort of take places in two places during this time period-Israel and Europe. We have what is happening on the ground in Israel- Ottomans, British, settlements, Arab riots- and then we have what was happening in Europe with Zionism and anti-semitism- Herzl, Ha'am, Kishniev, etc.

The distinctions involved in the word Palestinian is also very interesting. I think it was Gold Meir who said something like 'Who are the Palestinians? We, the Jews, were the Palestinians.' The development of a Palestinian nation is very interesting. Obviously today they are a legitimate and undeniable group of people, but their origins is more complicated. Palestinians were separate from he Jordanians before 1948, and from what I know, if you happened to be from either side of The Jordan river, it would determine your nationality when in reality, those two groups of people were extremely similar. I don't know.

Excited for the last class. But I really enjoyed it and wish I could take it again. Maybe a near eastern studies minor or something....Who knows? I got lots to work on. Until next post. I'm planning on a nice large blog for my last post since I'll be done with all my papers.

Islamic Jerusalem

So last time in class, we finished early Islamic Judaism, skipped ahead and finished the Crusades and then did late Islamic Jerusalem. I love learning this stuff because I already knew a lot of the material on Jewish Jerusalem and modern Jerusalem so learning about Islamic Jerusalem is all new stuff and its very exciting.

OK, so Crusades continued until the 1200s. In 1221 the walls are dismantled leaving the city defenseless, and the population shrinks to 2,000. That was during the 5th Crusade. Then during the 6th Crusade, the Europeans retake Jerusalem and work out a 10 year treaty where they retain control. Two more crusades occur, and finally in 1291, the last Crusader outpost in Acre falls, and the all-star period of history known as the Crusades ends. Another sports analogy...Many great athletes stick around way too long past their prime. Muhammad Ali is a good example. He was the greatest in his time (no pun intended), but stuck around way too long. His last couple fights were knockouts where he really just embarrassed himself. Kinda the same with the Crusades, like we had enough. The first couple were really fun to learn about and then after Saladin, it was like "OK, lets move on. This is silly. The walls are dismantled. We're really just fighting over nothing. Can't we just make a treaty and move on?" Like, Ali should have just retired instead of keep on attaching Jerusalem. Seriously Ali...

The Mamuluks took over Jerusalem in 1250. The Mamuluks were a group of converted slaves. They were not a dynasty which is important to note. They sought out to make Jerusalem the religious center that it once once, and stressed the Ziyara or visit to Jerusalem instead of the hajj to MEcca.

Socially/politically/all that kind of stuff, Jerusalem became pretty insignificant. It had a small population. It wasn't on the main roads once again. Other cities bypassed it and it became a place for political exiles. The lack of walls made it totally indefensible. But the Mamuluks still took an interest in it, and tried to develop it. They built schools, hospitals, a hostel, developed the Haram, or Temple Mount, and built two new mosques. They also rebuilt the walls, and those walls are the walls that remain today. They also built a Qaranic school which was called the third school of Jerusalem.

In 1267 Ramban came to Jerusalem from Spain. Ramban, or Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman was a Rabbi in Spain and can be considered a Zionist. He founded the Ramban synagogue that attracted Jews from across the world, pulling them back to Jerusalem. He argued that aliyah was a commandment for all Jews, and he also helped develop kabalah, or spiritual Judaism.

Ottoman Jerusalem started in 1516 and lasted all the way till the end of World War I. The Ottomans were led by Selim I and defeated the Mamuluks in 1517, but Jerusalem surrendered in 1516. It was described as the new possessor of the qibla and under the Ottoman administration, it flourished in the 16th century. Sultan Sulieman the Magnificent ruled from 1520 to 1566 and was responsible for many of the public works in Jerusalem including repairs and enlargements to aqueducts. Sulieman also rebuilds the walls from 1526-1541. His work ensured that Jerusalem stayed #3 to Mecca and Medina.

During this period, the Western Wall was given to the Jews as a place of prayer by Sulieman. Thought it was important to note.

Only two classes left :(

Crusader Jerusalem

First, I enjoyed the guest speaker, and learning about the Crusades. I feel like we didn't cover it enough because there is so much to talk about, but maybe I'm just thinking about the Crusades as a whole and not just Jerusalem. I would also like to mention that there is crusader stuff everywhere in Israel. For instance, at the kibbutz where I stayed, there was an old Crusader castle called Belmont which is French means something like strong mountain or something. And when
I was hiking in the North there was just a random castle and I was like damn, that's cool.

Now to the material...

