What do you think?
Rate this book
The Origins of Palestinian Nationalism
The only work of its kind devoted exclusively to the institutional framework of Palestinian politics from 1856 until December 1920, when the third Palestinian Arab Congress was held in Haifa to decide the future of Palestine. Muslih's book is also the first to present in detail the ideologies of Ottomanism and Arab nationalism and the ways in which they relate to Palestine. In a groundbreaking analysis that considers the entire context of Arab politics, Muhammad Muslih articulates a new interpretation for the emergence of Palestinian nationalism, and one which will foster a better understanding of the centuries-old attachment of the Arab Palestinians to their land and their struggle for its independence.
277 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1988
1 person is currently reading
230 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
November 15, 2023
I chose this book to review for an assignment. It was an interesting history and analysis of how and why Palestinian Nationalism became prominent and fostered as a result of Arab Nationalism as well as out of the decline of the Ottoman Empire. It has little relevance to why the land was taken over and focuses more on the Arabian Political landscape of the time and the relationships between Arab states.
June 3, 2021
A pretty good, even provocative book.
Muslih describes the Palestinian political framework as one composed of competing families that established themselves in Palestine throughout the successive waves of imperial conquer. The vast majority of these families traced their origins to the outside of Palestine (most to Southern Arabia and Yemen) and this is not an accidental argument, as some of them transported intra-tribal conflicts from their native homeland to Palestine, and still engaged in these conflicts some 1200 years after their settlement in the region.
By the end of the 19th century, these families had to deal with the emerging threat of Jewish colonists moved by an explicitly political ideology - Zionism. However, these families overwhelmingly associated themselves with the continuity of Ottoman power to ensure their control of the region, and mostly identified with the Pan-Islamist principles of the Ottoman - no wonder the few vocal voices of the nascent Arab nationalism were Christians.
With the growth of Turkish chauvinism among the Ottomans and their ultimate collapse, the Arab political dynasties had no option but to adopt Arab nationalism as a mode of political survival. Inside Palestine, different groups of Arab nationalists had different priorities, with some - mostly young politicians from families outside of traditional power - preferring their union with Syria and others - mostly older politicians determined to protect their power structures and moved by an abstract sense of nationalism - petitioning for independence.
What both groups were unanimous were in their opposition to Zionism, though. Although most settlers bought their land from rich absentee landowners or from the Ottoman empire directly, public discourse fanned the flames by arguing settlers were dispossessing poor peasants and taking their lands. This opposition was further crystallized by Zionism's open objective of creating a Jewish independent homeland in Palestine and in the lack of respect of Jewish settlers for customary rural and property law. It is, of course, also of the nature of Arab nationalism - and to be fair with the Arabs, most of post-Ottoman nationalism - to be extremely chauvinist and arabising. Muslih mentions en passant the massacre of Armenian migrant workers in Aleppo motivated by this Arab nationalism, which would reach its apotheosis in the many massacres and ethnic cleansings of the 20th century.
However, the idea that a Jewish homeland had an inherent right to be established in the region can only be seen, in retrospect, as a massive act of idealism. No nation in the world ever gave up land which is considered legally theirs in benefit of an abstract claim, and to consider that the Arabs had a moral obligation to do so only because another country told them so is plainly absurd. In a very cynical way, the Zionists acted as one more of the many foreign armies that passed through their land, clashing with the last, established power. Arabs and Jews fought, the Arabs lost. Had this happened in 1850 and not in 1948, it probably wouldn't have raised any eyebrows.
Muslih describes the Palestinian political framework as one composed of competing families that established themselves in Palestine throughout the successive waves of imperial conquer. The vast majority of these families traced their origins to the outside of Palestine (most to Southern Arabia and Yemen) and this is not an accidental argument, as some of them transported intra-tribal conflicts from their native homeland to Palestine, and still engaged in these conflicts some 1200 years after their settlement in the region.
By the end of the 19th century, these families had to deal with the emerging threat of Jewish colonists moved by an explicitly political ideology - Zionism. However, these families overwhelmingly associated themselves with the continuity of Ottoman power to ensure their control of the region, and mostly identified with the Pan-Islamist principles of the Ottoman - no wonder the few vocal voices of the nascent Arab nationalism were Christians.
With the growth of Turkish chauvinism among the Ottomans and their ultimate collapse, the Arab political dynasties had no option but to adopt Arab nationalism as a mode of political survival. Inside Palestine, different groups of Arab nationalists had different priorities, with some - mostly young politicians from families outside of traditional power - preferring their union with Syria and others - mostly older politicians determined to protect their power structures and moved by an abstract sense of nationalism - petitioning for independence.
What both groups were unanimous were in their opposition to Zionism, though. Although most settlers bought their land from rich absentee landowners or from the Ottoman empire directly, public discourse fanned the flames by arguing settlers were dispossessing poor peasants and taking their lands. This opposition was further crystallized by Zionism's open objective of creating a Jewish independent homeland in Palestine and in the lack of respect of Jewish settlers for customary rural and property law. It is, of course, also of the nature of Arab nationalism - and to be fair with the Arabs, most of post-Ottoman nationalism - to be extremely chauvinist and arabising. Muslih mentions en passant the massacre of Armenian migrant workers in Aleppo motivated by this Arab nationalism, which would reach its apotheosis in the many massacres and ethnic cleansings of the 20th century.
However, the idea that a Jewish homeland had an inherent right to be established in the region can only be seen, in retrospect, as a massive act of idealism. No nation in the world ever gave up land which is considered legally theirs in benefit of an abstract claim, and to consider that the Arabs had a moral obligation to do so only because another country told them so is plainly absurd. In a very cynical way, the Zionists acted as one more of the many foreign armies that passed through their land, clashing with the last, established power. Arabs and Jews fought, the Arabs lost. Had this happened in 1850 and not in 1948, it probably wouldn't have raised any eyebrows.
March 1, 2025
A great addition to the arsenal for anyone looking to expand their knowledge on Israel/Palestine.
There isn’t much academic literature that focuses on Palestinian identity prior to WW1, so this text provides a lot of valuable historical information that will widen your understanding on the roots of a Palestinian national identity.
There isn’t much academic literature that focuses on Palestinian identity prior to WW1, so this text provides a lot of valuable historical information that will widen your understanding on the roots of a Palestinian national identity.
September 20, 2025
A good overview of how Palestinian nationalism emerged. Essentially it was the result of both internal factors like the general spread of nationalist ideas (including Arab and Palestinian) and external ones like the collapse of Faisal’s monarchy over Syria in 1920. To Muslih, colonialism and Zionism played marginal roles in creating Palestinian nationalism.
Took off one star because it’s a bit dry. The book is interesting, but not what I’d call a page turner.
Took off one star because it’s a bit dry. The book is interesting, but not what I’d call a page turner.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews