The Gaza Strip, a region of profound archaeological and historical significance, has long endured the consequences of war, political instability, and systematic destruction. Its cultural heritage has been subjected to occupation, looting, neglect, misrepresentation and large-scale devastation, contributing to the gradual erosion of collective historical memory. The intensification of Israeli military operations and policies since October 2023 has further exacerbated these threats, placing Gaza’s archaeological sites, historical monuments, museums, archives and memory at an unprecedented risk of obliteration. This essay critically examines the far-reaching consequences of this particular aggression on the Gaza Strip’s cultural heritage and the broader challenges of safeguarding historical memory amidst ongoing geopolitical conflicts.
Introduction
The Gaza Strip, historically an integral part of Mandatory Palestine, holds a strategic position within the Mediterranean region. As a crucial crossroads, it has facilitated the movement of human groups between Asia, Europe and Africa since the Lower Paleolithic period, which began approximately 1.5 million years ago in the ancient Near East. The Gaza Strip’s location along ancient trade routes also made it a significant centre for commerce and intellectual exchange, fostering a rich archaeological, architectural, cultural, traditional and artistic legacy. Despite its small size —approximately 365 square kilometres— the Gaza Strip has been home to successive civilizations, including the ancient Egyptians, Canaanites, Philistines (Pelest), Persians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Greco-Romans, Byzantines, early Islamic dynasties, Crusaders and later Islamic dynasties. Archaeological evidence gathered over the past two centuries indicates that permanent settlement in Gaza began during the Late Neolithic period (5500–4500 B.C.E) and has continued uninterrupted into modern times. A 2019 inventory conducted by Palestinian archaeologists in collaboration with UNESCO documented 354 heritage assets in Gaza, comprising 86 archaeological sites and 268 historical buildings. Among the region’s most renowned archaeological sites and historical monuments are Tell al-‘Ajjul, Tell al-Sakan, Tell Umm ‘Amer, Khirbet Ma’in, Tell Ruqeish, Deir al-Balah, Tell ad-Dahab, Anthedon Harbour and the historic cemetery in Jabaliya. Additionally, significant Islamic period structures include the Great Omari Mosque in Gaza, Qasr al-Basha, Dar al-Saqqa and Hamam al-Sammra, among others (Al-Houdalieh et al, 2024).
Attacks on built cultural heritage
frequently occur during armed conflicts,
often extending beyond collateral damage
to deliberate, ideologically driven assaults
The military assault on the Gaza Strip, which commenced in October 2023 and persisted for fifteen months (until writing the first version of this essay), has precipitated an unparalleled humanitarian and infrastructural crisis, resulting in widespread devastation across multiple sectors. Cultural heritage sites spanning various historical periods, alongside residential and educational institutions, museums, cultural centres, religious monuments of both Muslim and Christian significance, archives, critical infrastructure, water and sanitation facilities, hospitals, transportation networks, as well as urban and agricultural landscapes, have sustained severe and often irreparable damage. According to Press Release No. 749 issued by the Government Media Office in Gaza, as of 2 February 2025, the aggression had claimed the lives of over 61,709 individuals. Of these, 47,487 were confirmed deceased upon arrival at medical facilities, while 14,222 remained unaccounted for beneath the rubble. Furthermore, the number of injured had reached 111,588, with approximately 2 million people forcibly displaced from their homes (Government Media Office, 2025). The scale of destruction and human suffering underscores not only the immediate humanitarian catastrophe but also the long-term implications for Gaza’s cultural and historical continuity, raising critical questions about the preservation of identity and memory in the wake of systemic erasure.
The Dual Facets of the Destruction of Heritage and Memory
Attacks on built cultural heritage frequently occur during armed conflicts, often extending beyond collateral damage to deliberate, ideologically driven assaults. Such actions systematically erase the identity of targeted communities and undermine their historical continuity, in order to facilitate their subjugation within a colonial framework dominated by the occupying power. The destruction of cultural heritage severs the deep-rooted connections between a people and their past, akin to cutting the primary roots of a centuries-old tree —leaving it vulnerable, incapable of resilience, and unable to bear fruit for future generations. Archaeological and historical evidence demonstrates that the destruction of built heritage during wartime is a deeply entrenched phenomenon, persisting to this day. Notable examples include the devastation of several Levantine Canaanite city-states at the end of the Late Bronze Age (ca. 1200 BCE), Athens in 480/479 BCE, the destruction of Carthage in 146 BCE, and the multiple burnings of the Library of Alexandria in 48 BCE, 272 CE and 391 CE. More recent instances include the destruction of the medieval university library in Louvain, the great cathedral in Reims, the old town of Warsaw, and the Bamiyan Buddhas. Similarly, sites and monuments such as Ebla and Tell Jifar, the Temple of Bel in Palmyra, the Ottoman bridge Stari Most in Mostar, and Yemeni heritage sites —including Qubbat al-Mahdi, the Ma’rib Dam, Baraqish and the National Museum in Sanaa— have been deliberately targeted. Other examples include Hosn Niha in Lebanon’s Beqa’ Valley and numerous shrines, tombs and mosques in Timbuktu, as well as a large number of Palestinian towns and villages in 1948 (Al-Houdalieh et al, 2024; Al-Houdalieh and Jamal, 2024). These cases illustrate an enduring pattern of cultural destruction, emphasizing the urgent need for international mechanisms to protect heritage sites in times of conflict.
