The legend of the immovable ladder—a wooden ladder that sat outside a second-story window of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem since circa 1728—has fascinated visitors of the holiest church in Christianity. For many observers, the ladder is a powerful symbol of Christian sectarianism. According to the status quo—an Ottoman policy that stated that the religious communities need to agree to any changes in common areas of religious places—no clergy member may alter, change, or rearrange any property in “common areas” of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre without consent of the five sects that share it—Greek, Ethiopian, Coptic, Syrian, and Armenian Orthodox churches, as well as the Roman Catholic church. The ladder has remained in place in its common area since the eighteenth century and serves as a reminder of the sectarian fissures, emphasizing how the basilica leaders could not agree on repairing the church even when it was on the verge of collapse after the 1927 earthquake.

The British Mandatory government of Palestine (1917–1948) claimed that it was maintaining the Ottoman-defined status quo, which left the holiest Christian site, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, as derelict. But in practice, the Department of Public Works (DPW) became an instrument for implementing a new British-defined status quo policy that justified British rule over Palestine through the management of the church. It furthermore became a tool for colonial actors on the ground to challenge the authority and power of local Christian and political powers.

Specifically, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a key site of the original status quo policy, attracted British attention after the 1927 earthquake. The secular Mandate government inserted itself into a symbolically charged religious domain through the installation of shoring and scaffolding. The government likewise worked directly with the communities but also acted on its own when deemed necessary. This decision, furthermore, had broader consequences on the politics of space in general and the status quo of Jerusalem in particular. 

While the basilica’s communities challenged any potential invasion of the Church of England via British repairs, the British needed to balance international opinion with their colonial project. As the sects had close connections with international powers—especially with the Catholics to the French and the Greek Orthodox to the Russians—the British needed to appease the people on the ground to maintain their control of Palestine. The British focused on upholding the narrative that the DPW only maintained the current state of the Holy Sepulchre and would not make repairs to the structure of the church without approval from the communities. This meant that the DPW constructed “temporary” repairs—scaffolding, shoring, and similar projects—rather than “permanent” changes of repairing structural damage to the church. The Mandatory government likewise worked with the religious leaders directly to negotiate permanent structural repairs. However, as this paper will show, the DPW completed permanent projects while maintaining the facade of the status quo. Through their construction projects, the British successfully inserted themselves permanently into the space and altered the structure of the church. 

Antiquity and the Status Quo

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, built in the fourth century, is one of the holiest sites in Christianity, as most Christians believe that the sites of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion, tomb, and resurrection are all within it. This belief creates constant contention, as each sect has attempted to create a stronger foothold in the church. Following Ottoman tradition, only six sects are allowed to officially worship within the church. Of the six, the Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Armenian Orthodox sects hold possession and usage rights to the space, thereby comprising the “major” communities entitled to the church. In contrast, the Coptic, Ethiopian, and Syrian Orthodox sects are the “minor” communities with usage rights but no possession rights to the site. Furthermore, since 1852, the church has been under the status quo policy, which means all six sects must agree to any repairs within the common areas of the church. The common areas include the restrooms, walkways, and the holiest part of the church, the Rotunda. 

In the lead-up to the Crimean War (1853–1856), the Ottoman Empire finalized the terms of the status quo in 1852, as French and Russian powers pressured Sultan Abdul Mejid to benefit their respective Christian sects within the Holy Sepulchre. The French wanted to restore Latin preeminence in the church, which the Greek Orthodox had taken over in 1757 when the French left the church unattended. The Russians wanted to maintain the current status of the Holy Sepulchre, keep Greek control over the majority of the building, and maintain Greek stylizations and designs in the shared areas.

Fearing a Russian invasion more than a French one, the sultan agreed to freeze the Church’s design and possessions indefinitely according to the 1757 iteration, through firmans (imperial decrees) in 1852 and 1853. Thus, the sultan affirmed the nature of the status quo, ensuring that all future changes would take place within the new guidelines. The sultan did not intend for the firmans applying the status quo to be used as a tool for preventing local conflicts; rather, they were a way to remove the question of the holy places from the Crimean War and out of the realm of international politics. The status quo also became part of international law under the 1878 Treaty of Berlin, which extended the status quo beyond Christian sites to all shared holy sites in Jerusalem. 

