What do you think?
Rate this book
Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History
For centuries, the land of Palestine has been fought over by competing faiths, nations and empires. Today, even the name itself has become a battleground for conflicting Israeli and Palestinian visions of the country's past. Israelis treat the very notion of 'Palestine' as a modern invention, while rooting their own nation's history in the ancient Kingdom of Israel. But, as Nur Masalha shows, the concept of Palestine (derived from the biblical 'Philistine') is one which can be traced to the beginning of recorded history, grounded in a distinctive Palestinian culture that long predates the Old Testament narrative of Israelite conquest. Beginning with the earliest references to the area in ancient texts, Masalha explores how the concept of Palestine and its associated identity has evolved over thousands of years, from the Bronze Age to the present day. Drawing on a rich body of sources and the latest archaeological evidence, Masalha shows how Palestine's past has been distorted and mythologised by Biblical lore and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the process, this magisterial work uncovers the true depth and complexity of Palestine's millennia-old heritage, and represents the authoritative account of the country's history.
304 pages, Hardcover
First published August 15, 2018
About the author
Nur Masalha
17 books106 followersProfessor Nur Masalha is a Palestinian historian and formerly Director of the Centre for Religion and History at St. Mary's University, Twickenham. He is Editor of “Journal of Holy Land and Palestine Studies”: http://www.euppublishing.com/journal/hls, published by Edinburgh University Press. He is the author of many books on Palestine-Israel. His current work focuses on religion and politics in the Middle East, oral history and social memory theory, subaltern studies, new Palestinian and Israeli historiography, the Bible and Zionism, Holy Land toponymy, Jerusalem archaeology, theologies of liberation in Palestine and Life-Long Learning in Palestine.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 126 reviews
November 4, 2019
If anyone says Palestine doesn’t exist, gift that person this book.
December 3, 2018
Masalha attempts a lot with this book, and many of his positions are unlikely to be accepted by other scholars considered perhaps more neutral and less sensational in style. For instance, the use of the word ‘Palestine’ in all its iterations, is unlikely to be accepted as term most commonly used name rather than the ‘Canaan’ up until classical antiquity (when it then became most often referred to as Syria-Palestine), let alone accepted as a well-established cultural or ethnic identifier that encompassed anyone west of the Jordan river from modern day Lebanon to Egypt as Masalha attempts to argue.
‘Palestine’ enters further controversy with the attempts to reduce any Jewish presence as simply small “communities of faith” that existed within a larger and clearly defined Palestinian identity. The attempt to completely dismiss the existence of the Israelites, whom Masalha puts in quotation marks through the book, is certainly a rarely held position even of the ‘minimalists’. Disappointingly, rather than attack the more accepted historical work on Israelites, the work of other new scholars, or the archeological evidence, Masalha prefers to only go after the religious writings and evidence. His avoidance of scholarly evidence on the topic is frustrating for me.
As to the credibility of the Jewish ethnicity (which is rejected entirely), Masalha suggests that the Jewish ethnicity, rather than having the privilege of say a Druze, Turk, Syrian, Palestinian or simply an Arab, was actually just an anti-semitic invention crafted in Europe and cemented by Nazism. For Masalha, the Zionists then took this "invention" of the Jewish ethnicity and used it to craft historical narratives that would legitimize a Jewish state. But Masalha’s conception and understanding of what constitutes ethnicity is highly questionable and seems to alter depending on which group of people he is speaking of.
Masalha is more successful in presenting a fresh conception and development of a Palestinian identity within the Levant that developed over the course of different occupations. But outside of detailing the depth of this culture Masalha’s writing often drifts into fiery attacks on Zionism and Israel, utilizing the sloppy conclusions he makes regarding Jewish history as ammunition.
Because of this ‘Palestine’ becomes another work that will appeal to those who already greatly dislike Israel and are looking for new narratives to fuel their disapproval.
‘Palestine’ enters further controversy with the attempts to reduce any Jewish presence as simply small “communities of faith” that existed within a larger and clearly defined Palestinian identity. The attempt to completely dismiss the existence of the Israelites, whom Masalha puts in quotation marks through the book, is certainly a rarely held position even of the ‘minimalists’. Disappointingly, rather than attack the more accepted historical work on Israelites, the work of other new scholars, or the archeological evidence, Masalha prefers to only go after the religious writings and evidence. His avoidance of scholarly evidence on the topic is frustrating for me.
As to the credibility of the Jewish ethnicity (which is rejected entirely), Masalha suggests that the Jewish ethnicity, rather than having the privilege of say a Druze, Turk, Syrian, Palestinian or simply an Arab, was actually just an anti-semitic invention crafted in Europe and cemented by Nazism. For Masalha, the Zionists then took this "invention" of the Jewish ethnicity and used it to craft historical narratives that would legitimize a Jewish state. But Masalha’s conception and understanding of what constitutes ethnicity is highly questionable and seems to alter depending on which group of people he is speaking of.
Masalha is more successful in presenting a fresh conception and development of a Palestinian identity within the Levant that developed over the course of different occupations. But outside of detailing the depth of this culture Masalha’s writing often drifts into fiery attacks on Zionism and Israel, utilizing the sloppy conclusions he makes regarding Jewish history as ammunition.
Because of this ‘Palestine’ becomes another work that will appeal to those who already greatly dislike Israel and are looking for new narratives to fuel their disapproval.
March 25, 2019
It was heart-warming to know that Tunisians and Palestinians are related to the Phoenician population. And also roughly the same length of time spanned by their history. Tunisia(3000years),Palastine (4000years). And of course, this is a must read book to understand the on-going palestinian-Israeli conflict
August 16, 2021
This book will be incredibly disappointing if you want to learn Palestinian History. It barely reads like it was written by a historian at all. It is, to be brief, a dismal, confusing and contradictory mess from what I read of it.
