Palestinian Identity and Cultural Heritage1 Nazmi Al-Ju’Beh
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Palestinian Identity and Cultural Heritage1 Nazmi Al-Ju’beh Introduction 1It is vital to differentiate between identity and identities. The difference between the terminologies is not simply that between singular and plural, it reaches far beyond, to a more philosophical approach, a way of life, and reflects the structure of a society and its political aspirations. It is therefore very difficult, perhaps impossible, to tackle the identity of a people as such, as if we were exploring one homogeneous entity, a clear-cut definition, accepted comfortably by the community/communities that formulate the society/the state/the nation. Before discussing Palestinian identity, it is important to address some basic and theoretical frameworks in a historical context. 2History is considered the main container of identity. Nations are rewriting their history/histories in order to explain and adapt contemporary developments, events, and phenomena, in order to employ them in the challenges facing the society, and also to reflect the ideology of the ruling class. It is, without hesitation, a difficult task, to trace one identity of a people through history; hence, identity, like any other component of a society, is very flexible, variable, and mobile and of course it reflects historical conditions. The formation of identity/identities commonly takes place in an intensive manner during conflicts and challenges, since it is important, in such circumstances, to clarify and to underline the common elements among certain groups of people that are adequate and can be mobilized facing the specific challenge. 3The understanding will not be exact if the process of formation of a nation is limited to conflicts and challenges only. Such an “identity” can only be a temporary one. It has to have much more than that; it includes, in most cases, other elements, mainly historical background, and historically shared experience 1 In: TEMPS ET ESPACES EN PALESTINE - Flux et résistances identitaires (Of Times and Spaces in Palestine: The Flows and Resistances of Identity), edited by Roger Heacock, Beirut: Presses de l’Ifpo, 2008. in addition to other components. The shared interests are usually an essential element in the process of formation. “Normally”, the effect of such developments spread out for a long span of time, and in some cases, they form a myth. In this case, the identity is far more important and becomes an essential political abstract, uniting the people. Building on that, the intellectual elite in a society begins to formulate the different elements of that society, and the creation of new elements is not a rare case in history. We have to be aware of the fact that the creation of a myth and other elements of identity don’t disappear automatically with the end of the conflict or challenge, they can last for a longer period and become an essential component of the formation of the people/the nation. Challenges and conflicts cannot create identities, but can certainly help in forming, clarifying, maintaining, and sharpening identity/identities. 4It is not rare to find that identity/identities are intensified through symbols, mainly national symbols, since these are easily utilized, marketed, and converted into a popular character. National symbols are also a subject of continuous changes, due to the socio-economic and political development of the society, and its need for self-expression. Symbols can also be created, shaped, and carved; but can also be a reflection of the realities and needs of a society. The intellectual elite or/and the ruling class can impose created symbols; in this case, symbols may last for a long period, or disappear when the need for them diminishes. Finally, symbols can be formulated within societies, but they later become impossible to change or to reshape and sometimes become a real burden on the society. Palestinian Identity 5It is very difficult to present one identity of any society. Each society has different identities of varied levels, regardless of its sub-identities. Identity can have geographic, cultural, ethnic, religious, and other dimensions (and not a single dimension). We have to look at these components in a complementary manner rather than in a contradictory one. These identities are supported with a multi- colored multi-shaped historical arsenal. Again, certain basic elements are to be clarified before we can present Palestinian identity in its cultural heritage context: Palestine, Palestinians, borders, historical context, and the different components of the identity. 