The land between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River has remained one of the most bitterly contested areas of the world for nearly two millennia, and at the heart of the conflict are the sacred places of the three main religionsâJudaism, Christianity and Islam. Whilst Christian and Jewish claims to sacred sites are well known outside the region, with the exception of Jerusalem and Hebron , the Muslim shrines are not well known and poorly understood. The principal aim of this book is to understand how Muslim shrines have become integrated into the fabric of Palestinian history and landscape. As a starting point, we can consider the following passage from the book of Joshua:
And Josephâs bones, which the Israelites had brought from Egypt , were buried at Shechem in the tract of land that Jacob bought for a hundred pieces of silver from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem. This became the inheritance of Josephâs descendants. (Joshua 24:32)
The above verse has been used by both Jews and Muslims as proof of the authenticity of the shrine of Josephâs Tomb (Qabr Yusuf ) outside the West Bank city of Nablus (Fig. 9.1, No. 17). Whilst the shrine will be discussed in more detail in Chap. 8, the biblical quotation encapsulates three major issues which set Muslim shrines at the heart of many debates in the contemporary Middle East. The first question relates to competing claims between Islamic and Jewish traditions, which both claim custodianship of shrines and, by extension, ownership of the land. The second issue relates to the existence of shrines built over gravesâwhilst this is a widespread phenomenon in the Muslim world, it is increasingly being called into question by advocates of fundamentalist Islam. The third issue relates to authenticityâand the importance of graves and human remains in the creation of Muslim shrines. To secular observers, the identity of a particular burial place is in many cases open to question, yet graves remain the most powerful and significant feature of most Muslim shrines. This book aims to address these questions and also explore other issues relating to the origins, development and current condition of Muslim shrines, which form a unique aspect of the Palestinian heritage.
Although the book will discuss a wide range of different forms of shrine, it will not include either the Haram in Jerusalem or the Mosque of Abraham in Hebron . This is because both these shrines are exceptional and do not easily relate to the typical shrines of Medieval and Ottoman Palestine. In any case, both Hebron and Jerusalem have been discussed in considerable depth elsewhere, and their inclusion would tend to overshadow the many important issues surrounding the other shrines. In addition to describing the context for the creation and use of the shrines, the book will focus on the architecture and history of the shrines rather than the many and varied ways in which the shrines were used by their local regional communities. This is partly because some of these issues have been examined by a number of publications, including Tewfik Canaanâs detailed study (see Chap. 3 for a discussion of Canaanâs work), and partly because this requires a more specialised approach grounded in ethnology and anthropology. As a consequence, the book will also not discuss the important role of women in relation to the use, maintenance and veneration of shrines, although there is certainly considerable scope for further research in this area (see also discussion in Chap. 10).
Whilst the rest of this book (Chaps. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10) will be firmly focussed on shrines in Palestine, this chapter will discuss a number of general issues of relevance to understanding the historical and cultural contexts of the Muslim shrines. Three main issues will be addressed: (1) the concept and definition of shrines, (2) the development of shrines within Islam and (3) the significance of shrines in the modern world. The final part of the chapter will give an outline of the structure of the book.
Concept and Definition of Shrines
Shrines exist in most world religions and, in particular, within Palestine, where each of the three main faiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam has both major and minor shrines. Although there are many definitions of the word shrine, the continuities between religions demonstrate that there are certain important and recurring characteristics. The term âshrineâ derives from the Latin term scrinium, which refers to the box or receptacle holding relics or other material regarded as sacred. According to Tim Insoll, the term is inadequate for describing the range of locations and features which can be regarded as shrines (Insoll 2004, 105). Probably the most basic definition of a shrine would be âa material focus of religious activitiesâ. Although this definition describes a necessary attribute of shrines, it is not a sufficient definition of shrines within a Muslim context. For example, it could be used to describe a mosque or specifically the mihrab within a mosque, which is explicitly not a shrine. Allowing for this exception, a wide variety of locations and objects within the Muslim world can be considered within the general classification of shrines. This is a reflection of the huge geographical range, cultural complexity and religious groupings which can be regarded as part of Muslim civilization.
Although there are examples of religious objects or relics which could be regarded as shrines within Islamic culture, it is the location of the relics which are designated as shrines rather than the objects themselves. Portable or mobile shrines certainly existed amongst the pre-Islamic Arabs who would often carry them into battle. These tribal shrines comprised stone idols carried within wooden boxes which could be carried to different locations and set up within a campsite. It is probably because of this association with idols that portable shrines are such a rare feature of Muslim religious practice. Exceptions to this general aversion might include the portable shrines or tabaqs containing depictions of âAli and other imams carried by ShiÊżas during festivals in the month of Muharram (Denny 2016, 310). The mahmal or empty camel litter which accompanied the Hajj annually to Mecca should not be regarded as a shrine despite bearing a superficial resemblance to portable shrines in other cultures and religions (Robinson 1931). Instead, the mahmal symbolized the authority of the secular ruler who was unable to accompany the Hajj.
For some Muslims there is only one shrine in Islam, which is the Kaaba in Mecca , which comprises a square box-like structure surrounded by a sacred precinct. Other major shrines within Islam which are accepted by the majority of Muslims are the Prophetâs Mosque in Medina and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. The Dome of the Rock has certain similarities with the Kaaba, including its pre-Islamic origins, the presence of a stone or rock at the centre of the shrine (the Kaaba has a black stone hajar aswad embedded in one corner) and the practice of circumambulation or circling the shrine. Certainly, the importance of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount was established early on within the Muslim community, and for the first few years, Jerusalem functioned as the qibla or direction of prayer before it was changed to Mecca . There were even attempts to re-direct the qibla towards Jerusalem during the Umayyad period when Mecca was under the control of Ibn Zubayr . The importance of Jerusalem within Islam is further demonstrated by the construction of the Dome of the Rock by the caliph âAbd al-Malikâ at the relatively early date of 691 AD.
Whilst Jerusalem and the Dome of the Rock are fairly unproblematic as Muslim shrines, the Prophetâs Mosque in Medina poses a different problem. Certainly, Medina has a central place within Islam as the home of the first Muslim community, the location of Muhammadâs house and the first mosque. The problematic part is that when he died, Muhammad was buried within his houseâa custom which is not alien to pre-Islamic Arabian culture and can still occasionally be seen today (see, e.g., Petersen 2001, 128). Although the building was designated as Muhammadâs house, it also fulfilled the function of a mosque and was the centre of the nascent Muslim community. Whilst Muslims revered Muhammad as a prophet and as the person to whom the Quran was revealed, he was explicitly only a messenger and was not the focus of the religion. The fact that Muhammadâs grave was located within the house/mosque later caused problems for some Muslims, such as Ibn Taymiyya , who was worried that people might inadvertently pray towards Muhammadâs grave rather than towards the Kaaba in Mecca . However, for most Muslims, the direction of prayer towards Mecca was well enough established that there would not be a chance of confusing this with Muhammadâs grave. Also, Muhammadâs pre-eminent position within Islam meant that the location of his grave within the mosque would only enhance the importance of the mosque and the prayer towards Mecca . Muslims would still be able t...