Lecture 18- 5/27/10

Today's lecture covered Jerusalem's rise throughout the Mamluk and Ottoman periods, eventually becoming the modern city it is today. Left without the protection of city walls, the Mamluk city was one in which religious significance reigned supreme. Lacking this protection, Jerusalem was no longer the administrative power seat it had been in years past, but rather left as a city whose importance was contained within the religious ideology. Within the Islamic and Jewish faiths (to a lesser extent, the Christian faith), the city came to become prominent in the spiritual realm, making up for its lack of administrative power with a connection to the religious imagination that made the holiness of the city unrestricted by its backwater role in the political and economic worlds.

During the Ottoman Empire, Jerusalem began to rise from the ashes. With its city walls rebuilt under Suleiman the Magnificent, the city once again gained political power, at the same time continuing to play a prominent role in the religious ideology of the region. Once again blessed with an upswing in building volume, Ottoman Jerusalem was made into a city clearly worthy of its claim as the third holiest in the Islamic faith.

However, the decline of the Ottoman Empire, coupled with corruption amongst local politicians, brought Jerusalem once again to its knees. This time, however, the decline in population eventually came to an end with the beginnings of the Zionist movement. With aliyah to the city now firmly engrained in the religious and secular ideology of the Jewish ethnicity, a return of Jewish population to the west side of the city served to once again make Jerusalem a Jewish-majority city despite its being under Islamic rule.

Lecture 17-5/25/10

Today's lecture covered a period of tremendous turmoil in Jerusalem, the Crusader period. Starting with the bloody conquest by these "Soliders of Christ" in 1099, Jerusalem underwent a nearly 200 year period of dramatic change, with the city falling back and forth between the hands of the Western Christian forces and those from the Islamic world. Although Christianity was in its formative years a religion deeply rooted in principles of peace and non-violence, Pope Urban II responded to a plea from Alexius I for mercenaries following several military losses by the Byzantine empire. In response, Urban makes a captivating (although to this day not completely transcribed) speech calling for "Holy War" to retake the Holy land from the "infidels" of Islam. Playing upon feelings of racism and a deep socioeconomic incentive (pursuit of fame and fortune), Urban's call leads to the formation of a massive Christian force that eventually takes Jerusalem in 1099.

After establishing the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem (with Baldwin I named as "King of Jerusalem" in 1100), the Crusaders began to re-transform the city into a Christian center, rebuilding damaged shrines, erecting new ones, and re-characterizing Muslim holy sites as sites holy to the Christian faith. However, infighting and a lack of incentive for Crusaders to stay in the city left the kingdom vulnerable, a vulnerability exploited by the legendary Ayyubid sultan, Saladin, who regained control of Jerusalem following a rout of Crusader troops at the Horns of Hattin on July 4, 1187 and then the complete surrender of the city on September 26 of the same year. Saladin's mercy in not replicating the slaughter that defined the Crusaders attack gained him a reputation for chivalry in Europe and the Islamic world alike.

But, the Crusader period did not end for another 104 years. During that span, the city bounced back and forth between Christian and Muslim hands, with each conquest leading to fatal infighting on the part of the city's new owners. Finally, in 1291, the last outpost of Crusader power in the Holy Land, Acre, fell into Muslim hands, bringing to an end the Crusader period and instituting a Muslim rule over the Holy Land that would last until the British occupation that followed the fall of the Ottoman Empire during World War I.

Lecture 16- 5/21/10

Today's Lecture dealt with the transformation of Jerusalem into a uniquely Islamic city. Following in the footsteps of a power vacuum created by the divide between the Roman West and the Byzantine East, the Islamic empire swept in and conquered Jerusalem fairly easily, instituting a rule that was uncharacteristically benign in its treatment and tolerance of religious views different from those of the Muslim conquerors.

However, while there was a level of benevolence at the center of Islamic rule, the building projects undertaken by these new rulers clearly had at their core a motive of making Jerusalem an Islamic city, using architectural prowess to assert political and religious authority over the local Christian and Jewish populations (Jews allowed back into the city).