6The meaning of the word “Palestine” is not clear; there are different interpretations of its meaning. (Brug 1985, Deger-Jalkotzy 1983, p. 99-120). As an administrative terminology, it was used since the Greco-Roman period in the first and second centuries BC. It is worth mentioning that Herodotus (ca. 490- 430 BC) had already written about Palestine, meaning of more or less the now familiar land of Palestine. The name was derived from the name of a group of people, the “Philista,” who settled in the Iron Age (around the 12th century BC) along the shores of Palestine, their origin (Aegean or Semitic) being disputed among scholars (Berlin 1997, p. 2-51). Therefore, the southern coastal strip (today’s Gaza Strip) in Assyrian texts (eighth century BC.) was called “Pilaschtu”. Herodotus extends the term “Palestinian Syria” to the entire coastal strip between Phoenicia (roughly today’s Lebanon) and Egypt. The Greek term “Palestine” was then transferred into Latin: “Palestina”. This Latin term, starting from 135 A.D., meant to the Romans the entire province of “Judea” and was introduced in order to erase the use of the term “Judea” after they had put down the Jewish rebellion against the Romans, to challenge the memory of the Jews. Jerusalem was renamed “Aelia Capitolina” (Wilkinson 1975, p. 118-136). 7It is certainly the case that the Palestinians, those who were living in Palestine, were mostly part of a greater regional or international political entity, which usually housed several nations, ethnic groups and cultures. Belonging to a great power did not convert the people culturally. This does not exclude the influence of the dominating culture. Roman Palestine not only left many influences in the cultural heritage of the land, but also deeply influenced its population (Hirschfeld 1995). These influences did not convert the people of the country (Palestine in this case) into Romans, in spite of the fact that some members of the elite of Palestine were heavily influenced, and even adapted imperial Roman culture, including personal names (Shahid 1984, p. 22 ff). But this development did not affect the masses in general and the peasants (the majority of the population) in the countryside in particular. 8In the major cities of Roman Palestine there is a clear-cut imperial Roman architecture (Caesarea, Bisan/Scythopolis, Jerusalem, etc.) reflecting the metropolis – of course with some local influence, but still it is Roman. Leaving this aside and focusing on the rest of the country, mainly on the countryside, we discover that the continuity of the cultural materials existed before the Romans and persisted afterwards (Beebe 1968, p. 35-58; Beebe 1975, p. 89-104). 9Following the Crusaders’ invasion of Palestine in 1099 AD, a good number of Palestinians left their homeland, some of them fleeing to Damascus, the major city in the region. These immigrants, mainly scholars (i.e., members of the elites) settled in a newly established quarter on the slopes of Mount Qasioun, named Salhiyya. Its inhabitants were called al-maqadisa, (the Jerusalemites), in spite of the fact that we know no Jerusalemite among them, they were mostly from the area of Nablus and mainly from the village of Jamma’in or Jamma’il, therefore they were also called al-Jamma’iny or al-Jamma’ily (a prominent family among them were Banu Qudama). “Al-Maqadisa” played a major role in the intellectual life of Damascus for centuries; some of them still carry the name al- Qudsi. This can be explained as a form of blessing, but also of belonging. During the Crusader period, most of the countryside of Palestine, including its Muslims and its Christians, as well as major cities except Jerusalem, remained Arab. In the later phase, Arab Christians were even re-settled in the walled city of Jerusalem. As the experiment collapsed, the Crusader colonialists left the country in several waves, but some of them remained and integrated with the local population. 10Much earlier, even directly after the Islamic conquest of Palestine, some scholars from Palestine carried the name “al-Filastini”. The most interesting discussion about this Palestinian belongingis to be found in the works of the Palestinian geographer al-Maqdisi/al-Muqaddasi, who lived and wrote in the tenth century AD. He uses the terminology “Palestine” and “Palestinian” with the clear-cut meaning of geographic belonging and identity (Al-MaqdisI 1906). 11The geographic definition “Palestine” went through significant changes and developments. What is called “Palestine” today is nothing except the British mandatory geographic definition of the borders, resulting from agreements with France during and after World War one. The highlands of Palestine during the Bronze and Iron Ages were called the “Land of Canaan”; the coastal plains were Philista. In the Roman period, the land was divided into three administrative areas: Palestine I, II, and III, which included most of East Jordan, southern Syria (Hauran), south Lebanon and the Golan Heights. In the Early Muslim period (late 7th century), it was divided into two major administrative divisions: the northern parts including southern Lebanon and the Golan Heights expanding to Hauran and northern Jordan; this was called Jordan (Jund al-Urdun) with Tiberias as administrative capital. The second part extended from the south of Mount Carmel to the south of the Negev including southern Jordan, and was called Palestine (Jund Filistin) with Ramla as a capital.