Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T22:15:22.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CONTESTED HERITAGE: MULTI-LAYERED POLITICS AND THE FORMATION OF THE SACRED SPACE – THE CHURCH OF GETHSEMANE AS A CASE-STUDY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2015

MASHA HALEVI
MASHA HALEVI*
Affiliation:
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
*
Lachish 86, POB 422, Shoham 60850, Israelhalevimasha@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The article analyses the processes that preceded the construction of sanctuaries in the Holy Land through the prism of the Church of Gethsemane in Jerusalem, deconstructing and uncovering layers of political power struggles which led to its formation and present shape. This study, based on extensive archival research and a field survey, demonstrates how the reconstruction of the basilica of Gethsemane, and hence the concretization in stone of some of the most depicted evangelical traditions, was not merely the result of an ecumenical consideration. In fact, it reflects the narrow, and sometimes very down-to-earth, interests of various denominations and political forces. The study also demonstrates how the unique setting of the Holy Land encouraged simultaneous multi-layered political processes, comparing the case-study of the Church of Gethsemane to those of other symbolic and national religious monuments: the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, the basilica of Sacré-Coeur in Paris, and the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 58 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 1031 - 1058
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 R. Cohen, Saving the Holy Sepulchre: how rival Christians came together to rescue their holiest shrine (Oxford, 2008); Harvey, D., ‘Monument and myth’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 69 (1979), pp. 362–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sidorov, D., ‘National monumentalization and the politics of scale: the resurrections of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90 (2000), pp. 548–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Eusebius, Onomasticon, ed. J. E. Taylor (Jerusalem, 2003), p. 45; M. L. McClure and C. L. Feltoe, eds., The pilgrimage of Etheria (London, 1919), pp. 71–2; J. Wilkinson, Jerusalem pilgrims before the Crusades (Warminster, 1977), p. 158; D. Pringle, The churches of the Crusader kingdom of Jerusalem: a corpus (4 vols., New York, NY, 1993–2007), iii, pp. 98–103, 358.

3 C. W. Wilson, ed., The pilgrimage of the Russian abbot Daniel in the Holy Land, 1106–1107 a.d. (London, 1895), ch. xxiii; Pringle, The churches, iii, pp. 98–103, 358–65.

4 Diotallevi, ‘Pro memoria sul Getsemani’, 11 Oct. 1920, ACTS (Archivio Custodia Terrae Sanctae), File: Getsemani famiglia religiosa; B. Meistermann, Gethsémani (Paris, 1920), pp. viii–xii; Pringle, The Churches, 98–103; F. Quaresmio, Francisci Quaresmii elucidatio Terrae Sanctae (Jerusalem, 1989), trans. S. De Sandoli, pp. 163–9; Wilkinson, Jerusalem pilgrims, pp. 157–8.

5 Halevi, M., ‘Between faith and science: Franciscan archaeology in the service of the holy places’, Middle Eastern Studies, 48 (2012), pp. 249–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Razzoli to Schuler, 15 Aug. 1910, ACTS, File: Barnabas Meistermann. In the guide published by Meistermann in 1925, he also associated it with the place where Jesus left his disciples and to which he returned and was arrested after the prayer; see B. Meistermann, Guida di Terra Santa (Florence, 1925), p. 253.

7 Razzoli to Schuler, 15 Aug. 1910, ACTS, File: Barnabas Meistermann.

8 Razzoli to Schuler, 19 Oct. 1910, ACTS, File: Barnabas Meistermann.

9 The division of the traditions was not as clear and dichotomous as presented here, and there were pilgrims at nearly every stage who placed the agony in the cave and the arrest in the garden, and vice versa. The presentation here follows the opinion of the majority, and especially the perception of the Franciscans from the fourteenth century on.

10 F. Diotallevi and D. Fabrizio, Diario di Terrasanta: 1918–1924 (Milan, 2002), p. 78.

11 ‘Il nostril santuari’, La Terra Santa, 1 (1921), pp. 15–7Google Scholar.

12 G. Orfali, Gethsémani, ou notice sur l’église de l'agonie ou de la prière (Paris, 1924), preface.

13 ‘Il nostril santuari’; Diotallevi and Fabrizio, Diario, pp. 220–1. For more on the relations of the British administration and the Greek Orthodox patriarchate, see Tsimhoni, D., ‘The Greek Orthodox patriarchate of Jerusalem during the formative years of the British mandate in Palestine’, Asian and African Studies, 12 (1978), pp. 77–121Google Scholar.

