Western Wall museum plans threaten Roman relics, archaeologists warn
Jerusalem planning council to rule on controversial project that opponents claim would destroy valuable ancient structures beneath the Old City.
By Nir HassonJerusalem's district planning council was on Sunday set to rule on a controversial museum project that archaeologists claim would destroy valuable ancient structures beneath the Old City.
The new museum is planned for the concourse beside the Western Wall of the Temple Mount – Judaism's holiest site.
 |
Jews praying at the Western Wall in Jerusalem's Old City, December 25, 2009 |
| Photo by: Emil Salman |
But a group of archaeologists who have petitioned the council says the new building, designed by architect Ada Karmi, would damage an ancient Roman road, flanked by rare and elaborate columns, that runs beneath the planned construction.
They say that if Jewish relics were under threat, the project would never have been allowed.
"It is impossible to exaggerate the cultural damage and the harm to antiquities that would result if the road is encased by the new building's foundation pillars," the archaeologists wrote in a petition to the planning council.
"It is difficult to escape the feeling that the fact that this find does not belong to Judaism's golden age is aiding the authorities in their decision to enclose it beneath the proposed structure."
Karmi's plans would preserve the Roman relics, which the public would be able to view from a basement gallery beneath the new building. But the group of archaeologists, which includes several members of Israel's UNESCO committee, says that this solution ignores the possibility of developing a unique historical site.
"The plans would destroy the chance to create a continuous passage of road over 200 meters long – originally a colonnade – which could serve as a foundation stone for researchers and students of Jerusalem's history, as well as to tourists and the general public," the archaeologists wrote.
In response to the petition, Shmuel Rabinovitch, the Western Wall's rabbi, said the new building would be essential in providing services to the increasing number of visitors to the site. Far from damaging fragile ruins, the new structures would ensure their preservation, he said.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
"Karmi's plans would preserve the Roman relics, which the public would be able to view from a basement gallery beneath the new building. But the group of archaeologists, which includes several members of Israel's UNESCO committee, says that this solution ignores the possibility of developing a unique historical site." So the issue is not harming relics as the headline misstates, but not putting evidence of the Roman invasion in the spot lite. Let the Vatican return the looted holy items that the Romans stole from Israel and we can discuss this.
It sounds like a law is needed to protect sites of historical interest / significance from development; and to do so in such a way as protect them from harm while still allowing development to take place?
There are laws like this and they are being applied.
The archaeology doesn't support the idea that the Western Wall was part of the temple but rather that is was part of Herods palace which was later used by the Romans as a fort after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70
The wall is symbolic of our holy temple which is currently occupied by Muslim invaders in the form of a Giant mosque placed on top of our temple!
There are enough treasures in the Old City to keep everyone satisfied. Karmi should be ashamed to dare touch what was built centuries and centuries ago. There's no need for ugly, new buildings made ouf ot concrete in the Old City. Theyc an easily be built out of the Walls.
First off, Jerusalem law dictates everything be built from Jerusalem stones. Secondly, this is an internal affair, so if you live in Israel, your comment is welcomed, if you don't, pipe down. You don't see people talking about a museum in Sweden.
Israel is the only country that believes East Jerusulem is part of their country. The rest of the world and their governements know that they are illegally occupying it. That is why no country has their embassy in East Jeruselum. So if you are a Pal, your comment is welcome, if you don't, pipe down.
and I can tell you that practically every new building that goes up here is disastrous from the points of view of taste, cultural consonance & continuity, and landscape. Mamilla area projects top the list, the Tolerance Museum especially, but Begin Center, Holylands towers... you ought to be getting the picture...
Jerusalem, especially Judaism's holiest site(where every Jewish boy goes to at the age of 13, including me), is under Israeli sovereignty. Just because 1,000 years ago or so a Muslim conqueror decided to build a mosque as a symbol of supremacy over foreign religions, and because Transjordan cleansed all Jews from that area, does not give them a right over that area. In the end your foreign opinion doesn't matter to us.
I see a theme developing where some correspondents basically say if you are not Israeli your opinion doesn't count. Unfortunately this chasm between Israeli opinion and the rest of the world will lead nowhere good. All parties, and especially Israel, need support for anything to work. If Israel can't address International voices then its on its own. Nobody can help it then.
We need to build in the Arab quarter more and expand there. It desperately needs renovation.
avi, your summery of history is arrogant and ignorant. Like Judaism and every religion in the world, Islam is a legitimate religion and also finds this city very important. this should be respected, just as they should respect judaism, remember "If we condemn these people as wrong, then we should not measure our decisons and actions by theirs." also the "cleansing of Jews" from "Transjordan". A. transjordan only refers to contemporary Jordan and not the historic palestine, and b. wasn't that the romans? and c. does it really matter 2000 years later? should we charge everybody with what happened 2000 years ago? cause we ALL have blood on our hands.