temple mount, solomon's temple on mount moriah

King Richard Lionheart Crusades

Temple Mount

Solomon's Temple, Knights

Templar, and Al-Aqsa Mosque:

Three Claims on Hallowed Ground

The Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail, and the Night Journey all involve Temple Mount, in addition to the outright religious claims wrapped around this hallowed ground.

Summary

As deeply emotional as this subject is for many people, the fighting over this ancient piece of land is not likely to end until an acceptable and long-lasting solution of some kind is found. This is a serious look at the issues and history involved, and the few existing foundation stones upon which a solution may one day be built. It is the full text of the academic paper presented at San Diego State University by Sanford Holst on 26 June 2010.

Judaism, Islam, Christianity and pagan religious groups have all claimed various parts of the sacred ground known as Temple Mount or al-Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem over the centuries, often with violent results.^[i] One of the most forceful steps in this process has been the denial of claims by other parties in order to gain a dominant position. To see these issues, facts and arguments in some detail, the unfolding picture of construction, consecration and re-use of holy buildings on Temple Mount is examined from the time of King David to the present day. Claims have been advanced by the builders of Solomon’s Temple, the Knights Templar, and Muslim caliphs, but whose sacred land is this? To discover the answer, we must first put this issue in a larger context.

Religious groups have fought over sacred land and venerated buildings since time immemorial, attempting to drive others away from property they consider to be their birthright. On Temple Mount in Jerusalem this is a recurring theme.^[ii] Tensions exploded again as recently as 16 March 2010, with the re-opening of the Hurva synagogue elsewhere in the Old City of Jerusalem.^[iii] Muslim leaders declared this act to be the first step in a plot directed at rebuilding Solomon’s Temple on the Mount, and called for a “Day of Rage.” Over 100 people were injured in the ensuing riots.

Of course, Temple Mount has not been alone in serving as a conflict zone for places of religious heritage. The Bombay Riots in India during 1992-1993 were triggered by the demolition of Babri Mosque, which was said to have been built on the site of a previous Hindu temple.^[iv] Over 2000 people were reported killed in the riots which followed.

Catholics and Protestants likewise fought for ownership of specific churches and sites, particularly during the Protestant Reformation when churches were seized and forcibly converted by both sides. Rosslyn Chapel in Scotland—of Da Vinci Code fame—was one of these contested houses of worship.^[v] Its Catholic altars were destroyed and left in disrepair. This house of worship was later re-opened as an Episcopal church.

In each of these cases, and in countless other contested sites around the world, the claims of adversarial parties often became entwined and difficult to untangle. The affairs on Temple Mount have been among the most difficult to resolve. That difficult challenge is taken on here, in an attempt to find results that could help untangle other disputes as well.

In the Beginning: Jewish Period

Prior to 1000 BCE, Mount Moriah may have been used by many different people for religious services. It was common practice in that era to go to a high place to perform worship or offer a sacrifice, just as the Patriarch Abraham had done.^[vi] However the first known building to be raised on that hilltop for religious worship was Solomon’s Temple, which was recorded by Hebrew scribes as being built during the 4^th through 11^th years of King Solomon’s reign.^[vii] Those early writers also told us that the Phoenicians from Tyre were deeply involved in the raising of this Temple, making the question of rights somewhat more complicated.

And Hiram  king of Tyre  sent his servants unto Solomon ; for he had heard that they had anointed him king in the room of his father; for Hiram was ever a [great admirer] of David .

And Solomon  sent to Hiram, saying…. “And, behold, I purpose to build an house unto the name of the LORD my God, as the LORD spake unto David  my father, saying, Thy son, whom I will set upon thy throne in thy room, he shall build an house unto my name.”

So Hiram gave Solomon  cedar  trees and fir trees according to all his desire. And Solomon gave Hiram twenty thousand measures of wheat for food to his household, and twenty measures of pure oil; thus gave Solomon to Hiram year by year. And the LORD gave Solomon wisdom, as he promised him; and there was peace between Hiram and Solomon; and they two made a league together.

 1 Kings 5:1-2, 5, 10-12

These records made it clear that Solomon paid the Phoenicians for their work, so they were contractors, and as such would exercise no religious claim on the building.^[viii] As a result, the earliest known claim for use of this mountaintop as a long-standing place of worship was staked by the Jewish community. However subsequent events would cause this claim to be seriously challenged.