14 Diotallevi and Fabrizio, Diario, pp. 399–403.

15 More about the period of the British mandate in Palestine can be found in R. Storrs, Orientations (London, 1949); G. Biger, An empire in the Holy Land: historical geography of the British administration in Palestine, 1917–1929 (New York, NY, 1994); Y. Ben-Arieh, ed., Yerushalayim bi-teḳufat ha-Mandaṭ (Jerusalem during the mandate period) (Jerusalem, 2003) (Hebrew).

16 R. Storrs, The memoirs of Sir Ronald Storrs (New York, NY, 1937), pp. 315–16.

17 C. G. Bartholomew and F. Hughes, Explorations in a Christian theology of pilgrimage (Aldershot, 2004), pp. 110–18.

18 N. A. Silberman, Digging for God and country: exploration, archeology, and the secret struggle for the Holy Land, 1799–1917 (New York, NY, 1982), pp. 8–9.

19 M. Halbwachs, La topographie légendaire des évangiles en Terre Sainte: étude de mémoire collective (Paris, 1941), p. 158.

20 N. Collins-Kreiner, Christian tourism to the Holy Land: pilgrimage during security crisis (Aldershot, 2006), p. 17.

21 Feldman, J., ‘Constructing a shared Bible land: Jewish Israeli guiding performances for Protestant pilgrims’, American Ethnologist, 34 (2007), pp. 351–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; S. Coleman and J. Eade, Reframing pilgrimage: cultures in motion (London, 2004), p. 51.

22 Robson, L., ‘Church, state, and the Holy Land: British Protestant approaches to imperial policy in Palestine, 1917–1948’, Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 39 (2011), p. 460CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Diotallevi and Fabrizio, Diario, 215. More about the Protestant pilgrimages and their attitudes to the Holy Land from the nineteenth century to today can be found in Ron, A. and Feldman, J., ‘From spots to themed sites: the evolution of the Protestant Holy Land’, Journal of Heritage Tourism, 4 (2009), pp. 201–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar; R. and T. Hummel, Patterns of the sacred: English Protestant and Russian Orthodox pilgrims of the nineteenth century (London, 1995); Collins-Kreiner, Christian tourism to the Holy Land.

24 Diotallevi and Fabrizio, Diario, pp. 202, 295.

25 Luke to Barlassina, 2 Sept. 1921, Israel Antiquities Authority, ATQ/1625, Israel; Barlassina to Gasparri, 6 Jan. 1922, Archives Propaganda Fide, Nuova Seria, vol. 755, Rub. 126, Prot. 371.

26 R. Storrs, Memorandum, 25 Aug. 1921, The National Archives (TNA), E 10039, FO 371/6397.

27 Dormer to Curzon of Kedleston, 20 Sept. 1923, TNA, E 9498/9498/65, FO 371/9016.

28 Dormer to MacDonald, 6 May 1924, TNA, E 4109/61/65, FO 371/10087.

29 D. M. Madden, Monuments to glory: the story of Antonio Barluzzi, architect of the Holy Land (New York, NY, 1964), pp. 44–51.

30 Harvey, ‘Monument and myth’.

31 Diotallevi to Van Rossum, 30 Apr. 1918, ACTS, File: Propaganda Fide 1906–36, Sub-File: Propaganda Fide 1918–19.

32 Germain, ‘Vœu de l'univers catholique au sacré cœur de Jésus pour obtenir la paix du monde dans la justice et la charité’, 15 Aug. 1918, the Vatican Archives (VA), Segretaria di stato, 1919, rub. 11, fasc. 2.0

33 S. I. Minerbi, The Vatican and Zionism: conflict in the Holy Land, 1895–1925 (New York, NY, 1990), p. 25.

34 A. Giovannelli, La Santa Sede e la Palestina: la custodia di Terra Santa tra la fine dell'impero ottomano e la guerra dei sei giorni (Rome, 2000), pp. 32, 46, 68–81.

35 Diotallevi and Fabrizio, Diario, pp. 55, 144.

36 Gasparri to Germain, 1 July 1919, VA, Segretaria di stato, 1919, rub. 11, fasc. 2.

37 Minerbi, The Vatican and Zionism, pp. 29–30.

38 Fabrizio claimed that the Italian character of Giustini's visit was more the result of the efforts of Count Monti, the unofficial Italian representative at the Holy See, than of Diotallevi. See Diotallevi and Fabrizio, Diario, pp. 68–9.

39 Giovannelli, La Santa Sede, pp. 24–6.

40 Minerbi, The Vatican and Zionism, pp. 29–31.

41 Some of the most important holy places in the Holy Land are in the joint possession of various Christian denominations, such as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem and the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem.

