ORIENTALISM

1
Also by the author
Joseph Conrad and the Fiction of Autobiography
Beginnings: Intention and Method
2
ORIENTALISM
Edward ! "aid
#outledge $ %egan &aul
'ondon and (enley
)
First published in 1*+,
by #outledge $ %egan &aul 'td!
)* "tore "treet-
'ondon CIE +..- and
Broadway (ouse-
/ewton #oad-
(enley0on01ha2es-
34on #5* 1E/
#eprinted and first published
as a paperbac6 in 1*,7
"et in 1i2es #o2an
and printed in 5reat Britain by
#edwood Burn 'i2ited
1rowbridge $ Esher
8 Edward ! "aid 1*+,
/o &art of this boo6 2ay be reproduced in any for2 without per2ission fro2 the
publisher- e4cept for the 9uotation of brief passage in criticis2!
British 'ibrary Cataloguing in &ublication .ata
"aid- Edward !
3rientalis2-
1! East : "tudy and teaching
I! 1itle
*;7<!7+ .")2!, +,0=7;)=
I"B/ 7 +177 77=7 ;
I"B/ 7 +177 7;;; ; &b6
=
5rateful ac6nowledge2ents is 2ade to the following for per2ission to reprint
pre>iously published 2aterial:
5eorge Allen $ ?nwin 'td!: E4cerpts fro2 "ub@ect of the .ay: Being a "election of
"peeches and ritings by 5eorge /athaniel CurAon!
5eorge Allen $ ?nwin 'td!: E4cerpts fro2 #e>olution in the Middle East and 3ther
Case "tudies- proceedings of a se2inar- edited by &! J! Bati6iotis!
A2erican Jewish Co22ittee: E4cerpts fro2 C1he #eturn of Isla2D by Bernard
'ewis- in Co22entary- >ol! E1- no! 1 FJanuary 1*+EG!#eprinted fro2 Co22entary by
per2ission!Copyright 8 1*+E by the A2erican Jewish Co22ittee!
Basic Boo6s- Inc!: E4cerpts fro2 C#enan<s &hilological 'aboratoryD by Edward !
"aid- in Art- &olitics- and ill: Essarys in (onor of 'ionel 1rilling- edited by Huentin
Anderson et al! Copyright 8 1*++ by Basic Boo6s- Inc!
1he Bodley (ead and McIntosh $ 3tis- Inc!: E4cerpts fro2 Flaubert in Egypt-
translated and edited by Franscis "teeg2uller!#eprinted by per2ission of Francis
"teeg2uller and 1he Bodley (ead!
Jonathan Cape- 'td!- and 1he 'etters of 1!E! 'awrence 1rust: E4cerpt fro2 the
'etters of 1!E! 'awrence- edited by .a>id 5arnett!
Jonathan Cape- 'td!- 1he "e>en &illars 1rust- and .oubleday $ Co!- Inc!: E4cerpt
fro2 1he "e>en &illars of isdo2: A triu2ph by 1!E! 'awrence!Copyright 1*E2-
1*); by .oubleday $ Co!- Inc!
.oubleday $ Co!- Inc!- a2d A!&! att $ "ons- '1d: E4cerpt fro2 Berse by
#udyyard %ipling!
1he 5eorgia #e>iew: E4cerpts fro2 C3rientalis2-D which originally appeared in the
5eorgia #e>iew F"print 1*++G- Copyright 8 1*++ by the ?nui>ersity of 5eorgia!
(arper $ #ow- &ublishers- Inc!: E4cerpt fro2 a poe2 by Borniers F1,E2G- Huoted in
.e 'esseps of "ueA by Charles Beatty!
Mac2illar $ Co!- 'ondon and Basingsto6e: E4cerpts fro2 Modern Egypt- >ol- 2- by
E>elyn Baring- 'ord Cro2er!
Mac2illian &ublishing Co!- Inc!: E4cerpt fro2 C&ropagandaD by (arold 'asswell-in
1he Encyclopedia of the "ocial "iences-edited by Edwin #!A!"elig2an->ol!12F1*)=G!
Mac2illan &ublishing Co!- Inc!- and A!&! att $ sons- '1d!: E4cerpt fro2
CByAantiu2D by illia2 Butler Ieats- in 1he Collected &oe2s! Copyright 1*)) by
Mac2illan &ublishing Co!- Inc!- renewed 1*E1 by Bertha 5eorgie Ieats!
1he /ew Ior6 1i2es co2pany: E4cerpts fro2 CArabs- Isla2- and the .og2as of the
estD by Edward ! "aid- in 1he /ew Ior6 1i2es Boo6 #e>iew- 3ctober )1-
1*+E!Copyright81*+E by the /ew Ior6 1i2es Co2pnay!#eprinted by per2ission!
/orthwestern ?ni>ersity &ress: E4cerpt fro2 C1he Arab &ortrayedD by Edward !
"aid- in 1he Arab0Israeli Confrontation of June 1*E+: An Arab &erspecti>e- edited by
Ibrahi2 Abu0'ughod! Copyright 8 1*+7 by /orthwestern ?ni>ersity &ress!
;
&rentice0(all Inc!: E4cerpt fro2 1he &ersians by Aeschylus- translated by Anthony J!
&odlec6!Copyright 8 1*+7 by &rentice0(all- Inc!
1he #oyal Asiatic "ociety- 5reat Britain and Ireland: E4cerpt fro2 C'ouis
Massignon F1,,201*E2G-D in Journal of the #oyal Asiatic "ociety F1*E2G
?ni>ersity of California &ress: E4cerpts fro2 Modern Isla2: 1he "earch for Cultural
Identity by 5usta>e >on 5runebau2!Copyright 81*E2 by the #egents of the
?ni>ersity of California!
?ni>ersity of Chicago &ress: E4cerpts fro2 Modern 1rends in Isla2 by (!A!#! 5ibb!
E
F3# JA/E1 A/. IB#A(IM
+
,
Contents
Ac6nowledge2ents 4i
Introduction 1
Chapter 1 The Scope of Orientalism
I! %nowing the 3riental )1
II! I2aginati>e 5eography an Its #epresentaions:
3rientaliAing the 3riental =*
III! &ro@ect +)
IB! Crisis *2
Chapter 2 Orientalist Structures and Restructures
I! #edrawn Frontiers- #edefined Issues- "eculariAed #eligion 11)
II! "il>erstre de "acy and Ernest #enan: #ational Anthropology
and &hilogical 'aboratory 12)
III! 3riental #esidence and "cholarship:
1he #e9uire2ents of 'e4icography and I2agination 1=*
IB! &ilgri2s and &ilgri2ages- British and French 1EE
Chapter 3 Orientalism No
I! 'atent and Manifest 3rientalis2 271
II! "tyle- E4perience- Bision: 3rientalis@<s orldiness 22E
III! Modern Ango0French 3rientalis2 in Fullest Flower 2;;
IB! 1he 'atest &hase 2,=
/otes )2*
Inde4 );1
*
17
Ac!noled"ements
I ha>e been reading about 3rientalis2 for a nu2ber of years- but 2ost of this
boo6 was written during 1*+;01*+E- which I spent as a Fellow at the Center for
Ad>anced "tudy in the Beha>ioural "ciences- "tanfort- California! In this uni9ue and
generous institution- it was 2y good fortune not only to ha>e benefited agreeably
fro2s se>eral colleagues- but also fro2 the help of Joan ar2brunn- Chris (oth-
Jane %iels2eier- &reston Cutler- and the center<s director- 5ardner 'indAey! 1he list
of friends- colleagues- and students who read- or listened to- parts or the whole of this
2anuscript is so long as to e2barrass 2e- and now that it has finally appeared as a
boo6- perhaps e>en the2- /e>ertheless I should 2ention with gratitude the always
helpful encourage2ent of Janet and Ibrahi2 Abu0'ughod- /oa2 Cho2s6y- and
#oger 3wen- who followed this pro@ect fro2 its beginning to its conclusion!
'i6ewise I 2ust gratefully ac6nowledge the helpful and critical interest of the
colleagues- friends- and students in >arious places whose 9uestions and discussion
sharpened the te4t considerably! Andre "chiffrin and Jeanne Morton of &antheon
Boo6s were ideal publisher and copy editor- respecti>ely- and 2ade the ordeal Ffor
the author- at leastG of preparing the 2anuscript an instructi>e and genuinely
intelligent process! Marian "aid helped 2e a great deal with her research on the early
2odern history of 3rientalist institutions! Apart fro2 that- though- her lo>ing support
really 2ade 2uch of the wor6 on this boo6 not only en@oyable but possible!
E!!"!
/ew Ior6
"epte2er03ctober 1*++
11
1hey cannot represent the2sel>esJ they 2ust be represented!
0%arl Mar4- 1he Eighteenth Bru2aire
of 'ouis Bonaparte
1he East is a career!
0Ben@a2in .israeli- 1ancred
12
1)
Introduction
I
3n a >isit to Beirut during the terrible ci>il war of 1*+;01*+E a French @ournalist
wrote regretfully of the gutted downtown area that Cit had once see2ed to belong
to ! ! ! the 3rient of Chateaubriand and /er>al!D
1
(e was right about the place- of
course- especially so far as a European was concerned! 1he 3rient was al2ost a
European in>ention- and had been since anti9uity Ka place of ro2ance- e4otic beings-
haunting 2e2ories and landscapes- re2ar6able e4periences! /ow it was
disappearingJ in a sense it had happened- its ti2e was o>er! &erhaps it see2ed
irrele>ant that 3rientals the2sel>es had so2ething at sta6e in the process- that e>en
in the ti2e of Chateaubriand and /er>al 3rientals had li>ed there- and that now it
was they who were sufferingJ the 2ain thing for the European >isitor was a European
representation of the 3rient and its conte2porary fate- both of which had a pri>ileged
co22unal significance for the @ournalist and his French readers!
A2ericans will not feel 9uite the sa2e about the 3rient- which for the2 is 2uch
2ore li6ely to be associated >ery differently with the Far East FChina and Japan-
2ainlyG! ?nli6e the A2ericans- the French and the British0less so the 5er2ans-
#ussians- "panish- &ortuguese- Italians- and "wiss0ha>e had a long tradition of what I
shall be calling 3rientation a way of co2ing to ter2s with the 3rient that is based on
the 3rient<s special place in European estern e4perience! 1he 3rient is not only
ad@acent to EuropeJ it is also the place of Europe<s greatest and richest and oldest
colonies- the source of its ci>iliAations and languages- its cultural contestant- and one
of its deepest and 2ost recurring i2ages of the other! In addition- the 3rient has
helped to define Europe For the estG
1
as its contrasting i2age- idea- personality- e4perience! Iet none of this 3rient is
2erely i2aginati>e! 1he 3rient is an integral of European 2aterial ci>iliAation and
culture! 3rientalis2 e4presses and represents that part culturally and e>en
ideologically as a 2ode of discourse with supporting institutions- >ocabulary-
scholarship- i2agery- doctrines- e>en colonial bureaucracies and colonial styles! In
contrast- the A2erican understanding of the 3rient will see2 considerably less dense-
although our recent Japanese- %orean- and Indochinese ad>entures ought now to be
creating a 2ore sober- 2ore realistic C3rientalD awareness! Moreo>er- the >astly
e4panded A2erican political and econo2ic role in the /ear East Fthe Middle EastG
2a6es great clai2s on our understanding of that 3rient!
It will be clear to the reader Fand will beco2e clearer still throughout the 2any
pages that followG that by 3rientalis2 I 2ean se>eral things- all of the2- in 2y
opinion- interdependent! 1he 2ost Kread adily accepted designation for 3rientalis2 is
an acade2ic one- and indeed the label still ser>es in a nu2ber of acade2ic
institutions! Anyone who teaches- writes about- or researches the 3rient0and this
applies whether the person is an anthropologist- sociologist- historian- or philologist0
either in its specific or its general aspects- is an 3rientalist- and what he or she does is
3rientalis2! Co2pared with 3riental studies or area studies- it is true that the ter2
3rientalis2 is less preferred by specialists today- both because it is too >ague and
general and because it connotes the high0handed e4ecuti>e attitude of nineteenth0
century and early twentieth0century European colonialis2! /e>ertheless boo6s are
written and congresses held with Cthe 3rientD as their 2ain focus- with the 3rientalist
in his new or old guise as their 2ain authority! 1he point is that e>en if it does not
sur>i>e as it once did- 3rientalis2 li>es on acade2ically through its doctrines and
theses about the 3rient and the 3riental!
#elated to this acade2ic tradition- whose fortunes- trans2igrations-
specialiAations- and trans2issions are in part the sub@ect of this study- is a 2ore
general 2eaning for 3rientalis2! 3rientalis2 is a style of thought based upon an
ontological and episte2ological distinction 2ade between Cthe 3rientD and F2ost of
the ti2eG Cthe 3ccident!D 1hus a >ery large 2ass of writers- a2ong who2 are poets-
no>elists- philosophers- political theorists- econo2ists- and i2perial ad2inistrators-
ha>e accepted the basic distinction between East and est as the starting point for
elaborate theories- epics- no>els- epics- social descriptions and political accounts
concerning the
2
3rient- its people- custo2s- C2ind-D destiny- and so on! 1his 3rientalis2 can
acco22odate Aeschylus- say- and Bictor (ugo- .ante and %arl Mar4! A little later in
this introduction I shall deal with the 2ethodological proble2s one encounters in so
broadly construed a CfieldD as this!
1he inter change between the acade2ic and the 2ore or less i2aginati>e 2eaning
of 3rientalis2 is a constant one- and since the late eighteenth century there has been a
considerable- 9uite disciplined0perhaps e>en regulated0traffic between the two! (ere I
co2e to the third 2eaning of 3rientalis2- which is so2ething 2ore historically and
2aterially defined than either of the other two! 1a6ing the late eighteenth century as a
>ery roughly defined starting point 3rientalis2 can be discussed and analyAed as the
corporate institution for dealing with the 3rient0dealing with it by 2a6ing state2ents
about it- authoriAing >iews of it- describing it- by teaching it settling it- ruling o>er it:
in short- 3rientalis2 as a estern style for do2inating restructuring- and ha>ing
authority o>er the 3rient! I ha>e found it useful here to e2ploy is a Foucault<s notion
of a discourse- as described by hi2 in 1he Archaeology of %nowledge and in
.iscipline and &unish- to identify 3rientalis2! My contention is that without
e4a2ining 3rientalis2 as a discourse one cannot possibly understand the enor2ously
syste2atic discipline by which European culture was able to 2anage0and e>en
produce0the 3rient politically - sociologically- 2ilitarily- ideologically- scientifically-
and i2aginati>ely during the post0Enlighten2ent period! Moreo>er- so authoritati>e a
position did 3rientalis2 ha>e that I belie>e no one writing- thin6ing- or acting on the
3rient could do so without ta6ing account of the li2itations on thought and action
i2posed by 3rientalis2! In brief- because of 3rientalis2 the 3rient was not Fand is
notG a free sub@ect of thought or action! 1his is not to say that 3rientalis2 unilaterally
deter2ines what can be said about the 3rient- but that it is the0whole networ6 of
interests ine>itably brought to bear on Fand therefore always in>ol>edG any occasion
when that peculiar entity Cthe 3rientD is in 9uestion! (ow this happens is what this
boo6 tries to de2onstrate! It also tries to show that European culture gained in
strength and identity by setting itself off against the 3rient as a sort of surrogate an
e>en underground self! -
(istorically and culturally there is a 9uantitati>e as well as a 9ualitati>e
difference between the Franco0British in>ol>e2ent in the 3rient and0until the period
of A2erican ascendancy after
)
orld ar II0the in>ol>e2ent of e>ery other European and Atlantic power! 1o spea6
of 3rientalis2 therefore is to spea6 2ainly- although not e4clusi>ely- of a British and
French cultural enterprise a pro@ect whose di2ensions ta6e in such disparate real2s
as the i2agination itself- the whole of India and the 'e>ant- the Biblical te4ts and the
Biblical lands- the spice trade- colonial ar2ies and a long tradition of colonial
ad2inistrators- a for2idable scholarly corpus- innu2erable 3riental Ce4pertsD and
Chands-D an 3riental professorate- a co2ple4 array of C3rientalD ideas F3riental
despotis2- 3riental splendor- cruelt - sensualityG- 2any Eastern sects- philosophies-
and wisdo2s do2esticated for local European use0the list can be e4tended 2ore or
less indefinitely! My point is that 3rientalis2 deri>es fro2 a particular closeness
e4perienced between Britain and France and the 3rient- which until the early
nineteenth century had really 2eant only India and the Bible lands! Fro2 the
beginning of the nineteenth century until the end of orld ar II France and Britain
do2inated the 3rient and 3rientalis2J since orld ar II A2erica has do2inated
the 3rient- and approaches it as France and Britain once did! 3ut of that closeness
whose dyna2ic is enor2ously producti>e e>en if it always de2onstrates the
co2parati>ely greater strength of the 3ccident FBritish- French- or A2ericanG- co2es
the large body of te4ts I call 3rientalist!
It should be said at once that e>en with the generous nu2ber of boo6s and
authors that I e4a2ine- there is a 2uch larger nu2ber that I si2ply ha>e had to lea>e
out! My argu2ent- howe>er- depends neither upon an e4hausti>e catalogue of te4ts
dealing with the 3rient nor upon a clearly deli2ited set of te4ts- authors- and ideas
that together 2a6e up the 3rientalist canon! I ha>e depended instead upon a different
2ethodological alternati>e0whose bac6bone in a sense is the set of historical
generaliAations I ha>e so far been 2a6ing in this Introduction0and it is these I want
now to discuss in 2ore analytical detail!
II
I ha>e begun with the assu2ption that the 3rient is not an inert fact of nature! It is
not 2erely there- @ust as the 3ccident itself is not @ust there either: e 2ust ta6e
seriously Bico<s great obser>ation
=
that 2en 2a6e their own history- that what they can 6now is what they ha>e 2ade-
and e4tend it to geography: as both geographical and cultural entities0to say nothing
of historical entities 0such locales- regions geographical sectors as C3rientD and
C3ccidentD are 2an02ade! 1herefore as 2uch as the est itself- the 3rient is an idea
that has a history and a tradition of thought- i2agery- and >ocabulary that ha>e gi>en
it reality and presence in and for the est! 1he two geographical entities thus support
and to an e4tent reflect each other!
(a>ing said that- one 2ust go on to state a nu2ber of reasonable 9ualifications!
In the first place- it would be wrong to conclude that the 3rient was essentially an
idea- or a creation with no corresponding reality! hen .israeli said in his no>el
1ancred that the East was a career- he 2eant that to be interested in the East was
so2ething bright young esterners would find to be an all consu2ing passionJ he
should not be interpreted as saying that the East was only a career for esterners!
1here were0and are0 cultures and nations whose location is in the East- and their li>es-
histories- and custo2s ha>e a brute reality ob>iously greater than anything that could
be said about the2 in the est! About that fact this study of 3rientalis2 has >ery
little to contribute- e4cept to ac6nowledge it tacitly! But the pheno2enon of
3rientalis2 as I study it here deals principally- not with a correspondence between
3rientalis2 and 3rient- but with the internal consistency of 3rientalis2 and its ideas
about the 3rient Fthe East as careerG despite or beyond any correspondence- or lac6
thereof- with a CrealD 3rient! My point is that .israeli<s state2ent about the East
refers 2ainly to that created consistency- that regular constellation of ideas as the pre0
e2inent thing about the 3rient- and not to its 2ere being- as allace "te>ens<s
phrase has it!
A second 9ualification is that ideas- cultures- and histories cannot seriously be
understood or studied without their force- or 2ore precisely their configurations of
power- also being studied!1o belie>e that the 3rient was created0or- as I call it-
C3rientaliAedD 0and to belie>e that such things happen si2ply as a necessity of the
i2agination- is to be disingenuous! 1he relationship between 3ccident and 3rient is a
relationship of power- of do2ination- of >arying degrees of a co2pe4 hege2ony an is
9uite accurately indicated in the title of %! M! &ani66ar<s classic Asia and estern
.o2inance!< 1he 3rient was 3rientaliAed not only because it was disco>ered to be
C3rientalD in all those ways considered co22on0
;
place by an a>erage nineteenth0century European- but also because it could be0that is-
sub2itted to being02ade 3riental! 1here is >ery little consent to be found- for
e4a2ple- in the fact that Flau0 bert<s encounter with an Egyptian courtesan produced
a widely in fluential 2odel of the 3riental wo2anJ she ne>er spo6e of herself- she
ne>er represented her e2otions- presence- or history! (e spo6e for and represented
her! (e was foreign- co2parati>ely wealthy- 2ale- and these were historical facts of
do2ination that allowed hi2 not only to possess %uchu6 (ane2 physically but to
spea6 for her and tell his readers in what way she was Ctypically 3riental!D My
argu2ent is that Flaubert<s situation of strength in relation to %uchu6 (ane2 was not
an isolated instance! It fairly stands for the pattern of relati>e strength between East
and est- and the discourse about the 3rient that it enabled!
1his brings us to a third 9ualification! 3ne ought ne>er to assu2e that the
structure of 3rientalis2 is nothing 2ore an a structure of lies or of 2yths which were
the truth about the2 to be told- would si2ply blow away! I 2yself belie>e that
3rientalis2 is 2ore particularly >aluable as a sign of European0Atlantic power o>er
the 3rient then it is as a >eridic discourse about the 3rient Fwhich is what- in its
acade2ic or scholarly for2- it clai2s to beG! /e>er theless- what we 2ust respect and
try to grasp is the sheer 6nitted together strength of 3rientalist discourse- its >ery
close ties to the enabling socio0econo2ic and political institutions- and its redoubt0
able durability! After all- any syste2 of ideas that can re2ain unchanged as teachable
wisdo2 Fin acade2ies- boo6s- congresses- uni>ersities- foreign0ser>ice institutesG
fro2 the period of Ernest #enan in the late 1,=7s until the present in the ?nited
"tates 2ust be so2ething 2ore for2idable than a 2ere collection of! lies!
3rientalis2- therefore- is not an airy European fantasy about the 3rient but a created
body of theory and practice in which- for 2any rations- there has been a considerable
2aterial in>est2ent! Continued in>est2ent 2ade 3rientalis2- as a syste2 of
6nowledge about the 3rient- an accepted grid for filtering through the 3rient into
estern consciousness- @ust as that sa2e in>est2ent 2ultiplied0indeed- 2ade truly
producti>e0the state2ents proliferating out fro2 3rientalis2 into the general culture!
5ra2sci has 2ade the useful analytic distinction between ci>il and political
society in which the for2er is 2ade up of >oluntary For atleast rational and
noncoerci>eG affiliations li6e schools-
E
fa2ilies- and unions- the latter of state institutions Fthe ar2y- the police- the central
bureaucracyG whose role in the polity is direct do2ination! Culture- of course- is to be
found operating within ci>il society- where the influence of ideas- of institutions- and
of other persons wor6s not through do2ination but by what 5ra2sci calls consent! In
any society not totalitarian- then- certain cultural for2s predo2inate o>er others- @ust
as certain ideas are 2ore in0 fluential than othersJ the for2 of this cultural leadership
is what 5ra2sci has identified as hege2ony- an indispensable concept for any
understanding of cultural life in the industrial est! It is hege2ony- or rather the
result of cultural hege2ony at wor6- that gi>es 3rientalis2 the durability and the
strength I ha>e been spea6ing about so far! 3rientalis2 is ne>er far fro2 what .enys
(ay has called the idea of Europe-
)
a collecti>e notion identifying CusD Europeans as
against all CthoseD non0Europeans- and indeed it can be argued that the 2a@or
co2ponent in European culture is precisely what 2ade that culture hege2onic both in
and outside Europe: the idea of European identiy as a superior one in co2parison
with all the non0European peoples and cultures! 1here is in addition the hege2ony of
European ideas about the 3rient- the2sel>es reiterating European superiority o>er
3rental bac6wardness usually o>erriding the possibility that a 2ore independent- or
2ore s6eptical- thin6er 2ight ha>e had different >iews on the 2atter!
In a 9uite constant way- 3rientalis2 depends for its strategy on this fle4ible
positional superiority- which puts the esterner in a whole series of possible
relationships with the 3rient without e>er losing hi2 the relati>e upper hand! And
why should it ha>e been otherwise- especially during the period of e4traordinary
European ascendancy fro2 the late #enaissance to the presentL 1he scientist- the
scholar- the 2issionary- the trader- or the soldier was in- or thought about- the 3rient
because he could be there- or could thin6 about it- with >ery little resistance on the
3rient<s part! ?nder the general heading of 6nowledge of the 3rient- and within the
u2brella of estern hege2ony o>er the 3rient during the period fro2 the end of the
eighteenth century- there e2erged a co2ple4 3rient suitable for study in the
acade2y- for display in the 2useu2- for reconstruction in the colonial office- for
theoretical illustration in anthropological- biological- linguistic- racial- and historical
theses about 2an6ind and the uni>erse- for instances of econo2ic and sociological
theories of de>elop2ent- re>olution- cultural personality-
+
national or religious character! Additionally- the i2aginati>e e4a2ination of things
3riental was based 2ore or less e4clusi>ely upon a so>ereign estern consciousness
out of whose unchallenged centrality an 3riental world e2erged- first according to
general ideas about who or what was an 3riental- then according to a detailed logic
go>erned not si2ply by e2pirical reality but by a battery of desires- regressions-
in>est2ents- and pro@ections! If we can point to great 3rientalist wor6s of genuine
scholarship li6e "il>estre de "acy<s Chresto2athie arabe or Edward illia2 'ane<s
Account of the Manners and Custo2s of the Modern Egyptians- we need also to note
that #enan<s and 5obineau<s racial ideas ca2e out of the sa2e i2pulse- as did a great
2any Bictorian pornographic no>els Fsee the analysis by "te>en Marcus of C1he
'ustful 1ur6D
=
MG!
And yet- one 2ust repeatedly as6 oneself whether what 2atters in 3rientalis2 is
the general group of ideas o>erriding the 2ass of 2aterial0about which who could
deny that they were shot through with doctrines of European superiority- >arious
6inds of racis2- i2perialis2- and the li6e- dog2atic >iews of Cthe 3rientalD as a 6ind
of ideal and unchanging abstractionLNor the 2uch 2ore >aried wor6 produced by
al2ost uncountable indi>idual writers- who2 one would ta6e up as indi>idual
instances of authors dealing with the 3rient! In a sense the two alternati>es- general
and particular- are really two perspecti>es on the sa2e 2aterial: in both instances one
would ha>e to deal with pioneers in the field li6e illia2 Jones- with great artists
li6e /er>al or Flaubert! And why would it not be possible to e2ploy both
perspecti>es together- or one after the otherL Isn<t there an ob>ious danger of
distortion Fof precisely the 6ind that acade2ic 3rientalis2 has always been prone toG
if either too general or too specific a le>el of description is 2aintained
syste2aticallyL
My two fears are distortion and inaccuracy- or rather the 6ind of inaccuracy
produced by too dog2atic a generality and too positi>istic a localiAed focus! In trying
to deal with these proble2s I ha>e tried to deal with three 2ain aspects of 2y own
conte2porary reality that see2 to 2e to point the way out of the 2ethodological or
perspecti>al difficulties I ha>e been discussing- difficulties that 2ight force one- in
the first instance- into writing a coarse pole2ic on so unacceptably general a le>el of
description as not to be worth the effort- or in the second instance- into writing so
detailed and ato2istic a series of analyses as to lose all trac6 of the general
,
lines of force infor2ing the field- gi>ing it its special cogency! (ow then to recogniAe
indi>iduality and to reconcile it with its intelligent- and by no 2eans passi>e or
2erely dictatorial- general and hege2onic conte4tL
III
I 2entioned three aspects of 2y conte2porary reality: I 2ust e4plain and briefly
discuss the2 now- so that it can be seen how I was led to a particular course of
research and writing!
1! 1he distinction between pure and political 6nowledge! It is >ery easy to argue
that 6nowledge about "ha6espeare or ordsworth is not political whereas 6nowledge
about conte2porary China or the "o>iet ?nion is! My own for2al and professional
designation is that of Chu2anist-D a title which indicates the hu2anities as 2y field
and therefore the unli6ely e>entuality that there 2ight be anything political about
what I do in that field! 3f course- all these labels and ter2s are 9uite unnuanced as I
use the2 here- but the general truth of what I a2 pointing to is- I thin6- widely held!
3ne reason for saying that a hu2anist who writes about ordsworth- or an editor
whose specialty is %eats- is not in>ol>ed in anything political is that what he does
see2s to ha>e no direct political effect upon reality in the e>eryday sense! A scholar
whose field is "o>iet econo2ics wor6s in a highly charged area where there is 2uch
go>ern2ent interest- and what he 2ight produce in the way of studies or proposals
will be ta6en up by policy2a6ers- go>ern2ent officials- institutional econo2ists-
intelligence e4perts! 1he distinction between Chu2anistsD and persons whose wor6
has policy i2plications- or political significance- can be broadened further by saying
that the for2er<s ideological color is a 2atter of incidental i2portance to politics
Falthough possibly of great 2o2ent to his colleagues in the field- who 2ay ob@ect to
his "talinis2 or fascis2 or too easy liberalis2G- whereas the ideology of the latter is
wo>en directly into his 2aterial0indeed- econo2ics- politics- and sociology in the
2odern 0acade2y are ideological sciences0and0 therefore ta6en for granted as being
Cpolitical!D !
/e>ertheless the deter2ining i2pinge2ent on 2ost 6nowledge
*
produced in the conte2porary est Fand here I spea6 2ainly about the ?nited "tatesG
is that it be nonpolitical- that is- scholarly- acade2ic- i2partial- abo>e partisan or
s2all02inded doctrinal belief! 3ne can ha>e no 9uarrel with such an a2bition in
theory- perhaps- but in practice the reality is 2uch 2ore proble2atic! /o one has e>er
de>ised a 2ethod for detaching the scholar fro2 the circu2stances of life- fro2 the
fact of his in>ol>e2ent Fconscious or unconsciousG with a class- a set of beliefs- a
social position- or fro2 the 2ere acti>ity of being a 2e2ber of a society! 1hese
continue to bear on what he does professionally- e>en though naturally enough his
research and its fruits do atte2pt to reach a le>el of relati>e freedo2 fro2 the
inhibitions and the restrictions of brute- e>eryday reality!For there is such a thing as
6nowledge that is less- rather than 2ore- partial than the indi>idual Fwith his
entangling and distracting life circu2stancesG who produces it! Iet this 6nowledge is
not therefore auto2atically nonpolitical!
hether discussions of literature or of classical philology are fraught withNor
ha>e un2ediated0political significance is a >ery large 9uestion that I ha>e tried to
treat in so2e detail elsewhere!< hat I a2 interested in doing now is suggesting how
the general liberal consensus that CtrueD 6nowledge is funda2entally non political
Fand con>ersely- that o>ertly political 6nowledge is not CtrueD 6nowledgeG obscures
the highly if obscurely organiAed political circu2stances obtaining when 6nowledge
is produced! /o one is helped in understanding this today when are ad@ecti>e
CpoliticalD is used as a label to discredit any wor6 for daring to >iolate the protocol of
pretended suprapolitical ob@ecti>ity! e 2ay say- first- that ci>il society recogniAes a
gradation of political i2portance in the >arious fields of 6nowledge! 1o so2e e4tent
the political i2portance gi>en a field co2es fro2 the possibility of its direct
translation into econo2ic ter2sJ but to a greater e4tent political i2portance co2es
fro2 the closeness of a field to ascertainable sources of power in political society!
1hus an econo2ic study of long0ter2 "o>iet energy potential and its effect on
2ilitary capability is li6ely to be co22issioned by the .efense .epart2ent- and
thereafter to ac9uire a 6ind of political status i2possible for a study of 1olstoi<s early
fiction financed in part by a foundation! Iet both wor6s belong in what ci>il society
ac6nowledges to be a si2ilar field- #ussian studies- e>en though one wor6 2ay be
done by a >ery conser>ati>e econo2ist- the other by a radical literary
17
historian! My point here is that C#ussiaD as a general sub@ect 2atter has political
priority o>er nicer distinctions such as Cecono2icsD and Cliterary history-D because
political society in 5ra2sci<s sense reaches into such real2s of ci>il society as the
acade2y and saturates the2 with significance of direct concern to it!
I do not want to press all this any further on general theoretical grounds: it see2s
to 2e that the >alue and credibility of 2y case can be de2onstrated by being 2uch
2ore specific- in the way- for e4a2ple- /oa2 Cho2s6y has studied the instru2ental
connection between the Bietna2 ar and the notion of ob@ecti>e scholarship as it
was applied 1o co>er state0sponsored 2ilitary research! /ow because Britain- France-
and0 recently the ?nited "tates are i2perial powers- their political societies i2part to
their ci>il societies a sense of urgency- a direct political infusion as it were- where and
whene>er 2atters pertaining to their i2perial interests abroad are concerned! I doubt
that it is contro>ersial- for e4a2ple- to say that an English2an in India or Egypt in the
later nineteenth century too6 an interest in those countries that was ne>er far fro2
their status in his 2ind as British colonies! 1o say this 2ay see2 9uite different fro2
saying that all acade2ic 6nowledge about India and Egypt is so2ehow tinged and
i2pressed with- >iolated by- the gross political fact0and that is what 1 a2 saying in
this study of 3rientalis2! For if it is true that no production of 6nowledge in the
hu2an sciences can e>er ignore or disclai2 its author<s in>ol>e2ent as a hu2an
sub@ect in his own circu2stances- then it 2ust also be true that for a European or
A2erican studying the 3rient there can be no disclai2ing the 2aid circu2stances of
his actuality: that he co2es up against the 3rient as a European or A2erican first- as
an indi>idual second! And to be a European or an A2erican in such a situation is by
no 2eans an inert fact! It 2eant and 2eans being aware- howe>er di2ly- that one
belongs to a power with definite interests in the 3rient- and 2ore i2portant- that one
belongs to a part of the earth with a definite history of in>ol>e2ent in the 3rient
al2ost since the ti2e of (o2er!
&ut in this way- these political actualities are still too undefined ltd general to be
really interesting! Anyone would agree to the2 without necessarily agreeing also that
they 2attered >ery 2uch- for instance- to Flaubert as he wrote "ala22bO- or to (! A!
#! 5ibb as he wrote Modern 1rends in Isla2! 1he trouble is that there is too great a
distance between the big do2inating fact- as I ha>e described it-
11
and the details of e>eryday life that go>ern the 2inute discipline of a no>el or a
scholarly te4t as each is being written! Iet if we eli2inate fro2 the start any notion
that CbigD facts li6e i2perial do2ination can be applied 2echanically and
deter2inistically to such co2ple4 2atters as culture and ideas- then we will begin to
approach an interesting 6ind of study! My idea is that European and then A2erican
interest in the 3rient was political according to so2e of the ob>ious historical
accounts of it that I ha>e gi>en here- but that it was the culture that created that
interest- that acted dyna2ically along with brute political- econo2ic- and 2ilitary
rationales to 2a6e the 3rient the >aried and co2plicated place that it ob>iously was
in the field I call 3rientalis2!
1herefore- 3rientalis2 is not a 2ere political sub@ect 2atter or field that is
reflected passi>ely by culture- scholarship- or institutionsJ nor is it a large and diffuse
collection of te4ts about the 3rientJ nor is it representati>e and e4pressi>e of so2e
nefarious CesternD i2perialist plot to hold down the C3rientalD world! It is rather a
distribution of geopolitical awareness into aesthetic- scholarly- econo2ic-
sociological- historical- and philological te4tsJ it is an elaboration not only of a basic
geographical distinction Fthe world is 2ade up of two une9ual hal>es- 3rient and
3ccidentG but also of a whole series of CinterestsD which- by such 2eans as scholarly
disco>ery- philological reconstruction- psychological analysis- landscape and
sociological description- it not only creates but also 2aintainsJ it is- rather than
e4presses- a certain will or intention to understand- in so2e cases to control-
2anipulate- e>en to incorporate- what is a 2anifestly different For alternati>e and
no>elG worldJ it is- abo>e all- a discourse that is by no 2eans in direct- corresponding
relationship with political power in the raw- but rather is produced and e4ists in an
une>en e4change with >arious 6inds of power- shaped to a degree by the e4change
with power political Fas with a colonial or i2perial establish2entG- power intellectual
Fas with reigning sciences li6e co2parati>e linguistics or anato2y- or any of the
2odern policy sciencesG- power cultural Fas with orthodo4ies and canons of taste-
te4ts- >aluesG- power 2oral Fas with ideas about what CweD do and what CtheyD
cannot do or understand as CweD doG! Indeed- 2y real argu2ent is that 3rientalis2 is0
and does not si2ply represent0a considerable di2ension of 2odern political0
intellectual culture- and as such has less to do with the 3rient than it does with CourD
world!
12
Because 3rientalis2 is a cultural and a political fact- then- it does not e4ist in
so2e archi>al >acuu2J 9uite the contrary- I thin6 it can be shown that what is
thought- said- or e>en done about the 3rient follows Fperhaps occurs withinG certain
distinct and intellectually 6nowable lines! (ere too a considerable degree of nuance
and elaboration can be seen wor6ing as between the broad superstructural pressures
and the details of co2position- the facts of te4tuality! Most hu2anistic scholars are- I
thin6- perfectly happy with the notion that te4ts e4ist in conte4ts- that there is such a
thing as interte4tuality- that the pressures of con>entions- predecessors- and rhetorical
styles li2it what alter Ben@a2in once called the Co>erta4ing of the producti>e
person in the na2e of ! ! ! the principle of Mcreati>ity-< Cin which the poet is belie>ed
on his own- and out of his pure 2ind- to ha>e brought forth his wor6!< Iet there is a
reluctance to allow that political- institutional- and ideological constraints act in the
sa2e 2anner on the indi>idual author! A hu2anist will belie>e it to be an interesting
fact to any interpreter of BalAac that he was influenced in the Co2Pdie hu2aine by
the conflict between 5eoffroy "aint0(ilaire and Cu>ier- but the sa2e sort of pressure
on BalAac of deeply reactionary 2onarchis2 is felt in so2e >ague way to de2ean his
literary CgeniusD and therefore to be less worth serious study! "i2ilarly0as (arry
Brac6en has been tirelessly showing0philosophers will conduct their discussions of
'oc6e- (u2e- and e2piricis2 without e>er ta6ing into account that there is an
e4plicit connection in these classic writers between their CphilosophicD doctrines
racial theory- @ustifications of sla>ery- or argu2ents for colonial e4ploitation!
,
1hese
are co22on enough ways by which conte2porary scholarship 6eeps itself pure!
&erhaps it is true that 2ost atte2pts to rub culture<s nose in the 2ud of politics
ha>e been crudely iconoclasticJ per perhaps also the social interpretation of literature
in 2y own field has si2ply riot 6ept up with the enor2ous technical ad>ances in
detailed te4tual analysis! But there is no getting away fro2 the fact that eary studies
in general- and A2erican Mar4ist theorists in particular- ha>e a>oided the effort of
seriously bridging the gap between the superstructural and the base le>els in te4tual-
historical scholarshipJ on another occasion I ha>e gone so far as to say that the
literary0cultural establish2ent as a whole has declare the serious study of i2perialis2
and culture off li2its!
*
For 3rientalis2 brings one up directly against that 9uestion0
that is- to realiAing
1)
that political i2perialis2 go>erns an entire field of study- i2agination- and scholarly
institutions0in such a way as to 2a6e its a>oidance an intellectual and historical
i2possibility! Iet there will always re2ain the perennial escape 2echanis2 of saying
that a literary scholar and a philosopher- for e4a2ple- are trained in literature and
philosophy respecti>ely- not in politics or ideological analysis! In other words- the
specialist argu2ent can wor6 9uite effecti>ely to bloc6 the larger and- in 2y opinion-
the 2ore intellectually serious perspecti>e!
(ere it see2s to 2e there is a si2ple two0part answer to be gi>en- at least so far
as the study of i2perialis2 and culture For 3rientalis2G is concerned! In the first
place- nearly e>ery nineteenth0century writer Fand the sa2e is true enough of writers
in earlier periodsG was e4traordinarily well aware of the fact of e2pire: this is a
sub@ect not >ery well studied- but it will not ta6e a 2odern Bictorian specialist long
to ad2it that liberal cultural heroes li6e John "tuart Mill- Arnold- Carlyle- /ew2an-
Macaulay- #us6in- 5eorge Eliot- and e>en .ic6ens had definite >iews on race and
i2perialis2- which are 9uite easily to be found at wor6 in their writing!"o e>en a
specialist 2ust deal with the 6nowledge that Mill- for e4a2ple- 2ade it clear in 3n
'ibert and #epresentati>e 5o>ern2ent that his >iews there could not be applied to
India Fhe was an India 3ffice functionary for a good deal of his lifeJ after allG because
the Indians were ci>iliAationally- if not racially- inferior! 1he sa2e 6ind of parado4 is
to be found in Mar4- as I try to show in this boo6! In the second place- to belie>e that
politics in the for2 of i2perialis2 bears upon the production of literature-
scholarship- social theory- and history writing is by no 2eans e9ui>alent to saying
that culture is therefore a de2eaned or denigrated thing! Huite the contrary: 2y whole
point is to say that we can better understand the persistence and the durability of
saturating hege2onic syste2s li6e culture when we realiAe that their internal
constraints upon writers and thin6ers were producti>e- not unilaterally inhibiting! It is
this idea that 5ra2sci- certainly- and Foucault and #ay2ond illia2s in their >ery
different ways ha>e been trying to illustrate! E>en one or two pages by illia2s on
Cthe uses of the E2pireD in 1he 'ong #e>olution tell us 2ore about nineteenth0
century cultural richness than 2any >olu2es of her2etic te4tual analyses!
17
1herefore I study 3rientalis2 as a dyna2ic e4change between
1=
indi>idual authors and the large political concerns shaped by the three great e2pires 0
British French- A2erican0in whose intellectual and i2aginati>e territory the writing
was produced! hat interests 2e 2ost as a scholar is not the gross political >erity but
the detail- as indeed what interests us in so2eone li6e 'ane or Flaubert or #enan is
not the Fto hi2G indisputable truth that 3ccidentals are superior to 3rientals- but the
profoundly wor6ed o>er and 2odulated e>idence of his detailed wor6 within the >ery
wide space opened up by that truth! 3ne need only re2e2ber that 'ane<s Manners
and Custo2s of the Modern Egyptians is a classic of historical and anthropological
obser>ation because of its style- its enor2ously intelligent and brilliant details- not
because of its si2ple reflection of racial superiority- to understand what I a2 saying
here!
1he 6ind of political 9uestions raised by 3rientalis2- then- are as follows: hat
other sorts of intellectual- aesthetic- scholarly- and cultural energies went into the
2a6ing of an i2perialist tradition li6e the 3rientalist oneL (ow did philology-
le4icography- history- biology- political and econo2ic theory- no>el0writing- and lyric
poetry co2e to the ser>ice of 3rientalis2<s broadly i2perialist >iew of the worldL
hat changes- 2odulations- refine2ents- e>en re>olutions ta6e place within
3rientalis2L hat is the 2eaning of originality- of continuity- of indi>iduality- in this
conte4tL (ow does 3rientalis2 trans2it or reproduce itself fro2 one epoch to
anotherL In fine- how can we treat the cultural- historical pheno2enon of 3rientalis2
as a 6ind of willed hu2an wor60not of 2ere -unconditioned ratiocination0in all its
historical co2ple4ity- detail- and worth without at the sa2e ti2e losing sight of the
alliance between cultural wor6- political tendencies- the state- and the specific
realities of do2inationL 5o>erned by such concerns a hu2anistic study can
responsibly address itself to politics and culture! But this is not to say that such a
study establishes a hard0and0fast rule about the relationship between 6nowledge and
politics! My argu2ent is that each hu2anistic in>estigation 2ust for2ulate the nature
of that connection in the specific conte4t of the study- the sub@ect utter- and its
historical circu2stances!
2! 1he 2ethodological 9uestion! In a pre>ious boo6 I ga>e a deal of thought and
analysis to the 2ethodological i2portance for wor6 in the hu2an sciences of finding
and for2ulating a first a point of departure- a beginning principle!
11
A 2a@or lesson
1;
I learned and tried to present was that there is no such thing as a 2erely gi>en-or
si2ply a>ailable- starting point: beginnings ha>e to be 2ade for each pro@ect in such a
way as to enable what follows fro2 the2! /owhere in 2y e4perience has the
difficulty of this lesson been 2ore consciously li>ed Fwith what success0or failure 0I
cannot really sayG than in this study of 3rientalis2! 1he idea of beginning- indeed the
act of beginning- necessarily in>ol>es an act of deli2itation by which so2ething is
cut out of a great 2ass of 2aterial- separated fro2 the 2ass- and 2ade to stand for- as
well as be- a starting point- a beginningJ for the student of te4ts one such notion of
inaugural deli2itation is 'ouis Althusser<s idea of the proble2atic- a specific
deter2inate unity of a te4t- or group of te4ts- which is so2ething gi>en rise to by
analysis!
12
Iet in the case of 3rientalis2 Fas opposed to the case of Mar4<s te4ts-
which is what Althusser studiesG there is not si2ply the proble2 of finding a point of
departure- or proble2atic- but also the 9uestion of designating which te4ts- authors-
and periods are the ones best suited for study!
It has see2ed to 2e foolish to atte2pt an encyclopedic narrati>e history of
3rientalis2- first of all because if 2y guiding principle was to be Cthe< European idea
of the 3rientD there would be >irtually no li2it to the 2aterial I would ha>e had to
deal withJ second- because the narrati>e 2odel itself did not suit 2y descripti>e and
political interestsJ third- because in such boo6s as #ay2ond "chwab<s 'a
#enaissance orientale- Johann FQc6<s .ie Arabischen "tudien in Europa bis in den
Anfang des 27! Jahrhunderts- and 2ore recently- .orothee MetlitA6i<s 1he Matter of
Araby in Medie>al England
1)
there already e4ist encyclopedic wor6s on certain
aspects of the European03riental encounter such as 2a6e the critic<s @ob- in the
general political and intellectual conte4t !I s6etched abo>e- a different one!
1here still re2ained the proble2 of cutting down a >ery fat archi>e to
2anageable di2ensions- and 2ore i2portant- outlining so2ething in the nature of an
intellectual order within that group of te4ts without at the sa2e ti2e following a
2indlessly chronological order! My starting point therefore has been the British-
French- and A2erican e4perience of the 3rient ta6en as a unit- what 2ade that
e4perience possible by way of historical and intellectual bac6ground- what the 9uality
and character of the e4perience has been! For reasons I shall discuss presently I
li2ited that already li2ited Fbut still inordinately largeG set of 9uestions to
1E
the Anglo0French0A2erican e4perience of the Arabs and Isla2- which for al2ost a
thousand years together stood for the 3rient!I22ediately upon doing that- a large part
of the 3rient see2ed to ha>e been eli2inated0India- Japan- China- and other sections
of the Far East0not because these regions were not i2portant Fthey ob>iously ha>e
beenG but because one could discuss Europe<s e4perience of the /ear 3rient- or of
Isla2- apart fro2 its e4perience of the Far 3rient! Iet at certain 2o2ents of that
general European history of interest in the East- particular parts of the 3rient li6e
Egypt- "yria- and Arabia cannot be discussed without also studying Europe<s
in>ol>e2ent in the 2ore distant parts- of which &ersia and India are the 2ost
i2portantJ a notable case in point is the connection between Egypt and India so far as
eighteenth0 and nineteenth0century Britain was concerned! "i2ilarly the French role
in deciphering the Rend0A>esta- the pre0e2inence of &aris as a center of "ans6rit
studies during the first decade of the nineteenth century- the fact that /apoleon<s
interest in the went was contingent upon his sense of the British role in India: these
Far Eastern interests directly influenced French interest it the /ear East- Isla2- and
the Arabs!
Britain and France do2inated the Eastern Mediterranean fro2 out the end of the
se>enteenth century on! Iet 2y discussion of that do2ination and syste2atic interest
does not do @ustice to FaG i2portant contributions to 3rientalis2 of 5er2any- Italy-
"pain- and &ortugal and FbG the fact that one of the i2portant i2pulses toward the
study of the 3rient in the eighteenth was the re>olution in Biblical studies sti2ulated
by such >ariously interesting pioneers as Bishop 'owth- Eichhorn- (erder- and
Michaelis! In the first place- I had to focus rigorously upon the British0French and
later the A2erican 2aterial because it see2ed inescapably true not only that Britain
and France were their nations in the 3rient and in 3riental studies- but that these and
positions were held by >irtue of the two greatest colonial networ6s in pre0twentieth0
century historyJ the A2erican 3rientaltion since orld ar II has fit0I thin6- 9uite
self0consciouslySin the places e4ca>ated by the two earlier European powers! Alen
too- I belie>e that the sheer 9uality- consistency- and 2ass of British- French- and
A2erican writing on the 3rient lifts it the doubtless crucial wor6 done in 5er2any-
Italy- #ussia- elsewhere!But I thin6 it is also true that the 2a@or steps in 3riental
scholarship were first ta6en in either Britain and France-
1+
then elaborated upon by 5er2ans! "il>estre de "acy- for e4a2ple- was not only the
first 2odern and institutional European 3rientalist- who wor6ed on Isla2- Arabic
literature- the .ruAe religion- and "assanid &ersiaJ he was also the teacher of
Cha2pollion and of FranA Bopp- the founder of 5er2an co2parati>e linguistics! A
si2ilar clai2 of priority and subse9uent pree2inence can be 2ade for illia2 Jones
and Edward illia2 'ane!
In the second place0and here the failings of 2y study of 3rientalis2 are a2ply
2ade up for0there has been so2e i2portant recent wor6 on the bac6ground in
Biblical scholarship to the rise of what I ha>e called 2odern 3rientalis2! 1he best
and the 2ost illu2inatingly rele>ant is E! "! "haffer<s i2pressi>e C%ubla %hanD and
1he Fall of Jerusale2-D an indispensable study of the origins of #o2anticis2- and of
the intellectual acti>ity underpinning a great deal of what goes on in Coleridge-
Browning- and 5eorge Eliot! 1o so2e degree "haffer<s wor6 refines upon the
outlines pro>ided in "chwab- by articulating the 2aterial of rele>ance to be found in
the 5er2an Biblical scholars and using that 2aterial to read- in an intelligent and
always interesting way- the wor6 of three 2a@or British writers! Iet what is 2issing
in the boo6 is so2e sense of the political as well as ideological edge gi>en the
3riental 2aterial by the British and French writers I a2 principally concerned withJ
in addition- unli6e "haffer I atte2pt to elucidate subse9uent de>elop2ents in
acade2ic as well as literary 3rientalis2 that bear on the connection between British
and French 3rientalis2 on the one hand and the rise of an e4plicitly colonial02inded
i2perialis2 on the other! 1hen too- I wish to show how all these earlier 2atters are
reproduced 2ore or less in A2erican 3rientalis2 after the "econd orld ar!
/e>ertheless there is a possibly 2isleading aspect to 2y study- where- aside fro2
an occasional reference- I do not e4hausti>ely discuss the 5er2an de>elop2ents after
the inaugural period do2inated by "acy! Any wor6 that see6s to pro>ide an
understanding of acade2ic 3rientalis2 and pays little attention to scholars li6e
"teinthal- Mdller- Bec6er- 5oldAiher- Broc6el2ann- /olde6e0to 2ention only a
handful0needs to be reproached- and I freely reproach 2yself! I particularly regret not
ta6ing 2ore account of the great scientific prestige that accrued to 5er2an
scholarship by the 2iddle of the nineteenth century- whose neglect was 2ade into a
denunciation of insular British scholars by 5eorge Eliot! I ha>e in 2ind Eliot<s
unforgettable portrait of Mr! Casaubon in Middle02arch!
1,
3ne reason Casaubon cannot finish his %ey to All Mythologies is- according to his
young cousin ill 'adislaw- that he is unac9uainted with 5er2an scholarship! For
not only has Casaubon chosen a sub@ect Cas changing as che2istry: new disco>eries
are constantly 2a6ing new points of >iewD: he is underta6ing a @ob si2ilar to a
refutation of &aracelsus because Che is not an 3rientalist- you 6now!D
1;
Eliot was not wrong in i2plying that by about 1,)7- which is when Middle2arch
is set- 5er2an scholarship had fully attained its European pree2inence! Iet at no
ti2e in 5er2an scholarship during the first two0thirds of the nineteenth century could
a close partnership ha>e de>eloped between 3rientalists and a protracted- sustained
national interest in the 3rient! 1here was nothing in 5er2any to correspond to the
Anglo0French presence in India- the 'e>ant- /orth Africa! Moreo>er- the 5er2an
3rient was al2ost e4clusi>ely a scholarly- or at least a classical- 3rient: it was 2ade
the sub@ect of lyrics- fantasies- and e>en no>els- but it was ne>er actual- the way
Egypt and "yria were actual for Chateaubriand- 'ane- 'a2artine- Burton- .israeli- or
/er>al! 1here is so2e significance in the fact that the two 2ost renowned 5er2an
wor6s on the 3rient- 5oethe<s estTstlicher .iwan and Friedrich "chlegel<s Uber
die "prache and eisheit der Indier- were based respecti>ely on a #hine @ourney and
on hours spent in &aris libraries! hat 5er2an 3riental scholarship did was to refine
and elaborate techni9ues whose application was to te4ts- 2yths- ideas- and languages
al2ost literally gathered fro2 the 3rient by i2perial Britain and France!
Iet what 5er2an 3rientalis2 had in co22on with Anglo French and later
A2erican 3rientalis2 was a 6ind of intellectual authority o>er the 3rient within
estern culture! 1his authority 2ust in large part be the sub@ect of any description of
3rientalis2- and it is so in this study! E>en the na2e 3rientalis2 suggests a serious-
perhaps ponderous style of e4pertiseJ when I apply it to 2odern A2erican social
scientists Fsince they do not call the2sel>es 3rientalists- 2y use of the word is
ano2alousG- it is to draw attention to the way Middle East e4perts can still draw on
the >estiges of 3rientalis2<s intellectual position in nineteenth0century Europe!
1here is nothing 2ysterious or natural about authority! It is for2ed- irradiated-
disse2inatedJ it is instru2ental- it is persuasi>eJ it has status- it establishes canons of
taste and >alueJ it is >irtually
1*
indistinguishable fro2 certain ideas it dignifies as true- and fro2 traditions-
perceptions- and @udg2ents it for2s- trans2its- reproduces! Abo>e all- authority can-
indeed 2ust- be analyAed! All these attributes of authority apply to 3rientalis2- and
2uch of what I do in this study is to describe both the historical authority in and the
personal authorities of 3rientalis2!
My principal 2ethodological de>ices for studying authority here are what can be
called strategic location- which is a way of describing the author<s position in a te4t
with regard to the 3riental 2aterial he writes about- and strategic for2ation- which is
a way of analyAing the relationship between te4ts and the way in which groups of
te4ts- types of te4ts- e>en te4tual genres- ac9uire 2ass- density- and referential power
a2ong the2sel>es and thereafter in the culture at large! I use the notion of strategy
si2ply to identify the proble2 e>ery writer on the 3rient has faced: how to get hold
of it- how to approach it- how not to be defeated or o>erwhel2ed by its subli2ity- its
scope- its awful di2ensions! E>eryone who writes about the 3rient 2ust locate
hi2self >is0V0>is the 3rientJ translated into his te4t- this location includes the 6ind of
narrati>e >oice he adopts- the type of structure he builds- the 6inds of i2ages- the2es-
2otifs that circulate in his te4t all of which add up to deliberate ways of addressing
the reader- containing the 3rient- and finally- representing it or spea6ing in its behalf!
/one of this ta6es place in the abstract- howe>er! E>ery writer on the 3rient Fand this
is true e>en of (o2erG assu2es so2e 3riental precedent- so2e pre>ious 6nowledge
of the 3rient- to which he refers and on which he relies! Additionally- each wor6 on
the 3rient affiliates itself with other wor6s- with audiences- with institutions- with the
3rient itself! 1he ense2ble of relationships between wor6s- audiences- and so2e
particular aspects of the 3rient therefore constitutes an analyAable for2ation0for
e4a2ple- that of philological studies- of anthologies of e4tracts fro2 3riental
literature- of tra>el boo6s- of 3riental fantasies0whose presence in ti2e- in discourse-
in institutions Fschools- libraries- foreign ser>icesG gi>es it strength and authority!
It is clear- I hope- that 2y concern with authority does not entail analysis of what
lies hidden in the 3rientalist te4t- but analysis rather of the te4t<s surface- its
e4teriority to what it describes! I do not thin6 that this idea can be o>ere2phasiAed!
3rientalis2 is pre2ised upon e4teriority- that is- on the fact that the 3rientalist- poet
or scholar- 2a6es the 3rient spea6- describes
27
the 3rient renders its 2ysteries plain for and to the est! (e is ne>er concerned with
the 3rient e4cept as the first cause of what he says! hat he says and writes- by
>irtue of the fact that it is said or written- is 2eant to indicate that the 3rientalist is
outside the 3rient- both as an e4istential and as a 2oral fact! 1he principal product of
this e4teriority is of course- representation: as early as Aeschylus<s play 1he &ersians
the 3rient is transfor2ed fro2 a >ery far distant and often threatening 3therness into
figures that are relati>ely fa2iliar Fin Aeschylus<s case- grie>ing Asiatic wo2enG! 1he
dra2atic i22ediacy of representation in 1he &ersians obscures the fact that the
audience is watching a highly artificial enact2ent of what a non03riental has 2ade
into a sy2bol for the whole 3rient! My analysis of the 3rientalist te4t therefore
places e2phasis on the e>idence- which is by no 2eans in>isible- for such
representations as representations- not as CnaturalD depictions of the 3rient! 1his
e>idence is found @ust as pro2inently in the so0called truthful te4t Fhistories-
philological analyses- political treatisesG as in the a>owedly artistic Fi!e!- openly
i2aginati>eG te4t! 1he things to loo6 at are style- figures of speech- setting- narrati>e
de>ices- historical and social circu2stances- not the correctness of the representation
nor its fidelity to so2e great original! 1he e4teriorly of the representation is always
go>erned by so2e >ersion of the truis2 that if the 3rient could represent itself- it
wouldJ since it cannot- the representation does the @ob- for the est- and faute de
2ieu4- for the poor 3rient! C"ie 6Tnnen sich nicht >ertreten-sie 2Qssen >ertre en
werden-D as Mar4 wrote in 1he Eighteenth Bru2aire of 'ouis Bonaparte!
Another reason for insisting upon e4teriority is that I belie>e it needs to be 2ade
clear about cultural discourse and e4change within a culture that what is co22only
circulated by it is not CtruthD but representations! It hardly needs to be de2onstrated
again that language itself is a highly organiAed and encoded syste2- which e2ploys
2any de>ices to e4press- indicate- e4change 2essages and infor2ation- represent-
and so forth! In any instance of at least written language- there is no such thing as a
deli>ered presence- but a re0presence- or a representation! 1he >alue- efficacy-
strength- apparent >eracity of a written state2ent about the 3rient therefore relies
>ery little- and cannot instru2entally depend- on the 3rient as such! 3n the contrary-
the written state2ent is a presence to the reader by >irtue of its ha>ing e4cluded-
displaced 2ade supererogatory any such real thing as Cthe 3rient!D 1hus all
21
of 3rientalis2 stands forth and away fro2 the 3rient: that 3rientalis2 2a6es sense at
all depends 2ore on the est than on the 3rient- and this sense is directly indebted to
>arious estern techni9ues of representation that 2a6e the 3rient >isible- clear-
CthereD in discourse about it! And these representations rely upon institutions-
traditions- con>entions- agreed0upon codes of understanding for their effects- not
upon a distant and a2orphous 3rient!
1he difference between representations of the 3rient before the last third of the
eighteenth century and those after it Fthat is- those belonging to what I call 2odern
3rientalis2G is that the range of representation e4panded enor2ously in the later
period! It is true that after illia2 Jones and An9uetil0.uperron- and after
/apoleon<s Egyptian e4pedition- Europe ca2e to 6now the 3rient 2ore scientifically-
to li>e in it with greater authority and discipline than e>er before! But what 2attered
to Europe was the e4panded scope and the 2uch greater refine2ent gi>en its
techni9ues for recei>ing the 3rient! hen around the turn of the eighteenth century
the 3rient definiti>ely re>ealed the age of its languages0thus outdating (ebrew<s
di>ine pedigree0it was a group of Europeans who 2ade the disco>ery- passed it on to
other scholars- and preser>ed the disco>ery in the new science of Indo0European
philology! A new powerful science for >iewing the linguistic 3rient was born- and
with it- as Foucault has shown in 1he 3rder of 1hings- a whole web of related
scientific interests! "i2ilarly illia2 Bec6ford- Byron- 5oethe- and (ugo
restructured the 3rient by their art and 2ade its colors- lights- and people >isible
through their i2ages- rhyth2s- and 2otifs! At 2ost- the CrealD 3rient pro>o6ed a
writer to his >isionJ it >ery rarely guided it!
3rientalis2 responded 2ore to the culture that produced it than to its putati>e
ob@ect- which was also produced by the est! 1hus the history of 3rientalis2 has
both an internal consistency and a highly articulated set of relationships to the
do2inant culture surrounding it! My analyses conse9uently try to show the field<s
shape and internal organiAation- its pioneers- patriarchal authorities- canonical te4ts-
do4ological ideas- e4e2plary figures- its followers- elaborators- and new authoritiesJ I
try also to e4plain how 3rientalis2 borrowed and was fre9uently infor2ed by
CstrongD ideas- doctrines- and trends ruling the culture!1hus there was Fand isG a
linguistic 3rient- a Freudian 3rient- a "penglerian 3rient- a .arwinian 3rient- a racist
3rient0and so on! Iet ne>er has there
22
been such a thing as a pure- or unconditional- 3rientJ si2ilarly- ne>er has there been a
non2aterial for2 of 3rientalis2- 2uch less so2ething so innocent as an CideaD of the
3rient! In this underlying con>iction and in its ensuing 2ethodological conse9uences
do I differ fro2 scholars who study the history of ideas!For the e2phases and the
e4ecuti>e for2- abo>e all the 2aterial effecti>eness- of state2ents 2ade by
3rientalist discourse are possible in ways that any her2etic history of ideas tends
co2pletely to scant! ithout those e2phases and that 2aterial effecti>eness
3rientalis2 would be @ust another idea- whereas it is and was 2uch 2ore than that!
1herefore I set out to e4a2ine not only scholarly wor6s but also wor6s of literature-
political tracts- @ournalistic te4ts- tra>el boo6s- religious and philological studies!In
other words- 2y hybrid perspecti>e is broadly historical and Canthropological-D gi>en
that I belie>e all te4ts to be worldly and circu2stantial in Fof courseG ways that >ary
fro2 genre to genre- and fro2 historical period to historical period!
Iet unli6e Michel Foucault- to whose wor6 I a2 greatly indebted- I do belie>e in
the deter2ining i2print of indi>idual writers upon the otherwise anony2ous
collecti>e body of te4ts constituting a discursi>e for2ation li6e 3rientalis2! 1he
unity of the large ense2ble of te4ts I analyAe is due in part to the fact that they
fre9uently refer to each other: 3rientalis2 is after all a syste2 for citing wor6s and
authors! Edward illia2 'ane<s Manners and Custo2s of the Modern Egyptians was
read and cited by such di>erse figures as /er>al- Flaubert- and #ichard Burton! (e
was an authority whose use was an i2perati>e for anyone writing or thin6ing about
the 3rient- not @ust about Egypt: when /er>al borrows passages >erbati2 fro2
Modern Egyptians it is to use 'ane<s authority to assist hi2 in describing >illage
scenes in "yria- not Egypt! 'ane<s authority and the opportunities pro>ided for citing
hi2 discri2inately as well as indiscri2inately were there because 3rientalis2 could
gi>e his te4t the 6ind of distributi>e currency that he ac9uired! 1here is no way-
howe>er- of understanding 'ane<s currency without also understanding the peculiar
features of his te4tJ this is e9ually true of #enan- "acy- 'a2artine- "chlegel- and a
group of other influential writers! Foucault belie>es that in general the indi>idual te4t
or author counts for >ery littleJ e2pirically- in the case of 3rientalis2 Fand perhaps
nowhere elseG I find this not to be so! Accordingly 2y analyses e2ploy close te4tual
2)
readings whose goal is to re>eal the dialectic between indi>idual te4t or writer and the
co2ple4 collecti>e for2ation to which his wor6 is a contribution!
Iet e>en though it includes an a2ple selection of writers- this boo6 is still far
fro2 a co2plete history or general account of 3rientalis2! 3f this failing I a2 >ery
conscious! 1he fabric of as thic6 a discourse as 3rientalis2 has sur>i>ed and
functioned in estern society because of its richness: all I ha>e done is to describe
parts of that fabric at certain 2o2ents- and 2erely to suggest the e4istence of a larger
whole- detailed- interesting- dotted with fascinating figures- te4ts- and e>ents! I ha>e
consoled 2yself with belie>ing that this boo6 is one install2ent of se>eral- and hope
there are scholars and critics who 2ight want to write others! 1here is still a general
essay to be written on i2perialis2 and cultureJ other studies would go 2ore deeply
into the connection between 3rientalis2 and pedagogy- or into Italian- .utch-
5er2an- and "wiss 3rientalis2- or into the dyna2ic between scholarship and
i2aginati>e writing- or into the relationship between ad2inistrati>e ideas and
intellectual discipline! &erhaps the 2ost i2portant tas6 of all would be to underta6e
studies in conte2porary alternati>es to 3rientalis2- to as6 how one can study other
cultures and peoples fro2 a libertarian- or a nonrepressi>e and non2anipulati>e-
perspecti>e! But then one would ha>e to rethin6 the whole co2ple4 proble2 of
6nowledge and power! 1hese are all tas6s left e2barrassingly inco2plete in this
study!
1he last- perhaps self0flattering- obser>ation on 2ethod that I want to 2a6e here
is that I ha>e written this study with se>eral audiences in 2ind! For students of
literature and criticis2- 3rientalis2 offers a 2ar>elous instance of the interrelations
between society- history- and te4tualityJ 2oreo>er- the cultural role played by the
3rient in the est connects 3rientalis2 with ideology- politics- and the logic of
power- 2atters of rele>ance- I thin6- to the literary co22unity! For conte2porary
students of the 3rient- fro2 uni>ersity scholars to policy2a6ers- I ha>e written with
two ends in 2ind: one- to present their intellectual genealogy to the2 in a way that
has not been doneJ two- to criticiAe0with the hope of stirring discussion0the often
un9uestioned assu2ptions on which their wor6 for the 2ost part depends! For the
general reader- this study deals with 2atters that always co2pel attention- all of the2
connected not only with estern conceptions and treat2ents of the other but also
with the singularly i2portant role played by estern culture
2=
in what Bico called the world of nations! 'astly- for readers in the so0called 1hird
orld- this study proposes itself as a step towards an understanding not so 2uch of
estern politics and of the non0estern world in those politics as of the strength of
estern cultural discourse- a strength too often 2ista6en as 2erely decorati>e or
Csuperstructural!D My hope is to illustrate the for2idable structure of cultural
do2ination and- specifically for for2erly coloniAed peoples- the dangers and
te2ptations of e2ploying this structure upon the2sel>es or upon others!
1he three long chapters and twel>e shorter units into which this boo6 is di>ided
are intended to facilitate e4position as 2uch as possible! Chapter 3ne- C1he "cope of
3rientalis2-D draws a large circle around all the di2ensions of the sub@ect- both in
ter2s of historical ti2e and e4periences and in ter2s of philosophical and political
the2es! Chapter 1wo- C3rientalist "tructures and #estructures-D atte2pts to trace the
de>elop2ent of 2odern 3rientalis2 by a broadly chronological description- and also
by the description of a set of de>ices co22on to the wor6 of i2portant poets- artists-
and scholars! Chapter 1hree- C3rientalis2 /ow-D begins where its predecessor left
off- at around 1,+7! 1his is the period of great colonial e4pansion into the 3rient- and
it cul2inates in orld ar II! 1he >ery last section of Chapter 1hree characteriAes
the shift fro2 British and French to A2erican hege2onyJ I atte2pt there finally to
s6etch the present intellectual and social realities of 3rientalis2 in the ?nited "tates!
). The personal dimension! In the Prison Notebooks 5ra2sci says: C1he starting0
point of critical elaboration is the consciousness of what one really is- and is
M6nowing thyself< as a product of the historical process to date- which has deposited
in you an infinity of traces- without lea>ing an in>entory!D 1he only a>ailable English
translation ine4plicably lea>es 5ra2sci<s co22ent at that- whereas is fact 5ra2sci<s
Italian te4t concludes by adding- Ctherefore it is i2perati>e at the outset to co2pile
such an in>entory!D
1E
Much of the personal in>est2ent in this study deri>es fro2 2y awareness of
being an C3rientalD as a child growing up in two British colonies! All of 2y
education- in those colonies F&alestine and EgyptG and in the ?nited "tates- has been
estern- and yet that deep early awareness has persisted! In 2any ways 2y study of
7rientalis2 has been an atte2pt to in>entory the traces upon 2e- the 3riental sub@ect-
of the culture whose do2ination has been so powerful a factor in the life of all
3rientals! 1his is why for 2e the
2;
Isla2ic 3rient has had to be the center of attention! hether what I ha>e achie>ed is
the in>entory prescribed by 5ra2sci is not for 2e to @udge- although I ha>e felt it
i2portant to be conscious of trying to produce one! Along the way- as se>erely and as
rationally as I ha>e been able- I ha>e tried to 2aintain a critical consciousness- as well
as e2ploying those instru2ents of historical- hu2anistic- and cultural research of
which 2y education has 2ade 2e the fortunate beneficiary! In none of that- howe>er-
ha>e I e>er lost hold of the cultural reality of- the personal in>ol>e2ent in ha>ing
been constituted as- Can 3riental!D
1he historical circu2stances 2a6ing such a study possible are fairly co2ple4-
and I can only list the2 sche2atically here! Anyone resident in the est since the
1*;7s- particularly in the ?nited "tates- will ha>e li>ed through an era of
e4traordinary turbulence in the relations of East and est! /o one will ha>e failed to
note how CEastD has always signified danger and threat during this period- e>en as it
has 2eant the traditional 3rient as well as #ussia! In the uni>ersities a growing
establish2ent of area0studies progra2s and institutes has 2ade the scholarly study of
the 3rient a branch of national policy! &ublic affairs in this country include a healthy
interest in the 3rient- as 2uch for its strategic and econo2ic i2portance as for its
traditional e4oticis2! If the world has beco2e i22ediately accessible to a estern
citiAen li>ing in the electronic age- the 3rient too has drawn nearer to hi2- and is now
less a 2yth perhaps than a place crisscrossed by estern- especially A2erican-
interests!
3ne aspect of the electronic- post2odern world is that there has been a
reinforce2ent of the stereotypes by which the 3rient is >iewed! 1ele>ision- the fil2s-
and all the 2edia<s resources ha>e forced infor2ation into 2ore and 2ore
standardiAed 2olds! "o far as the 3rient is concerned- standardiAation and cultural
stereotyping ha>e intensified the hold of the nineteenth0century acade2ic and
i2aginati>e de2onology of Cthe 2ysterious 3rient!D 1his is nowhere 2ore true than
in the ways by which the /ear East is grasped! 1hree things ha>e contributed to
2a6ing e>en the si2plest perception of the Arabs and Isla2 into a highly politiciAed-
al2ost raucous 2atter: one- the history of popular anti0Arab and anti0Isla2ic
pre@udice in the est- which is i22ediately reflected in the history of 3rientalis2J
two- the struggle between the Arabs and Israeli Rionis2- and its effects upon
A2erican Jews as well as upon both the liberal culture and the population at largeJ
three- the al2ost
2E
total absence of any cultural position 2a6ing it possible either to identify with or
dispassionately to discuss the Arabs or Isla2! Further2ore- it hardly needs saying that
because the Middle East is now so identified with 5reat &ower politics- oil
econo2ics- and the si2ple02inded dichoto2y of freedo20lo>ing- de2ocratic Israel
and e>il- totalitarian- and terroristic Arabs- the chances of anything li6e a clear >iew
of what one tal6s about in tal6ing about the /ear East are depressingly s2all!
My own e4periences of these 2atters are in part what 2ade 2e write this boo6!
1he life of an Arab &alestinian in the est- particularly in A2erica- is disheartening!
1here e4ists here an al2ost unani2ous consensus that politically he does not e4ist-
and when it is allowed that he does- it is either as a nuisance or as an 3riental! 1he
web of racis2- cultural stereotypes- political i2perialis2- dehu2aniAing ideology
holding in the Arab or the Musli2 is >ery strong indeed- and it is this web which
e>ery &alestinian has co2e to feel as his uni9uely punishing destiny! It has 2ade
2atters worse for hi2 to re2ar6 that no person acade2ically in>ol>ed with the /ear
East0no 3rientalist- that is0has e>er in the ?nited "tates culturally and politically
identified hi2self wholeheartedly with the ArabsJ certainly there ha>e been
identifications on so2e le>el- but they ha>e ne>er ta6en an CacceptableD for2 as has
liberal A2erican identification with Rionis2- and all too fre9uently they ha>e been
radically flawed by their association either with discredited political and econo2ic
interests Foilco2pany and "tate .epart2ent Arabists- for e4a2pleG or with religion!
1he ne4us of 6nowledge and power creating Cthe 3rientalD and in a sense
obliterating hi2 as a hu2an being is therefore not for 2e an e4clusi>ely acade2ic
2atter! Iet it is an intellectual 2atter of so2e >ery ob>ious i2portance! I ha>e been
able to put to use 2y hu2anistic and political concerns for the analysis and
description of a >ery worldly 2atter- the rise- de>elop2ent- and consolidation of
3rientalis2! 1oo often literature and culture are presu2ed to be politically- e>en
historically innocentJ it has regularly see2ed otherwise to 2e- and certainly 2y study
of 3rientalis2 has con>inced 2e Fand I hope will con>ince 2y literary colleaguesG
that society and literary culture can only be understood and studied together! In
addition- and by an al2ost inescapable logic- I ha>e found 2yself writing the history
of a strange- secret sharer of estern anti0"e2itis2! 1hat anti0"e2itis2 and- as I
ha>e discussed
2+
it in its Isla2ic branch- 3rientalis2 rese2ble each other >ery closely is a historical-
cultural- and political truth that needs only to be 2entioned to an Arab &alestinian for
its irony to be perfectly understood! But what I should li6e also to ha>e contributed
here is a better understanding of the way cultural do2ination has operated! If this
sti2ulates a new 6ind of dealing with the 3rient- indeed if it eli2inates the C3rientD
and C3ccidentD altogether- then we shall ha>e ad>anced a little in the process of what
#ay2ond illia2s has called the CunlearningD of Cthe inherent do2inati>e 2ode!D
1E
2,
1
The Scope of
Orientalism
W le gPnie in9uiet et a2bitieu4 de Europeens W i2patient d<e2ployer les nou>eau4
instru2ents de leur puissanceW
0 Jean 0Baptiste0Joseph Fourier- &reface histori9ue F1,7*G-
.escription de l<Xgypte
2*
)7
I
#noin" the Oriental
3n June 1)- 1*17- Arthur Ja2es Balfour lectured the (ouse of Co22ons on Cthe
proble2s with which we ha>e to deal in Egypt!D 1hese- he said- Cbelong to a wholly
different categoryD than those Caffecting the Isle of ight or the est #iding of
Ior6shire!D (e spo6e with the authority of a long0ti2e 2e2ber of &arlia2ent- for2er
pri>ate secretary to 'ord "alisbury- for2er chief secretary for Ireland- for2er
secretary for "cotland- for2er pri2e 2inister- >eteran of nu2erous o>erseas crises-
achie>e2ents- and changes! .uring his in>ol>e2ent in i2perial affairs Balfour ser>ed
a 2onarch who in 1,+E had been declared E2press of IndiaJ he had been especially
well placed in positions of unco22on influence to follow the Afghan and Rulu wars-
the British occupation of Egypt in 1,,2- the death of 5eneral 5ordon in the "udan-
the Fashoda Incident- the battle of 32dur2an- the Boer ar- the #usso0Japanese
ar! In addition his re2ar6able social e2inence- the breadth of his learning and
wit0he could write on such >aried sub@ects as Bergson- (andel- theis2- and golf0his
education at Eton and 1rinity College- Ca2bridge- and his apparent co22and o>er
i2perial affairs all ga>e considerable authority to what he told the Co22ons in June
1*17! But there was still 2ore to Balfour<s tech- or at least to his need for gi>ing it so
didactically and 2oralistically! "o2e 2e2bers were 9uestioning the necessity for
CEngland in Egypt-D the sub@ect of Alfred Milner<s enthusiastic boo6 of 1,*2- but
here designating a once0profitable occupation that had beco2e a source of trouble
now that Egyptian nationalis2 was on the rise and the continuing British presence in
Egypt no longer so easy to defend!Balfour- then- to infor2 and e4plain!
