Rating: 
Summary: Good Content, Bad Style
Review: From Time Immemorial is a book whose goal is to uncover the cynical use of the Palestinian refugees by Arab countries, as well as to provide evidence for a refugee community in Israel which fled those same Arab countries. Some people on this site argue that Peters denies the presence of Arabs in Palestine at the turn of the century, which is not true. She just asserts that the growth from 500,000 at the turn of the century, the same number provided by the Palestinian Authority on their home page (Facts about Palestine) to one and a half million by the war of '48 is due in large part to immigration. These arguments are justified in part through the census of the English, which she faithfully reports, the UN, and other sources.The one fact about the book, though, is that Peters is so indignant by the treatment and politization of the Palestinian refugees, as well as the Arab agenda in general, that it becomes difficult to read, as the book tends to 'lead you by the nose' and often explicitly interprets the history that is presented. Still, there are some good items in this book, like a copy of the agreement signed between King Faisal and Haim Weizmann, in which the Arab leader acknowledges the right and need for Jewish settlement in Palestine.
All in all, I would recommend people take a look at this book, even if its style does wear one down a bit. I think its as reliable historically as any book can be.
Rating: 
Summary: FACT OR FICTION? DECIDE FOR YOURSELF....
Review: I first read this book in the 1980's and was surprised to discover that it had recently been re-issued, as it was widely discredited not long after its original publication. However, as it is now available again I recommend that you read it, with the proviso that you also read Norman Finkelstein's "Image and reality of the Israel-Palestine conflict" which includes a devastating critique of Ms Peters' work. Then, after reading both books, ask yourself why so many people were so eager to believe the contents of "From time immemorial".
In this book Ms Peters strives to document a continuous Jewish presence in Israel stretching back for hundreds of years, while simultaneously making a case for the non-existence of the Palestinians as a distinct people. Her central claim in this regard is that most Palestinian refugees from the first Israeli-Arab war were not really refugees at all, since they had only recently moved into the area which became the state of Israel in 1948 (in fact followed the Jews there to take advantage of the employment opportunities which the Yishuv economy had created). This is certainly a bold claim with very obvious significance, but unfortunately Ms Peters backs it up with poor scholarship that consistently undermines her own arguments.
First of all, there are definite problems with her use of sources. Although apparently voluminous in number, closer examination shows that throughout the book she is often just making multiple references to a small number of well known official documents. In addition, further scrutiny reveals that quotations from sources which appear in the main body of the book are usually highly selective and frequently change either the actual text (which is generally hidden in her daunting array of footnotes) or its intended meaning. Her use of a small section of the 1930 Hope Simpson report is a good example of this. Despite the fact that it actually urges the immediate deportation of illegal immigrants, except for those classified as "pseudo-travellers" (who the statistics show were mainly Jews), Peters (mis)quotes the same section on numerous occasions to argue the complete opposite.
The demographic data on which Ms Peters' study depends is also highly questionable and her estimates of the late 19th century Arab and Jewish populations of Palestine are respectively much lower and much higher than even the most optimistic figures previously claimed by Zionists. Her data can be difficult to follow (she divides Palestine into 5 areas, each with it's own population totals for Arabs and Jews and sometimes also subdivides the Arab totals by religious group) but if you possess a calculator and follow it closely you'll see that the figures don't always add up. Notably they sometimes fail to include the Christian population or one or other of the "areas" in the Arab totals (Finkelstein's detailed exposition of this aspect of the book is particularly revealing). Ms Peters freely concedes that there's no evidence of "massive illegal Arab immigration" into Palestine in any official documents and if it really was happening, why didn't the Zionist movement ever make an issue of it at the time? The fact is that they didn't. Furthermore, if her claims are true it would mean that huge numbers of Arabs have been falsifying their family histories en masse. How likely is that?
Her assertion that Palestine was a neglected desert until the Jews made it bloom is also contradicted by other sources, including accounts by early Zionists, all of which she ignores. Palestine was a significant exporter of agricultural produce to Europe and the rest of the middle east in the second half of the 19th century and was undergoing economic growth before she alleges that the Jews "made the desert bloom". Her claims about the employment opportunities created by the Yishuv economy are simply extraordinary. We are asked to believe that the settlers were so immediately successful that by the end of the 19th century their endeavours were already able to support approximately 10 Arab workers per Jewish settler. This claim is not only at variance with settlers' accounts but also, if true, would completely negate all Ms Peters' demographic data.
This is yet another problem with the book, ie evidence which she uses to prove one of her arguments can frequently be used to contradict and disprove claims she makes elsewhere.
...
For these reasons and others, "From time immemorial" has been given a massive "thumbs-down" by most serious scholars of the subject and conclusive evidence of the book's many failings, with numerous examples, is widely available for anybody who wants to read it. However, as I'm a great believer in discovering the truth for myself I strongly advise you to do the same by following the recommendation I made at the start of this review. Read "From time immemorial", read Finkelstein's critique and reach your own conclusions about who gets closer to the truth. I guarantee that it will be an enlightening experience.
