|
As early as April 1949, when the basic planning of the government complex on Sheikh Baader
Hill (Givat Ram) began,5 the architect Arie Sharon, who stood at the head of the Planning
Section,6 proposed that the permanent Knesset building would be located at the Northern
plateau of the hill, together with the "Congress Hall" (Binyanei Ha'uma).7
Twenty five years later an ideological explanation was given to this idea:
"The symbolic intention was to create a close connection between the Knesset, which is
the parliament of the Jewish people in Israel, and Binyanei Ha`uma, which constitutes
the meeting place of the Zionist Congresses and Conferences of the Jews of the dispersions".8
In November 1949, Mordechai Shatner, who was chairman of the Committee for the Development
of the Government Buildings (that later turned into the Complex Committee), reported to the
Government Secretary, Ze'ev Sherf, that Knesset Speaker Joseph Sprinzak, and members of
the Knesset secretariat, had toured the area designated for the complex with members of the
Committee, and that the location of the Knesset had been agreed upon.9
In the plan that on April 25, 1950 won first prize in the competition for the planning of
the government complex, which had been submitted by the architects Munio Gitai Weinraub and
Al Mansfeld,10 the location of the Knesset was at a distance of around 200 meters from Binyanei
Ha'uma, but within the complex, on the North-Western side of what was known as "the
representational square" (one of two squares in the complex - the Southern one designed for
parades), together with the President's residence and the Prime Minister's Office. But
very soon this planned was shelved, and according to a map of the government complex, that
bears the date of September 6, 1950, the Knesset appears elsewhere: in the center of the
complex, on the South-Eastern side of a single central square, around which the Prime
Minister's Office, the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Finance are
also located.11 On this map the President's residence is on a separate hill, on the
South-Eastern corner of the complex - the hill on which the Knesset itself was finally
built. Over the next four and a half years, it was this plan that was deliberated by the
Government Complex Committee.12
 |
|
 |
| The original plan for the Government complex in Givat Ram by the architects Al Mansfeld and Munio Gitai Weinraub, that won the competition in 1950
|
|
A contemporary map drawn on the basis of the plan for the Government complex area, September 1950
|
On February 1, 1952, Shlomo Arazi, the Director of the Government Complex Bureau, informed
Ephraim Evron, Prime Minister David Ben Gurion’s private secretary, that "regarding the central
block, which includes the Knesset building, the Prime Minister's Office, the Ministry for Foreign
Affairs and the Ministry of Finance, it is intended to hold, at the end of this year, a competition for
planning the area and the buildings, in such a way that it will be possible to start the actual building in
1954".13 In the middle of 1952 it was still taken for granted that these buildings would be built around
a central square, and in several meetings of the Complex Committee the question of whether the
planning of the square and the Knesset building should come first, or whether all the buildings should
be planned simultaneously, was deliberated. The main consideration was budgetary.
"I think", said the Chairman of the Committee, Shatner, at the Committee meeting of May 13,
1952, "that even if we decide to plan the Knesset only, it will be necessary to determine, not only
height, but also the contours for the other buildings, and if it will be necessary to calculate the
contour and height, it is worth planning the whole area, if this will not take too much time". The
Secretary General of the Knesset, Moshe Rosseti, added that "there is no doubt that we cannot
approach this issue without planning the whole square, to the very last detail, so that there will be
harmony among the buildings, and that we should not create a situation in which each building will
be built over the years in a different architectural style”. Arazi interpreted the words of the Secretary
General: "Mr. Rosseti was undoubtedly referring to the city of Cardiff (in Britain), where a square
was planned in the center of the city, and various buildings were built around it in different periods,
and by different bodies. Each one of them separately is very nice, but they do not blend properly
with each other".14
It is curious that at this stage, the architect Joseph Klarwein, who was eventually to win first prize
in the competition for the planning of the Knesset building, and who served as an advisor to the
Complex Committee, thought that one should not yet start building the Knesset building. "I think, that
the time has not come to build a Knesset, as long as we do not yet have a constitution in the country
that lays down the form of the people's representation: one House or two Houses?"15
On June 2, 1952, a short time after this meeting took place, Sprinzak wrote an emotional letter to
Prime Minister David Ben Gurion. "I should like to ask you to raise the issue of a suitable residence
for the Knesset in one of the Government meetings devoted to a deliberation on the development
budget", he wrote, "so that the Government will consider the need to earmark money for this
purpose. Since March 1950 the Knesset has resided in 'Beit Frumin' [on King George Street],
which was requisitioned for it for a short period, and which is unsuited, in all respects, to its needs.