#ecalling the challenge of J! M! #obertson- the 2e2ber of 1yneside- Balfour
hi2self put #obertson<s 9uestion again: Chat tight ha>e you to ta6e up these airs of
superiority with regard to people who2 you choose to call 3rientalLD 1he choice of
C3rientalD was canonicalJ it had been e2ployed by Chaucer and Mande>ille- by
"ha6espeare- .ryden- &ope- and Byron! It designated Asia or the East-
geographically- 2orally- culturally! 3ne could spea6 in Europe of an 3riental
personality- an 3riental
)1
at2osphere- an 3riental tale- 3riental despotis2- or an 3riental 2ode of production-
and be understood! Mar4 had used the word- and now Balfour was using itJ his choice
was understandable and called for no co22ent whate>er!
I ta6e up no attitude of superiority! But I as6 Y#obertson and anyone elseZ ! ! !
who has e>en the 2ost superficial 6nowledge of history- if they will loo6 in the
face the facts with which a British states2an has to deal when he is put in a
position of supre2acy o>er great races li6e the inhabitants of Egypt and countries
in the East! e 6now the ci>iliAation of Egypt better than we 6now the
ci>iliAation of any other country! e 6now it further bac6J we 6now it 2ore
inti2atelyJ we 6now 2ore about it! It goes far beyond the petty span of the
history of our race- which is lost in the prehistoric period at a ti2e when the
Egyptian ci>ilisation had already passed its pri2e! 'oo6 at all the 3riental
countries! .o not tal6 about superiority or inferiority!
1wo great the2es do2inate his re2ar6s here and in what will follow: 6nowledge and
power- the Baconian the2es! As Balfour @ustifies the necessity for British occupation
of Egypt- supre2acy in his 2ind is associated with CourD 6nowledge of Egypt and not
principally with 2ilitary or econo2ic power! %nowledge to Balfour 2eans sur>eying
a ci>iliAation fro2 its origins to its pri2e to its decline0and of course- it 2eans being
able to do that. %nowledge 2eans rising abo>e i22ediacy- beyond self- into the
foreign and distant! 1he ob@ect of such 6nowledge is inherently >ulnerable to
scrutinyJ this ob@ect is a CfactD which- if it de>elops- changesJ or otherwise transfor2s
itself in the way that ci>iliAations fre9uently do- ne>ertheless is funda2entally- e>en
ontologically stable! 1o ha>e such 6nowledge of such a thing is to do2inate it- to
ha>e authority o>er it! And authority here 2eans for CusD to deny autono2y to
CitD0the 3riental country0since we 6now it and it e4ists- in a sense- as we 6now it!
British 6nowledge of Egypt is Egypt for Balfour- and the burdens of 6nowledge 2a6e
such 9uestions as inferiority and superiority see2 petty ones! Balfour nowhere denies
British superiority and Egyptian inferiorityJ he ta6es the2 for granted as he describes
the conse9uences of 6nowledge!
First of all- loo6 at the facts of the case! estern nations as soon as they
e2erge into history show the beginnings of those capacities for selfgo>ern2ent
ha>ing 2erits of their own!!!! Iou 2ay loo6 through the whole history of the
3rientals in what is called- broadly spea6ing- the East- and you ne>er find traces
of self0
)2
go>ern2ent! All their great centuries0and they ha>e been >ery great0ha>e been
passed under despotis2s- under absolute go>ern2ent! All their great
contributions to ci>ilisation0and they ha>e been great0ha>e been 2ade under that
for2 of go>ern2ent! Con9ueror has succeeded con9uerorJ one do2ination has
followed anotherJ but ne>er in all the re>olutions of fate and fortune ha>e you
seen one of those nations of its own 2otion establish what we- fro2 a estern
point of >iew- call self0go>ern2ent! 1hat is the fact! It is not a 9uestion of
superiority and inferiority! I suppose a true Eastern sage would say that the
wor6ing go>ern2ent which we ha>e ta6en upon oursel>es in Egypt and
elsewhere is not a wor6 worthy of a philosopher0that it is the dirty wor6- the
inferior wor6- of carrying on the necessary labour!
"ince these facts are facts- Balfour 2ust then go on to the ne4t part of his argu2ent!
Is it a good thing for these great nations0 I ad2it their greatness 00that this
absolute go>ern2ent should be e4ercised by usL I thin6 it is a good thing! I thin6
that e4perience shows that they ha>e got under it far better go>ern2ent than in
the whole history of the world they e>er had before- and which not only is a
benefit to the2- but is undoubtedly a benefit to the whole of the ci>ilised est!!!!
e are in Egypt not 2erely for the sa6e of the Egyptians- though we are there for
their sa6eJ we are there also for the sa6e of Europe at large!
Balfour produces no e>idence that Egyptians and Cthe races with who2 we dealD
appreciate or e>en understand the good that is being done the2 by colonial
occupation! It does not occur to Balfour- howe>er- to let the Egyptian spea6 for
hi2self- since presu2ably any Egyptian who would spea6 out is 2ore li6ely to be
Cthe agitator YwhoZ wishes to raise difficultiesD than the good nati>e who o>erloo6s
the CdifficultiesD of foreign do2ination! And so- ha>ing settled the ethical proble2s-
Balfour turns at last to the practical ones! CIf it is our business to go>ern- with or
without gratitude- with or without the real and genuine 2e2ory of all the loss of
which we ha>e relie>ed the population YBalfour by no 2eans i2plies- as part of that
loss- the loss or at least the indefinite postpone2ent of Egyptian independenceZ and
no >i>id i2agination of All the benefits which we ha>e gi>en to the2J if that is our
duty- bow is it to be perfor2edLD England e4ports Cour >ery best to these dies!D 1hese
selfless ad2inistrators do their wor6 Ca2idst tens of thousands of persons belonging
to a different creed- a different
))
race- a different discipline- different conditions of life!D hat 2a6es their wor6 of
go>erning possible is their sense of being supported at ho2e by a go>ern2ent that
endorses what they do! Iet
directly the nati>e populations ha>e that instincti>e feeling that those with who2
they ha>e got to deal ha>e not behind the2 the 2ight- the authority- the
sy2pathy- the full and ungrudging support of the country which sent the2 there-
those populations lose all that sense of order which is the >ery basis of their
ci>ilisation- @ust as our officers lose all that sense of power and authority- which
is the >ery basis of e>erything they can do for the benefit of those a2ong who2
they ha>e been sent!
Balfour<s logic here is interesting- not least for being co2pletely consistent with
the pre2ises of his entire speech! England 6nows EgyptJ Egypt is what England
6nowsJ England 6nows that Egypt cannot ha>e self0go>ern2entJ England confir2s
that by occupying EgyptJ for the Egyptians- Egypt is what England has occupied and
now go>ernsJ foreign occupation therefore beco2es Cthe >ery basisD of conte2porary
Egyptian ci>iliAationJ Egypt re9uires- indeed insists upon- British occupation! But if
the special inti2acy between go>ernor and go>erned in Egypt is disturbed by
&arlia2ent<s doubts at ho2e- then Cthe authority of what ! ! ! is the do2inant race and
as I thin6 ought to re2ain the do2inant race0has been under2ined!D /ot only does
English prestige sufferJ Cit is >ain for a handful of British officials0endow the2 how
you li6e- gi>e the2 all the 9ualities of character and genius you can i2agine00it is
i2possible for the2 to carry out the great tas6 which in Egypt- not we only- but the
ci>ilised world ha>e i2posed upon the2!D
1
As a rhetorical perfor2ance Balfour<s speech is significant for the way in which
he plays the part of and represents a >ariety of characters! 1here are of course Cthe
English-D for who2 the pronoun CweD is used with the full weight of a distinguished-
powerful 2an who feels hi2self to be representati>e of all that is best in his nation<s
history! Balfour can also spea6 for the ci>iliAed world- the est- and the relati>ely
s2all corps of colonial officials in Egypt! If he does not spea6 directly for the
3rientals- it is because they after all spea6 another languageJ yet he 6nows how they
feel since he 6nows their history- their reliance upon such as he- and their
e4pectations! "till- he does spea6 for the2 in the sense that what they 2ight ha>e to
say- were they to be as6ed and 2ight they be able to answer- would so2ewhat
uselessly confir2 what is already
)=
e>ident: that they are a sub@ect race- do2inated by a race that 6nows the2 and what is
good for the2 better than they could possibly 6now the2sel>es! 1heir great 2o2ents
were in the pastJ they are useful in the 2odern world only because the powerful and
up0to0date e2pires ha>e effecti>ely brought the2 out of the wretchedness of their
decline and turned the2 into rehabilitated residents of producti>e colonies!
Egypt in particular was an e4cellent case in point- and Balfour was perfectly
aware of how 2uch right he had to spea6 as a 2e2ber of his country<s parlia2ent on
behalf of England- the est- estern ci>iliAation- about 2odern Egypt! For Egypt
was not @ust another colony: it was the >indication of estern i2perialis2J it was-
until its anne4ation by England- an al2ost acade2ic e4a2ple of 3riental
bac6wardnessJ it was to beco2e the triu2ph of English 6nowledge and power!
Between 1,,2- the year in which England occupied Egypt and put an end to the
nationalist rebellion of Colonel Arabi- and 1*7+- England<s representati>e in Egypt-
Egypt<s 2aster- was E>elyn Baring Falso 6nown as C3>er0baringDG- 'ord Cro2er! 3n
July )7- 1*7+- it was Balfour in the Co22ons who had supported the pro@ect to gi>e
Cro2er a retire2ent priAe of fifty thousand pounds as a reward for what he had done
in Egypt! Cro2er made Egypt- said Balfour:
E>erything he has touched he has succeeded in ! ! ! ! 'ord Cro2er<s ser>ices
during the past 9uarter of a century ha>e raised Egypt fro2 the lowest pitch of
social and econo2ic degradation until it now stands a2ong 3riental nations- I
belie>e- absolutely alone in its prosperity- financial and 2oral!
2
(ow Egypt<s 2oral prosperity was 2easured- Balfour did not >enture to say! British
e4ports to Egypt e9ualed those to the whole of AfricaJ that certainly indicated a sort
of financial prosperity- for Egypt and England Fso2ewhat une>enlyG together! But
what tally 2attered was the unbro6en- all0e2bracing estern tutelage of an 3riental
country- fro2 the scholars- 2issionaries- business02en- soldiers- and teachers who
prepared and then i2ple2ented the occupation to the high functionaries li6e Cro2er
and Balfour who saw the2sel>es as pro>iding for- directing- and so2eti2es e>en
forcing Egypt<s rise fro2 3riental neglect to its present lonely e2inence!
If British success in Egypt was as e4ceptional as Balfour said- it was by no 2eans
an ine4plicable or irrational success! Egyptian
);
affairs had been controlled according to a general theory e4pressed both by Balfour in
his notions about 3riental ci>iliAation and by Cro2er in his 2anage2ent of e>eryday
business in Egypt! 1he 2ost i2portant thing about Kthe theory during the first decade
of the twentieth century was that it wor6ed- and wor6ed staggeringly well! 1he
argu2ent- when reduced to its si2plest for2- was clear- it was precise- it was easy to
grasp! 1here are esterners- and there are 3rientals! 1he for2er do2inateJ the latter
2ust be do2inated- which usually 2eans ha>ing their land occupied- their internal
affairs rigidly controlled- their blood and treasure put at the disposal of one or another
estern power! 1hat Balfour and Cro2er- as we shall soon see- could strip hu2anity
down to such ruthless cultural and racial essences was not at all an indication of their
particular >iciousness! #ather it was an indication of how strea2lined a general
doctrine had beco2e by the ti2e they put it to use0how strea2lined and effecti>e!
?nli6e Balfour- whose theses on 3rientals pretended to ob@ecti>e uni>ersality-
Cro2er spo6e about 3rientals specifically as what he had ruled or had to deal with-
first in India- then for the twenty0fi>e years in Egypt during which he e2erged as the
para2ount consulgeneral in England<s e2pire! Balfour<s C3rientalsD are Cro2er<s
Csub@ect races-D which he 2ade the topic of a long essay published in the Edinburgh
Review in January 1*7,! 3nce again- 6nowledge of sub@ect races or 3rientals is what
2a6es their 2anage2ent easy and profitableJ 6nowledge gi>es power- 2ore power
re9uires 2ore 6nowledge- and so on in an increasingly profitable dialectic of
infor2ation and control! Cro2er<s notion is that England<s e2pire will not dissol>e if
such things as 2ilitaris2 and co22ercial egotis2 at ho2e and Cfree institutionsD in
the colony Fas opposed to British go>ern2ent Caccording to the Code of Christian
2oralityDG are 6ept in chec6! For if- according to Cro2er- logic is so2ething Cthe
e4istence of which the 3riental is disposed altogether to ignore-D the proper 2ethod
of ruling is not to i2pose ultrascientific 2easures upon hi2 or to force hi2 bodily to
accept logic! It is rather to understand his li2itations and Cendea>or to find- in the
content2ent of the sub@ect race- a 2ore worthy and- it 2ay be hoped- a stronger bond
of union between the rulers and the ruled!D 'ur6ing e>erywhere behind the
pacification of the sub@ect race is i2perial 2ight- 2ore effecti>e for its refined
understanding and infre9uent use than for its soldiers- brutal ta4 gatherers- and
incontinent force! In a word-
)E
the E2pire 2ust be wiseJ it 2ust te2per its cupidity with selflessness- and its
i2patience with fle4ible discipline!
1o be 2ore e4plicit- what is 2eant when it is said that the co22ercial spirit
should be under so2e control is this0that in dealing with Indians or Egyptians- or
"hillu6s- or Rulus- the first 9uestion is to consider what these people- who are all-
nationally spea6ing- 2ore or less in statu pupillari- the2sel>es thin6 is best in
their own interests- although this is a point which deser>es serious consideration!
But it is essential that each special issue should be decided 2ainly with reference
to what- by the light of estern 6nowledge and e4perience te2pered by local
considerations- we conscientiously thin6 is best for the sub@ect race- without
reference to any real or supposed ad>antage which 2ay accrue to England as a
nation- or0as is 2ore fre9uently the case0to the special interests represented by
so2e one or 2ore influential classes of English2en! If the British nation as a
whole persistently bears this principle in 2ind- and insists sternly on its
application- though we can ne>er create a patriotis2 a6in to that based on affinity
of race or co22unity of language- we 2ay perhaps foster so2e sort of
cos2opolitan allegiance grounded on the respect always accorded to superior
talents and unselfish conduct- and on the gratitude deri>ed both fro2 fa>ours
conferred and fro2 those to co2e! 1here 2ay then at all e>ents be so2e hope
that the Egyptian will hesitate before he throws in his lot with any future Arabi ! !
! ! E>en the Central African sa>age 2ay e>entually learn to chant a hy2n in
honour of Astraea #edu4- as represented by the British official who denies hi2
gin but gi>es hi2 @ustice! More than this- co22erce will gain!
)
(ow 2uch Cserious considerationD the ruler ought to gi>e proposals fro2 the
sub@ect race was illustrated in Cro2er<s total opposition to Egyptian nationalis2! Free
nati>e institutions- the absence of foreign occupation- a selfsustaining national
so>ereignty: these unsurprising de2ands were consistently re@ected by Cro2er- who
asserted una2biguously that Cthe real future of Egypt ! ! ! lies not in the direction of a
narrow nationalis2- which will only e2brace nati>e Egyptians ! ! ! but rather in that
of an enlarged cos2opolitanis2!D
=
"ub@ect races did not ha>e it in the2 to 6now what
was good for the2! Most of the2 were 3rientals- of whose characteristics Cro2er
was >ery 6nowledgeable since he had had e4perience with the2 both in India and
Egypt! 3ne of the con>enient things about 3rientals for Cro2er was that 2anaging
)+
the2- although circu2stances 2ight differ slightly here and there- was al2ost
e>erywhere nearly the sa2e!
;
1his was- of course- because 3rientals were al2ost
e>erywhere nearly the sa2e!
/ow at last we approach the long0de>eloping core of essential 6nowledge-
6nowledge both acade2ic and practical- which Cro2er and Balfour inherited fro2 a
century of 2odern estern 3rientalis2: 6nowledge about and 6nowledge of
3rientals- their race- character- culture- history- traditions- society- and possibilities!
1his 6nowledge was effecti>e: Cro2er belie>ed he had put it to use in go>erning
Egypt! Moreo>er- it was tested and unchanging 6nowledge- since C3rientalsD for all
practical purposes were a &latonic essence- which any 3rientalist For ruler of
3rientalsG 2ight e4a2ine- understand- and e4pose! 1hus in the thirty0fourth chapter
of his two0>olu2e wor6 Modern Egypt, the 2agisterial record of his e4perience and
achie>e2ent- Cro2er puts down a sort of personal canon of 3rientalist wisdo2:
"ir Alfred 'yall once said to 2e: CAccuracy is abhorrent to the 3riental
2ind! E>ery Anglo0Indian should always re2e2ber that 2a4i2!D ant of
accuracy- which easily degenerates into untruthfulness- is in fact the 2ain
characteristic of the 3riental 2ind!
1he European is a close reasonerJ his state2ents of fact are de>oid of any
a2biguityJ he is a natural logician- albeit he 2ay not ha>e studied logicJ he is by
nature sceptical and re9uires proof before he can accept the truth of any
propositionJ his trained intelligence wor6s li6e a piece of 2echanis2! 1he 2ind
of the 3riental- on the other hand- li6e his pictures9ue streets- is e2inently
wanting in sy22etry! (is reasoning is of the 2ost slipshod description! Although
the ancient Arabs ac9uired in a so2ewhat higher degree the science of dialectics-
their descendants are singularly deficient in the logical faculty! 1hey are often
incapable of drawing the 2ost ob>ious conclusions fro2 any si2ple pre2ises of
which they 2ay ad2it the truth! Endea>or to elicit a plain state2ent of facts fro2
any ordinary Egyptian! (is e4planation will generally be lengthy- and wanting in
lucidity! (e will probably contradict hi2self half0a0doAen ti2es before he has
finished his story! (e will often brea6 down under the 2ildest process of cross0
e4a2ination!
3rientals or Arabs are thereafter shown to be gullible- Cde>oid of energy and
initiati>e-D 2uch gi>en to Cfulso2e flattery-D intrigue- cunning- and un6indness to
ani2alsJ 3rientals cannot wal6 on either a road or a pa>e2ent Ftheir disordered 2inds
fail to understand what the cle>er European grasps i22ediately- that roads and
),
pa>e2ents are 2ade for wal6ingGJ 3rientals are in>eterate liars- they are Clethargic
and suspicious-D and in e>erything oppose the clarity- directness- and nobility of the
Anglo0"a4on race!
E
Cro2er 2a6es no effort to conceal that 3rientals for hi2 were always and only
the hu2an 2aterial he go>erned in British colonies! CAs I a2 only a diplo2atist and
an ad2inistrator- whose proper study is also 2an- but fro2 the point of >iew of
go>erning hi2-D Cro2er says- C! ! ! I content 2yself with noting the fact that
so2ehow or other the 3riental generally acts- spea6s- and thin6s in a 2anner e4actly
opposite to the European!D
+
Cro2er<s descriptions are of course based partly on direct
obser>ation- yet here and there he refers to orthodo4 3rientalist authorities Fin
particular Ernest #enan and Constantin de BolneyG to support his >iews! 1o these
authorities he also defers when it co2es to e4plaining why 3rientals are the way they
are! (e has no doubt that any 6nowledge of the 3riental will confir2 his >iews-
which- to @udge fro2 his description of the Egyptian brea6ing under cross0
e4a2ination- find the 3riental to be guilty! 1he cri2e was that the 3riental was an
3riental- and it is an accurate sign of how co22only acceptable such a tautology was
that it could be written without e>en an appeal to European logic or sy22etry of
2ind! 1hus any de>iation fro2 what were considered the nor2s of 3riental beha>ior
was belie>ed to be unnaturalJ Cro2er<s last annual report fro2 Egypt conse9uently
proclai2ed Egyptian nationalis2 to be an Centirely no>el ideaD and Ca plant of e4otic
rather than of indigenous growth!D
,
e would be wrong- I thin6- to underesti2ate the reser>oir of accredited
6nowledge- the codes of 3rientalist orthodo4y- to which Cro2er and Balfour refer
e>erywhere in their writing and in their public policy! 1o say si2ply that 3rientalis2
was a rationaliAation of colonial rule is to ignore the e4tent to which colonial rule was
@ustified in ad>ance by 3rientalis2- rather than after the fact! Men ha>e always
di>ided the world up into regions ha>ing either real or i2agined distinction fro2 each
other! 1he absolute de2arcation between East and est- which Balfour and Cro2er
accept with such co2placency- had been years- e>en centuries- in the 2a6ing! 1here
were of course innu2erable >oyages of disco>eryJ there were contacts through trade
and war! But 2ore than this- since the 2iddle of the eighteenth century there had been
two principal ele2ents in the relation between East and est! 3ne was a growing
syste2atic 6nowledge in Europe about the 3rient- 6nowledge reinforced by the
colonial encounter as well as by the widespread interest
)*
in the alien and unusual- e4ploited by the de>eloping sciences of ethnology-
co2parati>e anato2y- philology- and historyJ further2ore- to this syste2atic
6nowledge was added a siAable body of literature produced by no>elists- poets-
translators- and gifted tra>elers! 1he other feature of 3riental0European relations was
that Europe was always in a position of strength- not to say do2ination! 1here is no
way of putting this euphe2istically! 1rue- the relationship of strong to wea6 could be
disguised or 2itigated- as when Balfour ac6nowledged the CgreatnessD of 3riental
ci>iliAations! But the essential relationship- on political- cultural- and e>en religious
grounds- was seen0in the est- which is what concerns us hereto be one between a
strong and a wea6 partner!
Many ter2s were used to e4press the relation: Balfour and Cro2er- typically-
used se>eral! 1he 3riental is irrational- depra>ed FfallenG- childli6e- CdifferentDJ thus
the European is rational- >irtuous- 2ature- Cnor2al!D But the way of enli>ening the
relationship was e>erywhere to stress the fact that the 3riental li>ed in a different but
thoroughly organiAed world of his own- a world with its own national- cultural- and
episte2ological boundaries and principles of internal coherence! Iet what ga>e the
3riental<s world its intelligibility and identity was not the result of his own efforts but
rather the whole co2ple4 series of 6nowledgeable 2anipulations by which the 3rient
was identified by the est! 1hus the two features of cultural relationship I ha>e been
discussing co2e together! %nowledge of the 3rient- because generated out of
strength- in a sense creates the 3rient- the 3riental- and his world! In Cro2er<s and
Balfour<s language the 3riental is depicted as so2ething one @udges Fas in a court of
lawG- so2ething one studies and depicts Fas in a curriculu2G- so2ething one
disciplines Fas in a school or prisonG- so2ething one illustrates Fas in a Aoological
2anualG! 1he point is that in each of these cases the 3riental is contained and
represented by do2inating fra2ewor6s! here do these co2e fro2L
Cultural strength is not so2ething we can discuss >ery easilyand one of the
purposes of the present wor6 is to illustrate- analyAe- and reflect upon 3rientalis2 as
an e4ercise of cultural strength! In other words- it is better not to ris6 generaliAations
about so >ague and yet so i2portant a notion as cultural strength until a good deal of
2aterial has been analyAed first! But at the outset one can say that so far as the est
was concerned during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries- an assu2ption had been
2ade that the
=7
3rient and e>erything in it was- if not patently inferior to- then in need of
correcti>e study by the est! 1he 3rient was >iewed as if fra2ed by the classroo2-
the cri2inal court- the prison- the illustrated 2anual! 3rientalis2- then- is 6nowledge
of the 3rient that places things 3riental in class- court- prison- or 2anual for scrutiny-
study- @udg2ent- discipline- or go>erning!
.uring the early years of the twentieth century- 2en li6e Balfour and Cro2er
could say what they said- in the way they did- because a still earlier tradition of
3rientalis2 than the nineteenth0century one pro>ided the2 with a >ocabulary-
i2agery- rhetoric- and figures with which to say it! Iet 3rientalis2 reinforced- and
was reinforced by- the certain 6nowledge that Europe or the est literally
co22anded the >astly greater part of the earth<s surface! 1he period of i22ense
ad>ance in the institutions and content of 3rientalis2 coincides e4actly with the
period of unparalleled European e4pansionJ fro2 1,1; to 1*1= European direct
colonial do2inion e4panded fro2 about ); percent of the earth<s surface to about ,;
percent of it!
*
E>ery continent was affected- none 2ore so than Africa and Asia! 1he
two greatest e2pires were the British and the FrenchJ allies and partners in so2e
things- in others they were hostile ri>als! In the 3rient- fro2 the eastern shores of the
Mediterranean to Indochina and Malaya- their colonial possessions and i2perial
spheres of influence were ad@acent- fre9uently o>erlapped- often were fought o>er!
But it was in the /ear 3rient- the lands of the Arab /ear East- where Isla2 was
supposed to define teal and racial characteristics- that the British and the French
countered each other and Cthe 3rientD with the greatest intensity- fa2iliarity- and
co2ple4ity! For 2uch of the nineteenth century- as 'ord "alisbury put it in 1,,1-
their co22on >iew of the 3rient was intricately proble2atic: Chen you ha>e got a !
! ! faithful ally who id< bent on 2eddling in a country in which you are deeply
interested 000you ha>e three courses open to you! Iou 2ay renounce00or
2onopoliAe0or share! #enouncing would ha>e been to place the French across our
road to India! MonopoliAing would ha>e been >ery near the ris6 of war! "o we
resol>ed to share!D
17
And share they did- in ways that we shall in>estigate presently! hat they shared-
howe>er- was not only land or profit or ruleJ it the 6ind of intellectual power I ha>e
been calling 3rientalis2! Is a sense 3rientalis2 was a library or archi>e of
infor2ation co22only and- in so2e of its aspects- unani2ously held! hat bound
the archi>e together was a fa2ily of ideas
11
and a unifying
=1
set of >alues pro>en in >arious ways to be effecti>e! 1hese ideas e4plained the
beha>ior of 3rientalsJ they supplied 3rientals with a 2entality- a genealogy- an
at2osphereJ 2ost i2portant- they allowed Europeans to deal with and e>en to see
3rientals as a pheno2enon possessing regular characteristics! But li6e any set of
durable ideas- 3rientalist notions influenced the people who were called 3rientals as
well as those called 3ccidental- European- or esternJ in short- 3rientalis2 is better
grasped as a set of constraints upon and li2itations of thought than it is si2ply as a
positi>e doctrine! If the essence of 3rientalis2 is the ineradicable distinction between
estern superiority and 3riental inferiority- then we 2ust be prepared to note how in
its de>elop2ent and subse9uent history 3rientalis2 deepened and e>en hardened the
distinction! hen it beca2e co22on practice during the nineteenth century for
Britain to retire its ad2inistrators fro2 India and elsewhere once they had reached the
age of fifty0fi>e- then a further refine2ent in 3rientalis2 had been achie>edJ no
3riental was e>er allowed to see a esterner as he aged< and degenerated- @ust as no
esterner needed e>er to see hi2self- 2irrored in the eyes of the sub@ect race- as
anything but a >igorous- rational- e>er0alert young #a@!
12
3rientalist ideas too6 a nu2ber of different for2s during the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries! First of all- in Europe there was a >ast literature about the 3rient
inherited fro2 the European past! hat is distincti>e about the late eighteenth and
early nineteenth centuries- which is where this study< assu2es 2odern 3rientalis2 to
ha>e begun- is that an 3riental renaissance too6 place- as Edgar 3uinet phrased it!
1)
"uddenly it see2ed to a wide >ariety of thin6ers- politicians- and artists that a new
awareness of the 3rient- which e4tended fro2 China to the Mediterranean- had
arisen! 1his awareness was partly the result of newly disco>ered and translated
3riental te4ts in languages li6e "ans6rit- Rend- and ArabicJ it was also the result of a
newly percei>ed relationship between the 3rient and the est! For 2y purposes here-
the 6eynote of the relationship was set for the /ear East and Europe by the
/apoleonic in>asion of Egypt in 1+*,J an in>asion which was in 2any ways the >ery
2odel of a truly scientific appropriation of one culture by another- apparently
stronger one! For with /apoleon<s occupation of Egypt processes were set in 2otion
between East and est that still do2inate our conte2porary cultural and political
perspecti>es! And the /apoleonic e4pedition- with its great collecti>e 2onu2ent of
erudition- the Description de lEgypte, pro>ided a scene or setting
=2
for 3rientalis2- since Egypt and subse9uently the other Isla2ic lands were >iewed as
the li>e pro>ince- the laboratory- the theater of effecti>e estern 6nowledge about
the 3rient! I shall return to the /apoleonic ad>enture a little later!
ith such e4periences as /apoleon<s the 3rient as a body of 6nowledge in the
est was 2oderniAed- and this is a second for2 in which nineteenth0 and
twentieth0century 3rientalis2 e4isted! Fro2 the outset of the period I shall be
e4a2ining there was e>erywhere a2ongst 3rientalists the a2bition to for2ulate their
disco>eries- e4periences- and insights suitably in 2odern ter2s- to put ideas about the
3rient in >ery close touch with 2odern realities! #enan<s linguistic in>estigations of
"e2itic in 1,=,- for e4a2ple- were couched in a style that drew hea>ily for its
authority upon conte2porary co2parati>e gra22ar- co2parati>e anato2y- and racial
theoryJ these lent his 3rientalis2 prestige and0the other side of the coin2ade
3rientalis2 >ulnerable- as it has been e>er since- to 2odish as well as seriously
influential currents of thought in the est! 3rientalis2 has been sub@ected to
i2perialis2- positi>is2- utopianis2- historicis2- .arwinis2- racis2- Freudianis2-
Mar4is2- "pengleris2! But 3rientalis2- li6e 2any of the natural and social sciences-
has had Cparadig2sD of research- its own learned societies- its own Establish2ent!
.uring the nineteenth century the field increased enor2ously in prestige- as did also
the reputation and influence of such institutions as the "ociPtP asiati9ue- the #oyal
Asiatic "ociety- the .eutsche Morgenl[ndische 5esellschaft- and the A2erican
3riental "ociety! ith the growth of these societies went also an increase- all across
Europe- in the nu2ber of professorships in 3riental studiesJ conse9uently there was
an e4pansion in the a>ailable 2eans for disse2inating 3rientalis2! 3rientalist
periodicals- beginning with the !undgraben des "rients F1,7*G- 2ultiplied the
9uantity of 6nowledge as well as the nu2ber of specialties!
Iet little of this acti>ity and >ery few of these institutions e4isted and flourished
freely- for in a third for2 in which it e4isted- 3rientalis2 i2posed li2its upon
thought about the 3rient! E>en the 2ost i2aginati>e writers of an age- 2en li6e
Flaubert- /er>al- or "cott- were constrained in what they could either e4perience of or
say about the 3rient!For 3rientalis2 was ulti2ately a political >ision of reality whose
structure pro2oted the difference between the fa2iliar FEurope- the est- CusDG and
the strange Fthe 3rient- the East- Cthe2DG! 1his >ision in a sense created and then
ser>ed
=)
the two worlds thus concei>ed! 3rientals li>ed in their world-CweD li>ed in ours! 1he
>ision and 2aterial reality propped each other up- 6ept each other going! A certain
freedo2 of intercourse was always the esterner<s pri>ilegeJ because his was the
stronger culture- he could penetrate- he could wrestle with- he could gi>e shape and
2eaning to the great Asiatic 2ystery- as .israeli once called it! Iet what has- I thin6-
been pre>iously o>erloo6ed is the constricted >ocabulary of such a pri>ilege- and the
co2parati>e li2itations of such a >ision! My argu2ent ta6es it that the 3rientalist
reality is both antihu2an and persistent! Its scope- as 2uch as its institutions and
all0per>asi>e influence- lasts up to the present!
But how did and does 3rientalis2 wor6L (ow can one describe it all together as
a historical pheno2enon- a way of thought- a conte2porary proble2- and a 2aterial
realityL Consider Cro2er again- an acco2plished technician of e2pire but also a
beneficiary of 3rientalis2! (e can furnish us with a rudi2entary answer! In C1he
5o>ern2ent of "ub@ect #acesD he wrestles with the proble2 of how Britain- a nation
of indi>iduals- is to ad2inister a wide0flung e2pire according to a nu2ber of central
principles! (e contrasts the Clocal agent-D who has both a specialist<s 6nowledge of
the nati>e and an Anglo0"a4on indi>iduality- with the central authority at ho2e in
'ondon! 1he for2er 2ay Ctreat sub@ects of local interest in a 2anner calculated to
da2age- or e>en to @eopardiAe- I2perial interests! 1he central authority is in a
position to ob>iate any danger arising fro2 this cause!D hyL Because this authority
can Censure the har2onious wor6ing of the different parts of the 2achineD and
Cshould endea>our- so far as is possible- to realise the circu2stances attendant on the
go>ern2ent of the dependency!D
1=
1he language is >ague and unattracti>e- but the
point is not hard to grasp! Cro2er en>isions a seat of power in the est- and radiating
out fro2 it towards the East a great e2bracing 2achine- sustaining the central
authority yet co22anded by it! hat the 2achine<s branches feed into it in the
East0hu2an 2aterial- 2aterial wealth- 6nowledge- what ha>e you0is processed by the
2achine- then con>erted into 2ore power! 1he specialist does the i22ediate
translation of 2ere 3riental 2atter into useful substance: the 3riental beco2es- for
e4a2ple- a sub@ect race- an e4a2ple of an C3rientalD 2entality- all for the
enhance2ent of the CauthorityD at ho2e! C'ocal interestsD are 3rientalist special
interests- the Ccentral authorityD is the general interest of the i2perial society as a
whole! hat Cro2er 9uite accurately sees is the 2anage2ent
==
of 6nowledge by society- the fact that 6nowledge0no 2atter how special0is regulated
first by the local concerns of a specialist- later by the general concerns of a social
syste2 of authority! 1he interplay between local and central interests is intricate- but
by no 2eans indiscri2inate!
In Cro2er<s own case as an i2perial ad2inistrator the Cproper study is also
2an-D he says! hen &ope proclai2ed the proper study of 2an6ind to be 2an- he
2eant all 2en- including Cthe poor IndianDJ whereas Cro2er<s CalsoD re2inds us that
certain 2en- such as 3rientals- can be singled out as the sub@ect for proper study! 1he
proper study0in this sense0of 3rientals is 3rientalis2- properly separate fro2 other
for2s of 6nowledge- but finally useful Fbecause finiteG for the 2aterial and social
reality enclosing all 6nowledge at any ti2e- supporting 6nowledge- pro>iding it with
uses! An order of so>ereignty is set up fro2 East to est- a 2oc6 chain of being
whose clearest for2 was gi>en once by %ipling:
Mule- horse- elephant- or bulloc6- he obeys his dri>er- and the dri>er his sergeant-
and the sergeant his lieutenant- and the lieutenant his captain- and the captain his
2a@or- and the 2a@or his colonel- and the colonel his brigadier co22anding three
regi2ents- and the brigadier his general- who obeys the Biceroy- who is the
ser>ant of the E2press!
1;
As deeply forged as is this 2onstrous chain of co22and- as strongly 2anaged as is
Cro2er<s Char2onious wor6ing-D 3rientalis2 can also e4press the strength of the
est and the 3rient<s wea6ness0as seen by the est! "uch strength and such
wea6ness are as intrinsic to 3rientalis2 as they are to any >iew that di>ides the world
into large general di>isions- entities that coe4ist in a state of tension produced by
what is belie>ed to be radical difference!
For that is the 2ain intellectual issue raised by 3rientalis2! Can one di>ide
hu2an reality- as indeed hu2an reality see2s to be- genuinely di>ided- into clearly
different cultures- histories- traditions- societies- e>en races- and sur>i>e the
conse9uences hu2anlyL By sur>i>ing the conse9uences hu2anly- I 2ean to as6
whether 3ere is any way of a>oiding the hostility e4pressed by the di>ision- say- of
2en into CusD FesternersG and CtheyD F3rientalsG! For such di>isions are generalities
whose use historically and actually has been to press the i2portance of the distinction
between so2e 2en and so2e other 2en- usually towards not especially ad2irable
ands! hen one uses categories li6e 3riental and estern as both the starting and the
and points of analysis- research- public policy
=;
Fas the categories were used by Balfour and Cro2erG- the result is usually to polariAe
the distinction0the 3riental beco2es 2ore 3riental- the esterner 2ore estern0and
li2it the hu2an encounter between different cultures- traditions- and societies! In
short- fro2 its earliest 2odern history to the present- 3rientalis2 as a for2 of thought
for dealing with the foreign has typically shown the altogether regrettable tendency of
any 6nowledge based on such hard0and0fast distinctions as CEastD and CestD: to
channel thought into a est or an East co2part2ent! Because this tendency is right at
the center of 3rientalist theory- practice- and >alues found in the est- the sense of
estern power o>er the 3rient is ta6en for granted as ha>ing the status of scientific
truth!
A conte2porary illustration or two should clarify this obser>ation perfectly! It is
natural for 2en in power to sur>ey fro2 ti2e to ti2e the world with which they 2ust
deal! Balfour did it fre9uently! 3ur conte2porary (enry %issinger does it also- rarely
with 2ore e4press fran6ness than in his essay C.o2estic "tructure and Foreign
&olicy!D 1he dra2a he depicts is a real one- in which the ?nited "tates 2ust 2anage
its beha>ior in the world under the pressures of do2estic forces on the one hand and
of foreign realities on the other! %issinger<s discourse 2ust for that reason alone
establish a polarity between the ?nited "tates and the worldJ in addition- of course- he
spea6s consciously as an authoritati>e !>oice for the 2a@or estern power- whose
recent history and present reality ha>e placed it before a world that does not easily
accept its power and do2inance! %issinger feels that the ?nited "tates can deal less
proble2atically with the industrial- de>eloped est than it can with the de>eloping
world! Again- the conte2porary actuality of relations between the ?nited "tates and
the so0called 1hird orld Fwhich includes China- Indochina- the /ear East- Africa-
and 'atin A2ericaG is 2anifestly a thorny set of proble2s- which e>en %issinger
cannot hide!
%issinger<s 2ethod in the essay proceeds according to what linguists call binary
opposition: that is- he shows that there are two styles in foreign policy Fthe prophetic
and the politicalG- two types of techni9ue- two periods- and so forth! hen at the end
of the historical part of his argu2ent he is brought face to face with the conte2porary
world- he di>ides it accordingly into two hal>es- the de>eloped and the de>eloping
countries! 1he first half- which is the est- Cis deeply co22itted to the notion that
the real world is e4ternal to the obser>er- that 6nowledge consists of recording and
=E
classifying data0the 2ore accurately the better!D %issinger<s proof for this is the
/ewtonian re>olution- which has not ta6en place in the de>eloping world: CCultures
which escaped the early i2pact of /ewtonian thin6ing ha>e retained the essentially
pre0/ewtonian >iew that the real world is al2ost co2pletely internal to the ob0
ser>er!D Conse9uently- he adds- Ce2pirical reality has a 2uch different significance
for 2any of the new countries than for the est because in a certain sense they ne>er
went through the process of disco>ering it!D
1E
?nli6e Cro2er- %issinger does not need to 9uote "ir Alfred 'yall on the
3riental<s inability to be accurateJ the point he 2a6es is sufficiently unarguable to
re9uire no special >alidation! e had our /ewtonian re>olutionJ they didn<t! As
thin6ers we are better off than they are! 5ood: the lines are drawn in 2uch the sa2e
way- finally- as Balfour and Cro2er drew the2! Iet si4ty or 2ore years ha>e
inter>ened between %issinger and the British i2perialists! /u2erous wars and
re>olutions ha>e pro>ed conclusi>ely that the pre0/ewtonian prophetic style- which
%issinger associates both with CinaccurateD de>eloping countries and with Europe
before the Congress of Bienna- is not entirely without its successes! Again unli6e
Balfour and Cro2er- %issinger therefore feels obliged to aspect this pre0/ewtonian
perspecti>e- since Cit offers great fle4ibility with respect to the conte2porary
re>olutionary tur2oil!D 1hus the duty of 2en in the post0/ewtonian FrealG world is to
Cconstruct an international order be#ore a crisis i2poses it as a necessityD: in other
words- we 2ust still find a way by which the de>eloping world can be contained! Is
this not si2ilar to Cro2er<s >ision of a har2oniously wor6ing 2achine designed
ulti2ately to benefit so2e central authority- which opposes the de>eloping worldL
%issinger 2ay not ha>e 6nown on what fund of pedigreed 6nowledge he was
drawing when he cut the world up into pre0/ewtonian and post0/ewtonian
conceptions of reality! But his distinction is identical with the orthodo4 one 2ade by
3rientalists- who separate 3rientals fro2 esterners! And li6e 3rientalis2<s
distinction \issinger<s is not >alue0free- despite the apparent neutrality of his tone!
1hus such words as Cprophetic-D Caccuracy-D Cinternal-D Ce2pirical reality-D and
CorderD are scattered throughout his description- and they characteriAe either
attracti>e- fa2iliar- desirable >irtues or 2enacing- peculiar- disorderly defects! Both
the traditional 3rientalist- as we shall see- and %issinger concei>e of the difference
between cultures- first- as creating a battlefront that
=+
separates the2- and second- as in>iting the est to control- contain- and otherwise
go>ern Fthrough superior 6nowledge and acco22odating powerG the 3ther! ith
what effect and at what considerable e4pense such 2ilitant di>isions ha>e been
2aintained- no one at present needs to be re2inded!
Another illustration do>etails neatly0perhaps too neatly0with %issinger<s analysis!
In its February 1*+2 issue- the $merican %ournal o# Psychiatry printed an essay by
(arold ! 5lidden- who is identified as a retired 2e2ber of the Bureau of
Intelligence and #esearch- ?nited "tates .epart2ent of "tateJ the essay<s title FC1he
Arab orldDG- its tone- and its content argue a highly characteristic 3rientalist bent of
2ind! 1hus for his four0page- double0colu2ned psychological portrait of o>er 177
2illion people- considered for a period of 1-)77 years- 5lidden cites e4actly four
sources for his >iews: a recent boo6 on 1ripoli- one issue of the Egyptian newspaper
$&'$hram, the periodical "riente Moderno, and a boo6 by Ma@id %hadduri- a
well06nown 3rientalist! 1he article itself purports to unco>er Cthe inner wor6ings of
Arab beha>ior-D which fro2 our point of >iew is CaberrantD but for Arabs is
Cnor2al!D After this auspicious start- we are told that Arabs stress confor2ityJ that
Arabs inhabit a sha2e culture whose Cprestige syste2<!D in>ol>es the ability to attract
followers and clients Fas an aside we are told that CArab society is and always has
been based on a syste2 of client0patron relationshipsDGJ that Arabs can function only
in conflict situationsJ that prestige is based solely on the ability to do2inate othersJ
that a sha2e culture0and therefore Isla2 itself 02a6es a >irtue of re>enge Fhere
5lidden triu2phantly cites the June 2*- 1*+7 $hram to show that Cin 1*E* Yin EgyptZ
in 17+7 cases of 2urder where the perpetrators were apprehended- it was found that
27 percent of the 2urders were based on a desire to wipe out sha2e- )7 percent on a
desire to satisfy real or i2aginary wrongs- and )1 percent on a desire for blood
re>engeDGJ that if fro2 a estern point of >iew Cthe only rational thing for the Arabs
to do is to 2a6e peace ! ! ! for the Arabs the situation is not go>erned by this 6ind of
logic- for ob@ecti>ity is not a >alue in the Arab syste2!D
5lidden continues- now 2ore enthusiastically: Cit is a notable fact that while the
Arab >alue syste2 de2ands absolute solidarity within the group- it at the sa2e ti2e
encourages a2ong its 2e2bers a 6ind of ri>alry that is destructi>e of that >ery
solidarityDJ in Arab society only Csuccess countsD and Cthe end @ustifies the 2eansDJ
=,
Arabs li>e CnaturallyD in a world CcharacteriAed by an4iety e4pressed in generaliAed
suspicion and distrust- which has been labelled free0floating hostilityDJ Cthe art of
subterfuge is highly de>eloped in Arab life- as well as in Isla2 itselfDJ the Arab need
for >engeance o>errides e>erything- otherwise the Arab would feel Cego0destroyingD
sha2e! 1herefore- if Cesterners consider peace to be high on the scale of >aluesD
and if Cwe ha>e a highly de>eloped consciousness of the >alue of ti2e-D this is not
true of Arabs! CIn fact-D we are told- Cin Arab tribal society Fwhere Arab >alues
originatedG- strife- not peace- was the nor2al state of affairs because raiding was one
of the two 2ain supports of the econo2y!D 1he purpose of this learned dis9uisition is
2erely to show how on the estern and 3riental scale of >aluesDCthe relati>e
position of the ele2ents is 9uite different!D HE.!
1+
1his is the apogee of 3rientalist confidence! /o 2erely asserted generality is
denied the dignity of truthJ no theoretical list of 3riental attributes is without
application to the beha>ior of 3rientals in the real world! 3n the one hand there are
esterners- and on the other there are Arab03rientalsJ the for2er are Fin no particular
orderG rational- peaceful- liberal- logical- capable of holding real >alues- without
natural suspicionJ the latter are none of these things! 3ut of what collecti>e and yet
particulariAed >iew of the 3rient do these state2ents e2ergeL hat specialiAed s6ills-
what i2aginati>e pressures- whht institutions and traditions- what cultural forces
produce such si2ilarity in the descriptions of the 3rient to be found in Cro2er-
Balfour- and our -conte2porary states2enL
II
Ima"inati$e %eo"raph& and
Its Representations'
Orientalizing the Oriental
"trictly spea6ing- 3rientalis2 is a field of learned study! In the Christian est-
3rientalis2 is considered to ha>e co22enced its for2al e4istence with the decision
of the Church Council of
Bienne in 1)12 to establish a series of chairs in CArabic- 5ree6- (ebrew- and "yriac
at &aris- 34ford- Bologna- A>ignon- and "ala2anca!D
1,
Iet any account of
=*
3rientalis2 would ha>e to consider not only the professional 3rientalist and his wor6
but also the >ery notion of a field of study based on a geographical- cultural-
linguistic- and ethnic unit called the 3rient! Fields- of course- are 2ade! 1hey ac9uire
coherence and integrity in ti2e because scholars de>ote the2sel>es in different ways
to what see2s to be a co22only agreed0upon sub@ect 2atter! Iet it goes without
saying that a field of study is rarely as si2ply defined as e>en its 2ost co22itted
partisans0usually scholars- professors- e4perts- and the li6e 0clai2 it is! Besides- a
field can change so entirely- in e>en the 2ost traditional disciplines li6e philology-
history- or theology- as to 2a6e an all0purpose definition of sub@ect 2atter al2ost
i2possible! 1his is certainly true of 3rientalis2- for so2e interesting reasons!
1o spea6 of scholarly specialiAation as a geographical CfieldD is- in the case of
3rientalis2- fairly re>ealing since no one is li6ely to i2agine a field sy22etrical to it
called 3ccidentalis2! Already the special- perhaps e>en eccentric attitude of
3rientalis2 beco2es apparent! For although 2any learned disciplines i2ply a
position ta6en towards- say- human 2aterial Fa historian deals with the hu2an past
fro2 a special >antage point in the presentG- there is no real analogy for ta6ing a
fi4ed- 2ore or less total geographical position towards a wide >ariety of social-
linguistic- political- and historical realities! A classicist- a #o2ance specialist- e>en an
A2ericanist focuses on a relati>ely 2odest portion of the world- not on a full half of
it! But 3rientalis2 is a field with considerable geographical a2bition! And since
3rientalists ha>e traditionally occupied the2sel>es with things 3riental Fa specialist
in Isla2ic law- no less than an e4pert in Chinese dialects or in Indian religions- is
considered an 3rientalist by people who call the2sel>es 3rientalistsG- we 2ust learn
to accept enor2ous- indiscri2inate siAe plus an al2ost infinite capacity for
subdi>ision as one of the chief characteristics of 3rientalis20one that is e>idenced in
its confusing a2alga2 of i2perial >agueness and precise detail!
All of this describes 3rientalis2 as an acade2ic discipline! 1he Cis2D in
3rientalis2 ser>es to insist on the distinction of this discipline fro2 e>ery other 6ind!
1he rule in its historical de>elop2ent as an acade2ic discipline has been its
increasing scope- not its greater selecti>eness! #enaissance 3rientalists li6e Erpenius
;7
and 5uillau2e &ostel were pri2arily specialists in the languages of the :Biblical
pro>inces- although &ostel boasted that he could get across Asia as far as China
without needing an interpreter! By and large- until the 2id0eighteenth century
3rientalists were Biblical scholars- is of the "e2itic languages- Isla2ic specialists- or-
because the Jesuits had opened up the new study of China- "inologists! 1he whole
2iddle e4panse of Asia was not acade2ically con9uered for 3rientalis2 until- during
the later eighteenth century- An9uetil0.uperron and "ir illia2 Jones were able
intelligibly to re>eal the ordinary riches of A>estan and "ans6rit! By the 2iddle of the
nineteenth century 3rientalis2 was as >ast a treasure0house of ruing as one could
i2agine! 1here are two e4cellent indices of this new- triu2phant eclecticis2! 3ne is
the encyclopedic description of 3rientalis2 roughly fro2 1+E; to 1,;7 gi>en by
#ay2ond "chwab in his (a Renaissance orientale!
1*
Huite aside fro2 the scientific
disco>eries of things 3riental 2ade by learned professionals during this period in
Europe- there was the >irtual epide2ic of 3rientalia affecting e>ery 2a@or poet-
essayist- and philosopher the period! "chwab<s notion is that C3rientalD identifies an
a2ateur or professional enthusias2 for e>erything Asiatic- which was wonderfully
synony2ous with the e4otic- the 2ysterious- the profound- the se2inalJ this is a later
transposition eastwards of a si2ilar enthusias2 in Europe for 5ree6 and 'atin
anti9uity during the (igh #enaissance! In 1,2* Bictor (ugo put this change in ions
as follows: CAu si]cle de 'ouis \IB on Ptait hellPniste- 2aintenant ant on est
3rientaliste!D
27
A nineteenth0century 3rientalist therefore either a scholar Fa
"inologist- an Isla2icist- an Indo EuropeanistG or a gifted enthusiast F(ugo in (es
"rientales, 5oethe the )est*stlicher Diwan+, or both F#ichard Burton- Edward
Friedrich "chlegelG!
1he second inde4 of how inclusi>e 3rientalis2 had beco2e the Council of
Bienne is to be found in nineteenth0century chronicles of the field itself! 1he 2ost
thorough of its 6ind is Jules Mohl<s ,ingt'sept $ns dhistoire des -tudes orientales, a
two0>olu2e longboo6 of e>erything of note that too6 place in 3rientalis2 be 1,=7
and 1,E+!
21
Mohl was the secretary of the "ociPtP asiati9ue in &aris- and for
so2ething 2ore than the first half of the nineteenth century &aris was the capital of
the 3rientalist world Fand- according to alter Ben@a2in- of the nineteenth centuryG!
Mohl<s position in the "ociPtP could not ha>e been 2ore central the field of
3rientalis2! 1here is scarcely anything done
;1
by a European scholar touching Asia during those twenty0se>en years that Mohl does
not enter under CPtudes orientales!D (is entries of course concern publications- but the
range of published 2aterial of interest to 3rientalist scholars is aweso2e! Arabic-
innu2erable Indian dialects- (ebrew- &ehle>i- Assyrian- Babylonian- Mongolian-
Chinese- Bur2ese- Mesopota2ian- Ja>anese: the list of philological wor6s considered
3rientalist is al2ost uncountable! Moreo>er- 3rientalist studies apparently co>er
e>erything fro2 the editing and translation of te4ts to nu2is2atic- anthropological-
archaeological- sociological- econo2ic- historical- literary- and cultural studies in
e>ery 6nown Asiatic and /orth African ci>iliAation- ancient and 2odern! 5usta>e
.ugat<s .istoire des orientalistes de /Europe du \II
e
au \I\
e
si0cle F1,E,01,+7G
22
is
a selecti>e history of 2a@or figures- but the range represented is no less i22ense than
Mohl<s!
"uch eclecticis2 as this had its blind spots- ne>ertheless! Acade2ic 3rientalists
for the 2ost part were interested in the classical period of whate>er language or
society it was that they studied! /ot until 9uite late in the century- with the single
2a@or e4ception of /apoleon<s Institut d<Xgypte- was 2uch attention gi>en to the
acade2ic study of the 2odern- or actual- 3rient! Moreo>er- the 3rient studied was a
te4tual uni>erse by and largeJ the i2pact of the 3rient was 2ade through boo6s and
2anuscripts- not- as in the i2press of 5reece on the #enaissance- through 2i2etic
artifacts li6e sculpture and pottery! E>en the rapport between an 3rientalist and the
3rient was te4tual- so 2uch so that it is reported of so2e of the early0
nineteenth0century 5er2an 3rientalists that their first >iew of an eightar2ed Indian
statue cured the2 co2pletely of their 3rientalist taste!
2)
hen a learned 3rientalist
tra>eled in the country of his specialiAation- it was always with unsha6able abstract
2a4i2s about the Cci>iliAationD he had studiedJ rarely were 3rientalists interested in
anything e4cept pro>ing the >alidity of these 2usty CtruthsD by applying the2-
without great success- to unco2prehending- hence degenerate- nati>es! Finally- the
>ery power and scope of 3rientalis2 produced not only a fair a2ount of e4act
positi>e 6nowledge about the 3rient but also a 6ind of second0order 6nowledge
lur6ing in such places as the C3rientalD tale- the 2ythology of the 2ysterious East-
notions of Asian inscrutability0with a life of its own- what B! 5! %iernan has aptly
called CEurope<s collecti>e day0drea2 of the 3rient!D
2=
3ne happy result of this is
that an esti2able nu2ber of i2portant writers during the nineteenth century were
3riental enthusiasts:
;2
It is perfectly correct- I thin6- to spea6 of a genre of 3rientalist writing as e4e2plified
in the wor6s of (ugo- 5oethe- /er>al- Flaubert- FitAgerald- and the li6e! hat
ine>itably goes with such wor6- howe>er- is a 6ind of freefloating 2ythology of the
3rient- an 3rient that deri>es not only fro2 conte2porary attitudes and popular
pre@udices but also fro2 what Bico called the conceit of nations and of scholars! I
ha>e already alluded to the political uses of such 02aterial as it has turned up in the
twentieth century!
1oday an 3rientalist is less li6ely to call hi2self an 3rientalist than he was
al2ost any ti2e up to orld ar II! Iet the designation is still useful- as when
uni>ersities 2aintain progra2s or depart2ents in 3riental languages or 3riental
ci>iliAations! 1here is an 3riental CfacultyD at 34ford- and a depart2ent of 3riental
studies at &rinceton! As recently as 1*;*- the British go>ern2ent e2powered a
co22ission Cto re>iew de>elop2ents in the ?ni>ersities in the fields of 3riental-
"la>onic- East European and African studies ! ! ! and to consider- and ad>ise on-
proposals for future de>elop2ent!D
2;
1he (ayter #eport- as it was called when it
appeared in 1*E1- see2ed untroubled by the broad designation of the word 3riental-
which it found ser>iceably e2ployed in A2erican uni>ersities as well! For e>en the
greatest na2e in 2odern Anglo A2erican Isla2ic studies- (! A! #! 5ibb- preferred to
call hi2self an 3rientalist rather than an Arabist! 5ibb hi2self- classicist that he was-
could use the ugly neologis2 Carea studyD for 3rientalis2 as a way of showing that
area studies and 3rientalis2 after all were interchangeable geographical titles!
2E
But
this- I thin6- ingenuously belies a 2uch 2ore interesting relationship between
6nowledge and geography! I should li6e to consider that relationship briefly!
.espite the distraction of a great 2any >ague desires- i2pulses- and i2ages- the
2ind see2s persistently to for2ulate what Claude 'e>i0"trauss has called a science
of the concrete!
2+
A pri2iti>e tribe- for e4a2ple- assigns a definite place- function-
and significance Cto e>ery leafy species in its i22ediate en>iron2ent! Many of these
grasses and flowers ha>e no practical useJ but the point 'e>i "trauss 2a6es is that
2ind re9uires order- and order is achie>ed by discri2inating and ta6ing note of
e>erything- placing e>erything of which the 2ind is aware in a secure- refindable
place- therefore gi>ing things so2e role to play in the econo2y of ob@ects and
identities that 2a6e up an en>iron2ent! 1his 6ind of rudi2entary classification has a
logic to it- but the rules of the logic by which a green fern in one society is a sy2bol
of grace and in another is considered
;)
2aleficent are neither predictably rational nor uni>ersal! 1here is always a 2easure of
the purely arbitrary in the way the distinctions between things are seen! And with
these distinctions go >alues whose history- if one could unearth it co2pletely- would
probably show the sa2e 2easure of arbitrariness! 1his is e>ident enough in the case
of fashion! hy do wigs- lace collars- and high buc6led shoes appear- then disappear-
o>er a period of decadesL "o2e of the answer has to do with utility and so2e with the
inherent beauty of the fashion! But if we agree that all things in history- li6e history
itself- are 2ade by 2en- then we will appreciate how possible it is for 2any ob@ects or
places or ti2es to be assigned roles and gi>en 2eanings that ac9uire ob@ecti>e
>alidity only a#ter the assign2ents are 2ade! 1his is especially true of relati>ely
unco22on things- li6e foreigners- 2utants- or Cabnor2alD beha>ior!
It is perfectly possible to argue that so2e distincti>e ob@ects are 2ade by the
2ind- and that these ob@ects- while appearing to e4ist ob@ecti>ely- ha>e only a
fictional reality! A group of people li>ing on a few acres of land will set up
boundaries between their land and its i22ediate surroundings and the territory
beyond- which they call Cthe land of the barbarians!D In other words- this uni>ersal
practice of designating in one<s 2ind a fa2iliar space which is CoursD and an
unfa2iliar space beyond CoursD which is CtheirsD is a way of 2a6ing geographical
distinctions that can be entirely arbitrary! I use the word CarbitraryD here because
i2aginati>e geography of the Cour land0barbarian landD >ariety does not re9uire that
the barbarians ac6nowledge the distinction! It is enough for CusD to set up these
boundaries in our own 2indsJ CtheyD beco2e CtheyD accordingly- and both their
territory and their 2entality are designated as different fro2 Cours!D 1o a certain
e4tent 2odern and pri2iti>e societies see2 thus to deri>e a sense of their identities
negati>ely! A fifth0century Athenian was >ery li6ely to feel hi2self to be
nonbarbarian as 2uch as he positi>ely felt hi2self to be Athenian! 1he geographic
boundaries acco2pany the social- ethnic- and cultural ones in e4pected ways! Iet
often the sense in which so2eone feels hi2self to be not0foreign is based on a >ery
unrigorous idea of what is Cout there-D beyond one<s own territory! All 6inds of
suppositions- associations- and fictions appear to crowd the unfa2iliar space outside
one<s own!
1he French philosopher 5aston Bachelard once wrote an analysis of what he
called the poetics of space!
2,
1he inside of a house- he said- ac9uires a sense of
inti2acy- secrecy- security- real or i2agined-
;=
because of the e4periences that co2e to see2 appropriate for it! 1he ob@ecti>e space
of a house0its corners- corridors- cellar- roo2s0is far less i2portant than what
poetically it is endowed with- which is usually a 9uality with an i2aginati>e or
figurati>e >alue we can na2e and feel: thus a house 2ay be haunted- or ho2eli6e- or
prisonli6e- or 2agical! "o space ac9uires e2otional and e>en rational sense by a 6ind
of poetic process- whereby the >acant or anony2ous reaches of distance are
con>erted into 2eaning for us here! 1he sa2e process occurs when we deal with
ti2e! Much of what we associate with or e>en 6now about such periods as Clong agoD
or Cthe beginningD or Cat the end of ti2eD is poetic02ade up! For a historian of
Middle %ingdo2 Egypt- Clong agoD will ha>e a >ery clear sort of 2eaning- but e>en
this 2eaning does not totally dissipate the i2aginati>e- 9uasi0fictional 9uality one
senses lur6ing in a ti2e >ery different and distant fro2 our own! For there is no doubt
that i2aginati>e geography and history help the 2ind to intensify its own sense of
itself by dra2atiAing the distance and difference between what is close to it and what
is far away! 1his is no less true of the feelings we often ha>e that we would ha>e been
2ore Cat ho2eD in the si4teenth century or in 1ahiti!
Iet there is no use in pretending that all we 6now about ti2e and Bace- or rather
history and geography- is 2ore than anything else i2aginati>e! 1here are such things
as positi>e history and positi>e geography which in Europe and the ?nited "tates
ha>e i2pressi>e achie>e2ents to point to! "cholars now do 6now 2ore about the
world- its past and present- than they did- for e4a2ple- in 5ibbon<s bate! Iet this is
not to say that they 6now all there is to 6now- nor- K2ore i2portant- is it to say that
what they 6now has effecti>ely dispelled the i2aginati>e geographical and historical
6nowledge I Kha>e been considering! e need not decide here whether this 6ind of
i2aginati>e 6nowledge infuses history and geography- or whether so2e way it
o>errides the2! 'et us @ust say for the ti2e being that it is there as so2ething 2ore
than what appears to be 2erely positi>e 6nowledge!
Al2ost fro2 earliest ti2es in Europe the 3rient was so2ething 2ore than what
was e2pirically 6nown about it! At least until the Kfly eighteenth century- as #! !
"outhern has so elegantly shown- European understanding of one 6ind of 3riental
culture- the Isla2ic- ignorant but co2ple4!
2*
For certain associations with the East000
not 9uite ignorant- not 9uite infor2ed000always see2 to ha>e
;;
gathered around the notion of an 3rient! Consider first the de2arcation between
3rient and est! It already see2s bold by the ti2e of the /liad. Two of the 2ost
profoundly influential 9ualities associated with the East appear in Aeschylus<s The
Persians, the earliest Athenian play e4tant- and in The 1acchae of Euripides- the >ery
last one e4tant! Aeschylus portrays the sense of disaster o>erco2ing the &ersians
when they learn that their ar2ies- led by %ing \er4es- ha>e been destroyed by the
5ree6s! 1he chorus sings the following ode:
/ow all Asia<s land
Moans in e2ptiness!
\er4es led forth- oh oh^
\er4es destroyed- woe woe^
\er4es< plans ha>e all 2iscarried
In ships of the sea!
hy did .arius then
Bring no har2 to his 2en
hen he led the2 into battle-
1hat belo>ed leader of 2en fro2 "usaL
)7
hat 2atters here is that Asia spea6s through and by >irtue of the European
i2agination- which is depicted as >ictorious o>er Asia- that hostile CotherD world
beyond the seas! 1o Asia are gi>en the feelings of e2ptiness- loss- and disaster that
see2 thereafter to reward 3riental challenges to the estJ and also- the la2ent that in
so2e glorious past Asia fared better- was itself >ictorious o>er Europe!
In The 1acchae, perhaps the 2ost Asiatic of all the Attic dra2as- .ionysus is
e4plicitly connected with his Asian origins and with the strangely threatening
e4cesses of 3riental 2ysteries! &entheus- 6ing of 1hebes- is destroyed by his 2other-
Aga>e- and her fellow bacchantes! (a>ing defied .ionysus by not recogniAing either
his power or his di>inity- &entheus is thus horribly punished- and the play ends with a
general recognition of the eccentric god<s terrible power! Modern co22entators on
The 1acchae ha>e not failed to note the play<s e4traordinary range of intellectual and
aesthetic effectsJ but there has been no escaping the additional historical detail that
Euripides Cwas surely affected by the new aspect that the .ionysiac cults 2ust ha>e
assu2ed in the light of the foreign ecstatic religions of Bendis- Cybele- "abaAius-
Adonis- and Isis- which were introduced fro2 Asia Minor and the 'e>ant and swept
;E
through &iraeus and Athens during the frustrating and increasingly irrational years of
the &eloponnesian ar!D
)1
1he two aspects of the 3rient that set it off fro2 the est in this pair of plays
will re2ain essential 2otifs of European i2aginati>e geography! A line is drawn
between two continents! Europe is powerful and articulateJ Asia is defeated and
distant! Aeschylus represents Asia- 2a6es her spea6 in the person of the aged &ersian
9ueen- \er4es< 2other! It is Europe that articulates the 3rientJ this articulation is the
prerogati>e- not of a puppet 2aster- but of a genuine creator- whose life0gi>ing power
represents- ani2ates- constitutes the otherwise silent and dangerous space beyond
fa2iliar boundaries! 1here is an analogy between Aeschylus<s orchestra- which
contains the Asiatic world as the playwright concei>es it- and the learned en>elope of
3rientalist scholarship- which also will hold in the >ast- a2orphous Asiatic sprawl for
so2eti2es sy2pathetic but always do2inating scrutiny! "econdly- there is the 2otif
of the 3rient as insinuating danger! #ationality is under2ined by Eastern e4cesses-
those 2ysteriously attracti>e opposites to what see2 to be nor2al >alues! 1he
difference separating East fro2 est is sy2boliAed by the sternness with which- at
first- &entheus re@ects the hysterical bacchantes! hen later he hi2self beco2es a
bacchant- he is destroyed not so 2uch for ha>ing gi>en in to .ionysus as for ha>ing
incorrectly assessed .ionysus<s 2enace in the first place! 1he lesson that Euripides
intends is dra2atiAed by the presence in the play of Cad2us and 1iresias-
6nowledgeable older 2en who realiAe that Cso>ereigntyD alone does not rule 2enJ
)2
tyre is such a thing as @udg2ent- they say- which 2eans siAing up correctly the force
of alien powers and e4pertly co2ing to ter2s with the2! (ereafter 3riental 2ysteries
will be ta6en seriously- not last because they challenge the rational estern 2ind to
new e4ercises of its enduring a2bition and power!
But one big di>ision- as between est and 3rient- leads to other s2aller ones-
especially as the nor2al enterprises of ci>iliAation pro>o6e such outgoing acti>ities as
tra>el- con9uest- new e4periences! In classical 5reece and #o2e geographers-
historians- public figures li6e Caesar- orators- and poets added to the fund of
ta4ono2ic lore separating races- regions- nations- and 2inds fro2 each otherJ 2uch
of that was self0ser>ing- and e4isted to pro>e that #o2ans and 5ree6s were superior
to other 6inds of people! But concern with 1he 3rient had its own tradition of
classification and hierarchy! Fro2 at least the second century B!C! on- it was lost on
no tra>eler
;+
or eastward0loo6ing and a2bitious estern potentate that (erodotushistorian-
tra>eler- ine4haustibly curious chronicler0and Ale4ander06ing warrior- scientific
con9ueror0had been in the 3rient before! 1he 3rient was therefore subdi>ided into
real2s pre>iously 6nown- >isited- con9uered- by (erodotus and Ale4ander as well as
their epigones- and those real2s not pre>iously 6nown- >isited- con9uered!
Christianity co2pleted the setting up of 2ain intra03riental spheres: there was a /ear
3rient and a Far 3rient- a fa2iliar 3rient- which #ene 5rousset calls Cl<e2pire du
'e>ant-D
))
and a no>el 3rient! 1he 3rient therefore alternated in the 2ind<s
geography between being an 3ld orld to which one returned- as to Eden or
&aradise- there to set up a new >ersion of the old- and being a wholly new place to
which one ca2e as Colu2bus ca2e to A2erica- in order to set up a /ew orld
Falthough- ironically- Colu2bus hi2self thought that he disco>ered a new part of the
3ld orldG! Certainly neither of these 3rients was purely one thing or the other: it is
their >acillations- their te2pting suggesti>eness- their capacity for entertaining and
confusing the 2ind- that are interesting!
Consider how the 3rient- and in particular the /ear 3rient- beca2e 6nown in the
est as its great co2ple2entary opposite since anti9uity! 1here were the Bible and
the rise of ChristianityJ there were tra>elers li6e Marco &olo who charted the trade
routes and patterned a regulated syste2 of co22ercial e4change- and after hi2
'odo>ico di Barthe2a and &ietro della BalleJ there were fabulists li6e Mande>illeJ
there were the redoubtable con9uering Eastern 2o>e2ents- principally Isla2- of
courseJ there were the 2ilitant pilgri2s- chiefly the Crusaders! Altogether an
internally structured archi>e is built up fro2 the literature that belongs to these
e4periences! 3ut of this co2es a restricted nu2ber of typical encapsulations: the
@ourney- the history- the fable- the stereotype- the pole2ical confrontation! 1hese are
the lenses through which the 3rient is e4perienced- and they shape the language-
perception- and for2 of the encounter between East and est! hat gi>es the
i22ense nu2ber of encounters so2e unity- howe>er- is the >acillation I was
spea6ing about earlier! "o2ething patently foreign and distant ac9uires- for one
reason or another- a status 2ore rather than less fa2iliar! 3ne tends to stop @udging
things either as co2pletely no>el or as co2pletely well 6nownJ a new 2edian
category e2erges- a category that allows one to see new things- things seen for the
first ti2e- as >ersions of a pre>iously 6nown thing!
;,
In essence such a category is not so 2uch a way of recei>ing new infor2ation as it is
a 2ethod of controlling what see2s to be a threat to so2e established >iew of things!
If the 2ind 2ust suddenly deal with what it ta6es to be a radically new for2 of life0as
Isla2 appeared to Europe in the early Middle! Ages0the response on the whole is
conser>ati>e and defensi>e! Isla2 is @udged to be a fraudulent new >ersion of so2e
pre>ious e4perience- in this case Christianity! 1he threat is 2uted- fa2iliar >alues
i2pose the2sel>es- and in the end the 2ind reduces the pressure upon it by acco20
2odating things to itself as either CoriginalD or Crepetitious!D Isla2 thereafter is
ChandledD: its no>elty and its suggesti>eness are brought under control so that
relati>ely nuanced discri2inations are now 2ade that would ha>e been i2possible
had the raw no>elty of Isla2 been left unattended! 1he 3rient at large- therefore-
>acillates between the est<s conte2pt for what is fa2iliar and its shi>ers of delight
in0or fear of0no>elty!
Iet where Isla2 was concerned- European fear- if not always respect- was in
order! After Moha22ed<s death in E)2- the 2ilitary and later the cultural and
religious hege2ony of Isla2 grew enor2ously! First &ersia- "yria- and Egypt- then
1ur6ey- then /orth Africa fell to the Musli2 ar2iesJ in the eighth and ninth centuries
"pain- "icily- and parts of France were con9uered! By the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries Isla2 ruled as far east as India- Indonesia- and China! And to this
e4traordinary assault Europe could respond with >ery little e4cept fear and a 6ind of
awe! Christian authors witnessing the Isla2ic con9uests had scant interest in the
learning- high culture- and fre9uent 2agnificence of the Musli2s- who were- as
5ibbon said- Ccoe>al with the dar6est and 2ost slothful period of European annals!D
FBut with so2e satisfaction he added- Csince the su2 of science has risen in the est-
it should see2 that the 3riental studies ha>e languished and declined!D
)=
G hat
Christians typically felt about the Eastern ar2ies was that they had Call the
appearance of a swar2 of bees- but with a hea>y hand ! ! ! they de>astated
e>erythingD: so wrote Erche2bert- a cleric in Monte Cassino in the ele>enth century!
);
/ot for nothing did Isla2 co2e to sy2boliAe terror- de>astation- the de2onic-
hordes of hated barbarians! For Europe- Isla2 was a lasting trau2a! ?ntil the end of
the se>enteenth century the C3tto2an perilD lur6ed alongside Europe to represent for
the whole of Christian ci>iliAation a constant danger- and in ti2e European
ci>iliAation incorporated that peril and its lore- its great e>ents-
;*
figures- >irtues- and >ices- as so2ething wo>en into the fall of life! In #enaissance
England alone- as "a2uel Chew recounts in his classic study The 2rescent and the
Rose, Ca 2arl of a>erage education and intelligenceD had at his fingertips- and could
atch on the 'ondon stage- a relati>ely large nu2ber of detailed e>ents in the history
of 3tto2an Isla2 and its encroach2ents upon Christian Europe!
)E
1he point is that
what re2ained current about Isla2 was so2e necessarily di2inished >ersion of those
great dangerous forces that it sy2boliAed for Europe! 'i6e alter "cott<s "aracens-
the European representation of the Musli2- 3tto2an- or Arab was always a way of
controlling the redoubtable 3rientJ and to a certain e4tent the sa2e is true of the
2ethods of conte2porary learned 3rientalists- whose sub@ect is not so 2uch the East
itself as the East 2ade 6nown- and therefore less fearso2e- to the estern reading
public!
1here is nothing especially contro>ersial or reprehensible about such
do2estications of the e4oticJ they ta6e place between all cultures- certainly- and
between all 2en! My point- howe>er- is to e2phasiAe the truth that the 3rientalist- as
2uch as anyone in the European est who thought about or e4perienced the 3rient-
perfor2ed this 6ind of 2ental operation! But what is 2ore i2portant still is the
li2ited >ocabulary and i2agery that i2pose the2sel>es as a conse9uence! 1he
reception of Isla2 in the est is a perfect case in point- and has been ad2irably
studied by /or2an .aniel! 3ne constraint acting upon Christian thin6ers who tried to
understand Isla2 was an analogical oneJ since Christ is the basis of Christian faith- it
was assu2ed0009uite incorrectly000 that Moha22ed was to Isla2 as Christ was to
Christianity! (ence the pole2ic na2e CMoha22edanis2D gi>en to Isla2- and the
auto2atic epithet Ci2posterD applied to Moha22ed!
)+
3ut of such and 2any other
2isconceptions Cthere for2ed a circle which was ne>er bro6en by i2aginati>e
e4teriorisation ! ! ! ! 1he Christian concept of Isla2 was integral and self0sufficient!D
),
Isla2 beca2e an i2age the word is .aniel<s but it see2s to 2e to ha>e re2ar6able
i2plications for 3rientalis2 in general whose function was not so 2uch to represent
Isla2 in itself as to represent it for the 2edie>al Christian!
1he in>ariable tendency to neglect what the Hur<an 2eant- or what Musli2s
thought it 2eant- or what Musli2s thought or did in any gi>en circu2stances-
necessarily i2plies that Hur<anic and other Isla2ic doctrine was presented in a
for2 that would con>ince
E7
ChristiansJ and 2ore and 2ore e4tra>agant for2s would stand a chance of
acceptance as the distance of the writers and public fro2 the Isla2ic border
increased! It was with >ery great reluctance that what Musli2s said Musli2s
belie>ed was accepted as what they did belie>e! 1here was a Christian picture in
which the details Fe>en under the pressure of factsG were abandoned as little as
possible- and in which the general outline was ne>er abandoned! 1here were
shades of difference- but only with a co22on fra2ewor6! All the corrections that
were 2ade in the interests of an increasing accuracy were only a defence of what
had newly been realised to be >ulnerable- a shoring up of a wea6ened structure!
Christian opinion was an erection which could not be de2olished- e>en to be
rebuilt!
)*
1his rigorous Christian picture of Isla2 was intensified in innu2erable ways-
including0during the Middle Ages and early #enaissance0a large >ariety of poetry-
learned contro>ersy- and popular superstition!