In the aftermath of the destruction of built heritage, affected communities often engage in reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts as a means of reclaiming their cultural and historical identity. This process serves not only to restore tangible remnants of the past but also to reaffirm a sense of continuity and resilience. However, as Kalman (2017: 539) argues, the reconstruction of damaged heritage is inherently an ideological endeavour and, paradoxically, a form of erasure. By reconstructing what has been lost, societies risk obscuring the material traces of violence and destruction, effectively removing crucial physical evidence of historical injustices. This tension underscores a critical dilemma: while rebuilding may offer psychological and cultural restoration, it simultaneously reshapes collective memory, potentially altering how historical traumas are acknowledged and remembered by future generations.
A nuanced approach to post-conflict heritage management requires a balance between reconstruction and the preservation of destruction as historical testimony. Nonetheless, in many cases, immediate reconstruction takes precedence, often at the expense of maintaining what may be termed “space and time memory.” A pertinent example within contemporary Palestinian history is the reconstruction of the Palestinian Authority headquarters in Ramallah (al-Muqata‘a). Following its severe damage by Israeli military forces in 2002, the ruins were swiftly removed, leaving no visible remnants of the destruction before new structures were erected.
This case raises critical questions regarding the future of the Gaza Strip’s historical monuments affected by the war that began in October 2023. Will Palestinians prioritize reconstruction, thereby erasing traces of destruction, or will they adopt an approach akin to that of the Greeks following the Persian invasions in the 5th century BCE? As recorded by Diodoros, after the devastation of Greek sanctuaries during the Battle of Plataea, the Greeks deliberately chose not to rebuild them, instead preserving the ruins as enduring evidence of the aggressors’ impiety (cited in Camp 2021: 78). This historical precedent underscores the broader dilemma faced by post-conflict societies: whether to reconstruct heritage sites as a means of reclaiming cultural identity or to maintain ruins as lasting symbols of historical trauma and resilience.
The Erasure of Collective Memory
The October 2023 aggression on the Gaza Strip differs qualitatively from previous Israeli military operations in terms of its scale, intent, weaponry and level of destruction, marking a critical crisis for all Palestinians, both within Mandatory Palestine and in the diaspora. In response, the United Nations Human Rights Council, along with numerous international organizations, has classified these actions as genocide and apartheid (Verdeja, 2025). ICOMOS–Palestine has further expanded this classification by employing more specific terms to describe the targeted destruction, including culturicide, medicide, schoolasticide, urbicide, domicide, and ecocide (ICOMOS–Palestine, 2025). Additionally, concepts such as spaciocide and memoricide can be applied to capture the systematic erasure of space and historical memory.
Beyond the physical destruction of archaeological sites and historical monuments, the aggression on the Gaza Strip poses a profound threat to the very memory and identity of Gazans in particular and Palestinian people in general. Museums, libraries and cultural institutions —repositories housing archaeological objects, manuscripts, artworks, rare books, traditional costumes and archives— have been systematically targeted, leading to the loss of material culture spanning different historical periods and the destruction of documentation essential for understanding Palestinian history. In addition to the devastation of cultural infrastructure, Israeli bombardment across all areas of the Gaza Strip —through land, sea and air attacks— has resulted in the death, arrest or displacement of a significant number of cultural heritage professionals, including archaeologists, conservators, restorers, artists, storytellers, authors and craftsmen (personal communication with Dr. Abdul Latif Abu Hashem, 59 years old, living in Gaza, and the director of Eyes on Heritage organization, accessed on 22 February 2025). As a result, both the tangible and intangible cultural heritage of Gaza teeters on the brink of irreversible loss, with consequences that will extend for generations to come.
