Jump to content

Talk:Levant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Maha Odeh (talk | contribs) at 05:04, 6 March 2008 (→‎Etymology: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Strange editing by users claiming Jordan and Syria are not part of the Levant

The Levant is defined simply as " The countries bordering on the eastern Mediterranean Sea from Turkey to Egypt." by dictionary.com. Also, the French mandates over Lebanon and Syria were called the Levant states. The argument that the east parts of Jordan and Syria are in 'Mesopotamia' is unfounded. In fact, in archaeology, there is a key separation between the region called Mesopotamia and Northern Syria. The only part of Syria that may be considered in Mesopotamia is the Hasakah province. I have no idea where the argument against Jordan comes through.Yuber 22:33, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

what are you talking about? Nobody claimed Jordan and Syria "are not part of the Levant". They are simply not contained in the Levant. Look, Syria and Lebanon are contemporary states, and the "Levant" is a historical term for the area. They overlap, but they are not identical. Yuber, your editing style is not pleasant. All edits I have seen from you were belligerent, or designed to pick petty fights. This is not the Wikipedia spirit. I advise you to take it easy, and try to argue with people in a friendly spirit. You are not surrounded by enemies. dab (ᛏ) 22:39, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked through many sources on the uses of the Levant and I have found no info that only the west parts of Jordan and Syria are in it. The fact that it's an approximate region also proves this. If you see the Names of the Levant you can further confirm this. I'm sorry if my edits seemed belligerent, as I haven't made any personal attacks on anyone and I have just stated my point.Yuber 22:42, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I just edited the article to make clear the points of you and Jayjg. However, I would like to point out that in the region of the worlds template at the bottom of the page there is no "Mesopotamia". Since you are an expert on middle eastern regions, dab, perhaps you would like to fix this.Yuber 22:55, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]


ok, you do have a point: we are saying that 'occasionally' the term is used in a modern context. In these cases, it may occasionally also refer to the entire state of Syria/Jordan. However, use of "Levant" in a modern context is quite over the top, stylistically. The basic meaning is/was "eastern borders of the Mediterranean". Now Eastern Syria is certainly not adjacent to the Mediterranean, but in a sense of "states that border the east coast of the Med", it may be possible to include it. We're going to say that this usage is neither current nor recommended anyway. Just like "Mesopotamia" is usually used in contexts of ancient history, "Levant" is usually reserved for historical discussions. We have Near East for current issues :) dab (ᛏ) 22:59, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm no expert on Middle Eastern regions. If anything, I'm an expert on semantics, i.e. I care about how a term is used and by whom. As I say above, "Mesopotamia" is hardly used for the contemporary region. Its area is contained in "Middle/Near East". dab (ᛏ) 22:59, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The term began to be used in a modern context after the French occupation. If anything, blame France for extending the borders of the Levant farther east :).Yuber 23:02, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
it may be that in French the term is more commonly used in contemporary contexts. Come to think of it, the "Levant" link in the "regions" template does seem a bit out of place. I would suggest it is replaced with Near East (which has, after all, the same meaning. It's just that the crusaders didn't reach as far inland) dab (ᛏ) 23:08, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps they should be both included, since I really don't know how far the "Near East" extends to. Also, I have a great interest in archaeology and that is where I have seen the term 'Levant' used the most.Yuber 23:56, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

difficult... look at Near East, Middle East and Southwest Asia. I think the region template should only have SW Asia, which includes all others. Near East seems to include Anatolia, Levant, Mesopotamia, and sometimes Egypt and Iran. dab (ᛏ) 00:50, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial Complaint Removed from Article Body

Anonymos 66.99.20.130 inserted the following under §Etymology, immediately after the first clause in the first sentence, disputing the first attestation of "Levant" in English to 1497.

(This can't be true. Levant and Outremer were interchangeable during the time of the Crusades, which began in 1095)

Leaving aside the inappropriate placement of the complaint in the body of the article — in the middle of a sentence, and without citation — the complaint does not seem to specifically address the statement. First attestation does not indicate when a term was coined, first popular, or even first noticed by compilers of dictionaries. It only indicates the age of the oldest available use of the term in writing — and specifically in this case in the writing of English. There's nothing implausible about a term current (in French, perhaps?) between ca. 1100 and 1300 not showing up in any long-lived English text before ca. 1500.