=7
By this ti2e the /ear 3rient had been
all but incorporated in the co22on world0picture of 'atin Christianity 0as in the
2hanson de Roland the worship of "aracens is portrayed as e2bracing Maho2et and
Apollo! By the 2iddle of the fifteenth century- as #! ! "outhern has brilliantly
shown- it beca2e apparent to serious European thin6ers Cthat so2ething would ha>e
to be done about Isla2-D which had turned the situation around so2ewhat by itself
arri>ing 2ilitarily in Eastern Europe! "outhern recounts a dra2atic episode between
1=;7 and 1=E7 when four learned 2en- John of "ego>ia- /icholas of Cusa- Jean
5er2ain- and Aeneas "il>ius F&ius IIG- atte2pted to deal with Isla2 through
contra#erentia, or Cconference!D 1he idea was John of "ego>ia<s: it was to ha>e been
a staged conference with Isla2 in which Christians atte2pted the wholesale
con>ersion of Musli2s! C(e saw the conference as an instru2ent with a political as
well as a strictly religious function- and in words which will stri6e a chord in 2odern
breasts he e4clai2ed that e>en if it were to last ten years it would be less e4pensi>e
and less da2aging than war!D 1here was no agree2ent between the four 2en- but the
episode is crucial for ha>ing been a fairly sophisticated atte2pt0part of a general
European atte2pt fro2 Bede to 'uther0to put a representati>e 3rient in front of
Europe- to stage the 3rient and Europe together in so2e coherent way- the idea being
for Christians to 2a6e it clear to Musli2s that Isla2 was @ust a 2isguided >ersion of
Christianity! "outhern<s conclusion follows:
E1
Most conspicuous to us is the inability of any of these syste2s of thought
YEuropean ChristianZ to pro>ide a fully satisfying e4planation of the pheno2enon
they had set out to e4plain YIsla2Z 0still less to influence the course of practical
e>ents in a decisi>e way! At a practical le>el- e>ents ne>er turned out either so
well or so ill as the 2ost intelligent obser>ers predictedJ and it is perhaps worth
noticing that they ne>er turned out better than when the best @udges confidently
e4pected a happy ending! as there any progress Yin Christian 6nowledge of
Isla2ZL I 2ust e4press 2y con>iction that there was! E>en if the solution of the
proble2 re2ained obstinately hidden fro2 sight- the state2ent of the proble2
beca2e 2ore co2ple4- 2ore rational- and 2ore related to e4perience!!!! 1he
scholars who labored at the proble2 of Isla2 in the Middle Ages failed to find
the solution they sought and desiredJ but they de>eloped habits of 2ind and
powers of co2prehension which- in other 2en and in other fields- 2ay yet
deser>e success!
=1
1he best part of "outhern<s analysis- here and elsewhere in his brief history of
estern >iews of Isla2- is his de2onstration that it is finally estern ignorance
which beco2es 2ore refined and co2ple4- not so2e body of positi>e estern
6nowledge which increases in siAe and accuracy! For fictions ha>e their own logic
and their own dialectic of growth or decline! 3nto the character of Moha22ed in the
Middle Ages was heaped a bundle of attributes that corresponded to the Ccharacter of
the Ytwelfth0centuryZ prophets of the KFree "pirit< who did actually arise in Europe-
and clai2 credence and collect followers!D "i2ilarly- since Moha22ed was >iewed
as the disse2inator of a false #e>elation- he beca2e as well the epito2e of lechery-
debauchery- sodo2y- and a whole battery of assorted treacheries- all of which deri>ed
ClogicallyD fro2 his doctrinal i2postures!
=2
1hus the 3rient ac9uired representati>es-
so to spea6- and representations- each one 2ore concrete- 2ore internally congruent
with so2e estern e4igency- than the ones that preceded it! It is as if- ha>ing once
settled on the 3rient as a locale suitable for incarnating the infinite in a finite shape-
Europe could not stop the practiceJ the 3rient and the 3riental- Arab- Isla2ic- Indian-
Chinese- or whate>er- beco2e repetitious pseudoincarnations of so2e great original
FChrist- Europe- the estG they were supposed to ha>e been i2itating! 3nly the
source of these rather narcissistic estern ideas about the 3rient changed in ti2e- not
their character! 1hus we will find it co22only belie>ed in the
E2
twelfth and thirteenth centuries that Arabia was Con the fringe of the Christian world-
a natural asylu2 for heretical outlaws-D
=)
and that Moha22ed was a cunning
apostate- whereas in the twentieth century an 3rientalist scholar- an erudite specialist-
will be the one to point out how Isla2 is really no 2ore than second0order Arian
heresy!
==
3ur initial description of 3rientalis2 as a learned field now ac9uires a new
concreteness! A field is often an enclosed space! 1he idea of representation is a
theatrical one: the 3rient is the stage on which the whole East is confined! 3n this
stage will appear figures whose role it is to represent the larger whole fro2 which
they e2anate! 1he 3rient then see2s to be- not an unli2ited e4tension beyond the
fa2iliar European world- but rather a closed field- a theatrical stage affi4ed to
Europe! An 3rientalist is but the particular specialist in 6nowledge for which Europe
at large is responsible- in the way that an audience is historically and culturally
responsible for Fand responsi>e toG dra2as technically put together by the dra2atist!
In the depths of this 3riental stage stands a prodigious cultural repertoire whose
indi>idual ite2s e>o6e a fabulously rich world: the "phin4- Cleopatra- Eden- 1roy-
"odo2 and 5o2orrah- Astarte- Isis and 3siris- "heba- Babylon- the 5enii- the Magi-
/ine>eh- &rester John- Maho2et- and doAens 2oreJ settings- in so2e cases na2es
only- half0i2agined- half06nownJ 2onsters- de>ils- heroesJ terrors- pleasures- desires!
1he European i2agination was nourished e4tensi>ely fro2 this repertoire: between
the Middle Ages and the eighteenth century such 2a@or authors as Ariosto- Milton-
Marlowe- 1asso- "ha6espeare- Cer>antes- and the authors of the 2hanson de Roland
and the Poema del 2id drew on the 3rient<s riches for their productions- in ways that
sharpened the outlines of i2agery- ideas- and figures populating it! In addition- a great
deal of what was considered learned 3rientalist scholarship in Europe pressed
ideological 2yths into ser>ice- e>en as 6nowledge see2ed genuinely to be ad>ancing!
A celebrated instance of how dra2atic for2 and learned i2agery co2e together
in the 3rientalist theater is BarthPle2y d<(erbelot<s 1iblioth03ue orientale, published
posthu2ously in 1E*+- with a preface by Antoine 5alland! 1he introduction of the
recent 2ambridge .istory o# /slam considers the 1iblioth-3ue, along with 5eorge
"ale<s preli2inary discourse to his translation of the %oran F1+)=G and "i2on
3c6ley<s .istory o# the 4aracens F1+7,- 1+1,G- to be Chighly i2portantD in widening
Cthe new understanding of Isla2D
E)
and con>eying it Cto a less acade2ic readership!D
=;
1his inade9uately describes
d<(erbelot<s wor6- which was not restricted to Isla2 as "ale<s and 3c6ley<s were!
ith the e4ception of Johann (! (ottinger<s (istoria "rientalis, which appeared in
1E;1- the 1iblioth03ue re2ained the standard reference wor6 in Europe until the early
nineteenth century! Its scope was truly epochal! 5alland- who was the first European
translator of The Thousand and "ne Nights and an Arabist of note- contrasted
d<(erbelot<s achie>e2ent with e>ery prior one by noting the prodigious range of his
enterprise! .<(erbelot read a great nu2ber of wor6s- 5alland said- in Arabic- &ersian-
and 1ur6ish- with the result that he was able to find out about 2atters hitherto
concealed fro2 Europeans!
=E
After first co2posing a dictionary of these three
3riental languages- d<(erbelot went on to study 3riental history- theology-
geography- science- and art- in both their fabulous and their truthful >arieties!
1hereafter he decided to co2pose two wor6s- one a biblioth03ue, or Clibrary-D an
alphabetically arranged dictionary- the second a #loril0ge, or anthology! 3nly the first
part was co2pleted!
5alland<s account of the 1iblioth03ue stated that CorientaleD was planned to
include principally the 'e>ant- although05alland says ad2iringly0the ti2e period
co>ered did not begin only with the creation of Ada2 and end with the Cte2ps o_
nous so22esD: d<(erbelot went e>en further bac6- to a ti2e described as Cplus hautD
in fabulous histories0to the long period of the preAda2ite "oli2ans! As 5alland<s
description proceeds- we learn that the 1iblioth03ue was li6e Cany otherD history of
the world- for what it atte2pted was a co2plete co2pendiu2 of the 6nowledge
a>ailable on such 2atters as the Creation- the .eluge- the destruction of Babel- and so
forth0with the difference that d<(erbelot<s sources were 3riental! (e di>ided history
into two types- sacred and profane Fthe Jews and Christians in the first- the Musli2s
in the secondG- and two periods- pre0 and postdilu>ian! 1hus d<(erbelot was able to
discuss such widely di>ergent histories as the Mogul- the 1artar- the 1ur6ish- and the
"la>onicJ he too6 in as well all the pro>inces of the Musli2 E2pire- fro2 the
E4tre2e 3rient to the &illars of (ercules- with their custo2s- rituals- traditions-
co22entaries- dynasties- palaces- ri>ers- and flora! "uch a wor6- e>en though it
included so2e attention to Cla doctrine per>erse de Maho2et- 9ui a cause si grands
do22ages au Christianis2e-D was 2ore capaciously thorough than any wor6 before
it! 5alland concluded his
E=
C.iscoursD by assuring the reader at length that d<(erbelot<s 1iblioth03ue was
uni9uely Cutile et agr]ableDJ other 3rientalists- li6e &ostel- "caliger- 5olius- &oc6o6e-
and Erpenius- produced 3rientalist studies that were too narrowly gra22atical-
le4icographigal- geographical- or the li6e! 3nly d<(erbelot was able to write a wor6!
capable of con>incing European readers that the study of 3riental culture was 2ore
than @ust than6less and fruitless: only d<(erbelot- according to 5alland- atte2pted to
for2 in the 2inds o# his readers a sufficiently a2ple idea of what it 2eant to 6now
and study the 3rient- an idea that would both fill the 2ind and satisfy one<s great-
pre>iously concei>ed e4pectations!<<
In such efforts as d<(erbelot<s- Europe disco>ered its capacities for
enco2passing and 3rientaliAing the 3rient! A certain sense of superiority appears
here and there in what 5alland had to say about about his and d<(erbelot<s materia
orientalia5 as in the wor6 of se>enteenth0century geographers li6e #aphael du Mans-
Europeans :could percei>e that the 3rient was being outstripped and outdated by
estern science!
=,
But what beco2es e>ident is not only the ad>antage of a estern
perspecti>e: there is also the triu2phant techni9ue #or ta6ing the i22ense fecundity
of the 3rient and 2a6ing if syste2atically- e>en alphabetically- 6nowable by estern
lay2en! hen 5alland said of d<(erbelot that he satisfied one<s e4pectations he
2eant- I thin6- that the 1iblioth03ue did not atte2pt to re>ise co22only recei>ed
ideas about the 3rient! For what the 3rientalist does is to con#irm the 3rient in his
readers< eyesJ he neither #ries nor wants to unsettle already fir2 con>ictions! All the
Biblioth]9ue orientale did was represent the 3rient 2ore fully and More clearlyJ
what 2ay ha>e been a loose collection of randy ac9uired facts concerning >aguely
'e>antine history- Biblical i2agery- Isla2ic culture- place na2es- and so on were
tranfor2ed into a rational 3riental panora2a- fro2 A to R! ?nder the entry #or
Moha22ed- d<(erbelot first supplied all of the Prophets given na2es- then
proceeded to confir2 Moha22ed<s ideological and doctrinal >alue as follows:
C<est le fa2eu4 i2posteur Maho2et- Auteur et Fondateur d<une hPrPsie- 9ui a
pris le no2 de religion- 9ue noun appellons Maho2etane!BoyeA le titre d<Esla2!
'es Interpr]tes de l<Alcoran et autres .octeurs de la 'oy Musul2ane ou
Maho2etane ont appli9uP V ce fau4 proph]te tous les -loges- 9uo les Ariens-
&aulitiens ou &aulianistes $ autres (PrPti9ues oat attribuP A JPsus0Christ- en lui
`tant sa .i>initP ! !!
=*
E;
F1his is the fa2ous i2poster Maho2et- Author and Founder of a heresy-
which has ta6en on the na2e of religion- which we call Moha22edan! "ee entry
under Isla2!
1he interpreters of the Alcoran and other .octors of Musli2 or
Moha22edan 'aw ha>e applied to this false prophet all the praises which the
Arians- &aulicians or &aulianists- and other (eretics ha>e attributed to Jesus
Christ- while stripping hi2 of his .i>inity ! ! ! ! G
CMoha22edanD is the rele>ant Fand insultingG European designationJ CIsla2-D
which happens to be the correct Musli2 na2e- is relegated to another entry! 1he
Cheresy ! ! ! which we call Moha22edanD is CcaughtD as the i2itation of a Christian
i2itation of true religion! 1hen- in the long historical account of Moha22ed<s life-
d<(erbelot can turn to 2ore or less straight narrati>e! But it is the placing of
Moha22ed that counts in the 1iblioth03ue. 1he dangers of free0wheeling heresy are
re2o>ed when it is transfor2ed into ideologically e4plicit 2atter for an alphabetical
ite2! Moha22ed no longer roa2s the Eastern world as a threatening- i22oral
debaucheeJ he sits 9uietly on his Fad2ittedly pro2inentG portion of the 3rientalist
stage!
;7
(e< is gi>en a genealogy- an e4planation- e>en a de>elop2ent- all of which
are subsu2ed under the si2ple state2ents that pre>ent hi2 fro2 straying elsewhere!
"uch Ci2agesD of the 3rient as this are i2ages in that they represent or stand for
a >ery large entity- otherwise i2possibly diffuse- which they enable one to grasp or
see! 1hey are also characters, related to such types as the braggarts- 2isers- or
gluttons produced by 1heophrastus- 'a Bruy]re- or "elden! &erhaps it is not e4actly
correct to say that one sees such characters as the miles gloriosus or Maho2et the
i2poster- since the discursi>e confine2ent of a character is supposed at best to let one
apprehend a generic type without difficulty or a2biguity! .<(erbelot<s character of
Maho2et is an image, howe>er- because the false prophet is part of a general
theatrical representation called orientale whose totality is contained in the
1iblioth03ue.
1he didactic 9uality of the 3rientalist representation cannot be detached fro2 the
rest of the perfor2ance! In a learned wor6 li6e the 1iblioth03ue orientate, which was
the result of syste2atic study and research- the author i2poses a disciplinary order
upon the 2aterial he has wor6ed onJ in addition- he wants it 2ade clear to the reader
that what the printed page deli>ers is an ordered- disciplined @udg2ent of the 2aterial!
hat is thus con>eyed by
EE
the 1iblioth03ue is an idea of 3rientalis2<s power and effecti>eness- which
e>erywhere re2ind the reader that henceforth in order to get at the 3rient he 2ust
pass through the learned grids and codes pro>ided by the 3rientalist! /ot only is the
3rient acco22odated to the 2oral e4igencies of estern ChristianityJ it is also
circu2scribed by a series of attitudes and @udg2ents that send the estern 2ind- not
first to 3riental sources for correction and >erification- but rather to other 3rientalist
wor6s! 1he 3rientalist stage- as I ha>e been calling it- beco2es a syste2 of 2oral and
episte2ological rigor! As a discipline representing institutionaliAed estern
6nowledge of the 3rient- 3rientalis2 thus co2es to e4ert a three0way force- on the
3rient- on the 3rientalist- and on the estern Cconsu2erD of 3rientalis2! It would be
wrong- I thin6- to underesti2ate the strength of the three0way relationship thus
established! For the 3rient FCout thereD towards the EastG is corrected- e>en penaliAed-
for lying outside the boundaries of European society- CourD worldJ the 3rient is thus
"rientali6ed, a process that not only 2ar6s the 3rient as the pro>ince of the
3rientalist but also forces the uninitiated estern reader to accept 3rientalist
codifications Fli6e d<(erbelot<s alphabetiAed 1iblioth03ue+ as the true 3rient! 1ruth-
in short- beco2es a function of learned @udg2ent- not of the 2aterial itself- which in
ti2e see2s to owe e>en its e4istence to the 3rientalist!
1his whole didactic process is neither difficult to understand nor difficult to
e4plain! 3ne ought again to re2e2ber that all cultures i2pose corrections upon raw
reality- changing it fro2 free0floating ob@ects into units of 6nowledge! 1he proble2 is
not that con>ersion ta6es place! It is perfectly natural for the hu2an 2ind to resist the
assault on it of untreated strangenessJ therefore cultures ha>e always been inclined to
i2pose co2plete transfor2ations on other cultures- recei>ing these other cultures not
as they are but as- for the benefit of the recei>er- they ought to be! 1o the esterner-
howe>er- the 3riental was always like so2e aspect of the estJ to so2e of the
5er2an #o2antics- for e4a2ple- Indian religion was essentially an 3riental >ersion
of 5er2ano0Christian pantheis2! Iet the 3rientalist 2a6es it his wor6 to be always
con>erting the 3rient fro2 so2ething into so2ething else: he does this for hi2self-
for the sa6e of his culture- in so2e cases for what he belie>es is the sa6e of the
3riental! 1his process of con>ersion is a disciplined one: it is taught- it has its own
societies- periodicals- traditions- >ocabulary- rhetoric- all in basic ways connected to
E+
and supplied by the pre>ailing cultural and political nor2s of the est! And- as I
shall de2onstrate- it tends to beco2e 2ore rather than less total in what it tries to do-
so 2uch so that as one sur>eys 3rientalis2 in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries
the o>erriding i2pression is of 3rientalis2<s insensiti>e sche2atiAation of the entire
3rient!
(ow early this sche2atiAation began is clear fro2 the e4a2ples I ha>e gi>en of
estern representations of the 3rient in classical 5reece! (ow strongly articulated
were later representations building on the earlier ones- how inordinately careful their
sche2atiAation- how dra2atically effecti>e their placing in estern i2aginati>e
geography- can be illustrated if we turn now to .ante<s /n#erno. .ante<s achie>e2ent
in The Divine 2omedy was to ha>e sea2lessly co2bined the realistic portrayal of
2undane reality with a uni>ersal and eternal syste2 of Christian >alues! hat .ante
the pilgri2 sees as he wal6s through the Inferno- &urgatorio- and &aradiso is a uni9ue
>ision of @udg2ent! &aolo and Francesca- for instance- are seen as eternally confined
to hell for their sins- yet they are seen as enacting- indeed li>ing- the >ery characters
and actions that put the2 where they will be for eternity! 1hus each of the figures in
.ante<s >ision not only represents hi2self but is also a typical representation of his
character and the fate 2eted out to hi2!
CMao2ettoD 0 Moha22ed 0 turns up in canto 2, of the /n#erno. (e is located in
the eighth of the nine circles of (ell- in the ninth of the ten Bolgias of Malebolge- a
circle of gloo2y ditches surrounding "atan<s stronghold in (ell! 1hus before .ante
reaches Moha22ed- he passes through circles containing people whose sins are of a
lesser order: the lustful- the a>aricious- the gluttonous- the heretics- the wrathful- the
suicidal- the blasphe2ous! After Moha22ed there are only the falsifiers and the
treacherous Fwho include Judas- Brutus- and CassiusG before one arri>es at the >ery
botto2 of (ell- which is where "atan hi2self is to be found! Moha22ed thus
belongs to a rigid hierarchy of e>ils- in the category of what .ante calls seminator di
scandalo a di scisma. Moha22ed<s punish2ent- which is also his eternal fate- is a
peculiarly disgusting one: he is endlessly being cleft in two fro2 his chin to his anus
li6e- .ante says- a cas6 whose sta>es are ripped apart! .ante<s >erse at this point
spares the reader none of the eschatological detail that so >i>id a punish2ent entails:
Moha22ed<s entrails and his e4cre2ent are described with unflinching accuracy!
Moha22ed e4plains his
E,
punish2ent to .ante- pointing as well to Ali- who precedes hi2 in the line of sinners
who2 the attendant de>il is splitting in twoJ he also as6s .ante to warn one Fra
.olcino- a renegade priest whose sect ad>ocated co22unity of wo2en and goods
and who was accused of ha>ing a 2istress- of what will be in store for hi2! It will not
ha>e been lost on the reader that .ante saw a parallel between .olcino<s and
Moha22ed<s re>olting sensuality- and also between their pretensions to theological
e2inence!
But this is not all that .ante has to say about Isla2! Earlier in the /n#erno, a s2all
group of Musli2s turns up! A>icenna- A>erroas- and "aladin are a2ong those
>irtuous heathens who- along with (ector- Aeneas- Abraha2- "ocrates- &lato- and
Aristotle- are confined to the first circle of the Inferno- there to suffer a 2ini2al Fand
e>en honorableG punish2ent for not ha>ing had the benefit of Christian re>elation!
.ante- of course- ad2ires their great >irtues and acco2plish2ents- but because they
were- not Christians he 2ust conde2n the2- howe>er lightly- to (ell! Eternity is a
great le>eler of distinctions- it is true- but the special anachronis2s and ano2alies of
putting pre0Christian lu2inaries in the sa2e category of CheathenD da2nation with
post0Christian Musli2s does not trouble .ante! E>en though the %oran specifies
Jesus as a prophet- .ante chooses to consider the great Musli2 philosophers and 6ing
as ha>ing been funda2entally ignorant of Christianity! 1hat they can also inhabit the
sa2e distinguished le>el as the heroes and sages of classical anti9uity is an ahistorical
>ision si2ilar to #aphael<s in his fresco The 4chool o# $thens, in which A>erroas rubs
elbows on the acade2y floor with "ocrates and &lato Fsi2ilar to FPnelon<s Dialogues
des morts 7&899'&8&:;, where a discussion ta6es place between "ocrates and
ConfuciusG!
1he discri2inations and refine2ents of .ante<s poetic grasp of Isla2 are an
instance of the sche2atic- al2ost cos2ological ine>itability with which Isla2 and its
designated representati>es are creatures of estern geographical- historical- and
abo>e all- 2oral apprehension! E2pirical data about the 3rient or about any of its
parts count for >ery littleJ what 2atters and is decisi>e is what I ha>e been calling the
3rientalist >ision- a >ision by no 2eans confined to the professional scholar- but
rather the co22on possession of all who ha>e thought about the 3rient in the est!
.anie<s powers as a poet intensify- 2a6e 2ore rather than less representati>e- these
perspecti>es on the 3rient! Moha22ed- "aladin-
E*
A>erroas- and A>icenna are fi4ed in a >isionary cos2ology0fi4ed- laid out- bo4ed in-
i2prisoned- without 2uch regard for anything e4cept their CfunctionD and the
patterns they realiAe on the stage on which they appear! Isaiah Berlin has described
the effect of such attitudes in the following way:
In Ysuch aZ ! ! ! cos2ology the world of 2en Fand- in so2e >ersions- the entire
uni>erseG is a single- all0inclusi>e hierarchyJ so that to e4plain why each ob@ect in
it is as- and where- and when it is- and does what it does- is eo ipso to say what its
goal is- how far it successfully fulfills it- and what are the relations of
coordination and subordination between the goals of the >arious goal0pursuing
entities in the har2onious pyra2id which they collecti>ely for2!If this is a true
picture of reality- then historical e4planation- li6e e>ery other for2 of
e4planation- 2ust consist- abo>e all- in the attribution of indi>iduals- groups-
nations- species- each to its own proper place in the uni>ersal pattern! 1o 6now
the Ccos2icD place of a thing or a person is to say what it is and what it does- and
at the sa2e ti2e why it should be and do as it is and does! (ence to be and to
ha>e >alue- to e4ist and to ha>e a function Fand to fulfill it 2ore or less
successfullyG are one and the sa2e! 1he pattern- and it alone- brings into being
and causes to pass away and confers purpose- that is to say- >alue and 2eaning-
on all there is! 1o understand is to percei>e patterns ! ! ! ! 1he 2ore ine>itable an
e>ent or an action or a character can be e4hibited as being- the better it has been
understood- the profounder the researcher<s insight- the nearer we are to the one
ulti2ate truth! 1his attitude is profoundly anti0e2pirical!
;1
And so- indeed- is the 3rientalist attitude in general! It shares with 2agic and
with 2ythology the self0containing- self0reinforcing character of a closed syste2- in
which ob@ects are what they are because they are what they are- for once- for all ti2e-
for ontological reasons that no e2pirical 2aterial can either dislodge or alter! 1he
European encounter with the 3rient- and specifically with Isla2- strengthened this
syste2 of representing the 3rient and- as has been suggested by (enri &irenne- turned
Isla2 into the >ery epito2e of an outsider against which the whole of European
ci>iliAation fro2 the Middle Ages on was founded! 1he decline of the #o2an E2pire
as a result of the barbarian in>asions had the parado4ical effect of incorporating
barbarian ways into #o2an and Mediterranean culture- #o2aniaJ whereas- &irenne
argues- the conse9uence of the Isla2ic
+7
in>asions beginning in the se>enth century was to 2o>e the center of European
culture away fro2 the Mediterranean- which was then an Arab pro>ince- and towards
the /orth! C5er2anis2 began to play its part in history! (itherto the #o2an tradition
had been uninterrupted! /ow an original #o2ano05er2anic ci>iliAation was about to
de>elop!D Europe was shut in on itself: the 3rient- when it was not 2erely a place in
which one traded- was culturally- intellectually- spiritually outside Europe and
European ci>iliAation- which- in &irenne<s words- beca2e Cone great Christian
co22unity- coter2inous with the ecclesia . . . . The 3ccident was now li>ing its own
life!D
;2
In .ante<s poe2- in the wor6 of &eter the Benerable and other Cluniac
3rientalists- in the writings of the Christian pole2icists against Isla2 fro2 5uibert of
/ogent and Bede to #oger Bacon- illia2 of 1ripoli- Burchard of Mount "yon- and
'uther- in the Poema del 2id, in the 2hanson de Roland, and in "ha6espeare<s
"thello Fthat Cabuser of the worldDG- the 3rient and Isla2 are always represented as
outsiders ha>ing a special role to play inside Europe!
I2aginati>e geography- fro2 the >i>id portraits to be found in the /n#erno to the
prosaic niches of d<(erbelot<s 1iblioth03ue orientale, legiti2ates a >ocabulary- a
uni>erse of representati>e discourse peculiar to the discussion and understanding of
Isla2 and of the 3rient! hat this discourse considers to be a fact0that Moha22ed is
an i2poster- for e4a2ple0is a co2ponent of the discourse- a state2ent the discourse
co2pels one to 2a6e whene>er the na2e Moha22ed occurs! ?nderlying all the
different units of 3rientalist discourse0by which I 2ean si2ply the >ocabulary
e2ployed whene>er the 3rient is spo6en or written about0is a set of representati>e
figures- or tropes! 1hese figures are to the actual 3rient 0or Isla2- which is 2y 2ain
concern hereas styliAed costu2es are to characters in a playJ they are li6e- for
e4a2ple- the cross that E>ery2an will carry- or the particolored costu2e worn by
(arle9uin in a commedia dellarte play! In other words- we need not loo6 for
correspondence between the language used to depict the 3rient and the 3rient itself-
not so 2uch because the language is inaccurate but because it is not e>en trying to be
accurate! hat it is trying to do- as .ante tried to do in the /n#erno, is at one and the
sa2e ti2e to characteriAe the 3rient as alien and to incorporate it sche2atically on a
theatrical stage whose audience- 2anager- and actors are #or Europe-
+1
and only for Europe! (ence the >acillation between the fa2iliar and the alienJ
Moha22ed is always the i2poster Ffa2iliar- because he pretends to be li6e the Jesus
we 6nowG and always the 3riental Falien- because although he is in so2e ways Cli6eD
Jesus- he is after all not li6e hi2G!
#ather than listing all the figures of speech associated with the 3rient0its
strangeness- its difference- its e4otic sensuousness- and so forth0we can generaliAe
about the2 as they were handed down through the #enaissance! 1hey are all
declarati>e and self0e>identJ the tense they e2ploy is the ti2eless eternalJ they
con>ey an i2pression of repetition and strengthJ they are always sy22etrical to- and
yet dia2etrically inferior to- a European e9ui>alent- which is so2eti2es specified-
so2eti2es not! For all these functions it is fre9uently enough to use the si2ple copula
is! 1hus- Moha22ed is an i2poster- the >ery phrase canoniAed in d<(erbelot<s
1iblioth03ue and dra2atiAed in a sense by .ante! /o bac6ground need be gi>enJ the
e>idence necessary to con>ict Moha22ed is contained in the CisD 3ne does not
9ualify the phrase- neither does it see2 necessary to say that Moha22ed was an
i2poster- nor need one consider for a 2o2ent that it 2ay not be necessary to repeat
the state2ent! It is repeated- he is an i2poster- and each ti2e one says it- he beco2es
2ore of an i2poster and the author of the state2ent gains a little 2ore authority in
ha>ing declared it! 1hus (u2phrey &rideau4<s fa2ous se>enteenth0century
biography of Moha22ed is subtitled The True Nature o# /mposture. Finally- of
course- such categories as i2poster For 3riental- for that 2atterG i2ply- indeed
re9uire- an opposite that is neither fraudulently so2ething else nor endlessly in need
of e4plicit identification! And that opposite is C3ccidental-D or in Moha22ed<s case-
Jesus!
&hilosophically- then- the 6ind of language- thought- and >ision that I ha>e been
calling 3rientalis2 >ery generally is a for2 of radical realis2J anyone e2ploying
3rientalis2- which is the habit for dealing with 9uestions- ob@ects- 9ualities- and
regions dee2ed 3riental- will designate- na2e- point to- fi4 what he is tal6ing or
thin6ing about with a word or phrase- which then is considered either to ha>e
ac9uired- or 2ore si2ply to be- reality! #hetorically spea6ing- 3rientalis2 is
absolutely anato2ical and enu2erati>e: to use its >ocabulary is to engage in the
particulariAing and di>iding of things 3riental into 2anageable parts!
&sychologically- 3rientalis2 is a for2 of paranoia- 6nowledge of another 6ind- say-
fro2 ordinary historical 6nowledge! 1hese are a few of the results-
+2
I thin6- of i2aginati>e geography and of the dra2atic boundaries it draws! 1here are
so2e specifically 2odern trans2utations of these 3rientaliAed results- howe>er- to
which I 2ust now turn!
III
(ro)ects
It is necessary to e4a2ine the 2ore fla2boyant operational successes of
3rientalis2 if only to @udge how e4actly wrong Fand how totally opposite to the truthG
was the grandly 2enacing idea e4pressed by Michelet- that Cthe 3rient ad>ances-
in>incible- fatal to the gods of light by the char2 of its drea2s- by the 2agic of its
chiaroscuro!D
;)
Cultural- 2aterial- and intellectual relations between Europe and the
3rient ha>e gone through innu2erable phases- e>en though the line between East and
est has 2ade a certain constant i2pression upon Europe! Iet in general it was the
est that 2o>ed upon the East- not >ice >ersa! 3rieritalis2 is the generic ter2 that I
ha>e been e2ploying to describe the estern approach to the 3rientJ 3rientalis2 is
the discipline by which the 3rient was Fand isG approached syste2atically- as a topic
of learning- disco>ery- and practice! But in addition I ha>e been using the word to
designate that collection of drea2s- i2ages- and >ocabularies a>ailable to anyone
who has tried to tal6 about what lies east of the di>iding line! 1hese two aspects of
3rientalis2 are not incongruent- since by use of the2 both Europe could ad>ance
securely and un2etaphorically upon the 3rient! (ere I should li6e principally to
consider 2aterial e>idence of this ad>ance!
Isla2 e4cepted- the 3rient for Europe was until the nineteenth century a do2ain
with a continuous history of unchallenged estern do2inance! 1his is patently true
of the British e4perience in India- the &ortuguese e4perience in the East Indies-
China- and Japan- and the French and Italian e4periences in >arious regions of the
3rient! 1here were occasional instances of nati>e intransigence to disturb the idyll- as
when in 1E),01E)* a group of Japanese Christians threw the &ortuguese out of the
areaJ by and large- howe>er- only the Arab and Isla2ic 3rient presented Europe with
an
+)
unresol>ed challenge on the political- intellectual- and for a ti2e- econo2ic le>els!
For 2uch of its history- then- 3rientalis2 carries within it the sta2p of a proble2atic
European attitude towards Isla2- and it is this acutely sensiti>e aspect of 3rientalis2
around which 2y interest in this study turns!
.oubtless Isla2 was a real pro>ocation in 2any ways! It lay uneasily close to
Christianity- geographically and culturally! It drew on the Judeo0(ellenic traditions- it
borrowed creati>ely fro2 Christianity- it could boast of unri>aled 2ilitary and
political successes!/or was this all! 1he Isla2ic lands sit ad@acent to and e>en on top
of the Biblical landsJ 2oreo>er- the heart of the Isla2ic do2ain has always been the
region closest to Europe- what has been called the /ear 3rient or /ear East! Arabic
and (ebrew are "e2itic languages- and together they dispose and redispose of
2aterial that is urgently i2portant to Christianity! Fro2 the end of the se>enth
century until the battle of 'epanto in 1;+1- Isla2 in either its Arab- 3tto2an- or
/orth African and "panish for2 do2inated or effecti>ely threatened European
Christianity! 1hat Isla2 outstripped and outshone #o2e cannot ha>e been absent
fro2 the 2ind of any European past or present! E>en 5ibbon was no e4ception- as is
e>ident in the following passage fro2 the .ecline and !all<
In the >ictorious days of the #o2an republic it had been the ai2 of the senate
to confine their councils and legions to a single war- and co2pletely to suppress a
first ene2y before they pro>o6ed the hostilities of a second! 1hese ti2id 2a4i2s
of policy were disdained by the 2agnani2ity or enthusias2 of the Arabian
caliphs! ith the sa2e >igour and success they in>aded the successors of
Augustus and Arta4er4esJ and the ri>al 2onarchies at the sa2e instant beca2e
the prey of an ene2y who2 they had so long been accusto2ed to despise! In the
ten years of the ad2inistration of 32ar- the "aracens reduced to his obedience
thirty0si4 thousand cities or castles- destroyed four thousand churches or te2ples
of the unbelie>ers- and edified fourteen hundred 2oschs for the e4ercise of the
religion of Moha22ed! 3ne hundred years after his flight fro2 Mecca the ar2s
and reign of his successors e4tended fro2 India to the Atlantic 3cean- o>er the
>arious and distant pro>inces ! ! ! !
;=
hen the ter2 3rient was not si2ply a synony2 for the Asiatic East as a whole- or
ta6en as generally denoting the distant and e4otic- it was 2ost rigorously understood
as applying to the Isla2ic 3rient!
+=
1his C2ilitantD 3rient ca2e to stand for what (enri Baudet has called Cthe Asiatic
tidal wa>e!D
;;
Certainly this was the case in Europe through the 2iddle of the
eighteenth century- the point at which repositories of C3rientalD 6nowledge li6e
d<(erbelot<s 1iblioth03ue orientale stop 2eaning pri2arily Isla2- the Arabs- or the
3tto2ans! ?ntil that ti2e cultural 2e2ory ga>e understandable pro2inence to such
relati>ely distant e>ents as the fall of Constantinople- the Crusades- and the con9uest
of "icily and "pain- but if these signified the 2enacing 3rient they did not at the
sa2e ti2e efface what re2ained of Asia!
For there was always India- where- after &ortugal pioneered the first bases of
European presence in the early si4teenth century- Europe- and pri2arily England after
a long period Ffro2 1E77 to 1+;,G of essentially co22ercial acti>ity- do2inated
politically as an occupying force! Iet India itself ne>er pro>ided an indigenous threat
to Europe! #ather it was because nati>e authority cru2bled there and opened the land
to inter0European ri>alry and to outright European political control that the Indian
3rient could be treated by Europe with such proprietary hauteur0ne>er with the sense
of danger reser>ed for Isla2!
;E
/e>ertheless- between this hauteur and anything li6e
accurate positi>e 6nowledge there e4isted a >ast disparity! .<(erbelot<s entries for
Indo0&ersian sub@ects in the 1iblioth03ue were all based on Isla2ic sources- and it is
true to say that until the early nineteenth century C3riental languagesD was considered
a synony2 for C"e2itic languages!D 1he 3riental renaissance of which Huinet spo6e
ser>ed the function of e4panding so2e fairly narrow li2its- in which Isla2 was the
catchall 3riental e4a2ple!
;+
"ans6rit- Indian religion- and Indian history did not
ac9uire the status of scientific 6nowledge until after "ir illia2 Jones<s efforts in the
late eighteenth century- and e>en Jones<s interest in India ca2e to hi2 by way of his
prior interest in and 6nowledge of Isla2!
It is not surprising- then- that the first 2a@or wor6 of 3riental scholarship after
d<(erbelot<s 1iblioth03ue was "i2on 3c6ley<s .istory o# the 4aracens, whose first
>olu2e appeared in 1+7,! A recent historian of 3rientalis2 has opined that 3c6ley<s
attitude towards the Musli2s0that to the2 is owed what was first 6nown of
philosophy by European Christians0Cshoc6ed painfullyD his European audience! For
not only did 3c6ley 2a6e this Isla2ic pre0e2inence clear in his wor6J he also Cga>e
Europe its first authentic and substantial taste of the Arab >iewpoint touching the
+;
wars with ByAantiu2 and &ersia!D
;,
(owe>er- 3c6ley was careful to dissociate
hi2self fro2 the infectious influence of Isla2- and unli6e his colleague illia2
histon F/ewton<s successor at Ca2bridgeG- he always 2ade it clear that Isla2 was
an outrageous heresy! For his Isla2ic enthusias2- on the other hand- histon was
e4pelled fro2 Ca2bridge in 1+7*!
Access to Indian F3rientalG riches had always to be 2ade by first crossing the
Isla2ic pro>inces and by withstanding the dangerous effect of Isla2 as a syste2 of
9uasi0Arian belief! And at least for the larger seg2ent of the eighteenth century-
Britain and France were successful! 1he 3tto2an E2pire had long since settled into a
Ffor EuropeG co2fortable senescence- to be inscribed in the nineteenth century as the
CEastern Huestion!D Britain and France fought each other in India between 1+== and
1+=, and again between 1+;E and 1+E)- until- in 1+E*- the British e2erged in
practical econo2ic and political control of the subcontinent! hat was 2ore
ine>itable than that /apoleon should choose to harass Britain<s 3riental e2pire by
first intercepting its Isla2ic throughway- EgyptL
Although it was al2ost i22ediately preceded by at least two 2a@or 3rientalist
pro@ects- /apoleon<s in>asion of Egypt in 1+*, and his foray into "yria ha>e had by
far the greater conse9uence for the 2odern history of 3rientalis2! Before /apoleon
only two efforts Fboth by scholarsG had been 2ade to in>ade the 3rient by stripping it
of its >eils and also by going beyond the co2parati>e shelter of the Biblical 3rient!
1he first was by Abraha20(yacinthe An9uetil0.uperron F1+)101,7;G- an eccentric
theoretician of egalitarianis2- a 2an who 2anaged in his head to reconcile Jansenis2
with orthodo4 Catholicis2 and Brah2anis2- and who tra>eled to Asia in order to
pro>e the actual pri2iti>e e4istence of a Chosen &eople and of the Biblical
genealogies! Instead he o>ershot his early goal and tra>eled as far east as "urat- there
to find a cache of A>estan te4ts- there also to co2plete his translation of the A>esta!
#ay2ond "chwab has said of the 2ysterious A>estan frag2ent that set An9uetil off
on his >oyages that whereas Cthe scholars loo6ed at the fa2ous frag2ent of 34ford
and then returned to their studies- An9uetil loo6ed- and then went to India!D "chwab
also re2ar6s that An9uetil and Boltaire- though te2pera2entally and ideologically at
hopeless odds with each other- had a si2ilar interest in the 3rient and the Bible- Cthe
one to 2a6e the Bible 2ore indisputable- the other to 2a6e it 2ore unbelie>able!D
Ironically- An9uetil<s A>esta translations
+E
ser>ed Boltaire<s purposes- since An9uetil<s disco>eries Csoon led to criticis2 of the
>ery YBiblicalZ te4ts which had hitherto been considered to be re>ealed te4ts!D 1he net
effect of An9uetil<s e4pedition is well described by "chwab:
In 1+;*- An9uetil finished his translation of the $vesta at "uratJ in 1+,E that of
the =panishads in &aris0he had dug a channel between the he2ispheres of hu2an
genius- correcting and e4panding the old hu2anis2 of the Mediterranean basin!
'ess than fifty years earlier- his co2patriots were as6ed what it was li6e to be
&ersian- when he taught the2 how to co2pare the 2onu2ents of the &ersians to
those of the 5ree6s! Before hi2- one loo6ed for infor2ation on the re2ote past of
our planet e4clusi>ely a2ong the great 'atin- 5ree6- Jewish- and Arabic writers!
1he Bible was regarded as a lonely roc6- an aerolite! A uni>erse in writing was
a>ailable- but scarcely anyone see2ed to suspect the i22ensity of those
un6nown lands! 1he realiAation began with his translation of the $vesta, and
reached diAAying heights owing to the e4ploration in Central Asia of the
languages that 2ultiplied after Babel! Into our schools- up to that ti2e li2ited to
the narrow 5rew0'atin heritage of the #enaissance Yof which 2uch had been
trans2itted to Europe by Isla2Z- he inter@ected a >ision of innu2erable
ci>iliAations fro2 ages past- of an infinity of literaturesJ 2oreo>er the few
European pro>inces were not the only places to ha>e left their 2ar6 in history!
;*
For the first ti2e- the 3rient was re>ealed to Europe in the 2ateriality of its te4ts-
languages- and ci>iliAations! Also for the first ti2e- Asia ac9uired a precise
intellectual and historical di2ension with which to buttress the 2yths of its
geographic distance and >astness! By one of those ine>itable contracting
co2pensations for a sudden cultural e4pansion- An9uetil<s 3riental labors were
succeeded by illia2 Jones<s- the second of the pre0/apoleonic pro@ects I 2entioned
abo>e! hereas An9uetil opened large >istas- Jones closed the2 down- codifying-
tabulating- co2paring! Before he left England for India in 1+,)- Jones was already a
2aster of Arabic- (ebrew- and &ersian! 1hese see2ed perhaps the least of his
acco2plish2ents: he was also a poet- a @urist- a polyhistor- a classicist- and an
indefatigable scholar whose powers would reco22end hi2 to such as Ben@a2in
Fran6lin- Ed2und Bur6e- illia2 &itt- and "a2uel Johnson! In due course he was
appointed to Can honorable and profitable place in the Indies-D and i22ediately upon
his arri>al there to ta6e up a post with the East India Co2pany
++
began the course of personal study that was to gather in- to rope off- to do2esticate
the 3rient and thereby turn it into a pro>ince of European learning! For his personal
wor6- entitled C3b@ects of En9uiry .uring My #esidence in AsiaD he enu2erated
a2ong the topics of his in>estigation Cthe 'aws of the (indus and Moha22edans-
Modern &olitics and 5eography of (industan- Best Mode of 5o>erning Bengal-
Arith2etic and 5eo2etry- and Mi4ed "ciences of the Asiatic6s- Medicine-
Che2istry- "urgery- and Anato2y of the Indians- /atural &roductions of India-
&oetry- #hetoric and Morality of Asia- Music of the Eastern /ations- 1rade-
Manufacture- Agriculture- and Co22erce of India-D and so forth! 3n August 1+-
1+,+- he wrote unassu2ingly to 'ord Althorp that Cit is 2y a2bition to 6now /ndia
better than any other European e>er 6new it!D (ere is where Balfour in 1*17 could
find the first adu2bration of his clai2 as an English2an to 6now the 3rient 2ore and
better than anyone else!
Jones<s official wor6 was the law- an occupation with sy2bolic significance for
the history of 3rientalis2! "e>en years before Jones arri>ed in India- arren
(astings had decided that Indians were to be ruled by their own laws- a 2ore
enterprising pro@ect than it appears at first glance since the "ans6rit code of laws
e4isted then for practical use only in a &ersian translation- and no English2an at the
ti2e 6new "ans6rit well enough to consult the original te4ts! A co2pany official-
Charles il6ins- first 2astered "ans6rit- then began to translate the /nstitutes of
ManuJ in this labor he was soon to be assisted by Jones! Fil6ins- incidentally- was
the first translator of the Bhaga>ad05ita!G In January 1+,= Jones con>ened the
inaugural 2eeting of the Asiatic "ociety of Bengal- which was to be for India what
the #oyal "ociety was for England! As first president of the society and as 2agistrate-
Jones ac9uired the effecti>e 6nowledge of the 3rient and of 3rientals that was later to
2a6e hi2 the undisputed founder Fthe phrase is A! J! Arberry<sG of 3rientalis2! 1o
rule and to learn- then to co2pare 3rient with 3ccident: these were Jones<s goals-
which- with an irresistible i2pulse always to codify- to subdue the infinite >ariety of
the 3rient to Ca co2plete digestD of laws- figures- custo2s- and wor6s- he is belie>ed
to ha>e achie>ed! (is 2ost fa2ous pronounce2ent indicates the e4tent to which
2odern 3rientalis2- e>en in its philosophical beginnings- was a co2parati>e
discipline ha>ing for its principal goal the grounding of the European languages in a
distant- and har2less- 3riental source:
+,
1he 4anscrit language- whate>er be its anti9uity- is of a wonderful structureJ
2ore perfect than the >reek, 2ore copious than the (atin, and 2ore e49uisitely
refined than either- yet bearing to both of the2 a stronger affinity- both in the
roots of >erbs and in the for2s of gra22ar- than could possibly ha>e been
produced by accidentJ so strong indeed- that no philologer could e4a2ine the2
all three without belie>ing the2 to ha>e sprung fro2 so2e co22on source!
E7
Many of the early English 3rientalists in India were- li6e Jones- legal scholars- or
else- interestingly enough- they were 2edical 2en with strong 2issionary leanings!
"o far as one can tell- 2ost of the2 were i2bued with the dual purpose of
in>estigating Cthe sciences and the arts of Asia- with the hope of facilitating
a2eliorations there and of ad>ancing 6nowledge and i2pro>ing the arts at ho2eD:
E1
so the co22on 3rientalist goal was stated in the 2entenary ,olume of the #oyal
Asiatic "ociety founded in 1,2) by (enry 1ho2as Colebroo6e! In their dealings with
the 2odern 3rientals- the early professional 3rientalists li6e Jones had only two roles
to fulfill- yet we cannot today fault the2 for strictures placed on their hu2anity by the
official "ccidental character of their presence in the 3rient! 1hey were either @udges
or they were doctors! E>en Edgar Huinet- writing 2ore 2etaphysically than
realistically- was di2ly aware of this therapeutic relationship! C'<Asie a les
proph]tes-D he said in (e >-nie des religions5 C'<Europe a les docteurs!D
E2
&roper
6nowledge of the 3rient proceeded fro2 a thorough study of the classical te4ts- and
only after that to an application of those te4ts to the 2odern 3rient! Faced with the
ob>ious decrepitude and political i2potence of the 2odern 3riental- the European
3rientalist found it his duty to rescue so2e portion of a lost- past classical 3riental
grandeur in order to Cfacilitate a2eliorationsD in the present 3rient! hat the
European too6 fro2 the classical 3riental past was a >ision Fand thousands of facts
and artifactsG which only he could e2ploy to the best ad>antageJ to the 2odern
3riental he ga>e facilitation and a2elioration0and- too- the benefit of his @udg2ent as
to what was best for the 2odern 3rient!
It was characteristic of all 3rientalist pro@ects before /apoleon<s that >ery little
could be done in ad>ance of the pro@ect to prepare for its success! An9uetil and Jones-
for e4a2ple- learned what they did about the 3rient only after they got there! 1hey
were confronting- as it were- the whole 3rient- and only after a while and after
considerable i2pro>ising could they whittle it down to a s2aller
+*
pro>ince! /apoleon- on the other hand- wanted nothing less than to ta6e the whole of
Egypt- and his ad>ance preparations were of unparalleled 2agnitude and
thoroughness! E>en so- these preparations were al2ost fanatically sche2atic and0if I
2ay use the word te4tual- which are features that will bear so2e analysis here! 1hree
things abo>e all else see2 to ha>e been in /apoleon<s 2ind as he readied hi2self
while in Italy in 1+*+ for his ne4t 2ilitary 2o>e! First- aside fro2 the still threatening
power of England- his 2ilitary successes that had cul2inated in the 1reaty of Ca2po
For2io left hi2 no other place to turn for additional glory than the East! Moreo>er-
1alleyrand had recently ani2ad>erted on Cles a>antages V retirer de colonies
nou>elles dans les circonstances prPsentes-D and this notion- along with the appealing
prospect of hurting Britain- drew hi2 eastwards! "econdly- /apoleon had been
attracted to the 3rient since his adolescenceJ his youthful 2anuscripts- for e4a2ple-
contain a su22ary he 2ade of Marigny<s .istoire des $rabes, and it is e>ident fro2
all of his writing and con>ersation that he was steeped- as Jean 1hiry has put it- in the
2e2ories and glories that were attached to Ale4ander<s 3rient generally and to Egypt
in particular!
E)
1hus the idea of recon9uering Egypt as a new Ale4ander proposed
itself to hi2- allied with the additional benefit of ac9uiring a new Isla2ic colony at
England<s e4pense! 1hirdly- /apoleon considered Egypt a li6ely pro@ect precisely
because he 6new it tactically- strategically- historically- and0not to be
underesti2ated0te4tually- that is- as so2ething one read about and 6new through the
writings of recent as well as classical European authorities! 1he point in all this is that
for /apoleon Egypt was a pro@ect that ac9uired reality in his 2ind- and later in his
preparations for its con9uest- through e4periences that belong to the real2 of ideas
and 2yths culled fro2 te4ts- not e2pirical reality! (is plans for Egypt therefore
beca2e the first in a long series of European encounters with the 3rient in which the
3rientalist<s special e4pertise was put directly to functional colonial useJ for at the
crucial instant when an 3rientalist had to decide whether his loyalties and sy2pathies
lay with the 3rient or with the con9uering est- he always chose the latter- fro2
/apoleon<s ti2e on! As for the e2peror hi2self- he saw the 3rient only as it had
been encoded first by classical te4ts and then by 3rientalist e4perts- whose >ision-
based on classical te4ts- see2ed a useful substitute for any actual encounter with the
real 3rient!
,7
/apoleon<s enlist2ent of se>eral doAen Csa>antsD for his Egyptian E4pedition is
too well 6nown to re9uire detail here! (is idea was to build a sort of li>ing archi>e for
the e4pedition- in the for2 of studies conducted on all topics by the 2e2bers of the
Institut d<Xgypte- which he founded! hat is perhaps less well 6nown is /apoleon<s
prior reliance upon the wor6 of the Co2te de Bolney- a French tra>eler whose
,oyage en ?gypte et en 4yrie appeared in two >olu2es in 1+,+! Aside fro2 a short
personal preface infor2ing the reader that the sudden ac9uisition of so2e 2oney Fhis
inheritanceG 2ade it possible for hi2 to ta6e the trip east in 1+,)- Bolney<s ,oyage is
an al2ost oppressi>ely i2personal docu2ent! Bolney e>idently saw hi2self as a
scientist- whose @ob it was always to record the CPtatD of so2ething he saw! 1he
cli2a4 of the ,oyage occurs in the second >olu2e- an account of Isla2 as a
religion!
E=
Bolney<s >iews were canonically hostile to Isla2 as a religion and as a
syste2 of political institutionsJ ne>ertheless /apoleon found this wor6 and Bolney<s
2onsid-rations sur la guerre actuel de Turcs F1+,,G of particular i2portance! For
Bolney after all was a canny French2an- and0li6e Chateaubriand and 'a2artine a
9uarter century after hi20he eyed the /ear 3rient as a li6ely place for the realiAation
of French colonial a2bition! hat /apoleon profited fro2 in Bolney was the
enu2eration- in ascending order of difficulty- of the obstacles to be faced in the
3rient by any French e4peditionary force!
/apoleon refers e4plicitly to Bolney in his reflections on the Egyptian
e4pedition- the 2ampagnes d?gypte et de 4yrie, &8@:'&8@@, which he dictated to
5eneral Bertrand on "aint (elena! Bolney- he said- considered that there were three
barriers to French hege2ony in the 3rient and that any French force would therefore
ha>e to fight three wars: one against England- a second against the 3tto2an &orte-
and a third- the 2ost difficult- against the Musli2s!
E;
Bolney<s assess2ent was both
shrewd and hard to fault since it was clear to /apoleon- as it would be to anyone- who
read Bolney- that his ,oyage and the 2onsid-rations were effecti>e te4ts to be used
by any European wishing to win in the 3rient! In other words- Bolney<s wor6
constituted a handboo6 for attenuating the hu2an shoc6 a European 2ight feel as he
directly e4perienced the 3rient: #ead the boo6s- see2s to ha>e been Bolney<s thesis-
and far fro2 being disoriented by the 3rient- you will co2pel it to you!
/apoleon too6 Bolney al2ost literally- but in a characteristically
,1
subtle way! Fro2 the first 2o2ent that the Ar2Pe d<Xgypte appeared on the Egyptian
horiAon- e>ery effort was 2ade to con>ince the Musli2s that Cnous so22es les >rais
2usul2ans-D as Bonaparte<s procla2ation of July 2- 1+*,- put it to the people of
Ale4andria!
EE
E9uipped with a tea2 of 3rientalists Fand sitting on board a flagship
called the "rient+, /apoleon used Egyptian en2ity towards the Ma2elu6es and
appeals to the re>olutionary idea of e9ual opportunity for all to wage a uni9uely
benign and selecti>e war against Isla2! hat 2ore than anything i2pressed the first
Arab chronicler of the e4pedition- Abd0al0#ah2an al0Jabarti- was /apoleon<s use of
scholars to 2anage his contacts with the nati>es 0that and the i2pact of watching a
2odern European intellectual establish2ent at close 9uarters!
E+
/apoleon tried
e>erywhere to pro>e that he was fighting #or Isla2J e>erything he said was translated
into %oranic Arabic- @ust as the French ar2y was urged by its co22and always to
re2e2ber the Isla2ic sensibility! FCo2pare- in this regard- /apoleon<s tactics in
Egypt with the tactics of the Re3uerimiento, a docu2ent drawn up in 1;1)0in
"panish0by the "paniards to be read aloud to the Indians: Ce shall ta6e you and your
wi>es and your children- and shall 2a6e sla>es of the2- and as such sell and dispose
of the2 as their (ighnesses Ythe %ing and Hueen of "painZ 2ay co22andJ and we
shall ta6e away your goods- and shall do you all the 2ischief and da2age that we
can- as to >assals who do not obey-D etc! etc!D
E,
G hen it see2ed ob>ious to /apoleon
that his force was too s2all to i2pose itself on the Egyptians- he then tried to 2a6e
the local i2a2s- cadis- 2uftis- and ule2as interpret the %oran in fa>or of the 5rande
Ar2Pe! 1o this end- the si4ty ule2as who taught at the AAhar were in>ited to his
9uarters- gi>en full 2ilitary honors- and then allowed to be flattered by /apoleon<s
ad2iration for Isla2 and Moha22ed and by his ob>ious >eneration for the %oran-
with which he see2ed perfectly fa2iliar! 1his wor6ed- and soon the population of
Cairo see2ed to ha>e lost its distrust of the occupiers!
E*
/apoleon later ga>e his
deputy %leber strict instructions after he left always to ad2inister Egypt through the
3rientalists and the religious Isla2ic leaders who2 they could win o>erJ any other
politics was too e4pensi>e and foolish!
+7
(ugo thought that he grasped the tactful
glory of /apoleon<s 3riental e4pedition in his poe2 C'uiD:
Au /il @e le retrou>e encore!
'<Xgypte resplendit des feu4 de son auroreJ
"on astre i2pPrial se l]>e V l<orient
,2
Bain9ueur- enthousiaste- Pclatant de prestiges-
&rodige- il Ptonna la terre des prodiges!
'es >ieu4 schei6s >PnPraient l<P2ir @eune et prudentJ
'e peuple redoutait ses ar2es inoubesJ
"ubli2e- il apparut au4 tribus Pblouies
Co22e un Maho2et d<occident!
+1
FBy the /ile- I find hi2 once again!
Egypt shines with the fires of his dawnJ
(is i2perial orb rises in the 3rient!
Bictor- enthusiast- bursting with achie>e2ents-
&rodigious- he stunned the land of prodigies!
1he old shei6hs >enerated the young and prudent e2ir!
1he people dreaded his unprecedented ar2sJ
"ubli2e- he appeared to the daAAled tribes
'i6e a Maho2et of the 3ccident!G
"uch a triu2ph could only ha>e been prepared be#ore a 2ilitary e4pedition-
perhaps only by so2eone who had no prior e4perience of the 3rient e4cept what
boo6s and scholars told hi2! 1he idea of ta6ing along a full0scale acade2y is >ery
2uch an aspect of this te4tual attitude to the 3rient! And this attitude in turn was
bolstered by specific #e>olutionary decrees Fparticularly the one of 17 5er2inal An
III0March )7- 1+*)0establishing an -cole publi3ue in the Biblioth]9ue nationale to
teach Arabic- 1ur6ish- and &ersianG
+2
whose ob@ect was the rationalist one of
dispelling 2ystery and institutionaliAing e>en the 2ost recondite 6nowledge! 1hus
2any of /apoleon<s 3rientalist translators were students of "yl>estre de "acy- who-
beginning in June 1+*E- was the first and only teacher of Arabic at the Xcole publi9ue
des langues orientales! "acy later beca2e the teacher of nearly e>ery 2a@or
3rientalist in Europe- where his students do2inated the field for about three 9uarters
of a century! Many of the2 were politically useful- in the ways that se>eral had been
to /apoleon in Egypt!
But dealings with the Musli2s were only a part of /apoleon<s pro@ect to
do2inate Egypt! 1he other part was to render it co2pletely open- to 2a6e it totally
accessible to European scrutiny! Fro2 being a land of obscurity and a part of the
3rient hitherto 6nown at second hand through the e4ploits of earlier tra>elers-
scholars- and con9uerors- Egypt was to beco2e a depart2ent of French learning!
(ere too the te4tual and sche2atic attitudes are e>ident! 1he Institut- with its tea2s of
che2ists- historians- biologists-
,)
archaeologists- surgeons- and anti9uarians- was the learned di>ision of the ar2y! Its
@ob was no less aggressi>e: to put Egypt into 2odern FrenchJ and unli6e the AbbP 'e
Mascrier<s 1+); Description de l?gypte, /apoleon<s was to be a uni>ersal
underta6ing! Al2ost fro2 the first 2o2ents of0 the occupation /apoleon saw to it
that the Institut began its 2eetings- its e4peri2ents0its fact0finding 2ission- as we
would call it today! Most i2portant- e>erything said- seen- and studied was to be
recorded- and indeed was recorded in that great collecti>e appropriation of one
country by another- the Description de l?gypte, published in twenty0three enor2ous
>olu2es between 1,7* and 1,2,!
+)
1he Descriptions uni9ueness is not only in its siAe- or e>en in the intelligence of
its contributors- but in its attitude to its sub@ect 2atter- and it is this attitude that
2a6es it of great interest for the study of 2odern 3rientalist pro@ects! 1he first few
pages of its pr-#ace histori3ue, written by Jean0Baptiste0Joseph Fourier- the Institut<s
secretary- 2a6e it clear that in CdoingD Egypt the scholars were also grappling
directly with a 6ind of unadulterated cultural- geographical- and historical
significance! Egypt was the focal point of the relationships between Africa and Asia-
between Europe and the East- between 2e2ory and actuality!
&laced between Africa and Asia- and co22unicating easily with Europe-
Egypt occupies the center of the ancient continent! 1his country presents only
great 2e2oriesJ it is the ho2eland of the arts and conser>es innu2erable
2onu2entsJ its principal te2ples and the palaces inhabited by its 6ings still e4ist-
e>en though its least ancient edifices had already been built by the ti2e of the
1ro@an ar! (o2er- 'ycurgus- "olon- &ythagoras- and &lato all went to Egypt to
study the sciences- religion- and the laws! Ale4ander founded an opulent city
there- which for a long ti2e en@oyed co22ercial supre2acy and which witnessed
&o2pey- Caesar- Mar6 Antony- and Augustus deciding between the2 the fate of
#o2e arid that of the entire world! It is therefore proper for this country to attract
the attention of illustrious princes who rule the destiny of nations!
/o considerable power was e>er a2assed by any nation- whether in the est
or in Asia- that did not also turn that nation toward Egypt- which was regarded in
so2e 2easure as its natural lot!
+=
Because Egypt was saturated with 2eaning for the arts- sciences- and
go>ern2ent- its role was to be the stage on which actions of
,=
a world0historical i2portance would ta6e place! By ta6ing Egypt- then- a 2odern
power would naturally de2onstrate its strength and @ustify historyJ Egypt<s own
destiny was to be anne4ed- to Europe preferably! In addition- this power would also
enter a history whose co22on ele2ent was defined by figures no less great than
(o2er- Ale4ander- Caesar- &lato- "olon- and &ythagoras- who graced the 3rient with
their prior presence there! 1he 3rient- in short- e4isted as a set of >alues attached- not
to its 2odern realities- but to a series of >aloriAed contacts it had had with a distant
European past! 1his is a pure e4a2ple of the te4tual- sche2atic attitude I ha>e been
referring to!
Fourier continues si2ilarly for o>er a hundred pages Feach page- incidentally- is a
s9uare 2eter in siAe- as if the pro@ect and the siAe of the page had been thought of as
possessing co2parable scaleG! 3ut of the free0floating past- howe>er- he 2ust @ustify
the /apoleonic e4pedition as so2ething that needed to be underta6en when it
happened! 1he dra2atic perspecti>e is ne>er abandoned! Conscious of his European
audience and of the 3riental figures he was 2anipulating- he writes:
3ne re2e2bers the i2pression 2ade on the whole of Europe by the
astounding news that the French were in the 3rient!!!! 1his great pro@ect was
2editated in silence- and was prepared with such acti>ity and secrecy that the
worried >igilance of our ene2ies was decei>edJ only at the 2o2ent that it
happened did they learn that it had been concei>ed- underta6en- and carried out
successfully!!!!
"o dra2atic a coup de th-Atre had its ad>antages for the 3rient as well:
1his country- which has trans2itted its 6nowledge to so 2any nations- is today
plunged into barbaris2!
3nly a hero could bring all these factors together- which is what Fourier now
describes:
/apoleon appreciated the influence that this e>ent would ha>e on the relations
between Europe- the 3rient- and Africa- on Mediterranean shipping- and on
Asia<s destiny!!!! /apoleon wanted to offer a useful European e4a2ple to the
3rient- and finally also to 2a6e the inhabitants< li>es 2ore pleasant- as well as to
procure for the2 all the ad>antages of a perfected ci>iliAation!
/one of this would be possible without a continuous application to the pro@ect
of the arts and sciences!
+;
,;
1o restore a region fro2 its present barbaris2 to its for2er classical greatnessJ to
instruct Ffor its own benefitG the 3rient in the ways of the 2odern estJ to
subordinate or underplay 2ilitary power in order to aggrandiAe the pro@ect of glorious
6nowledge ac9uired in the process of political do2ination of the 3rientJ to for2ulate
the 3rient- to gi>e it shape- identity- definition with full recognition of its place in
2e2ory- its i2portance to i2perial strategy- and its CnaturalD role as an appendage to
EuropeJ to dignify all the 6nowledge collected during colonial occupation with the
title Ccontribution to 2odern learningD when the nati>es had neither been consulted
nor treated as anything e4cept as prete4ts for a te4t whose usefulness was not to the
nati>esJ to feel oneself as a European in co22and- al2ost at will- of 3riental history-
ti2e- and geographyJ to institute new areas of specialiAationJ to establish new
disciplinesJ to di>ide- deploy- sche2atiAe- tabulate- inde4- and record e>erything in
sight Fand out of sightGJ to 2a6e out of e>ery obser>able detail a generaliAation and
out of e>ery generaliAation an i22utable law about the 3riental nature- te2pera2ent-
2entality- custo2- or typeJ and- abo>e all- to trans2ute li>ing reality into the stuff of
te4ts- to possess For thin6 one possessesG actuality 2ainly because nothing in the
3rient see2s to resist one<s powers: these are the features of 3rientalist pro@ection
entirely realiAed in the Description de l?gypte, itself enabled and reinforced by
/apoleon<s wholly 3rientalist engulf2ent of Egypt by the instru2ents of estern
6nowledge and power! 1hus Fourier concludes his preface by announcing that history
will re2e2ber how CXgypte fut le thPctre de sa Y/apoleon<sZ gloire- et prPser>e de
l<oubli toutes les circonstances de cet P>]ne2ent e4traordinaire!D
+E
1he Description thereby displaces Egyptian of 3riental history as a history
possessing its own coherence- identity- and sense! Instead- history as recorded in the
Description supplants Egyptian or 3riental history by identifying itself directly and
i22ediately with world history- a euphe2is2 for European history! 1o sa>e an e>ent
fro2 obli>ion is in the 3rientalist<s 2ind the e9ui>alent of turning the 3rient into a
theater for his representations of the 3rient: this is al2ost e4actly what Fourier says!
Moreo>er- the sheer power of ha>ing described the 3rient in 2odern 3ccidental
ter2s lifts the 3rient fro2 the real2s of silent obscurity where it has lain neglected
Fe4cept for the inchoate 2ur2urings of a >ast but undefined sense of its own pastG
into the clarity of 2odern European science! 1here this new 3rient figures as0for
instance- in 5eoffroy "aint0(ilaire<s
,E
biological theses in the .escription0the confir2ation of laws of Aoological
specialiAation for2ulated by Buffon!
++
3r it ser>es as a Ccontraste frappante a>ec les
habitudes des nations EuropPennes-D
+,
in which the CbiAarre @ouissancesD of 3rientals
ser>e to highlight the sobriety and rationality of 3ccidental habits! 3r- to cite one
2ore use for the 3rient- e9ui>alents of those 3riental physiological characteristics
that 2ade possible the successful e2bal2ing of bodies are sought for in European
bodies- so that che>aliers fallen on the field of honor can be preser>ed as lifeli6e
relics of /apoleon<s great 3riental ca2paign !
+*
Iet the 2ilitary failure of /apoleon<s occupation of Egypt did not also destroy
the fertility of its o>er0all pro@ection for Egypt or the rest of the 3rient! Huite literally-
the occupation ga>e birth to the entire 2odern e4perience of the 3rient as interpreted
fro2 within the uni>erse of discourse founded by /apoleon in Egypt- whose agencies
of do2ination and disse2ination included the Institut and the Description. The idea-
as it has been characteriAed by Charles0#ou4- was that Egypt Crestored to prosperity-
regenerated by wise and enlightened ad2inistration ! ! ! would shed its ci>iliAing rays
upon all its 3riental neighbors!D
,7
1rue- the other European powers would see6 to
co2pete in this 2ission- none 2ore than England! But what would happen as a
continuing legacy of the co22on 3ccidental 2ission to the 3rient0despite
inter0European s9uabbling- indecent co2petition- or outright war0would be the
creation of new pro@ects- new >isions- new enterprises co2bining additional parts of
the old 3rient with the con9uering European spirit! After /apoleon- then- the >ery
language of 3rientalis2 changed radically! Its descripti>e realis2 was upgraded and
beca2e not 2erely a style of representation but a language- indeed a 2eans of
creation. Along with the langues m0res, as those forgotten dor2ant sources for the
2odern European de2otics were entitled by Antoine Fabre d<3li>et- the 3rient was
reconstructed- reasse2bled- crafted- in short- born out of the 3rientalists< efforts! 1he
Description beca2e the 2aster type of all further efforts to bring the 3rient closer to
Europe- thereafter to absorb it entirely and centrally i2portant0to cancel- or at least
subdue and reduce- its strangeness and- in the case of Isla2- its hostility! For the
Isla2ic 3rient would henceforth appear as a category denoting the 3rientalists<
power and not the Isla2ic people as hu2ans nor their history as history!
1hus out of the /apoleonic e4pedition there issued a whole
,+
series of te4tual children- fro2 Chateaubriand<s /tin-raire to 'a2artine<s ,oyage en
"rient to Flaubert<s 4alammbB, and in the sa2e tradition- 'ane<s Manners and
2ustoms o# the Modern Egyptians and #ichard Burton<s Personal Narrative o# a
Pilgrimage to al'Madinah and Meccah. hat binds the2 together is not only their
co22on bac6ground in 3riental legend and e4perience but also their learned reliance
on the 3rient as a 6ind of wo2b out of which they were brought forth! If
parado4ically these creations turned out to be highly styliAed si2ulacra- elaborately
wrought i2itations of what a li>e 3rient 2ight be thought to loo6 li6e- that by no
2eans detracts either fro2 the strength of their i2aginati>e conception or fro2 the
strength of European 2astery of the 3rient- whose prototypes respecti>ely were
Cagliostro- the great European i2personator of the 3rient- and /apoleon- its first
2odern con9ueror! Artistic or te4tual wor6 was not the only product of the
/apoleonic e4pedition! 1here were- in addition and certainly 2ore influential- the
scientific pro@ect- whose chief instance is Ernest #enan<s 4yst0me compar- et histoire
g-n-rale des langues s-miti3ues, co2pleted in 1,=, for0neatly enough0the &ri4
Bolney- and the geopolitical pro@ect- of which Ferdinand de 'esseps<s "ueA Canal
and England<s occupation of Egypt in 1,,2 are pri2e instances! 1he difference
between the two is not only in 2anifest scale but also in 9uality of 3rientalist
con>iction! #enan truly belie>ed that he had re0created the 3rient- as it really was- in
his wor6! .e 'esseps- on the other hand- always was so2ewhat awed by the newness
his pro@ect had released out of the old 3rient- and this sense co22unicated itself to
e>eryone for who2 the opening of the canal in 1,E* was no ordinary e>ent! In his
ECcursionist and Tourist $dvertiser for July 1- 1,E*- 1ho2as Coo6<s enthusias2
carries on de 'esseps<s:
3n /o>e2ber the 1+th- the greatest engineering feat of the present century is to
ha>e its success celebrated by a 2agnificent inauguration fete- at which nearly
e>ery European royal fa2ily will ha>e its special representati>e! 1ruly the
occasion will be an e4ceptional one! 1he for2ation of a line of water
co22unication between Europe and the East- has been the thought of centuries-
occupying in turn the 2inds of 5ree6s- #o2an- "a4on and 5aul- but it was not
until within the last few years that 2odern ci>iliAation began seriously to set
about e2ulating the labours of the ancient &haraohs- who- 2any centuries since-
constructed a canal between the two seas- traces of which re2ain to this day!!!!
E>erything
,,
connected with Ythe 2odernZ wor6s are on the 2ost gigantic scale- and a perusal
of a little pa2phlet- descripti>e of the underta6ing- fro2 the pen of the Che>alier
de "t! "toess- i2presses us 2ost forcibly with the genius of the great
Master02ind0M! Ferdinand de 'esseps0to whose perse>erance- cal2 daring and
foresight- the drea2 of ages has at last beco2e a real and tangible fact ! ! ! the
pro@ect for bringing 2ore closely together the countries of the est and the East-
and thus uniting the ci>iliAations of different epochs!
,1
1he co2bination of old ideas with new 2ethods- the bringing together of cultures
whose relations to the nineteenth century were different- the genuine i2position of
the power of 2odern technology and intellectual will upon for2erly stable and
di>ided geographical entities li6e East and est: this is what Coo6 percei>es and
what- in his @ournals- speeches- prospectuses- and letters- de 'esseps ad>ertises!
5enealogically- Ferdinand<s start was auspicious! Mathieu de 'esseps- his father-
had co2e to Egypt with /apoleon and re2ained there Fas Cunofficial French
representati>e-D Marlowe says
,2
G for four years after the French e>acuated it in 1,71!
Many of Ferdinand<s later writings refer bac6 to /apoleon<s own interest in digging a
canal- which- because he had been 2isinfor2ed by e4perts- he ne>er thought was a
realiAable goal! Infected by the erratic history of canal pro@ects that included French
sche2es entertained by #ichelieu and the "aint0"i2onians- de 'esseps returned to
Egypt in 1,;=- there to e2bar6 on the underta6ing that was e>entually co2pleted
fifteen years later! (e had no real engineering bac6ground! 3nly a tre2endous faith
in his near0di>ine s6ills as builder- 2o>er- and creator 6ept hi2 goingJ as his
diplo2atic and financial talents gained hi2 Egyptian and European support- he see2s
to ha>e ac9uired the necessary 6nowledge to carry 2atters to co2pletion! More
useful- perhaps- he learned how to plant his potential contributors in the world0
historical theater and 2a6e the2 see what his CpensPe 2orale-D as he called his
pro@ect- really 2eant! CBous en>isageA-D he told the2 in 1,E7- Cles i22enses
ser>ices 9ue le rapproche2ent de l<occident et de l<orient doit rendre V la ci>iliAation
et au d]>eloppe2ent de la richesse gPnPrale! 'e 2onde attend de >ous un grand
progr]s et >ous >ouleA rPpondre V l<attente du 2onde!D
,)
In accordance with such
notions the na2e of the in>est2ent co2pany for2ed by de 'esseps in 1,;, was a
charged one and reflected the grandiose plans he cherished:
,*
the Co2pagnie uni>erselle! In 1,E2 the AcadP2ie frandaise offered a priAe for an
epic on the canal! Bornier- the winner- deli>ered hi2self of such hyperbole as the
following- none of it funda2entally contradicting de 'esseps<s picture of what he was
up to:
Au tra>ail^ 3u>riers 9ue notre France en>oie-
1raceA- pour l<uni>ers- cette nou>elle >oie^
Bos peres- les heros- sont >enus @us9u<iciJ
"oyeA fer2e co22e au4 intrepides-
Co22e eu4 >ows co2batteA au4 pieds des pyra2ides-
Et leurs 9uatre 2ille ans >ous conte2plent aussi^
3ui- c<est pour l<uni>ers^ &our l<Asie et l<Europe-
&our ces cli2ats lointain 9ue la nuit en>eloppe-
&our le Chinois perfide et I<Indien de2i0nuJ
&our les peuples heureu4- libres- hu2ains et bra>es-
&our les peuples 2echants- pour les peuples escla>es-
&our ceu4 V 9ui le Christ est encore inconnu!
,=
.e 'esseps was nowhere 2ore elo9uent and resourceful than when he was called
upon to @ustify the enor2ous e4pense in 2oney and 2en the canal would re9uire! (e
could pour out statistics to enchant any earJ he would 9uote (erodotus and 2ariti2e
statistics with e9ual fluency! In his @ournal entries for 1,E= he cited with approbation
Casi2ir 'econte<s obser>ation that an eccentric life would de>elop significant
originality in 2en- and fro2 originality would co2e great and unusual e4ploits!
,;
"uch
e4ploits were their own @ustification! .espite its i22e2orial pedigree of failures- its
outrageous cost- its astounding a2bitions for altering the way Europe would handle
the 3rient- the canal was worth the effort! It was a pro@ect uni9uely able to o>erride
the ob@ections of those who were consulted and- in i2pro>ing the 3rient as a whole-
to do what sche2ing Egyptians- perfidious Chinese- and half0na6ed Indians could
ne>er ha>e done for the2sel>es!
