Kazi hii inaeleza utambulisho wa tamaduni nyingi na historia zilizoshirikiwa za Palestina katika historia ndefu sana ya eneo lote. Inaweka historia ya Palestina ndani ya historia za kale, za kitamaduni, za baada ya kitamaduni, za enzi za kati, za mapema na za kisasa za Mashariki ya Karibu na Mediterania ya Mashariki. Lengo si kuandika historia isiyo na msimamo wa kiakili, bali kutoa historia iliyo na ufahamu wa kijamii, kiakili, kitamaduni na kisiasa, na inayojihusisha nayo. Ingawa inajaribu kufunika kipindi kirefu cha historia, kazi hii inaunganisha masuala ya historia kutoka chini, kumbukumbu za kijamii, utambulisho wa kitamaduni na siasa.

This work locates the multicultural identity and shared histories of Palestine in a very long history of the whole region. It locates Palestinian history in the ancient, classical, post-classical, medieval, early and modern histories of the Near East and Eastern Mediterranean. The intention is not to produce an intellectually detached form of history but rather to offer a socially, intellectually, culturally and politically informed and engaged history. While attempting to cover the vast span of history, this work links questions of history from below, social memory, cultural identity and politics.

Hii si "historia ya kitaifa" wala simulizi kuhusu Biblia hadi sasa kwa ajili ya "taifa la Wapalestina", ingawa ninafahamu kikamilifu uwezo wa historia wa kuunda uhalali wa kitaifa na kisiasa katika wakati wa sasa. "Taifa" na utaifa ni uvumbuzi na ujenzi wa kisasa, na ninashuku sana matumizi ya neno la kisiasa kama "taifa" katika upeo mpana wa historia. Bila shaka, mchakato wa "uvumbuzi wa kitaifa" na taswira yake hauko kwa Palestina ya kisasa au Wapalestina pekee. Ni jambo la kawaida kwa vyombo na makundi yote ya kitaifa ya kisasa, na ni kiungo muhimu katika utaifa na katika uundaji na udumishaji wa mataifa-dola. Ujenzi wa taifa na uvumbuzi wa mila ulikuwa desturi ya kawaida ya Ulaya ya kutumia kumbukumbu ya pamoja kwa kuchagua, kwa kuendesha sehemu fulani za zamani za kitaifa na kidini, kuzikandamiza nyingine, na kuinua na kuhamasisha nyingine kwa namna ya kiutendaji kabisa na kwa madhumuni ya kisiasa; kwa hiyo kumbukumbu iliyohamasishwa si lazima iwe halisi bali ni yenye manufaa kisiasa (Said 1999: 6‒7). Mbinu shindani za ujenzi wa taifa la kisasa na uundaji wa hadithi za kitaifa zimepitiwa upya kwa kina katika kazi za Benedict Anderson (1991: 6, 11‒12), Eric Hobsbawm (1990; Hobsbawm na Ranger 1996), Anthony Smith (1971, 1984, 1986) na Ernest Gellner (1983). Uchambuzi kamili zaidi wa Hobsbawm kuhusu ujenzi wa taifa na uundaji wa hadithi barani Ulaya unapatikana katika *Nations and Nationalism since 1780*. Kazi hiyo, iliyochapishwa mwaka 1990 ikiwa na kichwa kidogo *Programme, Myth, Reality*, inahusu "uvumbuzi wa mila", uundaji wa utamaduni wa kitaifa, na ujenzi wa utambulisho wa kitaifa kutoka mchanganyiko wa historia ya kimapokeo na hadithi za kihistoria (Hobsbawm 1990).

