British Museum Updates Ancient Middle East Exhibits to Replace Palestine with Canaan Following Concerns from Pro-Israel Lawyers in London

The British Museum in London has recently revised some of its displays related to the ancient Middle East, sparking discussion over how historical regions are labeled.

Some information boards that previously referred to parts of the eastern Mediterranean as “Palestine” have been changed to reflect older historical terms like “Canaan,” following debates about accuracy in the depiction of ancient peoples.

The Origins of the Change

Earlier exhibits described individuals from between 1500 BC and 1700 BC as “of Palestinian descent.”

UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), a pro-Israel legal group, raised concerns that applying the term “Palestine” to periods long before the name existed could distort historical understanding.

The group argued in a formal letter to the museum that the term did not appear until around the fifth century BC.

They suggested more historically precise labels, such as “Canaan,” the “kingdoms of Israel and Judah,” or “Judea,” to reflect the realities of the ancient Near East.

Historical Context Matters

Textual evidence from 1500 BC refers to the eastern Mediterranean region as Canaan, while the Kingdom of Israel appears in Egyptian inscriptions around 1200 BC.

By contrast, the term “Palestine” only emerged centuries later.

UKLFI emphasized that using one modern term across thousands of years risks creating a “false impression of continuity” and oversimplifies complex historical changes.

Controversy Over Cultural References

The debate extended beyond maps and labels.

UKLFI also objected to the description of a doll in “Palestinian traditional dress,” arguing that it suggested an unbroken cultural lineage spanning millennia.

The museum responded by clarifying that the display aimed to explore cultural identity rather than imply direct historical continuity.

A UKLFI spokesperson welcomed the museum’s willingness to review terminology, saying: “Museums play a vital role in public education, and it is essential that descriptions reflect the historical record with precision and neutrality.”

They highlighted that revising these terms helps visitors gain a more accurate understanding of the ancient Near East.

Museum Clarifications

Despite media coverage suggesting that the museum acted in response to UKLFI’s letter, a spokesperson denied that narrative.

They emphasized that “Palestine” continues to be used in various contemporary and historical contexts across the galleries.

The museum explained that using “Canaan” for certain periods of the southern Levant aligns with historical scholarship, while UN terminology on modern maps depicts current political boundaries like Gaza, West Bank, Israel, and Jordan.

“Palestinian” remains employed as a cultural or ethnographic identifier where relevant.

What’s next?

The debate highlights the broader challenge museums face in balancing historical accuracy with contemporary sensitivities.

Experts suggest that institutions may increasingly adopt layered approaches—clarifying when a term refers to historical periods versus modern cultural or political identities.

Public education campaigns, updated digital guides, and context-rich labels could become standard practice in museums worldwide.

Summary

The British Museum has adjusted some ancient Middle East displays to reflect historically accurate terms such as “Canaan,” amid discussion sparked by UK Lawyers for Israel.

While some perceive the changes as a response to external pressure, the museum maintains that they reflect independent curatorial decisions.

The incident underscores ongoing conversations about precision, neutrality, and cultural sensitivity in museum labeling, with implications for how history is presented to the public.