The crusader period lasted from 1099 to 1187. The crusades were inspired by Pope Urban II's speech in 1095, where he used lots of religious imagery and rhetoric against the Muslims, saying how they controlled their holy land, war, Christ, duty, responsibility, destined by God, all those cache words that inspire people. and so 1097, the peasant's crusade was launched and was ultimately squashed as they were not financed or trained compared to their Turkish rivals.

Eventually there were four principalities in the eastern Mediterranean- Odessa, Antioch, tripoli, and Jerusalem, with Jerusalem being the governing main center. By 1099, Godfry de Boullion conquered Jerusalem and in 1100, Baldwin became King. He established three quarters. The patriarchs, the Templar's, the Syrian, and The Armenian. He also set out to convert the Dome of the Rock, rebuild the Byzantine churches that had been in disrepair, and build new churches throughout Jerusalem. Today we located 42 churches that have been identified to the Crusader period.

Uhhhh, in 1197, Saladin won at the horns of Hattin. Pretty fun part of history I think. so much clash, emotion, Jerusalem, religion. Sort of like how when people make fantasy basketball teams-Wilt Chamberlain, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Bill Russell, and Oscar Robertson all one team- its kind of like that with the Crusades. Popes, Jerusalem, Christianity vs. Islam, some win some lose, changes of power, heroes, famous characters. It's like an all-star game of history. And I think that is why it has such a lasting legacy and it is so remembered today. We always hear people using Crusader imagery in speeches and poems and books. Maybe not as much now because it is so sensitive and powerful, but that is what makes the Crusades fun to learn about.

Early Islamic Jerusalem

So, the early Islmaic Period covers from when Jerusalem wass taken over by Caliph Umar of the Ummayad Dynasty in 638 all the way to the Crusader period in 1099. There were three main dynasties that ruled Jerusalem this period. The first, like Im already was the Ummayad who ruled from 638-750. Then came the Abbasids who ruled from 750-969. After the Abbasids were the Fatimids who ruled from 969-1099.

We discussed the beginnings of Islam, Mohammed, Sunni, Shiite...

During the Islamic period, Jerusalem still maintained its status as a holy city. It at first retained the term Aelia city of the Temple, and then became City of the Holy House and finally as it is today, Al-Quds which means the holy, which it got in the 10th century. In 691 the Ummayads under Abd al Malik started building the dome of the Rock. The purpose was to direct pilgrimage from Mecca to Jerusalem. First, the Ummayads ruled from Damascus, north of Jerusalem and had a rivalry with the rulers of the Arabian peninsula and Mecca. So by building a pilgrimage center in Jerusalem, and closer to their population they attracted more business. It was much easier and cheaper to travel to Jerusalem than to Mecca to from Damascus. The al Aqsa Mosque was built between 705 and 715. Ramla became the administrative center in 712 during this time period. Ramla today is still a mixed city. I've been there, yay for Israel!

Geometry, architecture of the Dome....Blah blah blah Both the Dome and the mosque were frequently damaged by earthquakes. I think it was most interesting that it was designed by Christian architects because the rulers wanted the best people to design the shrine.

OK, I'm done. This was short but I feel like I know about the history of Dome of the Rock, and its design because I took art history, where we discussed Islamic art a lot. I think we should gone more into how Jerusalem changed during these time periods Fatamid, Ummayad, and Abbasids..i.e. demographics, economics, internal events...sweet. OK, now I'm done.

Byzantine Jerusalem

We really didn't get into Byzantine Jerusalem till the very end. I think a better name for this class would be the Beginning of christian Jerusalem. It all starts with Constatine. There were Christians before Constatine, but Constatine was the people who really catalized the growth of Christianity, in mym opinion. In 313 he allowed Christianity to be a legal religion. In 324, Constatine held the Council of Nicaea to reconcile all the different sects of Christianity. As is today, there is a lot to argue about with Christianity. How much human is Jesus? How much God? What is the role of Judaism now? And all the different positions and levels of belief existed. If Constatine was going to use christianity to unite his empire, then he needed christianity to be united. So he helf this concil, and it is from this that the Trinity emerged- a theological concept to reconcile Jesus being fully man, and fully God. You could say that the Western view of Christ won out at this council over the Eastern view. the 7th cannon was also adapted which said that Aelia (Jerusalem) should have an honored position. This council was in many ways a move away from the teachings of Jesus. It also combines Church and State, a messy affair which is still attempted by many countries.

