Archaeological Views: Archaeology Adding to the Powder Keg

036

Among hundreds of academics internationally, David Ilan was one of a handful of Israeli archaeologists who agreed to sign a petition protesting archaeological excavations in the City of David, the most ancient part of Jerusalem. We invited him to write a column on his views in an effort to give a forum to different viewpoints in our pages.

In BAR we try to stay out of politics, except insofar as it affects archaeology, although we may not always be successful. Ilan’s column (below), however, crosses the line into pure politics. It is not so much about the archaeology in the City of David as it is about the funder and its political views. We do not intend to print responses to Ilan’s characterization of Elad, although it is certainly true that Elad is on the right end of the political spectrum.

Some of our readers may share Elad’s viewpoints; others may detest them. We are not taking sides in this debate. All we are interested in is whether Elad’s ideology has any effect on the archaeology it supports. All of the archaeologists mentioned in Ilan’s column are sterling, first-rate archaeologists, and we are confident that it does not.

Moreover, this is apparently the first time a dig has been publicly attacked on the basis of the politics of a funder. Evangelical Christians have provided major support for Israeli archaeology, the Reform Jewish college where David Ilan directs the school of archaeology supports the excavation of Tel Dan, and Tel Aviv University has accepted financial aid for its excavation at Megiddo from the most notorious antiquities collector in Israel, Shlomo Moussaieff. People may or may not agree with evangelical political positions or faith commitments; the same goes for Reform Judaism or the propriety of collecting antiquities. But there has been no objection to their financial support as long as the funders refrain from trying to influence the archaeologists or their archaeology. To my knowledge no one has ever suggested that this has occurred in these cases. There is absolutely no evidence that Elad has attempted to influence the acclaimed archaeologists who are working in the City of David, and David Ilan makes no such claim in the following column.—Ed.

Archaeology is flourishing in Jerusalem as never before. If you want to get a sense of the intensity of work, check out the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) Web site.¹ There will always be something about Jerusalem on the homepage, and a search under the word “Jerusalem” will bring up tens of entries about various sites excavated over the last few years. A good proportion of the IAA’s press releases concern Jerusalem (e.g., the recent press release concerning the rediscovered Hasmonean fortification wall; see Strata story).

If Jerusalem were a normal city, all those who love archaeology and history would applaud the myriad fascinating discoveries and keep coming back for more. But Jerusalem is not a normal city. And archaeology in Jerusalem is not only academic; it is a highly political enterprise with major economic implications. The current activity in the City of David is a case in point.

The results emanating from the separate excavations being conducted by Eilat Mazar (on behalf of the Hebrew University and the Shalem Center), Ronny Reich (Haifa University), Eli Shukron (Israel Antiquities Authority) and Doron Ben Ami (Israel Antiquities Authority) are providing lots of new data and loads of interesting, controversial interpretations. Viewed from a purely academic perspective, this is good for our field and our public; we thrive on disagreement.^a Much of this work has resulted in expanded tour routes and an elaborated presentation of the antiquities for an appreciative public. The number of visitors has risen steeply.

So what’s wrong? One problem is that the City of David National Park, unlike other national parks, is administered by an unabashedly political organization called Elad, whose chief goal is the Judaization of east Jerusalem. Elad has raised lots of money to finance archaeological work, but it has also pursued an aggressive program of removing Palestinian Arabs from their homes in the village of Silwan and settling these residences with Jews. This is done by outright purchase of property and by using the intricacies of the Israeli legal code to claim “abandoned” property. Whatever your political views, it is unseemly that such an organization has been given the franchise to run a national park. The tours given by park guides emphasize, in no uncertain terms, the Jewish historical narrative and Jewish precedence in the City of David. Almost 2,000 years of non-Jewish habitation goes virtually unmentioned.

Needless to say, the local Palestinian inhabitants are angry, worried and afraid of the Elad settlers and the ever-present security personnel. Archaeology is 086viewed by many Palestinians as a means of forwarding the settlers’ goal, which is essentially ethnic cleansing. The Elad representatives, and some excavation directors as well, will suggest that both the archaeological work and the enhancement of a major tourist venue provide much-needed employment for the residents of Silwan. But the residents of Silwan have little choice; unemployment is high, people are poor and there are mouths to feed. If they don’t do it, someone else will.

The City of David Foundation (i.e., Elad) maintains one of the finest Web sites you will ever come across: www.cityofdavid.org.il. An alternative site that investigates the problematic nature of Elad and examines the relationship of archaeology to people and politics can be found at www.alt-arch.org. Both of these groups sponsor tours of the City of David. I would recommend taking both and deciding for yourself which version you prefer.

Silwan, and east Jerusalem in general, is an explosion waiting to happen. And I think that archaeology is adding powder to the keg. We are riding roughshod over the Palestinians of Silwan, becoming enmeshed in the larger political enterprise of Judaizing east Jerusalem. I think that these fascinating new archaeological discoveries are coming at a moral price that is too high, and we may end up paying for it with future violence.

Among hundreds of academics internationally, David Ilan was one of a handful of Israeli archaeologists who agreed to sign a petition protesting archaeological excavations in the City of David, the most ancient part of Jerusalem. We invited him to write a column on his views in an effort to give a forum to different viewpoints in our pages. In BAR we try to stay out of politics, except insofar as it affects archaeology, although we may not always be successful. Ilan’s column (below), however, crosses the line into pure politics. It is not so much about the archaeology in […]