There is a lot of information given within these first few chapters of the book, Jerusalem: One City: Three Faiths, to take in all at once. Within these four chapters and Introduction, Armstrong sorts out some of the early beliefs and history of the region.
One point is made in the introduction that I feel must be remembered when looking at the political and religious claims on the city.
Armstrong writes that mythology has never had the intention of describing historically verifiable events that occurred. Rather, it serves as almost an ancient form of psychology. The myths are intended to give meaning or attention to realities that are too elusive to be discussed in a logical and coherent way (Armstrong, xviii).
Myths create 'sacred geography'. This means that regardless of whether or not a myth can be backed up by historical evidence, the believers in the story hold true to the tale. So this means, in relation to the claims over Jerusalem, that historical evidence, no matter how in depth, could not actually close the topic on who was there 'first'. The beliefs in the stories hold greater weight than historical events.
I do not believe that there is any solution that can be gained from determining who was there first. Instead, I think it is importnat to understand what it is people believe about the city of Jerusalem. Over time there has been so much political and religious doctrine influenced by this city, that it is important to mark how doctrines have changed.
No comments:
Post a Comment