ArticlePDF Available

Pompeo in Silwan: Judeo-Christian Nationalism, Kitsch, and Empire in Ancient Jerusalem

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Intrigued by repeated visits of Trump administration officials to the archaeological tunnels at the foot of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, I examine the extraordinary connection between American and Israeli nationalism, "Judeo-Christian values," and Holy Land archaeology, and propose a "Pompeo premise" that equates Jewish antiquities and settlement with bedrock values of "Western civilization," promotes a political narrative of redemption (even if accompanied by massive violence) and relegates Palestinian Muslims to an ephemeral existence. The "recovery" of a "true" Jerusalem, purified of any Islamic content, beneath the contested, chaotic surface of Palestinian and Israeli Jerusalem is delegated to archaeologists, who have for the most part accepted their task.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
Pompeo in Silwan: Judeo-Christian Nationalism, Kitsch, and Empire in Ancient
Jerusalem
Raphael Greenberg
Zitiervorschlag
Raphael Greenberg. 2021. Pompeo in Silwan: Judeo-Christian Nationalism, Kitsch, and Empire in Ancient Jeru-
salem. Forum Kritische Archäologie 10:55– 66.
URL http://www.kritischearchaeologie.de
DOI
ISSN 2194-346X
Dieser Beitrag steht unter der Creative Commons Lizenz CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (Namensnennung – Nicht kommer-
ziell – Keine Bearbeitung) International. Sie erlaubt den Download und die Weiterverteilung des Werkes / Inhaltes
unter Nennung des Namens des Autors, jedoch keinerlei Bearbeitung oder kommerzielle Nutzung.
Weitere Informationen zu der Lizenz nden Sie unter: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de.
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-30952
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
55
Pompeo in Silwan: Judeo-Christian Nationalism, Kitsch, and Empire in Ancient
Jerusalem
Raphael Greenberg
Tel Aviv University
Abstract
Intrigued by repeated visits of Trump administration officials to the archaeological tunnels at the foot of the Temple
Mount in Jerusalem, I examine the extraordinary connection between American and Israeli nationalism, “Judeo-
Christian values,” and Holy Land archaeology, and propose a “Pompeo premise” that equates Jewish antiquities
and settlement with bedrock values of “Western civilization,” promotes a political narrative of redemption (even if
accompanied by massive violence) and relegates Palestinian Muslims to an ephemeral existence. The “recovery”
of a “true” Jerusalem, purified of any Islamic content, beneath the contested, chaotic surface of Palestinian and
Israeli Jerusalem is delegated to archaeologists, who have for the most part accepted their task.
Keywords
Ancient Jerusalem, City of David, Silwan, Judeo-Christian values, evangelicals
Zusammenfassung
In Anbetracht der wiederholten Besuche von Vertreter*innen der Trump-Administration in den archäologischen
Tunneln am Fuße des Tempelbergs in Jerusalem untersuche ich die außergewöhnliche Verbindung zwischen ameri-
kanischem und israelischem Nationalismus, „jüdisch-christlichen Werten“ und der Archäologie des Heiligen Lan-
des. Ich nenne dies die „Pompeo-Prämisse“, die jüdische Altertümer und Siedlungen mit den Grundwerten der
„westlichen Zivilisation“ gleichsetzt, ein politisches Narrativ der Erlösung fördert (auch wenn es von massiver
Gewalt begleitet wird) und palästinensische Muslime in eine ephemere Existenz versetzt. Die „Wiederherstellung“
eines „wahren“, von jeglichem islamischem Inhalt gereinigten Jerusalems unter der umstrittenen, chaotischen Ober-
fläche des palästinensischen und israelischen Jerusalem wird an Archäolog*innen delegiert, die diese Aufgabe größ-
tenteils akzeptieren.
Schlagwörter
Alt-Jerusalem, Davidsstadt, jüdisch-christliche Werte, Evangelikale
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
56
Introduction
One of American Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s last acts under the Trump administration, and perhaps one
of his first as an aspiring presidential candidate for the American evangelical right, was a whirlwind visit to the
high-profile, settler-run antiquities site of “the City of David” in Israeli-annexed East Jerusalem, in and beneath
the Palestinian neighborhood of Wadi Hilweh (Silwan), less than two hundred yards away from the Temple Mount
and the Al-Aqsa mosque. This dramatic act of political symbolism, which, as stated to the press, “highlighted the
more than 3,000 years of Jerusalem’s heritage upon which the foundations of both the US and Israel rest” (Kem-
pinski 2020), offers a clear demonstration of a religious-political ideology that continues to reverberate in Israel
and Palestine, even after the end of the Trump years. A plaque installed in the excavation tunnels by the embassy
and the Commission for the Preservation of American Heritage Abroad, mere days before the end of the Trump ad-
ministration, doubled down on the sentiment (fig. 1): “The spiritual bedrock of our values as a nation comes from
Jerusalem. It is upon these ideals that the American Republic was founded, and the unbreakable bond between the
United States and Israel was formed.”
Figure 1. The plaque presented to the City of David Foundation in a tunnel beneath modern Silwan (Matty Stern, U.S.
Embassy in Israel).
In dedicating the plaque, Ambassador David Friedman said: “In modern America, we are inspired by many monu-
ments that remind us of the history of our Republic. I’ve often wondered, what monuments inspired our Founding
Fathers. … I suggest that those monuments are located right here, in the ancient City of Jerusalem. We have given
this plaque to the City of David Foundation with the hope that it will prompt all who read it to think of the Judeo-
Christian values upon which our country was founded and how those values were inspired by ancient Jerusalem
and its inhabitants” (U.S. Embassy in Israel 2021).
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
57
In the following pages I would like to explore the source of the sentiments that underlie the extraordinary connec-
tion, demonstrated in these last symbolic acts of the Trump administration, between Christian nationalism, Israeli
national-religious ideology, and Holy Land archaeology. I will suggest that the repeated demonstration in the “City
of David” of allegiance to biblically-inspired American and Israeli exceptionalism promotes a bedrock premise of
the American Christian right, a “Pompeo Premise,” that implies, (a) western (white) supremacy and the invisibility
(or spectrality) of indigenous people; (b) a blanket justification of settler-colonialism; and (c) the adoption of Holy
Land archaeology as an institutional feature of the civilizing project and scaffold for apocalyptic world views.