The status quo became a primary tool for maintaining the peace among the communities, allowing the rival sects to coexist, albeit often it was a tense coexistence. Though there were still conflicting claims of possession and numerous unresolved disputes, the status quo allowed the sects to function within shared spaces without being in perpetual conflict. Furthermore, conflicts no longer needed to be resolved through the sharia law courts but rather could be handled by governmental officials.

General Edward Allenby’s entrance into the Old City of Jerusalem on December 11, 1917, established a de facto military rule that would last until 1920. At the citadel, Allenby read a statement announcing British control over the status quo:

I make it known to you that every sacred building, monument, holy spot, shrine, traditional site, endowment, pious bequest or customary place of prayer of whatsoever form of the three religions will be maintained and protected according to the existing customs and beliefs.

Allenby’s statement emphasized the British commitment to maintaining the status quo of the region, a continuity of Ottoman policy. 

At the core of the British intention was their desire to not be perceived merely as colonizers. They wished to minimize local opposition and, thus, carefully treated the transition from a Muslim power to a Christian one by attempting to maintain Ottoman governmental practices. The British narrative of maintaining the status quo was also important for international prestige once the League of Nations officially created the Mandate system in 1920. The Mandatory government did not consider the question of “Ottoman law in force” as a hindrance to British colonial policy. Instead, the British maintenance of Ottoman law was part of legitimizing British rule in the region. 

The Fear of Things Falling Apart

Natural disasters often afforded colonizers the opportunity to impose new relations of power. After the earthquake in Jericho in 1927, the British took a special interest in the preservation of the Holy Sepulchre and began to act as its property manager. The British government provided and paid for advice from expert engineers, architects, and archaeologists through the DPW while asserting that they were merely maintaining the status quo of the Holy Sepulchre by managing the edifice.

This decision meant that the DPW would not complete work on the structure of the church, which was considered a common area. Any work on the church’s edifice—the external facade, main internal dividing walls, and any other structural components—required permission from the three major communities. Therefore, the DPW had to negotiate with the communities to make permanent repairs to the church. The process for construction work and repairs deemed “temporary” by the DPW was more complex under the Mandatory government. As a gray area in the status quo, the DPW’s work on temporary repairs could be completed with or without permission from the communities. Thus, after the earthquake, the DPW sought justification for repairing the Holy Sepulchre while simultaneously claiming to maintain the status quo policy.

In the immediate aftermath, the DPW surveyed the damage and asserted that the structure might collapse at any time. To avoid complete disaster, the DPW erected temporary scaffolding and a temporary conical roof (over the damaged Katholikon dome) to support the chapel’s structure. However, the DPW could not begin permanent repairs without permission from the communities. In the past, the Greeks had repaired the Katholikon dome, claiming sole ownership. This time, however, the Armenians and Catholics wanted to split the cost three ways. They asserted that the dome belonged to the structure of the church and was common property. In 1931, District Commissioner Edward Keith-Roach began shuttling between the church leaders of the major sects to reach an agreement for payment. Within a month, the sects agreed to allow the Greek Orthodox to pay for repairs in full. In return, the Armenians could repair the Chapel of St. Helena, and the Catholics could install an iron grille. The DPW, working closely with the Department of Antiquities (DOA), wanted to make the repairs quickly. However, more complications arose as the wall surrounding the dome (the drum) needed strengthening, and the DPW lacked the necessary expertise. Following the DPW’s delay, the Greek Orthodox likewise reneged on their agreement. 

Thus, in 1933, the Mandatory government funded a three-month survey trip for William Harvey, an expert in vaulted, arched buildings, to inspect the basilica using Palestinian taxpayer money. In March 1936, Harvey released his final report on the Holy Sepulchre, affirming everyone’s worst fears: the basilica was at risk of imminent collapse. Harvey argued that the greatest threat to the church came from the weight distribution of the Katholikon dome, the rotunda dome, and their lower levels (the “thrusts”). He provided recommendations for long-term construction projects and temporary shorings in the Holy Sepulchre to preserve it. 