The Temple was heavily damaged over the years, and rebuilt or refurbished several times. The last of these efforts came in 19 BCE by Herod,^[ix] titled King of the Jews. The modest hilltop on which Solomon’s Temple was originally built in approximately 957 BCE had only limited space for the faithful to gather outside the Temple. To remedy this situation, King Herod erected massive retaining walls and filled in the space behind them, thus extending the size of the hilltop.^[x] The Western Wall of this great structure—also referred to as the Wailing Wall^[xi]—remains a place of Jewish prayer to the present day.

However in 70 CE, Roman forces led by Titus burned the Temple while suppressing a Hebrew revolt against Roman rule,^{[xii], [xiii]} and followed this act by completely leveling the Temple. We are told that the Romans built a temple to Jupiter upon the Mount,^{[xiv], [xv], [xvi]} covering some traces of the Temple’s existence. Another blow to the remains of Herod’s Temple came in 363 CE when the Roman emperor Julian authorized the Jewish people to rebuild their Temple upon the Mount. The workers immediately began digging up and removing the old foundations, to make way for the new. When Julian was killed shortly thereafter, the project was abandoned. The last remains of the Temple building had disappeared.

This opened the door to one of the strongest charges being leveled today against Jewish claims to Temple Mount: the denial that Solomon’s Temple ever existed. This extreme position has been documented by Dore Gold, among others, who traced it back to Yasser Arafat in 2000.^[xvii] This position has since found its way into the current debate about rights to the Mount. The principal argument in favor of this position is that no trace whatever has been found of a Temple on the Mount.

The counter-argument is that detailed records exist which were written over many centuries, showing the building of the Temple, the number of times it was raided, the times it was repaired, and the events that happened there. To the impartial observer, this is compelling evidence. Yet it is also true that the primary source of this information is Jewish scribes, whose work appeared in the Jewish Tanakh and the Old Testament of the Christian Bible, and Jewish historians such as Flavius Josephus.

To be fair, then, we must look beyond that material to non-Jewish sources. Here we find accounts of the Roman general Pompey who achieved a battle victory at Jerusalem, and saw the inside of the Temple in 63 BCE—an act usually forbidden to outsiders. Also we find the Roman leader Titus securing a victory in Jerusalem in 70 CE, at which time he destroyed the Temple and took its contents to Rome as part of his triumphal procession. Images of these Temple contents, including the sacred menorah, were carved into the side of his arch of triumph in Rome, and can still be seen there today. So the Temple was real, as shown in documentation by impartial sources.

In addition to this, Temple Mount itself is a highly visible structure, built by the Jewish people as a religious precinct, and is still seen today. All of these things taken together show that the claim by Jewish people to buildings and usage upon the Mount has been authenticated. Not only that, but due to roughly 1000 years of usage, their claim is a strong one.

Sign of the Cross: First Christian Period

The first legacy of Mount Moriah was Solomon’s Temple, the large platform surrounding it erected by Herod, and possibly a temple to Jupiter built by the Romans.

But then came Christianity, with the Roman Emperor Constantine leading his people and empire into this new religion.^[xviii] Constantine authorized the excavation and preservation of sites in Jerusalem related to Christianity, and sent his mother, Helena—who had preceded him into Christianity—to establish churches at those and other appropriate sites in the Holy Land. She reportedly tore down a temple to the goddess Venus^[xix] to build the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, which surrounded what was believed to be the place of Christ’s burial.^[xx] This also triggered countless smaller churches and places of worship to be sanctified, including some on Temple Mount such as the Pinnacle or Corner Tower associated with the martyrdom of St. James the Less.^[xxi] This was followed by the Emperor Justinian, who ordered that a grand church be built in Jerusalem and dedicated it to St. Mary, the mother of Jesus. A large church was accordingly built in 560 CE, as documented by Procopius who lived at that time.

Such were the works of the Emperor Justinian…. And in Jerusalem he dedicated to the Mother of God a shrine with which no other can be compared. This is called by the natives the "New Church"….

