Since that date, proof of unbroken possession or use of any right made it unnecessary to establish the original grant under certain circumstances. This page was last edited on 13 September 2017, at 14:10. Peters from time immemorial pdf that at the same time a much larger number of Jews than the number of Arabs fleeing Palestine, were driven out of the Arab countries and became refugees in Israel.
Finkelstein’s criticism and called the book “ludicrous”, “worthless” and a “forgery”. On its release in the US the book received widespread critical acclaim. United States by the end of its publication in 1984. In April 1985 it was awarded the National Jewish Book Award in the “Israel” category. 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. Peretz suggested that there was not a single factual error in the book. Palestinian refugees are former immigrants or children of such immigrants”. Peters’ book was “the intellectual equivalent of the Six-Day War”. Peters “brought into the light the historical truth about the Mideast”.
Some reviewers, while describing the book in favourable terms, did point to certain deficiencies in Peters’ scholarship. 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. Peters’ “historical detective work has produced startling results, which should materially influence the future course of the debate about the Palestinian problem. He did, however, caution readers that “the author is not a historian or someone practiced in writing on politics, and she tends to let her passions carry her away. As a result, the book suffers from chaotic presentation and an excess of partisanship”, and said that critics of her hypothesis should feel obliged to ‘make a serious effort to show her wrong by demonstrating that many thousands of Arabs did not emigrate to Palestine in the period under question. Much of the book is irrelevant to Miss Peters’s central thesis.
The author’s linguistic and scholarly abilities are open to question. Excessive use of quotation marks, eccentric footnotes, and a polemical, somewhat hysterical undertone mar the book. Initially the book received very few unfavorable reviews. Peters had “cooked the statistics” and that her scholarship was “phony and tendentious”, recycling ideas promoted by right-wing Zionists since the 1930s. Finkelstein went into a close examination of all of Peters’ notes and sources, and argued that her work persistently misrepresented or distorted the primary documents. His systematic critique of the book, attacking the two major pillars of Peters’ thesis, which he regarded as a ‘threadbare hoax’ supported by the ‘American intellectual establishment’, had a major impact of later reviews of the book, especially those in Great Britain.