When did Palestine exist as more than a map notation?

a reply to: teamcommander
The fact that they ARE calling themselves Palestinians is self-evident from all the media.
That's all I need for the point I was trying to make.
Let me re-phrase it; "The fact that the modern population are calling themselves Palestinians, naming themselves after the territory, has no bearing on the question of continuity".
In other words, the fact that there was a Palestine in the time of the Romans can't be taken to show that "the Palestinians", in the modern sense, were there in the time of the Romans. The name of the territory is independent of the name of the people.

a reply to: MrCynic

They tried in the turn of the century to create a government, but the members of the government were deported and weren't recognized.

The question you should be asking is how far back have the Palestinians rights been withheld? How far back have they been oppressed?

It's not like people just recently began to have agendas for this land. While rich western Zionists began agendas, Palestinians just lived their lives there.

I have pretty much refrained as much as I can from commenting on Palestine/Israel threads for obvious reasons but mainly since there is no real "clear cut" solutions it really does require a bit of thinking. Pondering if you will. Not just something whereas quick snap decisions solve the whole situation.

I see a few people asking whose land is it anyway and a few answers that suggest 1500-5000 years of history as recent. Soulwaxer did raise a good point that here in the US we have given flak to the American Indian for the last 150 years yet sit here and tell people that have a longer history in the areas they live now and forget about the past. Right now Israel is under attack by Hamas and Palestinians are paying the price.

Now I'm not a history major so I have to claim a lot of ignorance. My knowledge only really extends biblical record (I'm not a Christian but I look at the bible as an accord on history. I know reading Exodus the Jews did their wandering in the Sinai Peninsula and after Moses died, under Joshua he went tear assing around the region sacking city after city, Jericho being the most memorable one. I really don't know where the Jews came from before they went to Egypt.

Just appears to me with my limited knowledge. I do know those events happened supposedly about 4500 years ago and it also appears that's when all the trouble really started. I also know that a lot of the Jews in Israel come from Europe, mainly Germany and Poland.

Am I wrong? Just trying to get it all clear in my head. Where did the Jews actually come from? Most the area they want now was mostly held by Persians at the time of Joshua I thought.

a reply to: Terminal1

Just gonna post another post just so I get over the 666th post.

/heh

originally posted by: Terminal1
Most the area they want now was mostly held by Persians at the time of Joshua I thought.

No, the Persians were later.
In the Genesis period, the area was dominated on-and-off by Egypt.
The decline of central power in Egypt meant there was something of a power vacuum in the territory north of Sinai, and the early Israelites only had to compete with the local populations, the "Canaanites". Even the Philistines arrived slightly later.

originally posted by: Murgatroid
Nice to see some truth here for a change...



The Palestinian 'homeland' is nothing more than a mythical fabrication.

Indeed, there is no such a thing like a Palestinian people, or a Palestinian culture, or a Palestinian language, or a Palestinian history. There has never been any Palestinian state, neither any Palestinian archaeological find nor coinage. The present-day “Palestinians” are an Arab people, with Arab culture, Arabic language and Arab history. That is the historical truth. They were Jordanians (another recent British invention, as there has never been any people known as “Jordanians”), and after the Six-Day War in which Israel utterly defeated the coalition of nine Arab states and took legitimate possession of Judea and Samaria, the Arab dwellers in those regions underwent a kind of anthropological miracle and discovered that they were Palestinians – something they did not know the day before.



Origin of the Name Palestine

After the destruction of the second Temple by the Roman Empire, the name of the land was changed to Palestine, to erase the name of the Jewish entities that had existed there- Judea and the Israel- and the name of Jerusalem was changed as well- to Capitonlina. this is how the Romans controlled the places they conquered- remove the original settlers and erase the name of the land from memory.



www.palestinefacts.org...

Believe it or not, I went to the link which you provided and actually learned a little bit.

First, I must say that I found you did not take your quote from the text of the site you linked. Your quote is from the comments section, from Eugene on February 12, 2012 at 4:52 pm.