Procopius, On Buildings^[xxii]

Book V, 6:1-2

Several sources have identified the site of this Church of St. Mary to be on Temple Mount, at the site now occupied by al-Aqsa Mosque.^{[xxiii], [xxiv]} However, recent writers have argued convincingly that the church site was in the city.^[xxv] In any event, when much of Jerusalem was destroyed by Persian soldiers in 614 CE, the way was opened for a new claimant to these holy sites.^[xxvi]

Star and Crescent: First Muslim Period

In 638 CE, only six years after the death of Muhammad, the Muslim Conquest came to Jerusalem. The caliph Omar entered the city and built a wooden mosque on the Mount.^{[xxvii], [xxviii]} This was followed in 691 CE by caliph Abd al-Malik, who built the eight-sided structure that still stands on the highest point of the Mount, and is known as the Dome of the Rock or Masjid Qubbat as-Sakhrah.^[xxix] Twenty years later his son al-Walid started construction of al-Aqsa Mosque,^[xxx] possibly on the site of Omar’s Mosque.

It is at this point that Muslims begin to experience some denial similar to that accorded to the Temple, for it has been proposed that the Roman temple to Jupiter on Temple Mount would have been similar to the Roman Temple built at Baalbek in Lebanon about that same time. If so, it would  have consisted of a rectangular building on the south end of the Mount, facing north toward a statue and a many-sided building.^[xxxi] This temple to Jupiter would have stood in the same place as al-Aqsa Mosque, and the many-sided building would have stood where the Dome of the Rock is today. If true, then the two Muslim shrines would not be original works, but rather pagan temples being reused. Clearly, that would reduce the Muslim claim to the Mount.

As we saw earlier, some have argued that the large Church of St Mary built by Justinian was also on the Mount, at the place where al-Aqsa stands today. If so, then the pagan temple became a Christian church, which became a Muslim mosque.

Some incidental evidence suggests this denial of the two Muslim places of worship might have some validity. The two buildings are unlike any other Muslim mosques. Also, I have been inside al-Aqsa Mosque and seen the pillars there, which form a wide central aisle uncommon to most mosques, but quite similar to Christian basilica churches.

Yet if we consider the historical documents available, there were visitors to Temple Mount during the Roman times who noted Roman statues there, but made no mention of a great temple to Jupiter on the site. Similarly, Christian visitors noted the Corner Tower associated with St James, but made no mention of a grand church on the site. Since credible evidence of their existence on the Mount has not been found, it must be seriously considered that those structures existed in the city instead, as a number of scholars have proposed.

Al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock are among the oldest Islamic structures ever built, after the Kaaba in Mecca. Therefore an Islamic form of architecture had not yet been established by the time they were built, which would explain why their overall design was so unusual. The builders retained by Muslim caliphs to do the designs would reasonably have drawn from the existing Christian designs, such as the many-sided martyria that marked sites associated with martyrs, and the spacious basilica churches.^[xxxii] It has even been suggested that Byzantine Christian architects may have been hired for the purpose. If so, it would have been similar to Solomon calling upon the Phoenicians to help build his Temple. Yet clearly Solomon’s Temple was a Jewish place of worship, and the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa were Islamic places of worship.

This being the case, it can be reasonably concluded that claims by Muslim to have built and used these houses of worship on Temple Mount have been authenticated. In addition, their long usage of the Mount as a place of worship (almost 1300 years) would constitute this as a strong claim.

Knights Templar: Second Christian Period

That state of affairs was turned upside down in the year 1099 when European Crusaders took control of Jerusalem.^[xxxiii] The new Christian rulers immediately began to convert what they found on Temple Mount into facilities for their own use. The Dome of the Rock was converted to Christian worship under the name Temple of the Lord.^{[xxxiv], [xxxv]} Al-Aqsa Mosque lost its religious use and became the palace of the newly installed Christian king of Jerusalem.^[xxxvi] Then, when a new religious order of knights was created during the reign of King Baldwin II, the order was given the use of rooms in his palace. The men of this order became known as the Knights Templar^[xxxvii] in recognition of their organization’s place of birth on Temple Mount. When the king moved to more luxurious surroundings and left the palace, it became fully dedicated to the Knights Templar and served as their headquarters or Grand Preceptory.^[xxxviii]

It is often forgotten that these Templars were a religious order of monks, notwithstanding the fact that they were also soldiers. Their order was related to the Cistercian Order, and the Templars took vows of poverty, chastity and obedience similar to those of other monks. Therefore when they took full possession of the palace building that had once been al-Aqsa Mosque, it can be said to have returned to religious use—as a Christian monastery in this case, albeit a heavily fortified one.