1he opening cere2onies in /o>e2ber 1,E* were an occasion which- no less than
the whole history of de 'esseps<s 2achinations- perfectly e2bodied his ideas! For
years his speeches- letters- and pa2phlets were laden with a >i>idly energetic and
theatrical >ocabulary! In the pursuit of success- he could be found saying of hi2self
Falways in the first person pluralG- we created- fought- disposed- achie>ed- acted-
recogniAed- perse>ered- ad>ancedJ nothing- he repeated on 2any occasions- could
stop us- nothing was i2possible- nothing 2attered finally e4cept the realiAation of Cle
rPsultat final- le grand but-D which he had concei>ed- defined-
*7
and finally e4ecuted! As the papal en>oy to the cere2onies spo6e on /o>e2ber 1E to
the asse2bled dignitaries- his speech stro>e desperately to 2atch the intellectual and
i2aginati>e spectacle offered by de 'esseps<s canal:
Il est per2is d<affir2er 9ue l<heure 9ui >ient de sonner est non seule2ent une
des plus solennelles de ce si]cle- 2ais encore une des plus grandes et des plus
dPcisi>es 9u<ait >ues l<hu2anitP- depuis 9u<elle a une histoire ci0bas! Ce lieu- o_
confinent0sans dPsor2ais y toucher0l<Afri9ue et I<Asie- cette grande fete du genre
hu2ain- cette assistance auguste et cos2opolite- toutes les races du globe- tous
les drapeau4- tous les pa>illions- flottant @oyeuse2ent sous ce ciel radieu4 et
i22ense- la croi4 debout et respectPe de tous en face du croissant- 9ue de
2er>eilles- 9ue de contrastes saississants- 9ue de re>es rPputPs chi2Pri9ues
de>enus de palpables rPalitPs^ et- dans cet asse2blage de tant de prodiges- 9ue de
su@ets de rPfle4ions pour le penseur- 9ue de @oies dans l<heure prPsente et- dans
les perspecti>es de l<a>enir- 9ue de glorieuses espPrances^ ! ! !
'es deu4 e4trP2itiPs du globe se rapprochentJ en se rapprochant- elles se
reconnaissentJ en se reconnaissant- tous les ho22es- enfants d<un seul et 2e2e
.ieu- eprou>ent le tressaille2ent @oyeu4 de leur 2utuelle fraternitP^ 3 3ccident^
3 3rient^ rapprocheA- regardeA- reconnaisseA- salueA- PtreigneA0>ous^ ! ! !
Mais derri]re le phPno2]ne 2atPriel- le regard du penseur dPcou>re des
horiAons plus >astes 9ue les espaces 2Psurables- les horiAons sans bornes o_
2ou>ent les plus hautes destinPes- les plus glorieuses con9uetes- les plus
i22ortelles certitudes du genre hu2ain ! ! ! !
Y.ieuZ 9ue >otre souffle di>in plane sur ces eau4^ Hu<il y passe et repasse- de
l<3ccident V l<3rient- de l<3rient V I<3ccident^ 3 .ieu^ "er>eA >ous de cette >oie
pour rapprocher les ho22es les uns des autres^
,E
1he whole world see2ed crowded in to render ho2age to a sche2e that 5od could
only bless and 2a6e use of hi2self! 3ld distinctions and inhibitions were dissol>ed:
the Cross faced down the Crescent- the est had co2e to the 3rient ne>er to lea>e it
Funtil- in July 1*;E- 5a2al Abdel /asser would acti>ate Egypt<s ta6ing o>er of the
canal by pronouncing the na2e of de 'essepsG!
In the "ueA Canal idea we see the logical conclusion of 3rientalist thought and-
2ore interesting- of 3rientalist effort! 1o the est- Asia had once represented silent
distance and alienationJ Isla2 was 2ilitant hostility to European Christianity! 1o
o>erco2e such
*1
redoubtable constants the 3rient needed first to be 6nown- then in>aded and
possessed- then re0created by scholars- soldiers- and @udges who disinterred forgotten
languages- histories- races- and cultures in order to posit the20beyond the 2odern
3riental<s 6en 0as the true classical 3rient that could be used to @udge and rule the
2odern 3rient! 1he obscurity faded to be replaced by hothouse entitiesJ the 3rient
was a scholar<s word- signifying what 2odern Europe had recently 2ade of the still
peculiar East! .e 'esseps and his canal finally destroyed the 3rient<s distance- its
cloistered inti2acy away fro2 the est- its perdurable e4oticis2! Just as a land
barrier could be trans2uted into a li9uid artery- so too the 3rient was
transubstantiated fro2 resistant hostility into obliging- and sub2issi>e- partnership!
After de 'esseps no one could spea6 of the 3rient as belonging to another world-
strictly spea6ing! 1here was only CourD world- ConeD world bound together because
the "ueA Canal had frustrated those last pro>incials who still belie>ed in the
difference between worlds! 1hereafter the notion of C3rientalD is an ad2inistrati>e or
e4ecuti>e one- and it is subordinate to de2ographic- econo2ic- and sociological
factors! For i2perialists li6e Balfour- or for anti0i2perialists li6e J! A! (obson- the
3riental- li6e the African- is a 2e2ber of a sub@ect race and not e4clusi>ely an
inhabitant of a geographical area! .e 'esseps had 2elted away the 3rient<s
geographical identity by Fal2ost literallyG dragging the 3rient into the est and
finally dispelling the threat of Isla2! /ew categories and e4periences- including the
i2perialist ones- would e2erge- and in ti2e 3rientalis2 would adapt itself to the2-
but not without so2e difficulty!
I*
Crisis
It 2ay appear strange to spea6 about so2ething or so2eone as holding a teCtual
attitude- but a student of literature will understand the phrase 2ore easily if he will
recall the 6ind of >iew attac6ed by Boltaire in 2andide, or e>en the attitude to reality
satiriAed by Cer>antes in Don DuiCote. hat see2s une4ceptionable good sense
*2
to these writers is that it is a fallacy to assu2e that the swar2ing- unpredictable- and
proble2atic 2ess in which hu2an beings li>e can be understood on the basis of what
boo6s0te4ts0sayJ to apply what one learns out of a boo6 literally to reality is to ris6
folly or ruin! 3ne would no 2ore thin6 of using $madis o# >aul to understand
si4teenth0century For present dayG "pain than one would use the Bible to understand-
say- the (ouse of Co22ons! But clearly people ha>e tried and do try to use te4ts in
so si2ple02inded a way- for otherwise 2andide and .on DuiCote would not still ha>e
the appeal for readers that they do today! It see2s a co22on hu2an failing to prefer
the sche2atic authority of a te4t to the disorientations of direct encounters with the
hu2an! But is this failing constantly present- or are there circu2stances that- 2ore
than others- 2a6e the te4tual attitude li6ely to pre>ailL
1wo situations fa>or a te4tual attitude! 3ne is when a hu2an being confronts at
close 9uarters so2ething relati>ely un6nown and threatening and pre>iously distant!
In such a case one has recourse not only to what in one<s pre>ious e4perience the
no>elty rese2bles but also to what one has read about it! 1ra>el boo6s or guideboo6s
are about as CnaturalD a 6ind of te4t- as logical in their co2position and in their use-
as any boo6 one can thin6 of- precisely because of this hu2an tendency to fall bac6
on a te4t when the uncertainties of tra>el in strange parts see2 to threaten one<s
e9uani2ity! Many tra>elers find the2sel>es saying of an e4perience in a new country
that it wasn<t what they e4pected- 2eaning that it wasn<t what a boo6 said it would
be! And of course 2any writers of tra>el boo6s or guideboo6s co2pose the2 in order
to say that a country is li6e this- or better- that it is colorful- e4pensi>e- interesting-
and so forth! 1he idea in either case is that people- places- and e4periences can always
be described by a boo6- so 2uch so that the boo6 For te4tG ac9uires a greater
authority- and use- e>en than the actuality it describes! 1he co2edy of Fabrice del
.ongo<s search for the battle of aterloo is not so 2uch that he fails to find the
battle- but that he loo6s for it as so2ething te4ts ha>e told hi2 about!
A second situation fa>oring the te4tual attitude is the appearance of success! If
one reads a boo6 clai2ing that lions are fierce and then encounters a fierce lion FI
si2plify- of courseG- the chances are that one will be encouraged to read 2ore boo6s
by that sa2e author- and belie>e the2! But if- in addition- the lion boo6 instructs one
how to deal with a fierce lion- and the instructions wor6
*)
perfectly- then not only will the author be greatly belie>ed- he will also be i2pelled to
try his hand at other 6inds of written perfor2ance! 1here is a rather co2ple4 dialectic
of reinforce2ent by which the e4periences of readers in reality are deter2ined by
what they ha>e read- and this in turn influences writers to ta6e up sub@ects defined in
ad>ance by readers< e4periences! A boo6 on how to handle a fierce lion 2ight then
cause a series of boo6s to be produced on such sub@ects as the fierceness of lions- the
origins of fierceness- and so forth! "i2ilarly- as the focus of the te4t centers 2ore
narrowly on the sub@ect0no longer lions but their fierceness 0we 2ight e4pect that the
ways by which it is reco22ended that a lion<s fierceness be handled will actually
increase its fierceness- force it to be fierce since that is what it is- and that is what in
essence we 6now or can only 6now about it!
A te4t purporting to contain 6nowledge about so2ething actual- and arising out
of circu2stances si2ilar to the ones I ha>e @ust described- is not easily dis2issed!
E4pertise is attributed to it! 1he authority of acade2ics- institutions- and go>ern2ents
can accrue to it- surrounding it with still greater prestige than its practical successes
warrant!Most i2portant- such te4ts can create not only 6nowledge but also the >ery
reality they appear to describe! In ti2e such 6nowledge and reality produce a
tradition- or what Michel Foucault calls a discourse- whose 2aterial presence or
weight- not the originality of a gi>en author- is really responsible for the te4ts
produced out of it! 1his 6ind of te4t is co2posed out of those pree4isting units of
infor2ation deposited by Flaubert in the catalogue of id-es reEues.
In the light of all this- consider /apoleon and de 'esseps! E>erything they 6new-
2ore or less- about the 3rient ca2e fro2 boo6s written in the tradition of
3rientalis2- placed in its library of id-es reEues5 for the2 the 3rient- li6e the fierce
lion- was so2ething to be encountered and dealt with to a certain e4tent because the
te4ts 2ade that 3rient possible! "uch an 3rient was silent- a>ailable to Europe for the
realiAation of pro@ects that in>ol>ed but were ne>er directly responsible to the nati>e
inhabitants- and unable to resist the pro@ects- i2ages- or 2ere descriptions de>ised for
it! Earlier in this chapter I called such a relation between estern writing Fand its
conse9uencesG and 3riental silence the result of and the sign of the est<s great
cultural strength- its will to power o>er the 3rient! But there is another side to the
strength- a side whose e4istence depends on the pressures of the 3rientalist tradition
*=
and its te4tual attitude to the 3rientJ this side li>es its own life- as boo6s about fierce
lions will do until lions can tal6 bac6! 1he perspecti>e rarely drawn on /apoleon and
de 'esseps0to ta6e two a2ong the 2any pro@ectors who hatched plans for the
3rient0is the one that sees the2 carrying on in the di2ensionless silence of the 3rient
2ainly because the discourse of 3rientalis2- o>er and abo>e the 3rient<s
powerlessness to do anything about the2- suffused their acti>ity with 2eaning-
intelligibility- and reality! 1he discourse of 3rientalis2 and what 2ade it possible0in
/apoleon<s case- a est far 2ore powerful 2ilitarily than the 3rient 0ga>e the2
3rientals who could be described in such wor6s as the Description de l?gypte and an
3rient that could be cut across as de 'esseps cut across "ueA! Moreo>er- 3rientalis2
ga>e the2 their success0at least fro2 their point of >iew- which had nothing to do
with that of the 3riental! "uccess- in other words- had all the actual hu2an inter0
change between 3riental and esterner of the Judge<s Csaid I to 2yself- said ID in
Trial by Jury!
3nce we begin to thin6 of 3rientalis2 as a 6ind of estern pro@ection onto and
will to go>ern o>er the 3rient- we will encounter few surprises! For if it is true that
historians li6e Michelet- #an6e- 1o9ue>ille- and Burc6hardt emplot their narrati>es
Cas a story of a particular 6ind-D
,+
the sa2e is also true of 3rientalists who plotted
3riental history- character- and destiny for hundreds of years! .uring the nineteenth
and twentieth centuries the 3rientalists beca2e a 2ore serious 9uantity- because by
then the reaches of i2aginati>e and actual geography had shrun6- because the
3riental European relationship was deter2ined by an unstoppable European
e4pansion in search of 2ar6ets- resources- and colonies- and finally- because
3rientalis2 had acco2plished its self02eta2orphosis fro2 a scholarly discourse to
an i2perial institution! E>idence of this 2eta2orphosis is already apparent in what I
ha>e said of /apoleon- de 'esseps- Balfour- and Cro2er! 1heir pro@ects in the 3rient
are understandable on only the 2ost rudi2entary le>el as the efforts of 2en of >ision
and genius- heroes in Carlyle<s sense! In fact /apoleon- de 'esseps- Cro2er- and
Balfour are far 2ore regular, far less unusual- if we recall the sche2ata of d<(erbelot
and .ante and add to the2 both a 2oderniAed- efficient engine Fli6e the
nineteenth0century European e2pireG and a positi>e twist: since one cannot
ontologically obliterate the 3rient Fas d<(erbelot and .ante perhaps realiAedG- one
does ha>e the 2eans to capture it- treat it- describe it- i2pro>e it- radically alter it!
*;
1he point I a2 trying to 2a6e here is that the transition fro2 a 2erely te4tual
apprehension- for2ulation- or definition of the 3rient to the putting of all this into
practice in the 3rient did ta6e place- and that 3rientalis2 had 2uch to do with that 0if
I 2ay use the word in a literal sense0preposterous transition! "o far as its strictly
scholarly wor6 was concerned Fand I find the idea of strictly scholarly wor6 as
disinterested and abstract hard to understand: still- we can allow it intellectuallyG-
3rientalis2 did a great 2any things! .uring its great age in the nineteenth century it
produced scholarsJ it increased the nu2ber of languages taught in the est and the
9uantity of 2anuscripts edited- translated- and co22ented onJ in 2any cases- it
pro>ided the 3rient with sy2pathetic- European students- genuinely interested in
such 2atters as "ans6rit gra22ar- &hoenician nu2is2atics- and Arabic poetry! Iet
and here we 2ust be >ery clear03rientalis2 o>errode the 3rient! As a syste2 of
thought about the 3rient- it always rose fro2 the specifically hu2an detail to the
general transhu2an oneJ an obser>ation about a tenth0century Arab poet 2ultiplied
itself into a policy towards Fand aboutG the 3riental 2entality in Egypt- Ira9- or
Arabia! "i2ilarly a >erse fro2 the %oran would be considered the best e>idence of an
ineradicable Musli2 sensuality! 3rientalis2 assu2ed an unchanging 3rient-
absolutely different Fthe reasons change fro2 epoch to epochG fro2 the est! And
3rientalis2- in its post0eighteenth0century for2- could ne>er re>ise itself! All this
2a6es Cro2er and Balfour- as obser>ers and ad2inistrators of the 3rient- ine>itable!
1he closeness between politics and 3rientalis2- or to put it 2ore circu2spectly-
the great li6elihood that ideas about the 3rient drawn fro2 3rientalis2 can be put to
political use- is an i2portant yet e4tre2ely sensiti>e truth! It raises 9uestions about
the predisposition towards innocence or guilt- scholarly disinterest or pressure0group
co2plicity- in such fields as blac6 or wo2en<s studies! It necessarily pro>o6es unrest
in one<s conscience about cultural- racial- or historical generaliAations- their uses-
>alue- degree of ob@ecti>ity- and funda2ental intent! More than anything else- the
political and cultural circu2stances in which estern 3rientalis2 has flourished
draw attention to the debased position of the 3rient or 3riental as an ob@ect of study!
Can any other than a political 2aster0sla>e relation produce the 3rientaliAed 3rient
perfectly characteriAed by Anwar Abdel Male6L
*E
aG 3n the le>el of the position o# the problem, and the proble2atic ! ! ! the
3rient and 3rientals Yare considered by 3rientalis2Z as an Cob@ectD of study-
sta2ped with an otherness 0as all that is different- whether it be Csub@ectD or
ob@ectD0but of a constituti>e otherness- of an essentialist character ! ! ! ! 1his
Cob@ectD of study will be- as is custo2ary- passi>e- non 0participating- entered
with a ChistoricalD sub@ecti>ity- abo>e all- non0acti>e- non0autono2ous-
non0so>ereign with regard to itself: the only 3rient or 3riental or Csub@ectD which
could be ad2itted- at the e4tre2e li2it- is the alienated being- philosophically-
that is- other than itself in relationship to itself- posed- understood- definedNand
acted000 by others!
bG 3n the le>el of the thematic, Ythe 3rientalistsZ adopt an essentialist
conception of the countries- nations and peoples of the 3rient study- a conception
which e4presses itself through a characteriAed ethnist typology ! ! ! and will soon
proceed with it towards racisi2!
According to the traditional orientalists- an essence should e4ist 0so2eti2es
e>en clearly described in 2etaphysical ter2s0which constitutes the inalienable
and co22on basis of all the beings considered this essence is both Chistorical-D
since it goes bac6 to the dawn of history- and funda2entally a0historical- since it
transfi4es the being- Cthe ob@ectD of study- within its inalienable and none>oluti>e
specificity- instead of defining it as all other beings- states- nations- peoples- and
cultures0as a product- a resultant of the >ection of the forces operating in the field
of historical e>olution!
1hus one ends with a typology0based on a real specificity- but detached fro2
history- and- conse9uently- concei>ed as being intangible essential0000which
2a6es of the studied Cob@ectD another being with rcgard to who2 the studying
sub@ect is transcendentJ we ill base a ho2o "inicus- a ho2o Arabicus Fand why
not a ho2o Aegypticus- etc!G- a ho2o Africanus- the 2an0the Cnor2al 2an< it is
understood being the European 2an of the historical period- that is- since 5ree6
anti9uity! 3ne sees how 2uch- fro2 the Eighteenth to the twentieth century- the
hege2onis2 of possessing Minorities- un>eiled by Mar4 and Engels- and the
anthropocentris2 dis2antled by Freud are acco2panied by europocentris2 in the
area of hu2an and social sciences- and 2ore particularly is those in direct
relationship with non0European peoples!
,,
Abdel Male6 sees 3rientalis2 as ha>ing a history which- according the
C3rientalD of the late twentieth century- led it to the i2passe described abo>e! 'et us
now briefly outline that history as
*+
it proceeded through the nineteenth century to accu2ulate weight and power- Cthe
hege2onis2 of possessing 2inorities-D and anthropocentris2 in alliance with
Europocentris2! Fro2 the last decades of the eighteenth century and for at least a
century and a half- Britain and France do2inated 3rientalis2 as a discipline! 1he
great philological disco>eries in co2parati>e gra22ar 2ade by Jones- FranA Bopp-
Ja6ob 5ri22- and others were originally indebted to 2anuscripts brought fro2 the
East to &aris and 'ondon! Al2ost without e4ception- e>ery 3rientalist began his
career as a philologist- and the re>olution in philology that produced Bopp- "acy-
Burnouf- and their students was a co2parati>e science based on the pre2ise that
languages belong to fa2ilies- of which the Indo0European and the "e2itic are two
great instances! Fro2 the outset- then- 3rientalis2 carried forward two traits: F1G a
newly found scientific self0consciousness based on the linguistic i2portance of the
3rient to Europe- and F2G a procli>ity to di>ide- subdi>ide- and redi>ide its sub@ect
2atter without e>er changing its 2ind about the 3rient as being always the sa2e-
unchanging- unifor2- and radically peculiar ob@ect!
Friedrich "chlegel- who learned his "ans6rit in &aris- illustrates these traits
together! Although by the ti2e he published his Fber die 4prache and )eisheit der
/ndier in 1,7, "chlegel had practically renounced his 3rientalis2- he still held that
"ans6rit and &ersian on the one hand and 5ree6 and 5er2an on the other had 2ore
affinities with each other than with the "e2itic- Chinese- A2erican- or African
languages! Moreo>er- the Indo0European fa2ily was artistically si2ple and
satisfactory in a way the "e2itic- for one- was not! "uch abstractions as this did not
trouble "chlegel- for who2 nations- races- 2inds- and peoples as things one could
tal6 about passionately0in the e>er0narrowing perspecti>e of populis2 first
adu2brated by (erder0held a lifelong fascination! Iet nowhere does "chlegel tal6
about the li>ing- conte2porary 3rient! hen he said in 1,77- CIt is in the 3rient that
we 2ust search for the highest #o2anticis2-D he 2eant the 3rient of the 4akuntala,
the Rend0A>esta- and the ?panishads! As for the "e2ites- whose language was
agglutinati>e- unaesthetic- and 2echanical- they were different- inferior- bac6ward!
"chlegel<s lectures on language and on life- history- and literature are full of these
discri2inations- which he 2ade without the slightest 9ualification! (ebrew- he said-
was 2ade for prophetic utterance and di>inationJ
*,
the Musli2s- howe>er- espoused a Cdead e2pty 1heis2- a 2erely negati>e ?nitarian
faith!D
,*
Much of the racis2 in "chlegel<s strictures upon the "e2ites and other ClowD
3rientals was widely diffused in European culture! But nowhere else- unless it be
later in the nineteenth century a2ong .arwinian anthropologists and phrenologists-
was it 2ade the basis of a scientific sub@ect 2atter as it was in co2parati>e linguistics
or philology! 'anguage and race see2ed ine4tricably tied- and the CgoodD 3rient was
in>ariably a classical period so2ewhere in a long0gone India- whereas the CbadD
3rient lingered in present0day Asia- parts of /orth Africa- and Isla2 e>erywhere!
CAryansD were confined to Europe and the ancient 3rientJ as 'eon &olia6o> has
shown Fwithout once re2ar6ing- howe>er- that C"e2itesD were not only the Jews but
the Musli2s as well
*7
G- the Aryan 2yth do2inated historical and cultural
anthropology at the e4pense of the ClesserD peoples!
1he official intellectual genealogy of 3rientalis2 would certainly include
5obineau- #enan- (u2boldt- "teinthal- Burnouf- #e2usat- &al2er- eil- .oAy-
Muir- to 2ention a few fa2ous na2es al2ost at rando2 fro2 the nineteenth century!
It would also include the diffusi>e capacity of learned societies: the "ociete asiati9ue-
founded in 1,22J the #oyal Asiatic "ociety- founded in 1,2)J the A2erican 3riental
"ociety- founded in 1,=2J and so on! But it 2ight perforce neglect the great
contribution of i2aginati>e and tra>el literature- which strengthened the di>isions
established by 3rientalists between the >arious geographical- te2poral- and racial
depart2ents of the 3rient! "uch neglect would be incorrect- since for the Isla2ic
3rient this literature is especially rich and 2a6es a significant contribution to
building the 3rientalist discourse! It includes wor6 by 5oethe- (ugo- 'a2artine-
Chateaubriand- %ingla6e- /er>al- Flaubert- 'ane- Burton- "cott- Byron- Bigny-
.israeli- 5eorge Eliot- 5autier! 'ater- in the late nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries- we could add .oughty- Barr]s- 'oti- 1! E! 'awrence- Forster! All these
writers gi>e a bolder outline to .israeli<s Cgreat Asiatic 2ystery!D In this enterprise
there is considerable support not only fro2 the unearthing of dead 3riental
ci>iliAations Fby 0European e4ca>atorsG in Mesopota2ia- Egypt- "yria- and 1ur6ey-
but also fro2 2a@or geographical sur>eys done all through the 3rient!
By the end of the nineteenth century these achie>e2ents were 2aterially abetted
by the European occupation of the entire /ear
**
3rient Fwith the e4ception of parts of the 3tto2an E2pire- which was swallowed up
after 1*1,G! 1he principal colonial powers once again were Britain and France-
although #ussia and 5er2any played so2e role as well!
*1
1o coloniAe 2eant at first
the identification0indeed- the creation0of interestsJ these could be co22ercial-
co22unicational- religious- 2ilitary- cultural! ith regard to Isla2 and the Isla2ic
territories- for e4a2ple- Britain felt that it had legiti2ate interests- as a Christian
power- to safeguard! A co2ple4 apparatus for tending these interests de>eloped! "uch
early organiAations as the "ociety for &ro2oting Christian %nowledge F1E*, G and the
"ociety for the &ropagation of the 5ospel in Foreign &arts F1+71G were succeeded and
later abetted by the Baptist Missionary "ociety F1+*2G - the Church Missionary
"ociety F1+**G- the British and Foreign Bible "ociety F1,7=G- the 'ondon "ociety for
&ro2oting Christianity A2ong the Jews F1,7,G ! 1hese 2issions Copenly @oined the
e4pansion of Europe!D
*2
Add to these the trading societies- learned societies-
geographical e4ploration funds- translation funds- the i2plantation in the 3rient of
schools- 2issions- consular offices- factories- and so2eti2es large European
co22unities- and the notion of an interestD will ac9uire a good deal of sense!
1hereafter interests were defended with 2uch Aeal and e4pense!
"o far 2y outline is a gross one! hat of the typical e4periences and e2otions
that acco2pany both the scholarly ad>ances of 3rientalis2 and the political
con9uests aided by 3rientalis2L First- there is disappoint2ent that the 2odern 3rient
is not at all li6e the te4ts! (ere is 5erard de /er>al writing to 1heophile 5autier at
the end of August 1,=):
I ha>e already lost- %ingdo2 after %ingdo2- pro>ince after pro>ince- the 2ore
beautiful half of the uni>erse- and soon I will 6now of no place in which I can
find a refuge for 2y drea2sJ but it is Egypt that I 2ost regret ha>ing dri>en out
of 2y i2agination- now that I ha>e sadly placed it in 2y 2e2ory!
*)
1his is by the author of a great ,oyage en "rient. /er>al<s la2ent is a co22on topic
of #o2anticis2 Fthe betrayed drea2- as described by Albert BPguin in ($me
romanti3ue et le rGve+ and of tra>elers in the Biblical 3rient- fro2 Chateaubriand to
Mar6 1wain! Any direct e4perience of the 2undane 3rient ironically co22ents on
such >aloriAations of it as were to be found in 5oethe<s CMaho2etsgesangD or
(ugo<s CAdieu4 de l<h`tesse arabe!D Me2ory
177
of the 2ode2 3rient disputes i2agination- sends one bac6 to the i2agination as a
place preferable- for the European sensibility- to the real 3rient! For a person who has
ne>er seen the 3rient- /er>al once said to 5autier- a lotus is still a lotusJ for 2e it is
only a 6ind of onion! 1o write about the 2ode2 3rient is either to re>eal an upsetting
de2ystification of i2ages culled fro2 te4ts- or to confine oneself to the 3rient of
which (ugo spo6e in his original preface to (es "rientales, the 3rient as Ci2ageD or
CpensPe-D sy2bols of Cune sorte de prPoccupation gPnPrale!D
*=
If personal disenchant2ent and general preoccupation fairly 2ap the 3rientalist
sensibility at first- they entail certain other 2ore fa2iliar habits of thought- feeling-
and perception! 1he 2ind learns to separate a general apprehension of the 3rient
fro2 a specific e4perience of itJ each goes its separate way- so to spea6! In "cott<s
no>el The Talisman F1,2;G- "ir %enneth Fof the Crouching 'eopardG battles a single
"aracen to a standoff so2ewhere in the &alestinian desertJ as the Crusader and his
opponent- who is "aladin in disguise- later engage in con>ersation- the Christian
disco>ers his Musli2 antagonist to be not so bad a fellow after all! Iet he re2ar6s:
I well thought ! ! ! that your blinded race had their descent fro2 the foul fiend-
without whose aid you would ne>er ha>e been able to 2aintain this blessed land
of &alestine against so 2any >aliant soldiers of 5od! I spea6 not thus of thee in
particular- "aracen- but generally of thy people and religion! "trange is it to 2e-
howe>er- not that you should ha>e the descent fro2 the E>il 3ne- but that you
should boast of it!
*;
For indeed the "aracen does boast of tracing his race<s line bac6 to Eblis- the Musli2
'ucifer! But what is truly curious is not the feeble historicis2 by which "cott 2a6es
the scene C2edie>al-D letting Christian attac6 Musli2 theologically in a way
nineteenth0century Europeans would not Fthey would- thoughGJ rather- it is the airy
condescension of da2ning a whole people CgenerallyD while 2itigating the offense
with a cool CI don<t 2ean you in particular!D
"cott- howe>er- was no e4pert on Isla2 Falthough (! A! #! 5ibb- who was-
praised The Talisman for its insight into Isla2 and "aladin
*E
G- and he was ta6ing
enor2ous liberties with Eblis<s role by turning hi2 into a hero for the faithful! "cott<s
6nowledge probably ca2e fro2 Byron and Bec6ford- but it is enough for us
171
here to note how strongly the general character ascribed to things 3riental could
withstand both the rhetorical and the e4istential force of ob>ious e4ceptions! It is as
if- on the one hand- a bin called C3rientalD e4isted into which all the authoritati>e-
anony2ous- and traditional estern attitudes to the East were du2ped unthin6ingly-
while on the other- true to the anecdotal tradition of storytelling- one could
ne>ertheless tell of e4periences with or in the 3rient that had little to do with the
generally ser>iceable bin! But the >ery structure of "cott<s prose shows a closer
intertwining of the two than that! For the general category in ad>ance offers the
specific instance a li2ited terrain in which to operate: no 2atter how deep the
specific e4ception- no 2atter how 2uch a single 3riental can escape the fences
placed around hi2- he is #irst an 3riental- second a hu2an being- and last again an
3riental!
"o general a category as C3rientalD is capable of 9uite interesting >ariations!
.israeli<s enthusias2 for the 3rient appeared first during a trip East in 1,)1! In Cairo
he wrote- CMy eyes and 2ind yet ache with a grandeur so little in unison with our
own li6eness!D
*+
5eneral grandeur and passion inspired a transcendent sense of things
and little patience for actual reality! (is no>el Tancred is steeped in racial and
geographical platitudesJ e>erything is a 2atter of race- "idonia states- so 2uch so that
sal>ation can only be found in the 3rient and a2ongst its races! 1here- as a case in
point- .ruAes- Christians- Musli2s- and Jews hobnob easily because0so2eone
9uips0Arabs are si2ply Jews on horsebac6- and all are 3rientals at heart! 1he unisons
are 2ade between general categories- not between categories and what they contain!
An 3riental li>es in the 3rient- he li>es a life of 3riental ease- in a state of 3riental
despotis2 and sensuality- i2bued with a feeling of 3riental fatalis2! riters as
different as Mar4- .israeli- Burton- and /er>al could carry on a lengthy discussion
between the2sel>es- as it were- using all those generalities un9uestioningly and yet
intelligibly!
ith disenchant2ent and a generaliAed0not to say schiAophrenic0>iew of the
3rient- there is usually another peculiarity! Because it is 2ade into a general ob@ect-
the whole 3rient can be 2ade to ser>e as an illustration of a particular for2 of
eccentricity! Although the indi>idual 3riental cannot sha6e or disturb the general
categories that 2a6e sense of his oddness- his oddness can ne>ertheless be en@oyed
for its own sa6e! (ere- for e4a2ple- is Flaubert describing the spectacle of the 3rient:
172
1o a2use the crowd- Moha22ed Ali<s @ester too6 a wo2an in a Cairo baAaar
one day- set her on the counter of a shop- and coupled with her publicly while the
shop6eeper cal2ly s2o6ed his pipe!
3n the road fro2 Cairo to "hubra so2e ti2e ago a young fellow had hi2self
publicly buggered by a large 2on6ey0as in the story abo>e- to create a good
opinion of hi2self and 2a6e people laugh!
A 2arabout died a while ago0an idiot0who had long passed as a saint 2ar6ed
by 5odJ all the Mosle2 wo2en ca2e to see hi2 and 2asturbated hi20in the end
he died of e4haustion0fro2 2orning to night it was a perpetual @ac6ing0off !!!!
Duid dicis of the following fact: so2e ti2e ago a santon Fascetic priestG used
to wal6 through the streets of Cairo co2pletely na6ed e4cept for a cap on his
head and another on his pric6! 1o piss he would doff the pric60cap- and sterile0
wo2en who wanted children would run up- put the2sel>es under the parabola of
his urine and rub the2sel>es with it!
*,
Flaubert fran6ly ac6nowledges that this is grotes9uerie of a special 6ind! CAll the old
co2ic businessD0by which Flaubert 2eant the well06nown con>entions of Cthe
cudgeled sla>e ! ! ! the coarse traffic6er in wo2en ! ! ! the thie>ing 2erchantD0ac9uire
a new- Cfresh ! ! ! genuine and char2ingD 2eaning in the 3rient! 1his 2eaning cannot
be reproducedJ it can only be en@oyed on the spot and Cbrought bac6D >ery
appro4i2ately! 1he 3rient is watched, since its al2ost Fbut ne>er 9uiteG offensi>e
beha>ior issues out of a reser>oir of infinite peculiarityJ the European- whose
sensibility tours the 3rient- is a watcher- ne>er in>ol>ed- always detached- always
ready for new e4a2ples of what the Description de l?gypte called CbiAarre
@ouissance!D 1he 3rient beco2es a li>ing tableau of 9ueerness!
And this tableau 9uite logically beco2es a special topic for te4ts! 1hus the circle
is co2pletedJ fro2 being e4posed as what te4ts do not prepare one for- the 3rient can
return as so2ething one writes about in a disciplined way! Its foreignness can be
translated- its 2eanings decoded- its hostility ta2edJ yet the generality assigned to the
3rient- the disenchant2ent that one feels after encountering it- the unresol>ed
eccentricity it displays- are all redistributed in what is said or written about it! Isla2-
for e4a2ple- was typically 3riental for 3rientalists of the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries! Carl Bec6er argued that although CIsla2D Fnote the >ast
generalityG inherited the (ellenic tradition- it could neither grasp
17)
nor e2ploy the 5ree6- hu2anistic traditionJ 2oreo>er- to understand Isla2 one
needed abo>e all else to see it- not as an CoriginalD religion- but as a sort of failed
3riental atte2pt to e2ploy 5ree6 philosophy without the creati>e inspiration that we
find in #enaissance Europe!
**
For 'ouis Massignon- perhaps the 2ost renowned and
influential of 2odern French 3rientalists- Isla2 was a syste2atic re@ection of the
Christian incarnation- and its greatest hero was not Moha22ed or A>errods but
al0(alla@- a Musli2 saint who was crucified by the orthodo4 Musli2s for ha>ing
dared to personaliAe Isla2!
177
hat Bec6er and Massignon e4plicitly left out of their
studies was the eccentricity of the 3rient- which they bac6handedly ac6nowledged by
trying so hard to regulariAe it in estern ter2s! Moha22ed was thrown out- but
al0(alla@ was 2ade pro2inent because he too6 hi2self to be a Christ figure!
As a @udge of the 3rient- the 2odern 3rientalist does not- as he belie>es and e>en
says- stand apart fro2 it ob@ecti>ely! (is hu2an detach2ent- whose sign is the
absence of sy2pathy co>ered by professional 6nowledge- is weighted hea>ily with all
the orthodo4 attitudes- perspecti>es- and 2oods of 3rientalis2 that I ha>e been
describing! (is 3rient is not the 3rient as it is- but the 3rient as it has been
3rientaliAed!An unbro6en arc of 6nowledge and power connects the European or
estern states2an and the estern 3rientalistsJ it for2s the ri2 of the stage
containing the 3rient!By the end of orld ar I both Africa and the 3rient for2ed
not so 2uch an intellectual spectacle for the est as a pri>ileged terrain for it! 1he
scope of 3rientalis2 e4actly 2atched the scope of e2pire- and it was this absolute
unani2ity between the two that pro>o6ed the only crisis in the history of estern
thought about and dealings with the 3rient! And this crisis continues now!
Beginning in the twenties- and fro2 one end of the 1hird orld to the other- the
response to e2pire and i2perialis2 has been dialectical! By the ti2e of the Bandung
Conference in 1*;; the entire 3rient had gained its political independence fro2 the
estern e2pires and confronted a new configuration of i2perial powers- the ?nited
"tates and the "o>iet ?nion! ?nable to recogniAe CitsD 3rient in the new 1hird
orld- 3rientalis2 now faced a challenging and politically ar2ed 3rient! 1wo
alternati>es opened before 3rientalis2! 3ne was to carry on as if nothing had
happened! 1he second was to adapt the old ways to the new! But to the 3rientalist-
who belie>es the 3rient ne>er changes- the new is si2ply the old betrayed by new-
2isunderstanding dis'"rientals Fwe can per2it
17=
oursel>es the neologis2G! A third- re>isionist alternati>e- to dispense with 3rientalis2
altogether- was considered by only a tiny 2inority! 3ne inde4 of the crisis- according
to Abdel Male6- was not si2ply that Cnational liberation 2o>e2ents in the
e40colonialD 3rient wor6ed ha>oc with 3rientalist conceptions of passi>e- fatalistic
Csub@ect racesDJ there was in addition the fact that Cspecialists and the public at large
beca2e aware of the ti2e0lag- not only between orientalist science and the 2aterial
under study- but also0and this was to be deter2ining0between the conceptions- the
2ethods and the instru2ents of wor6 in the hu2an and social sciences and those of
orientalis2!D
171
1he 3rientalists0fro2 #enan to 5oldAiher to Macdonald to >on
5runebau2- 5ibb- and Bernard 'ewis00saw Isla2- for e4a2ple- as a Ccultural
synthesisD Fthe phrase is &! M! (olt<sG that could be studied apart fro2 the econo2ics-
sociology- and politics of the Isla2ic peoples! For 3rientalis2- Isla2 had a 2eaning
which- if one were to loo6 for its 2ost succinct for2ulation- could be found in
#enan<s first treatise: in order best to be understood Isla2 had to be reduced to Ctent
and tribe!D 1he i2pact of colonialis2- of worldly circu2stances- of historical
de>elop2ent: all these were to 3rientalists as flies to wanton boys- 6illed0or
disregarded0for their sport- ne>er ta6en seriously enough to co2plicate the essential
Isla2!
1he career of (! A! #! 5ibb illustrates within itself the two alternati>e approaches
by which 3rientalis2 has responded to the 2odern 3rient! In 1*=; 5ibb deli>ered
the (as6ell 'ectures at the ?ni>ersity of Chicago! 1he world he sur>eyed was not the
sa2e one Balfour and Cro2er 6new before orld ar I! "e>eral re>olutions- two
world wars- and innu2erable econo2ic- political- and social changes 2ade the
realities of 1*=; an un2ista6ably- e>en cataclys2ically- new ob@ect! Iet we find
5ibb opening the lectures he called Modern Trends in Isla2 as follows:
1he student of Arabic ci>iliAation is constantly brought up against the stri6ing
contrast between the i2aginati>e power displayed- for e4a2ple- in certain
branches of Arabic literature and the literalis2- the pedantry- displayed in
reasoning and e4position- e>en when it is de>oted to these sa2e productions! It is
true that there ha>e been great philosophers a2ong the Musli2 peoples and that
so2e of the2 were Arabs- but they were rare e4ceptions! 1he Arab 2ind-
whether in relation to the outer world or in relation to the processes of thought-
cannot throw off its intense feeling for the separateness and the indi>iduality of
the concrete e>ents!
17;
1his is- I belie>e- one of the 2ain factors lying behind that Clac6 of a sense of
lawD which &rofessor Macdonald regarded as the characteristic difference in the
3riental!
It is this- too- which e4plains0what is so difficult for the estern student to
grasp Yuntil it is e4plained to hi2 by the 3rientalistZ 0the a>ersion of the Musli2s
fro2 the thoughtprocesses of rationalis2 !!!! 1he re@ection of rationalist 2odes of
thought and of the utilitarian ethic which is inseparable fro2 the2 has its roots-
therefore- not in the so0called Cobscurantis2D of the Musli2 theologians but in
the ato2is2 and discreteness of the Arab i2agination!
172
1his is pure 3rientalis2- of course- but e>en if one ac6nowledges the e4ceeding
6nowledge of institutional Isla2 that characteriAes the rest of the boo6- 5ibb<s
inaugural biases re2ain a for2idable obstacle for anyone hoping to understand
2odern Isla2! hat is fine 2eaning of CdifferenceD when the preposition Cfro2D has
dropped fro2 sight altogetherL Are we not once again being as6ed to inspect the
3riental Musli2 as if his world- unli6e ours0CdifferentlyD fro2 it had ne>er >entured
beyond the se>enth centuryL As for 2odern ai2 itself- despite the co2ple4ities of his
otherwise 2agisterial understanding of it- why 2ust it be regarded with so i2placable
a hostility as 5ibb<sL If Isla2 is flawed fro2 the start by >irtue of its per2anent
disabilities- the 3rientalist will find hi2self opposing any Isla2ic atte2pts to refor2
Isla2- because- according to his >iews- refor2 is a betrayal of Isla2: this is e4actly
5ibb<s argu2ent! (ow can an 3riental slip out fro2 these 2anacles into the 2odern
world e4cept by repeating with the Fool in Hing (ear, C1hey<ll ha>e 2e whipp<d for
spea6ing true- thou<lt ha>e 2e whipp<d for lyingJ and so2eti2es I a2 whipp<d for
holding 2y peace!D
Eighteen years later 5ibb faced an audience of English co2patriots- only now he
was spea6ing as the director of the Center for Middle Eastern "tudies at (ar>ard! (is
topic was CArea "tudies #econsidered-D in which- a2ong other apercus, he agreed
that Cthe 3rient is 2uch too i2portant to be left to the 3rientalists!D 1he new-or
second alternati>e- approach open to 3rientalists was being announced- @ust as
Modern Trends e4e2plified the first- or traditional- approach! 5ibb<s for2ula is
well0intentioned in CArea "tudies #econsidered-D so far- of course- as the estern
e4perts on the 3rient are concerned- whose @ob it is to prepare students for careers Cin
public life and business!D hat we now need- said 5ibb-
17E
is the traditional 3rientalist plus a good social scientist wor6ing together: between
the2 the two will do interdisciplinaryD wor6! Iet the traditional 3rientalist will not
bring outdated 6nowledge to bear on the 3rientJ no- his e4pertise will ser>e to re2ind
his uninitiated colleagues in area studies that Cto apply the psychology and 2echanics
of estern political institutions to Asian or Arab situations is pure alt .isney!!D
17)
In practice this notion has 2eant that when 3rientals struggle against colonial
occupation- you 2ust say Fin order not to ris6 a .isneyis2G that 3rientals ha>e ne>er
understood the 2eaning of self0go>ern2ent the way CweD do! hen so2e 3rientals
oppose racial discri2ination while others practice it- you say Cthey<re all 3rientals at
botto2D and class interest- political circu2stances- econo2ic factors are totally
irrele>ant! 3r with Bernard 'ewis- you say that if Arab &alestinians oppose Israeli
settle2ent and occupation of their lands- then that is 2erely Cthe return of Isla2-D or-
as a renowned conte2porary 3rientalist defines it- Isla2ic opposition to non0Isla2ic
peoples-
17=
a principle of Isla2 enshrined in the se>enth century! (istory- politics-
and econo2ics do not 2atter! Isla2 is Isla2- the 3rient is the 3rient- and please ta6e
all your ideas about a left and a right wing- re>olutions- and change bac6 to
.isneyland!
If such tautologies- clai2s- and dis2issals ha>e not sounded fa2iliar to
historians- sociologists- econo2ists- and hu2anists in any other field e4cept
3rientalis2- the reason is patently ob>ious! For li6e its putati>e sub@ect 2atter-
3rientalis2 has not allowed ideas to >iolate its profound serenity! But 2odern
3rientalists0or area e4perts- to gi>e the2 their new na2e0ha>e not passi>ely
se9uestered the2sel>es in language depart2ents! 3n the contrary- they ha>e profited
fro2 5ibb<s ad>ice! Most of the2 today are indistinguishable fro2 other Ce4pertsD
and Cad>isersD in what (arold 'asswell has called the policy sciences!
17;
1hus the
2ilitary national0security possibilities of an alliance- say- between a specialist in
Cnational character analysisD and an e4pert in Isla2ic institutions were soon
recogniAed- for e4pediency<s sa6e if for nothing else! After all- the CestD since
orld ar II had faced a cle>er totalitarian ene2y who collected allies for itself
a2ong gullible 3riental FAfrican- Asian- unde>elopedG nations! hat better way of
outflan6ing that ene2y than by playing to the 3riental<s illogical 2ind in ways only
an 3rientalist could de>iseL 1hus e2erged such 2asterful ploys as the
stic60and0carrot techni9ue- the Alliance for
17+
&rogress- "EA13- and so forth- all of the2 based on traditional C6nowledgeD retooled
for better 2anipulation of its supposed ob@ect!
1hus as re>olutionary tur2oil grips the Isla2ic 3rient- sociologists re2ind us that
Arabs are addicted to Coral functions-D
17E
while econo2ists0recycled
3rientalists0obser>e that for 2odern Isla2 neither capitalis2 nor socialis2 is an
ade9uate rubric!
17+
As anticolonialis2 sweeps and indeed unifies the entire 3riental
world- the 3rientalist da2ns the whole business not only as a nuisance but as an
insult to the estern de2ocracies! As 2o2entous- generally i2portant issues face the
world0issues in>ol>ing nuclear destruction- catastrophically scarce resources-
unprecedented hu2an de2ands for e9uality- @ustice- and econo2ic parity0popular
caricatures of the 3rient are e4ploited by politicians whose source of ideological
supply is not only the half0literate technocrat but the superliterate 3rientalist! 1he
legendary Arabists in the "tate .epart2ent warn of Arab plans to ta6e o>er the world!
1he perfidious Chinese- half0na6ed Indians- and passi>e Musli2s are described as
>ultures for CourD largesse and are da2ned when Cwe lose the2D to co22unis2- or
to their unregenerate 3riental instincts: the difference is scarcely significant!
1hese conte2porary 3rientalist attitudes flood the press and the popular 2ind!
Arabs- for e4a2ple- are thought of as ca2elriding- terroristic- hoo6nosed- >enal
lechers whose undeser>ed wealth is an affront to real ci>iliAation! Always there lur6s
the assu2ption that although the estern consu2er belongs to a nu2erical 2inority-
he is entitled either to own or to e4pend For bothG the 2a@ority of the world resources!
hyL Because he- unli6e the 3riental-is a true hu2an being! /o better instance e4ists
today of what Anwar Abdel Male6 calls Cthe hege2onis2 of possessing 2inoritiesD
and anthropocentris2 allied with Europocentris2: a white 2iddle0class esterner
belie>es it his hu2an prerogati>e not only to 2anage the nonwhite world but also to
own it- @ust because by definition CitD is not 9uite as hu2an as CweD are! 1here is no
purer e4a2ple than this of dehu2aniAed thought!
In a sense the li2itations of 3rientalis2 are- as I said earlier- the li2itations that
follow upon disregarding- essentialiAing- denuding the hu2anity of another culture-
people- or geographical region! But 3rientalis2 has ta6en a further step than that: it
>iews the 3rient as so2ething whose e4istence is not only displayed but has
re2ained fi4ed in ti2e and place for the est! "o i2pressi>e ha>e the descripti>e and
te4tual successes of 3rientalis2 been that
17,
entire periods of the 3rient<s cultural- political- and social history are considered
2ere responses to the est! 1he est is the actor- the 3rient a passi>e reactor! 1he
est is the spectator- the @udge and @ury- of e>ery facet of 3riental beha>ior! Iet if
history during the twentieth century has pro>o6ed intrinsic change in and for the
3rient- the 3rientalist is stunned: he cannot realiAe that to so2e e4tent
the new Y3rientalZ leaders- intellectuals or policy02a6ers- ha>e learned 2any
lessons fro2 the tra>ail of their predecessors! 1hey ha>e also been aided by the
structural and institutional transfor2ations acco2plished in the inter>ening
period and by the fact that they are to a great e4tent 2ore at liberty to fashion the
future of their countries! 1hey are also 2uch 2ore confident and perhaps slightly
aggressi>e! /o longer do they ha>e to function hoping to obtain a fa>orable
>erdict fro2 the in>isible @ury of the est! 1heir dialogue is not with the est- it
is with their fellow citiAens!
17,
Moreo>er- the 3rientalist assu2es that what his te4ts ha>e not prepared hi2 for is the
result either of outside agitation in the 3rient or of the 3rient<s 2isguided inanity!
/one of the innu2erable 3rientalist te4ts on Isla2- including their su22a- The
2ambridge .istory o# /slam, can prepare their reader for what has ta6en place since
1*=, in Egypt- &alestine- Ira9- "yria- 'ebanon- or the Ie2ens! hen the dog2as
about Isla2 cannot ser>e- not e>en for the 2ost &anglossian 3rientalist- there is
recourse to an 3rientaliAed social0science @argon- to such 2ar6etable abstractions as
elites- political stability- 2oderniAation- and institutional de>elop2ent- all sta2ped
with the cachet of 3rientalist wisdo2! In the 2eanti2e a growing- 2ore and 2ore
dangerous rift separates 3rient and 3ccident!
1he present crisis dra2atiAes the disparity between te4ts and reality! Iet in this
study of 3rientalis2 I wish not only to e4pose the sources of 3rientalis2<s >iews but
also to reflect on its i2portance- for the conte2porary intellectual rightly feels that to
ignore a part of the world now de2onstrably encroaching upon hi2 is to a>oid
reality! (u2anists ha>e too often confined their attention to depart2entaliAed topics
of research! 1hey ha>e neither watched nor learned fro2 disciplines li6e 3rientalis2
whose unre2itting a2bition was to 2aster all of a world- not so2e easily deli2ited
part of it such as an author or a collection of te4ts! (owe>er- along with such
acade2ic security0blan6ets as Chistory-D
17*
Cliterature-D or Cthe hu2anities-D and despite its o>erreaching aspirations- 3rientalis2
is in>ol>ed in worldly- historical circu2stances which it has tried to conceal behind
an often po2pous scientis2 and appeals to rationalis2! 1he conte2porary intellectual
can learn fro2 3rientalis2 how- on the one hand- either to li2it or to enlarge
realistically the scope of his disciplinefs clai2s- and on the other- to see the hu2an
ground Fthe foul0rag0and0bone shop of the heart- Ieats called itG in which te4ts-
>isions- 2ethods- and disciplines begin- grow- thri>e- and degenerate! 1o in>estigate
3rientalis2 is also to propose intellectual ways for handling the 2ethodological
proble2s that history has brought forward- so to spea6- in its sub@ect 2atter- the
3rient! But before that we 2ust >irtually see the hu2anistic >alues that 3rientalis2-
by its scope- e4periences- and structures- has all but eli2inated!
117
2
Orientalist Structures
and Restructures
hen the seyyid f32ar- the /a6eeb el0Ashrgf For chief of the descendants of the
&rophetG ! ! ! 2arried a daughter- about forty0fi>e years since- there wal6ed before the
procession a young 2an who had 2ade an incision in his abdo2en- and drawn out a
large portion of his intestines- which he carried before hi2 on a sil>er tray! After the
procession- he restored the2 to their proper place- and re2ained in bed 2any days
before he reco>ered fro2 the effects of this foolish and disgusting act!
0 Edward illia2 'ane- $n $ccount o# the Manners and 2ustoms o#
the Modern Egyptians
! ! ! dans le cas de la chute de cet e2pire- soit par une rP>olution V Constantinople-
soit par un dP2e2bre2ent successif- lee puissances europPennes prendront chacune-
V titre de protectorat- la partie de lfe2pire 9ui lui sera assignPe par les stipulations du
congr]sJ 9ue ces protectorate- dPfinis et li2itPs- 9uant au4 territoires- selon lee
>oisinages- la shretP des fronti]res- lfanalogie de religions- de 2oeurs et dfinterets ! ! !
ne consacreront 9ue la suAerainetP des puissances! Cette sorte de suAerainetP dPfinie
ainsi- et consacrPe co22e droit europPen- consistera principale2ent dans le droit
dfoccuper telle partie du territoire ou des c`tes- pour y fonder- soit des >ines libres-
soit des colonies europPennes- soit des ports et des Pchelles de co22erce ! ! ! ! Ce
nfest 9ufune tutelle ar2Pe et ci>ilisatrice 9ue cha9ue puissance e4ercera sur son
protectoratJ elle garantira son e4istence et ses PlP2ents de nationalitP- sous le drapeau
dfune nationalitP plus forte!!!!
0Alphonse de 'a2artine- ,oyage en "rient
111
112
I
Redran +rontiers, Redefined
Issues, Seculari-ed Reli"ion
5usta>e Flaubert died in 1,,7 without ha>ing finished Bou>ard et P-cuchet, his
co2ic encyclopedic no>el on the degeneration of 6nowledge and the inanity of
hu2an effort! /e>ertheless the essential outlines of his >ision are clear- and are
clearly supported by the a2ple detail of his no>el! 1he two cler6s are 2e2bers of the
bourgeoisie who- because one of the2 is the une4pected beneficiary of a handso2e
will- retire fro2 the city to spend their li>es on a country estate doing what they
please Finous ferons tout ce 9ue nous plaira^iG! As Flaubert portrays their e4perience-
doing as they please in>ol>es Bou>ard and &ecuchet in a practical and theoretical
@aunt through agriculture- history- che2istry- education- archaeology- literature-
always with less than successful resultsJ they 2o>e through fields of learning li6e
tra>elers in ti2e and 6nowledge- e4periencing the disappoint2ents- disasters- and
letdowns of uninspired a2ateurs! hat they 2o>e through- in fact- is the whole
disillusioning e4perience of the nineteenth century- whereby0in Charles MoraAefs
phrase0iles bourgeois con9uerantsi turn out to be the bu2bling >icti2s of their own
le>eling inco2petence and 2ediocrity! E>ery enthusias2 resol>es itself into a boring
cliche- and e>ery discipline or type of 6nowledge changes fro2 hope and power into
disorder- ruin- and sorrow!
A2ong Flaubertfs s6etches for the conclusion of this panora2a of despair are two
ite2s of special interest to us here! 1he two 2en debate the future of 2an6ind!
&Pcuchet sees ithe future of (u2anity through a glass dar6ly-i whereas Bou>ard sees
it ibrightly^i
Modern 2an is progressing- Europe will be regenerated by Asia! 1he historical
law that ci>iliAation 2o>es fro2 3rient to 3ccident! ! ! the two for2s of
hu2anity will at last be soldered together!
1
1his ob>ious echo of Huinet represents the start of still another of the cycles of
enthusias2 and disillusion2ent through which the two 2en will pass! Flaubertfs notes
indicate that li6e all his others-
11)
this anticipated pro@ect of Bou>ardfs is rudely interrupted by reality0this ti2e by the
sudden appearance of gendar2es who accuse hi2 of debauchery! A few lines later-
howe>er- the second ite2 of interest turns up! 1he two 2en si2ultaneously confess to
each other that their secret desire is once again to beco2e copyists! 1hey ha>e a
double des6 2ade for the2- they buy boo6s- pencils- erasers- and0as Flaubert
concludes the s6etch0 iils sfy 2ettenti: they turn to! Fro2 trying to li>e through and
apply 6nowledge 2ore or less directly- Bou>ard and &ecuchet are reduced finally to
transcribing it uncritically fro2 one te4t to another!
Although Bou>ardfs >ision of Europe regenerated by Asia is not fully spelled out-
it Fand what it co2es to on the copyistfs des6G can be glossed in se>eral i2portant
ways! 'i6e 2any of the two 2enfs other >isions- this one is global and it is
reconstructive5 it represents what Flaubert felt to be the nineteenth0century
predilection for the rebuilding of the world according to an i2aginati>e >ision-
so2eti2es acco2panied by a special scientific techni9ue! A2ong the >isions Flaubert
has in 2ind are the utopias of "aint"i2on and Fourier- the scientific regenerations of
2an6ind en>isioned by Co2te- and all the technical or secular religions pro2oted by
ideologues- positi>ists- eclectics- occultists- traditionalists- and idealists such as
.estutt de 1racy- Cabanis- Michelet- Cousin- &roudhon- Cournot- Cabet- Janet- and
'a2ennais!
2
1hroughout the no>el Bou>ard and &ecuchet espouse the >arious causes
of such figuresJ then- ha>ing ruined the2- they 2o>e on loo6ing for newer ones- but
with no better results!
1he roots of such re>isionist a2bitions as these are #o2antic in a >ery specific
way! e 2ust re2e2ber the e4tent to which a 2a@or part of the spiritual and
intellectual pro@ect of the late eighteenth century was a reconstituted theology0natural
supernaturalis2- as M! (! Abra2s has called itJ this type of thought is carried forward
by the typical nineteenth0century attitudes Flaubert satiriAes in 1ouvard et P-cuchet.
1he notion of regeneration therefore har6s bac6 to
a conspicuous #o2antic tendency- after the rationalis2 and decoru2 of the
Enlighten2ent ! ! ! Yto re>ertZ to the star6 dra2a and suprarational 2ysteries of
the Christian story and doctrines and to the >iolent conflicts and abrupt re>ersals
of the Christian inner life- turning on the e4tre2es of destruction and creation-
hell and hea>en- e4ile and reunion- death and rebirth- de@ection and @oy- paradise
lost and paradise regained!!!! But since they li>ed-
11=
inescapably- after the Enlighten2ent- #o2antic writers re>i>ed these ancient
2atters with a difference: they undertoo6 to sa>e the o>er>iew of hu2an history
and destiny- the e4istential paradig2s- and the cardinal >alues of their religious
heritage- by reconstituting the2 in a way that would 2a6e the2 intellectually
acceptable- as well as e2otionally pertinent- for the ti2e being!
)
hat Bou>ard has in 2ind0the regeneration of Europe by Asia0was a >ery
influential #o2antic idea! Friedrich "chlegel and /o>alis- for e4a2ple- urged upon
their country2en- and upon Europeans in general- a detailed study of India because-
they said- it was Indian culture and religion that could defeat the 2aterialis2 and
2echanis2 Fand republicanis2G of 3ccidental culture! And fro2 this defeat would
arise a new- re>italiAed Europe: the Biblical i2agery of death- rebirth- and rede2ption
is e>ident in this prescription! Moreo>er- the #o2antic 3rientalist pro@ect was not
2erely a specific instance of a general tendencyJ it was a powerful shaper of the
tendency itself- as #ay2ond "chwab has so con>incingly argued in 'a Renaissance
orientale. But what 2attered was not Asia so 2uch as Asiafs use to 2odern Europe!
1hus anyone who- li6e "chlegel or FranA Bopp- 2astered an 3riental language was a
spiritual hero- a 6night0errant bringing bac6 to Europe a sense of the holy 2ission it
had now lost! It is precisely this sense that the later secular religions portrayed by
Flaubert carry on in the nineteenth century! /o less than "chlegel- ordsworth- and
Chateaubriand- Auguste Co2te0li6e Bou>ard0was the adherent and proponent of a
secular post0Enlighten2ent 2yth whose outlines are un2ista6ably Christian!
In regularly allowing Bou>ard and &ecuchet to go through re>isionist notions
fro2 start to co2ically debased finish- Flaubert drew attention to the hu2an flaw
co22on to all pro@ects! (e saw perfectly well that underneath the id-e reEue
iEurope0regenerated0by0Asiai lur6ed a >ery insidious hubris! /either iEuropei nor
iAsiai was anything without the >isionariesf techni9ue for turning >ast geographical
do2ains into treatable- and 2anageable- entities! At botto2- therefore- Europe and
Asia were our Europe and our Asiaour will and representation, as "chopenhauer had
said! (istorical laws were in reality historiansI laws- @ust as ithe two for2s of
hu2anityi drew attention less to actuality than to a European capacity for lending
2an02ade distinctions an air of ine>itability! As for the other half of the phrase0iwill
at last be soldered togetheri0there Flaubert 2oc6ed the blithe indifference of science
to actuality-
11;
a science which anato2iAed and 2elted hu2an entities as if they were so 2uch inert
2atter! But it was not @ust any science he 2oc6ed: it was enthusiastic- e>en 2essianic
European science- whose >ictories included failed re>olutions- wars- oppression- and
an unteachable appetite for putting grand- boo6ish ideas 9ui4otically to wor6
i22ediately! hat such science or 6nowledge ne>er rec6oned with was its own
deeply ingrained and unselfconscious bad innocence and the resistance to it of reality!
hen Bou>ard plays the scientist he nai>ely assu2es that science 2erely is- that
reality is as the scientist says it is- that it does not 2atter whether the scientist is a fool
or a >isionaryJ he For anyone who thin6s li6e hi2G cannot see that the 3rient 2ay not
wish to regenerate Europe- or that Europe was not about to fuse itself de2ocratically
with yellow or brown Asians! In short- such a scientist does not recogniAe in his
science the egoistic will to power that feeds his endea>ors and corrupts his a2bitions!
Flaubert- of course- sees to it that his poor fools are 2ade to rub their noses in
these difficulties! Bou>ard and &ecuchet ha>e learned that it is better not to traffic in
ideas and in reality together! 1he no>elfs conclusion is a picture of the two of the2
now perfectly content to copy their fa>orite ideas faithfully fro2 boo6 onto paper!
%nowledge no longer re9uires application to realityJ 6nowledge is what gets passed
on silently- without co22ent- fro2 one te4t to another! Ideas are propagated and
disse2inated anony2ously- they are repeated without attributionJ they ha>e literally
beco2e id-es reEues< what 2atters is that they are there, to be repeated- echoed- and
re0echoed uncritically!
In a highly co2pressed for2 this brief episode- ta6en out of Flaubertfs notes for
Bou>ard et P-cuchet, fra2es the specifically 2odern structures of 3rientalis2- which
after all is one discipline a2ong the secular Fand 9uasireligiousG faiths of
nineteenth0century European thought! e ha>e already characteriAed the general
scope of thought about the 3rient that was handed on through the 2edie>al and
#enaissance periods- for which Isla2 was the essential 3rient! .uring the eighteenth
century- howe>er- there were a nu2ber of new- interloc6ing ele2ents that hinted at
the co2ing e>angelical phase- whose outlines Flaubert was later to re0create!
For one- the 3rient was being opened out considerably beyond the Isla2ic lands!
1his 9uantitati>e change was to a large degree the result of continuing- and
e4panding- European e4ploration of
11E
the rest of the world! 1he increasing influence of tra>el literature- i2aginary utopias-
2oral >oyages- and scientific reporting brought the 3rient into sharper and 2ore
e4tended focus! If 3rientalis2 is indebted principally to the fruitful Eastern
disco>eries of An9uetil and Jones during the latter third of the century- these 2ust be
seen in the wider conte4t created by Coo6 and Bougain>ille- the >oyages of
1ournefort and Adanson- by the &resident de Brossesfs .istoire des navigations auC
terres australes, by French traders in the &acific- by Jesuit 2issionaries in China and
the A2ericas- by illia2 .a2pierfs e4plorations and reports- by innu2erable
speculations on giants- &atagonians- sa>ages- nati>es- and 2onsters supposedly
residing to the far east- west- south- and north of Europe! But all such widening
horiAons had Europe fir2ly in the pri>ileged center- as 2ain obser>er For 2ainly
obser>ed- as in 5olds2ithfs 2iti6en o# the )orld+. For e>en as Europe 2o>ed itself
outwards- its sense of cultural strength was fortified! Fro2 tra>elersf tales- and not
only fro2 great institutions li6e the >arious India co2panies- colonies were created
and ethnocentric perspecti>es secured!
=
For another- a 2ore 6nowledgeable attitude towards the alien and e4otic was
abetted not only by tra>elers and e4plorers but also by historians for who2 European
e4perience could profitably be co2pared with other- as well as older- ci>iliAations!
1hat powerful current in eighteenth0century historical anthropology- described by
scholars as the confrontation of the gods- 2eant that 5ibbon could read the lessons of
#o2efs decline in the rise of Isla2- @ust as Bico could understand 2odern ci>iliAation
in ter2s of the barbaric- poetic splendor of their earliest beginnings!hereas
#enaissance historians @udged the 3rient infle4ibly as an ene2y- those of the
eighteenth century confronted the 3rientfs peculiarities with so2e detach2ent and
with so2e atte2pt at dealing directly with 3riental source 2aterial- perhaps because
such a techni9ue helped a European to 6now hi2self better! 5eorge "alefs translation
of the %oran and his acco2panying preli2inary discourse illustrate the change!
?nli6e his predecessors- "ale tried to deal with Arab history in ter2s of Arab sourcesJ
2oreo>er- he let Musli2 co22entators on the sacred te4t spea6 for the2sel>es!
;
In
"ale- as throughout the eighteenth century- si2ple co2paratis2 was the early phase
of the co2parati>e disciplines Fphilology- anato2y- @urisprudence- religionG which
were to beco2e the boast of nineteenth0century 2ethod!
11+
But there was a tendency a2ong so2e thin6ers to e4ceed co2parati>e study- and
its @udicious sur>eys of 2an6ind fro2 iChina to &eru-i by sy2pathetic identification!
1his is a third eighteenthcentury ele2ent preparing the way for 2odern 3rientalis2!
hat today we call historicis2 is an eighteenth0century ideaJ Bico- (erder- and
(a2ann- a2ong others- belie>ed that all cultures were organically and internally
coherent- bound together by a spirit- genius- Hlima, or national idea which an outsider
could penetrate only by an act of historical sy2pathy! 1hus (erderfs /deen 6ur
Philosophie der >eschichte der Menschheit J&8:K'&8@&+ was a panora2ic display of
>arious cultures- each per2eated by an ini2ical creati>e spirit- each accessible only
to an obser>er who sacrificed his pre@udices to Ein#uhlung. I2bued with the populist
and pluralist sense of history ad>ocated by (erder and others-
E
an eighteenth0century
2ind could breach the doctrinal walls erected between the est and Isla2 and see
hidden ele2ents of 6inship between hi2self and the 3rient! /apoleon is a fa2ous
instance of this Fusually selecti>eG identification by sy2pathy! MoAart is anotherJ The
Magic !lute Fin which Masonic codes inter2ingle with >isions of !a benign 3rientG
and The $bduction #rom the 4eraglio locate a particularly 2agnani2ous for2 of
hu2anity in the 3rient! And this- 2uch 2ore than the 2odish habits of i1ur6ishi
2usic- drew MoAart sy2pathetically eastwards!
It is >ery difficult nonetheless to separate such intuitions of the 3rient as MoAartfs
fro2 the entire range of pre0#o2antic and #o2antic representations of the 3rient as
e4otic locale! &opular 3rientalis2 during the late eighteenth century and the early
nineteenth attained a >ogue of considerable intensity! But e>en this >ogue- easily
identifiable in illia2 Bec6ford- Byron- 1ho2as Moore- and 5oethe- cannot be
si2ply detached fro2 the interest ta6en in 5othic tales- pseudo2edie>al idylls-
>isions of barbaric splendor and cruelty! 1hus in so2e cases the 3riental
representation can be associated with &iranesifs prisons- in others with 1iepolofs
lu4urious a2biences- in still others with the e4otic subli2ity of late0
eighteenth0century paintings!
+
'ater in the nineteenth century- in the wor6s of
.elacroi4 and literally doAens of other French and British painters- the 3riental genre
tableau carried representation into >isual e4pression and a life of its own Fwhich this
boo6 unfortunately 2ust scantG! "ensuality- pro2ise- terror- subli2ity- idyllic
pleasure- intense energy: the 3rient as a figure in the pre0#o2antic-
11,
pretechnical 3rientalist i2agination of late0eighteenth0century Europe was really a
cha2eleonli6e 9uality called Fad@ecti>allyG i3riental!i
,
But this free0floating 3rient
would be se>erely curtailed with the ad>ent of acade2ic 3rientalis2!
A fourth ele2ent preparing the way for 2odern 3rientalist structures was the
whole i2pulse to classify nature and 2an into types! 1he greatest na2es are- of
course- 'innaeus and Buffon- but the intellectual process by which bodily Fand soon
2oral- intellectual- and spiritualG e4tension0the typical 2ateriality of an ob@ect0could
be transfor2ed fro2 2ere spectacle to the precise 2easure2ent of characteristic
ele2ents was >ery widespread! 'innaeus said that e>ery note 2ade about a natural
type ishould be a product of nu2ber- of for2- of proportion- of situation-i and
indeed- if one loo6s in %ant or .iderot or Johnson- there is e>erywhere a si2ilar
penchant for dra2atiAing general features- for reducing >ast nu2bers of ob@ects to a
s2aller nu2ber of orderable and describable types. In natural history- in
anthropology- in cultural generaliAation- a type had a particular character which
pro>ided the obser>er with a designation and- as Foucault says- ia controlled
deri>ation!i 1hese types and characters belonged to a syste2- a networ6 of related
generaliAations! 1hus-
all designation 2ust be acco2plished by 2eans of a certain relation to all other
possible designations! 1o 6now what properly appertains to one indi>idual is to
ha>e before one the classification0or the possibility of classifying0all others!
*
In the writing of philosophers- historians- encyclopedists- and essayists we find
character0as0designation appearing as physiological2oral classification: there are- for
e4a2ple- the wild 2en- the Europeans- the Asiatics- and so forth! 1hese appear of
course in 'innaeus- but also in Montes9uieu- in Johnson- in Blu2enbach- in
"oe22erring- in %ant! &hysiological and 2oral characteristics are distributed 2ore
or less e9ually: the A2erican is ired- choleric- erect-i the Asiatic is iyellow-
2elancholy- rigid-i the African is iblac6- phleg2atic- la4!i
17
But such designations
gather power when- later in the nineteenth century- they are allied with character as
deri>ation- as genetic type! In Bico and #ousseau- for e4a2ple- the force of 2oral
generaliAation is enhanced by the precision with which dra2atic- al2ost archetypal
figures0pri2iti>e 2an- giants- heroes0are shown to be the genesis of current 2oral-
philosophic-
11*
e>en linguistic issues! 1hus when an 3riental was referred to- it was in ter2s of such
genetic uni>ersals as his ipri2iti>ei state- his pri2ary characteristics- his particular
spiritual bac6ground!
1he four ele2ents I ha>e described00e4pansion- historical confrontation-
sy2pathy- classification0are the currents in eighteenth century thought on whose
presence the specific intellectual and institutional structures of 2odern 3rientalis2
depend! ithout the2 3rientalis2- as we shall see presently- could not ha>e
occurred! Moreo>er- these ele2ents had the effect of releasing the 3rient generally-
and Isla2 in particular- fro2 the narrowly religious scrutiny by which it had hitherto
been e4a2ined Fand @udgedG by the Christian est! In other words- 2odern
3rientalis2 deri>es fro2 seculariAing ele2ents in eighteenth0century European
culture! 3ne- the e4pansion of the 3rient further east geographically and further bac6
te2porally loosened- e>en dissol>ed- the Biblical fra2ewor6 considerably! #eference
points were no longer Christianity and Judais2- with their fairly 2odest calendars
and 2aps- but India- China- Japan- and "u2er- Buddhis2- "ans6rit- Roroastrianis2-
and Manu! 1wo- the capacity for dealing historically Fand not reducti>ely- as a topic
of ecclesiastical politicsG with non0European and non0Judeo0Christian cultures was
strengthened as history itself was concei>ed of 2ore radically than beforeJ to
understand Europe properly 2eant also understanding the ob@ecti>e relations between
Europe and its own pre>iously unreachable te2poral and cultural frontiers! In a sense-
John of "ego>iafs idea of contra#erentia between 3rient and Europe was realiAed- but
in a wholly secular wayJ 5ibbon could treat Moha22ed as a historical figure who
influenced Europe and not as a diabolical 2iscreant ho>ering so2ewhere between
2agic and false prophecy! 1hree- a selecti>e identification with regions and cultures
not onefs own wore down the obduracy of self and identity- which had been polariAed
into a co22unity of e2battled belie>ers facing barbarian hordes! 1he borders of
Christian Europe no longer ser>ed as a 6ind of custo2 houseJ the notions of hu2an
association and of hu2an possibility ac9uired a >ery wide general0as opposed to
parochial0legiti2acy! Four- the classifications of 2an6ind were syste2atically
2ultiplied as the possibilities of designation and deri>ation were refined beyond the
categories of what Bico called gentile and sacred nationsJ race- color- origin-
te2pera2ent- character- and types o>erwhel2ed the distinction between Christians
and e>eryone else!
But if these interconnected ele2ents represent a seculariAing
127
tendency- this is not to say that the old religious patterns of hu2an history and destiny
and ithe e4istential paradig2si were si2ply re2o>ed! Far fro2 it: they were
reconstituted- redeployed- redistributed in the secular fra2ewor6s @ust enu2erated!
For anyone who studied the 3rient a secular >ocabulary in 6eeping with these
fra2ewor6s was re9uired! Iet if 3rientalis2 pro>ided the >ocabulary- the conceptual
repertoire- the techni9ues0for this is what- fro2 the end of the eighteenth century on-
3rientalis2 did and what 3rientalis2 was0it also retained- as an undislodged current
in its discourse- a reconstructed religious i2pulse- a naturaliAed supernaturalis2!
hat I shall try to show is that this i2pulse in 3rientalis2 resided in the 3rientalistfs
conception of hi2self- of the 3rient- and of his discipline!
1he 2odern 3rientalist was- in his >iew- a hero rescuing the 3rient fro2 the
obscurity- alienation- and strangeness which he hi2self had properly distinguished!
(is research reconstructed the 3rientfs lost languages- 2ores- e>en 2entalities- as
Cha2pollion reconstructed Egyptian hieroglyphics out of the #osetta "tone! 1he
specific 3rientalist techni9ues0le4icography- gra22ar- translation- cultural
decoding0restored- fleshed out- reasserted the >alues both of an ancient- classical
3rient and of the traditional disciplines of philology- history- rhetoric- and doctrinal
pole2ic! But in the process- the 3rient and 3rientalist disciplines changed
dialectically- for they could not sur>i>e in their original for2! 1he 3rient- e>en in the
iclassici for2 which the 3rientalist usually studied- was 2oderniAed- restored to the
presentJ the traditional disciplines too were brought into conte2porary culture! Iet
both bore the traces of powerpower to ha>e resurrected- indeed created- the 3rient-
power that dwelt in the new- scientifically ad>anced techni9ues of philology and of
anthropological generaliAation! In short- ha>ing transported the 3rient into 2odernity-
the 3rientalist could celebrate his 2ethod- and his position- as that of a secular
creator- a 2an who 2ade new worlds as 5od had once 2ade the old! As for carrying
on such 2ethods and such positions beyond the life0span of any indi>idual
3rientalist- there would be a secular tradition of continuity- a lay order of disciplined
2ethodologists- whose brotherhood would be based- not on blood lineage- but upon a
co22on discourse- a pra4is- a library- a set of recei>ed ideas- in short- a do4ology-
co22on to e>eryone who entered the ran6s! Flaubert was prescient enough to see
that in ti2e the 2odern 3rientalist would beco2e a copyist- li6e Bou>ard and
&ecuchetJ but during the early days- in
121
the careers of "il>estre de "acy and Ernest #enan- no such danger was apparent!
My thesis is that the essential aspects of 2odern 3rientalist theory and pra4is
Ffro2 which present0day 3rientalis2 deri>esG can be understood- not as a sudden
access of ob@ecti>e 6nowledge about the 3rient- but as a set of structures inherited
fro2 the past- seculariAed- redisposed- and re0for2ed by such disciplines as
philology- which in turn were naturaliAed- 2oderniAed- and laiciAed substitutes for For
>ersions ofG Christian supernaturalis2! In the for2 of new te4ts and ideas- the East
was acco22odated to these structures! 'inguists and e4plorers li6e Jones and
An9uetil were contributors to 2odern 3rientalis2- certainly- but what distinguishes
2odern 3rientalis2 as a field- a group of ideas- a discourse- is the wor6 of a later
generation than theirs! If we use the /apoleonic e4pedition F1+*,01,71G as a sort of
first enabling e4perience for 2odern 3rientalis2- we can consider its inaugural
heroes0in Isla2ic studies- "acy and #enan and 'ane0to be builders of the field-
creators of a tradition- progenitors of the 3rientalist brotherhood! hat "acy- #enan-
and 'ane did was to place 3rientalis2 on a scientific and rational basis! 1his entailed
not only their own e4e2plary wor6 but also the creation of a >ocabulary and ideas
that could be used i2personally by anyone who wished to beco2e an 3rientalist!