I found another comment which also seems to fill in a slightly different story.
However, I would much prefer information from an article which has been research rather than comments which can be shaded by opinion.

The Philistines entered in this region not all at one time but in different eras. The first group reached here in the pre-patriarchal period and made a settlement in Gerar, south of Beersheba. The second group arrived from Crete and settled in the southern coastal area where it divided made different settlements into Gat, Ekron, Ashdod, Ascalon and Gaza. These districts were occupied by the foreign settlers coming mostly from the Mediterranean islands.

In the fifth century BC, the region of eastern coast of the Mediterranean started being called as “the Philistine Syria”, a term coined by the Greek historian, Herodotus and used in its Greek language form. In AD 135, the Emperor Hadrian blotted out the name “Provincia Judea” and renamed it “Provincia Syria Palaestina”. This was the Latin version of the Greek name and soon became a name to be used as an administrative unit. This name was shortened to Palaestina and the name “Palestine” was derived from it as a modern and anglicized version.


No changes occurred to this name until after the fourth century had passed when Palestine was divided in to three regions, following the imperial reorganization. The name Palestine was used by the Christian Crusades to regard all three of the divided regions in general and continued to be used for the regions on both sides of the Jordan River in general. Palestine went under the rule of the Ottoman Turks for 400 years where its administration was attached to Damascus. After the fall of the Ottoman Empire in World War I, the name Palestine was revived and was applied to the land falling under the British Mandate for Palestine. Arabs use the name “Falastin” for Palestine which is an Arab pronunciation of the Roman word “Palaestina.”

I do hope this has helped to forward the discussion through the use of research which has been done rather than comments picked out because they agree with some one's opinion.

a reply to: MrCynic

Then who are they fighting? You are trying to erase the past.

a reply to: DISRAELI

I work with a guy who was born in Mexico. He calls himself an American.
Now, by the strictest sense of the term, he is by vertue of being born on the American Continent.
However, as he is not a citizen of the United States, his claim is not all together acceptable in the legal sense here in my home state. He does not have the same rights and privleges as others normally known as Americans. If his parents or grandparents been living here his claim would be much more valid. This would also be true of the Palestinians who have been born where they now live.

With this in mind does it really make all that much difference when someone "illegidly" calls themselves by a title? It depends a lot on where a person is born to determine which "group" they belong with.
As to your attempt to offer you statements as "Factual Proof", I am afraid it would not hold up in a court of law, so it is not acceptable.

a reply to: ugmold

You've lost me on how a wide open inquiry to whomever may have more knowledge than I do to explain something which doesn't entirely make sense is trying to erase anything?

I'm trying to find an answer in a way as definitive as asking whether they were a nation or not. That still is not entirely clear. What is clear and what I was not fully expecting was to see references in old script and language among the Library Of Congress collection some of those maps came from. Some show where Palestine or variants of the name are there all along. Usually as a subdivision within a larger entity.

I am still not sure I understand the line from the past to the present for the claims which start in the past. I can clearly see there has been some literal presence to recognize as Palestinian for the better part of history.

Is that a legal or international basis for this fight today? That is a question for other threads and not where I am at with this one. It seems to be showing they both DO have a claim from deep history though. One clear as a small empire with Kings to go with it and one by strong cultural ties and physical presence throughout.

originally posted by: teamcommander
As to your attempt to offer you statements as "Factual Proof", I am afraid it would not hold up in a court of law, so it is not acceptable.

What do you think I'm trying to prove?
All I am doing is breaking the connection between the history of the name of a territory, and the history of a people who have named themselves after that territory.
There were people in this thread saying "There has been a place called Palestine since Roman times, and this shows that the Palestinians have been there since Roman times", and I was pointing out that this argument was invalid. Not trying to prove anything, just questioning an attempted proof.

originally posted by: MrCynic
a reply to: ugmold
I can clearly see there has been some literal presence to recognize as Palestinian for the better part of history.