This is not a ‘nationalist history’ or a narrative about the Bible to the present for a ‘Palestinian nation’, although I am fully aware of history’s power to create national/political legitimacy in the present. ‘Nation’ and nationalism are modern inventions and constructions and I am highly sceptical about the utility of a political term such as ‘nation’ across a vast sweep of history. Of course, the process of ‘national invention’ and visualisation is not confined to modern Palestine or the Palestinians. It is common to all modern national entities and groupings, and it is an important ingredient both in nationalism and in the creation and maintenance of nation-states. Nation-building and the invention of tradition was a typical European practice of using collective memory selectively by manipulating certain bits of the national and religious past, suppressing others and elevating and mobilising others in an entirely functional way and for political purposes; thus mobilised memory is not necessarily authentic but rather useful politically (Said 1999: 6‒7). Competing modes of modern nation-building and nationalist myth-making have received extensive critical reappraisal in the works of Benedict Anderson (1991: 6, 11‒12), Eric Hobsbawm (1990; Hobsbawm and Ranger 1996), Anthony Smith (1971, 1984, 1986) and Ernest Gellner (1983). Hobsbawm’s most comprehensive analysis of nation-building and myth-making in Europe is found in Nations and Nationalism since 1780. Published in 1990 with the subtitle Programme, Myth, Reality, his work is about the ‘invention of tradition’, the creation of national culture, and the construction of national identities from a mixture of folk history and historical myths (Hobsbawm 1990).

Katika kitabu *The Invention of Tradition*, Hobsbawm na Terence Ranger (1996: 1‒14, 263‒283) wanachunguza jinsi mamlaka za kijamii na kisiasa katika Ulaya ya katikati ya karne ya 19 zilivyoanzisha desturi zinazodhaniwa kuwa za zamani sana, kwa kutoa kumbukumbu zilizobuniwa za zamani kama njia ya kuunda hisia mpya ya utambulisho kwa mtawala na watawaliwa.

In The Invention of Tradition Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (1996: 1‒14, 263‒283) explore the way social and political authorities in the Europe of the mid-19th century set about creating supposedly age-old traditions by providing invented memories of the past as a way of creating a new sense of identity for the ruler and ruled.

Mara nyingi wasomi wa Kiyahudi wa Israel wenye mwelekeo wa kiliberali (Sand 2009; Sternhell 1998; Piterberg 2001, 2008; Rabkin 2006, 2010; Ben-Zeev 2014; Greenstein 2014) wanakosoa mapokeo ya "kubuni ya kitaifa" ya Uzayuni na athari za "mapokeo yaliyobuniwa" haya kwa watu wa Kiyahudi, badala ya kuzungumzia matokeo ya janga la Uzayuni kwa muathiriwa wake mkuu, wenyeji asilia wa Palestina.

Often liberal Israeli Jewish scholars (Sand 2009; Sternhell 1998; Piterberg 2001, 2008; Rabkin 2006, 2010; Ben-Zeev 2014; Greenstein 2014) critique the ‘nationalist inventive’ traditions of Zionism and the impact of this ‘imagined tradition’ on the Jewish people, rather than on the catastrophic consequences of Zionism for its main victim, the indigenous people of Palestine.

Lakini kwa kuwa ujenzi huu wa taifa la Kizayuni na uvumbuzi wa mapokeo ulikuwa jambo la kawaida katika desturi za "kitaifa" za Ulaya za kutumia kumbukumbu ya pamoja, mbinu hii ya kitaaluma inaweka Uzayuni miongoni mwa mapokeo ya "kawaida" ya Ulaya ya uvumbuzi na utengenezaji wa hadithi za kitaifa. Kwa hakika, "kuufanya kuwa wa kawaida" na "kuufanya kuwa wa kitaifa" Uzayuni ndiko hasa wanaitikadi wa Uzayuni wamekuwa wakilitetea kila mara. Pia, mbinu hizi za Uzayuni za kutengeneza hadithi hazionekani kuwa ndizo mbaya zaidi kati ya sifa zake. Kinyume chake, kuusoma Uzayuni kutoka chini, kutoka mtazamo wa mhanga wake mkuu, watu wa asili wa Palestina, kunauweka Uzayuni ndani ya mapokeo tofauti kabisa: miongoni mwa nguvu za ukoloni wa walowezi wa Ulaya ya kisasa, usafishaji wa kikabila, ufutaji wa kumbukumbu na mauaji ya kitamaduni (Masalha 1992, 2012; Pappe 2006; Rashed et al. 2014).