By showcasing these ideals among the antiquities of ancient Jerusalem, under the auspices of the Israeli settler
right, in the heart of Palestinian Silwan, Pompeo and his envoys appropriate Jewish history as their own and as-
sert the centrality of the biblical-apocalyptic world view to their political identity. True to their self-perception as
a persecuted community, they join forces with their counterparts in the Jewish Zionist right to identify common
enemies, promote a “clash of civilizations” rhetoric, and defy the dominant reality of 1400 years of Islamic pres-
ence in Jerusalem. They are aided in their quest by archaeologists, who play the role of active accomplices (albeit
in a state of denial).
The “City of David” as a Locus of Colonial Appropriation and “Judeo-Christian” Rhetoric
On June 30th, 2019, the Israeli settler organization El’ad and their archaeological arm, the City of David Founda-
tion, which has been awarded exclusive rights to the management and development of the archaeological remains
in the heart of ancient Jerusalem, celebrated what might have been the apex of their success to date – the inaugura-
tion of the so-called Pilgrimage Road: a Roman-era stepped street, excavated in a tunnel cut several meters below
the modern surface, leading from the Siloam pool to the foot of the Temple Mount (the same tunnel in which the
ambassador’s plaque was later dedicated). The event, filmed and displayed on the City of David website, offers
considerable insight into the aesthetic, affective, and political setting of the excavations in the heart of the national-
ist politics of Netanyahu’s Israel and Trump’s America (City of David 2019).
In equal proportions a theatrical, political, and quasi-religious performance, the inauguration ceremony began with
a plenary in which speeches were made and credit assigned, continued with a symbolic wall-breaking (explained
below), and concluded with a tour for the most distinguished guests. In each of these three acts, the organizers
successfully merged and blurred the lines between the ideological, political, and scientific actors in the pageant.
As painstakingly enumerated by the hosts of the event, the select audience included the U.S. ambassador to Israel,
Friedman, the Trump-appointed ambassadors to Portugal and Denmark, GOP Senator Lindsey Graham, long-time
Netanyahu and Trump billionaire donors Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, Israeli government ministers, the Direc-
tor of the Israel Antiquities Authority and the Jerusalem District Archaeologist, officials of the Israel Nature and
National Parks Authority, a former mayor of Jerusalem, and many other officials and local settler-friendly digni-
taries. In the introductory session, conducted on the steps of an ancient pool decorated with theatrical backdrops
of “ancient” masonry and “biblical” scenery, brief speeches were interspersed with video clips of archaeologists
describing their work and with sentimental musical interludes based on biblical verses glorifying Jerusalem.
The speeches focused entirely on the political and affective aspects of the archaeological site, described by the
host of the event – spokesman and vice-president of the City of David Foundation Doron Spielman – as “the 600
most important meters for the spirit of Israel.” In a revealing “tell” that exposes the circularity of settler logic, the
archaeological video was edited to highlight the emotional and ideological commitment of the excavators and the
sentiments evoked in them by walking in the footsteps of Temple pilgrims, whereas the political speeches insisted
on the “powerful, irrefutable, undeniable evidence” imparted by “secular scientists”: a “truth” establishing both the
priority of Jewish presence at the site, the direct continuity between the past and the present, and the shared bibli-
cal ethos of western democracies. Several speakers made the connection between the antiquities and the reloca-
tion of the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. (Friedman: “Were there any doubt… about the accuracy, the
wisdom, the propriety of President Trump recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, I certainly think this [i.e.,
the archaeological evidence] lays all doubts to rest”). Most telling were the statements made by the head of El’ad,
David Be’eri. In addition to appropriating the entire work of excavation (“we discovered”, “we dug”), he strikingly
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
58
framed the act of excavation and reclamation as one of historic payback for centuries of Jewish persecution in the
diaspora, beginning with the Roman conquest of 70 CE, the horrors of which were said to have been witnessed by
the excavated street and its drains, and ending with the Holocaust. His speech concluded with the appearance of
his son, in Israel Defense Forces uniform, on stage, as the second generation of the Be’eri family to serve in one
of its touted anti-terror undercover units.
The speeches were followed by a choreographed performance in an installation built by the settler group inside
the subterranean excavations, beneath the houses of the Palestinian village. Here, Friedman, Sarah Netanyahu, the
Adelsons, Graham, and others took turns demolishing a faux-brick wall (apparently made of sheetrock) erected
across one of the excavated tunnels. This incongruous construction – red bricks have never been a feature of Jeru-
salem’s architecture – seemed to reference Hollywood portrayals of prison or ghetto break-outs; the sledge-ham-
mer evoked, perhaps, the picks wielded by generations of archaeologists and treasure hunters in tunnels adjacent to
these, or even those of the teams of laborers who carved the rock-cut Siloam tunnels 2700 years earlier. As crude as
it might appear, this set of actions is of a piece with the ceremony that preceded it, referencing the same amalgam
of sentiments related to Jewish suffering and redemption and similarly striving for emotional effect.
Figure 2. June 30th 2019 tour in the El’ad tunnels beneath Silwan: Sara Netanyahu at center, flanked by Senator Lindsey
Graham, Jason Greenblatt, Ambassador Friedman and his spouse, David Be’eri and IAA District Archaeologist Yuval
Baruch (Haim Zach, Government Press Office).
The third act in the inaugural ceremony was an archaeological tour, recorded in a remarkable photographed tab-
leau: staged in a large, reinforced concrete tunnel, the tableau is centered on the prime-minister’s wife, in bright
red, receiving instruction from IAA archaeologists and the El’ad team (fig. 2). With its interplay of light and dark,
its foregrounding of engineering technology, and its focus on elite patronage, it cannot but call to mind a more
modest, yet perhaps no less momentous, tableau recorded 150 years earlier, marking the inauguration of popular,
crowd-funded colonialist archaeology in Palestine: In a tunnel excavated but a short distance from this one, we see
the billowing white dress of a European woman touring the “galleries” excavated in 1867 by Capt. Charles Warren
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
59
along the base of the Temple Mount, illuminated by the lamp held by the gesturing archaeologist (another woman
is being lowered into the shaft, at left; fig. 3–4).1 “During the three years our works were open,” Warren wrote in
1871, “about four to five hundred visitors went over them…. [M]any people who went down the shafts perfectly
innocent on the subject appeared to be suddenly inoculated with unlimited enthusiasm.” Unlimited enthusiasm
seemed to be the order of the day for the 21st century visitors as well. “Honored to make history today with Mrs.