I'll give examples of what I mean, because I was hoping to learn more about Palestine.
First, and perhaps most glaring: this book does not contain a single map, despite being about a geographic location and the people situated therein. This is one of the worst possible oversights a history book can have when it spends a lot of its time tracking the etymology of a word throughout time (which is what this book is actually about - a history of the *word* Palestine, not really Palestine itself). It's terrible because it's confusing, because the subject matter covers several thousand years, and the boundaries of the location in question change based on the point in history the author is discussing. Do you know off the top of your head where Tal al-'Adas is? Me either. Do you need to know where it is for the author to make a point that zionists often speak Hebrew, as opposed to Arabic, and call it "Tel 'Adashim"? No, you don't, so the author isn't going to give you a map. The entire book is about a ton of places and their changing toponyms, and which ones the author is arguing are the oldest and most commonly used. But apparently, we don't need to locate these locations geographically. In a bizarre way, Nur Masalha has diminished the actual land itself in order to discuss it in a purely rhetorical fashion - a place that exists as concepts and words, but has no maps, no geography. And this is surely the opposite of what Masalha intended.
But back to the beginning -- Masalha writes: "This work as not aimed at creating a grand narrative or metanarrative for Palestine, as a way of mirroring or mimicking the foundational myths of Zionism." But yet -- that's what Masalha does. The whole book is a foundational narrative for Palestine. How does one write a narrative for a place/region, or country, over 3,000 or so years without writing a grand narrative for it? I'd argue it's not really possible, and disingenuous to imply that this is whole book is not an exercise in counter-narrative to what Masalha calls the "foundational myths of Zionism." I know this because we can't get through the first chapters of the ancient world without Masalha explicitly attempting to refute "zionism" multiple different times. That's a bummer when what I want is to learn about Palestine itself.
The terminology used in the front half of the book does very little to clear up who is who, or where those people are. On one page, Masalha writes that "The Cana'anites are in fact identical to the Phoenicians. The alphabet of the Phoenicians of the coastal regions of Palestine and Lebanon -- conventionally known as the proto-canaanite alphabet - was given to Greek, Aramaic, Arabic, and Hebrew. However, the Old Testament terms 'Canaanites' and Israelites' in Palestine do not necessarily refer to or describe two distinct ethnicities..."
To this, I say -- Wait, what? Proto-Canaanite (aka Proto-Sinaitic) is the ancestral precursor to the Phoenician alphabet, not the alphabet itself. Masalha is conflating two different terms here. Proto-Canaanite is the origin *of* the Phoenician alphabet, and the Phoenicians have child-alphabets of Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. Arabic is several steps removed from the Proto-Canaanite script. Essentially the language tree for Arabic would be: Proto-Canaanite -> Phoenician -> Aramaic -> Nabataean -> Arabic. By contrast, Hebrew would look like Proto-Canaanite -> Phoenician -> Paleo-Hebrew -> Hebrew, with ongoing cross-streams of Aramaic.
But let's return to the claim. The Canaanites are the Phoenicians all along. And also, the Israelites aren't actually different from the Canaanites, it's an in-group/out-group terminology. (The word "Hebrew" is often used this way too, so no surprises here). But then on another page, we're told "Also, a large amount of Palestinian ("Canaanite") pottery from this period was discovered in Egypt..." and yet another page reads "Like the Phoenicians, the Philistines developed advanced Naval technology...." So now, we know that the Palestinians are the Canaanites, the Canaanites are actually the Phoenicians, the Israelites are Canaanites (but aren't Palestinian?), and also the Philistines...who are the Palestinians (since we're using the Egyptian records of Peleset to identify the Philistines as Palestinians), are similar to the Phoenicians, even though we were just told that they're Canaanites and the Canaanites *are* the Phoenicians.
Are you following? I'm not. Are the Philistines Canaanites? Are they Phoenician? How do we know this? When do we know it? Why do we know it?
Masalha also doesn't follow the proposed connections of the Philistines/Peleset to Walistina/Palistin of Anatolia/Syria. (If they did, and I missed it, my apologies. I was trying to piece together the threads of evidence earlier). This is frustrating because they use multiple references to establish that Phoenicia and the various "Palestine" name regions extend all the way to Syria *anyways*.
Why not then discuss the inscriptions referring to Taita, King of Palistin? The link between the Syro-Hittite Kingdom of Palistin and the Philistines is debated, but it's an interesting theory to suggest that the names of the philistines like Peleset, Plistim, are similar to Palistin for a reason. It's possible that actually, the Philistines create a kingdom of Palistin among the remnants of the Hittite collapse. (Of course, there's another, smaller theory about the Illyrian-Epirote locality Palaeste, and its inhabitants, the Palaestini.) But also - this would help contextualize what Herodotus means when he says "that part of Syria called Palestine." Does he perhaps mean Palistin?
Ultimately, for all the "Peleset" Egyptian evidence gets used to document the Philistines in Palestine, there's not much discussed *about* said Egyptian mentions of the Peleset. Quotes if inscriptions and the text which mention variously "Palestine identified," peoples are sporadically given. Perhaps that's not surprising, because the Ramses III inscriptions 1.) tell us the people of Peleset were "reduced to ashes," (similar to "Israel is laid to waste," and 2.) that the remnant peoples were likely resettled in Egyptian fortresses (possibly also taken as Egyptian mercenaries) which could have/would included resettlement in Canaan from elsewhere. ...basically identical to how the Israelites are forcibly resettled in the Babylonian empire in exile. Are the Philistines a sea-faring people in exile when they live in Canaan? Good question.