Not really. There was an area called Palestine, but the occupants were not calling themselves Palestinians.
In fact in Roman times the inhabitants of Palestine were calling themselves Jews.
So if you're going to build up conclusions on the name alone, you couild say that the Jews were Palestinians.

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: MrCynic

Let me answer your question this way.

The majority of Jews in Israel came from Europe, or of European decent.In fact where they came from doesn't really matter.
Jews living in Israel now and their forefathers have interbreed with non-Jews over many years.
So, is there such a thing as a 100% true blood Jew living in Israel. I would suspect the answer is a resounding no.
So what gives them title to the land they live on?

The Jews deserve the land of Palestine back now after 2,000 years just like the Italians deserve Britain back after the same time period. Indeed I'm pushing for Italians to take back Britain, it was theirs 2,000 years ago so why not let them have it back too? It's fair right? What's good for the goose is good for the gander?

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: MrCynic

Can we please stop perpetuating the myth that a certain group of people are entitled to property/land because they may have ancestors that were there 3,000 to 5,000 years ago?

Are the entire world's populations supposed to revert back to where our ancestors were 5,000 years ago?

By that same logic, I suppose that the ancestors of American Indians are entitled to my house and property, which brings me to another point.

We laugh at Indian claims on land which are 150 years old but a 5,000 year old claim is legitimate?

Most of these Jews arent even Sephardic. They're Ashkenazis or Eastern European. Many believe that they are actually descendants of the Khazars, converts to Judaism as described in the The Thirteenth Tribe.

When you think about the insanity of it, there are Eastern Europeans coming into the Middle East and ordering Palestinian Arabs to abandon their ancestral/indigenous homes and property...

Which country isnt a "map notation"? The borders of nation states have been re-written and countries created out of nothing, generally after a time of war and conquest.

The hope is that we as a people have evolved to the point where we see the clear immorality of taking someone's property by force. Here in the West, the taking of property by force is referred to as stealing.

Seems reasonable to me that indigenous populations are the rightful owners of the land they were born on. Where exactly do people think the Palestinian Arabs came from? They've always been right there in the Middle East...

And lets not forget how this all started. The Palestinians never went looking for any trouble. They were on their own land, minding their own business when they were descended upon in a very violent manner and attacked thru no fault of their own.

Weird...You are condemning the idea that the Jews own the land because it was their land thousands of years ago and then why do the Palestinians now own it???

You seem to ignore the fact that Jews have lived on that land FOR thousands of years up to the current time...Jews lived all over the Middle East...When the Jews were given the land by the British, they were kicked out of most of the Arab countries while Arabs were still welcome to live in Israel...

Jews lived in Palestine...Arabs lived in Palestine...

originally posted by: teamcommander
Believe it or not, I went to the link which you provided and actually learned a little bit.

First, I must say that I found you did not take your quote from the text of the site you linked. Your quote is from the comments section, from Eugene on February 12, 2012 at 4:52 pm.

I found another comment which also seems to fill in a slightly different story.
However, I would much prefer information from an article which has been research rather than comments which can be shaded by opinion.

I do hope this has helped to forward the discussion through the use of research which has been done rather than comments picked out because they agree with some one's opinion.

Glad to see that you checked the source out, very few here do that let alone actually read the citation.

I find that most of the time, blog comments have more reliable info than the actual article above them.

What if all of us were to disregard everything just because it hasn't been properly 'researched'?

Should we disregard everything on ATS too including the posts you just created?

At some point one has to draw a line and recognize that truth and research many times have absolutely nothing in common.

Great thread.

I believe both Israelis and Palestinians have a legitimate claim to the land based on historical implications.

The UN Partition Plan that was drafted in 1947 was the ideal solution in my opinion, and would have theoretically given birth to two sovereign nations.

It's a tragedy that the Arab delegations decided to declare war on Israel instead of accepting the UN proposal. How many lives could have been spared since then?