Sara Netanyahu, [U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Senator Lindsey Graham] and other dignitaries as we opened the
ancient pilgrimage road … Bedrock (solid) proof of the Judeo-Christian heritage and values that our two countries
share” tweeted Trump envoy Jason Greenblatt (@jdgreenblatt45 June 30, 2019).
There are several outstanding themes that emerge from the three-act performance of June 2019: the pathos and
kitsch that anchors both the settler strategy and the Trump-Netanyahu political axis; the peculiar and repetitive
use of the concept of Judeo-Christianity; and the evidence for the endurance of western imperial interests in the
antiquities of Jerusalem.
Figure 3. Charles Warren’s excavation team hosting visiting tourists in a shaft and tunnel adjacent to the Temple Mount/
Haram ash-Sharif (after Wilson and Warren 1871).
1 The centrality of the female gure in the tunnel group in the older tableau, I suggest, serves a twofold purpose: the rst is to
signal the domestication of the conquered space, after its subjugation by the pioneer excavators; the second is to highlight
the superiority of Western civilization, where women are “honored as equals”. Both these motivations may well be at work
in the present-day case, even if they are subordinate to the political program of the settlers and their supporters.
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
60
The deployment of national-religious pathos accompanied by kitsch – the triggering of popular sentiment through
readily familiar objects, images, and sensory stimuli (“simulacra of genuine culture”, in Clement Greenberg’s
[1939] formulation) – is relentless in Israeli national culture. In the ceremonies I have just described, kitsch takes
various forms: the “biblical” décor serving as backdrop to the speeches, the allusions to both Jewish victimhood
and to IDF military might, the sentimental musical interludes, and the demolition of the false brick wall. American
kitsch, exemplified by the bombastic bronze plaque and the ambassador’s invocation of the “monuments [that]
inspired our founding fathers” (resonating with the Trumpian fixation on statues and dramatic tableaus of power;
Hock 2020) is also on display. Reflecting on the relations between kitsch, the political, and the past, Eli Friedlander
(1997) suggests that the most troubling forms of political kitsch can be understood in terms of their presumption
to the transcendent, which he terms false sublimity, or “sentimentality that does not renounce the pathos of re-
demption and the sense of power associated with it” (Friedlander 1997: 383). This results in political action that
acquires authenticity by relating to a lost, glorious, and traumatic past. “Resolving to act in accordance with such
a mythical self-consciousness thus entails the belief that a lost past can be recovered through action. This move-
ment of recovery takes the form of repetition” (Friedlander 1997: 389); it is a repetition enacted as if in cyclical,
ritual, or messianic time, but with real-world, predictably violent, results. In the “City of David,” archaeological
remains and artifacts are immediately absorbed into already extant narratives and images that are easily packaged
as both familiar and sublime; once the stepped street uncovered by archaeologists is seemingly identified in the
writings of Flavius Josephus, once it has been populated with “prophets and kings”, Roman legionaries and Jewish
victims, the task of the archaeologists, the “secular scientists” is done. They have borne witness to the presence
of the transcendent that now exists not in the linear time of archaeology, but in a collapsed, cyclical time of ritual
repetition and redemption.
Figure 4. Detail of the tunnel in Figure 3.
As for the Judeo-Christian terminology, which crops up so frequently in the rhetoric of the American sponsors
of the event: while there are grounds to ascribe the original formulation of a Judeo-Christian ethic to Protestant
interest in the Hebrew Bible and the adoption of a scriptural basis for enlightenment by 17th-18th century political
philosophers (Lambropoulos 1993; Nathan and Topolski 2016), the current widespread use of the term “Judeo-
Christian,” particularly in American political speech, is closely aligned with post-WW II geopolitics, where it is
used in an Orwellian way to define ideological allies and rivals of the moment. Mark Silk (1984) and Warren Zev
Harvey (2016) show how, at first, in the 1940s and early 50s, the term was used to promote interfaith tolerance
in the face of overt or covert Christian antisemitism; at the height of the Cold War and into the 1970s, it was used
primarily as a counter to the atheism of the Communist bloc (this was also the context of the establishment, under
the Reagan administration, of the Commission for the Preservation of America’s Heritage Abroad – co-sponsors of
Friedman’s plaque – which was devoted to preserving Jewish heritage in Eastern Bloc countries). Notably, one of
the key figures promoting the concept of Judeo-Christian heritage in Protestant circles was the famed archaeologist
William F. Albright. Defending the veracity of biblical history through his scholarship, Albright found ready allies
in the Israeli political and archaeological establishment of the 1950s and 60s, for whom a literal, lay (non-rabbinic)
reading of the Bible was an important tool of modern nation-building (Hummel 2019). This was a marriage of
interests based on widely divergent ideologies that became a model for later, less scholarly and more overtly po-
litical collaborations. Since the 1980s, and especially in recent decades, “Judeo-Christian” has been used by the
American right to highlight its support of right-wing activism in Israel and its opposition to “secular liberals” and
the Islamic Other. In the context of the Jerusalem tunnels, it is a most convenient euphemism, allowing Christian
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
61
nationalists to express solidarity with Jewish nationalists – and vice-versa – in their antagonism to Islam, without
having to detail their widely divergent understandings of the nature of the Israel’s covenant with God and of the
messianic future itself (the Rapture of evangelical Christians vs. the Third Temple of the Jewish national-religious
right). And while Israeli government spokespersons and Ambassador Friedman have no trouble with the term, it
does seem significant that it does not appear in any El’ad texts, nor does it have an idiomatic Hebrew equivalent
(Ambassador Friedman’s “Judeo-Christian values” are translated in the local press as “values related to Jews and
to Christians”).
The political expediency of the term is underscored by its ham-fisted coupling to the archaeological setting, to the
dedication of the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem, and to the naturalization of American intervention across the globe.
For El’ad spokesman Spielman, the branding of archaeological remains in Jerusalem as American and western
heritage requires no justification or explanation: “The people of Israel have returned to Jerusalem, and the City
of David has also returned as an anchor of Western civilization” (Spielman 2019). This statement resonates both
with Ambassador Friedman’s odd reference, cited above, to ancient Jerusalem “monuments” that “inspired” the
founders of the American polity and with unapologetic 19th and 20th century imperial claims by Western nations of
the antiquities of the Orient as their “birthright and sacred inheritance” (James Henry Breasted, cited in Emberling
2010: 11). It also expresses a strong desire by the settler leadership to foster the perception that they are associated
with “the West.” In many senses, the Pompeo-El’ad paradigm can be characterized as a prime instance of “imperial
durability” (Stoler 2016), where 21st century local nation-state actors cling to the legacy of 19th-century colonial-
ism: the inevitable, scripturally and scientifically sanctioned exercise of western (white) supremacy by means of
colonizing settlement. Archaeology, then, reprises its role as a prop to western historical teleology and justification
for its civilizing project (Silberman 1982; Díaz-Andreu 2007).