—Americist 18:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is Israel part of the Levant?

Are Wikipedians certain that Israel is located in the Levant? I thought that Israel was located in Canaan or the geographical area of modern day Palestine. My general impression from books I have read--however erroneous it may be--is that the Levant generally covered the region of Syria and Lebanon while Israel and Jordan's status is more ambiguous. Regards, Leoboudv 05:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any good sources you can cite describing the areal extent of the Levant will improve the article, whether they agree with what the article currently states or not. Because Levant is not a scientific term, or one defined by declaration, treaty, or acclamation, the article should properly present a wide range of the ways in which the term has been commonly used.
Levant is a relatively recent term which seems to be used generally in rough correspondence to classical Syria (not to be confused with the contemporary state of the same name) and ancient Canaan (which in turn was larger and more vaguely defined than Palestine ever has been). The term has already become obsolete and been revived at least once (at least in English). The most common contemporary usages, as far as I know, are in scholarly fields such as archaeology and history, where "Levant" and "Levantine" are sometimes used to refer to any regions within a circle defined by Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Arabia (not to confused with the Saudi kingdom), Egypt (not to be confused with the contemporary state of the same name) and the east edge of the Mediterranean Sea — and also to any languages, peoples, cultures, etc., associated with any such regions.
—Americist 17:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply Saul/Americist. I just had the impression that the Levant encompassed Syria and Lebanon while its relation with Israel/Jordan was a little more vague. Everyone knows what the geographical area of Canaan, Mesopotamia or Egypt is but the term Levant is rather more ambigious--like Orientalism. Perhaps scholars like it this way! But I'll take your word for it unless someone else can offer different radically differing interpretations for the word Levant.

As an Aside, I wonder whether most Israelis object to their nation being classified as being a part of the Levant? Thank You. Leoboudv 11:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this is the right place to raise this issue, but I don't want to be another anonymous editor, so I'll say it here. I changed "Judea and Samaria" to "the Occupied Palestinian Territories" a few days ago because that is the official, internationally recognized name assigned to this area. The term "Judea and Samaria" is a term used by Zionists in the Jewish Israeli community as a way to deny the very existence of Palestine, and to re-assert their claim to all Palestinian territories. "Judea and Samaria" do not exist. All of the other country names used in this particular subsection of the article referred to current nation-states. Therefore, the inclusion/use of "Judea and Samaria" is not only historically inaccurate, but reflects a bias which is rather distasteful. I noticed that someone changed it to "West Bank / Judea and Samaria." Though this is more broad, again, the inclusion of "Judea and Samaria" is incorrect at best. I added "Gaza Strip" to this phrase, instead of deleting the inaccurate phrase again, in the hopes that this would be acceptable until the appropriate person/people can confirm this information and make it right. -anonymous

Is there a right or wrong to this question, and does it matter?

Dear User:Leoboudv, I agree with you that the term is quite ambiguous and one can find verifiable sources that rightfully claim any number of borders or areas of inclusion/exclusion, and which becomes even more ambiguous when you throw in the passage of time. Everyone who has done some research on the subject is probably "right" to some degree. It is a term that I would compare to the modern world's use of the term "The West" (can anyone specify its borders? yet there is a general sense of what it means) or The Pacific Rim, or for that matter, the Middle East. Who is in charge of making the final decision as to specific borders of these terms? No one, of course. I think the news media comes up with such terms, and they either stick if they are useful, or die a natural death if not. As to historical or ancient place names, aren't they sometimes the creations of archeologists and other scholars attempting to clarify or specify various facts to make their research easier to understand, rather than an attempt to place boundaries on areas or places that don't meet our modern concepts of nationhood or geopolitical boundaries? Kurt76.171.173.77 20:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

In the Etymology section it says:

As such, it is broadly equivalent to the Arabic term Mashriq, "the land where the sun rises".

Actually, Al Mshriq refers to very much wider range that includes Iraq, KSA, Yemen and the Gulf states. The Levant in Arabic is Al Shaam الشام. --Maha Odeh (talk) 05:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Levant&oldid=196221506"