From Time Immemorial

From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine is a 1984 book by Joan Peters about the demographics of the Arab population of Palestine and of the Jewish population of the Arab world before and after the formation of the State of Israel.

According to the book a large fraction of the Arabs of Palestine were not descendants of long-term residents of Palestine at the time of the formation of Israel in 1948, but had arrived in waves of immigration starting in the 19th century and continuing through the period of the British Mandate. At the same time a large number of Jews equal in number, according to the author, to the Arabs fleeing Palestine, were driven out of the Arab countries and became refugees in Israel. Peters contends that what is referred to the Palestinian refugee problem is actually a population exchange that resulted from the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.

Contents

Positive reviews

According to Norman Finkelstein, the book had received some two hundred [favorable] notices in the United States by the end of its publication in 1984.[1]

Shortly after publication Martin Kramer wrote that the book raises overdue questions about the demographic history of Palestine in a way that cannot be ignored, but also referred to "serious weaknesses" in the book, and Peters' "rummaging through archives and far more balanced historical studies than her own for whatever evidence she can find to back up her thesis". He goes on to say that "It is specially unfortunate because on the central point of her book, the demographic argument, Peters is probably right."[2]

Theodore H. White called Peters' work a "superlative book" that traces Middle East history with "unmatched skill."[3]

Saul Bellow's endorsement on the cover of the book stated:

"Every political issue claiming the attention of a world public has its 'experts" - news managers, anchor men, ax grinders, and anglers. The great merit of this book is to demonstrate that, on the Palestinian issue, these experts speak from utter ignorance. Millions of people the world over, smothered by false history and propaganda, will be grateful for this clear account of the origins of the Palestinians. From Time Immemorial does not grudge these unhappy people their rights. It does, however, dissolve the claims made by nationalist agitators and correct the false history by which these unfortunate Arabs are imposed upon and exploited."

The book was also praised by Arthur J. Goldberg and Martin Peretz who said: "If (the book is) read, it will change the mind of our generation.”[4][5] Peretz suggested that there was not a single factual error in the book.[6]

After a new edition was published, in 2001, the journalist Joseph Farah called the book a "milestone history on the origins of the Arab-Jewish conflict in the region."[7] Walter Reich wrote on the book "fresh and powerful ... an original analysis as well as a synoptic view of a little-known but important human story". Jehuda Reinharz described the book as "valuable synthesis" and "new analysis" that "convincingly demonstrates that many of those who today call themselves Palestinian refugees are former immigrants or children of such immigrants". Ronald Sanders wrote that Peters's demographics "could change the entire Arab-Jewish polemic over Palestine". Sidney Zion wrote that Peters's book was "the intellectual equivalent of the Six-Day War". Timothy Foote acclaimed that the book is "part historic primer, part polemic, part revelation, and a remarkable document in itself". Lucy Dawidowicz wrote that Peters "brought into the light the historical truth about the Mideast". Barbara Probst Solomon called the book "brilliant, provocative and enlightened". Elie Wiesel described the "insight and analysis" of the book. Similar views were expressed by Arthur Goldberg, Paul Cowan and others.[6]

Negative reviews

Reviewing the book for the November 28, 1985 issue of The New York Times, Israeli historian Yehoshua Porath described the book as a "sheer forgery," stating that "[i]n Israel, at least, the book was almost universally dismissed as sheer rubbish except maybe as a propaganda weapon."[8] In 1986, Porath repeated his views in The New York Review of Books, and published a negative review that cites many inaccuracies.[9] In that review are mentions of other criticisms published by: Alexander Cockburn and Edward Said in The Nation (October 13, 1984 and October 19, 1985), Walter Reich in The Atlantic (July 1984), Ronald Sanders in The New Republic (April 23, 1984), Bernard Gwertzman in The New York Times (May 12, 1984), Norman G. Finkelstein in In These Times (September 1984), Bill Farrell in the Journal of Palestine Studies (Fall 1984), Ian and David Gilmour in The London Review of Books (February 7, 1985) and Daniel Pipes in Commentary (July 1984). However, both academic historians Ronald Sanders and Daniel Pipes had actually expressed their positive general assessment of the book in their responses named by Porath, and Pipes, in the Commentary article quoted by Porath actually found From Time Immemorial an important book:

"Despite its drawbacks. From Time Immemorial contains a wealth of information, which is well worth the effort to uncover." Pipes agrees with author Joan Peters, "Thus, the 'Palestinian problem' lacks firm grounding. Many of those who now consider themselves Palestinian refugees were either immigrants themselves before 1948 or the children of immigrants. This historical fact reduces their claim to the land of Israel; it also reinforces the point that the real problem in the Middle East has little to do with Palestinian-Arab rights."