Underpinning the settler-colonial and imperial project in Jerusalem and serving as a core precept of the Trump-
Pompeo doctrine, is the persistent exclusion of the Palestinian community of Silwan, whose homes and subsurface
are the backdrop to the archaeological-political performances just described. It is not merely that Palestinians were
not invited to the festivities, nor even mentioned in them (except obliquely, as those who would deny Jewish conti-
nuity); they are expressly called out as the Islamic Other that is to be confronted by “the Judeo-Christian tradition.”
Despite making up 95% of the inhabitants of Wadi Hilweh and close to 40% of the population of greater Jerusalem,
they are virtually invisible to the participants in the American-Israeli ceremonies and, by extension, to the con-
sumers of the multiple media presentations and prospective tourists. The structural harm done to houses along the
route of the tunnel excavations, including fissures and partial collapse, is, of course, ignored (Emek Shaveh 2020).
As has been the case since 1867, archaeology remains a physical and cultural threat to Palestinian Arab communi-
ties. It is used as a medium of ethnic erasure, prioritizing certain periods of history and dematerializing the rest.
In terms of the Israeli project, Palestinians are place-holders (Meister 2011); Arab lives, homes, and places are to
be reimagined as ruined or spectral (Leshem 2013; Mbembe 2019); something to be seen through or peeled away.
This spectralization is enhanced by its contrast to the archaeological project: houses built upon ancient sites are
candidates for demolition; their inhabitants are policed as trespassers; they are citizens of nowhere. They remain
outside the pale of the “Judeo-Christian” messianic plan.
The Complicity of Archaeologists
The progression from “archaeological” to “political” excavation in Bronze and Iron Age Jerusalem (widely known
as the City of David since it was first excavated in the early 20th century), has been chronicled and critiqued by
numerous authors. The frequent “value-neutral” characterization of the first decades of excavations in Jerusalem
has been exposed as disingenuous and steeped in assumptions of western supremacy (Greenberg 2018; Melman
2020); archaeology’s more recent undisguised recruitment for the Israeli nationalist cause has been deconstructed
and pilloried in academic and popular publications (e.g., Abu el-Haj 2001; Ricca 2007; Starzmann 2013; Green-
berg 2014; Paz 2014; Kletter 2020). But neither this exposure nor the more direct resistance practiced by Palestin-
ian residents and activist allies has had much of an effect on the ground or beneath it: The Israeli archaeology and
heritage establishment – the Nature and National Parks Authority, the Antiquities Authority, the Heritage program
in the Prime Minister’s Office, the Jerusalem Municipality, and even the Tel Aviv University Institute of Archaeol-
ogy – remains committed to the archaeological component of the Israeli settler agenda. I suspect that many of my
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
62
peers, here or abroad, are inclined to brush off any attribution of archaeologists’ complicity as misguided or politi-
cally motivated; archaeologists, they might say, should be judged solely on the scientific merits of their work, not
on the deplorable, but unavoidable, cherry-picking of finds by politicians or tourist organizations. Nonetheless, I
suggest that in a context of structural inequality, settler violence, and enduring western “Judeo-Christian” claims to
historic priority, where archaeology can either be practiced in support of the forces of oppression and destruction
and under their constraints, or refused as a form of resistance to them, my colleagues in the “City of David” have
chosen their side.
In fact, while politicians and settlers were most visibly cashing in on the heritage bonanza, it may reasonably be
claimed that the enablers and chief architects of the scenes enacted in 2019 and 2021 were archaeologists. It was
they who agreed to return to 19th century standards of tunnel-excavation in Jerusalem. It is they who, in the pro-
motional film that preceded the tunnel ceremony, proclaimed their excitement on being awarded the opportunity
to retrace the path of the ancient Jewish pilgrims. Above all, it is they who abdicated their archaeological integrity
by flattening time and space to the two dimensions of the stepped stone street surface: Soil sediments above and
beneath the street, the very matrix of archaeological interpretive work, barely merited attention, and by conducting
their excavation in a steel and concrete tunnel sheathe, they forsook its spatial context – what exists to its right or
left – as well.
To illustrate the extent of this abdication, let’s take a closer look at one of the central elements of the tale told by
both settlers and politicians, and note how it was enabled by archaeologists’ reductive, self-effacing presentation
of their own evidence. In the mid-aughts, excavations were conducted at different points along the route of the
stepped street, now marketed as the Pilgrims’ road. The excavations were awarded brief mention in a single peer-
reviewed publication (Reich et al. 2007). In that report, the excavation of a drain, climbing up the slope from a
point somewhat north of the Siloam pool, is described. Said to be of “varied” dimensions, the drain is reported to
have contained (at an undisclosed location) the remains of complete Roman-period cooking pots. Later excava-
tions, which tunneled through the debris above the stepped street, uncovered several points where the paving slabs
had been broken and removed, allowing access to the drain, which is, judging by a single published photograph,
about 40 cm wide and perhaps as deep. Seeking a literary reference to the drains in Josephus’ description of the
final battle for Jerusalem, the excavators found several mentions of “caverns” or “mines”, beneath and adjacent to
the city, into which hundreds of rebel fighters escaped in a bid to outwait the Roman assault and re-emerge when
it was completed. Josephus describes the Roman discovery of the treasure-filled caverns, “tearing up the ground”
above them and discovering “upwards of two thousand dead”. Setting aside the particulars of their specific ex-
cavation contexts and conflating the narrow, excavated drain with a separate system of large sewers discovered
nearby, Ronny Reich and Eli Shukron established a connection between their discoveries and Josephus’ “caverns,”
intimating – without evidence – that the slabs in their excavation are the very same as those “torn up” by the Ro-
man soldiers. By eliminating doubt and avoiding cardinal archaeological issues such as precise measurement,
sedimentation or stratification, they enabled all future narrators of the “Pilgrimage road” excavations to do the
same, thus laying the groundwork for the settler tale of tragedy and redemption, “proven by archaeologists.” The
restored cooking pots, glibly attributed to refugees hiding out in the drains, have been placed beneath the broken
slabs, and are now one of the highlights of the “Pilgrimage Road” tours, whether attended in person or online
(Anonymous 2020).
