The British Museum has issued a strong rebuttal to a recent media report, clarifying that it did not remove the term "Palestinian" from its exhibition descriptions as a result of lobbying from an external organization. This statement addresses concerns raised by a newspaper article implying that such alterations were made under pressure, emphasizing the museum's commitment to accurate and appropriate historical representation.
A recent report in The Telegraph alleged that the British Museum had systematically eliminated references to "Palestinian" from various wall texts after receiving a letter from UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI). This group purportedly argued that using the term "Palestine" in exhibits related to Middle Eastern art could inaccurately represent historical continuities and potentially misframe the origins of Israelite and Jewish people. The Telegraph cited specific instances, such as changing "Palestinian descent" to "Canaanite descent" in a display concerning the Hyksos, an ancient Levantine group.
However, a spokesperson for the British Museum asserted on Sunday that these changes, if any, were initiated before the museum received the UKLFI's correspondence. The museum clarified that the term "Canaan" is historically relevant for the southern Levant during the late second millennium BCE. Furthermore, the institution maintains its adherence to United Nations terminology, employing "Palestinian" as a cultural or ethnographic descriptor when contextually suitable. This statement implies that any adjustments were based on scholarly accuracy rather than external influence.
Further reinforcing the museum's position, reports from The National indicate that British Museum director Nicholas Cullinan personally contacted Husam Zomlot, the Palestinian ambassador to the UK, to provide assurances. According to The National, Ambassador Zomlot accepted the museum's explanation. The Palestinian embassy in the UK subsequently released a statement highlighting the concern that efforts to label "Palestine" as controversial could normalize the denial of Palestinian existence.
Additionally, art historian William Dalrymple confirmed on social media platform X that he had spoken with Cullinan. Cullinan acknowledged that the language on two specific panels concerning the Levant had been updated the previous year. He emphatically denied any connection between these linguistic adjustments and the letter from UK Lawyers for Israel, expressing his frustration over the inaccuracies presented in the media report. Cullinan emphasized his personal unawareness of the UKLFI letter until recently, underscoring that the museum's curatorial decisions were not influenced by the group's intervention.
In summary, the British Museum has robustly defended its curatorial independence and accuracy in response to recent reports regarding its use of the term "Palestinian." The museum asserts that any modifications to exhibit texts predated the alleged external pressure and were grounded in historical and ethnographic appropriateness, reaffirming its commitment to presenting cultural heritage responsibly and impartially.