Norman Finkelstein's Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict asserts that much of Peters' scholarship was fraudulent. Finkelstein's allegations that Alan Dershowitz plagiarized Peters' book became a central issue in the Dershowitz-Finkelstein affair. Noam Chomsky defended and promoted Finkelstein's critique, commenting:

[As] soon as I heard that the book was going to come out in England, I immediately sent copies of Finkelstein's work to a number of British scholars and journalists who are interested in the Middle East—and they were ready. As soon as the book [From Time Immemorial] appeared, it was just demolished, it was blown out of the water. Every major journal, the Times Literary Supplement, the London Review, the Observer, everybody had a review saying, this doesn't even reach the level of nonsense, of idiocy. A lot of the criticism used Finkelstein's work without any acknowledgment, I should say—but about the kindest word anybody said about the book was "ludicrous," or "preposterous."[10]

Robert Olson was among the few authors to write a critical review of the book before it was released in Britain.[11] He concluded:

This is a startling and disturbing book. It is startling because, despite the author's professed ignorance of the historiography of the Arab-Israeli conflict and lack of knowledge of Middle Eastern history (pp. 221, 335) coupled with her limitation to sources largely in English (absolutely no Arab sources are used), she engages in the rewriting of history on the basis of little evidence. ...The undocumented numbers in her book in no way allow for the wild and exaggerated assertions that she makes or for her conclusion. This book is disturbing because it seems to have been written for purely polemical and political reasons: to prove that Jordan is the Palestinian state. This argument, long current among revisionist Zionists, has regained popularity in Israel and among Jews since the Likud party came to power in Israel in 1977.[12]

According to Frank Menetrez, writing in CounterPunch, “when a number of scholars examined the book carefully, they concluded that it was of no scholarly value whatsoever. It ignores important parts of the documentary record, misuses the sources on which it does rely, and contains straightforward logical errors. Consequently, according to Menetrez, "Peters’ book has been rejected as worthless by the scholarly community around the world, including Israel."[13]

In discussing the reactions of commentators to the book, Anthony Lewis compared the reaction of American commentators to the reaction of Israeli ones:

"Israelis have not gushed over the book as some Americans have. Perhaps that is because they know the reality of the Palestinians' existence, as great Zionists of the past knew. Perhaps it is because most understand the danger of trying to deny a people identity. As Professor Porath says, Neither historiography nor the Zionist cause itself gains anything from mythologizing history."[4]

Notes

  1. ^ Finkelstein, Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict 45-46
  2. ^ Martin Kramer (May 14, 1984). "The New Case for Israel". The New Leader. Archived from the original on 2005-04-01. http://web.archive.org/web/20050401064600/http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/Peters.htm. 
  3. ^ Film to 'dispel Arab propaganda' Based on groundbreaking book contesting 'myths' of Holy Land conflict
  4. ^ a b Lewis, Anthony (January 13, 1986). "There Were No Indians". The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/1986/01/13/opinion/abroad-at-home-there-were-no-indians.html?scp=1&sq=%22There+Were+No+Indians%22&st=nyt. 
  5. ^ Peretz, Martin (July 23, 1984). The New Republic. 
  6. ^ a b Norman Finkelstein (1995). Image and Reality of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict , pp 21-22
  7. ^ Joseph Farah (April 25, 2001). "What is a Palestinian?". WorldNetDaily. http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=22564. 
  8. ^ Colin Campbell (November 28, 1985), "Dispute Flares Over Book on Claims to Palestine", The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/1985/11/28/books/dispute-flares-over-book-on-claims-to-palestine.html?scp=1&sq=Yehoshua+Porath&st=nyt, retrieved May 3, 2010 
  9. ^ Mrs. Peters’s Palestine New York Review Of Books January 16, 1986
  10. ^ "The Fate of an Honest Intellectual". http://www.chomsky.info/books/power01.htm. 
  11. ^ Christopher Hitchens, Edward Said (editors). Blaming the victims: spurious scholarship and the Palestinian question. Verso Books, 2001. p. 23.
  12. ^ Olson, Robert. "From Time Immemorial (Book Review)." American Historical Review 90, no. 2 (April 1985): 468. Professional Development Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed March 30, 2009).
  13. ^ F. Menetrez, "Dershowitz v. Finkelstein: Who's Right and Who's Wrong?" in Counterpunch, April 30, 2007

External links