We also talked about Helena, who is the mother of Constatine. She was given the title of Augusta by Constatine, which means she mhad an important role in the governemtn. She went to Jerusalem to inquire about Jesus, and his life in Jerusalem. Mark Twain mocks the way she went about looknig for the cross, and the site were Jesus was crucified. but it was Helena who ordered the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the new axis mundi for Christians. I think by establishing a different 'most holy spot' christians helped break with Jews even more. For instance, Christians for the most part stay away from the Temple Mount and stay closer to the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. By not seeing Christians in Jew's holy spots, literally seeing, going to the Wall, and not seeing Christians, it reinforces a separation between Jews and Christians.

Jerusalem in Revolt

There were two big Jewish revolts against the Romans. the first was the Great revolt which lasted from 66-70 or 73 CE depending on how you look at it. during the Roman period there were sects of Judaism, the Pharisees, Sadducees, Esseenes, and the early Christians. The Sadducees were buddies with the Romans and believed that the Temple was essential to daily life and all that. Basically there were pro-Temple and pro-Roman. The Pharisees would evolve into the rabbis. They did not stress the importance of the Temple. they were also very disatisfied with the Roman rule but knew that any revolt they would lead would get squashed and the Jews would be worse offin the long fun. There were also religious zealots who stabbed people and were named after their knives, but I forgot their names. They believed in all out revolt. Then the Esseenes were sort of on the periphery. They were out of Jerusalem and were purifying themselves in the desert trying to make the messiah come and rescue everyone.

Basically the Pharisees were right. The revolt happened and the Jews were much worse off. The Temple was destroyed. But it gets worse.....

Before I get to that though, let me mention Josephus. Josephus was a Jewish general who was captured by the Romans. He convinced Titus that he was a prophet by telling him that one day he would be Emperor of Rome. Josephus had a lucky guess and was saved by the Romans. He was comissioned to write records on the Jewish wars and the revolts which have become one of the foundational texts about Jews, Judaism, and Jerusalem from this time period. Thanks Josephus. You really helped out us history folks!

OK, back to the timeline. 70-Temple destroyed. 73-Masada falls, the last stand against the Romans. A very interesting story. Fast forward to about 132, and we are in the Bar Kochba revolt. Bar Kochba was a genreal who peple thought was the messi9ah because he A) he had a bomb-ass name (Bar Kochba means son of a star, and he had Akiba who people thought was a prophet which is prophesized somewhere. It goes something like messiah son of David, and prophet Elijah in English), B) he was leading a revolt against the Romans, and C) people were desparate. But that got squashed too, and the results were much worse. I rememeber reading that loss of life ws much worse in the second revolt and in addition to that, Jews were banned from Jerusalem, and the land was renamed Philistina just to rub it in the Jews face that they lost. Philistina is like Philistine, David's ancient enemies. The modern word Palestine comes fromt this. So ya, bad stuff.

There's more...rise of the synogauge, Pontias Pilot, Herod stuff, coins stuff. But I must write the second post for today. Sorry for any typos.

Roman/Herodian/Jesus' Jerusalem

Today we talked about the origin of Roman Rule, Herod, and a little bit about Jesus.

Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II were fighting and then Pompey came in and was like, "Yo, I'm the Roman. Y'all are fighting. Now I'm in charge." So he besieged the city and annexed it for the Roman Empire. He also put in ethnarchs, or leaders of a certain ethnicity, which was Hyrcanus II because that is who Pompey intervened on the side of. He also installed an Idumean Antipater. The Idumeans were people who lived south of Judah and were forcibly converted to Judaism after the Hasmonean revolution. (I know it's not called a revolution but I'll call it that anyways.) So he installed one dude as the head of Jerusalem and then his sons, including Herod, for different cities around the area. In 43BCE, the antipater is murdered and Herod exacts revenge. In 37 he took control of Jerusalem starting his reign as Herod the Great.

So Herod did a lot of stuff. But I like the question of whether Herod was a good king or not? Its definitely a complicated question, because he did many great things but did them ultimately for himself and his glory and not for the people. He also was a paranoid freak. Professor Cargill said he had his wife killed but he failed to say that Herod also had her embalmed in honey, and then he had sex with her. Gross, I know. But that ultimately doesn't affect whether he was a good king of not. I would say that he was a good King because he is the one that we remember and talk about. We don't ever talked about any of the Hasmonean rulers except the first and the last.

I have to go write my paper for this class. I apologize for sleeping in class today. I had a quiz at 8 AM. The sleep conquered me.

Peace.