Rating:
Summary: Absolute Rubbish
Review: I read this and was appalled. I believe the "facts", as set out in this book have completely been revealed as inaccurate and fabricated by Noam Chomsky and others. This book is advocating the apartheid occupation of Palestinian lands and the systematic fascism of Israel. (...)
Rating:
Summary: A Mixed Bag
Review: I think that critics have pointed out some serious flaws in Peters' research. However, they have not debunked what I believe is the crucial thesis, that Palestinian national identity is a product of Zionism, that before the Zionists came the Palestinians were simply South Syrians and whatnot. Indeed, I find it ironic that the most vociferous critics of Peters on Amazon consistently refer to the Arab population of "Palestine" throughout the ages, though of course there was no such administrative entity during Ottoman rule, and prior rulers. The book is useful, then, in large part for anti-Zionists who claim that Jewish national identity is a myth, and that the land of Israel is really "Palestinian." All national identities are myths, because we are all simply individual. But if one insists on comparing the longevity, coherence, etc. of Jewish national identity with Palestinian identity, surely Jewish national identity is longer-standing and based more on the cohesiveness of the people involved. Indeed, Palestinian identity has not existed where Zionism is not an issue, it exists only in opposition to Zionism. Jordan controlled the West Bank, "Palestinian" land for 18 years. Where were the cries for a Palestinian state there? For that matter, the rest of Jordan was also part of the British mandate for Palestine. But the Palestinians less want a homeland than they want to drive the Jews out. All that said, there's a limit to how useful all the arguments are for current political purposes. No matter how tenuous historically Palestinian national identity is, it is real, and must be dealt with as such; if only it could have an independent basis, rather than being based on hatred of Zionism. The lack of this independent basis is no doubt why Arafat turned down his opportunity to have a state on 90+ percent of the territories in 2000.
Rating: 
Summary: Classic!
Review: I truly believe that this is one of the classic books on the the subject. It was well researched, well written. It really is an answer to all the palestinian propaganda spread over the years. A must read!
Rating:
Summary: First rate facts and history
Review: If your knowledge of the Mideast comes from newspapers or public radio, this book is a must. The media is full of highlights and opinions about what happened five minutes ago, but it provides almost nothing about how we got here. This book provides the history, with thorough and well researched documentation.The book reminds me in many ways of Bjorn Lomberg's book The Skeptical Environmentalist. Lomborg was a greenpeace activist who set out to write a book about the perils facing the environment -- only to wind up with a book debunking many of the popular myths. Joan Peters set out to write a book about the injuries suffered by the Palestinian Arabs at the hands of Israel, and wound up finding a similar series of popular myths.
I see a lot of negative reviews have been posted by people with strong anti-Israel views. But these reviews do not respond to the book that Peters actually wrote. Rather, they underscore the importance of getting the facts straight, which Peters does so brilliantly.
People interested in this book are likely to be wowed by any of the history books by Paul Johnson. He also has a great writing style.
Rating:
Summary: Fasten your Seat Belt
Review: It's a bumpy ride through the wealth of information that Joan Peters presents.
Whatever you thought you knew about the Arab-Israel conflict, this book will tell you that there is lots more to learn.
Peters has done incredible research. Her sources are extensive.
Because she dislodges many sacrosanct theories, a campaign long has been underway to discredit "From Time Immemorial." So I was interested to know what a Harvard Ph.D candidate in Middle Eastern Studies would say about it. I asked. His response: "Excellent."
Read it and learn.
Rating:
Summary: I am surprised its still on bookshelves
Review: It's interesting to read some of the comments from people who actually claim some knowledge on the subject. The book was conclusively proven to be a hoax by Norman G. Finkelstein and was even disowned by Israeli scholars since the majority of its 'references' lead either to non-existent sources or others which claim exactly opposite of what is being said in the book. As a matter of fact, Noam Chomsky beleives it was put together by some intelligence agence.
Ironically enough, nearly two decades latter, Alan Dershowitz plagiarized most of the book for his own 'The Case for Israel', and once again, Norman G. Finkelstein exposed it as a complete hoax, plus the clear plagiarism. The whole controversy culminated in the interesting debate on Democracy Now, on which Finkelstein provides all the evidence, while Dershowitz is left stammering.
Rating:
Summary: This was proven to be a hoax!
Review: It's so disheartening to see so many five-star reviews, but certainly understandable. This book was lauded in the American press as a major historical event and a beacon of excellent scholarship, and on first glance, Peters appears to write forcefully and convincingly. The point is, almost nothing she says is true. This book was just torn apart in the British press, where it was first assigned to a man who is arguably the most knowledgeable person in the world on Middle East affairs, Albert Hourani of Oxford University. He derided it as a laughable hoax, and the rest of the British press joined in. In the Israeli press, even in the far-right Zionist press, this bookl was condemned because it was so blatantly untrue that it would make Zionism look bad. Yet still, the American intellectual community maintained its silence! I mean, this is book that argues the Palestinians hardly even existed! I would urge everyone who liked this book to read Hourani's review and read a paper by a courageous grad. student named Norman Finkelstein who debunked the myths put forward by Ms. Peters. His essay can be found in the volume entitled "Blaming the Victims" edited by Edward Said and Christopher Hitchens.