Archaeology and the Apocalypse
There is ample evidence that Pompeo and the Christian right viewed their political work in general, and the eleva-
tion of Donald Trump to the presidency in particular, as part of God’s plan. In the words of Mike Evans, a prolific
author and evangelical advisor to President Trump, “Israel has received a gift from God in an evangelical Secretary
of State, an evangelical Vice President and a President who is the most pro-Israel, pro-evangelical President in
American history” (RNS 2020). Pompeo himself was part of a White House bible study group that approached
international affairs in the spirit of “historical evangelism” and in the belief in everyday manifestations of divine
intervention (Timmons 2018; Wong 2019).
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
63
Several scholars and commentators have noted a deep connection between many of those who tried to overthrow
American democracy on January 6th, 2021 and this brand of evangelical Christianity, espoused by the Trump-
Pompeo administration and promoted in the tunnels of ancient Jerusalem. Thomas Edsall of the New York Times
cites Yale sociologist Philip Gorski, who attributes to Christian nationalists a narrative about American history that
postulates that “America was founded as a Christian nation; the Founding Fathers were evangelical Christians; the
Nation’s laws and founding documents were indirectly based on “biblical” principles, or even directly inspired by
God, Himself.” “Christian nationalists,” he continues, “use a language of blood and apocalypse. They talk about
blood conquest, blood sacrifice, and blood belonging, and also about cosmic battles between good and evil. The
blood talk comes from the Old Testament; the apocalyptic talk from the Book of Revelation” (Edsall 2021). These
concepts apply to nationalist visions of Jerusalem as well.
Observers of evangelical involvement in the Israel conflict have pointed to the Temple Mount as the primary focus
and meeting point for the Christian and Jewish-Israeli radical religious right (Gorenberg 2002; Inbari 2009). Given
the violent history of the conflict around the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif and al-Aqsa Mosque in the last two
decades alone, it is not too much of a stretch to assume that the application of continuous pressure on the Haram
by means of an ever-expanding network of “archaeological” tunnels is predicated on the belief that violence is in-
evitable and that a serious outbreak could be an opportunity for drastic change in the religious status quo. Violence
is thus not a bug, but a feature of both the Christian right and settler movements.
The repeated visits of members of the Trump administration to the heart of ancient Jerusalem show how central
the antiquities themselves are to the Christian nationalist playbook, no less than they were to the British Empire in
Victorian times. But where the Victorian-era empire envisioned Jerusalem as the crucible of a proselytizing Chris-
tian civilization (Bar-Yosef 2003, 2005), contemporary Christian (and Jewish) nationalism seems to be motivated
by desperation and offers (in its own terms) little beyond the prospect of conflict and apocalyptic doom.
Conclusion: Where Do We Go from Here?
On his way out the State Department door, Secretary Pompeo reaffirmed that Christian Zionism and Israeli nation-
alism are joined at the hip, and that both are anchored in the same fundamental premise: that colonizing Jerusalem
with Jewish settlers brings us closer to redemption (even if accompanied by massive violence) and that the pres-
ence of Palestinian Arabs in Palestine is ephemeral – particularly if they are Muslim. Remarkably, the repeated
locus of this affirmation has been archaeological tunnels excavated in Jerusalem. The “recovery” of a “true” Jeru-
salem, purified of any Islamic content, beneath the contested, chaotic surface of Palestinian and Israeli Jerusalem
has been delegated to archaeologists, who have for the most part accepted their task.
For many years, Christian evangelical interest and zeal in the archaeology of Jerusalem was seemingly uncontro-
versial, part of a multivocal chorus expressing different ways of imagining the city. Judeo-Christianity could be
understood as a relatively benign expression of moral aspirations shared by Christian and Jewish Americans (and,
by extension, Israelis). This fiction can now be dispelled: the evangelical program espoused by the Trump admin-
istration in Jerusalem is directly linked to a politics of moral superiority coupled with white Christian supremacy,
leading to an inevitable clash of cultures. We might thank Pompeo and his envoys for making that, and the stark
choices facing Jerusalem’s archaeologists, clear.
With Trump and Pompeo out of power (perhaps only temporarily), it might be tempting to think that some of the
urgency has been relieved and that archaeologists might resume their scientific work under less partisan condi-
tions. That would be dangerously naïve: the El’ad settlers have never put all their eggs in a single basket. They
continue to enjoy the sponsorship of the Israeli mainstream political parties and monetary support from American
Jewish and Christian conservative circles, while archaeologists build up the academic bona fides of their brand.
Even as I was writing this note, an email announcing fellowships awarded by a new center for biblical archaeology
at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, funded by a staunch ally of Israeli settlements and the American Trump
conservatives, landed in my inbox; and as I revised it, settler and police activities instigated a new round of vio-
lence in East Jerusalem and across Israel and Palestine. These academic programs, among many others that dot
the archaeological landscape, are poisoned gifts that ensure that the miseducation of young Israeli archaeologists
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
64
is not about to end and that their labor and reputation will be used to promote American and Israeli nationalist,
imperial, and apocalyptic agendas. The violence that engulfs us is a tragic reminder of the real-world consequences
of symbolic actions.
References
Abu El-Haj, Nadia. 2001. Facts on the Ground: Archaeological Practice and Territorial Self-Fashioning in Israeli
Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Anonymous. 2020, The Journey along the Pilgrimage Road in the City of David, the Heart of Ancient Jerusalem.
https://consent.youtube.com/m?continue=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DA
1XPG2856fI%26ab_channel%3DCityofDavid&gl=DE&m=0&pc=yt&uxe=23983172&hl=de&src=1,
viewed 13.5.2021.
Bar-Yosef, Eitan. 2003. Christian Zionism and Victorian Culture. Israel Studies 8(2): 18–44.
Bar-Yosef, Eitan. 2005. The Holy Land in English Culture 1799–1917: Palestine and the Question of Orientalism.
Oxford: Clarendon.
BBC 2020. Donald Trump Orders Creation of ‘National Heroes’ Garden. 5 July 2020.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53292585; viewed 13.05.2021.
City of David. 2019. Senior American and Israeli Officials Attend Inauguration of Second Temple Period Pil-
grimage Road in the City of David.
https://www.cityofdavid.org.il/en/news/senior-american-and-israeli-officials-attend-
inauguration-second-temple-period-pilgrimage-road-; viewed 13.05.2021.