1heir inauguration of 3rientalis2 was a considerable feat! It 2ade possible a
scientific ter2inologyJ it banished obscurity and instated a special for2 of
illu2ination for the 3rientJ it established the figure of the 3rientalist as central
authority #or the 3rientJ it legiti2iAed a special 6ind of specifically coherent
3rientalist wor6J it put into cultural circulation a for2 of discursi>e currency by
whose presence the 3rient henceforth would be spoken #or5 abo>e all- the wor6 of the
inaugurators car>ed out a field of study and a fa2ily of ideas which in turn could
for2 a co22unity of scholars whose lineage- traditions- and a2bitions were at once
internal to the field and e4ternal enough for general prestige! 1he 2ore Europe
encroached upon the 3rient during the nineteenth century- the 2ore 3rientalis2
gained in public confidence! Iet if this gain coincided with a loss in originality- we
should not be entirely surprised- since its 2ode- fro2 the beginning- was
reconstruction and repetition!
3ne final obser>ation: 1he late0eighteenth0century and nineteenth0century ideas-
institutions- and figures I shall deal with in this chapter are an i2portant part- a
crucial elaboration- of the first
122
phase of the greatest age of territorial ac9uisition e>er 6nown! By the end of orld
ar I Europe had coloniAed ,; percent of the earth! 1o say si2ply that 2odern
3rientalis2 has been an aspect of both i2perialis2 and colonialis2 is not to say
anything >ery disputable! Iet it is not enough to say itJ it needs to be wor6ed through
analytically and historically! I a2 interested in showing how 2odern 3rientalis2-
unli6e the precolonial awareness of .ante and df(erbelot- e2bodies a syste2atic
discipline of accu2ulation!And far fro2 this being e4clusi>ely an intellectual or
theoretical feature- it 2ade 3rientalis2 fatally tend towards the syste2atic
accu2ulation of hu2an beings and territories! 1o reconstruct a dead or lost 3riental
language 2eant ulti2ately to reconstruct a dead or neglected 3rientJ it also 2eant
that reconstructi>e precision- science- e>en i2agination could prepare the way for
what ar2ies- ad2inistrations- and bureaucracies would later do on the ground- in the
3rient! In a sense- the >indication of 3rientalis2 was not only its intellectual or
artistic successes but its later effecti>eness- its usefulness- its authority! "urely it
deser>es serious attention on all those counts!
II
Sil$estre de Sac&
and Ernest Renan'
Rational Anthropolo"& and
(hilolo"ical La.orator&
1he two great the2es of "il>estre de "acyfs life are heroic effort and a dedicated
sense of pedagogic and rational utility!Born in 1+;+ into a Jansenist fa2ily whose
occupation was traditionally that of notaire- Antoine0Isaac0"il>estre was pri>ately
tutored at a Benedictine abbey- first in Arabic- "yriac- and Chaldean- then in (ebrew!
Arabic in particular was the language that opened the 3rient to hi2 since it was in
Arabic- according to Joseph #einaud-
12)
that 3riental 2aterial- both sacred and profane- was then to be found in its oldest and
2ost instructi>e for2!
11
Although a legiti2ist- in 1+E* he was appointed the first
teacher of Arabic at the newly created school of langues orientales vivantes, of which
he beca2e director in 1,2=! In 1,7E he was na2ed professor at the College de
France- although fro2 1,7; on he was the resident 3rientalist at the French Foreign
Ministry! 1here his wor6 Funpaid until 1,11G at first was to translate the bulletins of
the 5rande Ar2ee and /apoleonfs Mani#esto of 1,7E- in which it was hoped that
iMusli2 fanaticis2i could be e4cited against #ussian 3rthodo4y! But for 2any years
thereafter "acy created interpreters for the French 3riental drago2anate- as well as
future scholars! hen the French occupied Algiers in 1,)7- it was "acy who
translated the procla2ation to the AlgeriansJ he was regularly consulted on all
diplo2atic 2atters relating to the 3rient by the foreign 2inister- and on occasion by
the 2inister of war! At the age of se>enty0fi>e he replaced .acier as secretary of the
Acade2ie des Inscriptions- and also beca2e curator of 3riental 2anuscripts at the
Bibliothe9ue royale! 1hroughout his long and distinguished career his na2e was
rightly associated with the restructuring and re0for2ing of education Fparticularly in
3riental studiesG in post0#e>olutionary France!
12
ith Cu>ier- "acy in 1,)2 was
2ade a new peer of France!
It was not only because he was the first president of the "ociete asiati9ue
Ffounded in 1,22G that "acyfs na2e is associated with the beginning of 2odern
3rientalis2J it is because his wor6 >irtually put before the profession an entire
syste2atic body of te4ts- a pedagogic practice- a scholarly tradition- and an i2portant
lin6 between 3riental scholarship and public policy! In "acyfs wor6- for the first ti2e
in Europe since the Council of Bienne- there was a self0conscious 2ethodological
principle at wor6 as a coe>al with scholarly discipline! /o less i2portant- "acy
always felt hi2self to be a 2an standing at the beginning of an i2portant re>isionist
pro@ect! (e was a self0aware inaugurator- and 2ore to the point of our general thesis-
he acted in his writing li6e a seculariAed ecclesiastic for who2 his 3rient and his
students were doctrine and parishioners respecti>ely! 1he .uc de Broglie- an
ad2iring conte2porary- said of "acyfs wor6 that it reconciled the 2anner of a
scientist with that of a Biblical teacher- and that "acy was the one 2an able to
reconcile ithe goals of 'eibniA with the efforts of Bossuet!i
1)
Conse9uently
e>erything he wrote was addressed
12=
specifically to students Fin the case of his first wor6- his Principes de grammaire
g-n-rale of 1+**- the student was his own sonG and presented- not as a no>elty- but as
a re>ised e4tract of the best that had already been done- said- or written!
1hese two characteristics0the didactic presentation to students and the a>owed
intention of repeating by re>ision and e4tract0are crucial! "acyfs writing always
con>eys the tone of a >oice spea6ingJ his prose is dotted with first 0person pronouns-
with personal 9ualifications- with rhetorical presence! E>en at his 2ost recondite0as
in a scholarly note on third0century "assanid nu2is2atics0one senses not so 2uch a
pen writing as a >oice pronouncing! 1he 6eynote of his wor6 is contained in the
opening lines of the dedication to his son of the Principes de grammaire g-n-rale<
iCfest V toi- 2on cher Fils- 9ue ce petit ou>rage a PtP entreprisi0which is to say- I a2
writing For spea6ingG to you because you need to 6now these things- and since they
donft e4ist in any ser>iceable for2- I ha>e done the wor6 2yself for you! .irect
address: utility: effort: i22ediate and beneficent rationality! For "acy belie>ed that
e>erything could be 2ade clear and reasonable- no 2atter how difficult the tas6 and
how obscure the sub@ect! (ere are Bossuetfs sternness and 'eibniAfs abstract
hu2anis2- as well as the tone of #ousseau- all together in the sa2e style!
1he effect of "acyfs tone is to for2 a circle sealing off hi2 and his audience fro2
the world at large- the way a teacher and his pupils together in a closed classroo2
also for2 a sealed space! ?nli6e the 2atter of physics- philosophy- or classical
literature- the 2atter of 3riental studies is arcaneJ it is of i2port to people who
already ha>e an interest in the 3rient but want to 6now the 3rient better- in a 2ore
orderly way- and here the pedagogical discipline is 2ore effecti>e than it is attracti>e!
1he didactic spea6er- therefore- displays his 2aterial to the disciples- whose role it is
to recei>e what is gi>en to the2 in the for2 of carefully selected and arranged topics!
"ince the 3rient is old and distant- the teacherfs display is a restoration- a re0>ision of
what has disappeared fro2 the wider 6en! And since also the >astly rich Fin space-
ti2e- and culturesG 3rient cannot be totally e4posed- only its 2ost representati>e parts
need be! 1hus "acyfs focus is the anthology- the chresto2athy- the tableau- the sur>ey
of general principles- in which a relati>ely s2all set of powerful e4a2ples deli>ers
the 3rient to the student! "uch e4a2ples are powerful for two reasons: one- because
they reflect "acyfs powers as a estern authority deliberately ta6ing
12;
fro2 the 3rient what its distance and eccentricity ha>e hitherto 6ept hidden- and two-
because these e4a2ples ha>e the se2iotical power in the2 For i2parted to the2 by
the 3rientalistG to signify the 3rient!
All of "acyfs wor6 is essentially co2pilatoryJ it is thus cere2oniously didactic
and painsta6ingly re>isionist! Aside fro2 the Principes de gra22aire gPnPrale- he
produced a 2hrestomathie arabe in three >olu2es F1,7E and 1,2+ G- an anthology of
Arab gra22atical writing F1,2;G- an Arabic gra22ar of 1,17 Fd lIusage des -l0ves
de lIEcole sp-ciale+, treatises on Arabic prosody and the .ruAe religion- and
nu2erous short wor6s on 3riental nu2is2atics- ono2astics- epigraphy- geography-
history- and weights and 2easures! (e did a fair nu2ber of translations and two
e4tended co22entaries on 2alila and Dumna and the Ma3amat o# al0(ariri! As
editor- 2e2orialist- and historian of 2ode2 learning "acy was si2ilarly energetic!
1here was >ery little of note in other related disciplines with which he was not au
courant, although his own writing was single02inded and- in its non03rientalist
respects- of a narrow positi>ist range!
Iet when in 1,72 the Institut de France was co22issioned by /apoleon to for2
a tableau g-n-rale on the state and progress of the arts and sciences since 1+,*- "acy
was chosen to be one of the tea2 of writers: he was the 2ost rigorous of specialists
and the 2ost historical02inded of generalists! .acierfs report- as it was 6nown
infor2ally- e2bodied 2any of "acyfs predilections as well as containing his
contributions on the state of 3riental learning! Its title 'Tableau histori3ue de
lfPrudition frandaise0announces the new historical Fas opposed to sacredG
consciousness! "uch consciousness is dra2atic: learning can be arranged on a stage
set- as it were- where its totality can be readily sur>eyed! Addressed to the 6ing-
.acierfs preface stated the the2e perfectly! "uch a sur>ey as this 2ade it possible to
do so2ething no other so>ereign had atte2pted- na2ely to ta6e in- with one coup
dIoeil, the whole of hu2an 6nowledge! (ad such a tableau histori3ue been
underta6en in for2er ti2es- .acier continued- we 2ight today ha>e possessed 2any
2asterpieces now either lost or destroyedJ the interest and utility of the tableau were
that it preser>ed 6nowledge and 2ade it i22ediately accessible! .acier inti2ated
that such a tas6 was si2plified by /apoleonfs 3riental e4pedition- one of whose
results was to heighten the degree of 2odern geographical 6nowledge!
1=

12E
FAt no point 2ore than in .acierfs entire discours do we see how the dra2atic for2 of
a tableau histori3ue has its use0e9ui>alent in the arcades and counters of a 2odern
depart2ent store!G
1he i2portance of the Tableau histori3ue for an understanding of 3rientalis2fs
inaugural phase is that it e4terioriAes the for2 of 3rientalist 6nowledge! and its
features- as it also describes the 3rientalistfs relationship to his sub@ect 2atter! In
"acyfs pages on 3rientalis20as elsewhere in his writing0he spea6s of his own wor6 as
ha>ing uncovered, brought to light, rescued a >ast a2ount of obscure 2atter! hyL
In order to place it be#ore the student! For li6e all his learned conte2poraries "acy
considered a learned wor6 a positi>e addition to an edifice that all scholars erected to0
gether! %nowledge was essentially the making visible o# 2aterial- and the ai2 of a
tableau was the construction of a sort of Bentha2ite &anopticon! "cholarly discipline
was therefore a specific technology of power: it gained for its user Fand his studentsG
tools and 6nowledge which Fif he was a historianG had hitherto been lost!
1;
And
indeed the >ocabulary of specialiAed power and ac9uisition is particularly associated
with "acyfs reputation as a pioneer 3rientalist! (is herois2 as a scholar was to ha>e
dealt successfully with insur2ountable difficultiesJ he ac9uired the 2eans to present a
field to his students where there was none! (e made the boo6s- the precepts- the
e4a2ples- said the .uc de Broglie of "acy! 1he result was the production of 2aterial
about the 3rient- 2ethods for studying it- and e4e2pla that e>en 3rientals did not
ha>e!
1E
Co2pared with the labors of a (ellenist or a 'atinist wor6ing on the Institut
tea2- "acyfs labors were aweso2e! 1hey had the te4ts- the con>entions- the schoolsJ
he did not- and conse9uently had to go about 2a6ing the2! 1he dyna2ic of pri2ary
loss and subse9uent gain in "acyfs writing is obsessionalJ his in>est2ent in it was
truly hea>y! 'i6e his colleagues in other fields he belie>ed that 6nowledge is
seeing0pan0optically- so to spea60but unli6e the2 he not only had to identify the
6nowledge- he had to decipher it- interpret it- and 2ost difficult- 2a6e it a>ailable!
"acyfs achie>e2ent was to ha>e produced a whole field! As a European he ransac6ed
the 3riental archi>es- and he could do so without lea>ing France! hat te4ts he
isolated- he then brought bac6J he doctored the2J then he annotated- codified-
arranged- and co22ented on the2! In ti2e- the 3rient as such beca2e less i2portant
than what the 3rientalist 2ade of itJ thus- drawn by "acy into the sealed
12+
discursi>e place of a pedagogical tableau- the 3rientalistfs 3rient was thereafter
reluctant to e2erge into reality!
"acy was 2uch too intelligent to let his >iews and his practice stand without
supporting argu2ent! First of all- he always 2ade it plain why the i3rienti on its own
could not sur>i>e a Europeanfs taste- intelligence- or patience! "acy defended the
utility and interest of such things as Arabic poetry- but what he was really saying was
that Arabic poetry had to be properly transfor2ed by the 3rientalist before it could
begin to be appreciated! 1he reasons were broadly episte2ological- but they also
contained an 3rientalistic self0@ustification! Arabic poetry was produced by a
co2pletely strange Fto EuropeansG people- under hugely different cli2atic- social- and
historical conditions fro2 those a European 6nowsJ in addition- such poetry as this
was nourished by iopinions- pre@udices- beliefs- superstitions which we can ac9uire
only after long and painful study!i E>en if one does go through the rigors of
specialiAed training- 2uch of the description in the poetry will not be accessible to
Europeans iwho ha>e attained to a higher degree of ci>iliAation!i Iet what we can
2aster is of great >alue to us as Europeans accusto2ed to disguise our e4terior
attributes- our bodily acti>ity- and our relationship to nature! 1herefore- the
3rientalistfs use is to 2a6e a>ailable to his co2patriots a considerable range of
unusual e4perience- and still 2ore >aluable- a 6ind of literature capable of helping us
understand the itruly di>inei poetry of the (ebrews!
1+
"o if the 3rientalist is necessary because he fishes so2e useful ge2s out of the
distant 3riental deep- and since the 3rient cannot be 6nown without his 2ediation- it
is also true that 3riental writing itself ought not to be ta6en in whole! 1his is "acyfs
introduction to his theory of frag2ents- a co22on #o2antic concern! /ot only are
3riental literary productions essentially alien to the EuropeanJ they also do not
contain a sustained enough interest- nor are they written with enough itaste and
critical spirit-i to 2erit publication e4cept as e4tracts Jpour meriter dIGtre publies
autrement 3ue par eCtrait+.
1,
1herefore the 3rientalist is re9uired to present the
3rient by a series of representati>e frag2ents- frag2ents republished- e4plicated-
annotated- and surrounded with still 2ore frag2ents! For such a presentation a special
genre is re9uired: the chresto2athy- which is where in "acyfs case the usefulness and
interest of 3rientalis2 are 2ost directly and profitably displayed! "acyfs 2ost fa2ous
production was the three0>olu2e 2hrestomathie arabe, which was
12,
sealed at the outset- so to spea6- with an internally rhy2ing Arabic couplet: i%itab
al0anis al02ufid lil01aleb al02ustafidJjwa ga2fi al shathur 2in 2anthou2 wa
2anthuri FA boo6 pleasant and profitable for the studious pupilJjit collects frag2ents
of both poetry and proseG!
"acyfs anthologies were used >ery widely in Europe for se>eral generations!
Although what they contain was clai2ed as typical- they sub2erge and co>er the
censorship of the 3rient e4ercised by the 3rientalist! Moreo>er- the internal order of
their contents- the arrange2ent of their parts- the choice of frag2ents- ne>er re>eal
their secretJ one has the i2pression that if frag2ents were not chosen for their
i2portance- or for their chronological de>elop2ent- or for their aesthetic beauty Fas
"acyfs were notG- they 2ust ne>ertheless e2body a certain 3riental naturalness- or
typical ine>itability! But this too is ne>er said! "acy clai2s si2ply to ha>e e4erted
hi2self on behalf of his students- to 2a6e it unnecessary for the2 to purchase For
readG a grotes9uely large library of 3riental stuff! In ti2e- the reader forgets the
3rientalistfs effort and ta6es the restructuring of the 3rient signified by a
chresto2athy as the 3rient tout court! 3b@ecti>e structure Fdesignation of 3rientG and
sub@ecti>e restructure Frepresentation of 3rient by 3rientalistG beco2e
interchangeable! 1he 3rient is o>erlaid with the 3rientalistfs rationalityJ its principles
beco2e his! Fro2 being distant- it beco2es a>ailableJ fro2 being unsustainable on its
own- it beco2es pedagogically usefulJ fro2 being lost- it is found- e>en if its 2issing
parts ha>e been 2ade to drop away fro2 it in the process! "acyfs anthologies not only
supple2ent the 3rientJ they supply it as 3riental presence to the est!
1*
"acyfs wor6
canoniAes the 3rientJ it begets a canon of te4tual ob@ects passed on fro2 one
generation of students to the ne4t!
And the li>ing legacy of "acyfs disciples was astounding! E>ery 2a@or Arabist in
Europe during the nineteenth century traced his intellectual authority bac6 to hi2!
?ni>ersities and acade2ies in France- "pain- /orway- "weden- .en2ar6- and
especially 5er2any were dotted with the students who for2ed the2sel>es at his feet
and through the anthological tableau4 pro>ided by his wor6!
27
As with all intellectual
patri2onies- howe>er- enrich2ents and restrictions were passed on si2ultaneously!
"acyfs genealogical originality was to ha>e treated the 3rient as so2ething to be
restored not only because of but also despite the 2odern 3rientfs disorderly and
12*
elusi>e presence! "acy placed the Arabs in the 3rient- which was itself placed in the
general tableau of 2odern learning! 3rientalis2 belonged therefore to European
scholarship- but its 2aterial had to be re0created by the 3rientalist before it could
enter the arcades alongside 'atinis2 and (ellenis2! Each 3rientalist re0created his
own 3rient according to the funda2ental episte2ological rules of loss and gain first
supplied and enacted by "acy! Just as he was the father of 3rientalis2- he was also
the disciplinefs first sacrifice- for in translating new te4ts- frag2ents- and e4tracts
subse9uent 3rientalists entirely displaced "acyfs wor6 by supplying their own
restored 3rient! /e>ertheless the process he started would continue- as philology in
particular de>eloped syste2atic and institutional powers "acy had ne>er e4ploited!
1his was #enanfs acco2plish2ent: to ha>e associated the 3rient with the 2ost recent
co2parati>e disciplines- of which philology was one of the 2ost e2inent!
1he difference between "acy and #enan is the difference between inauguration
and continuity! "acy is the originator- whose wor6 represents the fieldfs e2ergence
and its status as a nineteenth0century discipline with roots in re>olutionary
#o2anticis2! #enan deri>es fro2 3rientalis2fs second generation: it was his tas6 to
solidify the official discourse of 3rientalis2- to syste2atiAe its insights- and to
establish its intellectual and worldly institutions! For "acy- it was his personal efforts
that launched and >italiAed the field and its structuresJ for #enan- it was his
adaptation of 3rientalis2 to philology and both of the2 to the intellectual culture of
his ti2e that perpetuated the 3rientalist structures intellectually and ga>e the2
greater >isibility!
#enan was a figure in his own right neither of total originality nor of absolute
deri>ati>eness! 1herefore as a cultural force or as an i2portant 3rientalist he cannot
be reduced si2ply to his personality nor to a set of sche2atic ideas in which he
belie>ed! #ather- #enan is best grasped as a dyna2ic force whose opportunities were
already created for hi2 by pioneers li6e "acy- yet who brought their achie>e2ents
into the culture as a 6ind of currency which he circulated and recirculated with Fto
force the i2age a little furtherG his own un2ista6able re0currency! #enan is a figure
who 2ust be grasped- in short- as a type of cultural and intellectual pra4is- as a style
for 2a6ing 3rientalist state2ents within what Michel Foucault would call the archi>e
of his ti2e!
21
hat 2atters is not only the things that #enan said but also how he said
1)7
the2- what- gi>en his bac6ground and training-0he chose to use as his sub@ect 2atter-
what to co2bine with what- and so forth! #enanfs relations with his 3riental sub@ect
2atter- with his ti2e and audience- e>en with his own wor6- can be described- then-
without resorting to for2ulae that depend on an une4a2ined assu2ption of
ontological stability Fe!g!- the Leitgeist, the history of ideas- life0and0ti2esG! Instead
we are able to read #enan as a writer doing so2ething describable- in a place defined
te2porally- spatially- and culturally Fhence archi>allyG- for an audience and- no less
i2portant- for the furtherance of his own position in the 3rientalis2 of his era!
#enan ca2e to 3rientalis2 fro2 philology- and it is the e4traordinarily rich and
celebrated cultural position of that discipline that endowed 3rientalis2 with its 2ost
i2portant technical characteristics! For anyone to who2 the word philology suggests
dry0as0dust and inconse9uential word0study- howe>er- /ietAschefs procla2ation that
along with the greatest 2inds of the nineteenth century he is a philologist will co2e
as a surprise0though not if BalAacfs (ouis (ambert is recalled:
hat a 2ar>elous boo6 one would write by narrating the life and ad>entures of a
word^ ?ndoubtedly a word has recei>ed >arious i2pressions of the e>ents for
which it was usedJ depending on the places it was used- a word has awa6ened
different 6inds of i2pressions in different peopleJ but is it not 2ore grand still to
consider a word in its triple aspect of soul- body- and 2o>e2entL
22
hat is the category- /ietAsche will as6 later- that includes hi2self- agner-
"chopenhauer- 'eopardi- all as philologistsL 1he ter2 see2s to include both a gift for
e4ceptional spiritual insight into language and the ability to produce wor6 whose
articulation is of aesthetic and historical power!Although the profession of philology
was born the day in 1+++ iwhen F! A! olf in>ented for hi2self the na2e of stud.
philol.,M /ietAsche is ne>ertheless at pains to show that professional students of the
5ree6 and #o2an classics are co22only incapable of understanding their discipline:
ithey ne>er reach the roots o# the matter< they ne>er adduce philology as a proble2!i
For si2ply ias 6nowledge of the ancient world philology cannot- of course- last
fore>erJ its 2aterial is e4haustible!i
2)
It is this that the herd of philologists cannot
understand! But what distinguishes the few e4ceptional spirits who2 /ietAsche
dee2s worthy
1)1
of praise0not una2biguously- and not in the cursory way that I a2 now describing0is
their profound relation to 2odernity- a relation that is gi>en the2 by their practice of
philology!
&hilology proble2atiAes0itself-its practitioner- the present! It e2bodies a peculiar
condition of being 2odern and European- since neither of those two categories has
true 2eaning without being related to an earlier alien culture and ti2e! hat
/ietAsche also sees is philology as so2ething born- made in the Biconian sense as a
sign of hu2an enterprise- created as a category of hu2an disco>ery- self0disco>ery-
and originality! &hilology is a way of historically setting oneself off- as great artists
do- fro2 onefs ti2e and an i22ediate past e>en as- parado4ically and antino2ically-
one actually characteriAes onefs 2odernity by so doing!
Between the Friedrich August olf of 1+++ and the Friedrich /ietAsche of 1,+;
there is Ernest #enan- an 3riental philologist- also a 2an with a co2ple4 and
interesting sense of the way philology and 2odern culture are in>ol>ed in each other!
In (I$venir de la science Fwritten in 1,=, but not published till 1,*7G he wrote that
ithe founders of 2odern 2ind are philologists!i And what is 2odern 2ind- he said in
the preceding sentence- if not irationalis2- criticis2- liberalis2- Yall of whichZ were
founded on the sa2e day as philologyLi &hilology- he goes on to say- is both a
co2parati>e discipline possessed only by 2oderns and a sy2bol of 2odern Fand
EuropeanG superiorityJ e>ery ad>ance 2ade by hu2anity since the fifteenth century
can b7 attributed to 2inds we should call philological! 1he @ob of philology in
2odern culture Fa culture #enan calls philologicalG is to continue to see reality and
nature clearly- thus dri>ing out supernaturalis2- and to continue to 6eep pace with
disco>eries in the physical sciences! But 2ore than all this- philology enables a
general >iew of hu2an life and of the syste2 of things: iMe- being there at the center-
inhaling the perfu2e of e>erything- @udging- co2paring- co2bining- inducing0in this
way I shall arri>e at the >ery syste2 of things!i 1here is an un2ista6able aura of
power about the philologist! And #enan 2a6es his point about philology and the
natural sciences:
1o do philosophy is to 6now thingsJ following Cu>ierfs nice phrase-
philosophy is instructing the world in theory. 'i6e %ant I belie>e that e>ery
purely speculati>e de2onstration has no 2ore >alidity than a 2athe2atical
de2onstration- and can teach us nothing about e4isting reality! &hilology is the
eCact science of 2ental ob@ects 7(a philologie est la science eCacte des choses de
1)2
lfespritZ! It is to the sciences of hu2anity what physics and che2istry are to the
philosophic sciences of bodies!
2=
I shall return to #enanfs citation fro2 Cu>ier- as well as to the constant references
to natural science- a little later! For the ti2e being- we should re2ar6 that the whole
2iddle section of (I$venir de la science is ta6en up with #enanfs ad2iring accounts
of philology- a science he depicts as being at once the 2ost difficult of all hu2an
endea>ors to characteriAe and the 2ost precise of all disciplines! In the aspirations of
philology to a >eritable science of hu2anity- #enan associates hi2self e4plicitly with
Bico- (erder- olf- and Montes9uieu as well as with such philological near0
conte2poraries as ilhel2 >on (u2boldt- Bopp- and the great 3rientalist Eugene
Burnouf Fto who2 the >olu2e is dedicatedG! #enan locates philology centrally within
what he e>erywhere refers to as the 2arch of 6nowledge- and indeed the boo6 itself is
a 2anifesto of hu2anistic 2elioris2- which- considering its subtitle Fi&ensPes de
1,=,iG and other boo6s of 1,=, li6e 1ouvard et P-cuchet and The Eighteenth
1rumaire o# (ouis 1onaparte, is no 2ean irony! In a sense- then- the 2anifesto
generally and #enanfs accounts of philology particularly0he had by then already
written the 2assi>e philological treatise on "e2itic languages that had earned hi2 the
&ri4 Bolney0were designed to place #enan as an intellectual in a clearly perceptible
relationship to the great social issues raised by 1,=,! 1hat he should choose to
fashion such a relationship on the basis of the least i22ediate of all intellectual
disciplines FphilologyG- the one with the least degree of apparent popular rele>ance-
the 2ost conser>ati>e and the 2ost traditional- suggests the e4tre2e deliberateness of
#enanfs position! For he did not really spea6 as one 2an to all 2en but rather as a
reflecti>e- specialiAed >oice that too6- as he put it in the 1,*7 preface- the ine9uality
of races and the necessary do2ination of the 2any by the few for granted as an
antide2ocratic law of nature and society!
2;
But how was it possible for #enan to hold hi2self and what he was saying in
such a parado4ical positionL For what was philology on the one hand if not a science
of all hu2anity- a science pre2ised on the unity of the hu2an species and the worth
of e>ery hu2an detail- and yet what was the philologist on the other hand if notas
#enan hi2self pro>ed with his notorious race pre@udice against the >ery 3riental
"e2ites whose study had 2ade his professional na2e
2E
00a harsh di>ider of 2en into
superior and inferior races-
1))
a liberal critic whose wor6 harbored the 2ost esoteric notions of te2porality- origins-
de>elop2ent- relationship- and hu2an worthL &art of the answer to this 9uestion is
that- as his early letters of philological intent to Bictor Cousin- Michelet- and
Ale4ander >on (u2boldt show-
2+
#enan had a strong guild sense as a professional
scholar- a professional 3rientalist- in fact- a sense that put distance between hi2self
and the 2asses! But 2ore i2portant- I thin6- is #enanfs own conception of his role as
an 3riental philologist within philologyfs larger history- de>elop2ent- and ob@ecti>es
as he saw the2! In other words- what 2ay to us see2 li6e parado4 was the e4pected
result of how #enan percei>ed his dynastic position within philology- its history and
inaugural disco>eries- and what he- #enan- did within it! 1herefore #enan should be
characteriAed- not as spea6ing about philology- but rather as speaking philologically
with all the force of an initiate using the encoded language of a new prestigious
science none of whose pronounce2ents about language itself could be construed
either directly or nai>ely!
As #enan understood- recei>ed- and was instructed in philology- the discipline
i2posed a set of do4ological rules upon hi2! 1o be a philologist 2eant to be
go>erned in onefs acti>ity first of all by a set of recent re>aluati>e disco>eries that
effecti>ely began the science of philology and ga>e it a distincti>e episte2ology of its
own: I a2 spea6ing here of the period roughly fro2 the 1+,7s to the 2id01,)7s- the
latter part of which coincides with the period of #enanfs beginning his education! (is
2e2oirs record how the crisis of religious faith that cul2inated in the loss of that
faith led hi2 in 1,=; into a life of scholarship: this was his initiation into philology-
its world0>iew- crises- and style! (e belie>ed that on a personal le>el his life reflected
the institutional life of philology! In his life- howe>er- he deter2ined to be as
Christian as he once was- only now without Christianity and with what he called ila
science lai9uei Flay scienceG!
2,
1he best e4a2ple of what a lay science could and could not do was pro>ided
years later by #enan in a lecture gi>en at the "orbonne in 1,+,- i3n the "er>ices
#endered by &hilology to the (istorical "ciences!i hat is re>ealing about this te4t is
the way #enan clearly had religion in 2ind when he spo6e about philology0for
e4a2ple- what philology- li6e religion- teaches us about the origins of hu2anity-
ci>iliAation- and language0only to 2a6e it e>ident to his hearers that philology could
deli>er a far less coherent- less
1)=
6nitted together and positi>e 2essage than religion!
2*
"ince #enan was irre2ediably
historical and- as he once put it- 2orphological in his outloo6- it stood to reason that
the only way in which- as a >ery young 2an- he could 2o>e out of religion into
philological scholarship was to retain in the new lay science the historical world0>iew
he had gained fro2 religion! (ence- ione occupation alone see2ed to 2e to be
worthy of filling 2y lifeJ and that was to pursue 2y critical research into Christianity
Yan allusion to #enanfs 2a@or scholarly pro@ect on the history and origins of
ChristianityZ using those far a2pler 2eans offered 2e by lay science!i
)7
#enan had
assi2ilated hi2self to philology according to his own post Christian fashion!
1he difference between the history offered internally by Christianity and the
history offered by philology- a relati>ely new discipline- is precisely what 2ade
2odern philology possible- and this #enan 6new perfectly! For whene>er iphilologyi
is spo6en of around the end of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the
nineteenth- we are to understand the new philology- whose 2a@or successes include
co2parati>e gra22ar- the reclassification of languages into fa2ilies- and the final
re@ection of the di>ine origins of language! It is no e4aggeration to say that these
acco2plish2ents were a 2ore or less direct conse9uence of the >iew that held
language to be an entirely hu2an pheno2enon! And this >iew beca2e current once it
was disco>ered e2pirically that the so0called sacred languages F(ebrew- pri2arilyG
were neither of pri2ordial anti9uity nor of di>ine pro>enance! hat Foucault has
called the disco>ery of language was therefore a secular e>ent that displaced a
religious conception of how 5od deli>ered language to 2an in Eden!
)1
Indeed- one of
the conse9uences of this change- by which- an ety2ological- dynastic notion of
linguistic filiation was pushed aside by the >iew of language as a do2ain all of its
own held together with @agged internal structures and coherences- is the dra2atic
subsidence of interest in the proble2 of the origins of language! hereas in the
1++7s- which is when (erderfs essay on the origins of language wont the 1++2 2edal
fro2 the Berlin Acade2y- it was all the rage to discuss that proble2- by the first
decade of the new century it was all but banned as a topic for learned dispute in
Europe!
3n all sides- and in 2any different ways- what illia2 Jones stated in his
$nniversary Discourses F1+,;01+*2G- or what FranA Bopp put forward in his
,ergleichende >rammatik F1,)2G- is that
1);
the di>ine dynasty of language was ruptured definiti>ely and discredited as an idea! A
new historical conception- in short- was needed- since Christianity see2ed unable to
sur>i>e the e2pirical e>idence that reduced the di>ine status of its 2a@or te4t! For
so2e- as Chateaubriand put it- faith was unsha6able despite new 6nowledge of how
"ans6rit outdated (ebrew: i(Plas^ il est arri>P 9ufune connaissance plus approfondie
de la langue sa>ante de lfInde a fait rentrer ces si]cles inno2brables dans le cercle
]troit de la Bible!Bien 2fen a pris dfetre rede>enue croyant- a>ant dfa>oir Pprou>P
cette 2ortification!i
)2
FAlas^ it has happened that a deeper 6nowledge of the learned
language of India has forced innu2erable centuries into the narrow circle of the
Bible! (ow luc6y for 2e that I ha>e beco2e a belie>er again before ha>ing had to
e4perience this 2ortification!G For others- especially philologists li6e the pioneering
Bopp hi2self- the study of language entailed its own history- philosophy- and
learning- all of which did away with any notion of a pri2al language gi>en by the
5odhead to 2an in Eden! As the study of "ans6rit and the e4pansi>e 2ood of the
later eighteenth century see2ed to ha>e 2o>ed the earliest beginnings of ci>iliAation
>ery far east of the Biblical lands- so too language beca2e less of a continuity
between an outside power and the hu2an spea6er than an internal field created and
acco2plished by language users a2ong the2sel>es! 1here was no first language- @ust
as000e4cept by a 2ethod I shall discuss presently0there was no si2ple language!
1he legacy of these first0generation philologists was- to #enan- of the highest
i2portance- higher e>en than the wor6 done by "acy! hene>er he discussed
language and philology- whether at the beginning- 2iddle- or end of his long career-
he repeated the lessons of the new philology- of which the antidynastic-
anticontinuous tenets of a technical Fas opposed to a di>ineG linguistic practice are the
2a@or pillar! For the linguist- language cannot be pictured as the result of force
e2anating unilaterally fro2 5od! As Coleridge put it- i'anguage is the ar2ory of the
hu2an 2indJ and at once contains the trophies of its past and the weapons of its
future con9uests!i
))
1he idea of a first Edenic language gi>es way to the heuristic
notion of a protolanguage FIndo0European- "e2iticG whose e4istence is ne>er a
sub@ect of debate- since it is ac6nowledged that such a language cannot be recaptured
but can only be reconstituted in the philological process! 1o the e4tent that one
language ser>es- again heuristically- as a touchstone for all
1)E
the others- it is "ans6rit in its earliest Indo0European for2! 1he ter2inology has also
shifted: there are now #amilies of languages Fthe analogy with species and anato2ical
classifications is 2ar6edG- there is per#ect linguistic for2- which need not correspond
to any ireali language- and there are original languages only as a function of the
philological discourse- not because of nature!
But so2e writers shrewdly co22ented on how it was that "ans6rit and things
Indian in general si2ply too6 the place of (ebrew and the Edenic fallacy! As early as
1,7= Ben@a2in Constant noted in his %ournal intime that he was not about to discuss
India in his De la religion because the English who owned the place and the 5er2ans
who studied it indefatigably had 2ade India the tons et origo of e>erythingJ and then
there were the French who had decided after /apoleon and Cha2pollion that
e>erything originated in Egypt and the new 3rient!
)=
1hese teleological enthusias2s
were fueled after 1,7, by Friedrich "chlegelfs celebrated Uber die 4prache and
)eisheit der /ndier, which see2ed to confir2 his own pronounce2ent 2ade in 1,77
about the 3rient being the purest for2 of #o2anticis2!
hat #enanfs generation0educated fro2 the 2id01,)7s to the late 1,=7s0retained
fro2 all this enthusias2 about the 3rient was the intellectual necessity of the 3rient
for the 3ccidental scholar of languages- cultures- and religions!(ere the 6ey te4t was
Edgar Huinetfs (e >-nie des religions F1,)2G- a wor6 that announced the 3riental
#enaissance and placed the 3rient and the est in a functional relationship with each
other! I ha>e already referred to the >ast 2eaning of this relationship as analyAed
co2prehensi>ely by #ay2ond "chwab in (a Renaissance orientale5 2y concern with
it here is only to note specific aspects of it that bear upon #enanfs >ocation as a
philologist and as an 3rientalist! Huinetfs association with Michelet- their interest in
(erder and Bico- respecti>ely- i2pressed on the2 the need for the scholar0historian
to confront- al2ost in the 2anner of an audience seeing a dra2atic e>ent unfold- or a
belie>er witnessing a re>elation- the different- the strange- the distant! Huinetfs
for2ulation was that the 3rient proposes and the est disposes: Asia has its
prophets- Europe its doctors Fits learned 2en- its scientists: the pun is intendedG! 3ut
of this encounter- a new dog2a or god is born- but Huinetfs point is that both East and
est fulfill their destinies and confir2 their identities in the encounter! As a scholarly
attitude the picture of a learned esterner
1)+
sur>eying as if fro2 a peculiarly suited >antage point the passi>e- se2inal- fe2inine-
e>en silent and supine East- then going on to articulate the East- 2a6ing the 3rient
deli>er up its secrets under the learned authority of a philologist whose power deri>es
fro2 the ability to unloc6 secret- esoteric languages0this would persist in #enan!
hat did not persist in #enan during the 1,=7s- when he ser>ed his apprenticeship as
a philologist- was the dra2atic attitude: that was replaced by the scientific attitude!
For Huinet and Michelet- history was a dra2a! Huinet suggesti>ely describes the
whole world as a te2ple and hu2an history as a sort of religious rite! Both Michelet
and Huinet saw the world they discussed! 1he origin ofhu2an history was so2ething
they could describe in the sa2e splendid and i2passioned and dra2atic ter2s used by
Bico and #ousseau to portray life on earth in pri2iti>e ti2es! For Michelet and
Huinet there is no doubt that they belong to the co22unal European #o2antic
underta6ing ieither in epic or so2e other 2a@or genre0in dra2a- in prose ro2ance- or
in the >isionary Mgreater 3def0radically to recast into ter2s appropriate to the
historical and intellectual circu2stances of their own age- the Christian pattern of the
fall- the rede2ption- and the e2ergence of a new earth which will constitute a
restored paradise!i
);
I thin6 that for Huinet the idea of a new god being born was
tanta2ount to the filling of the place left by the old godJ for #enan- howe>er- being a
philologist 2eant the se>erance of any and all connections with the old Christian god-
so that instead a new doctrine0probably science would stand free and in a new place-
as it were! #enanfs whole career was de>oted to the fleshing out of this progress!
(e put it >ery plainly at the end of his undistinguished essay on the origins of
language: 2an is no longer an in>entor- and the age of creation is definitely
o>er!
)E
1here was a period- at which we can only guess- when 2an was literally
transported fro2 silence into words! After that there was language- and for the true
scientist the tas6 is to e4a2ine how language is- not how it ca2e about! Iet if #enan
dispels the passionate creation of pri2iti>e ti2es Fwhich had e4cited (erder- Bico-
#ousseau- e>en Huinet and MicheletG he instates a new- and deliberate- type of
artificial creation- one that is perfor2ed as a result of scientific analysis! In his leEon
inaugurale at the College de France FFebruary 21- 1,E2G #enan proclai2ed his
lectures open to the public so that it 2ight see at first hand
1),
ile laboratoire 2e2e de la science philologi9uei Fthe >ery laboratory of philological
scienceG!
)+
Any reader of #enan would ha>e understood that such a state2ent was
2eant also to carry a typical if rather li2p irony- one less intended to shoc6 than
passi>ely to delight!For #enan was succeeding to the chair of (ebrew- and his lecture
was on the contribution of the "e2itic peoples to the history of ci>iliAation! hat
2ore subtle affront could there be to isacredi history than the substitution of a
philological laboratory for di>ine inter>ention in historyJ and what 2ore telling way
was there of declaring the 3rientfs conte2porary rele>ance to be si2ply as 2aterial
for European in>estigationL
),
"acyfs co2parati>ely lifeless frag2ents arranged in
tableau4 were now being replaced with so2ething new!
1he stirring peroration with which #enan concluded his leEon had another
function than si2ply to connect 3riental0"e2itic philology with the future and with
science! ktienne Huatre2]re- who i22ediately preceded #enan in the chair of
(ebrew- was a scholar who see2ed to e4e2plify the popular caricature of what a
scholar was li6e! A 2an of prodigiously industrious and pedantic habits- he went
about his wor6- #enan said in a relati>ely unfeeling 2e2orial 2inute for the %ournal
des d-bats in 3ctober 1,;+- li6e a laborious wor6er who e>en in rendering i22ense
ser>ices ne>ertheless could not see the whole edifice being constructed! 1he edifice
was nothing less than ila science histori9ue de lfesprit hu2ain-i now in the process of
being built stone by stone!
)*
Just as Huatre2]re was not of this age- so #enan in his
wor6 was deter2ined to be of it! Moreo>er- if the 3rient had been hitherto identified
e4clusi>ely and indiscri2inately with India and China- #enanfs a2bition was to car>e
out a new 3riental pro>ince for hi2self- in this case the "e2itic 3rient! (e had no
doubt re2ar6ed the casual- and surely current- confusion of Arabic with "ans6rit Fas
in BalAacfs (a Peau de chagrin, where the fateful talis2anfs Arabic script is described
as "ans6ritG- and he 2ade it his @ob accordingly to do for the "e2itic languages what
Bopp had done for the IndoEuropean: so he said in the 1,;; preface to the
co2parati>e "e2itic treatise!
=7
1herefore #enanfs plans were to bring the "e2itic
languages into sharp and gla2orous focus V la Bopp- and in addition to ele>ate the
study of these neglected inferior languages to the le>el of a passionate new science of
2ind V la 'ouis 'a2bert!
3n 2ore than one occasion #enan was 9uite e4plicit in his assertions
1)*
that "e2ites and "e2itic were creations o# 3rientalist philological study!
=1
"ince he
was the 2an who did the study- there was 2eant to be little a2biguity about the
centrality of his role in this new- artificial creation! But how did #enan 2ean the
word creation in these instancesL And how was this creation connected with either
natural creation- or the creation ascribed by #enan and others to the laboratory and to
the classificatory and natural sciences- principally what was called philosophical
anato2yL (ere we 2ust speculate a little! 1hroughout his career #enan see2ed to
i2agine the role of science in hu2an life as Fand I 9uote in translation as literally as I
canG Mtelling Fspea6ing or articulatingG definiti>ely to 2an the word YlogosLZ of
things!i
=2
"cience gi>es speech to thingsJ better yet- science brings out- causes to be
pronounced- a potential speech within things! 1he special >alue of linguistics Fas the
new philology was then often calledG is not that natural science rese2bles it- but
rather that it treats words as natural- otherwise silent ob@ects- which are 2ade to gi>e
up their secrets! #e2e2ber that the 2a@or brea6through in the study of inscriptions
and hieroglyphs was the disco>ery by Cha2pollion that the sy2bols on the #osetta
"tone had a phonetic as well as a se2antic co2ponent!
=)
1o 2a6e ob@ects spea6 was
li6e 2a6ing words spea6- gi>ing the2 circu2stantial >alue- and a precise place in a
rule0go>erned order of regularity! In its first sense- creation, as #enan used the word-
signified the articulation by which an ob@ect li6e 4emitic could be seen as a creature
of sorts! "econd- creation also signified the setting 0in the case of "e2itic it 2eant
3riental history- culture- race- 2ind0illu2inated and brought forward fro2 its
reticence by the scientist! Finally- creation was the for2ulation of a syste2 of classi 0
fication by which it was possible to see the ob@ect in 9uestion co2parati>ely with
other li6e ob@ectsJ and by ico2parati>elyi #enan intended a co2ple4 networ6 of
paradig2atic relations that obtained between "e2itic and Indo0European languages!
If in what I ha>e so far said I ha>e insisted so 2uch on #enanfs co2parati>ely
forgotten study of "e2itic languages- it has been for se>eral i2portant reasons!
"e2itic was the scientific study to which #enan turned right after the loss of his
Christian faithJ I described abo>e how he ca2e to see the study of "e2itic as
replacing his faith and enabling !a critical future relation with it! 1he study of "e2itic
was #enanfs first full0length 3rientalist and scientific study Ffinished in 1,=+-
published first in 1,;;G- and was as 2uch a part of his late 2a@or wor6s on the origins
of Christianity and the history
1=7
of the Jews as it was a propaedeutic for the2! In intention- if not perhaps in
achie>e2ent0interestingly- few of the standard or conte2porary wor6s in either
linguistic history or the history of 3rientalis2 cite #enan with anything 2ore than
cursory attention
==
000his "e2itic opus was proposed as a philological brea6through-
fro2 which in later years he was always to draw retrospecti>e authority for his
positions Fal2ost always bad onesG on religion- race- and nationalis2!
=;
hene>er
#enan wished to 2a6e a state2ent about either the Jews or the Musli2s- for e4a2ple-
it was always with his re2ar6ably harsh Fand unfounded- e4cept according to the
science he was practicingG strictures on the "e2ites in 2ind! Further2ore- #enanfs
"e2itic was 2eant as a contribution both to the de>elop2ent of Indo0European
linguistics and to the differentiation of 3rientalis2s! 1o the for2er "e2itic was a
degraded for2- degraded in both the 2oral and the biological sense- whereas to the
latter "e2itic was a0if not the0stable for2 of cultural decadence! 'astly- "e2itic was
#enanfs first creation- a fiction in>ented by hi2 in the philological laboratory to
satisfy his sense of public place and 2ission! It should by no 2eans be lost on us that
"e2itic was for #enanfs ego the sy2bol of European Fand conse9uently hisG
do2inion o>er the 3rient and o>er his own era!
1herefore- as a branch of the 3rient- "e2itic was not fully a natural ob@ect li6e a
species of 2on6ey- for instance0nor fully an unnatural or a di>ine ob@ect- as it had
once been considered! #ather- "e2itic occupied a 2edian position- legiti2ated in its
oddities Fregularity being defined by Indo0EuropeanG by an in>erse relation to nor2al
languages- co2prehended as an eccentric- 9uasi2onstrous pheno2enon partly
because libraries- laboratories- and 2useu2s could ser>e as its place of e4hibition and
analysis! In his treatise- #enan adopted a tone of >oice and a 2ethod of e4position
that drew the 2a4i2u2 fro2 boo60learning and fro2 natural obser>ation as practiced
by 2en li6e Cu>ier and the 5eoffroy "aint0(ilaires p]re et fils! 1his is an i2portant
stylistic achie>e2ent- for it allowed #enan consistently to a>ail hi2self of the library-
rather than either pri2iti>ity or di>ine fiat- as a conceptual fra2ewor6 in which to
understand language- together with the 2useu2- which is where the results of
laboratory obser>ation! are deli>ered for e4hibition- study- and teaching!
=E
E>erywhere #enan treats of nor2al hu2an facts0language- history- culture- 2ind-
i2agination0as transfor2ed into so2ething else- as so2ething peculiarly de>iant-
because they are "e2itic and 3riental- and because they end up for
1=1
analysis in the laboratory! 1hus the "e2ites are rabid 2onotheists who produced no
2ythology- no art- no co22erce- no ci>iliAationJ their consciousness is a narrow and
rigid oneJ all in all they represent iune co2binaison infPrieure de la nature
hu2aine!i
=+
At the sa2e ti2e #enan wants it understood that he spea6s of a
prototype- !not a real "e2itic type with actual e4istence Falthough he >iolated this too
by discussing present0day Jews and Musli2s with less than scientific detach2ent in
2any places in his writingsG!
=,
"o on the one hand we ha>e the transfor2ation of the
hu2an into the speci2en- and on the other the co2parati>e @udg2ent rendered by
which the speci2en re2ains a speci2en and a sub@ect for philological- scientific
study!
"cattered throughout the .istoire g-n-rale et syst-me compar- des langues
s-miti3ues are reflections on the lin6s between linguistics and anato2y- andfor #enan
this is e9ually i2portant0re2ar6s on how these lin6s could be e2ployed to do hu2an
history Jles sciences histori3ues+. But first we should consider the i2plicit lin6s! I do
not thin6 it wrong or an e4aggeration to say that a typical page of #enanfs 3rientalist
.istoire g-n-rale was constructed typographically and structurally with a page of
co2parati>e philosophical anato2y- in the style of Cu>ier or 5eoffroy "aint0(ilaire-
6ept in 2ind! Both linguists and anato2ists purport to be spea6ing about 2atters not
directly obtainable or obser>able in natureJ a s6eleton and a detailed line drawing of a
2uscle- as 2uch as paradig2s constituted by the linguists out of a purely hypothetical
proto0"e2itic or proto0Indo0European- are si2ilarly products of the laboratory and of
the library! 1he te4t of a linguistic or an anato2ical wor6 bears the sa2e general
relation to nature For actualityG that a 2useu2 case e4hibiting a speci2en 2a22al or
organ does! hat is gi>en on the page and in the 2useu2 case is a truncated
e4aggeration- li6e 2any of "acyfs 3riental e4tracts- whose purpose is to e4hibit a
relationship between the science For scientistG and the ob@ect- not one between the
ob@ect and nature! #ead al2ost any page by #enan on Arabic- (ebrew- Ara2aic- or
proto0"e2itic and you read a fact of power- by which the 3rientalist philologistfs
authority su22ons out of the library at will e4a2ples of 2anfs speech- and ranges
the2 there surrounded by a sua>e European prose that points out defects- >irtues-
barbaris2s- and shortco2ings in the language- the people- and the ci>iliAation! 1he
tone and the tense of the e4hibition are cast al2ost unifor2ly in the conte2porary
present- so that one is gi>en an i2pression of
1=2
a pedagogical de2onstration during which the scholar0scientist stands before us on a
lecture0laboratory platfor2- creating- confining- and @udging the 2aterial he
discusses!
1his an4iety on #enanfs part to con>ey the sense of a de2onstration actually
ta6ing place is heightened when he re2ar6s e4plicitly that whereas anato2y e2ploys
stable and >isible signs by which to consign ob@ects to classes- linguistics does not!
=*
1herefore the philologist 2ust 2a6e a gi>en linguistic fact correspond in so2e way to
a historical period: hence the possibility of a classification! Iet- as #enan was often
to say- linguistic te2porality and history are full of lacunae- enor2ous discontinuities-
hypothetical periods! 1herefore linguistic e>ents occur in a nonlinear and essentially
discontinuous te2poral di2ension controlled by the linguist in a >ery particular way!
1hat way- as #enanfs whole treatise on the "e2itic branch of the 3riental languages
goes >ery far to show- is co2parati>e: Indo0European is ta6en as the li>ing- organic
nor2- and "e2itic 3riental languages are seen co2parati>ely to be inorganic.
;7
1i2e
is transfor2ed into the space of co2parati>e classification- which at botto2 is based
on a rigid binary opposition between organic and inorganic languages! "o on the one
hand there is the organic- biologically generati>e process represented by Indo0
European- while on the other there is an inorganic- essentially unregenerati>e process-
ossified into "e2itic: 2ost i2portant- #enan 2a6es it absolutely clear that such an
i2perious @udg2ent is 2ade by the 3riental philologist in his laboratory- for
distinctions of the 6ind he has been concerned with are neither possible nor a>ailable
for anyone e4cept the trained professional! i/ous refusons donc au4 langues
sP2iti9ues la facultP de se rPgPnPrer- toute en reconnaissant 9ufelles nfPchappent pas
plus 9ue les autres oeu>res de la conscience hu2aine V la nPessitP du change2ent et
des 2odifications successi>esi F1herefore we refuse to allow that the "e2itic
languages ha>e the capacity to regenerate the2sel>es- e>en while recogniAing that
they do not escape0any 2ore than other products of hu2an consciousness0the
necessity of change or of successi>e 2odificationsG!
;1
Iet behind e>en this radical opposition- there is another one wor6ing in #enanfs
2ind- and for se>eral pages in the first chapter of boo6 ; he e4poses his position 9uite
candidly to the reader! 1his occurs when he introduces "aint0(ilairefs >iews on the
idegradation of types!i
;2
Although #enan does not specify which "aint0(ilaire he
refers to- the reference is clear enough! For both Xtienne
1=)
and his son Isidore were biological speculators of e4traordinary fa2e and influence-
particularly a2ong literary intellectuals during the first half of the nineteenth century
in France! Xtienne- we recall- had been a 2e2ber of the /apoleonic e4pedition- and
BalAac dedicated an i2portant section of the preface for (a 2om-die humaine to
hi2J there is also 2uch e>idence that Flaubert read both the father and the son and
used their >iews in his wor6!
;)
/ot only were Xtienne and Isidore legatees of the
tradition of i#o2antici biology- which included 5oethe and Cu>ier- with a strong
interest in analogy- ho2ology- and organic ur0for2 a2ong species- but they were also
specialists in the philosophy and anato2y of 2onstrosity0teratology- as Isidore called
it0in which the 2ost horrendous physiological aberrations were considered a result of
internal degradation within the species0life!
;=
I cannot here go into the intricacies Fas
well as the 2acabre fascinationG of teratology- though it is enough to 2ention that
both Etienne and Isidore e4ploited the theoretical power of the linguistic paradig2 to
e4plain the de>iations possible within a biological syste2! 1hus Xtiennefs notion was
that a 2onster is an anomaly, in the sa2e sense that in language words e4ist in
analogical as well as ano2alous relations with each other: in linguistics the idea is at
least as old as Barrofs De (ingua (atina. No ano2aly can be considered si2ply as a
gratuitous e4ceptionJ rather ano2alies confir2 the regular structure binding together
all 2e2bers of the sa2e class! "uch a >iew is 9uite daring in anato2y! At one
2o2ent in the i&rPli2inairei to his Philosophie anatomi3ue ?tienne says:
And- indeed- such is the character of our epoch that it beco2es i2possible today
to enclose oneself strictly within the fra2ewor6 of a si2ple 2onograph! "tudy an
ob@ect in isolation and you will only be able to bring it bac6 to itselfJ
conse9uently you can ne>er ha>e perfect 6nowledge of it! But see it in the 2idst
of beings who are connected with each other in 2any different ways- and which
are isolated fro2 each other in different ways- and you will disco>er for this
ob@ect a wider scope of relationships! First of all- you will 6now it better- e>en in
its specificity: but 2ore i2portant- by considering it in the >ery center of its own
sphere of acti>ity- you will 6now precisely how it beha>es in its own e4terior
world- and you will also 6now how its own features are constituted in reaction to
its surrounding 2ilieu!
;;
/ot only is "aint0(ilaire saying that it is the specific character of conte2porary
study Fhe was writing in 1,22G to e4a2ine pheno2ena
1==
co2parati>elyJ he is also saying that for the scientist there is no such thing as a
pheno2enon- no 2atter how aberrant and e4ceptional- that cannot be e4plained with
reference to other pheno2ena! /ote also how "aint0(ilaire e2ploys the 2etaphor of
centrality Jle centre de sa sph0re dIactivit0+ used later by #enan in (I$venir de la
science to describe the position occupied by any ob@ect in nature0including e>en the
philologist0once the ob@ect is scientifically placed there by the e4a2ining scientist!
1hereafter between the ob@ect and the scientist a bond of sy2pathy is established! 3f
course- this can only ta6e place during the laboratory e4perience- and not elsewhere!
1he point being 2ade is that a scientist has at his disposal a sort of le>erage by which
e>en the totally unusual occurrence can be seen naturally and 6nown scientifically-
which in this case 2eans without recourse to the supernatural- and with recourse only
to an en>eloping en>iron2ent constituted by the scientist! As a result nature itself can
be repercei>ed as continuous- har2oniously coherent- and funda2entally intelligible!
1hus for #enan "e2itic is a pheno2enon of arrested de>elop2ent in co2parison
with the 2ature languages and cultures of the Indo0European group- and e>en with
the other "e2itic 3riental languages!
;E
1he parado4 that #enan sustains- howe>er- is
that e>en as he encourages us to see languages as in so2e way corresponding to
ietres >i>ants de la nature-i he is e>erywhere else pro>ing that his 3riental languages-
the "e2itic languages- are inorganic- arrested- totally ossified- incapable of
self0regenerationJ in other words- he pro>es that "e2itic is not a li>e language- and
for that 2atter- neither are "e2ites li>e creatures! Moreo>er- Indo0European language
and culture are ali>e and organic because of the laboratory- not despite it! But far
fro2 being a 2arginal issue in #enanfs wor6- this parado4 stands- I belie>e- at the
>ery center of his entire wor6- his style- and his archi>al e4istence in the culture of his
ti2e- a culture to which0as people so unli6e each other as Matthew Arnold- 3scar
ilde- Ja2es FraAer- and Marcel &roust concurred 0he was a >ery i2portant
contributor! 1o be able to sustain a >ision that incorporates and holds together life and
9uasi0li>ing creatures FIndo0European- European cultureG as well as 9uasi2onstrous-
parallel inorganic pheno2ena F"e2itic- 3riental cultureG is precisely the achie>e2ent
of the European scientist in his laboratory! (e constructs, and the >ery act of
construction is a sign of i2perial power o>er recalcitrant pheno2ena- as well as a
1=;
confir2ation of the do2inating culture and its inaturaliAation!i Indeed- it is not too
2uch to say that #enanfs philological laboratory is the actual locale of his European
ethnocentris2J but what needs e2phasis here is that the philological laboratory has
no e4istence outside the discourse- the writing by which it is constantly produced and
e4perienced! 1hus e>en the culture he calls organic and ali>e0Europefs0is also a
creature being created in the laboratory and by philology!
#enanfs entire later career was European and cultural! Its acco2plish2ents were
>aried and celebrated! hate>er authority his style possessed can- I thin6- be traced
bac6 to his techni9ue for constructing the inorganic For the 2issingG and for gi>ing it
the appearance of life! (e was 2ost fa2ous- of course- for his ,ie de JPsus- the wor6
that inaugurated his 2onu2ental histories of Christianity and the Jewish people! Iet
we 2ust realiAe that the ,ie was e4actly the sa2e type of feat that the .istoire
g-n-rale was- a construction enabled by the historianfs capacity for s6illfully crafting
a dead Fdead for #enan in the double sense of a dead faith and a lost- hence dead-
historical periodG 3riental biography 0and the parado4 is i22ediately apparent0as if it
were the truthful narrati>e of a natural life! hate>er #enan said had first passed
through the philological laboratoryJ when it appeared in print wo>en through the te4t-
there was in it the life0gi>ing force of a conte2porary cultural signature- which drew
fro2 2odernity all its scientific power and all its uncritical self0approbation! For that
sort of culture such genealogies as dynasty- tradition- religion- ethnic co22unities
were all si2ply functions of a theory whose @ob was to instruct the world! In
borrowing this latter phrase fro2 Cu>ier- #enan was circu2spectly placing scientific
de2onstration o>er e4perienceJ te2porality was relegated to the scientifically useless
real2 of ordinary e4perience- while to the special periodicity of culture and cultural
co2parati>is2 Fwhich spawned ethnocentris2- racial theory- and econo2ic
oppressionG were gi>en powers far in ad>ance of 2oral >ision!
#enanfs style- his career as 3rientalist and 2an of letters- the circu2stances of the
2eaning he co22unicates- his peculiarly inti2ate relationship with the European
scholarly and general culture of his ti2e0liberal- e4clusi>ist- i2perious- antihu2an
e4cept in a >ery conditional sense0all these are what I would call celibate and
scientific! 5eneration for hi2 is consigned to the real2 of
1=E
/Iavenir, which in his fa2ous 2anifesto he associated with science! Although as a
historian of culture he belongs to the school of 2en li6e 1urgot- Condorcet- 5uiAot-
Cousin- Jouffroy- and Ballanche- and in scholarship to the school of "acy- Caussin de
&erce>al- 3Aana2- Fauriel- and Burnouf- #enanfs is a peculiarly ra>aged- ragingly
2asculine world of history and learningJ it is indeed the world- not of fathers-
2others- and children- but of 2en li6e his Jesus- his Marcus Aurelius- his Caliban- his
solar god Fthe last as described in i#e>esi of the Dialogues philosophi3ues+.
;+
(e
cherished the power of science and 3rientalist philology particularlyJ he sought its
insights and its techni9uesJ he used it to inter>ene- often with considerable
effecti>eness- in the life of his epoch! And yet his ideal role was that of spectator!
According to #enan- a philologist ought to prefer bonheur to Nouissance< the
preference e4presses a choice of ele>ated- if sterile- happiness o>er se4ual pleasure!
ords belong to the real2 of bonheur, as does the study of words- ideally spea6ing!
1o 2y 6nowledge- there are >ery few 2o2ents in all of #enanfs public writing where
a beneficent and instru2ental role is assigned to wo2en! 3ne occurs when #enan
opines that foreign wo2en Fnurses- 2aidsG 2ust ha>e instructed the con9uering
/or2ansf children- and hence we can account for the changes that ta6e place in
language! /ote how producti>ity and disse2ination are not the functions aided- but
rather internal change- and a subsidiary one at that! iMan-i he says at the end of the
sa2e essay- ibelongs neither to his language nor to his raceJ he belongs to hi2self
before all- since before all he is a free being and a 2oral one!i
;,
Man was free and
2oral- but enchained by race- history- and science as #enan saw the2- conditions
i2posed by the scholar on 2an!
1he study of 3riental languages too6 #enan to the heart of these conditions- and
philology 2ade it concretely apparent that 6nowledge of 2an was0to paraphrase Ernst
Cassirer0poetically transfiguring
;*
only if it had been pre>iously se>ered fro2 raw
actuality Fas "acy had necessarily se>ered his Arabic frag2ents fro2 their actualityG
and then put into a do4ological strait@ac6et! By beco2ing philology, the study of
words as once practiced by Bico- (erder- #ousseau- Michelet- and Huinet lost its plot
and its dra2atic presentational 9uality- as "chelling once called it! Instead- philology
beca2e episte2ologically co2ple4J 4prachge#Ohl was no longer enough since words
the2sel>es pertained less to the senses or the
1=+
body Fas they had for BicoG and 2ore to a sightless- i2ageless- and abstract real2
ruled o>er by such hothouse for2ulations as race- 2ind- culture- and nation! In that
real2- which was discursi>ely constructed and called the 3rient- certain 6inds of
assertions could be 2ade- all of the2 possessing the sa2e0 powerful generality and
cultural >alidity! For all of #enanfs effort was to deny 3riental culture the right to be
generated- e4cept artificially in the philological laboratory! A 2an was not a child of
the cultureJ that dynastic conception had been too effecti>ely challenged by
philology! &hilology taught one how culture is a construct- an articulation Fin the
sense that .ic6ens used the word for Mr! Benusfs profession in "ur Mutual !riend+,
e>en a creation- but not anything 2ore than a 9uasi0organic structure!
hat is specially interesting in #enan is how 2uch he 6new hi2self to be a
creature of his ti2e and of his ethnocentric culture! 3n the occasion of an acade2ic
response to a speech 2ade by Ferdinand de 'esseps in 1,,;- #enan a>erred as how
iit was so sad to be a wiser 2an than onefs nation !!!! 3ne cannot feel bitterness
towards onefs ho2eland! Better to be 2ista6en along with the nation than to be too
right with those who tell it hard truths!i
E7
1he econo2y of such a state2ent is al2ost
too perfect to be true! For does not the old #enan say that the best relationship is one
of parity with onefs own culture- its 2orality- and its ethos during onefs ti2e- that and
not a dynastic relation by which one is either the child of his ti2es or their parentL
And here we return to the laboratory- for it is there0as #enan thought of it0that filial
and ulti2ately social responsibilities cease and scientific and 3rientalist ones ta6e
o>er! (is laboratory was the platfor2 fro2 which as an 3rientalist he addressed the
worldJ it 2ediated the state2ents he 2ade- ga>e the2 confidence and general
precision- as well as continuity! 1hus the philological laboratory as #enan understood
it redefined not only his epoch and his culture- dating and shaping the2 in new waysJ
it ga>e his 3riental sub@ect 2atter a scholarly coherence- and 2ore- it 2ade hi2 Fand
later 3rientalists in his traditionG into the 3ccidental cultural figure he then beca2e!
e 2ay well wonder whether this new autono2y within the culture was the freedo2
#enan hoped his philological 3rientalist science would bring or whether- so far as a
critical historian of 3rientalis2 is concerned- it set up a co2ple4 affiliation between
3rientalis2 and its putati>e hu2an sub@ect 2atter that is based finally on power and
not really on disinterested ob@ecti>ity!
1=,
III
Oriental Residence
and Scholarship'
The Requirements of
Lexicography and Imagination
#enanfs >iews of the 3riental "e2ites belong- of course- less to the real2 of
popular pre@udice and co22on anti0 "e2itis2 than they do to the real2 of scientific
3riental philology! hen we read #enan and "acy- we readily obser>e the way
cultural generaliAation had begun to ac9uire the ar2or of scientific state2ent and the
a2bience of correcti>e study! 'i6e 2any acade2ic specialties in their early phases-
2odern 3rientalis2 held its sub@ect 2atter- which it defined- in a >iseli6e grip which
it did al2ost e>erything in its power to sustain! 1hus a 6nowing >ocabulary
de>eloped- and its functions- as 2uch as its style- located the 3rient in a co2parati>e
fra2ewor6- of the sort e2ployed and 2anipulated by #enan! "uch co2paratis2 is
rarely descripti>eJ 2ost often- it is both e>aluati>e and e4pository! (ere is #enan
co2paring typically:
3ne sees that in all things the "e2itic race appears to us to be an inco2plete
race- by >irtue of its si2plicity! 1his race0if I dare use the analogy0is to the
Indo0European fa2ily what a pencil s6etch is to paintingJ it lac6s that >ariety-
that a2plitude- that abundance of life which is the condition of perfectibility!
'i6e those indi>iduals who possess so little fecundity that- after a gracious
childhood- they attain only the 2ost 2ediocre >irility- the "e2itic nations
e4perienced their fullest flowering in their first age and ha>e ne>er been able to
achie>e true 2aturity!
E1
Indo0Europeans are the touchstone here- @ust as they are when #enan says that the
"e2itic 3riental sensibility ne>er reached the heights attained by the Indo05er2anic
races!
hether this co2parati>e attitude is principally a scholarly necessity or whether
it is disguised ethnocentric race pre@udice- we cannot say with absolute certainty!
hat we can say is that the two
1=*
wor6 together- in support of each other! hat #enan and "acy tried to do was to
reduce the 3rient to a 6ind of hu2an flatness- which e4posed its characteristics easily
to scrutiny and re2o>ed fro2 it its co2plicating hu2anity! In #enanfs case- the
legiti2acy of his efforts was pro>ided by philology- whose ideological tenets
encourage the reduction of a language to its rootsJ thereafter- the philologist finds it
possible to connect those linguistics roots- as #enan and others did- to race- 2ind-
character- and te2pera2ent at their roots! 1he affinity between #enan and 5obineau-
for e4a2ple- was ac6nowledged by #enan to be a co22on philological and
3rientalist perspecti>eJ
E2
in subse9uent editions of the .istoire g-n-rale he
incorporated so2e of 5obineaufs wor6 within his own! 1hus did co2paratis2 in the
study of the 3rient and 3rientals co2e to be synony2ous with the apparent
ontological ine9uality of 3ccident and 3rient!
1he 2ain traits of this ine9uality are worth recapitulating briefly! I ha>e already
referred to "chlegelfs enthusias2 for India- and then his subse9uent re>ulsion fro2 it
and of course fro2 Isla2! Many of the earliest 3riental a2ateurs began by
welco2ing the 3rient as a salutary d-rangement of their European habits of 2ind and
spirit! 1he 3rient was o>er>alued for its pantheis2- its spirituality- its stability- its
longe>ity- its pri2iti>ity- and so forth! "chelling- for e4a2ple- saw in 3riental
polytheis2 a preparation of the way for Judeo0Christian 2onotheis2: Abraha2 was
prefigured in Brah2a! Iet al2ost without e4ception such o>erestee2 was followed
by a counterresponse: the 3rient suddenly appeared la2entably underhu2aniAed-
antide2ocratic- bac6ward- barbaric- and so forth! A swing of the pendulu2 in one
direction caused an e9ual and opposite swing bac6: the 3rient was under>alued!
3rientalis2 as a profession grew out of these opposites- of co2pensations and
corrections based on ine9uality- ideas nourished by and nourishing si2ilar ideas in
the culture at large! Indeed the >ery pro@ect of restriction and restructuring associated
with 3rientalis2 can be traced directly to the ine9uality by which the 3rientfs
co2parati>e po>erty For wealthG besought scholarly- scientific treat2ent of the 6ind
to be found in disciplines li6e philology- biology- history- anthropology- philosophy-
or econo2ics!
And thus the actual profession of 3rientalist enshrined this ine9uality and the
special parado4es it engendered! Most often an indi>idual entered the profession as a
way of rec6oning with the 3rientfs clai2 on hi2J yet 2ost often too his 3rientalist
training
1;7
opened his eyes- so to spea6- and what he was left with was a sort of debun6ing
pro@ect- by which the 3rient was reduced to considerably less than the e2inence once
seen in it! (ow else is one to e4plain the enor2ous labors represented by the wor6 of
illia2 Muir F1,1*01*7; G- for e4a2ple- or of #einhart .oAy F1,2701,,) G- and the
i2pressi>e antipathy in that wor6 to the 3rient- Isla2- and the ArabsL
Characteristically- #enan was one of .oAyfs supporters- @ust as in .oAyfs four0>olu2e
.istoire des Mussulmans dIEspagne, Nus3u P la con3uGte de &I$ndalousie par les
$lmoravides F1,E1G there appear 2any of #enanfs anti0"e2itic strictures-
co2pounded in 1,E= by a >olu2e arguing that the Jewsf pri2iti>e 5od was not
Jahweh but Baal- proof for which was to be found in Mecca- of all places! Muirfs (i#e
o# Mahomet F1,;,01,E1G and his The 2aliphate, /ts Rise, Decline and !all F1,*1G are
still considered reliable 2onu2ents of scholarship- yet his attitude towards his sub@ect
2atter was fairly put by hi2 when he slid that ithe sword of Muha22ed- and the
%orfln- are the 2ost stubborn ene2ies of Ci>ilisation- 'iberty- and the 1ruth which
the world has yet 6nown!i
E)
Many of the sa2e notions are to be found in the wor6 of
Alfred 'yall- who was one of the authors cited appro>ingly by Cro2er!
E>en if the 3rientalist does not e4plicitly @udge his 2aterial as .oAy and Muir
did- the principle of ine9uality e4erts its influence ne>ertheless! It re2ains the
professional 3rientalistfs @ob to piece together a portrait- a restored picture as it were-
of the 3rient or the 3rientalJ frag2ents- such as those unearthed by "acy- supply the
2aterial- but the narrati>e shape- continuity- and figures are constructed by the
scholar- for who2 scholarship consists of circu2>enting the unruly Fun03ccidentalG
nonhistory of the 3rient with orderly chronicle- portraits- and plots! Caussin de
&erce>alfs Essai sur lIhistoire des $rabes avant lI/slamisme, pendant lI-po3ue de
Mahomet Fthree >olu2es- 1,=+01,=,G is a wholly professional study- depending for
its sources on docu2ents 2ade a>ailable internally to the field by other 3rientalists
Fprincipally "acy- of courseG or docu2ents0li6e the te4ts of ibn0%haldun- upon who2
Caussin relied >ery hea>ily0reposing in 3rientalist libraries in Europe! Caussinfs
thesis is that the Arabs were 2ade a people by Moha22ed- Isla2 being essentially a
political instru2ent- not by any 2eans a spiritual one! hat Caussin stri>es for is
clarity a2idst a huge 2ass of confusing detail! 1hus what e2erges out of the study of
Isla2 is 9uite literally a one0di2ensional portrait of Moha22ed-
1;1
who is 2ade to appear at the end of the wor6 Fafter his death has been describedG in
precise photographic detail!
E=
/either a de2on- nor a prototype of Cagliostro-
Caussinfs Moha22ed is a 2an appropriated to a history of Isla2 Fthe fittest >ersion
of itG as an e4clusi>ely political 2o>e2ent- centraliAed by the innu2erable citations
that thrust hi2 up and- in a sense- out of the te4t! Caussinfs intention was to lea>e
nothing unsaid about Moha22edJ the &rophet is thereby seen in a cold light- stripped
both of his i22ense religious force and of any residual powers to frighten Europeans!
1he point here is that as a figure for his own ti2e and place Moha22ed is effaced- in
order for a >ery slight hu2an 2iniature of hi2 to be left standing!
A nonprofessional analogue to Caussinfs Moha22ed is Carlylefs- a Moha22ed
forced to ser>e a thesis totally o>erloo6ing the historical and cultural circu2stances
of the &rophetfs own ti2e and place! Although Carlyle 9uotes "acy- his essay is
clearly the product of so2eone arguing for so2e general ideas on sincerity- herois2-
and prophethood! (is attitude is salutary: Moha22ed is no legend- no sha2eful
sensualist- no laughable petty sorcerer who trained pigeons to pic6 peas out of his ear!
#ather he is a 2an of real >ision and self0con>iction- albeit an author of a boo6- the
%oran- that is ia weariso2e confused @u2ble- crude- inconditeJ endless iterations-
long0windedness- entangle2entJ 2ost crude- incondite0insupportable stupidity- in
short!i
E;
/ot a paragon of lucidity and stylistic grace hi2self- Carlyle asserts these
things as a way of rescuing Moha22ed fro2 the Bentha2ite standards that would
ha>e conde2ned both Moha22ed and hi2 together! Iet Moha22ed is a hero-
transplanted into Europe out of the sa2e barbaric 3rient found wanting by 'ord
Macaulay in his fa2ous iMinutei of 1,);- in which it was asserted that iour nati>e
sub@ectsi ha>e 2ore to learn fro2 us than we do fro2 the2!
EE
Both Caussin and Carlyle- in other words- show us that the 3rient need not cause
us undue an4iety- so une9ual are 3riental to European achie>e2ents! 1he 3rientalist
and non03rientalist perspecti>es coincide here! For within the co2parati>e field that
3rientalis2 beca2e after the philological re>olution of the early nineteenth century-
and outside it- either in popular stereotypes or in the figures 2ade of the 3rient by
philosophers li6e Carlyle and stereotypes li6e those of Macaulay- the 3rient in itself
was subordinated intellectually to the est! As 2aterial for study or reflection the
3rient ac9uired all the 2ar6s of an inherent wea6ness! It beca2e
1;2
sub@ect to the >agaries of 2iscellaneous theories that used it for illustration! Cardinal
/ew2an- no great 3rientalist- used 3riental Isla2 as the basis of lectures in 1,;)
@ustifying British inter>ention in the Cri2ean ar!
E+
Cu>ier found the 3rient useful
for his wor6 (e R0gne animal F1,1EG! 1he 3rient was usefully e2ployed as
con>ersation in the >arious salons of &aris!
E,
1he list of references- borrowings- and
transfor2ations that o>ertoo6 the 3riental idea is i22ense- but at botto2 what the
early 3rientalist achie>ed- and what the non03rientalist in the est e4ploited- was a
reduced 2odel of the 3rient suitable for the pre>ailing- do2inant culture and its
theoretical Fand hard after the theoretical- the practicalG e4igencies! 3ccasionally one
co2es across e4ceptions- or if not e4ceptions then interesting co2plications- to this
une9ual partnership between East and est! %arl Mar4 identified the notion of an
Asiatic econo2ic syste2 in his 1,;) analyses of British rule in India- and then put
beside that i22ediately the hu2an depredation introduced into this syste2 by
English colonial interference- rapacity- and outright cruelty! In article after article he
returned with increasing con>iction to the idea that e>en in destroying Asia- Britain
was 2a6ing possible there a real social re>olution! Mar4fs style pushes us right up
against the difficulty of reconciling our natural repugnance as fellow creatures to the
sufferings of 3rientals while their society is being >iolently transfor2ed with the
historical necessity of these transfor2ations!