The Knesset resides in this building under the assumption, that it will serve as a temporary
residence, and that before long it will be able to move to a more suitable building".
Sprinzak told Ben Gurion that in August 1950 a contract had been signed with the Economic
Corporation for the Development of Jerusalem, to rent the Beit Ha'am (cultural center) building in the
center of town, for a period of around three years "until its permanent building would be constructed
in the complex", but finally those in charge of the work of the Knesset reached the conclusion "that
the Beit Ha'am building will not solve the problem of the Knesset's residence, and will not satisfy its
requirements".16 It is doubtful whether at the time of writing the letter to Ben Gurion, Sprinzak
imagined that the Knesset would continue to reside in Beit Frumin, for anther fourteen years; He
certainly did not imagine the course of obstacles that the planners and constructors of the Knesset
building would have to undergo until the new building would be inaugurated on the South-Eastern
corner of the government complex on August 30, 1966.
In February 1955 the Government finally adopted an operative decision regarding the
construction of "an independent building for the Knesset".17 But before this happened there were two
additional plans for a temporary residence for the Knesset: the first in one of the buildings (building
No. 3) planned in the government complex,18 and the second in Binyanei Ha`uma. The idea of
putting the Knesset in Binyanei Ha`uma19 (the construction of which was in the basic frame stage),
was rejected in an opinion presented on December 12, 1953 by the architects Dov Karmi, Klarwein
and Jacob Pinkerfeld, to the Government Secretary Sherf. One of their arguments was that it is not
desirable "to locate the Knesset in a public building, that has its own designations, such as:
conferences, concerts, exhibitions, fairs etc."20 The idea was finally rejected in the beginning of
1955, after it became known that the Jewish Agency - the owner of Binyanei Ha`uma - refuses to
make it available to the Knesset.21
The idea of building the Knesset in the midst of the government complex, on the central square,
finally fell through, after it was agreed that even if the Knesset would form part of the complex, it
should be located on its periphery. On March 29, 1955, at the second meeting of the Program
Committee - the Committee, which had been set up in order to prepare the architectural program for
the Knesset building towards the competition for its planning - the Knesset representatives expressed
their dissatisfaction with the site allocated for the building in the complex. Rosseti argued that it was
necessary to separate the Knesset building from the rest of the buildings in the complex, in order to
give the separation of powers - the legislative authority and the executive authority - a geographical
dimension. In 1953 the Knesset Serjeant-at-Arms, Lieutenant-Colonel Moshe Yona Hazor, added
that even practical considerations regarding traffic arrangements, the approach to the building for
the general public, and Knesset’s working hours that sometimes lasted well into the night, made it
necessary to construct the Knesset in an area, which can be supervised independently. He also
mentioned that the regulations of the 1952 Law on the Immunity of the Knesset Buildings, grant the
Knesset buildings and the area known as the Knesset foreground, special status. To sum up, the
Committee decided to request that "another suitable area be found for the Knesset within the areas
of the government complex, or adjacent to them".22
After Sprinzak and his deputies toured the government complex area in the beginning of June,
the Knesset Presidium decided that the suitable place for constructing the Knesset building in the
government complex was the hill, which in the original plan was designated for the President’s
residence. After Shatner informed Sprinzak, that the Government Complex Committee had, on June
14, 1955, approved the allocation of the area needed for the Knesset's requirements, in the
South-East corner of the government complex, the Knesset Speaker announced the decision in the
plenum.23 In a press release, Sprinzak noted that in the period of the Second Temple, there had
been a Jewish settlement in the designated area, the residents of which engaged primarily in stone
cutting for the construction of the city of Jerusalem, and that after the destruction of the city, the
tenth Roman legion camped on the site. In the Christian era there was a Christian old people's
settlement on the location, and an oil-press from the period of the destruction was also found.
