In Arabic, the words “West” (مغرب) and “Foreign” (غريب) both stem from the same root: غ-ر-ب, carrying the meaning of foreignness, distance, or otherness. Interesting, isn’t it? Because this raises a simple question: if the root itself conveys “alienation,” why is the very heartland of Jewish history referred to in Arabic as “the West Bank” (الضفة الغربية)?
This name, now so common in international discourse, is actually a relatively new invention. Until 1948, even among Arabs, the area west of the Jordan River was naturally called by its historical names – Judea and Samaria - or described as part of Bilad al-Sham (بلاد الشام), the cultural and geographic region encompassing Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and the Land of Israel. In other words, no one used the phrase “West Bank” to describe this land.
Only after Israel’s War of Independence, when Jordan annexed the territory west of the Jordan River, was the term “West Bank” coined - a technical, geographical label highlighting its relationship to Jordan’s “East Bank.” It was never a reflection of a local identity, but rather a political construct imposed by Jordan.
And here lies the paradox: the choice of a term rooted in “otherness” became widely accepted, while the original, historical names - Judea and Samaria - were pushed aside. A closer look at the language itself reveals just how deeply tied this land is to Jewish history, and how artificial and recent the name “West Bank” really is.
So the next time we hear this term in political or media discourse, it’s worth remembering: it was invented less than a century ago, not an ancient or authentic label. The language itself tells the story. one that begins long before 1948, with Judea, Samaria, and a heritage that cannot be erased.
Comments
Post a Comment