/ow- sic6ening as it 2ust be to hu2an feeling to witness those 2yriads of
industrious patriarchal and inoffensi>e social organiAations disorganiAed and
dissol>ed into their units- thrown into a sea of woes- and their indi>idual
2e2bers losing at the sa2e ti2e their ancient for2 of ci>iliAation and their
hereditary 2eans of subsistence- we 2ust not forget that these idyllic >illage
co22unities- inoffensi>e though they 2ay appear- had always been the solid
foundation of 3riental despotis2- that they restrained the hu2an 2ind within the
s2allest possible co2pass- 2a6ing it the unresisting tool of superstition-
ensla>ing it beneath the traditional rules- depri>ing it of all grandeur and
historical energies !!!!
England- it is true- in causing a social re>olution in (industan was actuated
only by the >ilest interests- and was stupid in her 2anner of enforcing the2! But
that is not the 9uestion! 1he 9uestion is- can 2an6ind fulfil its destiny without a
funda2ental re>olution in the social state of AsiaL If not- whate>er 2ay ha>e
been the cri2es of England she was the unconscious tool of history in bringing
about that re>olution!
1;)
1hen- whate>er bitterness the spectacle of the cru2bling of an ancient world
2ay ha>e for our personal feelings- we ha>e the right- in point of history- to
e4clai2 with 5oethe:
"ollte these Hual uns 9ualen
.a she unsere 'ust >er2ehrt
(at nicht Myriaden "eelen
1i2urs (errschaft aufgeAiehrtL
E*
F"hould this torture then tor2ent us
"ince it brings us greater pleasureL
ere not through the rule of 1i2ur
"ouls de>oured without 2easureLG
1he 9uotation- which supports Mar4fs argu2ent about tor2ent producing pleasure-
co2es fro2 the )estQstlicher Diwan and identifies the sources of Mar4fs conceptions
about the 3rient! 1hese are #o2antic and e>en 2essianic: as hu2an 2aterial the
3rient is less i2portant than as an ele2ent in a #o2antic rede2pti>e pro@ect! Mar4fs
econo2ic analyses are perfectly fitted thus to a standard 3rientalist underta6ing- e>en
though Mar4fs hu2anity- his sy2pathy for the 2isery of people- are clearly engaged!
Iet in the end it is the #o2antic 3rientalist >ision that wins out- as Mar4fs theoretical
socio0econo2ic >iews beco2e sub2erged in this classically standard i2age:
England has to fulfill a double 2ission in India: one destructi>e- the other
regenerating0the annihilation of the Asiatic society- and the laying of the 2aterial
foundations of estern society in Asia!
+7
1he idea of regenerating a funda2entally lifeless Asia is a piece of pure #o2antic
3rientalis2- of course- but co2ing fro2 the sa2e writer who could not easily forget
the hu2an suffering in>ol>ed- the state2ent is puAAling! It re9uires us first to as6 how
Mar4fs 2oral e9uation of Asiatic loss with the British colonial rule he conde2ned
gets s6ewed bac6 towards the old ine9uality between East and est we ha>e so far
re2ar6ed! "econd- it re9uires us to as6 where the hu2an sy2pathy has gone- into
what real2 of thought it has disappeared while the 3rientalist >ision ta6es its place!
e are i22ediately brought bac6 to the realiAation that 3rientalists- li6e 2any
other early0nineteenth0century thin6ers- concei>e of hu2anity either in large
collecti>e ter2s or in abstract generalities! 3rientalists are neither interested in nor
capable of discussing indi>idualsJ instead artificial entities- perhaps with their
1;=
roots in (erderian populis2- predo2inate! 1here are 3rientals- Asiatics- "e2ites-
Musli2s- Arabs- Jews- races- 2entalities- nations- and the li6e- so2e of the2 the
product of learned operations of the type found in #enanfs wor6! "i2ilarly- the
age0old distinction between iEuropei and iAsiai or i3ccidenti and i3rienti herds
beneath >ery wide labels e>ery possible >ariety of hu2an plurality- reducing it in the
process to one or two ter2inal- collecti>e abstractions! Mar4 is no e4ception! 1he
collecti>e 3rient was easier for hi2 to use in illustration of a theory than e4istential
hu2an identities! For between 3rient and 3ccident- as if in a self0fulfilling
procla2ation- only the >ast anony2ous collecti>ity 2attered- or e4isted! /o other
type of e4change- se>erely constrained though it 2ay ha>e been- was at hand!
1hat Mar4 was still able to sense so2e fellow feeling- to identify e>en a little
with poor Asia- suggests that so2ething happened before the labels too6 o>er- before
he was dispatched to 5oethe as a source of wisdo2 on the 3rient! It is as if the
indi>idual 2ind FMar4fs- in this caseG could find a precollecti>e- preofficial
indi>iduality in Asia0find and gi>e in to its pressures upon his e2otions- feelings-
senses0only to gi>e it up when he confronted a 2ore for2idable censor in the >ery
>ocabulary he found hi2self forced to e2ploy! hat that censor did was to stop and
then chase away the sy2pathy- and this was acco2panied by a lapidary defini tion:
1hose people- it said- donft suffer0they are 3rientals and hence ha>e to be treated in
other ways than the ones youf>e @ust been using! A wash of senti2ent therefore
disappeared as it encountered the unsha6able definitions built up by 3rientalist
science- supported by i3rientali lore Fe!g!- the .iwanG supposed to be appropriate for
it! 1he >ocabulary of e2otion dissipated as it sub2itted to the le4icographical police
action of 3rientalist science and e>en 3rientalist art! An e4perience was dislodged by
a dictionary definition: one can al2ost see that happen in Mar4fs Indian essays- where
what finally occurs is that so2ething forces hi2 to scurry bac6 to 5oethe- there to
stand in his protecti>e 3rientaliAed 3rient!
In part- of course- Mar4 was concerned with >indicating his own theses on
socio0econo2ic re>olutionJ but in part also he see2s to ha>e had easy resource to a
2assed body of writing- both internally consolidated by 3rientalis2 and put forward
by it beyond the field- that controlled any state2ent 2ade about the 3rient! In
Chapter 3ne I tried to show how this control had had a general cultural
1;;
history in Europe since anti9uityJ in this chapter 2y concern has been to show how in
the nineteenth century a 2odern professional ter2inology and practice were created
whose e4istence do2inated discourse about the 3rient- whether by 3rientalists or
non03rientalists! "acy and #enan were instances of the way 3rientalis2 fashioned-
respecti>ely- a body of te4ts and a philologically rooted process by which the 3rient
too6 on a discursi>e identity that 2ade it une9ual with the est! In using Mar4 as the
case by which a non03rientalistfs hu2an engage2ents were first dissol>ed-then
usurped by 3rientalist generaliAations- we find oursel>es ha>ing to consider the
process of le4icographical and institutional consolidation peculiar to 3rientalis2!
hat was this operation- by which whene>er you discussed the 3rient a for2idable
2echanis2 of o2nico2petent definitions would present itself as the only one ha>ing
suitable >alidity for your discussionL And since we 2ust also show how this
2echanis2 operated specifically Fand effecti>elyG upon personal hu2an e4periences
that otherwise contradicted it- we 2ust also show where they went and what for2s
they too6- while they lasted!
All this is a >ery difficult and co2ple4 operation to describe- at least as difficult
and co2ple4 as the way any growing discipline crowds out its co2petitors and
ac9uires authority for its traditions- 2ethods- and institutions- as well as general
cultural legiti2acy for its state2ents- personalities- and agencies! But we can si2plify
a great deal of the sheer narrati>e co2ple4ity of the operation by specifying the 6inds
of e4periences that 3rientalis2 typically e2ployed for its own ends and represented
for its wider0than0professional audience! In essence these e4periences continue the
ones I described as ha>ing ta6en place in "acy and #enan! But whereas those two
scholars represent a wholly boo6ish 3rientalis2- since neither clai2ed any particular
e4pertise with the 3rient in situ, there is another tradition that clai2ed its legiti2acy
fro2 the peculiarly co2pelling fact of residence in- actual e4istential contact with- the
3rient! An9uetil- Jones- the /apoleonic e4pedition define the traditionfs earliest
contours- of course- and these will thereafter retain an unsha6able influence on all
3rientalist residents! 1hese contours are the ones of European power: to reside in the
3rient is to li>e the pri>ileged life- not of an ordinary citiAen- but of a representati>e
European whose e2pire FFrench or BritishG contains the 3rient in its 2ilitary-
econo2ic- and abo>e all- cultural ar2s!3riental residence- and its scholarly fruits- are
thereby fed into the
1;E
boo6ish tradition of the te4tual attitudes we found in #enan and "acy: together the
two e4periences will constitute a for2idable library against which no one- not e>en
Mar4- can rebel and which no one can a>oid!
#esidence in the 3rient in>ol>es personal e4perience and personal testi2ony to a
certain e4tent! Contributions to the library of 3rientalis2 and to its consolidation
depend on how e4perience and testi2ony get con>erted fro2 a purely personal
docu2ent into the enabling codes of 3rientalist science! In other words- within a te4t
there has to ta6e place a 2eta2orphosis fro2 personal to official state2entJ the
record of 3riental residence and e4perience by a European 2ust shed- or at least
2ini2iAe- its purely autobiographical and indulgent descriptions in fa>or of
descriptions on which 3rientalis2 in general and later 3rientalists in particular can
draw- build- and base further scientific obser>ation and description! "o one of the
things we can watch for is a 2ore e4plicit con>ersion than in Mar4 of personal
senti2ents about the 3rient into official 3rientalist state2ents!
/ow the situation is enriched and co2plicated by the fact that during the entire
nineteenth century the 3rient- and especially the /ear 3rient- was a fa>orite place for
Europeans to tra>el in and write about! Moreo>er- there de>eloped a fairly large body
of 3riental0style European literature >ery fre9uently based on personal e4periences in
the 3rient! Flaubert co2es to 2ind i22ediately as one pro2inent source of such
literatureJ .israeli- Mar6 1wain- and %ingla6e are three other ob>ious e4a2ples! But
what is of interest is the difference between writing that is con>erted fro2 personal to
professional 3rientalis2- and the second type- also based on residence and personal
testi2ony- which re2ains iliteraturei and not science: it is this difference that I now
want to e4plore!
1o be a European in the 3rient always in>ol>es being a consciousness set apart
fro2- and une9ual with- its surroundings! But the 2ain thing to note is the intention
of this consciousness: hat is it in the 3rient forL hy does it set itself there e>en if-
as is the case with writers li6e "cott- (ugo- and 5oethe- it tra>els to the 3rient for a
>ery concrete sort of e4perience without actually lea>ing EuropeL A s2all nu2ber of
intentional categories proposed the2sel>es sche2atically! 3ne: the writer who
intends to use his residence for the specific tas6 of pro>iding professional 3rientalis2
with scientific 2aterial- who considers his residence a for2 of scientific obser>ation!
1wo: the writer who intends the sa2e purpose
1;+
but is less willing to sacrifice the eccentricity and style of his indi>idual
consciousness to i2personal 3rientalist definitions! 1hese latter do appear in his
wor6- but they are disentangled fro2 the personal >agaries of style only with
difficulty! 1hree: the writer for who2 a real or 2etaphorical trip to the 3rient is the
fulfill2ent of so2e deeply felt and urgent pro@ect! (is te4t therefore is built on a
personal aesthetic- fed and infor2ed by the pro@ect! In categories two and three there
is considerably 2ore space than in one for the play of a personal0or at least
non03rientalist0consciousnessJ if we ta6e Edward illia2 'anefs Manners and
2ustoms o# the Modern Egyptians as the pre0e2inent e4a2ple of category one-
Burtonfs Pilgrimage to al'Madinah and Meccah as belonging to category two- and
/er>alfs ,oyage en "rient as representing category three- the relati>e spaces left in
the te4t for the e4ercise and display of authorial presence will be clear!
.espite their differences- howe>er- these three categories are not so separate fro2
each other as one would i2agine! /or does each category contain ipurei
representati>e types! For e4a2ple- wor6s in all three categories rely upon the sheer
egoistic powers of the European consciousness at their center! In all cases the 3rient
is #or the European obser>er- and what is 2ore- in the category that contains 'anefs
Egyptians, the 3rientalist ego is >ery 2uch in e>idence- howe>er 2uch his style tries
for i2partial i2personality! Moreo>er- certain 2otifs recur consistently in all three
types! 1he 3rient as a place of pilgri2age is oneJ so too is the >ision of 3rient as
spectacle- or tableau vivant. E>ery wor6 on the 3rient in these categories tries to
characteriAe the place- of course- but what is of greater interest is the e4tent to which
the wor6fs internal structure is in so2e 2easure synony2ous with a co2prehensi>e
interpretation For an atte2pt at itG of the 3rient! Most of the ti2e- not surprisingly-
this interpretation is a for2 of #o2antic restructuring of the 3rient- a re0>ision of it-
which restores it rede2pti>ely to the present! E>ery interpretation- e>ery structure
created for the 3rient- then- is a reinterpretation- a rebuilding of it!
(a>ing said that-we return directly to differences between the categories! 'anefs
boo6 on the Egyptians was influential- it was fre9uently read and cited Fby Flaubert
a2ong othersG- and it established its authorfs reputation as an e2inent figure in
3rientalist scholarship! In other words- 'anefs authority was gained- not by >irtue
si2ply of what he said- but by >irtue of how what he said could be adapted to
3rientalis2! (e is 9uoted as a source of 6nowledge
1;,
about Egypt or Arabia- whereas Burton or Flaubert were and are read for what they
tell us about Burton and Flaubert o>er and abo>e their 6nowledge of the 3rient! 1he
author0function in 'anefs Modern Egyptians is less strong than in the other categories
because his wor6 was disse2inated into the profession- consolidated by it-
institutionaliAed with it! 1he authorial identity in a wor6 of professional discipline
such as his is subordinated to the de2ands of the field- as well as to the de2ands of
the sub@ect 2atter! But this is not done si2ply- or without raising proble2s!
'anefs classic- $n $ccount o# the Manners and 2ustoms o# the Modern Egyptians
F1,)EG- was the self0conscious result of a series of wor6s and of two periods of
residence in Egypt F1,2;01,2, and 1,))01,);G! 3ne uses the phrase iself0consciousi
with so2e e2phasis here because the i2pression 'ane wished to gi>e was that his
study was a wor6 of i22ediate and direct- unadorned and neutral- description-
whereas in fact it was the product of considerable editing Fthe wor6 he wrote was not
the one he finally publishedG and also of a considerable >ariety of 9uite special
efforts! /othing in his birth or bac6ground see2ed to destine hi2 for the 3rient-
e4cept his 2ethodical studiousness and his capacity for classical studies and for
2athe2atics- which so2ewhat e4plain the apparent internal neatness of his boo6! (is
preface offers a series of interesting clues about what it was that he did for the boo6!
(e went to Egypt originally to study Arabic! 1hen- after 2a6ing so2e notes about
2odern Egypt- he was encouraged to produce a syste2atic wor6 on the country and
its inhabitants by a co22ittee of the "ociety for the .iffusion of ?seful %nowledge!
Fro2 being a rando2 set of obser>ations the wor6 was changed into a docu2ent of
useful 6nowledge- 6nowledge arranged for and readily accessible to anyone wishing
to 6now the essentials of a foreign society! 1he preface 2a6es it clear that such
6nowledge 2ust so2ehow dispose of pre0e4isting 6nowledge- as well as clai2 for
itself a particularly effecti>e character: here 'ane is the subtle pole2icist! (e 2ust
show initially that he did what others before hi2 either could not or did not do- and
then- that he was able to ac9uire infor2ation both authentic and perfectly correct!
And thus his peculiar authority begins to e2erge!
hile 'ane dallies in his preface with a .r! #ussellfs iaccount of the people of
Aleppoi Fa forgotten wor6G- it is ob>ious that the Description de /I?gypte is his 2ain
antecedent co2petition! But that wor6- confined by 'ane to a long footnote- is
2entioned in conte2ptuous 9uotation 2ar6s as ithe great French wor6i on Egypt!
1;*
That wor6 was at once too philosophically general and too careless- 'ane saysJ and
Jacob Burc6hardtfs fa2ous study was 2erely a collection of pro>erbial Egyptian
wisdo2- ibad tests of the 2orality of a people!i ?nli6e the French and Burc6hardt-
'ane was able to sub2erge hi2self a2ongst the nati>es- to li>e as they did- to
confor2 to their habits- and ito escape e4citing- in strangers- any suspicion of ! ! !
being a person who had no right to intrude a2ong the2!i 'est that i2ply 'anefs
ha>ing lost his ob@ecti>ity- he goes on to say that he confor2ed only to the words Fhis
italicsG of the %oran- and that he was always aware of his difference fro2 an
essentially alien culture!
+1
1hus while one portion of 'anefs identity floats easily in
the unsuspecting Musli2 sea- a sub2erged part retains its secret European power- to
co22ent on- ac9uire- possess e>erything around it!
1he 3rientalist can i2itate the 3rient without the opposite being true! hat he
says about the 3rient is therefore to be understood as description obtained in a
one0way e4change: as they spo6e and beha>ed- he obser>ed and wrote down! (is
power was to ha>e e4isted a2ongst the2 as a nati>e spea6er- as it were- and also as a
secret writer! And what he wrote was intended as useful 6nowledge- not for the2- but
for Europe and its >arious disse2inati>e institutions! For that is one thing that 'anefs
prose ne>er lets us forget: that ego- the first0person pronoun 2o>ing through Egyptian
custo2s- rituals- festi>als- infancy- adulthood- and burial rites- is in reality both an
3riental 2as9uerade and an 3rientalist de>ice for capturing and con>eying >aluable-
otherwise inaccessible infor2ation! As narrator- 'ane is both e4hibit and e4hibitor-
winning two confidences at once- displaying two appetites for e4perience: the
3riental one for engaging co2panionship For so it see2sG and the estern one for
authoritati>e- useful 6nowledge!
/othing illustrates this better than the last tripartite episode in the preface! 'ane
there describes his principal infor2ant and friend- "hei6h Ah2ed- as co2panion and
as curiosity! 1ogether the two pretend that 'ane is a Musli2J yet only after Ah2ed
con9uers his fear- inspired by 'anefs audacious 2i2icry- can he go through the
2otions of praying by his side in a 2os9ue! 1his final achie>e2ent is preceded by
two scenes in which Ah2ed is portrayed as a biAarre glass0eater and a polyga2ist! 1n
all three portions of the "hei6h Ah2ed episode the distance between the Musli2 and
'ane increases- e>en as in the action itself it decreases! As 2ediator and translator- so
to spea6- of Musli2 beha>ior-'ane ironically enters
1E7
the Musli2 pattern only far enough to be able to describe it in a sedate English prose!
(is identity as counterfeit belie>er and pri>ileged European is the >ery essence of bad
faith- for the latter undercuts the for2er in no uncertain way! 1hus what see2s to be
factual reporting of what one rather peculiar Musli2 does is 2ade to appear by 'ane
as the candidly e4posed center of all Musli2 faith! /o 2ind is gi>en by 'ane to the
betrayal of his friendship with Ah2ed or with the others who pro>ide hi2 with
infor2ation!hat 2atters is that the report see2 accurate- general- and dispassionate-
that the English reader be con>inced that 'ane was ne>er infected with heresy or
apostasy- and finally- that 'anefs te4t cancel the hu2an content of its sub@ect 2atter in
fa>or of its scientific >alidity!
It is for all these ends that the boo6 is organiAed- not si2ply as the narrati>e of
'anefs residence in Egypt but as narrati>e structure o>erwhel2ed by 3rientalist
restructuring and detail! 1his- I thin6- is the central achie>e2ent of 'anefs wor6! In
outline and shape Modern Egyptians follows the routine of an eighteenth0century
no>el- say one by Fielding! 1he boo6 opens with an account of country and setting-
followed by chapters on f&ersonal Characteristicsi and iInfancy and Early
Education!i 1wenty0fi>e chapters on such things as festi>als- laws- character-
industry- 2agic- and do2estic life precede the last section- i.eath and Funeral #ites!i
3n the face of it- 'anefs argu2ent is chronological and de>elop2ental! (e writes
about hi2self as the obser>er of scenes that follow the 2a@or di>isions in the hu2an
lifeti2e: his 2odel is the narrati>e pattern- as it is in Tom %ones with the herofs birth-
ad>entures- 2arriage- and i2plied death! 3nly in 'anefs te4t the narrati>e >oice is
agelessJ his sub@ect- howe>er- the 2odern Egyptian- goes through the indi>idual
life0cycle! 1his re>ersal- by which a solitary indi>idual endows hi2self with ti2eless
faculties and i2poses on a society and people a personal life0span- is but the first of
se>eral operations regulating what 2ight ha>e been the 2ere narration of tra>els in
foreign parts- turning an artless te4t into an encyclopedia of e4otic display and a
playground for 3rientalist scrutiny!
'anefs control of his 2aterial is not only established through his dra2atiAed
double presence Fas fa6e Musli2 and genuine esternerG and his 2anipulation of
narrati>e >oice and sub@ect- but also through his use of detail! Each 2a@or section in
each chapter is in>ariably introduced with so2e unsurprising general obser>ation! For
e4a2ple- iit is generally obser>ed that 2any of the 2ost
1E1
re2ar6able peculiarities in the 2anners- custo2s- and character of a nation are
attributable to the physical peculiarities of the country!i
+2
hat follows confir2s this
easily0the /ile- Egyptfs ire2ar6ably salubriousi cli2ate- the peasantfs iprecisei
labor! Iet instead of this leading to the ne4t episode in narrati>e order- the detail is
added to- and conse9uently the narrati>e fulfill2ent e4pected on purely for2al
grounds is not gi>en! In other words- although the gross outlines of 'anefs te4t
confor2 to the narrati>e and causal se9uence of birth0life0death- the special detail
introduced during the se9uence itself foils narrati>e 2o>e2ent! Fro2 a general
obser>ation- to a delineation of so2e aspect of Egyptian character- to an account of
Egyptian childhood- adolescence- 2aturity- and senescence- 'ane is always there with
great detail to prevent s2ooth transitions! "hortly after we hear about Egyptfs
salubrious cli2ate- for instance- we are infor2ed that few Egyptians li>e beyond a
few years- because of fatal illness- the absence of 2edical aid- and oppressi>e
su22er weather! 1hereafter we are told that the heat ie4cites the Egyptian Yan
un9ualified generaliAationZ to inte2perance in sensual en@oy2ents-i and soon are
bogged down in descriptions- co2plete with charts and line drawings- of Cairene
architecture- decoration- fountains- and loc6s!hen a narrati>e strain re0e2erges- it is
clearly only as a for2ality!
hat pre>ents narrati>e order- at the >ery sa2e ti2e that narrati>e order is the
do2inating fiction of 'anefs te4t- is sheer- o>erpowering- 2onu2ental description!
'anefs ob@ecti>e is to 2a6e Egypt and the Egyptians totally >isible- to 6eep nothing
hidden fro2 his reader- to deli>er the Egyptians without depth- in swollen detail! As
rapporteur his propensity is for sado2asochistic colossal tidbits: the self02ultilation
of der>ishes- the cruelty of @udges- the blending of religion with licentiousness a2ong
Musli2s- the e4cess of libidinous passions- and so on! Iet no 2atter how odd and
per>erse the e>ent and how lost we beco2e in its diAAying detail- 'ane is ubi9uitous-
his @ob being to reasse2ble the pieces and enable us to 2o>e on- albeit @er6ily! 1o a
certain e4tent he does this by @ust being a European who can discursi>ely control the
passions and e4cite2ents to which the Musli2s are unhappily sub@ect! But to an e>en
greater e4tent- 'anefs capacity to rein in his profuse sub@ect 2atter with an unyielding
bridle of discipline and detach2ent depends on his cold distance fro2 Egyptian life
and Egyptian producti>ity!
1he 2ain sy2bolic 2o2ent occurs at the beginning of chapter E-
1E2
i.o2estic 'ife0Continued!i By now 'ane has adopted the narrati>e con>ention of
ta6ing a wal6 through Egyptian life- and ha>ing reached the end of his tour of the
public roo2s and habits of an Egyptian household Fthe social and spatial worlds are
2i4ed together by hi2G- he begins to discuss the inti2ate side of ho2e life!
I22ediately- he i2ust gi>e so2e account of 2arriage and the 2arriage0cere2onies!i
As usual- the account begins with a general obser>ation: to abstain fro2 2arriage
iwhen a 2an has attained a sufficient age- and when there is no @ust i2pedi2ent- is
estee2ed by the Egyptians i2proper- and e>en disreputable!i ithout transition this
obser>ation is applied by 'ane to hi2self- and he is found guilty! For one long
paragraph he then recounts the pressures placed on hi2 to get 2arried- which he
unflinchingly refuses! Finally- after a nati>e friend e>en offers to arrange a mariage
de convenance, also refused by 'ane- the whole se9uence is abruptly ter2inated with
a period and a dash!
E)
(e resu2es his general discussion with another general
obser>ation!
/ot only do we ha>e here a typical 'ane0es9ue interruption of the 2ain narrati>e
with untidy detail- we ha>e also a fir2 and literal disengage2ent of the author fro2
the producti>e processes of 3riental society! 1he 2ini0narrati>e of his refusal to @oin
the society he describes concludes with a dra2atic hiatus: his story cannot continue-
he see2s to be saying- so long as he does not enter the inti2acy of do2estic life- and
so he drops fro2 sight as a candidate for it! (e literally abolishes hi2self as a hu2an
sub@ect by refusing to 2arry into hu2an society! 1hus he preser>es his authoritati>e
identity as a 2oc6 participant and bolsters the ob@ecti>ity of his narrati>e! If we
already 6new that 'ane was a nonMusli2- we now 6now too that in order for hi2 to
beco2e an 3rientalist0instead of an 3riental0he had to deny hi2self the sensual
en@oy2ents of do2estic life! Moreo>er- he had also to a>oid dating hi2self by
entering the hu2an life0cycle! 3nly in this negati>e way could he retain his ti2eless
authority as obser>er!
'anefs choice was between li>ing without iincon>enience and disco2forti and
acco2plishing his study of the 2odern Egyptians! 1he result of his choice is plainly
to ha>e 2ade possible his definition of the Egyptians- since had he beco2e one of
the2- his perspecti>e would no longer ha>e been antiseptically and ase4ually
le4icographical! In two i2portant and urgent ways- therefore- 'ane gains scholarly
credibility and legiti2acy! First- by interfering with the ordinary narrati>e course of
hu2an life: this is the function of
1E)
his colossal detail- in which the obser>ing intelligence of a foreigner can introduce
and then piece together 2assi>e infor2ation! 1he Egyptians are dise2boweled for
e4position- so to spea6- then put together ad2onishingly by 'ane! "econd- by
disengaging fro2 the generation of Egyptian03riental life: this is the function of his
subduing his ani2al appetite in the interest of disse2inating infor2ation- not in and
for Egypt- but in and for European learning at large! 1o ha>e achie>ed both the
i2position of a scholarly will upon an untidy reality and an intentional shift away
fro2 the place of his residence to the scene of his scholarly reputation is the source of
his great fa2e in the annals of 3rientalis2! ?seful 6nowledge such as his could only
ha>e been obtained- for2ulated- and diffused by such denials!
'anefs two other 2a@or wor6s- his ne>er0co2pleted Arabic le4icon and his
uninspired translation of the $rabian Nights, consolidated the syste2 of 6nowledge
inaugurated by Modern Egyptians. In both of his later wor6s his indi>iduality has
disappeared entirely as a creati>e presence- as of course has the >ery idea of a
narrati>e wor6! 'ane the 2an appears only in the official persona of annotator and
retranslator Fthe Nights+ and i2personal le4icographer! Fro2 being an author
conte2porary with his sub@ect 2atter- 'ane beca2e as 3rientalist scholar of classical
Arabic and classical Isla20its sur>i>or! But it is the for2 of that sur>i>al which is of
interest! For 'anefs legacy as a scholar 2attered not to the 3rient- of course- but to
the institutions and agencies of his European society! And these were either
acade2ic0the official 3rientalist societies- institutions- and agencies0or they were
e4traacade2ic in >ery particular ways- figuring in the wor6 of later Europeans
resident in the 3rient!
If we read 'anefs Modern Egyptians, not as a source of 3riental lore- but as a
wor6 directed towards the growing organiAation of acade2ic 3rientalis2- we will
find it illu2inating! 1he subordination of genetic ego to scholarly authority in 'ane
corresponds e4actly to the increased specialiAation and institutionaliAation of
6nowledge about the 3rient represented by the >arious 3riental societies! 1he #oyal
Asiatic "ociety was founded a decade before 'anefs boo6 appeared- but its co22ittee
of correspondence0whose iob@ects were to recei>e intelligence and in9uiries relating
to the arts- sciences- literature- history and anti9uitiesi of the 3rient
+=
000 the structural
recipient of 'anefs fund of infor2ation- processed and for2ulated as it was! As for
the diffusion of such wor6 as
1E=
'anefs- there were not only the >arious societies of useful 6nowledge but also- in an
age when the original 3rientalist progra2 of aiding co22erce and trade with the
3rient had beco2e e4hausted- the specialiAed learned societies whose products were
wor6s displaying the potential Fif not actualG >alues of disinterested scholarship!
1hus- a progra2 of the "ociete asiati9ue states:
1o co2pose or to print gra22ars- dictionaries- and other ele2entary boo6s
recogniAed as useful or indispensable for the study of those languages taught by
appointed professors Yof 3riental languagesZJ by subscriptions or by other 2eans
to contribute to the publication of the sa2e 6ind of wor6 underta6en in France or
abroadJ to ac9uire 2anuscripts- or to copy either co2pletely or in part those that
are to be found in Europe- to translate or to 2a6e e4tracts fro2 the2- to 2ultiply
their nu2ber by reproducing the2 either by engra>ing or by lithographyJ to 2a6e
it possible for the authors of useful wor6s on geography- history- the arts- and the
sciences to ac9uire the 2eans for the public to en@oy the fruits of their nocturnal
laborsJ to draw the attention of the public- by 2eans of a periodic collection
de>oted to Asiatic literature- to the scientific- literary- or poetic productions of the
3rient and those of the sa2e sort that regularly are produced in Europe- to those
facts about the 3rient that could be rele>ant to Europe- to those disco>eries and
wor6s of all 6inds of which the 3riental peoples could beco2e the sub@ect: these
are the ob@ecti>es proposed for and by the "ociete asiati9ue!
3rientalis2 organiAed itself syste2atically as the ac9uisition of 3riental 2aterial and
its regulated disse2ination as a for2 of specialiAed 6nowledge! 3ne copied and
printed wor6s of gra22ar- one ac9uired original te4ts- one 2ultiplied their nu2ber
and diffused the2 widely- e>en dispensed 6nowledge in periodic for2! It was into
and for this syste2 that 'ane wrote his wor6- and sacrificed his ego! 1he 2ode in
which his wor6 persisted in the archi>es of 3rientalis2 was pro>ided for also! 1here
was to be a i2useu2-i "acy said-
a >ast depot of ob@ects of all 6inds- of drawings- of original boo6s- 2aps-
accounts of >oyages- all offered to those who wish to gi>e the2sel>es to the
study of Ythe 3rientZJ in such a way that each of these students would be able to
feel hi2self transported as if by enchant2ent into the 2idst of- say- a Mongolian
tribe or of the Chinese race- whiche>er he 2ight ha>e 2ade the ob@ect of his
studies!!!! It is possible to say ! ! ! that after the publication of
1E;
ele2entary boo6s on ! ! ! the 3riental languages- nothing is 2ore i2portant than
to lay the cornerstone of this 2useu2- which I consider a li>ing co22entary
upon and interpretation 7truchement; of the dictionaries!
+;
Truchement deri>es nicely fro2 the Arabic turNaman, 2eaning iinterpreter-i
iinter2ediary-i or ispo6es2an!i 3n the one hand- 3rientalis2 ac9uired the 3rient as
literally and as widely as possibleJ on the other- it do2esticated this 6nowledge to the
est- filtering it through regulatory codes- classifications- speci2en cases- periodical
re>iews- dictionaries- gra22ars- co22entaries- editions- translations- all of which
together for2ed a si2ulacru2 of the 3rient and reproduced it 2aterially in the est-
for the est! 1he 3rient- in short- would be con>erted fro2 the personal- so2eti2es
garbled testi2ony of intrepid >oyagers and residents into i2personal definition by a
whole array of scientific wor6ers! It would be con>erted fro2 the consecuti>e
e4perience of indi>idual research into a sort of i2aginary 2useu2 without walls-
where e>erything gathered fro2 the huge distances and >arieties of 3riental culture
beca2e categorically "riental. It would be recon>erted- restructured fro2 the bundle
of frag2ents brought bac6 piece2eal by e4plorers- e4peditions- co22issions- ar2ies-
and 2erchants into le4icographical- bibliographical- depart2entaliAed- and
teCtuali6ed 3rientalist sense! By the 2iddle of the nineteenth century the 3rient had
beco2e- as .israeli said- a career- one in which one could re2a6e and restore not
only the 3rient but also oneself!
I*
(il"rims and (il"rima"es,
/ritish and +rench
E>ery European tra>eler or resident in the 3rient has had to protect hi2self fro2
its unsettling influences! "o2eone li6e 'ane ulti2ately rescheduled and resituated the
3rient when he ca2e to write about it! 1he eccentricities of 3riental life- with its odd
calendars- its e4otic spatial configurations- its hopelessly strange languages- its
see2ingly per>erse 2orality- were reduced considerably
1EE
when they appeared as a series of detailed ite2s presented in a nor2ati>e European
prose style! It is correct to say that in 3rientaliAing the 3rient- 'ane not only defined
but edited itJ he e4cised fro2 it what- in addition to his own hu2an sy2pathies- 2ight
ha>e ruffled the European sensibility! In 2ost cases- the 3rient see2ed to ha>e
offended se4ual proprietyJ e>erything about the 3rient0or at least 'anefs
3rient0in0Egypt0e4uded dangerous se4- threatened hygiene and do2estic see2liness
with an e4cessi>e ifreedo2 of intercourse-i as 'ane put it 2ore irrepressibly than
usual!
But there were other sorts of threats than se4! All of the2 wore away the
European discreteness and rationality of ti2e- space- and personal identity! In the
3rient one suddenly confronted uni2aginable anti9uity- inhu2an beauty- boundless
distance! 1hese could be put to use 2ore innocently- as it were- if they were thought
and written about- not directly e4perienced! In Byronfs i5iaour-i in the )est*stlicher
Diwan, in (ugofs "rientales, the 3rient is a for2 of release- a place of original
opportunity- whose 6eynote was struc6 in 5oethefs i(egirei
/ord and est "iid Aersplittern-
1hrone bersten- #eiche Aittern-
Fluchte du- in reinen 3sten
&atriarchenluft Au 6osten^
F/orth- est- and "outh disintegrate-
1hrones burst- e2pires tre2ble!
Fly away- and in the pure East
1aste the &atriarchsf air!G
3ne always returned to the 3rient i.ort- i2 #einen and in #echtenjill ich
2enschlichen 5eschlechtenjIn des ?rsprungs 1iefe dringeni F1here in purity and
righteousness will I go bac6 to the profound origins of the hu2an raceG seeing it as
co2pletion and confir2ation of e>erything one had i2agined:
5ottes ist der 3rient^
5ottes ist der 36Aident^
/ord and sudliches 5elande
#uht i2 Frieden seiner ([nde!
+E
5od is the 3rient^
5od is the 3ccident^
/orthern and southern lands
#epose in the peace of (is hands!G
1E+
1he 3rient- with its poetry- its at2osphere- its possibilities- was represented by poets
li6e .a#i6'unbegren6t, boundless- 5oethe said- older and younger than we Europeans!
And for (ugo- in iCri de guerre du 2uftii and i'a .ouleur du pachai
++
the fierceness
and the inordinate 2elancholy of 3rientals was 2ediated- not by actual fear for life or
disoriented lostness- but by Bolney and 5eorge "ale- hose learned wor6 translated
barbarous splendor into usable infor2ation for the subli2ely talented poet!
hat 3rientalists li6e 'ane- "acy- #enan- Bolney- Jones Fnot to 2ention the
Description de lI?gypte+, and other pioneers 2ade a>ailable- the literary crowd
e4ploited! e 2ust recall now our earlier discussion of the three types of wor6
dealing with the 3rient and based upon actual residence there! 1he rigorous
e4igencies of 6nowledge purged fro2 3rientalist writing an authorial sensibility:
hence 'anefs self0e4cision- and hence also the first 6ind of wor6 we enu2erated! As
for types two and three- the self is there pro2inently- subser>ient to a >oice whose @ob
it is to dispense real 6nowledge Ftype twoG- or do2inating and 2ediating e>erything
we are told about the 3rient Ftype threeG! Iet fro2 one end of the nineteenth century
to the other0after /apoleon- that is0the 3rient was a place of pilgri2age- and e>ery
2a@or wor6 belonging to a genuine if not always to an acade2ic 3rientalis2 too6 its
for2- style- and intention fro2 the idea of pilgri2age there! In this idea as in so 2any
of the other for2s of 3rientalist writing we ha>e been discussing- the #o2antic idea
of restorati>e reconstruction Fnatural supernaturalis2G is the principal source!
E>ery pilgri2 sees things his own way- but there are li2its to what a pilgri2age
can be for- to what shape and for2 it can ta6e- to what truths it re>eals! All
pilgri2ages to the 3rient passed through- or had to pass through- the Biblical landsJ
2ost of the2 in fact were atte2pts either to reli>e or to liberate fro2 the large-
incredibly fecund 3rient so2e portion of Judeo0Christianj5reco0#o2an actuality!
For these pilgri2s the 3rientaliAed 3rient- the 3rient of 3rientalist scholars- was a
gauntlet to be run- @ust as the Bible- the Crusades- Isla2- /apoleon- and Ale4ander
were redoubtable predecessors to be rec6oned with! /ot only does a learned 3rient
inhibit the pilgri2fs 2usings and pri>ate fantasiesJ its >ery antecedence places
barriers between the conte2porary tra>eler and his writing- unless- as was the case
with /er>al and Flaubert in their use of 'ane- 3rientalist wor6 is se>ered fro2 the
library and caught in the aesthetic pro@ect! Another inhibition is that 3rientalist
1E,
writing is too circu2scribed by the official re9uire2ents of 3rientalist learning! A
pilgri2 li6e Chateaubriand clai2ed insolently that he undertoo6 his >oyages
e4clusi>ely for his own sa6e: i@fallais chercher des i2ages: >oilV tout!i
+,
Flaubert-
Bigny- /er>al- %ingla6e- .israeli- Burton- all undertoo6 their pilgri2ages in order to
dispel the 2ustiness of the pre0e4isting 3rientalist archi>e!1heir writing was to be a
fresh new repository of 3riental e4perience but- as we shall see- e>en this pro@ect
usually Fbut not alwaysG resol>ed itself into the reductionis2 of the 3rientalistic! 1he
reasons are co2ple4- and they ha>e >ery 2uch to do with the nature of the pilgri2-
his 2ode of writing- and the intentional for2 of his wor6!
hat was the 3rient for the indi>idual tra>eler in the nineteenth centuryL
Consider first the differences between an English spea6er and a French spea6er! For
the for2er the 3rient was India- of course- an actual British possessionJ to pass
through the /ear 3rient was therefore to pass en route to a 2a@or colony! Already-
then- the roo2 a>ailable for i2aginati>e play was li2ited by the realities of
ad2inistration- territorial legality- and e4ecuti>e power! "cott- %ingla6e- .israeli-
arburton- Burton- and e>en 5eorge Eliot Fin whose Daniel Deronda the 3rient has
plans 2ade for itG are writers- li6e 'ane hi2self and Jones before hi2- for who2 the
3rient was defined by 2aterial possession- by a 2aterial i2agination- as it were!
England had defeated /apoleon- e>icted France: what the English 2ind sur>eyed was
an i2perial do2ain which by the 1,,7s had beco2e an unbro6en patch of
British0held territory- fro2 the Mediterranean to India! 1o write about Egypt- "yria-
or 1ur6ey- as 2uch as tra>eling in the2- was a 2atter of touring the real2 of political
will- political 2anage2ent- political definition! 1he territorial i2perati>e was
e4tre2ely co2pelling- e>en for so unrestrained a writer as .israeli- whose Tancred is
not 2erely an 3riental lar6 but an e4ercise in the astute political 2anage2ent of
actual forces on actual territories!
In contrast- the French pilgri2 was i2bued with a sense of acute loss in the
3rient! (e ca2e there to a place in which France- unli6e Britain- had no so>ereign
presence! 1he Mediterranean echoed with the sounds of French defeats- fro2 the
Crusades to /apoleon! hat was to beco2e 6nown as ila 2ission ci>ilisatricei began
in the nineteenth century as a political secondbest to Britainfs presence! Conse9uently
French pilgri2s fro2 Bolney on planned and pro@ected for- i2agined- ru2inated
about places that were principally in their minds5 they constructed sche2es for a
typically
1E*
French- perhaps e>en a European- concert in the 3rient- which of course they
supposed would be orchestrated by the2! 1heirs was the 3rient of 2e2ories-
suggesti>e ruins- forgotten secrets- hidden correspondences- and an al2ost >irtuosic
style of being- an 3rient whose highest literary for2s would be found in /er>al and
Flaubert- both of whose wor6 was solidly fi4ed in an i2aginati>e- unrealiAable
Fe4cept aestheticallyG di2ension!
1his was also true to a certain e4tent of scholarly French tra>elers in the 3rient!
Most of the2 were interested in the Biblical past or in the Crusades- as (enri
Bordeau4 has argued in his ,oyageurs dI"rient.
+*
To these na2es we 2ust add Fat
(assan al0/outyfs suggestionG the na2es of 3riental "e2iticists- including
Huatre2breJ "aulcy- the e4plorer of the .ead "eaJ #enan as &hoenician
archaeologistJ Judas- the student of &hoenician languagesJ Catafago and .efre2ery-
who studied the Ansarians- Is2ailis- and "el@u6sJ Cler2ont05anneau- who e4plored
JudeaJ and the Mar9uis de Bogue- whose wor6 centered on &al2yrian epigraphy! In
addition there was the whole school of Egyptologists descended fro2 Cha2pollion
and Mariette- a school that would later include Maspero and 'egrain! As an inde4 of
the difference between British realities and French fantasies- it is worthwhile
recalling the words in Cairo of the painter 'udo>ic 'epic- who co22ented sadly in
1,,= Ftwo years after the British occupation had begunG: i'f3rient est 2ort au Caire!i
3nly #enan- e>er the realistic racist- condoned the British suppression of Arabifs
nationalist rebellion- which- out of his greater wisdo2- he said was a idisgrace to
ci>iliAation!i
,7
?nli6e Bolney and /apoleon- the nineteenth0century French pilgri2s did not
see6 a scientific so 2uch as an e4otic yet especially attracti>e reality! 1his is
ob>iously true of the literary pilgri2s- beginning with Chateaubriand- who found in
the 3rient a locale sy2pathetic to their pri>ate 2yths- obsessions- and re9uire2ents!
(ere we notice how all the pilgri2s- but especially the French ones- e4ploit the
3rient in their wor6 so as in so2e urgent way to @ustify their e4istential >ocation!
3nly when there is so2e additional cogniti>e purpose in writing about the 3rient
does the outpouring of self see2 2ore under control! 'a2artine- for instance- writes
about hi2self- and also about France as a power in the 3rientJ that second enterprise
2utes and finally controls i2perati>es heaped upon his style by his soul, his 2e2ory-
and his i2agination! /o pilgri2- French or English- could so ruthlessly do2inate his
self or his sub@ect as 'ane did! E>en Burton and 1! E! 'awrence- of
1+7
who2 the for2er fashioned a deliberately Musli2 pilgri2age and the latter what he
called a re>erse pilgri2age away fro2 Mecca- deli>ered 2asses of historical-
political- and social 3rientalis2 that were ne>er as free of their egos as 'anefs were
of his! 1his is why Burton- 'awrence- and Charles .oughty occupy a 2iddle position
between 'ane and Chateaubriand!
Chateaubriandfs /tin-raire de Paris P %-rusalem, et de %-rusalem P &aris F1,170
1,11G records the details of a @ourney underta6en in 1,7;01,7E- after he had tra>eled
in /orth A2erica! Its 2any hundreds of pages bear witness to its authorfs ad2ission
that i@e parle eternelle2ent de 2oi-i so 2uch so that "tendhal- no selfabnegating
writer hi2self- could find Chateaubriandfs failure as a 6nowledgeable tra>eler to be
the result of his istin6ing egotis2!i (e brought a >ery hea>y load of personal
ob@ecti>es and suppositions to the 3rient- unloaded the2 there- and proceeded
thereafter to push people- places- and ideas around in the 3rient as if nothing could
resist his i2perious i2agination! Chateaubriand ca2e to the 3rient as a constructed
#igure, not as a true self! For hi2 Bonaparte was the last CrusaderJ he in turn was ithe
last French2an who left his country to tra>el in the (oly 'and with the ideas- the
goals- and the senti2ents of a pilgri2 of for2er ti2es!i But there were other reasons!
"y22etry: ha>ing been to the /ew orld and seen its 2onu2ents of nature- he
needed to co2plete his circle of studies by >isiting the 3rient and its 2onu2ents of
6nowledge: as he had studied #o2an and Celtic anti9uity- all that was left for hi2
was the ruins of Athens- Me2phis- and Carthage! "elfco2pletion: he needed to
replenish his stoc6 of i2ages! Confir2ation of the i2portance of the religious spirit:
ireligion is a 6ind of uni>ersal language understood by all 2en-i and where better to
obser>e it than there in the 3rient- e>en in lands where a co2parati>ely low religion
li6e Isla2 held sway! Abo>e all- the need to see things- not as they were- but as
Chateaubriand supposed they were: the %oran was ile li>re de Maho2etiJ it
contained ini principe de ci>ilisation- ni precepte 9ui puisse ele>er le caractere!i
i1his boo6-i he continued- 2ore or less freely in>enting as he went along- ipreaches
neither hatred of tyranny nor lo>e of liberty!i
,1
1o so preciously constituted a figure as Chateaubriand- the 3rient was a decrepit
can>as awaiting his restorati>e efforts! 1he 3riental Arab was ici>iliAed 2an fallen
again into a sa>age statei: no wonder- then- that as he watched Arabs trying to spea6
French- Chateaubriand felt li6e #obinson Crusoe thrilled by hearing his
1+1
parrot spea6 for the first ti2e! 1rue- there were places li6e Bethlehe2 Fwhose
ety2ological 2eaning Chateaubriand got0co2pletely wrongG in which one found
again so2e se2blance of real 0that is- European0ci>iliAation- but those were few and
far between! E>erywhere- one encountered 3rientals- Arabs whose ci>iliAation-
religion- and 2anners were so low- barbaric- and antithetical as to 2erit recon9uest!
1he Crusades- he argued- were not aggressionJ they were a @ust Christian counterpart
to 32arfs arri>al in Europe! Besides- he added- e>en if the Crusades in their 2odern
or original for2 were aggression- the issue they raised transcended such 9uestions of
ordinary 2ortality:
1he Crusades were not only about the deli>erance of the (oly "epulchre- but
2ore about 6nowing which would win on the earth- a cult that was ci>iliAationfs
ene2y- syste2atically fa>orable to ignorance Ythis was Isla2- of courseZ- to
despotis2- to sla>ery- or a cult that had caused to reawa6en in 2odern people the
genius of a sage anti9uity- and had abolished base ser>itudeL
,2
1his is the first significant 2ention of an idea that will ac9uire an al2ost
unbearable- ne4t to 2indless authority in European writing: the the2e of Europe
teaching the 3rient the 2eaning of liberty- which is an idea that Chateaubriand and
e>eryone after hi2 belie>ed that 3rientals- and especially Musli2s- 6new nothing
about!
3f liberty- they 6now nothingJ of propriety- they ha>e none: force is their 5od!
hen they go for long periods without seeing con9uerors who do hea>enly
@ustice- they ha>e the air of soldiers without a leader- citiAens without legislators-
and a fa2ily without a father!
,)
Already in 1,17 we ha>e a European tal6ing li6e Cro2er in 1*17- arguing that
3rientals re9uire con9uest- and finding it no parado4 that a estern con9uest of the
3rient was not con9uest after all- but liberty! Chateaubriand puts the whole idea in
the #o2antic rede2pti>e ter2s of a Christian 2ission to re>i>e a dead world- to
9uic6en in it a sense of its own potential- one which only a European can discern
underneath a lifeless and degenerate surface! For the tra>eler this 2eans that he 2ust
use the 3ld 1esta2ent and the 5ospels as his guide in &alestineJ
,=
only in this way
can the apparent degeneration of the 2ode2 3rient be gotten beyond! Iet
Chateaubriand senses no irony in the fact that his tour and his >ision will re>eal
nothing to hi2 about the 2odern 3riental and his destiny!
1+2
hat 2atters about the 3rient is what it lets happen to Chateaubriand- what it allows
his spirit to do- what it per2its hi2 to re>eal about hi2self- his ideas- his
e4pectations!1he liberty that so concerns hi2 is no 2ore than his own release fro2
the 3rientfs hostile wastes!
here his release allows hi2 to go is directly bac6 into the real2 of i2agination
and i2aginati>e interpretation! .escription of the 3rient is obliterated by the designs
and patterns foisted upon it by the i2perial ego- which 2a6es no secret of its powers!
If in 'anefs prose we watch the ego disappear so that the 3rient 2ay appear in all its
realistic detail- in Chateaubriand the ego dissol>es itself in the conte2plation of
wonders it creates- and then is reborn- stronger than e>er- 2ore able to sa>or its
powers and en@oy its interpretations!
hen one tra>els in Judea- at first a great ennui grips the heartJ but when-
passing fro2 one solitary place to another- space stretches out without li2its
before you- slowly the ennui dissipates- and one feels a secret terror- which- far
fro2 depressing the soul- gi>es it courage and ele>ates onefs nati>e genius!
E4traordinary things are disclosed fro2 all parts of an earth wor6ed o>er by
2iracles: the burning sun- the i2petuous eagle- the sterile fig treeJ all of poetry-
all the scenes fro2 "cripture are present there! E>ery na2e encloses a 2ysteryJ
e>ery grotto declares the futureJ e>ery su22it retains within it the accents of a
prophet! 5od (i2self has spo6en fro2 these shores: the arid torrents- the ri>en
roc6s- the open to2bs attest to the prodigyJ the desert still see2s struc6 du2b
with terror- and one would say that it has still not been able to brea6 the silence
since it heard the >oice of the eternal!
,;
1he process of thought in this passage is re>ealing! An e4perience of &ascalian terror
does not 2erely reduce onefs self0confidence- it 2iraculously sti2ulates it! 1he
barren landscape stands forth li6e an illu2inated te4t presenting itself to the scrutiny
of a >ery strong- refortified ego! Chateaubriand has transcended the ab@ect- if
frightening- reality of the conte2porary 3rient so that he 2ay stand in an original and
creati>e relationship to it! By the end of the passage he is no longer a 2odern 2an but
a >isionary seer 2ore or less conte2porary with 5odJ if the Judean desert has been
silent since 5od spo6e there- it is Chateaubriand who can hear the silence- understand
its 2eaning- and0to his reader02a6e the desert spea6 again!
1+)
1he great gifts of sy2pathetic intuition which had enabled Chateaubriand to
represent and interpret /orth A2erican 2ysteries in Ren- and Atala- as well as
Christianity in (e >-nie du 2hristianisme, are aroused to e>en greater feats of
interpretation during the /tin-raire. /o longer is the author dealing with natural
pri2iti>ity and ro2antic senti2ent: here he is dealing with eternal creati>ity and
di>ine originality the2sel>es- for it is in the Biblical 3rient that they were first
deposited- and they ha>e re2ained there in un2ediated and latent for2! 3f course-
they cannot be si2ply graspedJ they 2ust be aspired to and achie>ed by
Chateaubriand! And it is this a2bitious purpose that the /tin-raire is 2ade to ser>e-
@ust as in the te4t Chateaubriandfs ego 2ust be reconstructed radically enough to get
the @ob done! ?nli6e 'ane- Chateaubriand atte2pts to consume the 3rient! (e not
only appropriates it- he represents and spea6s for it- not in history but beyond history-
in the ti2eless di2ension of a co2pletely healed world- where 2en and lands- 5od
and 2en- are as one! In Jerusale2- therefore- at the center of his >ision and at the
ulti2ate end of his pilgri2age- he grants hi2self a sort of total reconciliation with the
3rient- the 3rient as Jewish- Christian- Musli2- 5ree6- &ersian- #o2an- and finally
French! (e is 2o>ed by the plight of the Jews- but he @udges that they too ser>e to
illu2inate his general >ision- and as a further benefit- they gi>e the necessary
poignance to his Christian >indicti>eness! 5od- he says- has chosen a new people- and
it is not the Jews!
,E
(e 2a6es so2e other concessions to terrestrial reality- howe>er! If Jerusale2 is
boo6ed into his itinerary as its final e4traterrestrial goal- Egypt pro>ides hi2 with
2aterial for a political e4cursus! (is ideas about Egypt supple2ent his pilgri2age
nicely! 1he 2agnificent /ile .elta 2o>es hi2 to assert that
I found only the 2e2ories of 2y glorious country worthy of those 2agnificent
plainsJ I saw the re2ains of 2onu2ents of a new ci>iliAation- brought to the
ban6s of the /ile by the genius of France!
,+
But these ideas are put in a nostalgic 2ode because in Egypt Chateaubriand belie>es
he can e9uate the absence of France with the absence of a free go>ern2ent ruling a
happy people! Besides- after Jerusale2- Egypt appears to be only a 6ind of spiritual
anticli2a4! After political co22entary on its sorry state- Chateaubriand as6s hi2self
the routine 9uestion about idifferencei as a result of
1+=
historical de>elop2ent: how can this degenerate stupid 2ob of iMusul2ansi ha>e
co2e to inhabit the sa2e land whose >astly different owners so i2pressed (erodotus
and .iodorusL
1his is a fitting >aledictory to Egypt- which he lea>es for 1unis- Carthaginian
ruins- and finally- ho2e! Iet he does one last thing of note in Egypt: unable to do
2ore than loo6 at the &yra2ids fro2 a distance- he ta6es the trouble to send an
e2issary there- to ha>e hi2 inscribe his FChateaubriandfsG na2e on the stone- adding
for our benefit- ione has to fulfill all the little obligations of a pious tra>eler!i e
would not ordinarily gi>e 2uch 2ore than a2used attention to this char2ing bit of
touristic banality! As a preparation- howe>er- for the >ery last page of the /tin-raire, it
appears 2ore i2portant than at first glance! #eflecting on his twenty0year pro@ect to
study itous les hasards et tous les chagrinsi as an e4ile- Chateaubriand notes
elegiacally how e>ery one of his boo6s has been in fact a 6ind of prolongation of his
e4istence! A 2an with neither a ho2e nor the possibility of ac9uiring one- he finds
hi2self now well past his youth! If hea>en accords hi2 eternal rest- he says- he
pro2ises to dedicate hi2self in silence to erecting a i2onu2ent a 2a patrie!i hat
he is left with on earth- howe>er- is his writing- which- if his na2e will li>e- has been
enough- and if it will not li>e- has been too 2uch!
,,
1hese closing lines send us bac6 to Chateaubriandfs interest in getting his na2e
inscribed on the &yra2ids! e will ha>e understood that his egoistic 3riental
2e2oirs supply us with a constantly de2onstrated- an indefatigably perfor2ed
e4perience of self! riting was an act of life for Chateaubriand- for who2 nothing-
not e>en a distant piece of stone- 2ust re2ain scripti>ely untouched by hi2 if he was
to stay ali>e! If the order of 'anefs narrati>e was to be >iolated by scientific authority
and enor2ous detail- then Chateaubriandfs was to be transfor2ed into the asserted
will of an egoistic- highly >olatile indi>idual! hereas 'ane would sacrifice his ego
to the 3rientalist canon- Chateaubriand would 2a6e e>erything he said about the
3rient wholly dependent on his ego! Iet neither writer could concei>e of his posterity
as continuing on fruitfully after hi2! 'ane entered the i2personality of a technical
discipline: his wor6 would be used- but not as a hu2an docu2ent! Chateaubriand- on
the other hand- saw that his writing- li6e the to6en inscription of his na2e on a
&yra2id- would signify his selfJ if not- if he had not succeeded in prolonging his life
by writing- it would be 2erely e4cessi>e- superfluous!
1+;
E>en if all tra>elers to the 3rient after Chateaubriand and 'ane ha>e ta6en their
wor6 into account Fin so2e cases- e>en to the e4tent of copying fro2 the2 >erbati2G-
their legacy e2bodies the fate of 3rientalis2 and the options to which it was li2ited!
Either one wrote science li6e 'ane or personal utterance li6e Chateaubriand! 1he
proble2s with the for2er were its i2personal estern confidence that descriptions of
general- collecti>e pheno2ena were possible- and its tendency to 2a6e realities not so
2uch out of the 3rient as out of its own obser>ations! 1he proble2 with personal
utterance was that it ine>itably retreated into a position e9uating the 3rient with
pri>ate fantasy- e>en if that fantasy was of a >ery high order indeed- aesthetically
spea6ing! In both cases- of course- 3rientalis2 en@oyed a powerful influence on how
the 3rient was described and characteriAed! But what that influence always
pre>ented- e>en until today- was so2e sense of the 3rient that was neither i2possibly
general nor i2perturbably pri>ate! 1o loo6 into 3rientalis2 for a li>ely sense of an
3rientalfs hu2an or e>en social reality0as a conte2porary inhabitant of the 2odern
world0is to loo6 in >ain!
1he influence of the two options I ha>e described- 'anefs and Chateaubriandfs-
British and French- is a great deal of the reason for this o2ission! 1he growth of
6nowledge- particularly specialiAed 6nowledge- is a >ery slow process! Far fro2
being 2erely additi>e or cu2ulati>e- the growth of 6nowledge is a process of
selecti>e accu2ulation- displace2ent- deletion- rearrange2ent- and insistence within
what has been called a research consensus! 1he legiti2acy of such 6nowledge as
3rientalis2 was during the nineteenth century ste22ed not fro2 religious authority-
as had been the case before the Enlighten2ent- but fro2 what we can call the
restorati>e citation of antecedent authority! Beginning with "acy- the learned
3rientalistfs attitude was that of a scientist who sur>eyed a series of te4tual
frag2ents- which he thereafter edited and arranged as a restorer of old s6etches 2ight
put a series of the2 together for the cu2ulati>e picture they i2plicitly represent!
Conse9uently- a2ongst the2sel>es 3rientalists treat each otherfs wor6 in the sa2e
citationary way! Burton- for e4a2ple- would deal with the Arabian Nights or with
Egypt indirectly- through 'anefs wor6- by citing his predecessor- challenging hi2
e>en though he was granting hi2 >ery great authority! /er>alfs own >oyage to the
3rient was by way of 'a2artinefs- and the latterfs by way of Chateaubriand! In short-
as a for2 of growing 6nowledge 3rientalis2 resorted 2ainly to
1+E
citations of predecessor scholars in the field for its nutri2ent! E>en when new
2aterials ca2e his way- the 3rientalist @udged the2 by borrowing fro2 predecessors
Fas scholars so often doG their perspecti>es- ideologies- and guiding theses! In a fairly
strict way- then- 3rientalists after "acy and 'ane rewrote "acy and 'aneJ after
Chateaubriand- pilgri2s rewrote hi2! Fro2 these co2ple4 rewritings the actualities
of the 2odern 3rient were syste2atically e4cluded- especially when gifted pilgri2s
li6e /er>al and Flaubert preferred 'anefs descriptions to what their eyes and 2inds
showed the2 i22ediately!
In the syste2 of 6nowledge about the 3rient- the 3rient is less a place than a
topos- a set of references- a congeries of characteristics- that see2s to ha>e its origin
in a 9uotation- or a frag2ent of a te4t- or a citation fro2 so2eonefs wor6 on the
3rient or so2e bit of pre>ious i2agining- or an a2alga2 of all these! .irect
obser>ation or circu2stantial description of the 3rient are the fictions presented by
writing on the 3rient- yet in>ariably these are totally secondary to syste2atic tas6s of
another sort! In 'a2artine- /er>al- and Flaubert- the 3rient is a re0presentation of
canonical 2aterial guided by an aesthetic and e4ecuti>e will capable of producing
interest in the reader! Iet in all three writers- 3rientalis2 or so2e aspect of it is
asserted- e>en though- as I said earlier- the narrati>e consciousness is gi>en a >ery
large role to play! hat we shall see is that for all its eccentric indi>iduality- this
narrati>e consciousness will end up by being aware- li6e Bou>ard and &ecuchet- that
pilgri2age is after all a for2 of copying!
hen he began his trip to the 3rient in 1,))- 'a2artine did so- he said- as
so2ething he had always drea2ed about: iun >oyage en 3rient YetaitZ co22e un
grand acte de 2a >ie interieure!i (e is a bundle of predispositions- sy2pathies-
biases: he hates the #o2ans and Carthage- and lo>es Jews- Egyptians- and (indus-
whose .ante he clai2s he will beco2e! Ar2ed with a for2al >erse iAdieui to
France- in which he lists e>erything that he plans to do in the 3rient- he e2bar6s for
the East! At first e>erything he encounters either confir2s his poetic predictions or
realiAes his propensity for analogy! 'ady (ester "tanhope is the Circe of the desertJ
the 3rient is the ipatrie de 2on i2aginationiJ the Arabs are a pri2iti>e peopleJ
Biblical poetry is engra>ed on the land of 'ebanonJ the 3rient testifies to the
attracti>e largeness of Asia and to 5reecefs co2parati>e s2allness! "oon after he
reaches &alestine- howe>er- he beco2es the incorrigible 2a6er of an i2aginary
3rient!
1++
(e alleges that the plains of Canaan appear to best ad>antage in the wor6s of &oussin
and 'orrain! Fro2 being a itranslation-i as he called it earlier- his >oyage is now
turned into a prayer- which e4ercises his 2e2ory- soul- and heart 2ore than it does
his eyes- 2ind- or spirit!
,*
1his candid announce2ent co2pletely unlooses 'a2artinefs analogic and
reconstructi>e Fand undisciplinedG Aeal! Christianity is a religion of i2agination and
recollection- and since 'a2artine considers that he typifies the pious belie>er- he
indulges hi2self accordingly! A catalogue of his tendentious iobser>ationsi would be
inter2inable: a wo2an he sees re2inds hi2 of (aidee in .on JuanJ the relationship
between Jesus and &alestine is li6e that between #ousseau and 5ene>aJ the actual
ri>er Jordan is less i2portant than the i2ysteriesi it gi>es rise to in onefs soulJ
3rientals- and Musli2s in particular- are laAy- their politics are capricious- passionate-
and futurelessJ another wo2an re2inds hi2 of a passage in AtalaJ neither 1asso nor
Chateaubriand Fwhose antecedent tra>els see2 often to harass 'a2artinefs otherwise
heedless egois2G got the (oly 'and right0and on and on! (is pages on Arabic poetry-
about which he discourses with supre2e confidence- betray no disco2fort at his total
ignorance of the language! All that 2atters to hi2 is that his tra>els in the 3rient
re>eal to hi2 how the 3rient is ila terre des cultes- des prodiges-i and that he is its
appointed poet in the est! ith no trace of self0irony he announces:
1his Arab land is the land of prodigiesJ e>erything sprouts there- and e>ery
credulous or fanatical 2an can beco2e a prophet there in his turn!
*7
(e has beco2e a prophet 2erely by the fact of residence in the 3rient!
By the end of his narrati>e 'a2artine has achie>ed the purpose of his pilgri2age
to the (oly "epulchre- that beginning and end point of all ti2e and space! (e has
internaliAed reality enough to want to retreat fro2 it bac6 into pure conte2plation-
solitude- philosophy- and poetry!
*1
#ising abo>e the 2erely geographical 3rient- he is transfor2ed into a latterday
Chateaubriand- sur>eying the East as if it were a personal For at the >ery least a
FrenchG pro>ince ready to be disposed of by European powers! Fro2 being a tra>eler
and pilgri2 in real ti2e and space- 'a2artine has beco2e a transpersonal ego
1+,
identifying itself in power and consciousness with the whole of Europe! hat he sees
before hi2 is the 3rient in the process of its ine>itable future dis2e2ber2ent- being
ta6en o>er and consecrated by European suAerainty! 1hus in 'a2artinefs cli2actic
>ision the 3rient is reborn as European right0to0power o>er it:
1his sort of suAerainty thus defined- and consecrated as a European right- will
consist principally in the right to occupy one or another territory- as well as the
coasts- in order to found there either free cities- or European colonies- or
co22ercial ports of call !!!!
/or does 'a2artine stop at this! (e cli2bs still higher to the point where the 3rient-
what he has @ust seen and where he has @ust been- is reduced to inations without
territory- patrie, rights- laws or security ! ! ! waiting an4iously for the shelteri of
European occupation!
*2
In all the >isions of the 3rient fabricated by 3rientalis2 there is no
recapitulation- literally- as entire as this one! For 'a2artine a pilgri2age to the 3rient
has in>ol>ed not only the penetration of the 3rient by an i2perious consciousness but
also the >irtual eli2ination of that consciousness as a result of its accession to a 6ind
of i2personal and continental control o>er the 3rient! 1he 3rientfs actual identity is
withered away into a set of consecuti>e frag2ents- 'a2artinefs recollecti>e
obser>ations- which are later to be gathered up and brought forth as a restated
/apoleonic drea2 of world hege2ony! hereas 'anefs hu2an identity disappeared
into the scientific grid of his Egyptian classifications- 'a2artinefs consciousness
transgresses its nor2al bounds co2pletely! In so doing- it repeats Chateaubriandfs
@ourney and his >isions only to 2o>e on beyond the2- into the sphere of the
"helleyan and /apoleonic abstract- by which worlds and populations are 2o>ed
about li6e so 2any cards on a table! hat re2ains of the 3rient in 'a2artinefs prose
is not >ery substantial at all! Its geopolitical reality has been o>erlaid with his plans
for itJ the sites he has >isited- the people he has 2et- the e4periences he has had- are
reduced to a few echoes in his po2pous generaliAations! 1he last traces of
particularity ha>e been rubbed out in the iresu2e politi9uei with which the ,oyage
en "rient concludes!
Against the transcendent 9uasi0national egois2 of 'a2artine we 2ust place
/er>al and Flaubert in contrast! 1heir 3riental wor6s play a substantial role in their
total oeuvre, a 2uch greater one than 'a2artinefs i2perialist ,oyage in his oeuvre.
Iet both of the2-
1+*
li6e 'a2artine- ca2e to the 3rient prepared for it by >olu2inous reading in the
classics- 2odern literature- and acade2ic 3rientalis2J about this preparation Flaubert
was 2uch 2ore candid than /er>al- who in (es !illes du #eu says disingenuously that
all he 6new about the 3rient was a halfforgotten 2e2ory fro2 his school education!
*)
1he e>idence of his ,oyage en "rient flatly contradicts this- although it shows a
2uch less syste2atic and disciplined 6nowledge of 3rientalia than Flaubertfs! More
i2portant- howe>er- is the fact that both writers F/er>al in &:KR'&:KS and Flaubert in
&:K@'&:T9+ had greater personal and aesthetic uses for their >isits to the 3rient than
any other nineteenth0century tra>elers! It is not inconse9uential that both were
geniuses to begin with- and that both were thoroughly steeped in aspects of European
culture that encouraged a sy2pathetic- if per>erse- >ision of the 3rient! /er>al and
Flaubert belonged to that co22unity of thought and feeling described by Mario &raA
in The Romantic $gony, a co22unity for which the i2agery of e4otic places- the
culti>ation of sado2asochistic tastes Fwhat &raA calls algolagnia+, a fascination with
the 2acabre- with the notion of a Fatal o2an- with secrecy and occultis2- all
co2bined to enable literary wor6 of the sort produced by 5autier Fhi2self fascinated
by the 3rientG- "winburne- Baudelaire- and (uys2ans!
*=
For /er>al and Flaubert-
such fe2ale figures as Cleopatra- "alo2e- and Isis ha>e a special significanceJ and it
was by no 2eans accidental that in their wor6 on the 3rient- as well as in their >isits
to it- they pre0e2inently >aloriAed and enhanced fe2ale types of this legendary-
richly suggesti>e- and associati>e sort!
In addition to their general cultural attitudes- /er>al and Flaubert brought to the
3rient a personal 2ythology whose concerns and e>en structure re9uired the 3rient!
Both 2en were touched by the 3riental renaissance as Huinet and others had defined
it: they sought the in>igoration pro>ided by the fabulously anti9ue and the e4otic! For
each- howe>er- the 3riental pilgri2age was a 9uest for so2ething relati>ely personal:
Flaubert see6ing a iho2eland-i as Jean Bruneau has called it-
*;
in the locales of the
origin of religions- >isions- and classical anti9uityJ /er>al see6ing 0or rather
following0the traces of his personal senti2ents and drea2s- li6e "ternefs Ioric6
before hi2! For both writers the 3rient was a place therefore of de@a >u- and for both-
with the artistic econo2y typical of all 2a@or aesthetic i2aginations- it was a place
often returned to after the actual >oyage had been co2pleted! For
1,7
neither of the2 was the 3rient e4hausted by their uses of it- e>en if there is often a
9uality of disappoint2ent- disenchant2ent- or de2ystification to be found in their
3riental writings!
1he para2ount i2portance of /er>al and Flaubert to a study such as this of the
3rientalist 2ind in the nineteenth century is that they produced wor6 that is
connected to and depends upon the 6ind of 3rientalis2 we ha>e so far discussed- yet
re2ains independent fro2 it! First there is the 2atter of their wor6fs scope! /er>al
produced his ,oyage en "rient as a collection of tra>el notes- s6etches- stories- and
frag2entsJ his preoccupation with the 3rient is to be found as well in (es 2himeres,
in his letters- in so2e of his fiction and other prose writings! Flaubertfs writing both
before and after his >isit is soa6ed in the 3rient! 1he 3rient appears in the 2arnets de
,oyage and in the first >ersion of (a Tentation de 4aint $ntoine Fand in the two later
>ersionsG- as well as in .-rodias, 4alammbB, and the nu2erous reading notes-
scenarios- and unfinished stories still a>ailable to us- which ha>e been >ery
intelligently studied by Bruneau!
*E
1here are echoes of 3rientalis2 in Flaubertfs other
2a@or no>els- too! In all- both /er>al and Flaubert continually elaborated their
3riental 2aterial and absorbed it >ariously into the special structures of their personal
aesthetic pro@ects! 1his is not to say- howe>er- that the 3rient is incidental to their
wor6! #ather0by contrast with such writers as 'ane Ffro2 who2 both 2en borrowed
sha2elesslyG- Chateaubriand- 'a2artine- #enan- "acy0their 3rient was not so 2uch
grasped- appropriated- reduced- or codified as li>ed in- e4ploited aesthetically and
i2aginati>ely as a roo2y place full of possibility! hat 2attered to the2 was the
structure of their wor6 as an independent- aesthetic- and personal fact- and not the
ways by which- if one wanted to- one could effecti>ely do2inate or set down the
3rient graphically! 1heir egos ne>er absorbed the 3rient- nor totally identified the
3rient with docu2entary and te4tual 6nowledge of it Fwith official 3rientalis2- in
shortG!
3n the one hand- therefore- the scope of their 3riental wor6 e4ceeds the
li2itations i2posed by orthodo4 3rientalis2! 3n the other hand- the sub@ect of their
wor6 is 2ore than 3riental or 3rientalistic Fe>en though they do their own
3rientaliAing of the 3rientGJ it 9uite consciously plays with the li2itations and the
challenges presented to the2 by the 3rient and by 6nowledge about it! /er>al- for
e4a2ple- belie>es that he has to infuse what he sees with >itality since- he says-
1,1
'e ciel et la 2er sont tou@ours lVJ le ciel df3rient- la 2er dfIonie se donnent
cha9ue 2atin le saint baiser dfa2ourJ 2ais la terre est 2orte- 2orte sous la 2ain
de Ifho22e- et lea dieu4 se sont en>olPs^
F1he s6y and the sea are still thereJ the 3riental s6y and the Ionian s6y gi>e each
other the sacred 6iss of lo>e each 2orningJ but the earth is dead- dead because
2an has 6illed it- and the gods ha>e fled!G
If the 3rient is to li>e at all- now that its gods ha>e fled- it 2ust be through his fertile
efforts! In the ,oyage en "rient the narrati>e consciousness is a constantly energetic
>oice- 2o>ing through the labyrinths of 3riental e4istence ar2ed0/er>al tells us0with
two Arabic words- tayeb, the word for assent- and ma#isch- the word for re@ection!
1hese two words enable hi2 selecti>ely to confront the antithetical 3riental world- to
confront it and draw out fro2 it its secret principles! (e is predisposed to recogniAe
that the 3rient is ile pays des re>es et de lfillision-i which- li6e the >eils he sees
e>erywhere in Cairo- conceal a deep- rich fund of fe2ale se4uality! /er>al repeats
'anefs e4perience of disco>ering the necessity for 2arriage in an Isla2ic society- but
unli6e 'ane he does attach hi2self to a wo2an! (is liaison with Raynab is 2ore than
socially obligatory:
I 2ust unite with a guileless young girl who is of this sacred soil- which is our
first ho2elandJ I 2ust bathe 2yself in the >i>ifying springs of hu2anity- fro2
which poetry and the faith of our fathers flowed forth^ ! ! ! I would li6e to lead 2y
life li6e a no>el- and I willingly place 2yself in the situation of one of those
acti>e and resolute heroes who wish at all costs to create a dra2a around the2- a
6not of co2ple4ity- in a word- action!
*+
/er>al in>ests hi2self in the 3rient- producing not so 2uch a no>elistic narrati>e as
an e>erlasting intention0ne>er fully realiAed 0to fuse 2ind with physical action! 1his
antinarrati>e- this parapilgri2age- is a swer>ing away fro2 discursi>e finality of the
sort en>isioned by pre>ious writers on the 3rient!
Connected physically and sy2pathetically to the 3rient- /er>al wanders
infor2ally through its riches and its cultural Fand principally fe2inineG a2bience-
locating in Egypt especially that 2aternal icenter- at once 2ysterious and accessiblei
fro2 which all wisdo2 deri>es!
*,
(is i2pressions- drea2s- and 2e2ories alternate
with sections of ornate- 2annered narrati>e done in the 3riental styleJ the hard
realities of tra>el0in Egypt- 'ebanon-
1,2
1ur6ey02ingle with the design of a deliberate digression- as if /er>al were repeating
Chateaubriandfs /tin-raire using an underground- though far less i2perial and
ob>ious- route! Michel Butor puts it beautifully:
1o /er>alfs eyes- Chateaubriandfs @ourney re2ains a >oyage along the surface-
while his own is calculated- utiliAing anne4 centers- lobbies of ellipses englobing
the principal centersJ this allows hi2 to place in e>idence- by paralla4- all the
di2ensions of the snare harbored by the nor2al centers! andering the streets or
en>irons of Cairo- Beirut- or Constantinople- /er>al is always lying in wait for
anything that will allow hi2 to sense a ca>ern e4tending beneath #o2e- Athens-
and Jerusale2 Ythe principal cities of Chateaubriandfs /tin-raire; . . . .
Just as the three cities of Chateaubriand are in co22unication 0#o2e- with its
e2perors and popes- reasse2bling the heritage- the testa2ent- of Athens and
Jerusale20the ca>erns of /er>al ! ! ! beco2e engaged in intercourse!