Sprinzak added that close to the area, burial caves from the period of the Sanhedrin had been
found.24
At this stage the preparation of the program for the building was completed. Though the
representatives of the Knesset administration participated in the preparation, and even the Knesset
Speaker was involved in the process, the issue was never debated in the Knesset plenum, or any of
its committees.25 The program was, in fact, a list of areas, installations and rooms that must be
included in the building. In this respect the program was simple and clear, but it said nothing about
its essence and the nature of the activity in the building, or the preferred architectural style.26 Many
years later, the architect Ram Karmi argued that the program was not clear, and that for this reason
many architects decided not to participate in the competition.27 The architect Heinz Rau argued that
the program was ideal for a petit-bourgeois parliament.28
5 The architect Heinz Rau prepared the first comprehensive plan for Jerusalem, according to which the city should be built in the shape of a horse-shoe around the "capitol" in the Western part of the city, close to the road leading to the coastal plain. (See Talia Margalit, "Bonim Le`om” [Building a Nation], Ha'aretz, April 23, 1999). The choice of this site for the construction of the Government complex was due to several reasons, including the fact that the area was very sparsely built, the convenient topographical structure, and the relative distance from the border with Jordan.
6 The Planning Section was a national planning body, which at first formed part of the Ministry of Labor and Construction, was then moved to the Prime Minister's Office, and finally, in 1951, to the Ministry of the Interior. (See Abba Elhanani, Hama`avak Le’atzma`ut Shel Ha`adrichalut Hayisra`elit Bame`ah Ha’esrim [The Struggle for Independence of Israeli Architecture in the 20th Century], Tel Aviv, the Ministry of Defense Publishing House, 1998, p. 255, footnote 50). Sharon described the Section's doctrine in his book Tichnun Physi Beyisra'el (Physical Planning in Israel), Jerusalem, the Government Press, 1951, pp. 64-67.
7 The State Archive, a map in envelope No. 6, file 1725, box C 5448/19.
8 The Jerusalem municipality, Department of the City Engineer, Town Planning Section, Kiryat Hamemshala - Kiryat Ben Gurion (The Government Complex - the Ben-Gurion Complex), June 1974, p. 6.
9 The State Archive, file 1719, box C 5448/13.
10 The plan appears in the book of David Kroyanker, Adrichalut Birushalayim: Habniya Hamodernit Mihutz Lahomot 1948-1990 (Architecture in Jerusalem: Modern construction Outside the Walls, 1948-1990), Jerusalem, the Keter Publishing House, 1991, p, 98.
11 The State Archive, file 1719, box C 5448/13.
12 The State Archive, file 1719a, minutes of the Government Complex Committee, box C 5448/13. It should be noted that finally neither this plan, nor any other comprehensive plan was implemented. Mordechai Shoshani, the chief architect of Ma'atz wrote the following at the end of the 1970s: "Over time it was decided that a government complex would be constructed on the site, which would include most of the Ministries on the national level; three government buildings were constructed. They were 'sown' in the area, as thousands of housing projects were sown in the country; lands were handed over to many bodies - the Knesset, Beit Hakhayal, Yad Labanim, Binyanei Ha`uma, the Hilton Hotel, the Bank of Israel, the Archeology Institute, the stadium and the Israel Museum. Several master plans were prepared, and dust covered all of them". (Avimar Gil and Mordechai Shoshani, Kiryat Ben Gurion, Yerushalyim (The Ben Gurion Complex, Jerusalem), Jerusalem, 1978, p. 1)
13 The State Archive, File 1722, Box C 5448/16.
14 Minutes of the 48th meeting of the Complex Committee, held on May 13, 1950, the Knesset Archive, file 218, box 9.
15 Ibid. Had the leaders of the state decided to wait for the completion of the constitution before starting to plan the Knesset building, the Knesset would not have been constructed to the present day. In any event, it should be noted that "Basic Law: the Knesset", which, like the rest of the basic laws, will eventually constitute part of Israel’s Constitution, was the first basic law passed by the Knesset, on February 12, 1958, around six years after the said meeting took place.