The Greek and Latin officials responded to Harvey’s 1933 preliminary reports with their own architectural reports. These reports stated that Harvey’s concerns had little merit and that the Holy Sepulchre was not in critical danger. They highlighted the sects’ reluctance to cooperate with the British, possibly fearing a potential Anglican foothold in the church and alterations to the status quo. Luigi Marangoni, the architect brought in by the Latin community, was particularly critical of Harvey’s conclusions. Marangoni believed that the decay of the church was not new, and that Harvey’s proposals were premature. He thought that the DPW could closely monitor the telltales and learn more before making hasty repairs. Of the 265 telltales installed by Harvey and the DPW in March 1934, only one had cracked by the time Marangoni filed his report.

“Temporary Repairs” and the Fabric of the Holy Sepulchre

The DPW initially considered the erection of shoring and scaffolding as temporary repairs to the interior and exterior of the edifice; however, they later argued that the repairs were part of the permanent structure of the church. The shorings installed between 1934 and 1935 would support the church for decades to come. Harvey warned that the shoring would weaken over time, and he recommended replacing it with permanent reinforcement. Nonetheless, the temporary shoring remained under the DPW’s watchful eye for the next few decades.

Conflict over the repairs continued throughout 1937, with the Greek Orthodox initially agreeing to the repairs and then reneging on their agreement. This conflict left the work untouched until late November when the DPW workers were finally allowed inside to inspect the building. Over thirty-five telltales were found either broken, cracked, or loose—all signs of potential danger for the Holy Sepulchre’s structure. Nonetheless, the temporary shorings prevented immediate collapse. 

The Mandatory government approved the DPW to begin repairs  on the exterior in September 1937. Shoring and scaffolding were installed outside of the church in the Parvis (the courtyard), which was considered part of the common area under the status quo. Because it was more easily accessible, the DPW workers were able to install the scaffolding without requiring approval from the sects. This decision became one of the earliest deviations from the status quo by the DPW in the Holy Sepulchre and shows how the British narrative often did not match the reality. 

In 1938 the church communities faced even greater challenges. Construction projects were further hindered by the Arab Revolt, a popular uprising of Palestinians demanding an end to Jewish immigration and the establishment of an independent Arab state. Although the revolt began with boycotts and strikes in 1936, it became far more violent in 1937 after a temporary suppression. The second phase of the revolt led to curfews and brutal tactics by the British police and military, resulting in approximately 2,000 Arab deaths by the end of 1939. During the revolt, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre had problems with the curfews imposed, difficulties in procuring necessary materials, and the need for the DPW to focus on repairing other damaged infrastructure. 

Amid the revolt, Sir Harold MacMichael became the new high commissioner. A controversial figure, he notably closed the church to pilgrims during the Easter week in an attempt to force the church’s communities into an agreement. Initially, the church officials agreed to split the cost of urgent repairs in three ways, hoping to quickly reopen the basilica during the holy week. But any hopes of making repairs were quickly dashed by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate. Concerned about splitting the costs evenly with the two other main communities, the Greek Patriarchate feared losing parts of their shared possessions and reneged on their agreement, wanting to return to the agreement of 1931. 

The DPW feared that Harvey’s predictions would come true and that the temporary scaffolding would not be sufficient. As a result, by July 1938, the Mandatory government approved the DPW’s entrance into the basilica, regardless of the dispute with the Greek Orthodox community. The Senior Architect Percy Winter together with the DPW director also hired a temporary clerk of works for the church. Winter wrote to the clerk warning of sectarian disagreement, stating “You must use discretion and tact in all your contacts with this representative of the Patriarchate and with the representatives of the other churches with whom you may come into contact.” Winter’s letter highlights the diplomatic nature of the positions of the on-the-ground workforce. While the DPW workers could not make decisions like the district commissioner and director of Public Works, Winter and the clerk of works under him were the people most often seen by the church communities. Thus, in many ways, they were the face of the DPW and needed to represent the British presence to the clergymen, who were accustomed to questioning any official figure in accordance with maintaining the status quo. Hence, upon entering the Holy Sepulchre, these workers needed to handle any crises from the clergymen with tact and maintain their authorized position in the edifice.