**
E>en the two large plotted episodes- i1he 1ale of the Caliph (a6i2i and i1he
1ale of the Hueen of the Morning-i that will supposedly con>ey a durable- solid
narrati>e discourse see2 to push /er>al away fro2 io>ergroundi finality- edging hi2
further and further into a haunting internal world of parado4 and drea2! Both tales
deal with 2ultiple !identity- one of whose 2otifs0e4plicitly stated0is incest- and both
return us to /er>alfs 9uintessential 3riental world of uncertain- fluid drea2s infinitely
2ultiplying the2sel>es past resolution- definiteness- 2ateriality! hen the @ourney is
co2pleted and /er>al arri>es in Malta on his way bac6 to the European 2ainland- he
realiAes that he is now in ile pays du froid et des orages- et dP@V lf3rient nfest plus
pour 2oi 9ufun de ses re>es du 2atin au49uels >iennent bient`t succPder les ennuis
du @our!i
177
(is ,oyage incorporates nu2erous pages copied out of 'anefs Modern
Egyptians, but e>en their lucid confidence see2s to dissol>e in the endlessly
deco2posing- ca>ernous ele2ent which is /er>alfs 3rient!
.is carnet for the ,oyage supplies us- I thin6- with two perfect te4ts for
understanding how his 3rient untied itself fro2 anything rese2bling an 3rientalist
conception of the 3rient- e>en though his wor6 depends on 3rientalis2 to a certain
e4tent! First- his appetites stri>e to gather in e4perience and 2e2ory indiscri2inately:
iJe sens le besoin de 2fassi2iler toute la nature Ffe22es tPrang]resG!"ou>enirs dfy
a>oir >Pcu!i 1he second elaborates a bit
1,)
on the first: i'es re>es et la folie ! ! ! 'e dPsir de lI"rient.'fEurope sfPl]>e!'e re>e se
rPalise ! ! ! Elle!Je lfa>ais fuie- @e lfa>ais perdue ! ! ! Baisseau df3rient!i
171
1he 3rient
sy2boliAes /er>alfs drea29uest and the fugiti>e wo2an central to it- both as desire
and as loss! iBaisseau df3rienti000>essel of the 3rient0refers enig2atically either to
the wo2an as the >essel carrying the 3rient- or possibly- to /er>alfs own >essel for
the 3rient- his prose voyage. In either case- the 3rient is identified with
co22e2orati>e absence.
(ow else can we e4plain in the ,oyage, a wor6 of so original and indi>idual a
2ind- the laAy use of large swatches of 'ane- incorporated without a 2ur2ur by
/er>al as his descriptions of the 3rientL It is as if ha>ing failed both in his search for
a stable 3riental reality and in his intent to gi>e syste2atic order to his
re0presentation of the 3rient- /er>al was e2ploying the borrowed authority of a
canoniAed 3rientalist te4t! After his >oyage the earth re2ained dead- and aside fro2
its brilliantly crafted but frag2ented e2bodi2ents in the ,oyage, his self was no less
drugged and worn out than before! 1herefore the 3rient see2ed retrospecti>ely to
belong to a negati>e real2- in which failed narrati>es- disordered chronicles- 2ere
transcription of scholarly te4ts- were its only possible >essel! At least /er>al did not
try to sa>e his pro@ect by wholeheartedly gi>ing hi2self up to French designs on the
3rient- although he did resort to 3rientalis2 to 2a6e so2e of his points!
In contrast to /er>alfs negati>e >ision of an e2ptied 3rient- Flaubertfs is
e2inently corporeal! (is tra>el notes and letters re>eal a 2an scrupulously reporting
e>ents- persons- and settings- delighting in their bi6arreries, ne>er atte2pting to
reduce the incongruities before hi2! In what he writes For perhaps because he writesG-
the pre2iu2 is on the eye0catching- translated into self0consciously wor6ed0out
phrases: for e4a2ple- iInscriptions and bird droppings are the only two things in
Egypt that gi>e any indication of life!
172
(is tastes run to the per>erse- whose for2 is
often a co2bination of e4tre2e ani2ality- e>en of grotes9ue nastiness- with e4tre2e
and so2eti2es intellectual refine2ent! Iet this particular 6ind of per>ersity was not
so2ething 2erely obser>ed- it was also studied- and ca2e to represent an essential
ele2ent in Flaubertfs fiction! 1he fa2iliar oppositions- or a2bi>alences- as (arry
'e>in has called the2- that roa2 through Flaubertfs writing0flesh >ersus 2ind-
"alo2e >ersus "aint John- "ala22bo >ersus "aint Anthony
17)
000are powerfully
>alidated by what he saw in the 3rient- what- gi>en
1,=
his eclectic learning- he could see there of the partnership between 6nowledge and
carnal grossness! In ?pper Egypt he was ta6en with ancient Egyptian art- its
preciosity and deliberate lubricity: iso dirty pictures e4isted e>en so far bac6 in
anti9uityLi (ow 2uch 2ore the 3rient really answered 9uestions than it raised the2
is e>ident in the following:
Iou YFlaubertfs 2otherZ as6 2e whether the 3rient is up to what I i2agined it to
be! Ies- it isJ and 2ore than that- it e4tends far beyond the narrow idea I had of it!
I ha>e found- clearly delineated- e>erything that was haAy in 2y 2ind! Facts ha>e
ta6en the place of suppositions0so e4cellently so that it is often as though I were
suddenly co2ing upon old forgotten drea2s!
17=
Flaubertfs wor6 is so co2ple4 and so >ast as to 2a6e any si2ple account of his
3riental writing >ery s6etchy and hopelessly inco2plete! /e>ertheless- in the conte4t
created by other writers on the 3rient- a certain nu2ber of 2ain features in Flaubertfs
3rientalis2 can fairly be described! Ma6ing allowances for the difference between
candidly personal writing Fletters- tra>el notes- diary @ottingsG and for2ally aesthetic
writing Fno>els and talesG- we can still re2ar6 that Flaubertfs 3riental perspecti>e is
rooted in an eastward and southward search for a i>isionary alternati>e-i which
i2eant gorgeous color- in contrast to the greyish tonality of the French pro>incial
landscape! It 2eant e4citing spectacle instead of hu2dru2 routine- the perennially
2ysterious in place of the all too fa2iliar!i
17;
hen he actually >isited it- howe>er-
this 3rient i2pressed hi2 with its decrepitude and senescence! 'i6e e>ery other
3rientalis2- then- Flaubertfs is re>i>alist: he 2ust bring the 3rient to life- he 2ust
deli>er it to hi2self and to his readers- and it is his e4perience of it in boo6s and on
the spot- and his language for it that will do the tric6! (is no>els of the 3rient
accordingly were labored historical and learned reconstructions! Carthage in
"ala22bo and the products of "aint Anthonyfs fe>ered i2agination were authentic
fruits of Flaubertfs wide reading in the F2ainly esternG sources of 3riental religion-
warfare- ritual- and societies!
hat the for2al aesthetic wor6 retains- o>er and abo>e the 2ar6s of Flaubertfs
>oracious readings and recensions- are 2e2ories of 3riental tra>el! 1he 1iblioth03ue
des id-es reEues has it that an 3rientalist is iun ho22e 9ui a beaucoup >oyagP-i
17E
only unli6e 2ost other such tra>elers Flaubert put his >oyages to ingenious use! Most
of his e4periences are con>eyed in theatrical for2! (e is
1,;
interested not only in the content of what he sees but0li6e #enan 0in how he sees- the
way by which the 3rient- so2eti2es horribly but always attracti>ely- see2s to
present itself to hi2! Flaubert is its best audience:
! ! !%asr el0fAini (ospital! ell 2aintained! 1he wor6 of Clot Bey0his hand is
still to be seen! &retty cases of syphilisJ in the ward of Abbasfs Ma2elu6es-
se>eral ha>e it in the arse! At a sign fro2 the doctor- they all stood up on their
beds- undid their trouserbelts Fit was li6e ar2y drillG- and opened their anuses
with their fingers to show their chancres! Enor2ous infundibulaJ one had a
growth of hair inside his anus! 3ne old 2anfs pric6 entirely de>oid of s6inJ I
recoiled fro2 the stench! A rachitic: hands cur>ed bac6ward- nails as long as
clawsJ one could see the bone structure of his torso as clearly as a s6eletonJ the
rest of his body- too- was fantastically thin- and his head was ringed with whitish
leprosy!
.issecting roo2: ! ! ! 3n the table an Arab cada>er- wide openJ beautiful
blac6 hair ! ! ! !
17+
1he lurid detail of this scene is related to 2any scenes in Flaubertfs no>els- in which
illness is presented to us as if in a clinical theater!(is fascination with dissection and
beauty recalls- for instance- the final scene of 4alammbB, cul2inating in Mcthofs
cere2onial death! In such scenes- senti2ents of repulsion or sy2pathy are repressed
entirelyJ what 2atters is the correct rendering of e4act detail!
1he 2ost celebrated 2o2ents in Flaubertfs 3riental tra>el ha>e to do with
%uchu6 (ane2- a fa2ous Egyptian dancer and courtesan he encountered in adi
(alfa! (e had read in 'ane about the almehs and the khawals, dancing girls and boys
respecti>ely- but it was his i2agination rather than 'anefs that could i22ediately
grasp as well as en@oy the al2ost 2etaphysical parado4 of the almehIs profession and
the 2eaning of her na2e! FIn Bictory- Joseph Conrad was to repeat Flaubertfs
obser>ation by 2a6ing his 2usician heroineAl2a0irresistibly attracti>e and
dangerous to A4el (eyst!G $lemah in Arabic 2eans a learned wo2an! It was the
na2e gi>en to wo2en in conser>ati>e eighteenth0century Egyptian society who were
acco2plished reciters of poetry! By the 2id0nineteenth century the title was used as a
sort of guild na2e for dancers who were also prostitutes- and such was %uchu6
(ane2- whose dance i'fAbeillei Flaubert watched before he slept with her! "he was
surely the prototype of se>eral of his no>elsf fe2ale characters in her learned
sensuality- delicacy- and
1,E
Faccording to FlaubertG 2indless coarseness! hat he especially li6ed about her was
that she see2ed to place no de2ands on hi2- while the inauseating odori of her
bedbugs 2ingled enchantingly with ithe scent of her s6in- which was dripping with
sandalwood!iAfter his >oyage- he had written 'ouise Colet reassuringly that ithe
oriental wo2an is no 2ore than a 2achine: she 2a6es no distinction between one
2an and another 2an!i %uchu6fs du2b and irreducible se4uality allowed Flaubertfs
2ind to wander in ru2inations whose haunting power o>er hi2 re2inds us so2ewhat
of .eslauriers and FrPderic Moreau at the end of lIEducation sentimentale<
As for 2e- I scarcely shut 2y eyes! atching that beautiful creature asleep Fshe
snored- her head against 2y ar2: I had slipped 2y forefinger under her
nec6laceG- 2y night was one long- infinitely intense re>erie00that was why I
stayed! I thought of 2y nights in &aris brothels0a whole series of old 2e2ories
ca2e bac60and I thought of her- of her dance- of her >oice as she sang songs that
for 2e were without 2eaning and e>en without distinguishable words!
17,
1he 3riental wo2an is an occasion and an opportunity for Flaubertfs 2usingsJ he
is entranced by her self0sufficiency- by her e2otional carelessness- and also by what-
lying ne4t to hi2- she allows hi2 to thin6! 'ess a wo2an than a display of i2pressi>e
but >erbally ine4pressi>e fe2ininity- %uchu6 is the prototype of Flaubertfs "ala22b`
and "alo2P as well as of all the >ersions of carnal fe2ale te2ptation to which his
"aint Anthony is sub@ect! 'i6e the Hueen of "heba Fwho also danced i1he BeeiG she
could say0were she able to spea60iJe ne suis pas une fe22e- @e suis un 2onde!i
17*
'oo6ed at fro2 another angle %uchu6 is a disturbing sy2bol of fecundity- peculiarly
3riental in her lu4uriant and see2ingly unbounded se4uality! (er ho2e near the
upper reaches of the /ile occupied a position structurally si2ilar to the place where
the >eil of 1anit0 the goddess described as "mni#-conde'is concealed in 4alammbB.
117
Iet li6e 1anit- "alo2P and "ala22b` herself- %uchu6 was doo2ed to re2ain barren-
corrupting- without issue! (ow 2uch she and the 3riental world she li>ed in ca2e to
intensify for Flaubert his own sense of barrenness is indicated in the following:
e ha>e a large orchestra- a rich palette- a >ariety of resources! e 6now 2any
2ore tric6s and dodges- probably- than were e>er 6nown before! /o- what we
lac6 is the intrinsic principle- the soul
1,+
of the thing- the >ery idea of the sub@ect! e ta6e notes- we 2a6e @ourneys:
e2ptiness^ e2ptiness^ e beco2e scholars- archaeologists- historians- doctors-
cobblers- people of taste! hat is the good of all thatL here is the heart- the
>er>e- the sapL here to start fro2L here to goL efre good at suc6ing- we
play a lot of tongue0ga2es- we pet for hours: but the real thing^ 1o e@aculate-
beget the child^
111
o>en through all of Flaubertfs 3riental e4periences- e4citing or disappointing-
is an al2ost unifor2 association between the 3rient and se4! In 2a6ing this
association Flaubert was neither the first nor the 2ost e4aggerated instance of a
re2ar6ably persistent 2otif in estern attitudes to the 3rient! And indeed- the 2otif
itself is singularly un>aried- although Flaubertfs genius 2ay ha>e done 2ore than
anyone elsefs could ha>e to gi>e it artistic dignity! hy the 3rient see2s still to
suggest not only fecundity but se4ual pro2ise Fand threatG- untiring sensuality-
unli2ited desire- deep generati>e energies- is so2ething on which one could
speculate: it is not the pro>ince of 2y analysis here- alas- despite its fre9uently noted
appearance! /e>ertheless one 2ust ac6nowledge its i2portance as so2ething
eliciting co2ple4 responses- so2eti2es e>en a frightening self0disco>ery- in the
3rientalists- and Flaubert was an interesting case in point!
1he 3rient threw hi2 bac6 on his own hu2an and technical resources! It did not
respond- @ust as %uchu6 did not- to his presence! "tanding before its ongoing life
Flaubert- li6e 'ane before hi2- felt his detached powerlessness- perhaps also his
self0induced unwillingness- to enter and beco2e part of what he saw! 1his of course
was Flaubertfs perennial proble2J it had e4isted before he went East- and it re2ained
after the >isit! Flaubert ad2itted the difficulty- the antidote to which was in his wor6
Fespecially in an 3riental wor6 li6e 'a 1entation de "aint AntoineG to stress the for2
of encyclopedic presentation of 2aterial at the e4pense of hu2an engage2ent in life!
Indeed- "aint Anthony is nothing if not a 2an for who2 reality is a series of boo6s-
spectacles- and pageants unrolling te2ptingly and at a distance before his eyes! All of
Flaubertfs i22ense learning is structured0as Michel Foucault has tellingly noted0li6e
a theatrical- fantastic library- parading before the anchoritefs gaAeJ
112
residually- the
parade carries in its for2 Flaubertfs 2e2ories of %asr elfAini Fthe syphiliticsf ar2y
drillG and %uchu6fs dance! More to the point- howe>er- is that "aint Anthony
1,,
is a celibate to who2 te2ptations are pri2arily se4ual! After putting up with e>ery
sort of dangerous char2- he is finally gi>en a gli2pse into the biological processes of
lifeJ he is delirious at being able to see life being born- a scene for which Flaubert felt
hi2self to be inco2petent during his 3riental so@ourn! Iet because Anthony is
delirious- we are 2eant to read the scene ironically! hat is granted to hi2 at the end-
the desire to become 2atter- to beco2e life- is at best a desire0whether realiAable and
fulfillable or not- we cannot 6now!
.espite the energy of his intelligence and his enor2ous power- of intellectual
absorption- Flaubert felt in the 3rient- first- that ithe 2ore you concentrate on it Yin
detailZ the less you grasp the whole-i and then- second- that ithe pieces fall into place
of the2sel>es!i
11)
At best- this produces a spectacular for2- but it re2ains barred to
the esternerfs full participation in it! 3n one le>el this was a personal predica2ent
for Flaubert- and he de>ised 2eans- so2e of which we ha>e discussed- for dealing
with it! 3n a 2ore general le>el- this was an epistemological difficulty for which- of
course- the discipline of 3rientalis2 e4isted! At one 2o2ent during his 3riental tour
he considered what the episte2ological challenge could gi>e rise to: ithout what he
called spirit and style- the 2ind could iget lost in archaeologyi: he was referring to a
sort of regi2ented anti9uarianis2 by which the e4otic and the strange would get
for2ulated into le4icons- codes- and finally cliches of the 6ind he was to ridicule in
the Dictionnaire des id-es reEues. ?nder the influence of such an attitude the world
would be iregulated li6e a college! 1eachers will be the law! E>eryone will be in
unifor2!i
11=
As against such an i2posed discipline- he no doubt felt that his own
treat2ents of e4otic 2aterial- notably the 3riental 2aterial he had both e4perienced
and read about for years- were infinitely preferable! In those at least there was roo2
for a sense of i22ediacy- i2agination- and flair- whereas in the ran6s of
archaeological to2es e>erything but ilearningi had been s9ueeAed out! And 2ore
than 2ost no>elists Flaubert was ac9uainted with organiAed learning- its products-
and its results: these products are clearly e>ident in the 2isfortunes of Bou>ard and
&ecuchet- but they would ha>e been as co2ically apparent in fields li6e 3rientalis2-
whose te4tual attitudes belonged to the world of id-es reEues. 1herefore one could
either construct the world with >er>e and style- or one could copy it tirelessly
according to i2personal acade2ic rules of procedure!
1,*
In both cases- with regard to the 3rient- there was a fran6 ac6nowledg2ent that it was
a world elsewhere- apart fro2 the ordinary attach2ents- senti2ents- and >alues of our
world in the est!
In all of his no>els Flaubert associates the 3rient with the escapis2 of se4ual
fantasy! E22a Bo>ary and FrPderic Moreau pine for what in their drab For harriedG
bourgeois li>es they do not ha>e- and what they realiAe they want co2es easily to
their daydrea2s pac6ed inside 3riental clichPs: hare2s- princesses- princes- sla>es-
>eils- dancing girls and boys- sherbets- oint2ents- and so on! 1he repertoire is
fa2iliar- not so 2uch because it re2inds us of Flaubertfs own >oyages in and
obsession with the 3rient- but because- once again- the association is clearly 2ade
between the 3rient and the freedo2 of licentious se4! e 2ay as well recogniAe that
for nineteenth0century Europe- with its increasing embourgeoisement, se4 had been
institutionaliAed to a >ery considerable degree! 3n the one hand- there was no such
thing as ifreei se4- and on the other- se4 in society entailed a web of legal- 2oral-
e>en political and econo2ic obligations of a detailed and certainly encu2bering sort!
Just as the >arious colonial possessions09uite apart fro2 their econo2ic benefit to
2etropolitan Europe0were useful as places to send wayward sons- superfluous
populations of delin9uents- poor people- and other undesirables- so the 3rient was a
place where one could loo6 for se4ual e4perience unobtainable in Europe! Birtually
no European writer who wrote on or tra>eled to the 3rient in the period after 1,77
e4e2pted hi2self or herself fro2 this 9uest: Flaubert- /er>al- i.irty .ic6i Burton-
and 'ane are only the 2ost notable! In the twentieth century one thin6s of 5ide-
Conrad- Maugha2- and doAens of others! hat they loo6ed for often0correctly- I
thin60was a different type of se4uality- perhaps 2ore libertine and less guiltriddenJ
but e>en that 9uest- if repeated by enough people- could Fand didG beco2e as
regulated and unifor2 as learning itself! In ti2e i3riental se4i was as standard a
co22odity as any other a>ailable in the 2ass culture- with the result that readers and
writers could ha>e it if they wished without necessarily going to the 3rient!
It was certainly true that by the 2iddle of the nineteenth century France- no less
than England and the rest of Europe- had a flourishing 6nowledge industry of the sort
that Flaubert feared! 5reat nu2bers of te4ts were being produced- and 2ore
i2portant- the agencies and institutions for their disse2ination and propagation were
e>erywhere to be found! As historians of science and 6nowledge ha>e
1*7
obser>ed- the organiAation of scientific and learned fields that too6 place during the
nineteenth century was both rigorous and allenco2passing! #esearch beca2e a
regular acti>ityJ there was a regulated e4change of infor2ation- and agree2ent on
what the proble2s were as well as consensus on the appropriate paradig2s for
research and its results!
11;
1he apparatus ser>ing 3riental studies was part of the
scene- and this was one thing that Flaubert surely had in 2ind when he proclai2ed
that ie>eryone will be in unifor2!i An 3rientalist was no longer a gifted a2ateur
enthusiast- or if he was- he would ha>e trouble being ta6en seriously as a scholar! 1o
be an 3rientalist 2eant uni>ersity training in 3riental studies Fby 1,;7 e>ery 2a@or
European uni>ersity had a fully de>eloped curriculu2 in one or another of the
3rientalist disciplinesG- it 2eant sub>ention for onefs tra>el Fperhaps by one of the
Asiatic societies or a geographical e4ploration fund or a go>ern2ent grantG- it 2eant
publication in accredited for2 Fperhaps under the i2print of a learned society or an
3riental translation fundG! And both within the guild of 3rientalist scholars and to the
public at large- such unifor2 accreditation as clothed the wor6 of 3rientalist
scholarship- not personal testi2ony nor sub@ecti>e i2pressionis2- 2eant "cience!
Added to the oppressi>e regulation of 3riental 2atters was the accelerated
attention paid by the &owers Fas the European e2pires were calledG to the 3rient- and
to the 'e>ant in particular! E>er since the 1reaty of Chana6 of 1,7E between the
3tto2an E2pire and 5reat Britain- the Eastern Huestion had ho>ered e>er 2ore
pro2inently on Europefs Mediterranean horiAons! Britainfs interests were 2ore
substantial in the East than Francefs- but we 2ust not forget #ussiafs 2o>e2ents into
the 3rient F"a2ar6and and Bo6hara were ta6en in 1,E,J the 1ranscaspian #ailroad
was being e4tended syste2aticallyG- nor 5er2anyfs and Austria0(ungaryfs! Francefs
/orth African inter>entions- howe>er- were not the only co2ponents of its Isla2ic
policy! In 1,E7- during the clashes between Maronites and .ruAes in 'ebanon
Falready predicted by 'a2artine and /er>alG- France supported the Christians-
England the .ruAes! For standing near the center of all European politics in the East
was the 9uestion of 2inorities- whose iinterestsi the &owers- each in its own way-
clai2ed to protect and represent! Jews- 5ree6 and #ussian 3rthodo4- .ruAes-
Circassians- Ar2enians- %urds- the >arious s2all Christian sects: all these were
studied- planned for- designed upon by European &owers i2pro>ising as well as
constructing their 3riental policy!
1*1
I 2ention such 2atters si2ply as a way of 6eeping >i>id the sense of layer upon
layer of interests- official learning- institutional pressure- that co>ered the 3rient as a
sub@ect 2atter and as a territory during the latter half of the nineteenth century! E>en
the 2ost innocuous tra>el boo60and there were literally hundreds written after
2id0century
11E
0contributed to the density of public awareness of the 3rientJ a hea>ily
2ar6ed di>iding line separated the delights- 2iscellaneous e4ploits- and testi2onial
portentousness of indi>idual pilgri2s in the East Fwhich included so2e A2erican
>oyagers- a2ong the2 Mar6 1wain and (er2an Mel>ille
11+
G fro2 the authoritati>e
reports of scholarly tra>elers- 2issionaries- go>ern2ental functionaries- and other
e4pert witnesses! 1his di>iding line e4isted clearly in Flaubertfs 2ind- as it 2ust ha>e
for any indi>idual consciousness that did not ha>e an innocent perspecti>e on the
3rient as a terrain for literary e4ploitation!
English writers on the whole had a 2ore pronounced and harder sense of what
3riental pilgri2ages 2ight entail than the French! India was a >aluably real constant
in this sense- and therefore all the territory between the Mediterranean and India
ac9uired a correspondingly weighty i2portance! #o2antic writers li6e Byron and
"cott conse9uently had a political >ision of the /ear 3rient and a >ery co2bati>e
awareness of how relations between the 3rient and Europe would ha>e to be
conducted! "cottfs historical sense in 1he Talisman and 2ount Robert o# Paris
allowed hi2 to set these no>els in Crusader &alestine and ele>enth0century
ByAantiu2- respecti>ely- without at the sa2e ti2e detracting fro2 his canny political
appreciation of the way powers act abroad! 1he failure of .israelifs Tancred can
easily be ascribed to its authorfs perhaps o>erde>eloped 6nowledge of 3riental
politics and the British Establish2entfs networ6 of interestsJ 1ancredfs ingenuous
desire to go to Jerusale2 >ery soon 2ires .israeli in ludicrously co2ple4
descriptions of how a 'ebanese tribal chieftain tries to 2anage .ruAes- Musli2s-
Jews- slid Europeans to his political ad>antage! By the end of the no>el 1ancredfs
Eastern 9uest has 2ore or less disappeared because there is nothing in .israelifs
2aterial >ision of 3riental realities to nourish the pilgri2fs so2ewhat capricious
i2pulses! E>en 5eorge Eliot- who ne>er >isited the 3rient herself- could not sustain
the Jewish e9ui>alent of an 3riental pilgri2age in Daniel Deronda J&:8U+ without
straying into the co2ple4ities of British realities as they decisi>ely affected the
Eastern pro@ect!
1*2
1hus whene>er the 3riental 2otif for the English writer was not principally a
stylistic 2atter Fas in FitA5eraldfs Rubaiyat or in Morierfs $dventures o# .aNNi 1aba
o# /spahan+, it forced hi2 to confront a set of i2posing resistances to his indi>idual
fantasy! 1here are no English e9ui>alents to the 3riental wor6s by Chateaubriand-
'a2artine- /er>al- and Flaubert- @ust as 'anefs early 3rientalist counterparts00"acy
and #enan0were considerably 2ore aware than he as of how 2uch they were
creating what they wrote about! 1he for2 of such wor6s as %ingla6efs Eothen F1,==G
and Burtonfs Personal Narrative o# a Pilgrimage to $l'Madinah and Meccah
F1,;;01,;EG is rigidly chronological and dutifully linear- as if what the authors were
describing was a shopping trip to an 3riental baAaar rather than an ad>enture!
%ingla6efs undeser>edly fa2ous and popular wor6 is a pathetic catalogue of po2pous
ethnocentris2s and tiringly nondescript accounts of the English2anfs East! (is
ostensible purpose in the boo6 is to pro>e that tra>el in the 3rient is i2portant to
i2oulding of your character0that is- your >ery identity-i but in fact this turns out to be
little 2ore than solidifying iyouri anti0"e2itis2- 4enophobia- and general allpurpose
race pre@udice! e are told- for instance- that the $rabian Nights is too li>ely and
in>enti>e a wor6 to ha>e been created by a i2ere 3riental- who- for creati>e
purposes- is a thing dead and dry0a 2ental 2u22y!i Although %ingla6e blithely
confesses to no 6nowledge of any 3riental language- he is not constrained by
ignorance fro2 2a6ing sweeping generaliAations about the 3rient- its culture-
2entality- and society! Many of the attitudes he repeats are canonical- of course- but it
is interesting how little the e4perience of actually seeing the 3rient affected his
opinions! 'i6e 2any other tra>elers he is 2ore interested in re2a6ing hi2self and the
3rient Fdead and dry0a 2ental 2u22yG than he is in seeing what there is to be seen!
E>ery being he encounters 2erely corroborates his belief that Easterners are best
dealt with when inti2idated- and what better instru2ent of inti2idation than a
so>ereign estern egoL En route to "ueA across the desert- alone- he glories in his
self0sufficiency and power: iI was here in this African desert- and I mysel#, and no
other, had charge o# my li#e.M
11,
It is for the co2parati>ely useless purpose of letting
%ingla6e ta6e hold of hi2self that the 3rient ser>es hi2!
'i6e 'a2artine before hi2- %ingla6e co2fortably identified his superior
consciousness with his nationfs- the difference being that
1*)
in the English2anfs case his go>ern2ent was closer to settling in the rest of the
3rient than France was0for the ti2e being! Flaubert saw this with perfect accuracy:
It see2s to 2e al2ost i2possible that within a short ti2e England wonft beco2e
2istress of Egypt! "he already 6eeps Aden full of her troops- the crossing of "ueA
will 2a6e it >ery easy for the redcoats to arri>e in Cairo one fine 2orning0the
news will reach France two wee6s later and e>eryone will be >ery surprised^
#e2e2ber 2y prediction: at the first sign of trouble in Europe- England will ta6e
Egypt- #ussia will ta6e Constantinople- and we- in retaliation- will get oursel>es
2assacred in the 2ountains of "yria!
11*
For all their >aunted indi>iduality %ingla6efs >iews e4press a public and national will
o>er the 3rientJ his ego is the instru2ent of this willfs e4pression- not by any 2eans
its 2aster! 1here is no e>idence in his writing that he struggled to create a no>el
opinion of the 3rientJ neither his 6nowledge nor his personality was ade9uate for
that- and this is the great difference between hi2 and #ichard Burton! As a tra>eler-
Burton was a real ad>enturerJ as a scholar- he could hold his own with any acade2ic
3rientalist in EuropeJ as a character- he was fully aware of the necessity of co2bat
between hi2self and the unifor2ed teachers who ran Europe and European
6nowledge with such precise anony2ity and scientific fir2ness! E>erything Burton
wrote testifies to this co2bati>eness- rarely with 2ore candid conte2pt for his
opponents than in the preface to his translation of the $rabian Nights. (e see2s to
ha>e ta6en a special sort of infantile pleasure in de2onstrating that he 6new 2ore
than any professional scholar- that he had ac9uired 2any 2ore details than they had-
that he could handle the 2aterial with 2ore wit and tact and freshness than they!
As I said earlier- Burtonfs wor6 based on his personal e4perience occupies a
2edian position between 3rientalist genres represented on the one hand by 'ane and
on the other by the French writers I ha>e discussed! (is 3riental narrati>es are
structured as pilgri2ages and- in the case of The (and o# Midian Revisited,
pilgri2ages for a second ti2e to sites of so2eti2es religious- so2eti2es political and
econo2ic significance! (e is present as the principal character of these wor6s- as
2uch the center of fantastic ad>enture and e>en fantasy Fli6e the French writersG as
the authoritati>e co22entator and detached esterner on 3riental society and
custo2s Fli6e 'aneG! (e has been rightly considered the first in a series of fiercely
1*=
indi>idualistic Bictorian tra>elers in the East Fthe others being Blunt and .oughtyG by
1ho2as Assad- who bases his wor6 on the distance in tone and intelligence between
his writersf wor6 and such wor6s as Austen 'ayardfs Discoveries in the Ruins of
Nineveh and 1abylon F1,;1G- Eliot arburtonfs celebrated The 2rescent and the
2ross F1,==G- #obert CurAonfs ,isit to the Monasteries of the (evant F1,=*G - and Fa
wor6 he does not 2entionG 1hac6erayfs 2oderately a2using Notes of a %ourney #rom
2ornhill to >rand 2airo F1,=;G!
127
Iet Burtonfs legacy is 2ore co2ple4 than
indi>idualis2 precisely because in his writing we can find e4e2plified the struggle
between indi>idualis2 and a strong feeling of national identification with Europe
Fspecifically EnglandG as an i2perial power in the East! Assad sensiti>ely points out
that Burton was an i2perialist- for all his sy2pathetic self0association with the ArabsJ
but what is 2ore rele>ant is that Burton thought of hi2self both as a rebel against
authority Fhence his identification with the East as a place of freedo2 fro2 Bictorian
2oral authorityG and as a potential agent of authority in the East! It is the manner of
that coe4istence- between two antagonistic roles for hi2self-that is of interest!
1he proble2 finally reduces itself to the proble2 of 6nowledge of the 3rient-
which is why a consideration of Burtonfs 3rientalis2 ought to conclude our account
of 3rientalist structures and restructures in 2ost of the nineteenth century! As a
tra>eling ad>enturer Burton concei>ed of hi2self as sharing the life of the people in
whose lands he li>ed! Far 2ore successfully than 1! E! 'awrence- he was able to
beco2e an 3rientalJ he not only spo6e the language flawlessly- he was able to
penetrate to the heart of Isla2 and- disguised as an Indian Musli2 doctor- acco2plish
the pilgri2age to Mecca! Iet Burtonfs 2ost e4traordinary characteristic is- I belie>e-
that he was preternaturally 6nowledgeable about the degree to which hu2an life in
society was go>erned by rules and codes! All of his >ast infor2ation about the 3rient-
which dots e>ery page he wrote- re>eals that he 6new that the 3rient in general and
Isla2 in particular were syste2s of infor2ation- beha>ior- and belief- that to be an
3riental or a Musli2 was to 6now certain things in a certain way- and that these were
of course sub@ect to history- geography- and the de>elop2ent of society in
circu2stances specific to it! 1hus his accounts of tra>el in the East re>eal to us a
consciousness aware of these things and able to steer a narrati>e course through the2:
no 2an who did not 6now Arabic and Isla2 as well as Burton could ha>e gone as far
as he did in actually beco2ing
1*;
a pilgri2 to Mecca and Medina! "o what we read in his prose is the history of a
consciousness negotiating its way through an alien culture by >irtue of ha>ing
successfully absorbed its syste2s of infor2ation and beha>ior! Burtonfs freedo2 was
in ha>ing sha6en hi2self loose of his European origins enough to be able to li>e as an
3riental! E>ery scene in the &ilgri2age re>eals hi2 as winning out o>er the obstacles
confronting hi2- a foreigner- in a strange place! (e was able to do this because he had
sufficient 6nowledge of an alien society for this purpose!
In no writer on the 3rient so 2uch as in Burton do we feel that generaliAations
about the 3riental0for e4a2ple- the pages on the notion of Hay# for the Arab or on
how education is suited to the 3riental 2ind Fpages that are clearly 2eant as a
rebuttal to Macaulayfs si2ple02inded assertionsG
121
0are the result of 6nowledge
ac9uired about the 3rient by li>ing there- actually seeing it firsthand- truly trying to
see 3riental life fro2 the >iewpoint of a person i22ersed in it! Iet what is ne>er far
fro2 the surface of Burtonfs prose is another sense it radiates- a sense of assertion and
do2ination o>er all the co2ple4ities of 3riental life! E>ery one of Burtonfs footnotes-
whether in the &ilgri2age or in his translation of the $rabian Nights Jthe sa2e is true
of his i1er2inal Essayi for it
122
G was 2eant to be testi2ony to his >ictory o>er the
so2eti2es scandalous syste2 of 3riental 6nowledge- a syste2 he had 2astered by
hi2self! For e>en in Burtonfs prose we are ne>er directly gi>en the 3rientJ e>erything
about it is presented to us by way of Burtonfs 6nowledgeable Fand often prurientG
inter>entions- which re2ind us repeatedly how he had ta6en o>er the 2anage2ent of
3riental life for the purposes of his narrati>e! And it is this fact 0for in the &ilgri2age
it is a fact0that ele>ates Burtonfs consciousness to a position of supre2acy o>er the
3rient! In that position his indi>iduality perforce encounters- and indeed 2erges with-
the >oice of E2pire- which is itself a syste2 of rules- codes- and concrete
episte2ological habits! 1hus when Burton tells us in the &ilgri2age that iEgypt is a
treasure to be won-i that it iis the 2ost te2pting priAe which the East holds out to the
a2bition of Europe- not e4cepted e>en the 5olden (orn-
12)
we 2ust recogniAe how
the >oice of the highly idiosyncratic 2aster of 3riental 6nowledge infor2s- feeds into
the >oice of European a2bition for rule o>er the 3rient!
Burtonfs two >oices blending into one presage the wor6 of 3rientalists0cu20
i2perial agents li6e 1! E! 'awrence- Edward
1*E
(enry &al2er- .! 5! (ogarth- 5ertrude Bell- #onald "torrs- "t! John &hilby- and
illia2 5ifford &algra>e- to na2e only so2e English writers! 1he doublepronged
intention of Burtonfs wor6 is at the sa2e ti2e to use his 3riental residence for
scientific obser>ation and not easily to sacrifice his indi>iduality to that end! 1he
second of these two intentions leads hi2 ine>itably to sub2it to the first because- as
will appear increasingly ob>ious- he is a European for who2 such 6nowledge of
3riental society as he has is possible only for a European- with a Europeanfs
self0awareness of society as 0a collection of rules and practices! In other words- to be
a European in the 3rient- and to be one 6nowledgeably- one 2ust see and 6now the
3rient as a do2ain ruled o>er by Europe! 3rieritalis2- which is the syste2 of
European or estern 6nowledge about the 3rient- thus beco2es synony2ous with
European do2ination of the 3rient- and this do2ination effecti>ely o>errules e>en
the eccentricities of Burtonfs personal style!
Burton too6 the assertion of personal- authentic- sy2pathetic- and hu2anistic
6nowledge of the 3rient as far as it would go in its struggle with the archi>e of
official European 6nowledge about the 3rient! In the history of nineteenthcentury
atte2pts to restore- restructure- and redee2 all the >arious pro>inces of 6nowledge
and life- 3rientalis20li6e all the other #o2antically inspired learned
disciplines0contributed an i2portant share! For not only did the field e>ol>e fro2 a
syste2 of inspired obser>ation into what Flaubert called a regulated college of
learning- it also reduced the personalities of e>en its 2ost redoubtable indi>idualists
li6e Burton to the role of i2perial scribe! Fro2 being a place- the 3rient beca2e a
do2ain of actual scholarly rule and potential i2perial sway! 1he role of the early
3rientalists li6e #enan- "acy- and 'ane was to pro>ide their wor6 and the 3rient
together with a mise en scene5 later 3rientalists- scholarly or i2aginati>e- too6 fir2
hold of the scene! "till later- as the scene re9uired 2anage2ent- it beca2e clear that
institutions and go>ern2ents were better at the ga2e of 2anage2ent than
indi>iduals! 1his is the legacy of nineteenth0century 3rientalis2 to which the
twentieth century has beco2e inheritor! e 2ust now in>estigate as e4actly as
possible the way twentiethcentury 3rientalis20inaugurated by the long process of the
estfs occupation of the 3rient fro2 the 1,,7s on0successfully controlled freedo2
and 6nowledgeJ in short- the way 3rientalis2 was fully for2aliAed into a repeatedly
produced copy of itself!
1*+
1*,
3
Orientalism No
3n les aperce>ait tenant leurs idoles entre leurs bras co22e de grands enfants
paralyti9ues!
0 5usta>e Flaubert- 'a 1entation de "aint Antoine
1he con9uest of the earth- which 2ostly 2eans the ta6ing it away fro2 those who
ha>e a different co2ple4ion or slightly flatter noses than oursel>es- is not a pretty
thing when you loo6 into it too 2uch! hat redee2s it is the idea only! An idea at the
bac6 of itJ not a senti2ental pretence but an ideaJ and an unselfish belief in the idea0
so2ething you can set up- and bow down before- and offer a sacrifice toW
0 Joseph Conrad- (eart of .ar6ness
1**
277
I
Latent and Manifest
Orientalism
In Chapter 3ne- I tried to indicate the scope of thought and action co>ered by the
word 3rientalis2- using as pri>ileged types the British and French e4periences of and
with the /ear 3rient- Isla2- and the Arabs! In those e4periences I discerned an
inti2ate- perhaps e>en the 2ost inti2ate- and rich relationship between 3ccident and
3rient! 1hose e4periences were part of a 2uch wider European or estern
relationship with the 3rient- but what see2s to ha>e influenced 3rientalis2 2ost was
a fairly constant sense of confrontation felt by esterners dealing with the East! 1he
boundary notion of East and est- the >arying degrees of pro@ected inferiority and
strength- the range of wor6 done- the 6inds of characteristic features ascribed to the
3rient: all these testify to a willed i2aginati>e and geographic di>ision 2ade between
East and est- and li>ed through during 2any centuries! In Chapter 1wo 2y focus
narrowed a good deal! I was interested in the earliest phases of what I call 2odern
3rientalis2- which began during the latter part of the eighteenth century and the early
years of the nineteenth! "ince I did not intend 2y study to beco2e a narrati>e
chronicle of the de>elop2ent of 3riental studies in the 2odern est- I proposed
instead an account of the rise- de>elop2ent- and institutions of 3rientalis2 as they
were for2ed against a bac6ground of intellectual- cultural- and political history until
about 1,+7 or 1,,7! Although 2y interest in 3rientalis2 there included a decently
a2ple >ariety of scholars and i2aginati>e writers- I cannot clai2 by any 2eans to
ha>e presented 2ore than a portrait of the typical structures Fand their ideological
tendenciesG constituting the field- its associations with other fields- and the wor6 of
so2e of its 2ost influential scholars! My principal operating assu2ptions were0and
continue to be0that fields of learning- as 2uch as the wor6s of e>en the 2ost eccentric
artist- are constrained and acted upon by society- by cultural traditions- by worldly
circu2stance- and by stabiliAing influences li6e schools- libraries- and go>ern2entsJ
2oreo>er- that both learned and i2aginati>e
271
writing are ne>er free- but are li2ited in their i2agery- assu2ptions- and intentionsJ
and finally- that the ad>ances 2ade by a isciencei li6e 3rientalis2 in its acade2ic
for2 are less ob@ecti>ely true than we often li6e to thin6! In short- 2y study hitherto
has tried to describe the economy that 2a6es 3rientalis2 a coherent sub@ect 2atter-
e>en while allowing that as an idea- concept- or i2age the word "rient has a
considerable and interesting cultural resonance in the est!
I realiAe that such assu2ptions are not without their contro>ersial side! Most of us
assu2e in a general way that learning and scholarship 2o>e forwardJ they get better-
we feel- as ti2e passes and as 2ore infor2ation is accu2ulated- 2ethods are refined-
and later generations of scholars i2pro>e upon earlier ones! In addition- we entertain
a 2ythology of creation- in which it is belie>ed that artistic genius- an original talent-
or a powerful intellect can leap beyond the confines of its own ti2e and place in order
to put before the world a new wor6! It would be pointless to deny that such ideas as
these carry so2e truth! /e>ertheless the possibilities for wor6 present in the culture to
a great and original 2ind are ne>er unli2ited- @ust as it is also true that a great talent
has a >ery healthy respect for what others ha>e done before it and for what the field
already contains! 1he wor6 of predecessors- the institutional life of a scholarly field-
the collecti>e nature of any learned enterprise: these- to say nothing of econo2ic and
social circu2stances- tend to di2inish the effects of the indi>idual scholarfs
production! A field li6e 3rientalis2 has a cu2ulati>e and corporate identity- one that
is particularly strong gi>en its associations with traditional learning Fthe classics- the
Bible- philologyG- public institutions Fgo>ern2ents- trading co2panies- geographical
societies- uni>ersitiesG- and generically deter2ined writing Ftra>el boo6s- boo6s of
e4ploration- fantasy- e4otic descriptionG! 1he result for 3rientalis2 has been a sort of
consensus: certain things- certain types of state2ent- certain types of wor6 ha>e
see2ed for the 3rientalist correct! (e has built his wor6 and research upon the2- and
they in turn ha>e pressed hard upon new writers and scholars! 3rientalis2 can thus be
regarded as a 2anner of regulariAed For 3rientaliAedG writing- >ision- and study-
do2inated by i2perati>es- perspecti>es- and ideological biases ostensibly suited to
the 3rient! 1he 3rient is taught- researched- ad2inistered- and pronounced upon in
certain discrete ways!
1he 3rient that appears in 3rientalis2- then- is a syste2 of
272
representations fra2ed by a whole set of forces that brought the 3rient into estern
learning- estern consciousness- and later- estern e2pire! If this definition of
3rientalis2 see2s 2ore political than not- that is si2ply because I thin6 3rientalis2
was itself a product of certain political forces and acti>ities! 3rientalis2 is a school of
interpretation whose 2aterial happens to be the 3rient- its ci>iliAations- peoples- and
localities! Its ob@ecti>e disco>eries0the wor6 of innu2erable de>oted scholars who
edited te4ts and translated the2- codified gra22ars- wrote dictionaries- reconstructed
dead epochs- produced positi>istically >erifiable learning0are and always ha>e been
conditioned by the fact that its truths- li6e any truths deli>ered by language- are
e2bodied in language- and what is the truth of language- /ietAsche once said- but
a 2obile ar2y of 2etaphors- 2etony2s- and anthropo2orphis2s 0in short- a su2
of hu2an relations- which ha>e been enhanced- transposed- and e2bellished
poetically and rhetorically- and which after long use see2 fir2- canonical- and
obligatory to a people: truths are illusions about which one has forgotten that this
is what they are!
1
&erhaps such a >iew as /ietAschefs will stri6e us as too nihilistic- but at least it will
draw attention to the fact that so far as it e4isted in the estfs awareness- the 3rient
was a word which later accrued to it a wide field of 2eanings- associations- and
connotations- and that these did not necessarily refer to the real 3rient but to the field
surrounding the word!
1hus 3rientalis2 is not only a positi>e doctrine about the 3rient that e4ists at any
one ti2e in the estJ it is also an influential acade2ic tradition Fwhen one refers to
an acade2ic specialist who is called an 3rientalistG- as well as an area of concern
defined by tra>elers- co22ercial enterprises- go>ern2ents- 2ilitary e4peditions-
readers of no>els and accounts of e4otic ad>enture- natural historians- and pilgri2s to
who2 the 3rient is a specific 6ind of 6nowledge about specific places- peoples- and
ci>iliAations! For the 3rient idio2s beca2e fre9uent- and these idio2s too6 fir2 hold
in European discourse! Beneath the idio2s there was a layer of doctrine about the
3rientJ this doctrine was fashioned out of the e4periences of 2any Europeans- all of
the2 con>erging upon such essential aspects of the 3rient as the 3riental character-
3riental despotis2- 3riental sensuality- and the li6e! For any European during the
nineteenth century0and I thin6 one
27)
can say this al2ost without 9ualification03rientalis2 was such a syste2 of truths-
truths in /ietAschefs sense of the word! It is therefore correct that e>ery European- in
what he could say about the 3rient- was conse9uently a racist- an i2perialist- and
al2ost totally ethnocentric! "o2e of the i22ediate sting will be ta6en out of these
labels if we recall additionally that hu2an societies- at least the 2ore ad>anced
cultures- ha>e rarely offered the indi>idual anything but i2perialis2- racis2- and
ethnocentris2 for dealing with iotheri cultures! "o 3rientalis2 aided and was aided
by general cultural pressures that tended to 2a6e 2ore rigid the sense of difference
between the European and Asiatic parts of the world! My contention is that
3rientalis2 is funda2entally a political doctrine willed o>er the 3rient because the
3rient was wea6er than the est- which elided the 3rientfs difference with its
wea6ness!
1his proposition was introduced early in Chapter 3ne- and nearly e>erything in
the pages that followed was intended in part as a corroboration of it! 1he >ery
presence of a ifieldi such as 3rientalis2- with no corresponding e9ui>alent in the
3rient itself- suggests the relati>e strength of 3rient and 3ccident! A >ast nu2ber of
pages on the 3rient e4ist- and they of course signify a degree and 9uantity of
interaction with the 3rient that are 9uite for2idableJ but the crucial inde4 of estern
strength is that there is no possibility of co2paring the 2o>e2ent of esterners
eastwards Fsince the end of the eighteenth centuryG with the 2o>e2ent of Easterners
westwards! 'ea>ing aside the fact that estern ar2ies- consular corps- 2erchants-
and scientific and archaeological e4peditions were always going East- the nu2ber of
tra>elers fro2 the Isla2ic East to Europe between 1,77 and 1*77 is 2inuscule when
co2pared with the nu2ber in the other direction!
2
Moreo>er- the Eastern tra>elers in
the est were there to learn fro2 and to gape at an ad>anced cultureJ the purposes of
the estern tra>elers in the 3rient were- as we ha>e seen- of 9uite a different order!
In addition- it has been esti2ated that around E7-777 boo6s dealing with the /ear
3rient were written between 1,77 and 1*;7J there is no re2otely co2parable figure
for 3riental boo6s about the est! As a cultural apparatus 3rientalis2 is all
aggression- acti>ity- @udg2ent- will to truth- and 6nowledge! 1he 3rient e4isted for
the est- or so it see2ed to countless 3rientalists- whose attitude to what they
wor6ed on was either paternalistic or candidly condescending0unless- of course- they
were anti9uarians- in which case the iclassicali 3rient was a credit to them and not to
the la2entable 2odern 3rient!
27=
And then- beefing up the estern scholarsf wor6- there were nu2erous agencies and
institutions with no parallels in 3riental society!
"uch an i2balance between East and est is ob>iously a function of changing
historical patterns! .uring its political and 2ilitary heyday fro2 the eighth century to
the si4teenth- Isla2 do2inated both East and est! 1hen the center of power shifted
westwards- and now in the late twentieth century it see2s to be directing itself bac6
towards the East again! My account of nineteenth0century 3rientalis2 in Chapter
1wo stopped at a particularly charged period in the latter part of the century- when
the often dilatory- abstract- and pro@ecti>e aspects of 3rientalis2 were about to ta6e
on a new sense of worldly 2ission in the ser>ice of for2al colonialis2! It is this
pro@ect and this 2o2ent that I want now to describe- especially since it will furnish us
with so2e i2portant bac6ground for the twentieth0century crises of 3rientalis2 and
the resurgence of political and cultural strength in the East!
3n se>eral occasions I ha>e alluded to the connections between 3rientalis2 as a
body of ideas- beliefs- cliches- or learning about the East- and other schools of
thought at large in the culture! /ow one of the i2portant de>elop2ents in
nineteenth0century 3rientalis2 was the distillation of essential ideas about the
3rient0its sensuality- its tendency to despotis2- its aberrant 2entality- its habits of
inaccuracy- its bac6wardness0into a separate and unchallenged coherenceJ thus for a
writer to use the word 3riental was a reference for the reader sufficient to identify a
specific body of infor2ation about the 3rient! 1his infor2ation see2ed to be 2orally
neutral and ob@ecti>ely >alidJ it see2ed to ha>e an episte2ological status e9ual to that
of historical chronology or geographical location! In its 2ost basic for2- then-
3riental 2aterial could not really be >iolated by anyonefs disco>eries- nor did it see2
e>er to be re>aluated co2pletely! Instead- the wor6 of >arious nineteenth0century
scholars and of i2aginati>e writers 2ade this essential body of 6nowledge 2ore
clear- 2ore detailed- 2ore substantial0and 2ore distinct fro2 i3ccidentalis2!i Iet
3rientalist ideas could enter into alliance with general philosophical theories Fsuch as
those about the history of 2an6ind and ci>iliAationG and diffuse world0hypotheses- as
philosophers so2eti2es call the2J and in 2any ways the professional contributors to
3riental 6nowledge were an4ious to couch their for2ulations and ideas- their
scholarly wor6- their considered conte2porary obser>ations- in language and
27;
ter2inology whose cultural >alidity deri>ed fro2 other sciences and syste2s of
thought!
1he distinction I a2 2a6ing is really between an al2ost unconscious Fand
certainly an untouchableG positi>ity- which I shall call latent 3rientalis2- and the
>arious stated >iews about 3riental society- languages- literatures- history- sociology-
and so forth- which I shall call mani#est 3rientalis2! hate>er change occurs in
6nowledge of the 3rient is found al2ost e4clusi>ely in 2anifest 3rientalis2J the
unani2ity- stability- and durability of latent 3rientalis2 are 2ore or less constant! In
the nineteenth0century writers I analyAed in Chapter 1wo- the differences in their
ideas about the 3rient can be characteriAed as e4clusi>ely 2anifest differences-
differences in for2 and personal style- rarely in basic content! E>ery one of the2 6ept
intact the separateness of the 3rient- its eccentricity- its bac6wardness- its silent
indifference- its fe2inine penetrability- its supine 2alleabilityJ this is why e>ery
writer on the 3rient- fro2 #enan to Mar4 Fideologically spea6ingG- or fro2 the 2ost
rigorous scholars F'ane and "acyG to the 2ost powerful i2aginations FFlaubert and
/er>alG- saw the 3rient as a locale re9uiring estern attention- reconstruction- e>en
rede2ption! 1he 3rient e4isted as a place isolated fro2 the 2ainstrea2 of European
progress in the sciences- arts- and co22erce! 1hus whate>er good or bad >alues were
i2puted to the 3rient appeared to be functions of so2e highly specialiAed estern
interest in the 3rient! 1his was the situation fro2 about the 1,+7s on through the
early part of the twentieth century0but let 2e gi>e so2e e4a2ples that illustrate what
I 2ean!
1heses of 3riental bac6wardness- degeneracy- and ine9uality with the est 2ost
easily associated the2sel>es early in the nineteenth century with ideas about the
biological bases of racial ine9uality! 1hus the racial classifications found in Cu>ierfs
(e Regne animal, 5obineaufs Essai sur lIin-galit- des races humaines, and #obert
%no4fs The Dark Races o# Man found a willing partner in latent 3rientalis2! 1o these
ideas was added second0order .arwinis2- which see2ed to accentuate the
iscientifici >alidity of the di>ision of races into ad>anced and bac6ward- or
EuropeanAryan and 3riental0African! 1hus the whole 9uestion of i2perialis2- as it
was debated in the late nineteenth century by pro0i2perialists and anti0i2perialists
ali6e- carried forward the binary typology of ad>anced and bac6ward For sub@ectG
races- cultures- and societies! John estla6efs 2hapters on the Principles
27E
o# /nternational (aw F1,*=G argues- for e4a2ple- that regions of the earth designated
as iunci>iliAedi Fa word carrying the freight of 3rientalist assu2ptions- a2ong
othersG ought to be anne4ed or occupied by ad>anced powers! "i2ilarly- the ideas of
such writers as Carl &eters- 'eopold de "aussure- and Charles 1e2ple draw on the
ad>ancedjbac6ward binaris2
)
so centrally ad>ocated in latenineteenth0century
3rientalis2!
Along with all other peoples >ariously designated as bac6ward- degenerate-
unci>iliAed- and retarded- the 3rientals were >iewed in a fra2ewor6 constructed out
of biological deter2inis2 and 2oral0political ad2onish2ent! 1he 3riental was
lin6ed thus to ele2ents in estern society Fdelin9uents- the insane- wo2en- the poorG
ha>ing in co22on an identity best described as la2entably alien! 3rientals were
rarely seen or loo6ed atJ they were seen through- analyAed not as citiAens- or e>en
people- but as proble2s to be sol>ed or confined or0as the colonial powers openly
co>eted their territoryta6en o>er! 1he point is that the >ery designation of so2ething
as 3riental in>ol>ed an already pronounced e>aluati>e @udg2ent- and in the case of
the peoples inhabiting the decayed 3tto2an E2pire- an i2plicit progra2 of action!
"ince the 3riental was a 2e2ber of a sub@ect race- he had to be sub@ected: it was that
si2ple! 1he locus classicus for such @udg2ent and action is to be found in 5usta>e 'e
Bonfs (es (ois psychologi3ues de lI-volution des peuples J&:@K+.
But there were other uses for latent 3rientalis2! If that group of ideas allowed
one to separate 3rientals fro2 ad>anced- ci>iliAing powers- and if the iclassicali
3rient ser>ed to @ustify both the 3rientalist and his disregard of 2odern 3rientals-
latent 3rientalis2 also encouraged a peculiarly Fnot to say in>idiouslyG 2ale
conception of the world! I ha>e already referred to this in passing during 2y
discussion of #enan! 1he 3riental 2ale was considered in isolation fro2 the total
co22unity in which he li>ed and which 2any 3rientalists- following 'ane- ha>e
>iewed with so2ething rese2bling conte2pt and fear! 3rientalis2 itself-
further2ore- was an e4clusi>ely 2ale pro>inceJ li6e so 2any professional guilds
during the 2odern period- it >iewed itself and its sub@ect 2atter with se4ist blinders!
1his is especially e>ident in the writing of tra>elers and no>elists: wo2en are usually
the creatures of a 2ale power0fantasy! 1hey e4press unli2ited sensuality- they are
2ore or less stupid- and abo>e all they are willing! Flaubertfs %uchu6 (ane2 is the
prototype of such caricatures- which were co22on
27+
enough in pornographic no>els Fe!g!- &ierre 'ouysfs $phrodite+ whose no>elty draws
on the 3rient for their interest! Moreo>er the 2ale conception of the world- in its
effect upon the practicing 3rientalist- tends to be static- froAen- fi4ed eternally! 1he
>ery possibility of de>elop2ent- transfor2ation- hu2an 2o>e2entin the deepest
sense of the word0is denied the 3rient and the 3riental! As a 6nown and ulti2ately an
i22obiliAed or unproducti>e 9uality- they co2e to be identified with a bad sort of
eternality: hence- when the 3rient is being appro>ed- such phrases as ithe wisdo2 of
the East!i
1ransferred fro2 an i2plicit social e>aluation to a grandly cultural one- this static
2ale 3rientalis2 too6 on a >ariety of for2s in the late nineteenth century- especially
when Isla2 was being discussed! 5eneral cultural historians as respected as 'eopold
>on #an6e and Jacob Burc6hardt assailed Isla2 as if they were dealing not so 2uch
with an anthropo2orphic abstraction as with a religiopolitical culture about which
deep generaliAations were possible and warranted: in his )eltgeschichte F1,,101,,,G
#an6e spo6e of Isla2 as defeated by the 5er2anic0#o2anic peoples- and in his
i(istorische Frag2entei Funpublished notes- 1,*)G Burc6hardt spo6e of Isla2 as
wretched- bare- and tri>ial!
=
"uch intellectual operations were carried out with
considerably 2ore flair and enthusias2 by 3swald "pengler- whose ideas about a
Magian personality Ftypified by the Musli2 3rientalG infuse Der =ntergang des
$bendlandes F1*1,01*22G and the i2orphologyi of cultures it ad>ocates!
hat these widely diffused notions of the 3rient depended on was the al2ost
total absence in conte2porary estern culture of the 3rient as a genuinely felt and
e4perienced force! For a nu2ber of e>ident reasons the 3rient was always in the
position both of outsider and of incorporated wea6 partner for the est! 1o the e4tent
that estern scholars were aware of conte2porary 3rientals or 3riental 2o>e2ents
of thought and culture- these were percei>ed either as silent shadows to be ani2ated
by the 3rientalist- brought into reality by hi2- or as a 6ind of cultural and intellectual
proletariat useful for the 3rientalistfs grander interpretati>e acti>ity- necessary for his
perfor2ance as superior @udge- learned 2an- powerful cultural will! I 2ean to say that
in discussions of the 3rient- the 3rient is all absence- whereas one feels the
3rientalist and what he says as presenceJ yet we 2ust not forget that the 3rientalistfs
presence is enabled by the 3rientfs effecti>e absence!
27,
1his fact of substitution and displace2ent- as we 2ust call it- clearly places on the
3rientalist hi2self a certain pressure to reduce the 3rient in his wor6- e>en after he
has de>oted a good deal of ti2e to elucidating and e4posing it! (ow else can one
e4plain 2a@or scholarly production of the type we associate with Julius ellhausen
and 1heodor /olde6e and- o>erriding it- those bare- sweeping state2ents that al2ost
totally denigrate their chosen sub@ect 2atterL 1hus /olde6e could declare in 1,,+
that the su2 total of his wor6 as an 3rientalist was to confir2 his ilow opinioni of
the Eastern peoples!
;
And li6e Carl Bec6er- /dlde6e was a philhellenist- who showed
his lo>e of 5reece curiously by displaying a positi>e disli6e of the 3rient- which after
all was what he studied as a scholar!
A >ery >aluable and intelligent study of 3rientalis20Jac9ues aardenburgfs
(I/slam dans le miroir de lI"ccident '' eCamines fi>e i2portant e4perts as 2a6ers of
an i2age of Isla2! aardenburgfs 2irror0i2age 2etaphor for latenineteenth0 and
earlytwentieth0century 3rientalis2 is apt! In the wor6 of each of his e2inent
3rientalists there is a highly tendentious0in four cases out of the fi>e- e>en
hostile0>ision of Isla2- as if each 2an saw Isla2 as a reflection of his own chosen
wea6ness! Each scholar was profoundly learned- and the style of his contribution was
uni9ue! 1he fi>e 3rientalists a2ong the2 e4e2plify what was best and strongest in
the tradition during the period roughly fro2 the 1,,7s to the interwar years! Iet
IgnaA 5oldAiherfs appreciation of Isla2fs tolerance towards other religions was
undercut by his disli6e of Moha22edfs anthropo2orphis2s and Isla2fs too0e4terior
theology and @urisprudenceJ .uncan Blac6 Macdonaldfs interest in Isla2ic piety and
orthodo4y was >itiated by his perception of what he considered Isla2fs heretical
ChristianityJ Carl Bec6erfs understanding of Isla2ic ci>iliAation 2ade hi2 see it as a
sadly unde>eloped oneJ C! "nouc6 (urgron@efs highly refined studies of Isla2ic
2ysticis2 Fwhich he considered the essential part of Isla2G led hi2 to a harsh
@udg2ent of its crippling li2itationsJ and 'ouis Massignonfs e4traordinary
identification with Musli2 theology- 2ystical passion- and poetic art 6ept hi2
curiously unforgi>ing to Isla2 for what he regarded as its unregenerate re>olt against
the idea of incarnation! 1he 2anifest differences in their 2ethods e2erge as less
i2portant than their 3rientalist consensus on Isla2: latent inferiority!
E
aardenburgfs study has the additional >irtue of showing how
27*
these fi>e scholars shared a co22on intellectual and 2ethodological tradition whose
unity was truly international! E>er since the first 3rientalist congress in 1,+)-
scholars in the field ha>e 6nown each otherfs wor6 and felt each otherfs presence >ery
directly! hat aardenburg does not stress enough is that 2ost of the
latenineteenth0century 3rientalists were bound to each other politically as well!
"nouc6 (urgron@e went directly fro2 his studies of Isla2 to being an ad>iser to the
.utch go>ern2ent on handling its Musli2 Indonesian coloniesJ Macdonald and
Massignon were widely sought after as e4perts on Isla2ic 2atters by colonial
ad2inistrators fro2 /orth Africa to &a6istanJ and- as aardenburg says Fall too
brieflyG at one point- all fi>e scholars shaped a coherent >ision of Isla2 that had a
wide influence on go>ern2ent circles throughout the estern world!
+
hat we 2ust
add to aardenburgfs obser>ation is that these scholars were co2pleting- bringing to
an ulti2ate concrete refine2ent- the tendency since the si4teenth and se>enteenth
centuries to treat the 3rient not only as a >ague literary proble2 but0according to
Masson03ursel0as iun fer2e propos dfassi2iler adP9uate2ent la >aleur des langues
pour pPnPtrer les 2oeurs et les pensPes- pour forcer 2e2e des secrets de lfhistoire!i
,
I spo6e earlier of incorporation and assi2ilation of the 3rient- as these acti>ities
were practiced by writers as different fro2 each other as .ante and df(erbelot!
Clearly there is a difference between those efforts and what- by the end of the
nineteenth century- had beco2e a truly for2idable European cultural- political- and
2aterial enterprise! 1he nineteenth0century colonial iscra2ble for Africai was by no
2eans li2ited to Africa- of course! /either was the penetration of the 3rient entirely
a sudden- dra2atic afterthought following years of scholarly study of Asia! hat we
2ust rec6on with is a long and slow process of appropriation by which Europe- or the
European awareness of the 3rient- transfor2ed itself fro2 being te4tual and
conte2plati>e into being ad2inistrati>e- econo2ic- and e>en 2ilitary! 1he
funda2ental change was a spatial and geographical one- or rather it was a change in
the 9uality of geographical and spatial apprehension so far as the 3rient was
concerned! 1he centuries0old designation of geographical space to the east of Europe
as i3rientali was partly political- partly doctrinal- and partly i2aginati>eJ it i2plied
no necessary connection between actual e4perience of the 3rient and 6nowledge of
what is
217
3riental- and certainly .ante and df(erbelot 2ade no clai2s about their 3riental
ideas e4cept that they were corroborated by a long learned Fand not e4istentialG
tradition! But when 'ane- #enan- Burton- and the 2any hundreds of
nineteenth0century European tra>elers and scholars discuss the 3rient- we can
i22ediately note a far 2ore inti2ate and e>en proprietary attitude towards the 3rient
and things 3riental! In the classical and often te2porally re2ote for2 in which it was
reconstructed by the 3rientalist- in the precisely actual for2 in which the 2odern
3rient was li>ed in- studied- or i2agined- the geographical space of the 3rient was
penetrated- wor6ed o>er- ta6en hold of! 1he cu2ulati>e effect of decades of so
so>ereign a estern handling turned the 3rient fro2 alien into colonial space! hat
was i2portant in the latter nineteenth century was not whether the est had
penetrated and possessed the 3rient- but rather how the British and French felt that
they had done it!
1he British writer on the 3rient- and e>en 2ore so the British colonial
ad2inistrator- was dealing with territory about which there could be no doubt that
English power was truly in the ascendant- e>en if the nati>es were on the face of it
attracted to France and French 2odes of thought! "o far as the actual space of the
3rient was concerned- howe>er- England was really there- France was not- e4cept as
a flighty te2ptress of the 3riental yo6els! 1here is no better indication of this
9ualitati>e difference in spatial attitudes than to loo6 at what 'ord Cro2er had to say
on the sub@ect- one that was especially dear to his heart:
1he reasons why French ci>ilisation presents a special degree of attraction to
Asiatics and 'e>antines are plain! It is- as a 2atter of fact- 2ore attracti>e than
the ci>ilisations of England and 5er2any- and- 2oreo>er-it is 2ore easy of
i2itation! Co2pare the unde2onstrati>e- shy English2an- with his social
e4clusi>eness and insular habits- with the >i>acious and cos2opolitan
French2an- who does not 6now what the word shyness 2eans- and who in ten
2inutes is apparently on ter2s of inti2ate friendship with any casual
ac9uaintance he 2ay chance to 2a6e! 1he se2i0educated 3riental does not
recognise that the for2er has- at all e>ents- the 2erit of sincerity- whilst the latter
is often 2erely acting a part! (e loo6s coldly on the English2an- and rushes into
the ar2s of the French2an!
1he se4ual innuendoes de>elop 2ore or less naturally thereafter! 1he French2an is
all s2iles- wit- grace- and fashionJ the English2an
211
is plodding- industrious- Baconian- precise! Cro2erfs case is of course based on
British solidity as opposed to a French seducti>eness without any real presence in
Egyptian reality!
Can it be any 2atter for surprise YCro2er continuesZ that the Egyptian- with his
light intellectual ballast- fails to see that so2e fallacy often lies at the botto2 of
the French2anfs reasoning- or that he prefers the rather superficial brilliancy of
the French2an to the plodding- unattracti>e industry of the English2an or the
5er2L 'oo6- again- at the theoretical perfection of French ad2inistrati>e
syste2s- at their elaborate detail- and at the pro>ision which is apparently 2ade to
2eet e>ery possible contingency which 2ay arise! Co2pare these features with
the English2anfs practical syste2s- which lay down rules as to a few 2ain points-
and lea>e a 2ass of detail to indi>idual discretion! 1he halfeducated Egyptian
naturally prefers the French2anfs syste2- for it is to all outward appearance 2ore
perfect and 2ore easy of application! (e fails- 2oreo>er- to see that the
English2an desires to elaborate a syste2 which will suit the facts with which he
has to deal- whereas the 2ain ob@ection to applying French ad2inistrati>e
procedures to Egypt is that the facts ha>e but too often to confor2 to the
ready02ade syste2!
"ince there is a real British presence in Egypt- and since that presence 0according to
Cro2er0is there not so 2uch to train the Egyptianfs 2ind as to ifor2 his character-i it
follows therefore that the ephe2eral attractions of the French are those of a pretty
da2sel with iso2ewhat artificial char2s-i whereas those of the British belong to ia
sober- elderly 2atron of perhaps so2ewhat greater 2oral worth- but of less pleasing
outward appearance!i
*
?nderlying Cro2erfs contrast between the solid British nanny and the French
co9uette is the sheer pri>ilege of British e2place2ent in the 3rient! i1he facts with
which he Ythe English2anZ has to deali are altogether 2ore co2ple4 and interesting-
by >irtue of their psion by England- than anything the 2ercurial French could point
to! 1wo years after the publication of his Modern Egypt F1*7,G- Cro2er e4patiated
philosophically in Ancient anal Modern I2perialis2! Co2pared 0witm #o2an
i2perialis2- with its fran6ly assi2ilationist- e4ploitati>e- and repressi>e policies-
British i2perialis2 see2ed to Cro2er to be preferable- if so2ewhat 2ore
wishywashy! 3n certain points- howe>er- the British were clear enough- e>en if iafter
a rather di2- slipshod- but characteristically Anglo
212
"a4on fashion-i their E2pire see2ed undecided between ione of two bases0an
e4tensi>e 2ilitary occupation or the principle of nationality Yfor sub@ect racesZ!i But
this indecision was acade2ic finally- for in practice Cro2er and Britain itself had
opted against ithe principle of nationality!i And then thereJ were other things to be
noted! 3ne point was that the E2pire was not going to be gi>en up! Another was that
inter2arriage between nati>es and English 2en and wo2en was undesirable! 1hird
and 2ost i2portant- I thin60Cro2er concei>ed of British i2perial presence in the
Eastern colonies as ha>ing had a lasting- not to say cataclys2ic- effect on the 2inds
and societies of the East! (is 2etaphor for e4pressing this effect is al2ost
theological- so powerful in Cro2erfs 2ind was the idea of estern penetration of
3riental e4panses! i1he country-i he says- io>er which the breath of the est-
hea>ily charged with scientific thought- has once passed- and has- in passing- left an
enduring 2ar6- can ne>er be the sa2e as it was before!i
17
In such respects as these- nonetheless- Cro2erfs was far fro2 an original
intelligence!hat he saw and how he e4pressed it were co22on currency a2ong his
colleagues both in the i2perial Establish2ent and in the intellectual co22unity! 1his
consensus is notably true in the case of Cro2erfs >iceregal colleagues- CurAon-
"wettenha2- and 'ugard! 'ord CurAon in particular always spo6e the i2perial lingua
franca- and 2ore obtrusi>ely e>en than Cro2er he delineated the relationship
between Britain and the 3rient in ter2s of possession- in ter2s of a large
geographical space wholly owned by an efficient colonial 2aster! For hi2- he said on
one occasion- the E2pire was not an iob@ect of a2bitioni but ifirst and fore2ost- a
great historical and political and sociological fact!i In 1*7* he re2inded delegates to
the I2perial &ress Conference 2eeting at 34ford that iwe train here and we send out
to you your go>ernors and ad2inistrators and @udges- your teachers and preachers and
lawyers!i And this al2ost pedagogical >iew of e2pire had- for CurAon- a specific
setting in Asia- which as he once put it- 2ade ione pause and thin6!i
I so2eti2es li6e to picture to 2yself this great I2perial fabric as a huge structure
li6e so2e 1ennysonian i&alace of Art-i of which the foundations are in this
country- where they ha>e been laid and 2ust be 2aintained by British hands- but
of which the Colonies are the pillars- and high abo>e all floats the >astness of an
Asiatic do2e!
11
21)
ith such a 1ennysonian &alace of Art in 2ind- CurAon and Cro2er were
enthusiastic 2e2bers together of a depart2ental co22ittee for2ed in 1*7* to press
for the creation of a school of 3riental studies! Aside fro2 re2ar6ing wistfully that
had he 6nown the >ernacular he would ha>e been helped during his ifa2ine toursi in
India- CurAon argued for 3riental studies as part of the British responsibility to the
3rient!3n "epte2ber 2+- 1*7*- he told the (ouse of 'ords that
our fa2iliarity- not 2erely with the languages of the people of the East but with
their custo2s- their feelings- their traditions- their history and religion- our
capacity to understand what 2ay be called the genius of the East- is the sole basis
upon which we are li6ely to be able to 2aintain in the future the position we ha>e
won- and no step that can be ta6en to strengthen that position can be considered
undeser>ing of the attention of (is Ma@estyfs 5o>ern2ent or of a debate in the
(ouse of 'ords!
At a Mansion (ouse conference on the sub@ect fi>e years later- CurAon finally dotted
the ifs! 3riental studies were no intellectual lu4uryJ they were- he said-
a great I2perial obligation!In 2y >iew the creation of a school Yof 3riental
studies0later to beco2e the 'ondon ?ni>ersity "chool of 3riental and African
"tudiesZ li6e this in 'ondon is part of the necessary furniture of E2pire! 1hose of
us who- in one way or another- ha>e spent a nu2ber of years in the East- who
regard that as the happiest portion of our li>es- and who thin6 that the wor6 that
we did there- be it great or s2all- was the highest responsibility that can be placed
upon the shoulders of English2en- feel that there is a gap in our national
e9uip2ent which ought e2phatically to be filled- and that those in the City of
'ondon who- by financial support or by any other for2 of acti>e and practical
assistance- ta6e their part in filling that gap- will be rendering a patriotic duty to
the E2pire and pro2oting the cause and goodwill a2ong 2an6ind!
12
1o a >ery great e4tent CurAonfs ideas about 3riental studies deri>e logically fro2
a good century of British utilitarian ad2inistration of and philosophy about the
Eastern colons! 1he influence of Bentha2 and the Mills on British rule in the 3rient
Fand India particularlyG was considerable- and was effecti>e is doing away with too
2uch regulation and inno>ationJ instead- as Eric sto6es has con>incingly shown-
utilitarianis2 co2bined with the legacies
21=
of liberalis2 and e>angelicalis2 as philosophies of British rule in the East stressed
the rational i2portance of a strong e4ecuti>e ar2ed with >arious legal and penal
codes- a syste2 of doctrines on such 2atters as frontiers and land rents- and
e>erywhere an irreducible super>isory i2perial authority!
1)
1he cornerstone of the
whole syste2 was a constantly refined 6nowledge of the 3rient- so that as traditional
societies hastened forward and beca2e 2odern co22ercial societies- there would be
no loss of paternal British control- and no loss of re>enue either! (owe>er- when
CurAon referred so2ewhat inelegantly to 3riental studies as ithe necessary furniture
of E2pire-i he was putting into a static i2age the transactions by which English2en
and nati>es conducted their business and 6ept their places! Fro2 the days of "ir
illia2 Jones the 3rient had been both what Britain ruled and what Britain 6new
about it: the coincidence between geography- 6nowledge- and power- with Britain
always in the 2asterfs place- was co2plete! 1o ha>e said- as CurAon once did- that
ithe East is a ?ni>ersity in which the scholar ne>er ta6es his degreei was another
way of saying that the East re9uired onefs presence there 2ore or less fore>er!
1=
But then there were the other European powers- France and #ussia a2ong the2-
that 2ade the British presence always a Fperhaps 2arginallyG threatened one! CurAon
was certainly aware that all the 2a@or estern powers felt towards the world as
Britain did! 1he transfor2ation of geography fro2 idull and pedanticiCurAonfs
phrase for what had now dropped out of geography as an acade2ic sub@ect0into ithe
2ost cos2opolitan of all sciencesi argued e4actly that new estern and widespread
predilection! /ot for nothing did CurAon in 1*12 tell the 5eographical "ociety- of
which he was president- that
an absolute re>olution has occurred- not 2erely in the 2anner and 2ethods of
teaching geography- but in the esti2ation in which it is held by public opinion!
/owadays we regard geographical 6nowledge as an essential part of 6nowledge
in general! By the aid of geography- and in no other way- do was understand the
action of great natural forces- the distribution of population- the growth of
co22erce- the e4pansion of frontiers- tape de>elop2ent of "tates- the splendid
achie>e2ents of less air in its >arious 2anifestations!
e recogniAe geography as the hand2aid of history ! ! ! ! 5eography- too- is a
sister science to econo2ies and politicsJ and
21;
to any of us who ha>e atte2pted to study geography it is 6nown that the 2o2ent
you di>erge fro2 the geographical field you find yourself crossing the frontiers
of geology- Aoology- ethnology- che2istry- physics- and al2ost all the 6indred
sciences! 1herefore we are @ustified in saying that geography is one of the first
and fore2ost of the sciences: that it is part of the e9uip2ent that is necessary for
a proper conception of citiAenship- and is an indispensable ad@unct to the
production of a public 2an!