Hellenistic and Hasmonean Periods

We really flew by a couple hundred years of history in Jerusalem. These are some of my favorite periods, the second temple period in general is probably my favorite part of Jewish history. There is a great story about Alexander, that if we have more time, I think Professor Cargill would have said. It goes like this...When Alexander came to the gates of Jerusalem and was about to conquer the city, the high priest came out and said, "Hey Alexander, you can't enter this city. This is the city of the Lord and the Temple." Obviously Alexander could have squashed the city but choose to spare the city and never entered it. It was still a backwater compared to other places in Syria and Babylon and Persia. But because of the sympathy that Alexander showed, Alexander is the only name not in the Bible that a Jew can be called up to the Torah by. I think its pretty cool.

To the material. It goes like this. Alexander conquered in 332. He dies in 323. He divides his Kingdom into a couple parts. The Ptolmies, who ruled from Egypt were given Jerusalem. They rule until 201, when the Selucids defeat them. The Ptolmies were much nicer rulers than the Selucids. Then the Selucids rule until 164, which is when the Hasmonean/Maccabean revolt happens and the Jews kick out the Greeks and establish self rule in Israel for the last time till 1948. That is big. David ben Gurion once said that Jewish history stopped after the fall of the Hasmoneans and restarted when he founded the new state about 2000 years later. Pretty bold statement.

Also, it is so ridiculous that 70 rabbis could agree on the entire meaning on the Bible. I mean come on, its hard enough to find two rabbis that agree exactly on the meaning of one verse so the idea that 70 would give the same translation of the bible is actually comical if you think about it. Maybe you have to hang out with rabbis enough to really understand that. But it makes for a pretty impressive story, 70 rabbis producing the same translation. Haha, I like it.

I am about to get kicked out of the library. Jewish history is great. I love Jerusalem. We need more time to work on the paper!!! How bout an extension till the Tuesday of the next week? OK, awesome.

Joey

Persian Jerusalem

The Persian period of Jerusalem marks the beginning of the second temple period. After Judah was conquered Babylon, the Persians came through and conquered the Babylonians. King Cyrus issued an edict telling all the conquered people to return to their homelands. He even gave the Jews some money to reubild the Temple. But there were different groups of Jews who wanted different things. Some in Babylon wanted to stay in Babylon because they had been there for about 50 years, and had been accustomed to living there. Some wanted to go back to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple. And then there were also the Jews who stayed in Jerusalem who were like, hey what are you guys doing? We don't need a Temple and we were doing just fine without you.

There are no non-biblical accounts of Jerusalem in this time period. So in class today, we really focused on the Bible, particuarly Ezekial, Haggai, and Isaiah. Ezekial is the big dramatic, post apocolyptic messenger. A lot of what he describes and prophesizes from Bablyon we can't really see and make a rendering of. But he recreates the idea of a mobile God that can exist without a Temple. The recreation of this idea creates another problem. If God can exist without a Temple or shrine, why do we really need the Temple? It's part of the idea of cognitive dissonance. Conflicting ideas of God, mobility, the Temple, and exile.

Short post today. Got a lot to do!

Joey

End of Josiah till 586 BCE

Where to start???

We finished covering the Lachish letters, went over some more archaeological evidence of when the Bible could have been written/compiled, learned about Nebuchadnezzar, the death of of Josiah, the exile of the Jews, the destruction of the Temple, and discussed how people dealt with/reconciled the broken promise to David/destruction/all that. A lot of stuff.

Quick Note: I'm starting to realize how much emotion was involved with my learning of Jewish history when I learned this stuff in Israel. For instance, the teachers clearly wanted to illicit a feeling of sadness when discussing 586 BCE. Here, we approached it much more unemotionally, which I think is more appropriate given the context. That being said, I naturally feel some amount of sadness when I learn about the destruction of the Temple. The Babylonian exile is one of the most important events in Jewish history (probably around 4th, just running through it in my head).

So now to the material...The evidence of the Babylonian exile is crazy!! The fact that there are less archaeological sites, less luxury items, arrow heads, burn layers, its totally crazy and makes me love history. Based on what we went over in class, the Babylonian exile seems pretty undeniable. In 597 BCE, the Babylonians exiled the King from JErusalem and put in the puppet king, Zedekiah. But he soon rebelled and in 586, Nebuchadnezzar came back and was pissed off and totally sacked the entire city. He exiled everyone to Babylon and left only a few very poor laborers to basically tend the land. He destroyed the Temple, everything. The archaeological evidence that I was so excited about shows that before the destruction of the Temple, there were lots of luxury items and cities. But there are very few archaeological sites dated to after 586, and very few luxury items found after the destruction.