The Knights Templar not only re-used existing facilities, they modified them for their own purposes and built new ones as well. They built the main part of the Gothic porch that still covers the front of al-Aqsa today. They built the large Dining Hall that continues to be part of the Southern Wall of the Mount, filling the space between al-Aqsa and the Western Wall.^{[xxxix], [xl], [xli]} This Templar hall is still in use, identified now as “Women’s Mosque” and as part of the Islamic Museum. Also visible today is their stone tower that was connected to the back of their Dining Hall and al-Aqsa.^[xlii] It extended beyond the South Wall, and reached from the ground far below, up to the row of windows peeking out from the top of the Mount. This fortified building partially covered the entryway at ground level that was known as the Double Gate.^[xliii] Passing through the Templar tower into the Double Gate, one could walk up steps in a long passageway that eventually came out at the top of Temple Mount in front of their Grand Preceptory.^[xliv] This corridor was clearly much-used by the Templars, but it dates from the time of King Herod.^[xlv] Unfortunately this is now largely sealed off and closed to visitors.

When it was in use, the Templar tower protected the courtyard at the bottom of the South Wall, where the Triple Gate and Single Gate gave access to stables under the Mount—where the Templars’ battle steeds were kept.^[xlvi] This well-protected yard could well have been the place where the knights came down from their Preceptory above, mounted their horses, raised their Beauseant standard, and rode off to battle across the Holy Land.

While exploring the Mount, I was able to examine the Templar buildings and detect the distinctive stonework typical of the Templars, which was a diagonal tooling of the stone surface.^[xlvii] Earlier surveyors had been able to examine hidden parts of the stones and verified that they still held their masons’ marks. These are the two most distinctive characteristics of Templar construction. Given this evidence, it can be said that the Christian Templar use of the Mount has been clearly authenticated. However since Christian Crusaders were only on the Mount for eighty-eight years before they were forced to move elsewhere, the Christian claim on Temple Mount would be a fairly weak one at best.

The Waqf: Second Muslim Period

When Muslims finally became ascendant again under Saladin,^[xlviii] Jerusalem and Temple Mount once more passed into the hands of the followers of Islam.^[xlix] In short order the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque were restored to their previous condition and to Muslim religious worship. In recognition of its special status, the Mount was placed in a Muslim religious trust or waqf, for safekeeping and operation.^[l] By 1475 the waqf’s Superintendent of Pius Endowments was housed in the al-Madrasa al-Tankiziyya at a main entrance to the Mount.

There matters stood until the Six Day War in 1967. That short war resulted in the young state of Israel taking possession of Temple Mount and East Jerusalem.^[li] Ownership of those two territories has remained an area of dispute between Jewish and Muslim groups to the present day. As a compromise, Temple Mount was allowed to continue operating under control of the Muslim waqf.^[lii] Yet both sides realize that situation could change at any time. This compromise between the Jewish administration and the Muslim waqf has allowed non-Muslims access to the Mount, provided they did not pray there,^[liii] which has also been a contentious issue.

Today, there seems to be a deep, abiding fear among many Muslims that the powerful Jewish majority in Israel will one day seize the Mount, tear down the Islamic houses of worship, and rebuild their Temple on the site. These flames of fear are being fanned by groups that actively advocate rebuilding the Temple, which they refer to as the Third Temple. One of these groups, Temple Institute, has made their advocacy visible in the form of a six-and-a-half foot high menorah for the new Temple, and made it with 92 pounds of gold—not ounces of gold but 92 pounds.^[liv] It was a serious commitment. And Muslim observers seem to take it as such.

Hence the fierce riots that erupt in Jerusalem from time to time—such as the one on 16 March 2010 which was caused by a rumor that the new Temple was coming. This is an issue over which people have been willing to give their lives, and it has proven to be one that will not go away easily.