And all of this would further explain why the use of the term Canaan falls by the wayside in favor of Peleset at this time. Not to mention it would explain why the Leon Levy expeditions found that the Philistines weren't completely local Canaanites - sometimes using Aegean scripts rather than semitic ones. Further, genetic testing shows the Philistines had European ancestry - which makes sense if they were indeed, an Aegean people in part. Genetics provides an interesting way to enhance (not dictate) historical discussions. Contemporary Palestinians have levantine heritage of course — they are closely related to the Jewish people, who are closely related to the Canaanite/Phoenician peoples. But they also have Arab genetic markers which make them close to Arab and Bedouin peoples as well. But do they share genetic similarities to the Philistines? We know the Philistines aren't identical to the Canaanites genetically! I wish this had been explored more.
Elsewhere the book is obviously leading me to specific doubts and conclusions, but not explaining why the doubts should be held, or even why one conclusion is obvious but the other isn't. For example: I'm not sure why the merneptah stele's "Pi-lis-te/pi-lis-tu" is unquestionably "Palestine," (and what proves the Philistines are Palestinians) but I-si-ri-ar is only "-possibly the Asher, or Israel..." This is deeply unclear to me, and I'm not sure why it's up for debate. How is Pil-lis-te to Palestine more of an accurate and precise translation than I-si-ri-ar to Israel? I'm willing to say that perhaps it's absolutely a translation up for debate and doubt — but my question is why? What makes one cognate more reliable than the other? Is Pil-lis-te definitely Palestine, or is it Philistine?
Back to the Philistines vs Palestine question— remember the quote where we're told a ton of Canaanite pottery is found in Egypt (because Canaan is a series of Egyptian client states)? Do we also find Philistine pottery in Egypt? Because we have limited Philistine pottery examples in Canaan, and I would like to know where and when this might be found in Egypt, and what the differences are between "Canaanite (Palestinian)" ceramics and "Philistine (Palestinian)," ceramics might be.
As the book progresses, we get the usual - endless - reminders that the "Old Testament" (er, you mean Hebrew Bible? We're not referencing the Christian texts, here) is not a historical text written as a history. This is fair. But then it's made bizarrely laughable by introducing notoriously unreliable and exaggerative Herodotus as the "father of history," in order to prove his use of Palestine/Palestinians is the more common and "more popular" one over other names for the region. But no discussion about the complex reliability of Herodotus? I'm at a loss.
I'm also not sure I buy it. Palestine isn't used prior to "Syria-Palaestina," in coinage.
Here's a citation:
Cohen, Getzel M. (2006). "A Geographic Overview". In Cohen, Getzel M. (ed.). The Hellenistic Settlements in Syria, the Red Sea Basin, and North Africa (1st ed.). University of California Press. pp. 21–70. ISBN 978-0-520-24148-0. JSTOR 10.1525/j.ctt1pnd22.5. Nevertheless, it is important to note that despite its appearance in various literary texts of and pertaining to the Hellenistic period, the term “Palestine” is not found on any extant Hellenistic coin or inscription. In other words, there is no attestation for its use in an official context in the Hellenistic period. Even in the early Roman period its use was not especially widespread. For example, Philo and Josephus generally used “Judaea” rather than “Palestine” to refer to the area.48 Furthermore, “Palestine” is nowhere attested in the New Testament. “Palestine” did not come into official use until the early second century a.d., when the emperor Hadrian decided to rename the province of Judaea; for its new name he chose “Syria Palaestina.”49 The new name took hold. It is found thereafter in inscriptions, on coins, and in numerous literary texts.50 Thus Arrian (7.9.8, Indica 43.1) and Appian (Syr. 50), who lived in the second century a.d., and Cassius Dio (e.g., 38.38.4, 39.56.6), who lived in the third, referred to the region as “Palestine.” And in the rabbinic literature “Palestine” was used as the name of the Roman province adjacent to Phoenicia and Arabia (e.g., Bereshith Rabbah 90.6)
Later on, the book has a chart of Arabic toponyms vs. Hebrew toponyms to make a point about "zionist settler colonialism." I got to the part where it's argued the Arabic Indor likely "preserves" the original Canaanite "En-dor" as opposed to the Israeli "Ein Dor." This is proof of the issue of ignoring the entire Hebrew Bible as a mythic narrative only -- Endor is mentioned more than once in the bible. The name En-Dor in Hebrew is the same as the Ein-Dor/En-Dor of today. (There's spelling variants in the biblical Hebrew, if I recall correctly).
But this hardly makes a case for the colonialist erasing of toponyms when 1) Hebrew is a development from Phoenician and is therefore also Canaanite (since per earlier in the book, the Israelites are canaanite) and 2) the cognate Hebrew hasn't changed since at least the 8th century BCE. Another village example mentions depopulation in the 1920's, whereas a quick Google implies that it was likely depopulated during WWI due to a fight with the Ottomans, and then the land legally purchased at least two different times thereafter.
All in all, what a muddled, confusing mess, which taught me terribly little about Palestine. What a bummer.
I'm honestly shocked the author is a historian because the footnotes are some of the worst I've seen in a history book in a long time. There was a point where the author writes of the "4" Abrahamic religions of Palestine and I wish I'd noted the page. If they'd specified ancient/late antique I suppose that makes sense — but for anyone counting in today's world, the number is 6, not 4. 1) Judaism 2) Samaritanism 3) Christianity 4) Islam 5) Druze 6) Baiha'i. If I'm wrong, and they did specify, then the fault is my own.
I'll give examples of what I mean, because I was hoping to learn more about Palestine.