During this building phase, iconic structures such as the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque came to dominate the Temple Mount, at this point known as the Haram al-Sharif. While Jerusalem was simply given the role of 3rd holiest city in the Islamic faith, the political usage of these magnificent structures also came with the added bonus of turning Jerusalem into a tourist attraction, not only bringing in multitudes of Christian and Jewish pilgrims, but now the added patronage of muslim faithful. Now in direct competition for "tourist business" in the form of attracting pilgrims with the holy city of Mecca, the Umayyad dynasty was creating internal tension between those open to the holiest of the newly conquered city and those unnerved by a challenge to the reverence for Mecca. This divide would leave the Islamic empire without a united front and thus vulnerable in the face of the impending Crusade attack.

Lecture 15- 5/18/10

Yesterday's lecture covered Jerusalem's role in the Byzantine era of the Roman empire. An era marking the city's transition into a fully "Romanized" city, Jerusalem during the Byzantine period quickly became a city whose primary religious function lay within the Christian faith. With the Edict of Milan legalizing the faith in 313 and Theodosius making it the state religion in 391, Christianity's influence across the Roman empire grew enormously during this stage of the empire's development. Spurned by the "first" pilgrimage of Helena (Constantine's mother), the city attracted flocks of Christian pilgrims during the Byzantine era, attracted by holy sites such as the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and the Nea ("New") Church.

However, the Byzantine era was also one marked by tension involving the entire Roman empire, tension rooted in both internal and external forces. In addition to the ongoing disputes over the orthodoxy (or lack thereof) that the new Christian church should adopt, the Roman empire itself was undergoing significant political turmoil. During the period, the expansive Roman empire was split, laying the foundation for the political and religious divide that would cement itself between the Christian empire centered in Rome and that which emerged to the east, in Constantinople (Istanbul). Ultimately, this political and religious schism would create a power vacuum leading directly or indirectly to the eventual conquest of the eastern empire (including Jerusalem) by the forces of Islam during the middle stages of the first millenia CE.

Lecture 14- 5/13/10

Sorry about the delay. Headed off to Phoenix right after class and forgot to recap. Anyway, Thursday's lecture moved beyond Herodian times and into the periods of revolt that brought to an end Jewish control or at least autonomous settlement of Jerusalem. Following Herod's death, Jerusalem and the Roman colony of Palestina fell into the divided hands of his 3 remaining sons. Unable to control the area, Roman rule quickly shed its autonomous nature and became more concrete when it came to its power of the lives of the Jewish people. With this control came dissent, dissent that eventually culminated in the 1st Jewish revolt of 66-73 CE. Although the Roman power struggle leading Vespasian to take the throne and leave the conquest of Jersualem to Titus delayed the inevitable Roman victory, Roman conquest of Jerusalem meant the total destruction of the Temple. With Jerusalem lost, the remaining Jewish fighters set up camp at Masada, eventually forming a suicide pact before the Romans could overtake the fortress. Although the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple began the Jewish diaspora that would last until the end of World War 2, remaining settlers experienced a 2nd Jewish revolt in 132 CE. Named for its leader, Bar-Kokhba (Simon Bar Kosiba), the revolt had some early success, but eventually ended in total failure.

With the 2nd destruction of a Jewish revolt, Roman emperor Hadrian asserted total control, banning Jews from Jerusalem (except on the famed 9th of Ab) and rebuilding the city as the Roman Aelia Capitolina in hopes of removing any trace of the former Jewish city.

Lecture 13- 5/11/10

Finishing up Hasmonean Jerusalem and moving into the period of Roman occupation (and thus the period of Herod the Great as well as that of Jesus), today's lecture described the Roman conquest of Palestine as a direct result of infighting and corruption among the Hasmonean rulers who had once been heralded as the saviors of the Jewish community. Plagued not only by sectarian dispute caused in part by their impossible claims to both the Judean throne and high priesthood, but also by political struggle amongst the royal family, the Hasmonean dynasty came to an end with Pompey's annexation of Palestine into the Roman empire in 63 BCE, establishing Hyrcanus II as the "puppet" ruler of the Jewish people (with no political authority). After the later installation of the Idumean ruler Antipeter, the Romans had clearly established rule over Jerusalem and all of Palestine, putting in place a leader whose allegiance to the Jewish community existed only because of the forced conversion to Judaism of his people by the Hasmoneans.

