Muslims guarding antiques?
Usually Islam is associated in the public mind with the wanton destruction of archaeological sites and remains - the Buddhas of Bamian are the prime example, but widespread looting of archaeological sites in Iraq and Iran, the attempt to destroy Persepolis on the grounds that it was not Islamic, and the activities of the Waqf authorities at the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem are hardly less blackening for the name of Islam.
It is pleasing, therefore, to report on the 15th anniversary of the Palestinian Department of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage, set up in 1994 to explore and safeguard archaeological sites in the Palestinian areas of Gaza and the West Bank.
If you read the Israeli press, you gain the impression that since the Intifada halted Jewish exploration of Samaria - the Jewish name for the West Bank - the area has become an archaeological wasteland. Nothing could be further from the truth. Despite a shortage of both money and skilled personnel, the DACH has carried out over 500 rescue "digs". Among the sites excavated are the Khirbet Bal'ama water tunnel - a 374' long water tunnel that rivals the water systems of Megiddo and Hazor, tombs from a variety of periods and in numerous locations, an 8th century sugar factory near Jericho, the monastery of Bir el-Hammam on Mt Gerizim, the church of Jabalia in the Gaza Strip as well as the ancient port of Anthedon in Gaza itself.
One of the more interesting projects is the preservation of the winter palace of Caliph Hisham at Jericho, which involved building a replica of the palace in its heyday. I rather doubt that the replica incorporates the ornamental stonework or the life-size terracotta semi-nude female dancers of the original, but it certainly shows what Islamic architecture was like and how it made the best use of the site in order to keep the building as cool and airey as possible.
This particular project perhaps exemplifies the difference between the Israeli and the Palestinian approaches to archaeology. In Israel, anything Jewish is treated with almost religious respect while remains from the Christian and Muslim periods have to take pot-luck. The destruction of a Byzantine monastery to facilitate the building of an underground carpark still rankles: anywhere else the building would have been preserved - relocated, possibly - and that would certainly have been the case in Israel if it had been a Jewish ruin.
The Palestinians, on the other hand, are chiefly interested in discovering their Islamic heritage - and who can blame them? The fact that they have shown as much care over a Christian church is commendable but perhaps not surprising given that many Palestinians are Christians. It remains to be seen whether Jewish remains are treated fairly and appropriately - and I must confess that the actions of the Waqf in Jerusalem incline me towards a pessimistic view.
There is also the political aspect of archaeology. The first Jewish archaeologists to work in Israel were delighted to find places and objects that confirmed the historicity of the Bible, a delight that was shared by Christians and, to a lesser extent, by Muslims as well.
The second generation, however, came to interpret these discoveries as somehow confirming the Jewish right to the land of Israel - an unfortunate logical fallacy. If I go back to the house I lived in 30 years ago and find there an object I had lost, it confirms that I once lived there, but it does not have anything to say about my present right to live there. If I have sold or abandoned or otherwise terminated my occupancy of the house it may very well be that I have no right whatsoever to live there now.
Modern Jewish archaeologists who interpret Jewish remains in Israel as "proof" that they land belongs to them conveniently forget that in virtually every case those remains overlie the remains of earlier cultures - and if priority is an argument, then the land of Israel belongs not to the Jews but to the Canaanites and their linear descendants (who may well be the Palestinians!)
It is this political aspect that doubtless underlay the refusal of the Waqf to allow proper archaeological work in the Haram es-Sharif - and may even have been the motivation behind the work of stripping the area of dirt. It appears to be a curiously Muslim mentality to equate absence of evidence with evidence of absence. Even if every sign of Jewish occupation is obliterated from the Haram, the fact that the area is surrounded by Jewish remains demonstrates that the Haram was, as sane people of all faiths acknowledge, the site of the Jewish temple.
We can but hope that the DACH will not make the same mistake and somehow harness archaeology to their political cause. Archaeology is about the discovery of facts and it can only be applauded if that is done honestly, thoroughly and fairly. To ignore - or worse still, neglect - Jewish sites would be dishonest and while we understand the emphasis on Muslim sites and Muslim remains, we expect that the Palestinians will deal fairly with any Jewish sites in their area.
© Kendall K. Down 2009