First, and perhaps most glaring: this book does not contain a single map, despite being about a geographic location and the people situated therein. This is one of the worst possible oversights a history book can have when it spends a lot of its time tracking the etymology of a word throughout time (which is what this book is actually about - a history of the *word* Palestine, not really Palestine itself). It's terrible because it's confusing, because the subject matter covers several thousand years, and the boundaries of the location in question change based on the point in history the author is discussing. Do you know off the top of your head where Tal al-'Adas is? Me either. Do you need to know where it is for the author to make a point that zionists often speak Hebrew, as opposed to Arabic, and call it "Tel 'Adashim"? No, you don't, so the author isn't going to give you a map. The entire book is about a ton of places and their changing toponyms, and which ones the author is arguing are the oldest and most commonly used. But apparently, we don't need to locate these locations geographically. In a bizarre way, Nur Masalha has diminished the actual land itself in order to discuss it in a purely rhetorical fashion - a place that exists as concepts and words, but has no maps, no geography. And this is surely the opposite of what Masalha intended.
But back to the beginning -- Masalha writes: "This work as not aimed at creating a grand narrative or metanarrative for Palestine, as a way of mirroring or mimicking the foundational myths of Zionism." But yet -- that's what Masalha does. The whole book is a foundational narrative for Palestine. How does one write a narrative for a place/region, or country, over 3,000 or so years without writing a grand narrative for it? I'd argue it's not really possible, and disingenuous to imply that this is whole book is not an exercise in counter-narrative to what Masalha calls the "foundational myths of Zionism." I know this because we can't get through the first chapters of the ancient world without Masalha explicitly attempting to refute "zionism" multiple different times. That's a bummer when what I want is to learn about Palestine itself.
The terminology used in the front half of the book does very little to clear up who is who, or where those people are. On one page, Masalha writes that "The Cana'anites are in fact identical to the Phoenicians. The alphabet of the Phoenicians of the coastal regions of Palestine and Lebanon -- conventionally known as the proto-canaanite alphabet - was given to Greek, Aramaic, Arabic, and Hebrew. However, the Old Testament terms 'Canaanites' and Israelites' in Palestine do not necessarily refer to or describe two distinct ethnicities..."
To this, I say -- Wait, what? Proto-Canaanite (aka Proto-Sinaitic) is the ancestral precursor to the Phoenician alphabet, not the alphabet itself. Masalha is conflating two different terms here. Proto-Canaanite is the origin *of* the Phoenician alphabet, and the Phoenicians have child-alphabets of Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. Arabic is several steps removed from the Proto-Canaanite script. Essentially the language tree for Arabic would be: Proto-Canaanite -> Phoenician -> Aramaic -> Nabataean -> Arabic. By contrast, Hebrew would look like Proto-Canaanite -> Phoenician -> Paleo-Hebrew -> Hebrew, with ongoing cross-streams of Aramaic.
But let's return to the claim. The Canaanites are the Phoenicians all along. And also, the Israelites aren't actually different from the Canaanites, it's an in-group/out-group terminology. (The word "Hebrew" is often used this way too, so no surprises here). But then on another page, we're told "Also, a large amount of Palestinian ("Canaanite") pottery from this period was discovered in Egypt..." and yet another page reads "Like the Phoenicians, the Philistines developed advanced Naval technology...." So now, we know that the Palestinians are the Canaanites, the Canaanites are actually the Phoenicians, the Israelites are Canaanites (but aren't Palestinian?), and also the Philistines...who are the Palestinians (since we're using the Egyptian records of Peleset to identify the Philistines as Palestinians), are similar to the Phoenicians, even though we were just told that they're Canaanites and the Canaanites *are* the Phoenicians.
Are you following? I'm not. Are the Philistines Canaanites? Are they Phoenician? How do we know this? When do we know it? Why do we know it?
Masalha also doesn't follow the proposed connections of the Philistines/Peleset to Walistina/Palistin of Anatolia/Syria. (If they did, and I missed it, my apologies. I was trying to piece together the threads of evidence earlier). This is frustrating because they use multiple references to establish that Phoenicia and the various "Palestine" name regions extend all the way to Syria *anyways*.
Why not then discuss the inscriptions referring to Taita, King of Palistin? The link between the Syro-Hittite Kingdom of Palistin and the Philistines is debated, but it's an interesting theory to suggest that the names of the philistines like Peleset, Plistim, are similar to Palistin for a reason. It's possible that actually, the Philistines create a kingdom of Palistin among the remnants of the Hittite collapse. (Of course, there's another, smaller theory about the Illyrian-Epirote locality Palaeste, and its inhabitants, the Palaestini.) But also - this would help contextualize what Herodotus means when he says "that part of Syria called Palestine." Does he perhaps mean Palistin?
Ultimately, for all the "Peleset" Egyptian evidence gets used to document the Philistines in Palestine, there's not much discussed *about* said Egyptian mentions of the Peleset. Quotes if inscriptions and the text which mention variously "Palestine identified," peoples are sporadically given. Perhaps that's not surprising, because the Ramses III inscriptions 1.) tell us the people of Peleset were "reduced to ashes," (similar to "Israel is laid to waste," and 2.) that the remnant peoples were likely resettled in Egyptian fortresses (possibly also taken as Egyptian mercenaries) which could have/would included resettlement in Canaan from elsewhere. ...basically identical to how the Israelites are forcibly resettled in the Babylonian empire in exile. Are the Philistines a sea-faring people in exile when they live in Canaan? Good question.
And all of this would further explain why the use of the term Canaan falls by the wayside in favor of Peleset at this time. Not to mention it would explain why the Leon Levy expeditions found that the Philistines weren't completely local Canaanites - sometimes using Aegean scripts rather than semitic ones. Further, genetic testing shows the Philistines had European ancestry - which makes sense if they were indeed, an Aegean people in part. Genetics provides an interesting way to enhance (not dictate) historical discussions. Contemporary Palestinians have levantine heritage of course — they are closely related to the Jewish people, who are closely related to the Canaanite/Phoenician peoples. But they also have Arab genetic markers which make them close to Arab and Bedouin peoples as well. But do they share genetic similarities to the Philistines? We know the Philistines aren't identical to the Canaanites genetically! I wish this had been explored more.