Choices and Resolution

Which party has the superior claim? Which group has the right to have their place of worship stand upon Temple Mount?

The Jewish people have strong claims, due to being the first ones on the Mount with a long-lasting Temple. This Temple was rebuilt twice between 957 BCE and 70 CE,^[lv] and refurbished at other times. Muslims also have strong claims because they built places of worship, have held the Mount for most of the years since 638 CE, and still control it today. Christian claims are less compelling and have fallen by the wayside, leaving only two major competitors for the site.

Between these two, then, which group has the superior right? Should the one that arrived first be awarded the treasured site? Or should it be permanently vested to the waqf? What precedent should be set here, which might be used to guide similar religious disputes around the world?

The ideal solution—commonly proposed by dispute resolution groups for other issues—would result in both parties acting in accordance with the religious charity and brotherhood that they both seem to advocate. If this positive, but unlikely, solution were to be implemented, the two groups would sit together and agree on how to share usage of the Mount. This would reasonably include welcoming people of all faiths to come and pray there, in reasonable buildings, with no further demands made by either side.

Lacking the ideal solution, a reasonable political solution would be necessary. A specific example of such a solution was proposed by the United Nations in 1947,^[lvi] which included an international zone covering Temple Mount and some of the surrounding area. That is not necessarily the best solution, but it is a possible solution. Other possibilities could involve some form of clearer agreement between the two parties, backed by international guarantees, and provisions for specific rights to each side for use of Temple Mount. This might include a prohibition against using violence to change that balance, with use of violence to be penalized in a manner determined by the international group.

Lacking a political solution, this dispute would almost inevitably be drawn into the third choice: a violent takeover, with considerable bloodshed. Even that violent solution would be unlikely to resolve the issue, since balances of power have a way of shifting, producing renewed fighting and bloodshed.

As we have seen in different cases around the world, the parties involved in these disputes tend to gravitate to the third solution. If we hope to see the benefits of the first two solutions being considered and sought by parties involved in these conflicts, there would need to be some definite steps taken to move the disputes in that direction. Fundamental to this process would be what we have seen here: recognition that both parties had ownership of this sacred land in the past—and therefore neither group should expect to have 100 percent of its usage. Upon that base would need to be built a reasonable balance of use that both sides could accept.

History could help us with implementing this process on Temple Mount. Going back to the earliest event we saw here, the Phoenicians of Lebanon helped the Hebrew people of Israel build their First Temple. That was a real-life example of religious tolerance in the Holy Land. It resulted in mutual benefit, and it produced something extraordinary. If we could find a way to revive the religious tolerance that once existed in this region, that would be a truly remarkable solution.

Notes:

___________________

Temple Mount Books:

Jerusalem's Temple Mount

by Hershel Shanks  (2007)

A good exploration of the history of Temple Mount, working backward from what we see in the present day to what would have been reasonable assumptions about Solomon's Temple and how it looked in those days.

@ Amazon

The New Knighthood

by Malcolm Barber  (1995)

Covers the history of the Knights Templar at a good level of detail from their origin to the end of the Order. Author also wrote The Trial of the Templars.

@ Amazon

The Temple and the Lodge

by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh  (1989)

Looks for links between the Knights Templar and Freemasons, via Robert the Bruce, Scots Guard, and Rosslyn Chapel. The authors also wrote Holy Blood, Holy Grail. 

@ Amazon

Solomon's Temple

Al-Aqsa Mosque

Knights Templar Meeting

Golden Menorah for Temple

Other books about Temple Mount:

Contested Holiness: Jewish, Muslim and Christian Perspectives on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (2003) by Rivka Gonen.

Blood on the Mountain (1999) by Richard Andrews.

Temple Beyond Time: Mount Moriah: From Solomon's Temple to Christian and Islamic Shrines (1986) by Herbert Arthur Klein.

The Trial of the Templars (1978) by Malcolm Barber.

The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, the West, and the Future of the Holy City (2007) by Dore Gold.

Where Heaven and Earth Meet (2009) edited by Oleg Grabar and Benjamin Z. Kedar.

The Holy Land (2008) by Jerome Murphy-O'Conner.