Jerusalem as Capitol of a Major Empire

[mikegold]

I was thinking about some of the recent threads on butterflied Islam; one possibility mentioned was that the Arabs embraced Judaism.

It got me thinking - what if there was a Jewish "caliphate" - an Arab based, Perso-Byzantine influenced empire stretching roughly from the Oxus to the Nile (or beyond) and constituting the great "other" for the Christian powers.

Now, obviously this is an interesting TL in all sorts of ways, but I have a very specific question - assume that the empire is ruled from Jerusalem, rather than Damascus or Ctesiphon (City of David and all that). In addition, the Third Temple is built and Jerusalem becomes the spiritual capitol of the Middle East, with pilgrimages to Jerusalem replacing the Hajj and yearly inflating Jerusalem's population by, eventually, hundreds of thousands if not millions. (Yes, Temple-era Judaism had yearly pilgrimages, which is even more dramatic than the once-in-a-lifetime Hajj).

Alright. Jerusalem has a long history as a spiritual center and, off and on, a sovereign capital of a small state; but this is orders of magnitude bigger. Can a city so far from any major source of water ever get as big as OTL's medieval Damascus or Baghdad? I know that Jerusalem was positively tiny well into modern times IOTL; can it be an Imperial Capital and super-city? And if so, what does it look like?

 

[Imladrik]

Given that Jerusalem have water problems to this day, i think that it was as big as it could be. It could be the capital of an empire but would be quickly surpassed in wealth and population by several cities. IIRC Mecca wasn't big despite being an holy city (probably due to water related problem too).

 

[EternalCynic]

An Islamic Caliphate which builds a government district outside the Old City of Jerusalem, while the Levant's main cultural and trade hub is Damascus would satisfy the requirements. It would then proclaim itself the custodian of the *three* Holy Mosques.

 

[Minchandre]

Jerusalem is suitable for being the capital of a small kingdom; it's pretty horrible as the capital of a major empire. The same terrain that makes it easily defensible makes it hell to get to. Even today, there's only one major road into Jerusalem, and the rail link has been waiting for renovation for decades because the terrain makes it so expensive. In ancient times, the same problem would have existed: Jerusalem is on top of a small mountain, surrounded by many other small mountains. Though they aren't tall, they're pretty steep. And they're made of hard limestone, which is pretty difficult to cut through. If the city wants to grow to any kind of size, it's also going to be incredibly hilly. This rough terrain also means that no trade routes will run through it (aside from those specifically going to it).

Being in the hills also means that the land nearby isn't good for high-intensity farming, and certainly not of any staples (historically it's been olives and fruit trees, with the odd grape vine). It also has, as Imladrik points out, pretty big water issues.

In contrast, major capitals tend to be several of: on a river, near good agricultural land, on the coast, on a major trade route. Jerusalem is none of these things. I'm not even sure that Jerusalem's holiness will be enough to overcome this for any long period of time - note that not a single one of the major Muslim powers had a capital in Mecca or Medina.

There's always the possibility of Jerusalem being something of a symbolic capitol, the high, holy fortress where the King lives and works...while the majority of the bureaucracy hangs out somewhere on the coast near a river mouth (or near modern Rosh haAyin, at the confluence of 3 rivers, and pretty close to the coast).

 

[scholar]

It is possible to make it the capital of a rich, incredibly rich, trading center of a small kingdom. Think Amsterdam or Lisbon [though with considerably less water and populous] in scale of riches if it can maintain its rich spiritual and resource trade route network. There are other places that are better for a capital, but an Emperor can make a capital in any place [though not make deserts bloom with flowers unless they divert a massive river to be its aqueduct... oh-] and build aqueducts and canals to bring water to the city. It is unlikely to ever become huge, no where near the size of any Southern or East Asian city, but it can easily dominate the middle east. Its just the pain, oh the pain, of carving through the terrain.

 

[Chairwoman Roxelana]

It is possible to make it the capital of a rich, incredibly rich, trading center of a small kingdom. Think Amsterdam or Lisbon [though with considerably less water and populous] in scale of riches if it can maintain its rich spiritual and resource trade route network. There are other places that are better for a capital, but an Emperor can make a capital in any place [though not make deserts bloom with flowers unless they divert a massive river to be its aqueduct... oh-] and build aqueducts and canals to bring water to the city. It is unlikely to ever become huge, no where near the size of any Southern or East Asian city, but it can easily dominate the middle east. Its just the pain, oh the pain, of carving through the terrain.