The question of what do the Jews do after the destruction of the Temple is a very good question. But I also think it is interesting if we are going to follow the Jews into Babylon because Jerusalem is now gone, or if somehow we are going to stay focused on the absence of Jerusalem. Luckily for the class there is only a few generation between the destruction and the decree of Cyrus that lets all conquered people return to their homeland. I won't spill the beans anymore.

But the reconciliation or cognitive dissonance is very interesting. Broken promises? No more land? And after learning more and seeing more of the psalms, I am totally convinced that they were written at different times by different authors. How else could they praise and exalt Jerusalem in one poem and then talk about weeping at the rivers of Babylon?

I kind of don't like learning about when the Bible could have been written because I do like to think that it was assembled at once and I feel that if we prove that it was assembled over time, then it loses some of its authority. But the pursuit of truth is what it is all about, even if I don't like it.

I think Professor Cargill emphasized that the destruction of the Temple is a major turning point in the history of Jerusalem and in the history of the Jewish people. Like I said before, when I learned this 2 years ago, it was much more emotional but Professor Cargill is smart to have the midterm at this point because 586, to me, is a major turning point. (And from my emotional side, the destruction of the Temple really really sucks. The broken promises to David and about the land are annoying, but the sacking of a city and the exile is what really sucks.)

I'm done for this post. It was kind of scattered. I really enjoy the class and like that we're getting more into history with hard evidence.

Hope you enjoyed it,

Joey

Hezekiah and Josiah's Jerusalem

This is going to be a quick blog post. I want to give blood and watch a lecture and get this done in the next two hours. So here we go...

The Assyrians, as badass as they were, did not capture Jerusalem. The Bible says that an angel came from heaven and killed I think 185,000 Assyrian soldiers. The Assyrian records say that King Sennacherib was outside the walls and had Hezekiah trapped like a bird in a cage. But in the list of the conquered cities, Jerusalem is missing. Awesome. So what did this do for the reputation of the city?

The Assyrian failure to conquer Jerusalem was the single greatest catalyst for the snowballing legend of an inviolable Jerusalem. Reason? Jerusalem was already a big deal to the Jews but it was a very backwater kind of town to most of the world. This event probably spread the word of Jerusalem across the Middle East and it became known to other people as the city that withstood the Assyrians. In other words, it helped put Jerusalem on the map for other people, not just Israelites and Judaens, Jews.

This also led to Zion theology which is the idea that the prophecies written about Jerusalem were written after Hezekiah withstood the Assyrain siege.They are all over 2 Kings 21, and they really talk about "for the sake of my servant David." In other words, it backs up the promise that God made to David, that his throne and line will be everlasting. Scholars (can someone tell me who scholar are? Rabbis are scholars, nachon? Not just professors?) argue about the exact chronology of all these events and the dates they were written and assembled and all that.

Three paragraphs. I'm done. Sweet. I'm done ten minutes after class ended. We covered more. I really enjoyed class today.

Hezekiah's Jerusalem

We just got out about ten minutes ago. I hope I can always post immediately after like this. OK, here we go....

I would say the main thing we went over today in class was the badassness of the Assyrian Empire. Basically Judah and Israel split up. Israel was more powerful. But both weren't major players in the whole Middle East so they tried to align themselves with the other guys, like Chris Bosh and um, how about Pau Gasol. (No one ever gives Pau or KG or Ray Allen shit for taking second fiddle and sacrificing for the potential of winning. And ya, I know Pau was traded but he went from Alpha Dog in Memphis to second fiddle in LA.) So, Israel gets buddy buddy with Assyria and Judah gets with Syria. Yes note the difference. The do this to protect themselves from the other major players like Egypt and just because you want to be allies with powerful people, just like today.

So 8th century Assyria is a big deal. They have all the fertile crescent which includes modern day Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq. They eventually conquer the northern ten tribes of Israel and those are the lost tribes. The Assyrians were pretty brutal with their treatment. They made public displays, artwork, and really tried to tell people "Hey don't mess with us." So Israel is conquered in 721 BCE by Sennacherib, I think. Then Sennacherib conquers Judah, along with some other places but doesn't sack Jerusalem because Jerusalem isn't really worth sacking. But Jerusalem starts growing. People flee from the North to Jerusalem. Farmers and small town folks come to Jerusalem for protection, because Jerusalem is a walled city and out in the country you have no protection. As a result Jerusalem grows from 8,00 to 40,000, a 400% increase in the 8th century. Thats a lot of people. It also becomes a bigger deal in terms of its power in Judah. It went from being 6% of Judah's population to 30% of the population.