Elsewhere the book is obviously leading me to specific doubts and conclusions, but not explaining why the doubts should be held, or even why one conclusion is obvious but the other isn't. For example: I'm not sure why the merneptah stele's "Pi-lis-te/pi-lis-tu" is unquestionably "Palestine," (and what proves the Philistines are Palestinians) but I-si-ri-ar is only "-possibly the Asher, or Israel..." This is deeply unclear to me, and I'm not sure why it's up for debate. How is Pil-lis-te to Palestine more of an accurate and precise translation than I-si-ri-ar to Israel? I'm willing to say that perhaps it's absolutely a translation up for debate and doubt — but my question is why? What makes one cognate more reliable than the other? Is Pil-lis-te definitely Palestine, or is it Philistine?
Back to the Philistines vs Palestine question— remember the quote where we're told a ton of Canaanite pottery is found in Egypt (because Canaan is a series of Egyptian client states)? Do we also find Philistine pottery in Egypt? Because we have limited Philistine pottery examples in Canaan, and I would like to know where and when this might be found in Egypt, and what the differences are between "Canaanite (Palestinian)" ceramics and "Philistine (Palestinian)," ceramics might be.
As the book progresses, we get the usual - endless - reminders that the "Old Testament" (er, you mean Hebrew Bible? We're not referencing the Christian texts, here) is not a historical text written as a history. This is fair. But then it's made bizarrely laughable by introducing notoriously unreliable and exaggerative Herodotus as the "father of history," in order to prove his use of Palestine/Palestinians is the more common and "more popular" one over other names for the region. But no discussion about the complex reliability of Herodotus? I'm at a loss.
I'm also not sure I buy it. Palestine isn't used prior to "Syria-Palaestina," in coinage.
Here's a citation:
Cohen, Getzel M. (2006). "A Geographic Overview". In Cohen, Getzel M. (ed.). The Hellenistic Settlements in Syria, the Red Sea Basin, and North Africa (1st ed.). University of California Press. pp. 21–70. ISBN 978-0-520-24148-0. JSTOR 10.1525/j.ctt1pnd22.5. Nevertheless, it is important to note that despite its appearance in various literary texts of and pertaining to the Hellenistic period, the term “Palestine” is not found on any extant Hellenistic coin or inscription. In other words, there is no attestation for its use in an official context in the Hellenistic period. Even in the early Roman period its use was not especially widespread. For example, Philo and Josephus generally used “Judaea” rather than “Palestine” to refer to the area.48 Furthermore, “Palestine” is nowhere attested in the New Testament. “Palestine” did not come into official use until the early second century a.d., when the emperor Hadrian decided to rename the province of Judaea; for its new name he chose “Syria Palaestina.”49 The new name took hold. It is found thereafter in inscriptions, on coins, and in numerous literary texts.50 Thus Arrian (7.9.8, Indica 43.1) and Appian (Syr. 50), who lived in the second century a.d., and Cassius Dio (e.g., 38.38.4, 39.56.6), who lived in the third, referred to the region as “Palestine.” And in the rabbinic literature “Palestine” was used as the name of the Roman province adjacent to Phoenicia and Arabia (e.g., Bereshith Rabbah 90.6)
Later on, the book has a chart of Arabic toponyms vs. Hebrew toponyms to make a point about "zionist settler colonialism." I got to the part where it's argued the Arabic Indor likely "preserves" the original Canaanite "En-dor" as opposed to the Israeli "Ein Dor." This is proof of the issue of ignoring the entire Hebrew Bible as a mythic narrative only -- Endor is mentioned more than once in the bible. The name En-Dor in Hebrew is the same as the Ein-Dor/En-Dor of today. (There's spelling variants in the biblical Hebrew, if I recall correctly).
But this hardly makes a case for the colonialist erasing of toponyms when 1) Hebrew is a development from Phoenician and is therefore also Canaanite (since per earlier in the book, the Israelites are canaanite) and 2) the cognate Hebrew hasn't changed since at least the 8th century BCE. Another village example mentions depopulation in the 1920's, whereas a quick Google implies that it was likely depopulated during WWI due to a fight with the Ottomans, and then the land legally purchased at least two different times thereafter.
All in all, what a muddled, confusing mess, which taught me terribly little about Palestine. What a bummer.
I'm honestly shocked the author is a historian because the footnotes are some of the worst I've seen in a history book in a long time. There was a point where the author writes of the "4" Abrahamic religions of Palestine and I wish I'd noted the page. If they'd specified ancient/late antique I suppose that makes sense — but for anyone counting in today's world, the number is 6, not 4. 1) Judaism 2) Samaritanism 3) Christianity 4) Islam 5) Druze 6) Baiha'i. If I'm wrong, and they did specify, then the fault is my own.
October 26, 2018
"Masalha clearly demonstrates the way that the history of Palestine, a history where Jews, Arabs, Christians and others lived together peacefully for long periods of time, has been ignored, erased and destroyed in the interests of the modern Israeli state. This is detailed history that restores the forgotten past in the interests of a more just future for everyone, from all backgrounds and religions, in the Middle East."
Full review on the blog: http://resolutereader.blogspot.com/20...
Full review on the blog: http://resolutereader.blogspot.com/20...
September 2, 2018
This is the best history of Palestine. A must read if you want to understand not only what's problem with zionism but also the enormous value of this tiny land in human history.
September 19, 2021
This book is borderline disinformation. Aside from being poorly edited, the author's arguments are contradictory.
