<html style="direction: ltr;">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css">body p { margin-bottom: 1cm; margin-top: 0pt; } </style>
</head>
<body style="direction: ltr;"
bidimailui-detected-decoding-type="UTF-8" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"
text="#000000">
Hi,<br>
<br>
One of my FaceBook chats with an Egyptian who studies Hebrew drifted
to the subject of the presence of Jews in the Holy Land throughout
history. I thought a good example for him would be the ancient
synagogue in Jericho, so I looked for more details about the site on
Wikipedia. Apparently it came to be known as "Shalom Al Yisrael
Synagogue" (after one of the inscriptions that had found in it), and
it has Wikipedia articles in three languages: English, Hebrew and
Polish <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalom_Al_Yisrael_Synagogue">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalom_Al_Yisrael_Synagogue</a><br>
<br>
I can't read Polish, but the English and Hebrew versions tell
different stories about the contemporary history of the site, since
its excavation. Both versions agree upon the raw details, but
present two points of views, which seems to be politically
motivated, at least to some degree. BTW, I have no idea which point
of view is closer to the truth, and it probably won't be so easy to
check this out.<br>
<br>
Here are examples for the differences:<br>
<br>
<b><u>English</u></b>: "<i>The owners of the site kept it in
excellent condition and allowed visits to the site with a small
entrance fee as agreed by the British government. They also built
a house on top and used it as a winter house for the family which
originates from Jerusalem</i>"<i>.</i><br>
<br>
<u><b>Hebrew</b></u>: "<i>Following the victory in the Six Day War,
several Israelis started to visit Shalom Al Yisrael in Jericho and
other holy sites in Judea and Samaria. A local Arab built a house
on the site and demanded entrance fee from visitors</i>".<br>
<br>
The EN version implies that the land in which the synagogue was
unearthed was privately owned at the time of the discovery. It
further suggests that the owner took good care of the place, and
that the entrance fee was "small" and legitimate. The HE version
suggests that after June 1967, a local resident took advantage of
the Jewish interest in the site and implies that the entrance fee
was illegitimate.<br>
<br>
<b><u>English</u></b>: "<i>In 1987, the Israeli authorities
confiscated the mosaic, the house and a small part of the farm
around it. They offered compensation to the Shahwan family but
that was rejected</i>".<br>
<br>
<b><u>Hebrew</u></b>: "<i>In 1986 the [Israeli] Nature and Park
Authority purchased the building</i>".<br>
<br>
The English version suggests that the change of ownership was an act
of coercion and that the former owners actively protested against
it. The Hebrew version suggests that the change of ownership was
voluntary.<br>
<br>
There are other differences, specifically in the description of the
attack on the site during the Second Intifada in October 2000, but I
think the two above are enough to demonstrate the POV issue. It is
interesting to note, that both versions say that the Palestinian
Authority did a good job protecting the place after its
establishment in 1995 following the Oslo Accords.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Dror <br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>