Díaz-Andreu, Margarita. 2007. A World History of Nineteenth-Century Archaeology: Nationalism, Colonialism,
and the Past. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Edsall, Thomas. 2021. “The Capitol Insurrection Was as Christian Nationalist as It Gets.” New York Times, Janu-
ary 28, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/28/opinion/christian-nationalists-capitol-attack.html;
viewed 13.05.2021.
Emberling, Geoff. 2010. Pioneers to the Past: American Archaeologists in the Middle East, 1919–1920. Chicago:
Oriental Institute Museum.
Emek Shaveh. 2020. “Fissures and Cracks Damage to Homes in the Wadi Hilweh Neighborhood of Silwan.”
https://emekshaveh.org/en/fissures-and-cracks/; viewed 13.05.2021.
Friedlander, Eli. 1997. Some Thoughts on Kitsch. History and Memory 9(1/2): 376–392.
Gorenberg, Gershom. 2002. The End of Days: Fundamentalism and the Struggle for the Temple Mount. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Greenberg, Clement. 1939. Avant-Garde and Kitsch. Partisan Review 6(Fall 1939): 34–49.
Greenberg, Raphael. 2014. A Privatized Heritage: How the Israel Antiquities Authority Relinquished Jerusalem’s
Past. Jerusalem: Emek Shaveh.
Greenberg, Raphael. 2018. One Hundred and Fifty Years of Archaeology and Controversy in Jerusalem. In Sulei-
man A. Mourad, Naomi Koltun-Fromm and Bedross Der Matossian, eds.: Routledge Handbook on Jeru-
salem, pp. 363–376. London and New York: Routledge.
Harvey, Warren Zev. 2016. The Judeo-Christian Tradition’s Five Others. In Emmanuel Nathan and Anya Topolski,
eds.: Is There a Judeo-Christian Tradition? A European Perspective, pp. 211–224. Berlin and Boston: De
Gruyter.
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
65
Hock, Stephen. 2020. Memorializing the Future of Donald Trump in Amy Waldman’s The Submission. In Stephen
Hock, ed.: Trump Fiction: Essays on Donald Trump in Literature, Film and Television, pp. 79–96. Lon-
don: Rowan and Littlefield.
Hummel, Daniel G. 2019. Covenant Brothers: Evangelicals, Jews, and U.S.-Israeli Relations. Philadelphia: Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania Press.
Inbari, Motti. 2009. Jewish Fundamentalism and the Temple Mount. New York: SUNY Press.
Kempinski, Yoni. 2020. “Pompeo Walked through the Ancient City of David”, November 19, 2020.
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/291581; viewed 13.05.2021.
Kletter, Raz. 2020. Archaeology, Heritage and Ethics in the Western Wall Plaza, Jerusalem: Darkness at the End
of the Tunnel. London and New York: Routledge
Lambropoulos, Vassilis. 1993. The Rise of Eurocentrism: Anatomy of Interpretation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Leshem, Noam. 2013. Repopulating the Emptiness: A Spatial Critique of Ruination in Israel/Palestine. Environ-
ment and Planning D: Society and Space 31: 522–537.
Mbembe, Achille. 2019. Necropolitics. Durham NC: Duke University Press.
Meister, Robert. 2011. After Evil: A Politics of Human Rights. New York: Columbia University Press.
Melman, Billie. 2020. Empires of Antiquities: Modernity and the Rediscovery of the Ancient Near East, 1914–
1950. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nathan, Emmanuel and Anya Topolski. 2016. The Myth of a Judeo-Christian Tradition: Introducing a European
Perspective. In Emmanuel Nathan and Anya Topolski, eds.: Is There a “Judeo-Christian Tradition? A
European Perspective, pp. 1–16. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
Paz, Alejandro I. 2014. Guiding Settler Jerusalem: Voice and the Transpositions of History in Religious Zionist
Pilgrimage. Religion and Society: Advances in Research 5: 128–142.
Reich, Ronny., Shukron, Eli. and Lernau, Omri. 2007. Recent Discoveries in the City of David. Israel Exploration
Journal 57(2): 153–169.
Ricca, Simone. 2007. Reinventing Jerusalem: Israel’s Reconstruction of the Jewish Quarter after 1967. London:
J.B. Tauris.
RNS. 2020. “Secretary of State Mike Pompeo Receives Friends of Zion Award.” Religion News Service,
June 30, 2020. https://religionnews.com/2020/06/30/secretary-of-state-mike-pompeo-receives-friends-
of-zion-award/; viewed 13.05.2021.
Silberman, Neil Asher. 1982. Digging for God and Country: Exploration, Archaeology and the Secret Struggle for
the Holy Land, 1700-1917. New York: Random House.
Silk, Mark. 1984. Notes on the Judeo-Christian Tradition in America. American Quarterly 36(1): 65–85.
Spielman, Doron. 2019. “Israeli and American Dignitaries Unveil the Pilgrimage Road.” The Times of Israel,
June 30, 2019. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/israeli-and-american-dignitaries-unveil-pilgrimage-road/;
viewed 13.05.2021.
Starzmann, Maria Theresia. 2013. Occupying the Past: Colonial Rule and Archaeological Practice in Israel/Pales-
tine. Archaeologies 9: 546–570.
Stoler, Ann L. 2016. Duress. Imperial Durabilities in Our Times. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Forum Kritische Archäologie 10 (2021) Pompeo in Silwan
66
Timmons, Heather. 2018. “Trump’s Foreign Policy Looks A Lot Like Rapture Christians’ Plan to Trigger Apoca-
lypse”. Quartz, May 15, 2018. https://qz.com/1270516/jerusalem-embassy-trumps-foreign-policy-looks-
like-rapture-christians-plan-to-trigger-apocalypse/; viewed 13.05.2021.
US Embassy in Israel. 2021. Recognizing the City of David as a Testament to America’s Judeo-Christian Her-
itage and Founding Principles. Press release, January 18, 2021. https://il.usembassy.gov/recognizing-
the-city-of-david-as-a-testament-to-americas-judeo-christian-heritage-and-founding-principles/; viewed
13.05.2021.
Wilson, Charles. Wilson and Charles Warren. 1871. The Recovery of Jerusalem: A Narrative of Exploration and
Discovery in the City and the Holy Land. New York: D. Appleton & Co.