He claims to advance a pluralistic indigenous perspective while promoting a pan-Arab/Islamic narrative that erases the existence of an indigenous Jewish society. The historical evidence of Jewish indigeneity cannot be seriously disputed, so he is of course unable to back up his laughably false claims.
At best he acknowledges a Jewish "faith community" that supposedly lived in harmony before Zionism. Jews have always been described as a nation or people, not a "faith community," and far from living peacefully, they were repeatedly exiled and persecuted by conquering empires, including the Arab and Muslim empires whose history the author lionizes.
So much for pluralist, indigenous history. The author is little more than a sloppy polemicist masquerading as an academic.
He claims to advance a pluralistic indigenous perspective while promoting a pan-Arab/Islamic narrative that erases the existence of an indigenous Jewish society. The historical evidence of Jewish indigeneity cannot be seriously disputed, so he is of course unable to back up his laughably false claims.
At best he acknowledges a Jewish "faith community" that supposedly lived in harmony before Zionism. Jews have always been described as a nation or people, not a "faith community," and far from living peacefully, they were repeatedly exiled and persecuted by conquering empires, including the Arab and Muslim empires whose history the author lionizes.
So much for pluralist, indigenous history. The author is little more than a sloppy polemicist masquerading as an academic.
November 30, 2023
This is a really fascinating book about Palestine and it's history over thousands of years. This is not really written as an overall history of Palestine though, it's more written as a reference book to the history of what the land was called over time and through that shows who lived on the land, as well as who passed through the land and wrote about it. And it also reads like a linguistic study, there is a lot about language over time, which I found fascinating. This is a really interesting way to look at the history of Palestine, especially since so much history has been ignored, erased, and rewritten. This book really highlights how we don't get history told from people who experienced oppression and colonization, it's written by the oppressors and by white people and this really emphasizes how much that effects what we learn about history. It also really highlights how terrible our (American) education around the Middle East is.
It's a fascinating and devastating book. I do think this not an intro level book- for nonfiction readers and people learning about the region, but I do hope more people read it. Because this book is written in a very reference book way, it is very dense to read and there is a lot of repetition (I think some of that makes sense given the structure, but some of it also seemed like editing issues).
I found listening to the audiobook while following along in the physical book really helpful to stay engaged given the writing style. The voice actor does an amazing job. The audiobook is available on Everand (Scribd).
It's a fascinating and devastating book. I do think this not an intro level book- for nonfiction readers and people learning about the region, but I do hope more people read it. Because this book is written in a very reference book way, it is very dense to read and there is a lot of repetition (I think some of that makes sense given the structure, but some of it also seemed like editing issues).
I found listening to the audiobook while following along in the physical book really helpful to stay engaged given the writing style. The voice actor does an amazing job. The audiobook is available on Everand (Scribd).
July 14, 2019
Should be mandatory reading for all Americans, especially the "religious" folks.
June 3, 2020
Palestine is in the region on the Mediterranean Sea between Egypt and Lebanon. Over its long history, Palestine has been a melting pot of different religions, languages and ethnicities. The Palestinian Arab of today have a mixed ancestry of Greek, Philistine, Israelite, Arab, Roman and other ethnicities that inhabited there over the years.
Zionism, the European colonial project that seeks to claim Palestine as its territory has interrupted the continual existence of Palestinian people by depopulating their cities and appropriating their culture and language. Ethnocentrism at its best.
Zionism, the European colonial project that seeks to claim Palestine as its territory has interrupted the continual existence of Palestinian people by depopulating their cities and appropriating their culture and language. Ethnocentrism at its best.
March 10, 2024
This is the best book I have on Palestinian history, and I have a small library on the subject. Highly recommended on Palestinian history from the beginning. For example, contrary to narratives that say that it was the Romans who named the area Palestine, not only did the Greeks such as Herodotus call it Palestine when he visits there in the fifth century BCE (not noting any Jewish presence there), but the root word for Palestine is used as early as the 13th century BC in Egyptian inscriptions from Ramses II in Luxor. This is 500 years before there is any archeological evidence for any reference to the Hebrews, Jews, Israelites, etc. and the truth is that there always were indigenous people in Palestine (most of the archeological literature will call them the people of Canaan but that is more of a word constructed by the writers of the Bible and not one attested to in the archeological record) long before there ever were Hebrews (coming from the grandson of Abraham Jacob who becomes Israel and his twelve sons become the 12 tribes, etc. in the Biblical narrative itself). I am really tired of lies, propaganda, and bad scholarship on this issue. The Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Greeks, etc.--the whole ancient world called the region some root of Palestine and the people were referred to as Palestinians forever, though there were, of course, regional distinctions of different peoples within the larger group. The book really goes over the intellectual history of Palestine in the ancient and early Christian world as well. Gaza had an amazing intellectual history, and some of the greatest philosophers in history were Gazans. This is all before Islam, and there is, of course, a great history after that.
So many of the lies out there are actual jokes as far as scholarship. This book is a powerful weapon to bring balance against those lies and to fully humanize and tell the stories of our Palestinian brethren as they are being dehumanized and genocided by the Zionists before our eyes.
#FreePalestine #FreeGaza #LandBack
So many of the lies out there are actual jokes as far as scholarship. This book is a powerful weapon to bring balance against those lies and to fully humanize and tell the stories of our Palestinian brethren as they are being dehumanized and genocided by the Zionists before our eyes.
#FreePalestine #FreeGaza #LandBack
August 24, 2021
Disappointing and careless. Ignores evidence that undermines the thesis of his argument which seems emotionally driven. One can see the hatred boiling away throughout this book of lists
Currently reading
May 31, 2024*May '24 - Going through a second read.