Its quite simple, people of semetic origin have lived in the area for more than 2000 years, problem is the state of israel has nothing to do with judea or the orginal decedents of the people who labored the land.

So yes palestine has never really been a country, and no israel cant use the god gave us the land speech either.

So yes semetic people have had there land stolen by europeens.

The Mandate of Palestine was maintained by Britain until 1948. In 1946 they started planning to fulfill an earlier promise. Let's go back in time now to 1917. It's the height of the first world war and we look at the Balfour Declaration, which was a formal promise to the Jewish Population of Great Britain that the area known as the British Mandate of Palestine would be established as a national home for the Jewish people. This was in part to raise more soldiers. Now, this promise is tabled for decades, until after the Second World War and the atrocities of the holocaust, the Jewish people are livid. Jews across Europe are full of hate, fear, strife, and have had enough.

The Balfour Declaration is returned to the light, and Britain responds. In 1946 Britain formally looks into what it would take to admit Jews into Palestine. They decided to immediately admit 100,000 Jewish refugees from Europe, accompanied by 300,000 troops to keep the peace against an Arab revolt.

After the Romans removed the rebellions Jews from the province of Judea they renamed it Palestine. So while until recently there has been no independent country named Palestine, The Jews who became the founding citizens of Israel were already living there. Some families never left and were there for thousands of years, others had started moving in waves since the 1800's. They had established their own cities and towns, such as Tel Aviv, and of course Jerusalem thousands of years ago, and all of the land then controlled by Jews had been purchased legally from Turkish and British landowners. Nobody gave them the land, the UN partition reflected demographic changes which had occurred legally and naturally, before the war got underway

Palestinians and Hamas seem to only make a claim since the state of Israel was created which was to be shared land of Muslims & Jews

However as we all know very well Muslims are forbidden by a silly book to kill all none believers, and so surrounding Arab states have armed and funded this attempt to drive the Jews into the sea, it hasn't worked. Out as planned of course the Jews have gained ground through war and defending there settlements and who can blame them

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
Its quite simple, people of semetic origin have lived in the area for more than 2000 years, problem is the state of israel has nothing to do with judea or the orginal decedents of the people who labored the land.

So yes palestine has never really been a country, and no israel cant use the god gave us the land speech either.

So yes semetic people have had there land stolen by europeens.

Your sounding so confused

You're basically saying that the Anglian's have nothing to do with the UK

The name Judea is a Greek and Roman adaptation of the name "Judah", which originally encompassed the territory of the Israelite tribe of that name and later of the ancient Kingdom of Judah. Nimrud Tablet K.3751, dated c.733 BCE, is the earliest known record of the name Judah (written in Assyrian cuneiform as Yaudaya or KUR.ia-ú-da-a-a).

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: MrCynic



Let me answer your question this way.



The majority of Jews in Israel came from Europe, or of European decent.In fact where they came from doesn't really matter.

Jews living in Israel now and their forefathers have interbreed with non-Jews over many years.

So, is there such a thing as a 100% true blood Jew living in Israel. I would suspect the answer is a resounding no.

So what gives them title to the land they live on?

Blatantly 100% false. Genetic testing shows current day Jews have Middle Eastern and Levant origins.

originally posted by: teamcommander
a reply to: MrCynic



I can appreciate your statement:

I am sincerely and genuinely curious about the TRUTH behind the often repeated and commonly accepted idea that there is a solid past historic claim, after I couldn't find a logical place for it to have come from.

So I looked back to another web site I had seen this morning. They are showing several maps which do show a place called Palestine, or variations on that name, in the same location. Map of the known world, 43AD (Oh, look! Palestina!)

You will need to enlarge this maps:



whatreallyhappened.com...



To see where the name is written. It is on the coast right next to Judea .

It is also about the same size, if you notice.

Yes, and it's an area. No one debates there is an area called Palestine. It belonged to numerous groups, including Jews. One group of people it did not belong to was present day Palestinians.