National Geographic Society
December 1, 2004
To: National Geographic Society
December 1, 2004
Dear Sarah Clark,
I am writing to you as a professor at California State University,
Fullerton. I have been a member of the National Geographic for the past
two years and for reasons enumerated below, I will cancel my membership
with your organization. This is not so much because of my personal and
national loyalties, rather the wrong decision by your committee to place
the name of “Arabian Gulf” next to that of “Persian
Gulf.” The body of water called “Arabian Gulf” already
exists for another body of water which I teach about in my ancient history
courses. What you have done is to confuse the bodies of water for the
students and others alike. In antiquity the Greeks and Romans called
the Red Sea as “Arabian Gulf” (Pomponius Mela, de Chorographia,
passage 72). Am I to tell me students that the National Geographic Society
has decided to change its location for us?
As for the nomenclature of the Persian Gulf, it is clear that it was
known as Persicus sinus “Persian Gulf,” or as Persicum mare
“Persian Sea” in the Classical Sources. In the Islamic period
the Arabs called this body of water as (Arabic) bahr Faris “Sea
of Fars.” In the first half of the twentieth century it was known
as khalij al-fars “Persian Gulf” by virtually all Arab countries.
From The Europeans who continued the Classical tradition employed such
terms as Sino Persico, Sinus Persicus. Thus in the West and the Middle
East this body of water was known as the “Persian Gulf.”
It was only with the appearance of Arab nationalism and the president
of Egypt, Nasser, who was hostile to the late of Shah of Iran that the
term al-khalij al-‘Arabi “Arabian Gulf” was coined.
It simply did not exist before! How could we go about changing names
for places because of war of words or nationalism? The Society states
that since many institutions and people use an alternative name for
the Persian Gulf, then “Arabian Gulf” must be mentioned.
By your logic then Shatt al-Arab which is the waterway bordering Iran
and Iraq, and known as Arvand Rud “Arvand River” by the
Iranians for several decades must also be mentioned. But this would
be historically incorrect and I would not support the changing of names
based on nationalism. By this logic if the Iranians begin calling the
Sea of Oman or the Arabian Sea the “Sea of Iran,” then the
National Geographic would have to cave in and place such artificial
names for these bodies of water. Even the island of Kesh in your map
is mentioned by it alternate Arabic name Qays which is almost never
used in Iran and it belongs to Iran.
If it is personal (Directorate) or financial matters that govern such
decisions, then I must say that I am dismayed that such a reputable
organization would be pushed to create false names as acceptable alternatives.
But again, we live in a world where even names can be bought or changed
for money. I just did not expect that the National Geographic Society
would do such a thing. Rest assured that I will have this matter discussed
in our department and my fellow historians in other California State
University campuses will hear about this matter. I do ask you to please
cancel my subscription.
Sincerely,
Touraj Daryaee
Associate Professor of Ancient History
tdaryaee@fullerton.edu
|