January 3, 2021
An important history of Palestine. It restores the long history of Palestinians (Muslims, Christians & Jews) in the land of Palestine from ancient times to the present. Book ends with the tragic and systematic erasure of Arab-Palestinian heritage by the Israeli state.
March 17, 2022
A book whose focus is more on the word Palestine than a history of the region and its people. Nur Masalha also disregards contentious historical narratives and debates to replace them his own views without any nuance or justification.
February 22, 2024
Certainly not a page turner, but expertly researched. If you like academic writing, you’ll dig this! If not, I’d skip for something more approachable.
January 31, 2021
I've been reading this book for the past few weeks, and I could not put it down. The most rich and insanely detailed history about Palestine that I will forever keep referring back to.
November 13, 2023
I entered this book sad for the people of Palestine; I'm leaving it enraged on their behalf.
From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free 🍉🍉🍉
From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free 🍉🍉🍉
February 17, 2022
Nur Masalha brings us an exceptional book, full of hisotriographic references from various sources, times and cultures. A history of Palestine in terms of its inhabitants, geography, culture, language, politics, traditions and urban developments.
This is not a book about European and Israeli colonialism, Zionism, or modern Palestinian history, but rather a historical journey from the Bronze Age to the present day. This is how this book does not intend to focus on the Palestinian-Isreali Colonialism conflict, but instead addresses it, in its last chapter, as an example of European colonialism and destroys the historiographical and rhetorical myths that Zionism uses to justify its colonial policy.
From the beginning Masalha destroys the Zionist idea of a depopulated and backward land, and gives us references that prove that the area, which we now recognize as historical Palestine, was always inhabited and, after the Hellenic era, had many centers of urban and intellectual development, compared to the Greek Athens or Hellenic Alexandria. Later, under the Ottoman influence, the large cities of the area represented a strong access to the East, nourished not only by culture and economic well-being, but also by a multi-culturality that was uncommon in those times.
With the crusades and the return of Christianity, a Russian-European interest began in the area to gain control of the holy land, where the Abrahamic theologies indicate as one of its origins. However, the control of trade routes, as well as the interest in the fall of the Ottoman Empire, are the main reasons for a systematic invasion.
The arrival of Zionist Jews in the area is very well documented by Jewish, European, Russian and Arab sources that destroy the myth of an uninhabited and little prosperous land. Those who highlight Israel's right to occupy a supposedly alien and empty land will find in this book historiographical refutations (from very explicit sources) of the Zionist invention of that myth.
Similarly, the Palestinian national concept is discussed in the context of modern nationalism, but a clear difference is made with the Palestinian social, cultural, religious identity that is strongly linked to the usurped land and its ancient history.
Israel's subsequent systematic policy of erasing Palestinian history and heritage is also very well documented, using sources from Israeli academics, military, and politicians.
This is not a book about European and Israeli colonialism, Zionism, or modern Palestinian history, but rather a historical journey from the Bronze Age to the present day. This is how this book does not intend to focus on the Palestinian-Isreali Colonialism conflict, but instead addresses it, in its last chapter, as an example of European colonialism and destroys the historiographical and rhetorical myths that Zionism uses to justify its colonial policy.
From the beginning Masalha destroys the Zionist idea of a depopulated and backward land, and gives us references that prove that the area, which we now recognize as historical Palestine, was always inhabited and, after the Hellenic era, had many centers of urban and intellectual development, compared to the Greek Athens or Hellenic Alexandria. Later, under the Ottoman influence, the large cities of the area represented a strong access to the East, nourished not only by culture and economic well-being, but also by a multi-culturality that was uncommon in those times.
With the crusades and the return of Christianity, a Russian-European interest began in the area to gain control of the holy land, where the Abrahamic theologies indicate as one of its origins. However, the control of trade routes, as well as the interest in the fall of the Ottoman Empire, are the main reasons for a systematic invasion.
The arrival of Zionist Jews in the area is very well documented by Jewish, European, Russian and Arab sources that destroy the myth of an uninhabited and little prosperous land. Those who highlight Israel's right to occupy a supposedly alien and empty land will find in this book historiographical refutations (from very explicit sources) of the Zionist invention of that myth.
Similarly, the Palestinian national concept is discussed in the context of modern nationalism, but a clear difference is made with the Palestinian social, cultural, religious identity that is strongly linked to the usurped land and its ancient history.
Israel's subsequent systematic policy of erasing Palestinian history and heritage is also very well documented, using sources from Israeli academics, military, and politicians.
January 2, 2021
The research that went in to this book was astronomical, I found it incredibly comprehensive. On occasion I did struggle to follow the logical sequence of events or understand the the reason behind some arguments/facts. Less of a storytelling historical narrative and more of an academic style.
Side note: The book was edited poorly. Lots of gramatical errors that reduced the flow
Side note: The book was edited poorly. Lots of gramatical errors that reduced the flow
February 15, 2021
المشكلة الحقيقة في الاسلوب، أما المضمون فهو ليس بالشيء الجديد، بل الكثير منها كان مختصراً ومكرراً، أنصح بقراءة مفصلة عن كل حقبة مرّت بها فلسطين وهذا الكتاب يوثق ٤٠٠٠ آلاف عاماً على عجل دون تأني، الكتاب مضغوط جداً والترجمة غير موفقة. وأسلوب مصالحة جاء مملاً ورتيباً.
August 24, 2020
A wonderful book, and invaluable resource that I will surely utilize often.
