This book is written in Latin. In 1695. Rilandy was describing what was then called Palestine.

Author Adriani Rilandi was a geographer, cartographer, traveler, philologist, he knew several European languages, Arabic, ancient Greek, Hebrew.
He visited almost 2,500 settlements mentioned in the Bible.
He made a population census by settlements.

Here are the main conclusions and some facts:

* The country is mainly empty, abandoned, sparsely populated, the main population is Jerusalem, Akko, Tsfat, Jaffa, Tveria and Gaza.

* Most of the population is Jews, almost everyone else is Christians, very few Muslims, mostly Bedouins.

* The only exception is Nablus (now Shchem), where approximately 120 people from the Muslim family Natsha and approximately 70 "shomronims" (Samaritans).

* In Nazareth, the capital of Galilee, lived approximately 700 people - all Christians.

* In Jerusalem there are about 5,000 people, almost all Jews and a few Christians.

* In 1695, everyone knew that the origin of the country was Jewish.

* There is not a single settlement in Palestine that has Arabic roots in its name.

* Most settlements have Jewish originals, and in some cases Greek or Roman Latin.

* About 550 people lived in Gaza, half of them Jews and half Christians. Jews were successful in agriculture, especially in vineyards, olives and wheat, Christians were engaged in trade and transportation.

The book completely refutes theories about "Palestinian traditions", "Palestinian people" and leaves almost no link between the land and the Arabs who even stole the land's Latin name (Palestine) and took it for themselves.

Book by Adrian Reland (1676-1718) about Palestine, published in Utrecht in 1714.

And now "Free Palestine" people, remind me, please, why are you trying to free Palestine from its original indigenous people (Jews) and give it to Islamist colonizers?

1 It would seem that we are being hoodwinked by the "usual suspects," the highly-educated morons who will believe anything except the real truth.


I went to a state university, to study music education, long enough ago that we weren't taught this kind of garbage. I sort of remember a "History of Western Civ" class taught by a guy who put us to sleep. My real history teacher was a professor of American History who was one of three who taught a large class, and he was wonderful; his lectures were like Shakespeare soliloquies that often drew applause from the otherwise jaded students. He told us frequently that the only reason to study history was "to gain a sense of perspective." I think he really was using that as a jumping-off spot. And none of us could figure what his politics were, either.

I hope that man is in Heaven with the angels!

2 Agreed Dana.History isn't about just dates and names (as some teach it) nor is it a tool of social revolution. It is, as your teacher said, to give us a sense of the flow of things, and help us not make the same mistakes again.

Now we teach a fiction for the purposes of societal change, not so we understand why we are here and where we came from. Very  different and very bad.

3 I neglected to mention that that history professor was Jewish...