16 The Knesset archive, ibid.
17 A document without a date entitled "guidelines for the drafting of the announcement of the Speaker of the Knesset, concerning the construction of the Knesset building". The Knesset Archive, File 2181, Box 9.
18 The Secretary of the Complex Bureau, Z. Vantik, to the Secretary General of the Knesset, Moshe Rosseti, July 13, 1952. The Knesset Archive, file 218, box 9.
19 Letter from Yerahmiel Belkind (the Knesset Serjeant at Arms until 1953) to M. Zagagi (the Ministry of Finance). The issue came up for deliberation in June 1953. The Knesset Archive, ibid.
20 The Knesset Archive, file 2181, box 9.
21 The Knesset Speaker, Joseph Sprinzak, announced this at a meeting that took place in his bureau on February 15, 1955. See the Knesset Archive, File 218, Box 9.
22 Minutes of the second meeting of the Program Committee, held on March 29, 1955, Ibid.
23 The Knesset Record, Volume XVIII, p. 2183, June 30, 1955.
24 Undated press release, the Knesset Archive, file 2181, box 9.
25 In fact, the Knesset Members almost completely avoided any involvement in the planning of the building, at all stages. On the other hand, a debate took place on whether it was proper to call the Knesset building ‘mishkan’ (in the Old Testament the word mishkan means ‘tabernacle’. In modern Hebrew the word means dwelling-place, or building). In the first sitting that took place in the new building on the morrow of its inauguration, at which the first reading of Basic Law: the Government was debated, MK Menachem Begin argued: "Let us not use the term mishkan. There are names in the history of the Jews that should be left untouched, because of their sanctity, or the sanctity of their uniqueness". (See, the Knesset Record, Volume 46, p. 2505, August 31, 1966). MK Shlomo Lorentz (from Agudat Yisrael) added: "In the name of the haredi Judaism I must comment that in our opinion the name 'mishkan haknesset' which is used to describe the new building… involves the distortion of holy values, and pretentiousness that knows no limits. The mishkan was called by that name because of the shkhina (Divine Presence) that frequently prevailed in it. When one raises the flag of secularism, and locks the gates of this House to the authority of the shkhina, there is no moral right to attach the name 'mishkan' that derives from the word shkhina, which is a term that is incomprehensible to the human mind". (Ibid. p, 2518). One of the secular MKs, who related to this comment was Israel Yeshayahu (Alignment): "I do not understand the reservations of some Members of the Knesset regarding the term mishkan. I should like to say to those religious Members… for whom every word in the Torah is holy. If we shall follow this path, we shall cease to speak Hebrew. Except for the explicit name of God, all other words in Hebrew are usable. If it were not so - where would be end? Even the word ohel (tent) will be rejected. It is written: 'ma tovu ohleicha Ya'acov, mishkenoteich Yisrael'' ('How goodly are your tents, O Jacob, your swellings, Israel!' - Numbers, 24:5) - where the meaning was Yeshivot, seminaries etc. Nevertheless, there are tents (ohalim) and there are dwellings (mishkenot). Can we not use these words?… And also not the word mashkanta (mortgage)? (Ibid.. p. 2523). The word mishkan was approved and became commonplace in daily usage.
26 The clearest proof to the fact that it was not possible to understand from the program what sort of building was perceived by those ordering it, was the lack of uniformity in the external appearance of the building as presented in the various plans submitted to the competition, even though most of them complied with the requirements of the program. The only photographs I found, which present some of the plans submitted, appeared in the H’aolam Hazeh weekly, August 7, 1957.
27 In an interview with the writer on June 14, 1998, Ram Karmi said: "Someone wrote a program for the building, and one could not understand how the building was to function from the program. In a competition you do not sit with a client, but with a piece of paper. This paper said nothing".
28 Heinz Rau, "No Hurry to Build", The Jerusalem Post, September 7, 1957.
Continued...
© Copyright 2006, The State of Israel. All Rights Reserved.
We welcome your Suggestions and Comments.
Email: feedback@knesset.gov.il
|