42 Diotallevi to Van Rossum, 23 Oct. 1919, ACTS, File Propaganda Fide 1906–36, Sub-File Propaganda Fide 1918–19.

43 Maglione to Gasparri, 5 Feb. 1930, VA, Segretaria di stato, 1930, rub. 311, fasc. 1; Valeri to Ottaviani, 4 May 1933, VA, Segretaria di stato, 1933, rub. 311, fasc. 2.

44 Halevi, M., ‘A pious architect and an Italian nationalist: Antonio Barluzzi and his activism in promoting Italian interests in the Holy Land’, Cathedra, 144 (2012), pp. 75–106 (Hebrew)Google Scholar.

45 ‘Il Monte Oliveto’, La Terra Santa, 14 (1934), p. 148Google Scholar; Barluzzi, ‘Appunti sui quadri da eseguire per la basilica del getsemani in Gerusalemme’, 1931, ACTS, File: A. Barluzzi Getsemani Tabor, Sub-File: Getsemani mosaici. Some relate to his architectonic style in Gethsemane as neo-Byzantine; see E. R. Norman, The house of God: church architecture, style, and history (New York, NY, 1990), p. 297.

46 ‘Dalla Palestina: Quadri di Passione i mosaici della basilica del Gethsemani’, Osservatore Romano, 73 (28 Mar. 1928)Google Scholar, ACTS, File: A. Barluzzi Flagellazione Dominus Flevit Gerico Monte Sion Naim, Sub-File: Giornali sui lavori in Terra Santa; ‘Nella basilica del dolore e della preghiera’, Almanacco di Terra Santa (1929), pp. 11–14.

47 Barluzzi to Bargellini, 14 June 1928, ACTS, File: A. Barluzzi Getsemani Tabor, Sub-File: Getsemani mosaici, Folder: Mosaici Facciata Getsemani (Concorso).

48 Barluzzi, Appunti sulle decorazioni da eseguire nella basilica dell'agonia nell'orto degli olivi al getsemani, 4 May 1931, ACTS, File: A. Barluzzi Getsemani Tabor, Sub-File: Getsemani mosaici.

49 Barluzzi, ‘Appunti sulle decorazioni’; idem, ‘A proposito dell'abside del Getsemani’, La Terra Santa 28 (1953), pp. 246–50.

50 Barluzzi to Paribeni, 4 May 1931, ACTS, File: A. Barluzzi Getsemani Tabor, Sub-File: Getsemani mosaici.

51 Barluzzi, ‘Appunti sulle decorazioni’.

52 Antonio Barluzzi to Giulio Barluzzi, 5 May 1931, ACTS, File: A. Barluzzi Getsemani Tabor, Sub-File: Getsemani mosaici.

53 Barluzzi to Migliorati, 24 Sept. 1935, ACTS, File: A. Barluzzi Getsemani Tabor, Sub-File: Getsemani mosaici.

54 ‘Notiziario: Nuovo musaico a Getsemani’, La Terra Santa, 24 (1949), p. 149Google Scholar.

55 ‘Il principe ereditario d'Italia Pellegrino in Terra Santa’, Palestina: rassegna di vita e di studi dell'Oriente cristiano, 1 (1928), pp. 55–74Google Scholar, ACTS, File: A. Barluzzi vita atricoli, Sub-File: Discorsi ed articoli sui Santuari di Terrasanta 1928 al 1952.

56 B. Monasterolo, La politica religiosa fascista e la Terra Santa (Chieri, 1928), pp. 152–3.

57 G. Morsani, ‘Le nuove basiliche del Tabor e del Getsemani’, Corriere d'Italia (1 July 1924), p. 3.

58 Several churches in the Holy Land (the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Mary's Tomb, and the Church of the Ascension in Jerusalem), among the most important churches for Christendom, are possessed by several Christian communities all competing over the same sacred sites, fighting for pre-eminence in the sacred places and bound by the Ottoman document of the Status Quo. Six Christian communities have rights of possession in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre; however, the three minor ones, the Ethiopians, Syriacs, and Copts, were not involved in the property arrangements of the church and were represented by the Armenians.

59 Cohen, Saving the Holy Sepulchre.

60 For other discussions on the rebuilding of Catholic shrines in the Holy Land, such as the Church of the Visitation or the Church of the Annunciation, and the conflicts which led to their reconstruction, see N. Kenaan-Kedar, The madonna of the prickly-pear cactus (Jerusalem, 2010).

61 Harvey, ‘Monument and myth’, p. 381.

62 Halevi, M., ‘The politics behind the construction of the modern Church of the Annunciation in Nazareth’, Catholic Historical Review, 96 (2010), pp. 27–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

63 Sidorov, ‘National momumentalization’.

64 Harvey, ‘Monument and myth’, p. 370.

65 Halevi, ‘A pious architect’.