Wong, Edward. 2019. “The Rapture and the Real World: Mike Pompeo Blends Belief and Policy.” New York Times
March 30, 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/30/us/politics/pompeo-christian-policy.html; viewed
13.05.2021.
... The notion that the United States and Israel are core states of Judeo-Christian civilization played a role, according to Israeli academic and archeologist Raphael Greenberg, in American foreign policy under the Trump administration. Greenberg (2021) begins by noting the increasingly frequent, in his view, use of the term "Judeo-Christian" by "the American right to highlight its support of right-wing activism in Israel and its opposition to 'secular liberals' and the Islamic Other". He finds an extreme example of this in the visit of Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State in the Trump administration from 2018 to 2021, to Israel in November 2020. ...
... He finds an extreme example of this in the visit of Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State in the Trump administration from 2018 to 2021, to Israel in November 2020. Greenberg (2021) describes how Pompeo visited the "high-profile, settler-run antiquities site of 'the City of David' in Israeli-annexed East Jerusalem, in and beneath the Palestinian neighborhood of Wadi Hilweh (Silwan), less than two hundred yards away from the Temple Mount and the Al-Aqsa mosque". The "City of David" is a site claimed by some Israeli archeologists and the settler-run Ir David Foundation (or Elad) to be the city or citadel of David. ...
... Pompeo's visit to the "City of David" was described by the Trump administration as being designed to highlight "the more than 3000 years of Jerusalem's heritage upon which the foundations of both the US and Israel rest" (Kempinski 2020). In this way, Greenberg observes, the visit offered "a clear demonstration of a religious-political ideology that continues to reverberate in Israel and Palestine, even after the end of the Trump years" (Greenberg 2021). According to Greenberg (2021), the American embassy installed a plaque in the City of David's evacuation tunnels shortly before Pompeo's visit, which reads "The spiritual bedrock of our values as a nation comes from Jerusalem. ...
Article
Full-text available
This article tests the salience of the concept of “civilizational populism” in the European and North American contexts. Right-wing populism is increasingly successful across a range of countries in Europe and North America. While right-wing populism is oriented toward nationalism and nativism, many right-wing populist parties increasingly perceive, as Brubaker puts it, the “opposition between self and other” and “the boundaries of belonging” not in narrow “national but in broader civilizational terms”. Yilmaz and Morieson describe this phenomenon as “civilizational populism”. Using Cas Mudde’s ideological/ideational definition of populism, Yilmaz and Morieson describe civilizational populism as “a group of ideas that together considers that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale (general will) of the people, and society to be ultimately separated into two homogenous and antagonistic groups, ‘the pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt elite’ who collaborate with the dangerous others belonging to other civilizations that are hostile and present a clear and present danger to the civilization and way of life of the pure people”. Civilizational populism appears to be widespread across Europe, and it is also present in the United States, although there is curiously little research on this phenomenon, and Yilmaz and Morieson’s conception of civilizational populism has not been extensively tested. To test the salience of this concept, this article examines three distinct manifestations of civilizational rhetoric in three different countries: the Trump administration in the United States, National Rally in France, and PiS in Poland. The article asks the following two questions. What role does civilizationalism play in populist discourses? How do the civilizational populists in France, Poland, and the United States define “the people”, “elites”, and “others”, and what are the similarities and differences between the parties/movements examined? The article finds that all three parties/movements may be termed “civilizational populists” under the definition given by Yilmaz and Morieson. It finds that the civilizational populists examined in the article posit that “elites” are immoral insofar as they have both turned away from the “good” religion-derived cultural values of “the people” and permitted or desired the immigration of people who do not share the culture and values as “the people”, instead belonging to a foreign civilization—Islam—with different and even antithetical values. However, the article finds that “the people”, “elites”, and “others” are described by Trump, Le Pen, and Kaczyński in significantly different ways.
... It is not that expanding kingdoms or nations never invoked transcendent destiny to resettle regions and countries before colonialism or that noncolonial ethnostates haven't tried to ensure their ethnic majority through force, but it is a peculiar characteristic of European colonialism that tied together race and "manifest destiny" and then linked them to foundational ideologies of rational enlightenment and Judeo-Christian morality (a Christian, not a Jewish, concept, it must be stressed!) embedded in the antiquities of Athens and Jerusalem (see Greenberg 2021). Using a circular logic, the antiquities were cleansed of any accretions that were deemed extraneous, then used to anchor an essential and eternal moral superiority. ...
Chapter
This chapter examines three manifestations of populist civilizationism in three countries: the Trump administration in the United States, National Rally in France, and PiS in Poland. The chapter asks: What role does civilizationism play in populist discourses? How do the civilizational populists in France, Poland, and the United States define “the people,” “elites,” and “others,” and what are the similarities and differences between the movements? The chapter finds that all three movements may be termed “civilizational populists” under Yilmaz and Morieson’s definition. Civilizational populists posit that “elites” are immoral insofar as they have both turned away from the “good” religion-derived cultural values of “the people” and permitted the immigration of people who do not share the religion and values of “the people,” instead belonging to a foreign civilization—Islam—with different and even antithetical values. However, “the people,” “elites,” and “others” are differently described by Trump, Le Pen, and Kaczyński.KeywordsPopulismReligionCivilizationismCivilizational populismPolandFranceUnited StatesCivilizationism
Article
Full-text available
This paper examines civilizational populism in Israel and focuses on the largest and most powerful party in Israel since the 1980s, National Liberal Movement (Likud), and its most significant leader of the past twenty years, the populist politician Benjamin Netanyahu. We show how Netanyahu incorporates ‘civilizationism’ into his populist discourses by, first, using the notion that Jewish civilization predates all others in the region to establish the legitimacy of the state of Israel, the hegemony of Jewish culture within Israel, and at times his own political decisions. Second, through his portrayal of the Arab-Muslim world as an antisemitic and barbaric bloc that, far from being a civilization, threatens Western civilization through its barbarism. Equally, this paper shows how Netanyahu argues that Israel is akin to protective wall that protects Western Civilization from the Islamist barbarians who wish to destroy it, and therefore on this basis calls for Europeans and North Americans to support Israel in its battle for civilization and against “the forces of barbarism.”
