squiz

From this link http://www.theage.com.au/world/netan...209-82eh.html:
How true is this statement?

premjan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golan_H...ncient_history
Probably not entirely.

Anat

Define Palestinian, Syrian in this context. Also define ancient. There were several Jewish cities in the Golan in Roman/Herodian times. But there were also non-Jewish cities there in those times (whom do you think the Maccabbeans were campaigning against in the area?) Who knows if any ancestors of Syrians or Palestinians or others were among ancient Golan residents, whether Jewish or not.

Roger Pearse

I presume the reference is to contemporary Palestinian and Syrians. These largely are and define themselves as Arabs, which limits their cultural beginnings to the 7th century AD. To demonstrate cultural continuity prior to this date would involve abandoning their position that Islam is integral to their identity.

Interestingly the presence of Syriac-speakers in Syria does mean a pre-Islamic cultural element survives, albeit only just. It would be possible to look for the cultural artefacts of Aramaic speakers, and argue continuity. But since that Syriac-speaking element is marginal in Arab states -- indeed currently actively persecuted in Iraq by the Syrian-backed elements -- it would be an impossible argument for the Syrians to make.

The point being made is that a time-traveller to ancient times would find recognisable Jews. He wouldn't find anything that looked like a Syrian or a Palestinian. The nearest he would get would be someone on a camel who'd come off the desert into town for the weekend.

???

Indeed, but we can't sensibly argue that the Palestinians and Syrians speak Greek, can we? If they did, if they were Greeks, some kind of case might be made.

Not quite the point, surely?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Anat

Identity is a complex issue. I wouldn't persume to dictate to anyone living in Syria what hir identity is *supposed* to be based on. It probably involves elements of Islam and Islam-based culture, language - both Arabic in general and the local dialect(s), local traditions stemming from assorted time periods, biological and perceived ancestry. Most people want to belong to a larger collective and with the tangled lines that history tends to take people have a broad menu to pick and choose from. I understand that these days there are Palestinians in Gaza who want to reconnect to their Philistine roots. There has been a neo-Canaanite identity on and off in Israel - earlier on it mostly involved people on the right wing (similar to the romanticism of pre-Christian Europe) and later it found more fans on the left (because it supports a non-religious Hebrew identity). That current Syrians do not speak Greek is no reason to exclude local Greek speakers in the distant past from the category of proto-Syrians. It is for the individual Syrians to decide if they view those Greek-speakers as their cultural/ethnic progenitors or not.

Roger Pearse

I'm afraid this seems very like special pleading to me. Don't do this. On this narrow issue, the Israelis are right. Corrupting all our categories to try to evade this seems bonkers to me.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

premjan

Arabs pay allegiance to a culture from Arabia. Jews pay allegiance to one from Palestine.

Roger Pearse

Americans alternate, depending on which party they elect? :-)