This presents its own problems, just like all cities that undergo change. There is a conflict between rural and urban people. Cosmopolitans from the North and more traditional people from Judah. Changing family structure. New Religious movements. None of this is unique to Jerusalem. Dallas, LA, San Antonio, any city that has changes with its population, size, politics, demographics will undergo change in other areas, as well as social tension. People often dislike immigrants for no other reason than they are foreigners. It happens throughout history. Xenophobia is everywhere.

So, as Jerusalem is changing Hezekiah, the king of Jerusalem, decides he must fortify the city because it is becoming a bigger target for Assyria. So he builds the "Broad Wall' around the city. You can go to Jerusalem and walk through the old city and see where this wall was. It is marked on the ground. He also builds food storages to help withstand a siege. And then there is also Hezekiah's tunnel which helped pump water from the Gihon for the rest of the city. I asked the Professor today where they got all the water to support these people. What I meant was how did the Gihon, which we said could support 2,500 people, support about 40,000 people. Does digging a tunnel produce more water or does it simply make the water more moveable? Did they bring water from the North? Dig wells? I don't know.

Anyways, I'm done for this class. Hope you enjoyed this blog. I really enjoyed this class. It focused more on history and less on the bible and were also getting more into solid, proven history which I enjoy more.

Class from January 2o

Doesn't twenty look cooler written as 2o than 20? I accidentally typed 2o instead of 20 for the title of this post and think I am going to keep it. Anyways.........

Sorry this is from like 4 days ago. I suck. I know. Please accept my apology.

We went over 2 Samuel, why Jerusalem is sacred (kind of a major theme in the class), the temple of Solomon, Solomon in general, and thats pretty much it.

I think its very cool that the description of the Temple of Solomon (from now on Temple 1) matches other temples from the area of similar times. This type of evidence is called comparative evidence. For instance, Tel Arad has pillars standing inside, similar to what is described in I think 1 Kings. Scholars argue about what these pillars were meant for, perhaps phallic symbols like anything else. Perhaps monuments to other deities that Solomon was trying to please. Perhaps just decoration. While Solomon was wise, and not a warrior like his father David, he had many wives from all across the region. Naturally not all these wives were "Jewish." (I think at this point we can call the Israelites/Hebrews/ people of David and Solomon and Judah and Israel Jews. There is debate about this, whether it was with Abraham, at Sinai, during the United Kingdom period, but for the sake of simplicity, Am Yisrael will now be Jews.) They were on the religion of their local places of origin and so Solomon tried to accommodate this, even at the expense of his own relationship with God. I remember learning about the fertility goddess Astarte while on EIE. Astarte, she goes by other names, was the goddess of fertility that many people prayed to and they found statues of her in and around Jerusalem from around the time of Solomon. Once again, not evidence of the existence of Solomon but they statues are some form of historicity to perhaps give some credence to the biblical account.

We also talked about Ain Dara. At Ain Dara, archaeologists discovered large footsteps leading to the main alter. The first slab had two foot prints and the second slab only one. Some think that it could be God walking into his temple. I don't know how this matches the description of Solomon's Temple but it could be evidence of similar concepts regarding the Temple. The Temple was supposed to be the place that God physically resided, like a house. If the footsteps at Ain Dara were supposed to be the footsteps of a deity, then it shows that the people of Ain Dara believed that their God resided in that temple. Again, this shows similarities between Solomon's Temple and the other places of worship in the region.

Last thing- 2 Samuel 7 is apparently the most important verse in the bible for messianism, In 2 Samuel, God promises that his throne will last forever. Of course, it doesn't and Temple is destroyed and the Jews are exiled and all that. So why did God lie? Or did he? And how do people reconcile these broken promises? Well, 2 Samuel has been a basis for messianism, and some people look to as evidence that Jesus is in the line of David.

OK, I'm done. I hope you enjoyed this.

Joey

Class from the 18th

Sorry I'm late posting this. I should have done it right after class but it definitely slipped my mind on Wednesday. But it was such a pretty day out and I was super tired and hungry so I just didn't get around to it.