After Antipeter's murder, his son, Herod (the Great) ascended to the throne at the behest of the Roman occupiers. Famous for his elaborate building projects, Herod quickly became a ruler revered by the Romans for his ability to assert power over the conquered Jewish people. In the eyes of his subjects, however, Herod was a highly controversial figure. Although he used his knowledge of the Jewish tradition in order to ensure that his rule was done without (overly) offending the religious practice of the land, he was a reviled leader throughout Judea. His respect for the Jewish faith and ability to provide economic stimulus through extensive construction projects was balanced by an impulsive paranoia that led Herod to essentially kill anyone he felt even slightly threatened by, including his own sons. Thus, while Herod is known today as "the Great", his approval rating at the time more closely resembled that of Bush than it did of Washington.

Lecture 12- 5/6/10

Today's lecture covered Jerusalem during the Hellenistic and Hasmonean eras. During the Hellenistic period, Jerusalem was stuck in the middle of a territorial battle between the Seleucids to the north and the Ptolemies to the south following the death of Alexander the Great. Although the Ptolemies gained control of Jerusalem first and allowed for a significant amount of autonomy, the conquest by the Seleucid dynasty after the defeat of Ptolemy V at Paneas in 198 BCE brought a period of strict Hellenization to Jerusalem. This forcible conversion of the Jewish people to Greek religion and culture created immense internal and external strife, conflict that boiled over into the revolt known as the "Maccabean Revolt".

Led by Judas Maccabeus, "the hammer", the revolt brought down the Seleucid army through the use of brutal guerilla tactics and established a 100 year period of Jewish self-rule. While the revolt was hailed as a religious movement, the nationalistic ulterior motivation came out during the later attempts by the Hasmonean leaders to rapidly expand the empire, forcibly "Judaizing" conquered peoples. Eventually, the corruption within the Hasmonean dynasty (cant be both king and priest according to tradition) led to a complete loss of confidence among the Jewish people, fueling internal dissent that allowed for the end of self-rule around 63 BCE.

Lecture 11- 5/4/10

Today's lecture moved on from the exilic period and into the so-called "Persian" period in Jerusalem's development. Following his capture of the Babylonian empire, Persian King Cyrus issued an edict providing support for the Jewish return to Jerusalem and the rebuilding of the Temple.

While the biblical version proclaims Cyrus a messianic figure, reality probably falls closer in line with the characterization of a ruler intent on appeasing a people who were simply a nuisance in Babylon and whose presence in Jerusalem as allies to the Persian throne was of great value in Cyrus' attempt to curb the threat posed by the advance of the Greeks.

In addition to Cyrus' role in the characterization of the period, prophets such a Ezekiel played a prominent role in describing a period for which little archaeological evidence remains. Drawing upon the same themes within a sort of cognitive dissonance in the exilic period, Ezekiel talked about a dream in which a mobile reincarnation of the Ark of the Covenant appeared to him. This idea of a mobile god, conceived perhaps in an attempt to rationalize the destruction of the Solomonic temple, was integral in the movement from early biblical Judaism to the modern religion of today. In addition to the birth of the 2nd Temple, this growth of heavenly mobility played a key role in making the Persian period one of great significance in the development of Jerusalem, the Holy Land, and the Judaic religion as a whole.

midterm

Thursday's lecture was replaced by the midterm exam taken online. Wasnt bad, felt prepared.

I wasnt expecting as many picture-based questions, and thought that maybe a practice exam with a few sample questions that actually pertained to the material might have helped provide a better picture of what the exam was going to look like. Anyway, fair test no doubt.