Amsterdam and Lisbon are port cities in lands with a naval tradition, they also have quality land and rivers. They have lots going for them that Jerusalem does not.

 

[scholar]

Amsterdam and Lisbon are port cities in lands with a naval tradition, they also have quality land and rivers. They have lots going for them that Jerusalem does not.

Port cities are important because they are access points to trade throughout an ocean. The middle east is at the center of trade between three continents. Jerusalem is at a point where it can easily be made into the trade route focal point. Utilizing religious and cultural importance they can easily magnify their own import and maximize their gains by not just traders and the movement of goods, but the movement of pilgrims brought on by their faith. The larger the faith, the greater the coin purse of the King/Emperor residing in Jerusalem.

 

[Minchandre]

Amsterdam and Lisbon are port cities in lands with a naval tradition, they also have quality land and rivers. They have lots going for them that Jerusalem does not.

This. Going by my "checklist of capitols" from before,

Amsterdam is:
-On the coast
-On a river
-Near fertile land

Lisbon is:
-On the coast
-On a river
-Near fertile land
-On a trade route (anything going from Africa or the Mediterranean to northern Europe will pass it)

Baghdad, for example, in on a river and near fertile land (with an additional note that it's some of the most fertile land in the world).

Jerusalem is landlocked, not on or particularly near any rivers, up in some not-bad-but-not-particularly-fertile limestone mountains, and not on any trade routes.

Port cities are important because they are access points to trade throughout an ocean. The middle east is at the center of trade between three continents. Jerusalem is at a point where it can easily be made into the trade route focal point.

I disagree. The roughness of the terrain in Jerusalem, especially in contrast to terrain just a few hundred kilometers north in the Jezreel Valley, or north of the Lebanon and Antilebanon moutains (especially with the option of following the Euphrates northwest...) means that no trade is going to go through Jerusalem. Trade might come to it, but it will never be a way-point like Samarkand, Baghdad, Constantinople, Venice, Palermo...

Utilizing religious and cultural importance they can easily magnify their own import and maximize their gains by not just traders and the movement of goods, but the movement of pilgrims brought on by their faith. The larger the faith, the greater the coin purse of the King/Emperor residing in Jerusalem.

Pilgrimage is the only way. And, frankly, I'm not that enthused about it. I mean, every Muslim goes to Mecca once in his life. Does that mean that Mecca was a thriving capital, ever? No.

 

[scholar]

Pilgrimage is the only way. And, frankly, I'm not that enthused about it. I mean, every Muslim goes to Mecca once in his life. Does that mean that Mecca was a thriving capital, ever? No.

Mecca is, metaphorically, in the middle of a wasteland far from the coast and with no sources of anything valuable near by.

Jerusalem may be out of the way and surrounded by rugged terrain, but one can not say that it is in the middle of a desert and with no strategic positioning on trade routes.

I disagree. The roughness of the terrain in Jerusalem, especially in contrast to terrain just a few hundred kilometers north in the Jezreel Valley, or north of the Lebanon and Antilebanon moutains (especially with the option of following the Euphrates northwest...) means that no trade is going to go through Jerusalem. Trade might come to it, but it will never be a way-point like Samarkand, Baghdad, Constantinople, Venice, Palermo...

There are ways, easy ways, to manipulate trade routes. Build roads. Maintain them, guard them, and encourage travel on them. Make every road go to Jerusalem before going someplace else. Make it a central hub of these roads. Draw canals and ditches to bring water to the city to better support it and convince travelers and traders the safest, easiest, most profitable, and quickest way is through Jerusalem.

Cities and towns burst to life because of a railway intersection and stopping location in the middle no nowhere. It is of similar means to do the same for Jerusalem.

 

[Minchandre]

There are ways, easy ways, to manipulate trade routes. Build roads. Maintain them, guard them, and encourage travel on them. Make every road go to Jerusalem before going someplace else. Make it a central hub of these roads. Draw canals and ditches to bring water to the city to better support it and convince travelers and traders the safest, easiest, most profitable, and quickest way is through Jerusalem.