So on Tuesday we began talking about the ark of the covenant. I have always been really confused on what exactly the ark of the covenant was. It is the box which holds the ten commandments fragments and possibly the instructions to the Temple of Solomon. Does it actually exist? Maybe, my guess is probably not. Did it ever exist? Maybe, maybe maybe maybe. But it would be pretty freaking sweet if it did. Like damn, thats the really fun stuff. When we find archaeological evidence for biblical stuff, thats the cool stuff. Like Tel Dan. I think if we found the ark of the covenant, that would be like the ultimate find. Anyways, David wanted to build a house to hold the Ark, but God was all like 'nah, its no big deal. Ive been chillin in my ark outside in the desert like the rest of the Jews for a while.' And david was like 'u got it boss.' So David didn't build the temple and instead God waited for Solomon to build it. I don't know if its in the Tanak or in the Midrash, but I believe its because of David's 'blood stained hands.' And God didn't want the builder to have 'blood on his hands."

We also went over some biblical parallels between David and Jesus. I think we have had enough of those and I feel like they aren't part of the history of Jerusalem, at least not in the period we are studying. They can wait till we get to the time of Jesus. But there are a ton. The procession for a king/priest through Jerusalem. Bethlehem. Underdog. Jesus's lineage goes through David. Theres a lot.

Then we also talked about how the Hebrew Bible is fairly consistent with other religions and mythologies of the Near East, which makes a lot of sense. Judaism is a middle eastern religion, even though we think of it not in the middle east for the majority of its history, and certainly for the last 1900 years.

Um, ya, I didn't take too much notes on Tuesday so that's it for this class.

Hope you enjoyed!

Joey

From a couple days ago

Last time in class, we went over Canaanite Jerusalem, which we said was pre-1000BCE and David's Jerusalem.

I really don't enjoy prehistoric history very much. Never really have. So I am going to skip to Joshua We went over the discrepancies in the Book of Joshua and how/if Joshua conquered Jerusalem. In some parts of the book it says that Joshua defeated the whole land and killed all the Jebusites and in other parts it says that the Jebusites and the Israelites coexisted in Jerusalem. Obviously some part of this story is false, if not the whole part. How could Joshua kill all the Jebusties and then live in Jerusalem with them? Some people look at this as evidence that the Bible was man written. I personally think "How could the Jews, after wandering in the desert for 40 years and with no military experience, conquer a city?" From a historical/practical/somethingical perspective that question must be asked.

The existence of David is controversial. Professor Cargil mentioned the archaeological digging under the neighborhood of Silwan. This is controversial for many reasons. Silwan is an Arab neighborhood. The existence of David, among other things, would provide more evidence of the ancient Jew's connection to Jerusalem, though at this point, I think Jews and Jerusalem are undeniably connected through history. When the professor mentioned Tel Dan though, I thought "Damn, that is fucking awesome." Like that is the coolest thing ever. Mentions of the house of David in ancient records. Its so cool.

The other big thing we went over was the origins of the Israelites from a historical perspective. Blah Blah Blah

I hate that I am only writing two paragraphs and change but I am sick and UCLA is on tv. Not my best blog post. I apologize. Tuesday's will be better. Until next time.

Joey

Sacred space, time, Jerusalem, and all that continued...

OK, so I just got out of my third history of Jerusalem class about 15 minutes ago. We continued with the same concepts of sacred time and space.

The first idea on sacred space that we touched on was how sacred space is often divinely inspired. Babel, the temple, Babylonian ziggurats, these are all examples of structures that have some sort of divine inspiration or instruction. Another example could be Noah's ark, which god instructed Moses to build with specific dimensions and a specific purpose. A lot of the same information was repeated, that Jerusalem is sacred, that it attracts different stories and myths, that it is a holy city for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (which will now be referred to as JCI in this blog because typing all three out is a waste of time. I hope no one gets offended by that.)

This class did focus more on specifically which myths and stories Jerusalem attracts and how it acts as an axis mundi. If I hadn't already studied Judaism and Jerusalem a little bit, I would probably get confused between all the references to Moriah, Jerusalem, and Zion. For any student who is reading this blog, know that they are all more or less the same. Mount Moriah = Temple Mount = most sacred, and contested, part of Jerusalem = Mount Zion. And we are really only talking about the Old City so far in class. Myths/stories covered today in class that are traced back to Jerusalem include the Garden of Eden, the Akedah, the burial of Adam, and obviously the Temples. Also, the construction of the Hell idea is traced back to Jerusalem. I had heard this idea mentioned but never explicitly explained. Basically the Hinnon Valley is the valley inn Jerusalem that goes around the southwest. In it, ancient Canaanite Kings were said to have sacrificed their children. After that ended, people dumped all their trash. It smelled like shit. fire, below, all this culminated in the idea of hell. Gai hinnon in Hebrew became gahennia in Greek which means hell.

I'm going to skip putting my two cents in about the Hebrew name for God.

