Jerusalem Besieged : From Ancient Canaan to Modern Israel

Rating:
Summary: Buy this book!
Review: Eric Cline has written a vast range of books and articles for both specialized publications and general audiences. His latest book, "Jerusalem Besieged", is written in the same vein as his previous book "Battles of Armageddon" and yet in many ways this new book must have been difficult to write. While Megiddo is in ruins, Jerusalem is still the religious center of three major world faiths and is held sacred by hundreds of millions of people throughout the world. It is almost impossible to write a book on Jerusalem without offending someone, but Cline has managed to write one of the most tactful books possible. Nowhere does he slide into polemic, nor has he made any religious claims in lieu of evidence. He has tried his best to write an even-handed account of Jerusalem's military past. He has spent a great deal of time in that city and his love of the subject comes through loud and clear. He writes as an archaeologist not as a political commentator, and yet there is much journalistic material he has read and incorporated into the text. Cline writes in beautifully lucid prose. General readers will find the material accessible and yet Cline's research is available in the footnotes and the extensive bibliography. Readers are given a framework within which to think about the repercussions of several millenia of strife in Jerusalem. Cline documents 118 separate conflicts during which Jerusalem has been destroyed completely twice, besieged 23 times and attacked an additional 52 times. It has been captured and re-captured 44 times and this does not even include the 20 revolts and innumerable riots. Cline manages to cover them in less than 500 pages while covering each incident, and giving judicious opinions in places where controversy occurs. This is a must purchase for military historians and general readers alike.

Rating:
Summary: A book that really needed to be written
Review: This is a book that really needed to be written.

When I lived briefly in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia, I was told that in ancient times, Tabuk had been known as "the most evil place in the world." Frankly at the time, I doubted that any geographical locality could have a karma of its own. After reading Eric H. Cline's book, Jerusalem Besieged, I think I'm going to have to reconsider the issue.

What I found most intriguing about the author's discussion was his concept of the origin of the site's importance. Most archaeologists tend to point to the advantage of a location as the inspiration for settlement and development in the area. Often things like access to a sheltered harbor, a fishing resource, mineral wealth such as flint, obsidian, ceramic clay, iron, gold or silver, or water availability and so on are reasons that a city grows and flourishes through time. As one realtor has said, "there are three things to remember in selecting real estate: location, location, location."

Jerusalem however seems to defy that premise. According to the author, it is neither exceptional for its geologic nor for its geographic gifts. The agricultural value of the surrounding land is marginal, water supply is iffy, there are no large stands of timber to be harvested and few if any valuable mineral riches to be mined. Geographically it seems to have been an isolated site, in the back of beyond. It lies well inland of the coast and is not the hub of intersecting trade routes. In fact, although it is mentioned in the Egyptian Armarna texts, it seems to have held little political value until David took it forcibly from the Jebusites, its previous owners, and made it the center of his new monarchy. It would appear that even he chose the site primarily because it had not been a power base for any of his own people. Its foreign citizenry owed no one but him any loyalty, so it would not entangle him in the petty internal feuds that seemed to be the bane of the Israelite political world. Yet over the past 3000 years, more blood has been shed over the city of Jerusalem than practically any other site on earth.

So what makes this rock in the middle of nowhere such a magnet for passion and violence? Why does the City of Peace seem to drive sensible people crazy? According to Professor Cline it would appear to be the city's emotional wealth. So many have made Jerusalem the center of spiritual and emotional importance that the site is invested with staggering human significance. That investment in Jerusalem over the past 3000 years almost ensures continuous strife over its possession. No one seems immune to the insanity either. People from as distant as the Far East have taken a part in the madness. Everyone from the Romans to the British and the US have entered the melee. Embarrassingly-for a nominal Christian at least-the worst of the violence seems to have been perpetrated by the Crusaders.

Almost all of the illustrations of the city in the book are from its outside and from a fair distance. I think the artist had a good idea. Personally by the end of the book I felt that everyone should be forbidden to live on the site for their own good; it's far too dangerous. It should be walled off for the health of the world, and the faithful and the curious can look at it through the fence from a safe distance. Having read the author's book The Battles of Armageddon, I would have to say that if the end of days does occur, it won't be at Megiddo; it'll be at Jerusalem!

As I said above, this is a book that really needed to be written. It's not that there is anything particularly new in it; it's just that it's all particularly focused. I think that it should be required reading for all politicians, both regional and national, and certainly for any of those involved in attempts to bring about peace in the area. For the general reader it will make the issues in the Middle East far clearer and reveal why a lasting peace in the area is unlikely to occur any time soon. It will also make the Arab countries' horror over the US activities in the region more understandable. Certainly the author's final statement, quoting O'Neill, is vividly evocative of the entire message of the book, "For now, however, in Jerusalem, perhaps more than anywhere else in the world, `There is no present or future-only the past, happening over and over again...(p. 310).'"