The problem: building major roads to Jerusalem is prohibitively expensive - perhaps even functionally impossible - pre-dynamite. Canals and ditches are impossible in the hilly terrain of Jerusalem; you'd need raised aqueducts. Raised aqueducts crossing mountains and valleys. I guess you could divert the Sorek River...but I'm not sure that would work. You could always build cisterns on a grand scale (the traditional solution to the water problem in Jerusalem).

And your point about cities springing up at railroad intersections is a good one...except that in those cases the roads or railroads are actually going somewhere. Jerusalem isn't really on the route from anywhere to anywhere else.

 

[eliphas8]

And your point about cities springing up at railroad intersections is a good one...except that in those cases the roads or railroads are actually going somewhere. Jerusalem isn't really on the route from anywhere to anywhere else.

Well it is kind of on the way to Egypt. It could end up being a stopping point between Egypt and Mesopatamia/Persia/Anatolia.

 

[Imladrik]

Well it is kind of on the way to Egypt. It could end up being a stopping point between Egypt and Mesopatamia/Persia/Anatolia.

Actually no. It's easier to go either along the coast and then to the Sea of Galilee and under the Anti-Lebanon Mountains to Damascus. Or you can go into Lebanon and then to Hama. Or you can go to Tyre and then by ship to Alexandria.

A trade route through Jerusalem would have to go up the hills and then downward in the rift valley and then upwards again.

 

[Grey Wolf]

It could be the religious capital, with much of the administration happening elsewhere.

I mean, Gondar isn't exactly easy to get to either...

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[eliphas8]

It could be the religious capital, with much of the administration happening elsewhere.

I mean, Gondar isn't exactly easy to get to either...

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Well yeah but Ethiopia is much more akin to the kind of country that would have Israel as its capital in the first place, its more of a regional power than anything else.

 

[scholar]

The problem: building major roads to Jerusalem is prohibitively expensive - perhaps even functionally impossible - pre-dynamite. Canals and ditches are impossible in the hilly terrain of Jerusalem; you'd need raised aqueducts. Raised aqueducts crossing mountains and valleys. I guess you could divert the Sorek River...but I'm not sure that would work. You could always build cisterns on a grand scale (the traditional solution to the water problem in Jerusalem).

And your point about cities springing up at railroad intersections is a good one...except that in those cases the roads or railroads are actually going somewhere. Jerusalem isn't really on the route from anywhere to anywhere else.

I would rank the difficulty of this to be several orders of magnitude less than the pyramids. Yes, that's an extreme example, but yes I am proposing works to make Jerusalem bloom that would require tens of thousands of workers. This is all ideas on how to make it happen rather than reasons why it didn't, because we know most of them being evident inside of OTL.

Actually, yeah it does. Jerusalem is at a position where it is possible that Asia Minor, Persia, Arabia, and Egypt can all intersect at Jerusalem. With minor tracts going to the coastline after the main road already forces them to enter Jerusalem first. Efficiency isn't the idea here, building up Jerusalem as the cultural and economic center of an empire is. And a big empire with large coffers and a little bit of an insane plan can do this. Think of the City of Rome. I'm going for a lesser scale while copying some of the techniques from them. Hell, you could even have a Roman Remnant center itself in Jerusalem after converting to a particular kind of Christianity that has the resources and the capacity to do so in Jerusalem. It wouldn't be impossible, unlikely and so expensive I doubt the Emperor would plan on paying half the people who took part in it, but it is *possible*.

 

[Orko]

Is it possible for Jerusalem or anywhere else in Judea to be on the westernmost edges of the silk rout, thus attracting European traders?

 

[scholar]

Is it possible for Jerusalem or anywhere else in Judea to be on the westernmost edges of the silk rout, thus attracting European traders?

It wasn't too far from it. It just needs a small shift and a semi-organized road.

 

[Minchandre]

Is it possible for Jerusalem or anywhere else in Judea to be on the westernmost edges of the silk rout, thus attracting European traders?

Elsewhere in Judea, sure. Northward near the Sea of Galilee, and then up the Jezreel Valley to Haifa. Of course, it makes even more sense to follow the Euphrates north, go north of the Antilebanon Mountains, and then through Homs and ending around Tripoli. Or go even further north, going through Hatay. Jerusalem...not really, for reasons that I've already discussed here.