May 19, 2024
a book that reads more as an etymological revelation rather than a handbook of palestinian culture throughout the years, and i believe that was the intention. i found the analysis of the effects of colonialism, settlement and urbanisation fascinating, as well as the details of political and social change (although quite dense and at times tedious.)
i can’t wait to learn more about the beautiful culture and people of palestine 🍉
i can’t wait to learn more about the beautiful culture and people of palestine 🍉
March 12, 2024
This was a really eye-opening book for me. It served as essential bit of de-programming that I didn't know I needed regarding my views of the Palestinian-Israeli region. I had no idea how little actual archeological evidence there was for the nation of Israel described in the Bible.
I always assumed that it was a given fact that the region was known as Israel until Jerusalem was sacked by Romans 2000 years ago. It turns out this is nowhere near the reality. The kingdom of Israel is an arguably minor historical entity that existed for at most 400 years roughly 3000-2700 years ago.
The region has been historically called Palestine for most of its recorded history - a stark contrast to Zionist propaganda that claims Palestine never existed.
This is an important book to counter Zionist lies about the history of the region. I highly recommend it.
I always assumed that it was a given fact that the region was known as Israel until Jerusalem was sacked by Romans 2000 years ago. It turns out this is nowhere near the reality. The kingdom of Israel is an arguably minor historical entity that existed for at most 400 years roughly 3000-2700 years ago.
The region has been historically called Palestine for most of its recorded history - a stark contrast to Zionist propaganda that claims Palestine never existed.
This is an important book to counter Zionist lies about the history of the region. I highly recommend it.
March 3, 2024
This is a tedious and exhausting history of Palestine, and it should be required reading for everyone whose primary frame of reference of the history of this region is through an Israeli or American or European lens. Sometimes tedious and exhausting is exactly what's necessary.
September 11, 2022
There’s little doubt you’ve heard of Palestine in the context of the Arab-Israeli conflict – it’s one of the longest-running political disputes of the modern age.
While the media and politicians alike make the conflict out to be complicated, these blinks seek to paint a simpler picture. The fact is that Palestine has existed for four thousand years as a multiethnic, multicultural and multireligious region of the eastern Mediterranean between modern-day Lebanon and Egypt.
But Palestine’s uninterrupted history came under threat in the nineteenth century. White European colonists called Zionists began trying to create a Jewish state in Palestine. What ensued was the systematic displacement and cleansing of Palestine of its ancestral people and replacement by European settlers. That is the root of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
As the politics of the conflict may be contentious to many, these blinks will seek to paint an accurate, evidence-based picture of historical Palestine. After all, only by understanding history can we move forward toward a brighter tomorrow and attempt to rectify the injustices of the past.
The name “Palestine” has been the most common way to describe the region on the Mediterranean sea between Egypt and Lebanon for 3,200 years. Over its long history, Palestine has been a melting pot of different religions, languages, and ethnicities. The Palestinian Arabs of today have mixed ancestry of Greek, Philistine, Israelite, Arab, Roman, and other ethnicities that have populated the region over the years. While the major religion has been Islam for the last 1,400 years, Christianity and Judaism were also practiced continuously by the native population for millennia. Zionism – the European colonial project that seeks to claim Palestine as its own territory – has interrupted the continual existence of the Palestinian people by depopulating their cities and appropriating their culture and language.
While the media and politicians alike make the conflict out to be complicated, these blinks seek to paint a simpler picture. The fact is that Palestine has existed for four thousand years as a multiethnic, multicultural and multireligious region of the eastern Mediterranean between modern-day Lebanon and Egypt.
But Palestine’s uninterrupted history came under threat in the nineteenth century. White European colonists called Zionists began trying to create a Jewish state in Palestine. What ensued was the systematic displacement and cleansing of Palestine of its ancestral people and replacement by European settlers. That is the root of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
As the politics of the conflict may be contentious to many, these blinks will seek to paint an accurate, evidence-based picture of historical Palestine. After all, only by understanding history can we move forward toward a brighter tomorrow and attempt to rectify the injustices of the past.
The name “Palestine” has been the most common way to describe the region on the Mediterranean sea between Egypt and Lebanon for 3,200 years. Over its long history, Palestine has been a melting pot of different religions, languages, and ethnicities. The Palestinian Arabs of today have mixed ancestry of Greek, Philistine, Israelite, Arab, Roman, and other ethnicities that have populated the region over the years. While the major religion has been Islam for the last 1,400 years, Christianity and Judaism were also practiced continuously by the native population for millennia. Zionism – the European colonial project that seeks to claim Palestine as its own territory – has interrupted the continual existence of the Palestinian people by depopulating their cities and appropriating their culture and language.
February 25, 2024
I didn't finish this one. I'm a third of the way through and Nur is still just listing all of the different times in historical texts or ancient literature something resembling Palestine or was arguably Palestine was mentioned. I gave up because I hadn't hit actual history yet.
Also, why are there no maps? Nur references pulling some of this information from ancient maps, but there are no maps. I was super hopeful given the title that I'd learn something, but I just couldn't slog through it.
Also, why are there no maps? Nur references pulling some of this information from ancient maps, but there are no maps. I was super hopeful given the title that I'd learn something, but I just couldn't slog through it.
October 26, 2023
Obviously a hugely important work. This is thorough and it goes DEEP.
If you want a quick primer on Palestine - this ain’t it. If you want to go deeper and having a longer scope of historical context, this is for you.
Minus one star because the editing was lacking. Book felt repetitive and a bit disorganized.
If you want a quick primer on Palestine - this ain’t it. If you want to go deeper and having a longer scope of historical context, this is for you.
Minus one star because the editing was lacking. Book felt repetitive and a bit disorganized.
Read
June 3, 2020This is one of those historical books that not only has a very biased author to begin with, but also takes a biased side by not making any appeal to facts and proof.
January 11, 2022
Full amazing and enlightening information.
I would give it the fifth star if Editing and arrangement of book better!
I would give it the fifth star if Editing and arrangement of book better!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 126 reviews