Conclusion
During this 15-month war, the Gaza Strip’s cultural heritage has suffered unprecedented devastation through the systematic deployment of various forms of weaponry. This destruction has unfolded amid a conspicuous silence from most international cultural heritage organizations, raising critical questions about the global commitment to preserving cultural memory in conflict zones. The targeting of the Gaza Strip’s archaeological sites, historical monuments, museums, libraries, archives, cafés, youth clubs and cultural institutions represents not only a material loss, but also an assault on the intangible dimensions of identity —oral traditions, community knowledge, memories, lived experiences and historical narratives that have been passed down for generations. This crisis echoes the Nakba, the catastrophe of 1948 that displaced and dispossessed Palestinians, reaffirming a long pattern of attempts to dismantle Palestinian historical and cultural continuity. Yet, the question remains: Can Palestinian identity truly be erased, or does it persist and adapt, finding new ways to endure despite systematic attempts at eradication?
Despite displacement, war, occupation,
colonization and external pressures,
Palestinian identity persists through
both tangible and intangible heritage
It may be premature to definitively answer this question; however, substantial evidence suggests that Palestinians —both Muslim and Christian— remain deeply connected to their inherited identity, despite the succession of civilizations on their land and the immense challenges imposed upon them. This enduring cultural resilience is evident in various aspects of daily life and symbolic practices. For instance, Palestinian farmers continue to use the term “rain-fed agriculture,” (Zira’a Ba’aliya) unconsciously preserving the legacy of Baal, the Canaanite god of rain and fertility, reflecting their deep historical roots. Similarly, the key carried by Palestinians displaced in 1948 has become a powerful symbol of their right to return, passed down through generations as a tangible representation of historical continuity and collective memory. These cultural markers demonstrate that, despite displacement, war, occupation, colonization and external pressures, Palestinian identity persists through both tangible and intangible heritage, reinforcing a profound connection to the land and its historical narrative.
Mahmoud Darwish, the renowned Palestinian poet, consistently explored themes of land, resilience and the enduring pain of occupation —ideas that continue to resonate in contemporary discourse. His poetry serves as both a testament to displacement and a powerful assertion of belonging. Reflecting on exile, destruction and the longing for home, he wrote:
“I am the earth,
And the earth is you,
Khadija! Do not close the door,
Do not enter the darkness.
We will kick them out from inside the flower’s vase and the clothesline,
We will kick them away from the stones of this long road,
We will kick them away from Al-Galilee’s breeze” (Darwish 2005: 285-286).
Darwish’s poetry captures the unbreakable connection between the Palestinian people and their land, turning resistance into a poetic act of defiance. His words embody both grief and determination, offering a vision where memory, identity and hope remain inseparable.
References
Al-Houdalieh, Salah; Abu Alsaud, Loay and Warasneh, Ayman. “Heritage and conflict in Gaza.” Palgrave Encyclopedia of Cultural Heritage and Conflict. Springer Nature. 2024.
Al-Houdalieh, Salah and Jamal, Hasan. “The Price of Conflict: Devastation of Cultural Heritage in War and Political Strife, the West Bank as a Case Study.” in Palestine Exploration Quarterly vol. 156. No. 4, 1-21, 2024.
Camp, John. “The Persian destruction of Athens: source and archaeology.” in (eds.) Sylvian Fachard and Edward Harris, The destruction of cities in the ancient Greek world, integrating the archaeological and literary evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 70-84. 2021.
Darwish, Mahmoud. “The land.” Al-Diwan 2. Lebanon: Raid El-Rayyes Books S. A. R. L. 283-299. 2005.
Government Media Office. Press release No. 749. https://arabic.news.cn/20250203/82815c5ebe294713b5f95f2d7d94616f/c.html. 2025. Accessed on 20 February 2025.
ICOMOS Palestine. Statement. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uEmuO4uJHFXRdtEztGCSd2WcEToyOZJj/view?fbclid=IwY2xjawIm4yRleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHdQvfyTzYDABOqpG1g-9fK17ACYX0VSjCcEd-npHJyMeFi9qz13i_6uzFA_aem_tJDERKZZjnjWcfdmU4dNuQ. 2025. Accessed on 17 February 2025.
Kalman, Harold. “Destruction, mitigation, and reconciliation of cultural heritage.” in International Journal of Heritage Studies 23 no. 6: 538-555. 2017.
Verdeja, Ernesto. “The Gaza Genocide in Five Crises.” in Journal of Genocide Research, DOI: 10.1080/14623528.2025.2452707. 2025.
Header Photo: The Great Omari Mosque in Gaza is among the sites listed as damaged. Pictured: The mosque as it looked in 2021. CC 4.0
