Was it because of some Israeli bullshit group?
It was because of some Israeli bullshit group.
The changes have been made following audience research, and after concerns were raised by UK Lawyers for Israel, a voluntary association of lawyers.
It sounds like the exhibits’ text was politicized by this group.
The name “Palestine” for the region has been in use for over 1000 years.
The historian Herodotus is believed to have made the first textual mention of Palestine in the fifth century BC.
The name “Palestine” for the region has been in use for over 1000 years.
But from this article this is relating to:
Information boards in the museum’s ancient Middle East galleries, covering the period from 1500BC to 1700BC.
The change doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. It wouldn’t make sense to refer to Ancient Rome as “Italy” or Ancient Persia as “Iran” either.
That does make the changes sound reasonable. Good point!
What about saying “present day Palestine” or “present day Iran”? That helps people understand relative to what locations are called today.
Erasing an entire culture and people. Those who are responsible could give adolf hitler advice on genocide. I wonder who it could be? Surly someone whose people have never been subject to an attempt at the same.
the group claimed: “Applying a single name – Palestine – retrospectively to the entire region, across thousands of years, erases historical changes and creates a false impression of continuity.
It is understood that the “Palestinian descent” has been changed to read “Canaanite descent” in the Hyksos panel.
What they did is technically correct, Canaanite is the correct term for the time period. The term Palestinian did not yet exist.
BUT it is certainly no coincidence that “UK Lawyers of Israel” did request that change now.
Cultural descendants of Palestinians did exist in Canaan at the time around 1200BC. I doubt that anywhere in that museum you would be able to find information about this though. Because the whole point of this debacle is a childish claim of the form “Our descendants was there first!”. Given that kingdom of Israel was created around 1200BC it is no wonder they (Zionists) are flailing arms like spoiled infants like they always do and particularly obsessing about this exhibition that covers a date range somewhat before this.
If British Museum had any balls they would make this correction and add the history of Philistines next to it but we all know they wouldn’t do it and why.
The text changed in the museum refers to the origins of a specific line of Egyptian kings around 1650 BC. I think neither the history of the Philistines nor the history of the kingdom of Israel is relevant to this.
As to the question if they have the history of Palestine/Israel/Canaan/Levant somewhere else in the museum? I don’t know, but I would hope so. If not, they would have a serious knowledge gap there. That topic deserves its own space, not a footnote in the Egyptian section.
‘Levantine’ would have been a more accurate term. The ‘Canaanite’ term is specifically what’s used to differentiate from ‘Hebrews’ in zionism, both before and after Israel was created. Biblically Canaanites are Phoenecians, which are one of many Levantine tribes and city states of the Bronze and Biblical eras.
AFAIK it is common practice to call them Canaanites:
Thus, while “Phoenician” and “Canaanite” refer to the same culture, archaeologists and historians commonly refer to the Bronce Age pre-1200 BC Levantine peoples as Canaanites, while their Iron Age descendants, particularly those living on the coast, are referred to as Phoenicians.
Not disputing that, but even in that section of explanatory text it uses ‘Levantine peoples’.
Well Levantine is the broader term, so you need it to define the more specific term Canaanite.
It’s a broader term that is no less accurate. But it is also one more removed from political connotations since this is not just about using the term ‘Canaanite’ as it is also changing it from ‘Palestinian.’
Changing ‘Palestinian’ to ‘Canaanite’ in 2026 specifically means something more given the Israelite-Canaanite context.
It’s either malicious or stupid, and evidence is tending to the former for the group that sought the change and the latter for the museum.
Didn’t the Bible also say that they were literal giants?
Also that people can be resurrected, that matter can be duplicated and all sorts of other bullshit
They had food replicators and teleporters back then? Things have really gone downhill.
what time period exactly? because Palestine is mentioned during the bronze age collapse. it’s pretty old.
although they refer to a specific group of people that settled a specific area.
Apparently the panel in the museum is about the Hyksos, so 1650 - 1550 BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyksos
The oldest mention of the predecessor term “Peleset” is from 1150 BC. And the actual term “Palestine” appeared around the 5th century BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_name_Palestine
that would make sense then, given that at the time the Palestinians (Peleset) weren’t even in the area, as they likely came from Cyprus with the Sea people.
similarly, Jews weren’t there either, as they come from Babilonia. so cnaan makes sense.
that being said, there’s much Palestinian erasure it makes sense to be hyper vigilant
Well, ofcourse they would do that. A genocide is not complete if you also don’t erase a culture from history and collective memory, just killing them and forced migration is not enough. And I assume British museum has a lot of Zionist sponsors which is why they were so quick to agree on this. This is also another proof as to why “billionaire charities” are just tax evading methods to use insane amounts of money for attaching strings and their philanthropy is just pure bullshit.
The British Museum needs a proper relootig, honestly.
As if British archeology needed to be shittier.
Ahem Elgin Marbles.
Literally antisemitism if you’re acknolwedging the major players of Semitic languages, culture, and history.
Kind of the purpose of a museum; no?