Chapter
Full-text available
This chapter provides a review of the literature on civilizationalism, the ‘clash of civilizations’ thesis, populism, and discusses civilizational populism. It begins by discussing the concept of civilizationalism, first in the form of Samuel P. Huntington’s thesis that the post-Cold War international environment would be defined by clashing civilizations, and the influence of this theory on real world politics, and describes the flaws in Huntington’s theory. The chapter then discusses populism, describes the various approaches to populism, and explains why this book uses the ideational approach. Following this, the chapter discusses the literature on civilizational populism, and describes how scholars have so far located civilizational populism in Europe and North America, yet there is strong evidence suggesting civilization populism can be found in a variety of non-Western, non-Christian societies, including India, Turkey, Myanmar, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Israel.KeywordsPopulismReligionCivilizationClash of civilizationsCivilizationalismTransnationalismPure peopleEliteEmotions
Chapter
This chapter discusses Christian-based civilizationalism across a variety of societies. It begins with a discussion of the historical relationship between Christianity and politics, and the impact of secularization on European societies in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The chapter then describes the rise of right-wing populism across Europe and North America in the late twentieth and twenty-first centuries, and the manner in which right-wing populists have incorporated Christian civilizationalism into their populism. The chapter describes how Christian civilizationalism may incorporate elements of Christianity as a faith, or may be entirely secularized and perceive Christianity as the chief progenitor of national values. The chapter provides three case studies of Christian civilizational populists: Hungary’s Fidesz Party and its leader Viktor Orbán, the National Rally in France and its leader Marine Le Pen, and the Trump Administration in the United States and President Donald Trump.KeywordsPopulismReligionCivilizationCivilizationalismTransnationalismPure peopleEliteEmotionsChristianityChristiansHungaryFranceUnited StatesOrbanLe PenTrump
Article
Archaeology, Nation, and Race is a must-read book for students of archaeology and adjacent fields. It demonstrates how archaeology and concepts of antiquity have shaped, and have been shaped by colonialism, race, and nationalism. Structured as a lucid and lively dialogue between two leading scholars, the volume compares modern Greece and modern Israel – two prototypical and influential cases – where archaeology sits at the very heart of the modern national imagination. Exchanging views on the foundational myths, moral economies, and racial prejudices in the field of archaeology and beyond, Hamilakis and Greenberg explore topics such as the colonial origins of national archaeologies, the crypto-colonization of the countries and their archaeologies, the role of archaeology as a process of purification, and the racialization and 'whitening' of Greece and Israel and their archaeological and material heritage. They conclude with a call for decolonization and the need to forge alliances with subjugated communities and new political movements.
Book
The dream of building Jerusalem in England's green and pleasant land has long been a quintessential part of English identity and culture: but how did this vision shape the Victorian encounter with the actual Jerusalem in the Middle East? The Holy Land in English Culture 1799-1917 offers a new cultural history of the English fascination with Palestine in the long nineteenth century, from Napoleon‘s failed Mediterranean campaign of 1799, which marked a new era in the British involvement in the land, to Allenby‘s conquest of Jerusalem in 1917. Bar-Yosef argues that the Protestant tradition of internalizing Biblical vocabulary - ‘Promised Land’, ‘Chosen People’, ‘Jerusalem’ - and applying it to different, often contesting, visions of England and Englishness evoked a unique sense of ambivalence towards the imperial desire to possess the Holy Land. Popular religious culture, in other words, was crucial to the construction of the orientalist discourse: so crucial, in fact, that metaphorical appropriations of the ‘Holy Land’ played a much more dominant role in the English cultural imagination than the actual Holy Land itself. As it traces the diversity of ‘Holy Lands’ in the Victorian cultural landscape - literal and metaphorical, secular and sacred, radical and patriotic, visual and textual - this study joins the ongoing debate about the dissemination of imperial ideology. Drawing on a wide array of sources, from Sunday-school textbooks and popular exhibitions to penny magazines and soldiers‘ diaries, the book demonstrates how the Orientalist discourse functions - or, to be more precise, malfunctions - in those popular cultural spheres that are so markedly absent from Edward Said's work: it is only by exploring sources that go beyond the highbrow, the academic, or the official, that we can begin to grasp the limited currency of the orientalist discourse in the metropolitan centre, and the different meanings it could hold for different social groups. As such, The Holy Land in English Culture 1799-1917 provides a significant contribution to both postcolonial studies and English social history.
Book
Empires of Antiquities is a history of the rediscovery of the imperial civilizations of the ancient Near East in a modern imperial order that evolved between the outbreak of the First World War and the decolonization of the British Empire in the 1950s. It explores the ways in which near eastern antiquity was redefined and experienced, becoming the subject of imperial regulation, modes of enquiry, and international and national politics. A series of globally publicized spectacular archaeological discoveries in Iraq, Egypt, and Palestine, which the book follows, made antiquity material visible and accessible as never before. The book demonstrates that the new definition and uses of antiquity and their relations to modernity were inseparable from the emergence of the post-war international imperial order, transnational collaboration and crises, the aspirations of national groups, and collisions between them and the British mandatories. It uniquely combines a history of the internationalization of archaeology and the rise of a new “regime of antiquities” under the oversight of the League of Nations and its institutions, a history of British attitudes to, and passion for, near eastern antiquity and on-the-ground colonial policies and mechanisms, as well as nationalist claims on the past. It points to the centrality of the new mandate system, particularly mandates classified A in Mesopotamia/Iraq, Palestine, and Transjordan, formerly governed by the Ottoman Empire, and of Egypt, in the new archaeological regime. Drawing on an unusually wide range of materials collected in archives in six countries, as well as on material and visual evidence, the book weaves together imperial, international, and national histories, and the history of archaeological discovery which it connects to imperial modernity.
Book
Examines radical and messianic movements in Israel seeking to rebuild the Third Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple Mount, located in Jerusalem, is the most sacred site in Judaism and the third-most sacred site in Islam, after Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia. The sacred nature of the site for both religions has made it one of the focal points of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Jewish Fundamentalism and the Temple Mount is an original and provocative study of the theological roots and historical circumstances that have given rise to the movement of the Temple Builders. Motti Inbari points to the Six Day War in 1967 as the watershed event: the Israeli victory in the war resurrected and intensified Temple-oriented messianic beliefs. Initially confined to relatively limited circles, more recent "land for peace" negotiations between Israel and its Arab neighbors have created theological shock waves, enabling some of the ideas of Temple Mount activists to gain wider public acceptance. Inbari also examines cooperation between Third Temple groups in Israel and fundamentalist Christian circles in the United States, and explains how such cooperation is possible and in what ways it is manifested.