But since this Zionist nation-building and the invention of tradition was typical of European ‘nationalist’ practices of using collective memory, this scholarly approach places Zionism among the ‘normal’ European traditions of nationalist invention and myth-making. In effect this ‘normalisation’ and ‘nationalisation’ of Zionism is exactly what Zionist ideologues have always argued for. Also, these myth-making strategies of Zionism are hardly its worst aspects. By contrast, reading Zionism from below, from the viewpoint of its main victim, the indigenous people of Palestine, places Zionism within an altogether different tradition: among the forces of modern European settler-colonisation, ethnic cleansing memoricide and cultural genocide (Masalha 1992, 2012; Pappe 2006; Rashed et al. 2014).

Zaidi ya hayo, kama nilivyosema katika kazi zangu The Bible and Zionism: Invented Traditions, Archaeology and Post-Colonialism in Palestine-Israel (2007) na The Zionist Bible: Biblical Precedent, Colonialism and the Erasure of Memory (2013), historia ya Palestina kama historia ya watu inaweza na inapaswa kuandikwa tu bila kutegemea simulizi za Agano la Kale. Kazi hizi pia zimeshughulikia jinsi Uzayuni ulivyojaribu kuhalalisha miradi yake ya ukoloni na "madai yake ya kihistoria" kwa matumizi mengi na mabaya ya maandiko ya Biblia. Mada hii pia imechunguzwa katika kazi ya msingi ya Keith Whitelam, The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History (1996). Kitabu hiki hakikusudiwa kurudia uwanja huo wala kujenga juu ya kazi nzuri ya Whitelam na uchambuzi wake madhubuti wa "mwendelezo wa kihistoria" unaounganisha Biblia na uhuru wa Israeli. Badala yake, kinalenga kusonga mbele kwa kurejesha na kusimulia historia ya Palestina iliyo huru kabisa kutoka mijadala ya Biblia na tafiti za Biblia. Aidha, ingawa kinasema kwamba historia tata ya Palestina imejikita kwa kina katika Mashariki ya Karibu ya kale na Mediterania ya Mashariki, hakuna jaribio hapa la kuiga madai ya Uzayuni ya historia ndefu, "isiyokatika" na safi ya Palestina.

Furthermore, as I have argued in The Bible and Zionism: Invented Traditions, Archaeology and Post-Colonialism in Palestine-Israel (2007) and The Zionist Bible: Biblical Precedent, Colonialism and the Erasure of Memory (2013), Palestinian history as people’s history can and should only be written independent of the Old Testament stories. These works have also addressed the ways in which Zionism attempted to validate its colonisation projects and its own ‘historical claims’ through extensive uses and abuses of the biblical text. This theme has also been explored in Keith Whitelam’s seminal work, The Invention of Ancient Israel: The Silencing of Palestinian History (1996). This book is not designed to revisit that ground or build on Whitelam’s excellent work and his effective dismantling of a Bible-to-independence ‘historical continuum’ for Israel. It rather seeks to move forward by recovering and narrating a history of Palestine completely independent of the biblical debates and the biblical scholarship. Furthermore, while arguing that the complex history of Palestine is deeply grounded in the ancient Near East and Eastern Mediterranean, there is no attempt here to mimic the Zionist claims of a long, ‘unbroken’ and neat history of Palestine.

Kinyume chake, kama juzuu hii itakavyoonyesha, urithi wa Palestina wenye tabaka nyingi ni historia ya mitindo iliyochanganyika na mila zinazopingana; historia iliyojaa mabadiliko na zamu nyingi, ya kumbukumbu na kusahau, na ya kukandamizwa na kurejeshwa.

On the contrary, as this volume will demonstrate, the multi-layered heritage of Palestine is a history of mixed styles and contradictory traditions; a history full of twist and turns, of memory and forgetfulness, and of suppression and recovery.