Palestinian responses to forced depopulation and ethnic cleansing from their villages and towns are ‘discursively rich, complex and protean’ (Slyomovics 2002). In recent decades novels, poems, films, plays, ethnographic and photographic documentation, maps, oral history archives, online websites, and a wide range of activities in exiled and internally displaced communities have been and are being produced, many with the aim of countering Israeli denial and correcting distortions of omission and commission that eradicate the Palestinian presence in the land. Also a large number of books have been produced both inside Israel and at Birzeit University, all dedicated to villages that have been depopulated and destroyed. These form part of a large historical and imaginative literature in which the destroyed Palestinian villages are ‘revitalised and their existence celebrated’ (Slyomovics 2002). In the post-1948 period Palestinians maintained the multiple meaning of their Arabic names and the multi-layered Palestinian identity embedded in ancient names (Ashrawi 1995: 132‒134; Doumani 1995).

Palestinian nationalism (both secular and religious strands) however – like all other modern nationalisms – with its construction of national consciousness, is a modern phenomenon (Khalidi, R. 1998). But this must not be automatically conflated with the Palestinians’ social, cultural and religious identities, which are deeply rooted in the land as well as in the ancient history and toponymic memory of Palestine. Furthermore, the Palestinians, until the 1948 catastrophe, were predominantly peasants, deeply rooted in the physical and cultural landscapes of Palestine. The local dialect and the names of their villages and towns preserved the multi-layered and diverse cultural heritage of the country.

Today the Palestinians are culturally and linguistically Arab and largely but not exclusively Muslim. The Palestinian Muslim population was mainly descended from local Palestinian Christians and Jews who had converted to Islam after the Islamic conquest in the 7th century and inherited many of the social, cultural, religious and linguistic traditions of ancient Palestine, including those of the Israelites, Canaanites and Philistines (Shaban 1971: 25–161; Donner 1981; Nebel and Oppenheim 2000; Rose 2010; Esler 2011). Furthermore, the similarities between their Arabic language and Ugaritic suggests that Arabic was not a late intruder into Palestine from 638 AD onwards, following the Arab Muslim conquest (Ra’ad 2010). Also many Palestinians are Christian Arabs who have historic roots in Palestine and a long heritage in the land where Christ lived. Commenting on the multi-layered cultural identity and diverse heritage of the Palestinians, Palestinian sociologist Samih Farsoun (1937–2005) writes:

Palestinians are descendants of an extensive mixing of local and regional peoples, including the Canaanites, Philistines, Hebrews, Samaritans, Hellenic Greeks, Romans, Nabatean Arabs, tribal nomadic Arabs, some Europeans from the Crusades, some Turks, and other minorities; after the Islamic conquests of the seventh century, however, they became overwhelmingly Arabs. Thus, this mixed-stock of people has developed an Arab-Islamic culture for at least fourteen centuries. (Farsoun 2004: 4)

The development of Palestinian nationalism in recent decades has brought with it a much greater awareness of critical archaeology and historical writing based on critical Biblical Studies and the question of the shared historical heritage of Palestine and the Palestinians (Thompson 2003: 1).

Also, interestingly, Palestinian scholar Mazin Qumsiyeh has suggested, in his Sharing the Land of Canaan, a more realistic and less dichotomous approach to the debate on Canaanites–Israelites. He argued for coexistence in Palestine–Israel based on shared historical heritage and cultural and genetic affinities between the ‘Canaanitic people’: Mizrahi Jews and Palestinian Christians and Muslims (Qumsiyeh 2004: 28‒30; see also Nebel and Oppenheim 2000).

Indeed, it would not be unreasonable to argue that the modern Palestinians are more likely to be the descendants of the ancient Philistines (and Israelites) than Ashkenazi Jews, many of whom were European converts to Judaism. Certainly historically, in contrast to the myth of ‘exile and return’, many of the original Jewish inhabitants of ancient Palestine remained in the country but had accepted Christianity and Islam many generations later. Today, however – in contrast to the mythologised Ashkenazi Zionist and Arab nationalist historiographies – more and more archaeologists and biblical scholars are convinced that the ancestors of the Israelites had never been in Egypt and that the biblical paradigm of a military conquest of Cana’an was completely fictional. Indeed, the archaeological evidence undermines, in particular, the Book of Joshua. If the Exodus from Egypt and the forty-year desert journey around Sinai could not have happened and the military conquest of the ‘fortified cities’ ancient Palestine (according to Deuteronomy 9:1: ‘great cities with walls sky-high’) were totally refuted by archaeology, who, then, were these Israelites, Philistines or Canaanites?

Palestinian digitally archived oral histories and toponymic memories of the hundreds of destroyed villages and towns have emerged in recent decades as a significant methodology not only for the construction of an alternative history of the Palestinian Nakba and memories of the lost historic Palestine but also for an ongoing indigenous life, living Palestinian practices and a sustained human ecology. In contrast with the Israeli settler-colonial heritage- style industry and a supremacist biblical archaeology, with its obsession with myth-narratives and assembling archaeological fragments, indigenous Palestinians have devoted much attention to the enormously rich sedimentations of village history and oral traditions as a reminder of the continuity of native life and living practices (Said 2004: 49; Masalha 2008: 123–156).

Decolonising history and reclaiming and preserving the ancient heritage and material culture of Palestine and the Palestinians is vital. There is an urgent need to teach the ancient history of Palestine and the indigenous Palestinians (Muslims, Christians, Samaritans and Jews), including the production of new and critical Palestinian textbooks for schools, colleges and universities, as well as for the millions of exiled Palestinian refugees. This understanding and teaching should encompass the new critical archaeology scholarship of Palestine and the new critical understanding of the ancient history and memories of the land.