The concept of sacred time was started today also. The sabbath is one of the most important parts of Judaism. It is major. I forgot where its from but the quote goes something like this, "the Jewish people have kept the sabbath and the sabbath has kept the Jewish people." Maybe a prayer. Jews consecrate one day out of the week for rest, but also for respect to God. the sabbath is the day of spiritual renewal, similar to how Eliade speaks of the New year. Jews celebrate a new year but every week go through a renewal, through the sabbath. My guess is I'll probably expand on this more in my paper, which is I need to start thinking more about.

I am sure I could type more but I don't like this keyboard. So on this note, good bye. I am excited to start Canaanite Jerusalem, even though its definitely not my favorite part of history.

Welcome to the blog!!

Hello all!!

My name is Joey Blatt, and for those who don't know why this blog has been created, it is for my history of Jerusalem class with Professor Cargill. I am super excited about the class and look forward to learning more about Jerusalem, keeping up with this blog, and everything about it.

First an introduction. (because like everyone I like talking about myself and so you will know who I actually am) I want everyone who is reading this blog from the class to have no questions about where I am coming from. So, I am a first year at UCLA. I am Jewish and have some knowledge about Israel and Jerusalem. During my junior year, I lived in Israel studying Jewish history, so I expect much of this class to be fairly familiar. Funny note: the only other blog I've ever written was about my time in Israel and here I am making another blog about a similar thing.

Second, I am writing this blog in a colloquial, simple, way. I do not intend for it to be technical. I am not trying to hide my bias. What goes in this blog will be my reactions, thoughts, and ideas about what happened in lecture. I will try to keep it focused on the lectures and the material but if I stray and write about oh, I don't know, his comment on shwarma and how it really is best off the street and Professor Cargill mispronounced it as "swarm," then I apologize but at least hopefully you the reader will find it somewhat enjoyable (Maybe swarma is the arabic pronunciation?)

Now to the material- Today in lecture we talked about sacred space, Jerusalem's geography, the importance of water, its central location, and mentioned a few key events with the Temple Mount. I think Jerusalem's sacredness as a place is a unique part of this world that has transcended through time and space. (whoa, technical) We've stressed how it is important to the three faiths but often people with little spiritual connections at all can feel it's power. To paraphrase what Neil Armstrong once said about being in the Old City, "I am more excited to be here in Jerusalem than to walk on the moon." Jerusalem is a big fucking deal, in other words, spiritually, politically,historically, through architecture, culturally, in any way. It is where Abraham is believed to have almost sacrificed Isaac, where Solomon built his Temple, where the second temple was rebuilt, where Mohammed ascended to heaven, where Jesus walk and did other things (don't really know what he did in Jerusalem other than get greeted with palms), and where many cultures have built cities and prospered. Sacred, no doubt. To someone who has studied western religion, even slightly, it almost goes without saying. But ya, everyone should get it by now, Jerusalem = sacred.

I really like how Professor Cargill stressed the importance of water with Jerusalem. Having studied this part of history before I know something about the Gihon spring and all that. But even today water is incredibly important in the middle east. My Jewish History teacher in Israel, David (pronounced with an Israeli accent like Da-veed. I didn't make that known in my last blog and readers read it the American way while I wrote it the Hebrew way.), said that the next war in the middle east will be fought not over religion or oil, but over water. It is important and contributes to the uniqueness of Jerusalem, both in terms of holiness and geographically, as Cargill pointed out. Israel is not a land of great rivers or bays, but of natural springs. Rain is extremely important. A little dinky spring, like the Gihon can form the basis for a much larger city, example A being Jerusalem.

Last thing I will touch on is the idea that Jerusalem is a magnet pulling towards it legends, ideas, myths, stories, and everything in between. There is so much description in the bible and in other ancient texts that is difficult to attribute to a specific location. But Jerusalem, with broad geographic features, and a long history is an easy place to attribute all these things to. It's an idea that I haven't heard before but makes total sense. It's been around for thousands of years, is a spiritual home to many religions, blah blah blah, and makes for an easy bowl to dump descriptions to.

I think I have wrote enough for this one post. I look forward to writing more. Congratulations if you read the whole thing, even though it could be much longer. I going to try and not just regurgitate the information from lecture.

And you are encouraged to leave comments!!!!! I know what you are thinking write now. "Hey that was alright. Oh look a comment. I'm not going to leave one. It might be awkward or weird or I don't know Joey." Well guess what, all comments are welcomed. They let the blogger know that someone actually read them and even if they aren't totally positive, I will still appreciate them greatly.

Now I'm actually done.

Joey