Reorganization of knowledge: The name "Palestine" is being erased at the British Museum

Last weekend, we learned that the name "Palestine" has been removed from exhibitions at the British Museum. It is reported that from now on, the name Palestine will not appear on display panels or maps within the museum. News reports indicate that Zionist lobbies were influential in taking this step. However, I have been trying to express for some time that Zionist lobbies cannot, by their own power alone, cause such significant decisions to be made. Therefore, it would not be correct to reduce the step of removing the name Palestine from the British Museum merely to the work of Zionist lobbies. Indeed, the British Museum took this step just before Israel's decision to "initiate a land registration process in the West Bank, formalizing the usurpation of Palestinian lands." It is nearly impossible to consider the museum's decision separately from the UK's policy towards the Eastern Mediterranean and the central geography of Islam. This is because the British Museum, and museums in general in the UK, France, and the USA, are legacies of the colonial history of Western countries. In fact, as stated in a significant portion of museology studies, museums themselves emerged in the 19th century to reflect the grandeur and designs of colonial empires. For this reason, we cannot separate colonial museums from modern empires. Here, of course, we must find an answer to the question of why the British Museum erased the name Palestine. This step must have some meaning.

It is very important to analyse the world's fairs of colonial empires, museums and similar institutions, modern libraries, and even maps within the context of the reorganization of knowledge. However, due to the immediacy of the British Museum incident, we need to refer specifically to a few historical events related to exhibitions and museums. In the 1930s, even children brought from African colonies were exhibited for show. Visuals from France's African colonies or objects brought from British colonies were used many times for various purposes. Even advertising billboards would feature images related to the colonies. Because the concepts of "utilization and exploitation," derived from the notion of colonialism, have had a limiting effect on our intellectual framework, the grandeur and designs of colonization are not often dwelled upon. Moreover, with a tendency to place blame on ourselves, the impact of colonial classifications and arrangements on intellectual worlds is not subjected to widespread criticism. Instead, we are exposed to a conceptual framework that leads us to turn inward. However, as seen in the British Museum's attempt to erase the name Palestine, the colonial legacy of Western European countries is not merely composed of elements displaying imperial grandeur over inert and static cultures and geographies. The name Palestine does not signify something on behalf of the empire, as it might have in the past; on the contrary, it conveys very powerful messages about the existence and resistance of the Palestinian people, despite all the destruction, genocides, and exiles. Therefore, explaining the erasure of the name Palestine from a British museum through the power of Zionist Jews would mean tearing the event from its context and shifting it to a different realm.

While museums, exhibitions, archives, libraries, and similar institutions displayed or served as sources for imperial grandeur and designs, the existence of objects collected from the colonies and their names did not pose any problem. It should not be surprising that the most detailed maps of India or Palestine date back to the imperial periods. I should state that I maintain some distance from definitions like "realms of memory." The colonial legacy allowed things to be classified in any desired way, and because things were rendered inert, they could not possess meaning on their own. But we understand that this mode of arrangement no longer remains as it was. There is undoubtedly a new situation forcing a change in form. It is very clear that the name Palestine is saying something unsettling to the British and to Zionist Jews. I can say that the removal of this name from the museum stems from this unsettling situation. Because the name Palestine today refers to the Palestinians living in Palestine and signifies a living reality. This stands in stark contrast to the very existence of the British Museum.

After the Second World War, in Western European countries and especially in the Anglo-Saxon world, Zionist Jews had an overwhelming dominance in Orientalist studies. In colonial designs concerning Palestine, they ignored the Palestinians. But the Palestinians never disappeared. Now they are trying to ignore the name Palestine. Events show that the name Palestine will not disappear either.