In late 1939, the DPW finally completed the installation of the scaffolding and shoring. However, the work was not finished without numerous delays. Notably, the Copts, as the possessors of the area above the Chapel of Saint Helena dome, obstructed the work by not allowing the clerk of works to measure the space in May 1939. As a minor church community, the Copts often feared British infringement and viewed (and continue to view) their possessions in and above the church as precarious. Nonetheless, in October 1939, the DPW entered the edifice with police protection and ordered the Coptic bishop to keep his clergymen in line. This British encroachment emphasizes the limited power of the Copts and highlights the British perspective of the major communities—supported by European states—in comparison to the minor communities. While the DPW and the British Mandate worked tirelessly to reach an agreement with the major communities, they demanded access to the Coptic space and used police intervention to accomplish their construction goals.

With the church still supported by temporary scaffolding years later, the British began to question the permanency of the construction. The bracing work required continuous inspections to ensure that the bolts were properly tightened and that the boards were secure. Alongside these inspections, the DPW also searched for cracked or broken telltales and any other obvious signs of hazardous and deteriorating conditions of the church. These temporary measures became part of the clerk of works’ permanent schedule. 

In a scathing letter from May 1943 from the director of the DPW, V. Kenniff, written in conjunction with the Senior Architect Winter, to the chief secretary, the director called out the hypocrisy of these narratives and emphasized the need for substantial repairs:

There appears to be two distinguishable responsibilities; (i) for the “temporary measures” – D.P.W., (ii) for the fabric – no one in particular but Government in general. I consider it important, especially in view of occurrences at [the] Easter Ceremonies, to place before you facts and reasonings to show that these seemingly separate responsibilities are, in reality, inseparable. 

In this letter, both the director of the DPW and the senior architect concluded that the church was held up by the “temporary” shoring and scaffolding. Consequently, the bracing work had become an integral part of the overall structure of the church, challenging the British narrative of maintaining the status quo. Thus, although the British continued to promote a narrative that they would not alter the composition of the basilica, they did, in fact, implement permanent changes to the structure. 

Bibliography

Bunton, Martin. “Inventing the Status Quo: Ottoman Land-Law during the Palestine Mandate, 1917–1936.” International History Review 21, no. 1 (1999): 28–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/07075332.1999.9640851. 

Cohen, Raymond. Saving the Holy Sepulchre: How Rival Christians Came Together to Rescue Their Holiest Shrine. Oxford University Press, 2008.

Dalachanis, Angelos and Vincent Lemire, eds. Ordinary Jerusalem, 1840–1940: Opening New Archives, Revisiting a Global City. Brill, 2018. 

Irving, Sarah. “1927: Earthquakes, Unemployment, and the Infrastructure of Mandate Palestine.” Journal of Palestine Studies 52, no. 1 (2023): 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/0377919X.2023.2169077.

Jacobson, Abigail. From Empire to Empire: Jerusalem between Ottoman and British Rule. Syracuse University Press, 2011.

Lemire, Vincent. In the Shadow of the Wall : The Life and Death of Jerusalem’s Maghrebi Quarter, 1187–1967. Stanford University Press, 2023.

Mazza, Roberto. “‘The Preservation and Safeguarding of the Amenities of the Holy City Without Favour of Prejudice to Race or Creed’: The Pro-Jerusalem Society and Ronald Storrs, 1917–1926.” In Ordinary Jerusalem 1840–1940 : Opening New Archives, Revisiting a Global City, edited by Angelos Dalachanes and Vincent Lemire. Brill, 2018.

Reiter, Yitzhak. Contested Holy Places in Israel/Palestine: Sharing and Conflict Resolution. Routledge, 2017.