1;
5eography was essentially the 2aterial underpinning for 6nowledge about the 3rient!
All the latent and unchanging characteristics of the 3rient stood upon- were rooted in-
its geography! 1hus on the one hand the geographical 3rient nourished its
inhabitants- guaranteed their characteristics- and defined their specificityJ on the other
hand- the geographical 3rient solicited the estfs attention- e>en as0by one of those
parado4es re>ealed so fre9uently by organiAed 6nowledge0East was East and est
was est! 1he cos2opolitanis2 of geography was- in CurAonfs 2ind- its uni>ersal
i2portance to the whole of the est- whose relationship to the rest of the world was
one of fran6 co>etousness! Iet geographical appetite could also ta6e on the 2oral
neutrality of an episte2ological i2pulse to find out- to settle upon- to unco>er0as
when in .eart o# Darkness Marlow confesses to ha>ing a passion for 2aps!
I would loo6 for hours at "outh A2erica- or Africa- or Australia- and lose 2yself
in all the glories of e4ploration! At that ti2e there were 2any blan6 spaces on the
earth- and when I saw one that loo6ed particularly in>iting on a 2ap Fbut they all
loo6 thatG I would put 2y finger on it and say- hen I grow up I will go there!
1E
"e>enty years or so before Marlow said this- it did not trouble 'a2artine that what on
a 2ap was a blan6 space was inhabited by nati>esJ nor- theoretically- had there been
any reser>ation in the 2ind of E2er de Battel- the "wiss0&russian authority on
international law- when in 1+;, he in>ited European states to ta6e possession of
territory inhabited only by 2ere wandering tribes!
1+
1he i2portant thing was to
dignify si2ple con9uest with an idea- to turn the appetite for 2ore geographical space
into a theory about the special relationship between geography on the one hand and
ci>iliAed or unci>iliAed peoples on the other! But to these rationaliAations there was
also a distincti>ely French contribution!
21E
By the end of the nineteenth century- political and intellectual circu2stances
coincided sufficiently in France to 2a6e geography- and geographical speculation Fin
both senses of that wordG- an attracti>e national pasti2e! 1he general cli2ate of
opinion in Europe was propitiousJ certainly the successes of British i2perialis2
spo6e loudly enough for the2sel>es! (owe>er- Britain always see2ed to France and
to French thin6ers on the sub@ect to bloc6 e>en a relati>ely successful French i2perial
role in the 3rient! Before the Franco&russian ar there was a good deal of wishful
political thin6ing about the 3rient- and it was not confined to poets and no>elists!
(ere- for instance- is "aint0Marc 5irardin writing in the Revue des DeuC Mondes on
March 1;-1,E2:
'a France a beaucoup a faire en 3rient- parce 9ue lf3rient attend beaucoup
dfelle! 11 lui de2ande 2e2e plus 9ufelle ne peut faireJ il lui re2ettrait >olontiers
le soin entier de son a>enir- ce 9ui serait pour la France et pour If3rient un grand
danger: pour la France- parce 9ue- disposee a prendre en 2ains la cause des
populations souffrantes- elle se charge le plus sou>ent de plus dfobligations
9ufelle nfen pent re2plirJ pour If3rient parce 9ue tout peuple 9ui attend sa
destinee de lfetranger nfa @a2ais 9ufune condition precaire et 9ufil nfy a de salut
pour les nations 9ue celui 9ufelles se font elles2e2es!
1,
3f such >iews as this .israeli would doubtless ha>e said- as he often did- that France
had only isenti2ental interestsi in "yria Fwhich is the i3rienti of which 5irardin was
writingG! 1he fiction of ipopulations souffrantesi had of course been used by
/apoleon when he appealed to the Egyptians on their behalf against the 1ur6s and for
Isla2! .uring the thirties- forties- fifties- and si4ties the suffering populations of the
3rient were li2ited to the Christian 2inorities in "yria! And there was no record of
iIf3rienti appealing to France for its sal>ation! It would ha>e been altogether 2ore
truthful to say that Britain stood in Francefs way in the 3rient- for e>en if France
genuinely felt a sense of obligation to the 3rient Fand there were so2e French2en
who didG- there was >ery little France could do to get between Britain and the huge
land 2ast it co22anded fro2 India to the Mediterranean!
A2ong the 2ost re2ar6able conse9uences of the ar of 1,+7 in France were a
tre2endous efflorescence of geographical societies and a powerfully renewed
de2and for territorial ac9uisition! At the end of 1,+1 the "ociete de geographie de
&aris declared itself
21+
no longer confined to iscientific speculation!i It urged the citiAenry not to iforget that
our for2er preponderance was contested fro2 the day we ceased to co2pete ! ! ! in
the con9uests of ci>iliAation o>er barbaris2!i 5uillau2e .epping- a leader of what
has co2e to be called the geographical 2o>e2ent- asserted in 1,,1 that during the
1,+7 war iit was the school2aster who triu2phed-i 2eaning that the real triu2phs
were those of &russian scientific geography o>er French strategic sloppiness! 1he
go>ern2ents Journal ofciel sponsored issue after issue centered on the >irtues Fand
profitsG of geographical e4ploration and colonial ad>entureJ a citiAen could learn in
one issue fro2 de 'esseps of ithe opportunities in Africai and fro2 5arnier of ithe
e4ploration of the Blue #i>er!i "cientific geography soon ga>e way to ico22ercial
geography-i as the connection between national pride in scientific and ci>iliAational
achie>e2ent and the fairly !rudi2entary profit 2oti>e was urged- to be channeled into
support for colonial ac9uisition! In the words of one enthusiast- i1he geographical
societies are for2ed to brea6 the fatal char2 that holds us enchained to our shores!i
In aid of this liberating 9uest all sorts of sche2es were spun out- including the
enlisting of Jules Berne00whose iunbelie>able success-i as it was called- ostensibly
displayed the scientific 2ind at a >ery high pea6 of ratiocination0to head ia
round0the0world ca2paign of scientific e4ploration-i and a plan for creating a >ast
new sea @ust south of the /orth African coast- as well as a pro@ect for ibindingi
Algeria to "enegal by railroad0ia ribbon of steel-i as the pro@ectors called it!
1*
Much of the e4pansionist fer>or in France during the last third of the nineteenth
century was generated out of an e4plicit wish to co2pensate for the &russian >ictory
in 1,+701,+1 and- no less i2portant- the desire to 2atch British i2perial
achie>e2ents! "o powerful was the latter desire- and out of so long a tradition of
Anglo0French ri>alry in the 3rient did it deri>e- that France see2ed literally haunted
by Britain- an4ious in all things connected with the 3rient to catch up with and
e2ulate the British! hen in the late 1,+7s- the "ociete acade2i9ue indo0chinoise
refor2ulated its goals- it found it i2portant to ibring Indochina into the do2ain of
3rientalis2!i hyLIn order to turn Cochin China into a iFrench India!i 1he absence
of substantial colonial holdings was bla2ed by 2ilitary 2en for that co2bination of
2ilitary and co22ercial wea6ness in the war with &russia- to say nothing of
long0standing and pronounced colonial inferiority co2pared with Britain!
21,
1he ipower of e4pansion of the estern races-i argued a leading geographer- 'a
#onciere 'e /oury- iits superior causes- its ele2ents- its influences on hu2an
destinies- will be a beautiful study for future historians!i Iet only if the white races
indulged their taste for >oyaging0a 2ar6 of their intellectual supre2acy0could
colonial e4pansion occur!
27
Fro2 such theses as this ca2e the co22only held >iew of the 3rient as a
geographical space to be culti>ated- har>ested- and guarded! 1he i2ages of
agricultural care for and those of fran6 se4ual attention to the 3rient proliferated
accordingly! (ere is a typical effusion by 5abriel Char2es- writing in 1,,7:
3n that day when we shall be no longer in the 3rient- and when other great
European powers will be there- all will be at an end for our co22erce in the
Mediterranean- for our future in Asia- for the traffic of our southern ports! "ne o#
the most #ruit#ul sources o# our national wealth will be dried up. FE2phasis
addedG
Another thin6er- 'eroy0Beaulieu- elaborated this philosophy still further:
A society coloniAes- when itself ha>ing reached a high degree of 2aturity and of
strength- it procreates- it protects- it places in good conditions of de>elop2ent-
and it brings to >irility a new society to which it has gi>en birth! ColoniAation is
one of the 2ost co2ple4 and delicate pheno2ena of social physiology!
1his e9uation of self0reproduction with coloniAation led 'eroyBeaulieu to the
so2ewhat sinister idea that whate>er is li>ely in a 2odern society is i2agnified by
this pouring out of its e4uberant acti>ity on the outside!i 1herefore- he said-
ColoniAation is the e4pansi>e force of a peopleJ it is its power of reproductionJ it
is its enlargement and its multiplication through space5 it is the sub@ection of the
uni>erse or a >ast part of it to that peoplefs language- custo2s- ideas- and laws!
21
1he point here is that the space of wea6er or underde>eloped regions li6e the 3rient
was >iewed as so2ething in>iting French interest- penetration- inse2ination0in short-
coloniAation! 5eographical conceptions- literally and figurati>ely- did away with the
discrete entities held in by borders and frontiers! /o less than entrepreneurial
>isionaries li6e de 'esseps- whose plan was to liberate the 3rient and the 3ccident
fro2 their geographical bonds-
21*
French scholars- ad2inistrators- geographers- and co22ercial agents poured out their
e4uberant acti>ity onto the fairly supine- fe2inine 3rient! 1here were the
geographical societies- whose nu2ber and 2e2bership outdid those of all Europe by
a factor of twoJ there were such powerful organiAations as the Co2ite de lfAsie
francaise and the Co2ite df3rientJ there were the learned societies- chief a2ong the2
the "ociete asiati9ue- with its organiAation and 2e2bership fir2ly e2bedded in the
uni>ersities- the institutes- and the go>ern2ent! Each in its own way 2ade French
interests in the 3rient 2ore real- 2ore substantial! Al2ost an entire century of what
now see2ed passi>e study of the 3rient had had to end- as France faced up to its
transnational responsibilities during the last two decades of the nineteenth century!
In the only part of the 3rient where British and French interests literally
o>erlapped- the territory of the now hopelessly ill 3tto2an E2pire- the two
antagonists 2anaged their conflict with an al2ost perfect and characteristic
consistency! Britain was in Egypt and Mesopota2iaJ through a series of
9uasi0fictional treaties with local Fand powerlessG chiefs it controlled the #ed "ea- the
&ersian 5ulf- and the "ueA Canal- as well as 2ost of the inter>ening land 2ass
between the Mediterranean and India! France- on the other hand- see2ed fated to
ho>er o>er the 3rient- descending once in a while to carry out sche2es that repeated
de 'essepsfs success with the canalJ for the 2ost part these sche2es were railroad
pro@ects- such as the one planned across 2ore or less British territory- the
"yrian0Mesopota2ian line! In addition France saw itself as the protector of Christian
2inorities000Maronites- Chaldeans- /estorians! Iet together- Britain and France were
agreed in principle on the necessity- when the ti2e ca2e- for the partition of Asiatic
1ur6ey! Both before and during orld ar I secret diplo2acy was bent on car>ing
up the /ear 3rient first into spheres of influence- then into 2andated For occupiedG
territories! In France- 2uch of the e4pansionist senti2ent for2ed during the heyday
of the geographical 2o>e2ent focused itself on plans to partition Asiatic 1ur6ey- so
2uch so that in &aris in 1*1= ia spectacular press ca2paign was launchedi to this
end!
22
In England nu2erous co22ittees were e2powered to study and reco22end
policy on the best ways of di>iding up the 3rient! 3ut of such co22issions as the
Bunsen Co22ittee would co2e the @oint Anglo0French tea2s of which the 2ost
fa2ous was the one headed by Mar6 "y6es and 5eorges &icot! E9uitable di>ision of
geographical space was the
227
rule of these plans- which were deliberate atte2pts also at cal2ing AngloFrench
ri>alry! For- as 0"y6es put it in a 2e2orandu2-
it was clear ! ! ! that an Arab rising was sooner or later to ta6e place- and that the
French and oursel>es ought to be on better ter2s if the rising was not to be a
curse instead of a blessing! ! !
2)
1he ani2osities re2ained! And to the2 was added the irritant pro>ided by the
ilsonian progra2 for national self0deter2ination- which- as "y6es hi2self was to
note- see2ed to in>alidate the whole s6eleton of colonial and partitionary sche2es
arri>ed at @ointly between the &owers! It would be out of place here to discuss the
entire labyrinthine and deeply contro>ersial history of the /ear 3rient in the early
twentieth century- as its fate was being decided between the &owers- the nati>e
dynasties- the >arious nationalist parties and 2o>e2ents- the Rionists! hat 2atters
2ore i22ediately is the peculiar episte2ological fra2ewor6 through which the
3rient was seen- and out of which the &owers acted! For despite their differences- the
British and the French saw the 3rient as a geographical0and cultural- political-
de2ographical- sociological- and historical0entity o>er whose destiny they belie>ed
the2sel>es to ha>e traditional entitle2ent! 1he 3rient to the2 was no sudden
disco>ery- no 2ere historical accident- but an area to the east of Europe whose
principal worth was unifor2ly defined in ter2s of Europe- 2ore particularly in ter2s
specifically clai2ing for EuropeEuropean science- scholarship- understanding- and
ad2inistration0the credit for ha>ing 2ade the 3rient what it was now! And this had
been the achie>e2ent0inad>ertent or not is beside the point0of 2odern 3rientalis2!
1here were two principal 2ethods by which 3rientalis2 deli>ered the 3rient to
the est in the early twentieth century! 3ne was by 2eans of the disse2inati>e
capacities of 2odern learning- its diffusi>e apparatus in the learned professions- the
uni>ersities- the professional societies- the e4plorational and geographical
organiAations-the publishing industry! All these- as we ha>e seen- built upon the
prestigious authority of the pioneering scholars- tra>elers- and poets- whose
cu2ulati>e >ision had shaped a 9uintessential 3rientJ the doctrinal0or do4ological 0
2anifestation of such an 3rient is what I ha>e been calling here latent 3rientalis2!
"o far as anyone wishing to 2a6e a state2ent of any conse9uence about the 3rient
was concerned- latent 3rientalis2 supplied hi2 with an enunciati>e capacity that
could be used- or rather 2obiliAed- and turned into
221
sensible discourse for the concrete occasion at hand! 1hus when Balfour spo6e about
the 3riental to the (ouse of Co22ons in 1*17- he 2ust surely ha>e had in 2ind
those enunciati>e capacities in the current and acceptably rational language of his
ti2e- by which so2ething called an i3rientali could be na2ed and tal6ed about
without danger of too 2uch obscurity! But li6e all enunciati>e capacities and the
discourses they enable- latent 3rientalis2 was profoundly conser>ati>e0dedicated-
that is- to its self0preser>ation! 1rans2itted fro2 one generation to another- it was a
part of the culture- as 2uch a language about a part of reality as geo2etry or physics!
3rientalis2 sta6ed its e4istence- not upon its openness- its recepti>ity to the 3rient-
but rather on its internal- repetitious consistency about its constituti>e will0topower
o>er the 3rient! In such a way 3rientalis2 was able to sur>i>e re>olutions- world
wars- and the literal dis2e2ber2ent of e2pires!
1he second 2ethod by which 3rientalis2 deli>ered the 3rient to the est was
the result of an i2portant con>ergence! For decades the 3rientalists had spo6en about
the 3rient- they had translated te4ts- they had e4plained ci>iliAations- religions-
dynasties- cultures- 2entalities0as acade2ic ob@ects- screened off fro2 Europe by
>irtue of their ini2itable foreignness! 1he 3rientalist was an e4pert- li6e #enan or
'ane- whose @ob in society was to interpret the 3rient for his co2patriots! 1he
relation between 3rientalist and 3rient was essentially her2eneutical: standing
before a distant- barely intelligible ci>iliAation or cultural 2onu2ent- the 3rientalist
scholar reduced the obscurity by translating- sy2pathetically portraying- inwardly
grasping the hard0to0reach ob@ect! Iet the 3rientalist re2ained outside the 3rient-
which- howe>er 2uch it was 2ade to appear intelligible- re2ained beyond the
3ccident! 1his cultural- te2poral- and geographical distance was e4pressed in
2etaphors of depth- secrecy- and se4ual pro2ise: phrases li6e ithe >eils of an Eastern
bridei or ithe inscrutable 3rienti passed into the co22on language!
Iet the distance between 3rient and 3ccident was- al2ost parado4ically- in the
process of being reduced throughout the nineteenth century! As the co22ercial-
political- and other e4istential encounters between East and est increased Fin ways
we ha>e been discussing all alongG- a tension de>eloped between the dog2as of latent
3rientalis2- with its support in studies of the iclassicali 3rient- and the descriptions
of a present- 2odern- 2anifest 3rient
222
articulated by tra>elers- pilgri2s- states2en- and the li6e! At so2e 2o2ent
i2possible to deter2ine precisely- the tension caused a con>ergence of the two types
of 3rientalis2! &robably0and this is only a speculation0the con>ergence occurred
when 3rientalists- beginning with "acy- undertoo6 to ad>ise go>ern2ents on what the
2odern 3rient was all about! (ere the role of the specially trained and e9uipped
e4pert too6 on an added di2ension: the 3rientalist could be regarded as the special
agent of estern power as it atte2pted policy >is0a0>is the 3rient! E>ery learned
Fand not so learnedG European tra>eler in the 3rient felt hi2self to be a representati>e
esterner who had gotten beneath the fil2s of obscurity! 1his is ob>iously true of
Burton- 'ane- .oughty- Flaubert- and the other 2a@or figures I ha>e been discussing!
1he disco>eries of esterners about the 2anifest and 2odern 3rient ac9uired a
pressing urgency as estern territorial ac9uisition in the 3rient increased! 1hus what
the scholarly 3rientalist defined as the iessentiali 3rient was so2eti2es
contradicted- but in 2any cases was confir2ed- when the 3rient beca2e an actual
ad2inistrati>e obligation! Certainly Cro2erfs theories about the 3riental0theories
ac9uired fro2 the traditional 3rientalist archi>e 0were >indicated plentifully as he
ruled 2illions of 3rientals in actual fact! 1his was no less true of the French
e4perience in "yria- /orth Africa- and elsewhere in the French colonies- such as they
were! But at no ti2e did the con>ergence between latent 3rientalist doctrine and
2anifest 3rientalist e4perience occur 2ore dra2atically than when- as a result of
orld ar I- Asiatic 1ur6ey was being sur>eyed by Britain and France for its
dis2e2ber2ent! 1here- laid out on an operating table for surgery- was the "ic6 Man
of Europe- re>ealed in all his wea6ness- characteristics- and topographical outline!
1he 3rientalist- with his special 6nowledge- played an inesti2ably i2portant part
in this surgery! Already there had been inti2ations of his crucial role as a 6ind of
secret agent inside the 3rient when the British scholar Edward (enry &al2er was
sent to the "inai in 1,,2 to gauge anti0British senti2ent and its possible enlist2ent on
behalf of the Arabi re>olt! &al2er was 6illed in the process- but he was only the 2ost
unsuccessful of the 2any who perfor2ed si2ilar ser>ices for the E2pire- now a
serious and e4acting business entrusted in part to the regional ie4pert!i /ot for
nothing was another 3rientalist- .! 5! (ogarth- author of the
22)
fa2ous account of the e4ploration of Arabia aptly titled The Penetration o# $rabia
J&@9K+,
2=
2ade the head of the Arab Bureau in Cairo during orld ar I! And neither
was it by accident that 2en and wo2en li6e 5ertrude Bell- 1! E! 'awrence- and "t!
John &hilby- 3riental e4perts all- posted to the 3rient as agents of e2pire- friends of
the 3rient- for2ulators of policy alternati>es because of their inti2ate and e4pert
6nowledge of the 3rient and of 3rientals! 1hey for2ed a ibandi0as 'awrence called
it oncebound together by contradictory notions and personal si2ilarities: great
indi>iduality- sy2pathy and intuiti>e identification with the 3rient- a @ealously
preser>ed sense of personal 2ission in the 3rient- culti>ated eccentricity- a final
disappro>al of the 3rient! For the2 all the 3rient was their direct- peculiar e4perience
of it! In the2 3rientalis2 and an effecti>e pra4is for handling the 3rient recei>ed
their final European for2- before the E2pire disappeared and passed its legacy to
other candidates for the role of do2inant power!
"uch indi>idualists as these were not acade2ics! e shall soon see that they were
the beneficiaries of the acade2ic study of the 3rient- without in any sense belonging
to the official and professional co2pany of 3rientalist scholars! 1heir role- howe>er-
was not to scant acade2ic 3rientalis2- nor to sub>ert it- but rather to 2a6e it
effecti>e! In their genealogy were people li6e 'ane and Burton- as 2uch for their
encyclopedic autodidacticis2 as for the accurate- the 9uasi0scholarly 6nowledge of
the 3rient they had ob>iously deployed when dealing with or writing about 3rientals!
For the curricular study of the 3rient they substituted a sort of elaboration of latent
3rientalis2- which was easily a>ailable to the2 in the i2perial culture of their epoch!
1heir scholarly fra2e of reference- such as it was- was fashioned by people li6e
illia2 Muir- Anthony Be>an- .! "! Margoliouth- Charles 'yall- E! 5! Browne- #!
A! /icholson- 5uy 'e "trange- E! .! #oss- and 1ho2as Arnold- who also followed
directly in the line of descent fro2 'ane! 1heir i2aginati>e perspecti>es were
pro>ided principally by their illustrious conte2porary #udyard %ipling- who had
sung so 2e2orably of holding ido2inion o>er pal2 and pine!i
1he difference between Britain and France in such 2atters was perfectly
consistent with the history of each nation in the 3rient: the British were thereJ the
French la2ented the loss of India and the inter>ening territories! By the end of the
century- "yria had
22=
beco2e the 2ain focus of French acti>ity- but e>en there it was a 2atter of co22on
consensus that the French could not 2atch the British either in 9uality of personnel or
in degree of political influence! 1he Anglo0French co2petition o>er the 3tto2an
spoils was felt e>en on the field of battle in the (e@aA- in "yria- in Mesopota2ia0but
in all these places- as astute 2en li6e Ed2ond Bre2ond noted- the French 3rientalists
and local e4perts were outclassed in brilliance and tactical 2aneu>ering by their
British counterparts!
2;
E4cept for an occasional genius li6e 'ouis Massignon- there
were no French 'awrences or "y6eses or Bells! But there were deter2ined
i2perialists li6e Etienne Flandin and Fran6lin0Bouillon! 'ecturing to the &aris
Alliance francaise in 1*1)- the Co2te de Cressaty- a >ociferous i2perialist-
proclai2ed "yria as Francefs own 3rient- the site of French political- 2oral- and
econo2ic interests0interests- he added- that had to be defended during this iage des
en>ahissants i2perialistesiJ and yet Cressaty noted that e>en with French co22ercial
and industrial fir2s in the 3rient- with by far the largest nu2ber of nati>e students
enrolled in French schools- France was in>ariably being pushed around in the 3rient-
threatened not only by Britain but by Austria- 5er2any- and #ussia! If France was to
continue to pre>ent ile retour de lfIsla2-i it had better ta6e hold of the 3rient: this
was an argu2ent proposed by Cressaty and seconded by "enator &aul .ou2er!
2E
1hese >iews were repeated on nu2erous occasions- and indeed France did well by
itself in /orth Africa and in "yria after orld ar I- but the special- concrete
2anage2ent of e2erging 3riental populations and theoretically independent
territories with which the British always credited the2sel>es was so2ething the
French felt had eluded the2! ?lti2ately- perhaps- the difference one always feels
between 2odern British and 2odern French 3rientalis2 is a stylistic oneJ the i2port
of the generaliAations about 3rient and 3rientals- the sense of distinction preser>ed
between 3rient and 3ccident- the desirability of 3ccidental do2inance o>er the
3rient0all these are the sa2e in both traditions! For of the 2any ele2ents 2a6ing up
what we custo2arily call ie4pertise-i style- which is the result of specific worldly
circu2stances being 2olded by tradition- institutions- will- and intelligence into
for2al articulation- is one of the 2ost 2anifest! It is to this deter2inant- to this
perceptible and 2oderniAed refine2ent in early0twentieth0century 3rientalis2 in
Britain and France-that we 2ust now turn!
22;
II
St&le, E0pertise, *ision'
Orientalism's Worldliness
As he appears in se>eral poe2s- in no>els li6e %i2- and in too 2any catchphrases
to be an ironic fiction- %iplingfs hite Man- as an idea- a persona- a style of being-
see2s to ha>e ser>ed 2any Britishers while they were abroad! 1he actual color of
their s6in set the2 off dra2atically and reassuringly fro2 the sea of nati>es- but for
the Britisher who circulated a2ongst Indians- Africans- or Arabs there was also the
certain 6nowledge that he belonged to- and could draw upon the e2pirical and
spiritual reser>es of- a long tradition of e4ecuti>e responsibility towards the colored
races! It was of this tradition- its glories and difficulties-that %ipling wrote when he
celebrated the iroadi ta6en by hite Men in the colonies:
/ow- this is the road that the hite Men tread
hen they go to clean a land
Iron underfoot and the >ine o>erhead
And the deep on either hand!
e ha>e trod that road0and a wet and windy road0
3ur chosen star for guide!
3h- well for the world when the
hite Men tread
1heir highway side by side^
2+
iCleaning a landi is best done by hite Men in delicate concert with each other-
an allusion to the present dangers of European ri>alry in the coloniesJ for failing in
the atte2pt to coordinate policy- %iplingfs hite Men are 9uite prepared to go to war:
iFreedo2 for oursel>es and freedo2 for our sonsjAnd- failing freedo2- ar!i Behind
the hite Manfs 2as6 of a2iable leadership there is always the e4press willingness
to use force- to 6ill and be 6illed! hat dignifies his 2ission is so2e sense of
intellectual dedicationJ he is a hite Man- but not for 2ere profit- since his ichosen
stari presu2ably sits far abo>e earthly gain! Certainly 2any hite Men often
wondered what it was they fought for on that iwet and windy road-i and certainly a
great nu2ber of the2 2ust ha>e been puAAled as to how the color of their s6ins ga>e
the2 superior ontological status plus great power o>er 2uch of the inhabited world!
22E
Iet in the end- being a hite Man- for %ipling and for those whose perceptions and
rhetoric he influenced- was a selfconfir2ing business! 3ne beca2e a hite Man
because one was a hite ManJ 2ore i2portant- idrin6ing that cup-i li>ing that
unalterable destiny in ithe hite Manfs day-i left one little ti2e for idle speculation
on origins- causes- historical logic!
Being a hite Man was therefore an idea and a reality! It in>ol>ed a reasoned
position towards both the white and the nonwhite worlds!It 2eant 0in the
colonies00spea6ing in a certain way- beha>ing according to a code of regulations- and
e>en feeling certain things and not others! It 2eant specific @udg2ents- e>aluations-
gestures! It was a for2 of authority before which nonwhites- and e>en whites
the2sel>es- were e4pected to bend! In the institutional for2s it too6 Fcolonial
go>ern2ents- consular corps- co22ercial establish2entsG it was an agency for the
e4pression- diffusion- and i2ple2entation of policy towards the world- and within
this agency- although a certain personal latitude was allowed- the i2personal
co22unal idea of being a hite Man ruled! Being a hite Man- in short- was a >ery
concrete 2anner of being0in0the0world- a way of ta6ing hold of reality- language- and
thought! It 2ade a specific style possible!
%ipling hi2self could not 2erely ha>e happenedJ the sa2e is true of his hite
Man! "uch ideas and their authors e2erge out of co2ple4 historical and cultural
circu2stances- at least two of which ha>e 2uch in co22on with the history of
3rientalis2 in the nineteenth century! 3ne of the2 is the culturally sanctioned habit
of deploying large generaliAations by which reality is di>ided into >arious collecti>es:
languages- races- types- colors- 2entalities- each category being not so 2uch a neutral
designation as an e>aluati>e interpretation! ?nderlying these categories is the rigidly
bino2ial opposition of ioursi and itheirs-i with the for2er always encroaching upon
the latter Fe>en to the point of 2a6ing itheirsi e4clusi>ely a function of ioursiG! 1his
opposition was reinforced not only by anthropology- linguistics- and history but also-
of course- by the .arwinian theses on sur>i>al and natural selection- and0no less
decisi>e0by the rhetoric of high cultural hu2anis2! hat ga>e writers li6e #enan and
Arnold the right to generalities about race was the official character of their for2ed
cultural literacy! i3uri >alues were Flet us sayG liberal- hu2ane- correctJ they were
supported by the tradition of belleslettres- infor2ed scholarship- rational in9uiryJ as
Europeans Fand white 2enG iwei shared in
22+
the2 e>ery ti2e their >irtues were e4tolled! /e>ertheless- the hu2an partnerships
for2ed by reiterated cultural >alues e4cluded as 2uch as they included! For e>ery
idea about iouri art spo6en for by Arnold- #us6in- Mill- /ew2an- Carlyle- #enan-
5obineau- or Co2te- another lin6 in the chain binding iusi together was for2ed
while another outsider was banished! E>en if this is always the result of such rhetoric-
where>er and whene>er it occurs- we 2ust re2e2ber that for nineteenth0century
Europe an i2posing edifice of learning and culture was built- so to spea6- in the face
of actual outsiders Fthe colonies- the poor- the delin9uentG- whose role in the culture
was to gi>e definition to what they were constitutionally unsuited for!
2,
1he other circu2stance co22on to the creation of the hite Man and
3rientalis2 is the ifieldi co22anded by each- as well as the sense that such a field
entails peculiar 2odes- e>en rituals- of beha>ior- learning- and possession! 3nly an
3ccidental could spea6 of 3rientals- for e4a2ple- @ust as it was the hite Man who
could designate and na2e the coloreds- or nonwhites! E>ery state2ent 2ade by
3rientalists or hite Men Fwho were usually interchangeableG con>eyed a sense of
the irreducible distance separating white fro2 colored- or 3ccidental fro2 3rientalJ
2oreo>er- behind each state2ent there resonated the tradition of e4perience- learning-
and education that 6ept the 3riental0colored to his position of obNect studied by the
"ccidental'white, instead of >ice >ersa! here one was in! a position of power0as
Cro2er was- for e4a2ple0the 3riental belonged to the syste2 of rule whose principle
was si2ply to 2a6e sure that no 3riental was e>er allowed to be independent and rule
hi2self! 1he pre2ise there was that since the 3rientals were ignorant of
self0go>ern2ent- they had better be 6ept that way for their own good!
"ince the hite Man- li6e the 3rientalist- li>ed >ery close to the line of tension
6eeping the coloreds at bay- he felt it incu2bent on hi2 readily to define and redefine
the do2ain he sur>eyed! &assages of narrati>e description regularly alternate with
passages of rearticulated definition and @udg2ent that disrupt the narrati>eJ this is a
characteristic style of the writing produced by 3riental e4perts who operated using
%iplingfs hite Man as a 2as6! (ere is 1! E! 'awrence- writing to B! ! #ichards in
1*1,:
! ! ! the Arab appealed to 2y i2agination! It is the old- old ci>ilisation- which has
refined itself clear of household gods- and
22,
half the trappings which ours hastens to assu2e! 1he gospel of bareness in
2aterials is a good one- and it in>ol>es apparently a sort of 2oral bareness too!
1hey thin6 for the 2o2ent- and endea>our to slip through life without turning
corners or cli2bing hills! In part it is a 2ental and 2oral fatigue- a race trained
out- and to a>oid difficulties they ha>e to @ettison so 2uch that we thin6
honorable and gra>e: and yet without in any way sharing their point of >iew- I
thin6 I can understand it enough to loo6 at 2yself and other foreigners fro2 their
direction- and without conde2ning it! I 6now I a2 a stranger to the2- and always
will beJ but I cannot belie>e the2 worse- any 2ore than I could change to their
ways!
2*
A si2ilar perspecti>e- howe>er different the sub@ect under discussion 2ay see2 to be-
is found in these re2ar6s by 5ertrude Bell:
(ow 2any thousand years this state of things has lasted Yna2ely- that Arabs li>e
in ia state of wariZ- those who shall read the earliest records of the inner desert
will tell us- for it goes bac6 to the first of the2- but in all the centuries the Arab
has bought no wisdo2 fro2 e4perience! (e is ne>er safe- and yet he beha>es as
though security were his daily bread!
)7
1o which- as a gloss- we should add her further obser>ation- this ti2e about life in
.a2ascus:
I begin to see di2ly what the ci>ilisation of a great Eastern city 2eans- how they
li>e- what they thin6J and I ha>e got on to ter2s with the2! I belie>e the fact of
2y being English is a great help!!!! e ha>e gone up in the world since fi>e years
ago! 1he difference is >ery 2ar6ed! I thin6 it is due to the success of our
go>ern2ent in Egypt to a great e4tent!!!! 1he defeat of #ussia stands for a great
deal- and 2y i2pression is that the >igorous policy of 'ord CurAon in the &ersian
5ulf and on the India frontier stands for a great deal 2ore! /o one who does not
6now the East can realise how it all hangs together! It is scarcely an e4aggeration
to say that if the English 2ission had been turned bac6 fro2 the gates of %abul-
the English tourist would be frowned upon in the streets of .a2ascus!
)1
In such state2ents as these- we note i22ediately that ithe Arabi or iArabsi ha>e
an aura of apartness- definiteness- and collecti>e self0consistency such as to wipe out
any traces of indi>idual Arabs with narratable life histories! hat appealed to
'awrencefs i2agination was the clarity of the Arab- both as an i2age and as a
supposed philosophy For attitudeG towards life: in both cases what
22*
'awrence fastens on is the Arab as if seen fro2 the cleansing perspecti>e of one not
an Arab- and one for who2 such unselfconscious pri2iti>e si2plicity as the Arab
possesses is so2ething defined by the obser>er- in this case the hite Man! Iet Arab
refine2ent- which in its essentials corresponds to Ieatsfs >isions of ByAantiu2 where
Fla2es that no faggot feeds- flint nor steel has lit-
/or stor2 disturbs- fla2es begotten of fla2e-
here blood0begotten spirits co2e
And all co2ple4ities of fury lea>e!
)2
is associated with Arab perdurability- as if the Arab had not been sub@ect to the
ordinary processes of history! &arado4ically- the Arab see2s to 'awrence to ha>e
e4hausted hi2self in his >ery te2poral persistence! 1he enor2ous age of Arab
ci>iliAation has thus ser>ed to refine the Arab down to his 9uintessential attributes-
and to tire hi2 out 2orally in the process! hat we are left with is Bellfs Arab:
centuries of e4perience and no wisdo2! As a collecti>e entity- then- the Arab
accu2ulates no e4istential or e>en se2antical thic6ness! (e re2ains the sa2e- e4cept
for the e4hausting refine2ents 2entioned by 'awrence- fro2 one end to the other of
ithe records of the inner desert!i e are to assu2e that if an Arab feels @oy- if he is
sad at the death of his child or parent- if he has a sense of the in@ustices of political
tyranny- then those e4periences are necessarily subordinate to the sheer- unadorned-
and persistent fact of being an Arab!
1he pri2iti>eness of such a state e4ists si2ultaneously on at least two le>els: one-
in the de#inition, which is reducti>eJ and two Faccording to 'awrence and BellG- in
reality. 1his absolute coincidence was itself no si2ple coincidence! For one- it could
only ha>e been 2ade fro2 the outside by >irtue of a >ocabulary and episte2ological
instru2ents designed both to get to the heart of things and to a>oid the distractions of
accident- circu2stance- or e4perience! For another- the coincidence was a fact
uni9uely the result of 2ethod- tradition- and politics all wor6ing together! Each in a
sense obliterated the distinctions between the type''the 3riental, the "e2ite, the
Arab, the 3rient0and ordinary hu2an reality- Ieatsfs iuncontrollable 2ystery on the
bestial floor-i in which all hu2an beings li>e! 1he scholarly in>estigator too6 a type
2ar6ed i3rientali for the sa2e thing as any indi>idual 3riental he 2ight encounter!
Iears of tradition had encrusted discourse about such
2)7
2atters as the "e2itic or 3riental spirit with so2e legiti2acy! And political good
sense taught- in Bellfs 2ar>elous phrase- that in the East iit all hangs together!i
&ri2iti>eness therefore inhered in the 3rient- was the 3rient- an idea to which anyone
dealing with or writing about the 3rient had to return- as if to a touchstone outlasting
ti2e or e4perience!
1here is an e4cellent way of understanding all this as it applied to the white
agents- e4perts- and ad>isers for the 3rient! hat 2attered to 'awrence and Bell was
that their references to Arabs or 3rientals belonged to a recogniAable- and
authoritati>e- con>ention of for2ulation- one that was able to subordinate detail to it!
But fro2 where- 2ore particularly- did ithe Arab-i ithe "e2ite-i or ithe 3rientali
co2eL
e ha>e re2ar6ed how- during the nineteenth century in such writers as #enan-
'ane- Flaubert- Caussin de &erce>al- Mar4- and 'a2artine- a generaliAation about
ithe 3rienti drew its power fro2 the presu2ed representati>eness of e>erything
3rientalJ each particle of the 3rient told of its 3rientalness- so 2uch so that the
attribute of being 3riental o>errode any counter>ailing instance!An 3riental 2an was
first an 3riental and only second a 2an! "uch radical typing was naturally reinforced
by sciences For discourses- as I prefer to call the2G that too6 a bac6ward and
downward direction towards the species category- which was supposed also to be an
ontogenetic e4planation for e>ery 2e2ber of the species! 1hus within broad-
se2ipopular designations such as i3rientali there were so2e 2ore scientifically
>alid distinctions being 2adeJ 2ost of these were based principally on language types
0 e!g!- "e2itic- .ra>idic- (a2itic0but they were 9uic6ly able to ac9uire anthro0
pological- psychological- biological- and cultural e>idence in their support! #enanfs
i"e2itic-i as an instance- was a linguistic generaliAation which in #enanfs hands
could add to itself all sorts of parallel ideas fro2 anato2y- history- anthropology- and
e>en geology! i"e2itici could then be e2ployed not only as a si2ple description or
designationJ it could be applied to any co2ple4 of historical and political e>ents in
order to pare the2 down to a nucleus both antecedent to and inherent in the2!
i"e2itic-i therefore- was a transte2poral- transindi>idual category- purporting to
predict e>ery discrete act of i"e2itici beha>ior on the basis of so2e pre0e4isting
i"e2itici essence- and ai2ing as well to interpret all aspects of hu2an life and
acti>ity in ter2s of so2e co22on i"e2itici ele2ent!
2)1
1he peculiar hold on late0nineteenth0century liberal European culture of such
relati>ely puniti>e ideas will see2 2ysterious unless it is re2e2bered that the appeal
of sciences li6e linguistics- anthropology- and biology was that they were e2pirical-
and by no 2eans speculati>e or idealistic! #enanfs "e2itic- li6e Boppfs
Indo0European- was a constructed ob@ect- it is true- but it was considered logical and
ine>itable as a protofor2- gi>en the scientifically apprehendable and e2pirically
analyAable data of specific "e2itic languages! 1hus- in trying to for2ulate a
prototypical and pri2iti>e linguistic type Fas well as a cultural- psychological- and
historical oneG- there was also an iatte2pt to define a pri2ary hu2an potential-
))
out
of which co2pletely specific instances of beha>ior unifor2ly deri>ed! /ow this
atte2pt would ha>e been i2possible had it not also been belie>ed0in classical
e2piricist ter2s0that 2ind and body were interdependent realities- both deter2ined
originally by a gi>en set of geographical- biological- and 9uasihistorical conditions!
)=
Fro2 this set- which was not a>ailable to the nati>e for disco>ery or introspection-
there was no subse9uent escape! 1he anti9uarian bias of 3rientalists was supported
by these e2piricist ideas! In all their studies of iclassicali Isla2- Buddhis2- or
Roroastrianis2 they felt the2sel>es- as 5eorge Eliotfs .r! Casaubon confesses- to be
acting ili6e the ghost of an ancient- wandering about the world and trying 2entally to
construct it as it used to be- in spite of ruin and confusing changes!i
);
ere these theses about linguistic- ci>iliAational- and finally racial characteristics
2erely one side of an acade2ic debate a2ongst European scientists and scholars- we
2ight dis2iss the2 as furnishing 2aterial for an uni2portant closet dra2a! 1he point
is- howe>er- that both the ter2s of the debate and the debate itself had f>ery wide
circulationJ in late0nineteenthcentury culture- as 'ionel 1rilling has said- iracial
theory- sti2ulated by a rising nationalis2 and a spreading i2perialis2- supported by
an inco2plete and 2al0assi2ilated science- was al2ost undisputed!iY)EZ #ace theory-
ideas about pri2iti>e origins and pri2iti>e classifications- 2odern decadence- the
progress of ci>iliAation- the destiny of the white For AryanG races- the need for
colonial territories0all these were ele2ents in the peculiar a2alga2 of science-
politics- and culture whose drift- al2ost without e4ception- was always to raise
Europe or a European race to do2inion o>er non0European portions of 2an6ind!
1here was general agree2ent too that- according to a strangely transfor2ed >ariety of
.arwinis2 sanctioned by .arwin
2)2
hi2self- the 2odern 3rientals were degraded re2nants of a for2er greatnessJ the
ancient- or iclassical-i ci>iliAations of the 3rient were percei>able through the
disorders of present decadence- but only FaG because a white specialist- with highly
refined scientific techni9ues could do the sifting and reconstructing- and FbG because a
>ocabulary of sweeping generalities Fthe "e2ites- the Aryans- the 3rientalsG referred
not to a set of fictions but rather to a whole array of see2ingly ob@ecti>e and
agreed0upon distinctions! 1hus a re2ar6 about what 3rientals were and were not
capable of was supported by biological itruthsi such as those spelled out in &!
Charles Michelfs iA Biological Biew of 3ur Foreign &olicyi F1,*EG- in 1ho2as
(enry (u4leyfs The 4truggle #or ECistence in .uman 4ociety F1,,,G- Ben@a2in
%iddfs "ocial Evolution F1,*=G- John B! CroAierfs .istory o# /ntellectual Development
on the (ines o# Modern Evolution F1,*+01*71G- and Charles (ar>eyfs The 1iology o#
1ritish Politics F1*7=G
)+
! It was assu2ed that if languages were as distinct fro2 each
other as the linguists said they were- then too the language users0their 2inds- cultures-
potentials- and e>en their bodies0were different in si2ilar ways! And these
distinctions had the force of ontological- e2pirical truth behind the2- together with
the con>incing de2onstration of such truth in studies of origins- de>elop2ent-
character- and destiny!
1he point to be e2phasiAed is that this truth about the distincti>e differences
between races- ci>iliAations- and languages was For pretended to beG radical and
ineradicable! It went to the botto2 of things- it asserted that there was no escape fro2
origins and the types these origins enabledJ it set the real boundaries between hu2an
beings- on which races- nations- and ci>iliAations were constructedJ it ford >ision
away fro2 co22on- as well as plural- hu2an realities li6e @oy- suffering- political
organiAation- forcing attention instead in the downward and bac6ward direction of
i22utable origins! A scientist could no 2ore escape such origins in his research than
an 3riental could escape ithe "e2itesi or ithe Arabsi or ithe Indiansi fro2 which his
present reality000debased- coloniAed- bac6ward00e4cluded hi2- e4cept for the white
researcherfs didactic presentation!
1he profession of specialiAed research conferred uni9ue pri>ileges! e recall that
'ane could appear to be an 3riental and yet retain his scholarly detach2ent! 1he
3rientals he studied beca2e in fact his 3rientals- for he saw the2 not only as actual
people but as 2onu2entaliAed ob@ects in his account of the2! 1his double perspecti>e
2))
encouraged a sort of structured irony! 3n the one hand- there was a collection of
people li>ing in the presentJ on the other hand- these people0as the sub@ect of
study00beca2e ithe Egyptians-i ithe Musli2s-i or ithe 3rientals!i 3nly the scholar
could see- and 2anipulate- the discrepancy between the two le>els! 1he tendency of
the for2er was always towards greater >ariety- yet this >ariety was always being
restrained- co2pressed downwards and bac6wards to the radical ter2inal of the
generality! E>ery 2odern- nati>e instance of beha>ior beca2e an effusion to be sent
bac6 to the original ter2inal- which was strengthened in the process! 1his 6ind of
idispatchingi was precisely the discipline of 3rientalis2!
'anefs ability to deal with the Egyptians as present beings and as >alidations of
sui generis labels was a function both of 3rientalist discipline and of generally held
>iews about the /ear 3riental Musli2 or "e2ite! In no people 2ore than in the
3riental "e2ites was it possible to see the present and the origin together! 1he Jews
and the Musli2s- as sub@ects of 3rientalist study- were readily understandable in >iew
of their pri2iti>e origins: this was Fand to a certain e4tent still isG the cornerstone of
2orn 3rientalis2! #enan had called the "e2ites an instance of arrested de>elop2ent-
and functionally spea6ing this ca2e to 2ean that for the 3rientalist no 2odern
"e2ite- howe>er 2uch he 2ay ha>e belie>ed hi2self to be 2orn- could e>er
outdistance the organiAing clai2s on hi2 of his origins! 1his functional rule wor6ed
on the te2poral and spatial le>els together! /o "e2ite ad>anced in ti2e beyond the
de>elop2ent of a iclassicali periodJ no "e2ite could e>er sha6e loose the pastoral-
desert en>iron2ent of his tent and tribe! E>ery 2anifestation of actual i"e2itici life
could be- and ought to be- referred bac6 to the pri2iti>e e4planatory category of ithe
"e2itic!i
1he e4ecuti>e power of such a syste2 of reference- by which each discrete
instance of real beha>ior could be reduced down and bac6 to a s2all nu2ber of
e4planatory ioriginali categories- was considerable by the end of the nineteenth
century! In 3rientalis2 it was the e9ui>alent of bureaucracy in public ad2inistration!
1he depart2ent was 2ore useful than the indi>idual file- and certainly the hu2an
being was significant principally as the occasion for a file! e 2ust i2agine the
3rientalist at wor6 in the role of a cler6 putting together a >ery wide assort2ent of
files in a large cabinet 2ar6ed ithe "e2ites!i Aided by recent disco>eries in
co2parati>e and pri2iti>e anthropology- a scholar li6e illia2 #obertson "2ith
could group together the inhabitants of the /ear 3rient and write
2)=
on their 6inship and 2arriage custo2s- on the for2 and content of their religious
practice! 1he power of "2ithfs wor6 is its plainly radical de2ythologiAing of the
"e2ites! 1he no2inal barriers presented to the world by Isla2 or Judais2 are swept
asideJ "2ith uses "e2itic philology- 2ythology- and 3rientalist scholarship ito
construct!! a hypothetical picture of the de>elop2ent of the social syste2s- consistent
with all the Arabian facts!i If this picture succeeds in re>ealing the antecedent- and
still influential- roots of 2onotheis2 in tote2is2 or ani2al worship- then the scholar
has been successful! And this- "2ith says- despite the fact that iour Moha22edan
sources draw a >eil- as far as they can- o>er all details of the old heathenis2!iY),Z
"2ithfs wor6 on the "e2ites co>ered such areas as theology- literature- and
historyJ it was done with a full awareness of wor6 done by 3rientalists Fsee- for
instance- "2ithfs sa>age attac6 in 1,,+ on #enanfs .istoire du peuple dI/sraVl+, and
2ore i2portant- was intended as an aid to the understanding of the 2odern "e2ites!
For "2ith- I thin6- was a crucial lin6 in the intellectual chain connecting the
hite0Man0as0e4pert to the 2odern 3rient! /one of the encapsulated wisdo2
deli>ered as 3riental e4pertise by 'awrence- (ogarth- Bell- and the others would
ha>e been possible without "2ith! And e>en "2ith the anti9uarian scholar would not
ha>e had half the authority without his additional and direct e4perience of ithe
Arabian facts!i It was the co2bination in "2ith of the igraspi of pri2iti>e categories
with the ability to see general truths behind the e2pirical >agaries of conte2porary
3riental beha>ior that !ga>e weight to his writing! Moreo>er- it was this special
co2bination that adu2brated the style of e4pertise upon which 'awrence- Bell- and
&hilby built their reputation!
'i6e Burton and Charles .oughty before hi2- "2ith >oyaged in the (e@aA-
between 1,,7 and 1,,1! Arabia has been an especially pri>ileged place for the
3rientalist- not only because Musli2s treat Isla2 as Arabiafs genius loci- but also
because the (e@aA appears historically as barren and retarded as it is geographicallyJ
the Arabian desert is thus considered to be a locale about which one can 2a6e
state2ents regarding the past in e4actly the sa2e for2 Fand with the sa2e contentG
that one 2a6es the2 regarding the present! In the (e@aA you can spea6 about
Musli2s- 2odern Isla2- and pri2iti>e Isla2 without bothering to 2a6e distinctions!
1o this >ocabulary de>oid of historical grounding- "2ith was able to bring the cachet
of additional authority pro>ided by his "e2itic studies!
2);
hat we hear in his co22ents is the standpoint of a scholar co22anding all the
antecedents for Isla2- the Arabs- and Arabia! (ence:
It is characteristic of Moha22edanis2 that all national feeling assu2es a
religious aspect- inas2uch as the whole polity and social for2s of a Mosle2
country are clothed in a religious dress! But it would be a 2ista6e to suppose that
genuine religious feeling is at the botto2 of e>erything that @ustifies itself by
ta6ing a religious shape! 1he pre@udices of the Arab ha>e their roots in a
conser>atis2 which lies deeper than his belief in Isla2! It is- indeed- a great fault
of the religion of the &rophet that it lends itself so easily to the pre@udices of the
race a2ong who2 it was first pro2ulgated- and that it has ta6en under its
protection so 2any barbarous and obsolete ideas- which e>en Moha22ed 2ust
ha>e seen to ha>e no religious worth- but which he carried o>er into his syste2 in
order to facilitate the propagation of his refor2ed doctrines! Iet 2any of the
pre@udices which see2 to us 2ost distincti>ely Moha22edan ha>e no basis in
the %oran!
)*
1he iusi in the last sentence of this a2aAing piece of logic defines the hite Manfs
>antage point e4plicitly! 1his allows iusi to say in the first sentence that all political
and social life are iclothedi in religious dress FIsla2 can thus be characteriAed as
totalitarianG- then to say in the second that religion is only a co>er used by Musli2s
Fin other words- all Musli2s are hypocrites essentiallyG! In the third sentence- the
clai2 is 2ade that Isla20e>en while laying hold upon the Arabfs faith0has not really
refor2ed the Arabfs basic pre0Isla2ic conser>atis2!/or is this all! For if Isla2 was
successful as a religion it was because it fec6lessly allowed these iauthentici Arab
pre@udices to creep inJ for such a tactic Fnow we see that it was a tactic on Isla2fs
behalfG we 2ust bla2e Moha22ed- who was after all a ruthless crypto0Jesuit! But all
this is 2ore or less wiped out in the last sentence- when "2ith assures iusi that
e>erything he has said about Isla2 is in>alid- since the 9uintessential aspects of Isla2
6nown to the est are not iMoha22edani after all!
1he principles of identity and noncontradiction clearly do not bind the 3rientalist!
hat o>errides the2 is 3rientalist e4pertise- which is based on an irrefutable
collecti>e >erity entirely within the 3rientalistfs philosophical and rhetorical grasp!
"2ith is able without the slightest trepidation to spea6 about ithe @e@une- practical
2)E
and! ! !constitutionally irreligious habit of the Arabic 2ind-i Isla2 as a syste2 of
iorganiAed hypocrisy-i the i2possibility of ifeeling any respect for Mosle2 de>otion-
in which for2alis2 and >ain repetition are reduced to a syste2!i (is attac6s on Isla2
are not relati>ist- for it is clear to hi2 that Europefs and Christianityfs superiority is
actual- not i2agined! At botto2- "2ithfs >ision of the world is binary- as is e>ident in
such passages as the following:
1he Arabian tra>eller is 9uite different fro2 oursel>es! 1he labour of 2o>ing
fro2 place to place is a 2ere nuisance to hi2- he has no en@oy2ent in effort Yas
iwei doZ- and gru2bles at hunger or fatigue with all his 2ight Yas iwei do notZ!
Iou will ne>er persuade the 3riental that- when you get off your ca2el- you can
ha>e any other wish than i22ediately to s9uat on a rug and ta6e your rest
Jisterih+, s2o6ing and drin6ing! Moreo>er the Arab is little i2pressed by scenery
Ybut iwei areZ!
=7
iei are this- itheyi are that! hich Arab- which Isla2- when- how- according to
what tests: these appear to be distinctions irrele>ant to "2ithfs scrutiny of and
e4perience in the (e@aA! 1he crucial point is that e>erything one can 6now or learn
about i"e2itesi and i3rientalsi recei>es i22ediate corroboration- not 2erely in the
archi>es- but directly on the ground!
3ut of such a coerci>e fra2ewor6- by which a 2odern icoloredi 2an is chained
irre>ocably to the general truths for2ulated about his prototypical linguistic-
anthropological- and doctrinal forebears by a white European scholar- the wor6 of the
great twentiethcentury 3riental e4perts in England and France deri>ed! 1o this
fra2ewor6 these e4perts also brought their pri>ate 2ythology and obsessions- which
in writers li6e .oughty and 'awrence ha>e been studied with considerable energy!
Each0ilfrid "cawen Blunt- .oughty- 'awrence- Bell- (ogarth- &hilby- "y6es-
"torrs000belie>ed his >ision of things 3riental was indi>idual- self0created out of so2e
intensely personal encounter with the 3rient- Isla2- or the ArabsJ each e4pressed
general conte2pt for official 6nowledge held about the East! i1he sun 2ade 2e an
Arab-i .oughty wrote in Arabia .eserta- ibut ne>er warped 2e to 3rientalis2!i Iet
in the final analysis they all Fe4cept BluntG e4pressed the traditional estern hostility
to and fear of the 3rient! 1heir >iews refined and ga>e a personal twist to the
acade2ic style of 2odern 3rientalis2- with its repertoire of grand generaliAations-
tendentious isciencei fro2 which there was no appeal- reducti>e for2ulae! F.oughty
2)+
again- on the sa2e page as his sneer at 3rientalis2: i1he "e2ites are li6e to a 2an
sitting in a cloaca to the eyes- and whose brows touch hea>en!iY=1ZG 1hey acted- they
pro2ised- they reco22ended public policy on the basis of such generaliAationsJ and-
by a re2ar6able irony- they ac9uired the identity of hite 3rientals in their natal
cultures0e>en as- in the instances of .oughty- 'awrence- (ogarth- and Bell- their
professional in>ol>e2ent with the East Fli6e "2ithfsG did not pre>ent the2 fro2
despising it thoroughly! 1he 2ain issue for the2 was preser>ing the 3rient and Isla2
under the control of the hite Man!
A new dialectic e2erges out of this pro@ect! hat is re9uired of the 3riental
e4pert is no longer si2plyiunderstandingi: now the 3rient 2ust be 2ade to perfor2-
its power 2ust be enlisted on the side of iouri >alues- ci>iliAation- interests- goals!
%nowledge of the 3rient is directly translated into acti>ity- and the results gi>e rise to
new currents of thought and action in the 3rient! But these in turn will re9uire fro2
the hite Man a new assertion of control- this ti2e not as the author of a scholarly
wor6 on the 3rient but as the 2a6er of conte2porary history- of the 3rient as urgent
actuality Fwhich- because he began it- only the e4pert can understand ade9uatelyG!
1he 3rientalist has now beco2e a figure of 3riental history- indistinguishable fro2
it- its shaper- its characteristic sign for the est! (ere is the dialectic in brief:
"o2e English2en- of who2 %itchener was chief- belie>ed that a rebellion of
Arabs against 1ur6s would enable England- while fighting 5er2any-
si2ultaneously to defeat her ally 1ur6ey! 1heir 6nowledge of the nature and
power and country of the Arabicspea6ing peoples 2ade the2 thin6 that the issue
of such a rebellion would be happy: and indicated its character and 2ethod! "o
they allowed it to begin- ha>ing obtained for2al assurances of help for it fro2 the
British 5o>ern2ent! Iet none the less the rebellion of the "herif of Mecca ca2e
to 2ost as a surprise- and found the Allies unready! It aroused 2i4ed feelings and
2ade strong friends and ene2ies- a2id whose clashing @ealousies its affairs
began to 2iscarry!
=2
1his is 'awrencefs own synopsis of chapter 1 of 1he "e>en &illars of isdo2! 1he
i6nowledgei of iso2e English2eni authors a 2o>e2ent in the 3rient whose
iaffairsi create a 2i4ed progenyJ the a2biguities- the half0i2agined- tragico2ic
results of this new- re>i>ed 3rient beco2e the sub@ect of e4pert writing- a new for2
of 3rientalist discourse that presents a >ision of the conte2porary
2),
3rient- not as narrati>e- but as all co2ple4ity- proble2atics- betrayed hope0with the
hite 3rientalist author as its prophetic- articulate definition!
1he defeat of narrati>e by >ision0which is true e>en in so patently storyli6e a
wor6 as The 4even Pillars0is so2ething we ha>e already encountered in 'anefs
Modern Egyptians! A conflict between a holistic >iew of the 3rient Fdescription-
2onu2ental recordG and a narrati>e of e>ents in the 3rient is a conflict on se>eral
le>els- in>ol>ing se>eral different issues! As the conflict is fre9uently renewed in the
discourse of 3rientalis2- it is worthwhile analyAing it here briefly! 1he 3rientalist
sur>eys the 3rient fro2 abo>e- with the ai2 of getting hold of the whole sprawling
panora2a before hi20culture- religion- 2ind- history- society! 1o do this he 2ust see
e>ery detail through the de>ice of a set of reducti>e categories Fthe "e2ites- the
Musli2 2ind- the 3rient- and so forthG! "ince these categories are pri2arily
sche2atic and efficient ones- and since it is 2ore or less assu2ed that no 3riental can
6now hi2self the way an 3rientalist can- any >ision of the 3rient ulti2ately co2es to
rely for its coherence and force on the person- institution- or discourse whose property
it is! Any co2prehensi>e >ision is funda2entally conser>ati>e- and we ha>e noted
how in the history of ideas about the /ear 3rient in the est these ideas ha>e
2aintained the2sel>es regardless of any e>idence disputing the2! FIndeed- we can
argue that these ideas produce e>idence that pro>es their >alidity!G
1he 3rientalist is principally a 6ind of agent of such co2prehensi>e >isionsJ 'ane
is a typical instance of the way an indi>idual belie>es hi2self to ha>e subordinated
his ideas- or e>en what he sees- to the e4igencies of so2e iscientifici >iew of the
whole pheno2enon 6nown collecti>ely as the 3rient- or the 3riental nation! A >ision
therefore is static- @ust as the scientific categories infor2ing late0nineteenth0century
3rientalis2 are static: there is no recourse beyond ithe "e2itesi or ithe 3riental
2indiJ these are final ter2inals holding e>ery >ariety of 3riental beha>ior within a
general >iew of the whole field! As a discipline- as a profession- as specialiAed
language or discourse- 3rientalis2 is sta6ed upon the per2anence of the whole
3rient- for without ithe 3rienti there can be no consistent- intelligible- and articulated
6nowledge called i3rientalis2!i 1hus the 3rient belongs to 3rientalis2- @ust as it is
assu2ed that there is pertinent infor2ation belonging to For aboutG the 3rient!
2)*
Against this static syste2 ofisynchronic essentialis2i
=)
I ha>e called >ision
because it presu2es that the whole 3rient can be seen panoptically- there is a constant
pressure! 1he source of pressure is narrati>e- in that if any 3riental detail can be
shown to 2o>e- or to de>elop- diachrony is introduced into the syste2! hat see2ed
stable0and the 3rient is synony2ous with stability and unchanging eternality0now
appears unstable! Instability suggests that history- with its disrupti>e detail- its
currents of change- its tendency towards growth- decline- or dra2atic 2o>e2ent- is
possible in the 3rient and for the 3rient! (istory and the narrati>e by which history is
represented argue that >ision is insufficient- that ithe 3rienti as an unconditional
ontological category does an in@ustice to the potential of reality for change!
Moreo>er- narrati>e is the specific for2 ta6en by written history to counter the
per2anence of >ision! 'ane sensed the dangers of narrati>e when he refused to gi>e
linear shape to hi2self and to his infor2ation- preferring instead the 2onu2ental
for2 of encyclopedic or le4icographical >ision! /arrati>e asserts the power of 2en to
be born- de>elop- and die- the tendency of institutions and actualities to change- the
li6elihood that 2odernity and conte2poraneity will finally o>erta6e iclassicali
ci>iliAationsJ abo>e all- it asserts that the do2ination of reality by >ision is no 2ore
than a will to power- a will to truth and interpretation- and not an ob@ecti>e condition
of history! /arrati>e- in short- introduces an opposing point of >iew- perspecti>e-
consciousness to the unitary web of >isionJ it >iolates the serene Apollonian fictions
asserted by >ision!
hen as a result of orld ar I the 3rient was 2ade to enter history- it was the
3rientalist0as0agent who did the wor6! (annah Arendt has 2ade the brilliant
obser>ation that the counterpart of the bureaucracy is the i2perial agent-
==
which is to
say that if the collecti>e acade2ic endea>or called 3rientalis2 was a bureaucratic
institution based on a certain conser>ati>e >ision of the 3rient- then the ser>ants of
such a >ision in the 3rient were i2perial agents li6e 1! E! 'awrence! In his wor6 we
can see 2ost clearly the conflict between narrati>e history and >ision- as0in his
words00the inew I2perialis2i atte2pted ian acti>e tide of i2posing responsibility on
the local peoples Yof the 3rientZ!i
=;
1he co2petition between the European &owers
now caused the2 to prod the 3rient into acti>e life- to press the 3rient into ser>ice- to
turn the 3rient fro2 unchanging i3rientali passi>ity into 2ilitant 2odern life! It
would be i2portant- ne>ertheless- ne>er to let the 3rient go its own way or
2=7
get out of hand- the canonical >iew being that 3rientals had no tradition of freedo2!
1he great dra2a of 'awrencefs wor6 is that it sy2boliAes the struggle- first- to
sti2ulate the 3rient Flifeless- ti2eless- forcelessG into 2o>e2entJ second- to i2pose
upon that 2o>e2ent an essentially estern shapeJ third- to contain the new and
aroused 3rient in a personal >ision- whose retrospecti>e 2ode includes a powerful
sense of failure and betrayal!
I 2eant to 2a6e a new nation- to restore a lost influence- to gi>e twenty 2illions
of "e2ites the foundation on which to build an inspired drea20palace of their
national thoughts ! ! ! ! All the sub@ect pro>inces of the E2pire to 2e were not
worth one dead English boy! If I ha>e restored to the East so2e selfrespect- a
goal- ideals: if I ha>e 2ade the standard rule of white o>er red 2ore e4igent- I
ha>e fitted those peoples in a degree for the new co22onwealth in which the
do2inant races will forget their brute achie>e2ents- and white and red and
yellow and brown and blac6 will stand up together without sideglances in the
ser>ice of the world!
=E
/one of this- whether as intention- as an actual underta6ing- or as a failed pro@ect-
would ha>e been re2otely possible without the hite 3rientalist perspecti>e at the
outset:
1he Jew in the Metropole at Brighton- the 2iser- the worshipper of Adonis- the
lecher in the stews of .a2ascus were ali6e signs of the "e2itic capacity for
en@oy2ent- and e4pressions of the sa2e ner>e which ga>e us at the other pole the
self0denial of the Essenes- or the early Christians- or the first %halifas- finding the
ways to hea>en fairest for the poor in spirit! 1he "e2ite ho>ered between lust and
self0denial!
'awrence is bac6ed in such state2ents by a respectable tradition stretching li6e a
lighthouse bea2 through the whole nineteenth centuryJ at its lighte2anating center-
of course- is ithe 3rient-i and that is powerful enough to light up both the gross and
the refined topographies within its range! 1he Jew- the worshipper of Adonis- the
.a2ascene lecher- are signs not so 2uch of hu2anity- let us say- as of a se2iotic
field called "e2itic and built into coherence by the "e2itic branch of 3rientalis2!
Inside this fold- certain things were possible:
Arabs could be swung on an idea as on a cordJ for the unpledged allegiance of
their 2inds 2ade the2 obedient ser>ants! /one of
2=1
the2 would escape the bond till success had co2e- and with it responsibility and
duty and engage2ent! 1hen the idea was gone and the wor6 ended0in ruins!
ithout a creed they could be ta6en to the four corners of the world Fbut not to
hea>enG by being shown the riches of the earth and the pleasures of itJ but if on
the road ! ! ! they 2et the prophet of an idea- who had nowhere to lay his head
and who depended for his food on charity or birds- then they would all lea>e their
wealth for his inspiration ! ! ! ! 1hey were as unstable as water- and li6e water
would perhaps finally pre>ail! "ince the dawn of life- in successi>e wa>es they
had been dashing the2sel>es against the coasts of flesh! Each wa>e was
bro6en ! ! ! ! 3ne such wa>e Fand not the leastG I raised and rolled before the
breath of an idea- till it reached its crest- and toppled o>er and fell at .a2ascus!
1he wash of that wa>e- thrown bac6 by the resistance of >ested things- will
pro>ide the 2atter of the following wa>e- when in fullness of ti2e the sea shall
be raised once 2ore!
iCould-i iwould-i and iiff are 'awrencefs way inserting hi2self in the field- as it
were! 1hus the possibility is prepared for the last sentence- in which as 2anipulator of
the Arabs 'awrence puts hi2self at their head! 'i6e Conradfs %urtA- 'awrence has
cut hi2self loose fro2 the earth so as to beco2e identified with a new reality in
order0he says later0that he 2ight be responsible for ihustling into for2 ! ! ! the new
Asia which ti2e was ine4orably bringing upon us!i
=+
1he Arab #e>olt ac9uires 2eaning only as 'awrence designs 2eaning for itJ his
2eaning i2parted thus to Asia was a triu2ph- ia 2ood of enlarge2ent ! ! ! in that we
felt that we had assu2ed anotherfs pain or e4perience- his personality!i 1he
3rientalist has beco2e now the representati>e 3riental- unli6e earlier participant
obser>ers such as 'ane- for who2 the 3rient was so2ething 6ept carefully at bay!
But there is an unresol>able conflict in 'awrence between the hite Man and the
3riental- and although he does not e4plicitly say so- this conflict essentially restages
in his 2ind the historical conflict between East and est! Conscious of his power
o>er the 3rient- conscious also of his duplicity- unconscious of anything in the 3rient
that would suggest to hi2 that history- after all- is history and that e>en without hi2
the Arabs would finally attend to their 9uarrel with the 1ur6s- 'awrence reduces the
entire narrati>e of the re>olt Fits 2o2entary successes and its bitter failureG to his
>ision of hi2self as an unresol>ed- istanding ci>il wari:
2=2
Iet in reality we had borne the >icarious for our own sa6es- or at least
because it was pointed for our benefit: and could escape fro2 this 6nowledge
only by a 2a6e0belief in sense as well as in 2oti>e!!!!
1here see2ed no straight wal6ing for us leaders in this croo6ed lane of
conduct- ring within ring of un6nown- sha2efaced 2oti>es cancelling or
double0charging their precedents!
=,
1o this inti2ate sense of defeat 'awrence was later to add a theory about ithe old
2eni who stole the triu2ph fro2 hi2! In any e>ent- what 2atters to 'awrence is that
as a white e4pert- the legatee of years of acade2ic and popular wisdo2 about the
3rient- he is able to subordinate his style of being to theirs- thereafter to assu2e the
role of 3riental prophet gi>ing shape to a 2o>e2ent in ithe new Asia!i And when-
for whate>er reason- the 2o>e2ent fails Fit is ta6en o>er by others- its ai2s are
betrayed- its drea2 of independence in>alidatedG- it is (awrenceIs disappoint2ent that
counts! "o far fro2 being a 2ere 2an lost in the great rush of confusing e>ents-
'awrence e9uates hi2self fully with the struggle of the new Asia to be born!
hereas Aeschylus had represented Asia 2ourning its losses- and /er>al had
espressed his disappoint2ent in the 3rient for not being 2ore gla2orous than he had
wanted- 'awrence becomes both the 2ourning continent and a sub@ecti>e
consciousness e4pressing an al2ost cos2ic disenchant2ent! In the end 'awrence0and
than6s not only to 'owell 1ho2as and #obert 5ra>es0and 'awrencefs >ision beca2e
the >ery sy2bol of 3riental trouble: 'awrence- in short- had assu2ed responsibility
for the 3rient by interspersing his 6nowing e4perience between the reader and his0
tory! Indeed what 'awrence presents to the reader is an un2ediated e4pert power0the
power to be- for a brief ti2e- the 3rient! All the e>ents putati>ely ascribed to the
historical Arab #e>olt are reduced finally to 'awrencefs e4periences on its behalf!
In such a case- therefore- style is not only the power to sy2boliAe such enonnous
generalities as Asia- the 3rient- or the ArabsJ it is also a for2 of displace2ent and
incorporation by which one >oice beco2es a whole history- and0for the white
esterner- as reader or writer0the only 6ind of 3rient it is possible to 6now! Just as
#enan had 2apped the field of possibility open to the "e2ites in culture- thought- and
language- so too 'awrence charts the space Fand indeed- appropriates that spaceG and
ti2e of 2odern Asia!
2=)
1he effect of this style is that it brings Asia tantaliAingly close to the est- but
only for a brief 2o2ent! e are left at the end with a sense of the pathetic distance
still separating iusi fro2 an 3rient destined to bear its foreignness as a 2ar6 of its
per2anent estrange2ent fro2 the est! 1his is the disappointing conclusion
corroborated Fconte2poraneouslyG by the ending of E! M! Forsterfs $ Passage to
/ndia, where AAiA and Fielding atte2pt- and fail at- reconciliation:
ihy canft we be friends nowLi said the other- holding hi2 affectionately!
iItfs what I want! Itfs what you want!i
But the horses didnft want it0they swer>ed apartJ the earth didnft want it-
sending up roc6s through which riders 2ust pass single fileJ the te2ples- the tan6-
the @ail- the palace- the birds- the carrion- the 5uest (ouse- that ca2e into >iew as
they issued fro2 the gap and saw Mau beneath: they didnft want it- they said in
their hundred >oices- i/o- not yet-i and the s6y said- i/o- not there!i
=*
1his style- this co2pact definition- is what the 3rient will always co2e up against!
.espite its pessi2is2- there is a positi>e political 2essage behind its phrases!
1he gulf between East and est can be 2odulated- as Cro2er and Balfour 6new
well- by superior estern 6nowledge and power! 'awrencefs >ision is co2ple2ented
in France by Maurice Barresfs =ne En3uGte auC pays du (evant, the record of a
@ourney through the /ear 3rient in 1*1=! 'i6e so 2any wor6s before it- the En3uGte
is a wor6 of recapitulation whose author not only searches out sources and origins of
estern culture in the 3rient but also redoes /er>al- Flaubert- and 'a2artine in their
>oyages to the 3rient! For Barr]s- howe>er- there is an additional political di2ension
to his @ourney: he see6s proof- and conclusi>e e>idence- for a constructi>e French role
in the East! Iet the difference between French and British e4pertise re2ains: the
for2er 2anages an actual con@unction of peoples and territory- whereas the latter
deals with a real2 of spiritual possibility! For Barres the French presence is best seen
in French schools where- as he says of a school in Ale4andriaJ iIt is ra>ishing to see
those little 3riental girls welco2ing and so wonderfully reproducing the fantaisie and
the 2elody Yin their spo6en FrenchZ of the lle0de France!i If France does not actually
ha>e any colonies there- she is not entirely without possessions:
2==
1here is- there in the 3rient- a feeling about France which is so religious and
strong that it is capable of absorbing and reconciling all our 2ost di>erse
aspirations! In the 3rient we represent spirituality- @ustice- and the category of the
ideal! England is powerful thereJ 5er2any is all0powerfulJ but we possess
3riental souls!
Arguing >ociferously with Jaures- this celebrated European doctor proposes to
>accinate Asia against its own illnesses- to occidentaliAe the 3rientals- to bring the2
into salubrious contact with France! Iet e>en in these pro@ects Barresfs >ision
preser>es the >ery distinction between East and est he clai2s to be 2itigating!
(ow will we be able to for2 for oursel>es an intellectual elite with which we can
wor6- 2ade out of 3rientals who would not be deracinated- who would continue
to e>ol>e according to their own nor2s- who would re2ain penetrated by fa2ily
traditions- and who would thus for2 a lin6 between us and the 2ass of nati>esL
(ow will we create relationships with a >iew towards preparing the way for
agree2ents and treaties which would be the desirable for2 ta6en by our political
future Yin the 3rientZL All these things are finally all about soliciting in these
strange peoples the taste for 2aintaining contact with our intelligence- even
though this taste may in #act come out o# their own sense o# their national
destiny.
;7
1he e2phasis in the last sentence is Barresfs own! "ince unli6e 'awrence and
(ogarth Fwhose boo6 1he )andering 4cholar is the wholly infor2ati>e and
unro2antic record of two trips to the 'e>ant in 1,*E and 1*17
;1
G he writes of a world
of distant probabilitiesJ he is 2ore prepared to i2agine the 3rient as going its own
way! Iet the bond For leashG between East and est that he ad>ocates is designed to
per2it a constant >ariety of intellectual pressure going fro2 est to East!Barrens
sees things- not in ter2s of wa>es- battles- spiritual ad>entures- but in ter2s of the
culti>ation of intellectual i2perialis2- as ineradicable as it- is subtle! 1he British
>ision- e4e2plified by 'awrence- is of the 2ainstrea2 3rient- of peoples- political
organiAations- and 2o>e2ents guided and held in chec6 by the hite Manfs e4pert
tutelageJ the 3rient is iouri 3rient- iouri people- iouri do2inions! .iscri2inations
between elites and the 2asses are less li6ely to be 2ade by the British than by the
French- whose perceptions and policy were always based on 2inorities and on the
insidious pressures of spiritual co22unity between France and its colonial children!
2=;
1he British agent03rientalist 'awrence- Bell- &hilby- "torrs- (ogarth 0during and
after orld ar I too6 o>er both the rule of e4pert0ad>enturer0eccentric Fcreated in
the nineteenth century by 'ane- Burton- (ester "tanhopeG and the role of colonial
authority- whose position is in a central place ne4t to the indigenous ruler: 'awrence
with the (ashi2ites- &hilby with the house of "aud- are the two best06nown
instances! British 3riental e4pertise fashioned itself around consensus and orthodo4y
and so>ereign authorityJ French 3riental e4pertise between the wars concerned itself
with heterodo4y- spiritual ties- eccentrics! It is no accident- then- that the two 2a@or
scholarly careers of this period- one British- one French- were (! A! #! 5ibbfs and
'ouis Massignonfs- one whose interest was defined by the notion of "unna For
orthodo4yG in Isla2- the other whose focus was on the 9uasi0Christli6e- theosophical
"ufi figure- Mansur al0(alla@! I shall return to these two 2a@or 3rientalists a little
later!
If I ha>e concentrated so 2uch on i2perial agents and policy2a6ers instead of
scholars in this section- it was to accentuate the 2a@or shift in 3rientalis2- 6nowledge
about the 3rient- intercourse with it- fro2 an acade2ic to an instrumental attitude!
hat acco2panies the shift is a change in the attitude as well of the indi>idual
3rientalist- who need no longer see hi2self0as 'ane- "acy- #enan- Caussin- Muller-
and others did0as belonging to a sort of guild co22unity with its own internal
traditions and rituals! /ow the 3rientalist has beco2e the representati>e 2an of his
estern culture- a 2an who co2presses within his own wor6 a 2a@or duality of
which that wor6 Fregardless of its specific for2G is the sy2bolic e4pression:
3ccidental consciousness- 6nowledge- science ta6ing hold of the furthest 3riental
reaches as well as the 2ost 2inute 3riental particulars! For2ally the 3rientalist sees
hi2self as acco2plishing the union of 3rient and 3ccident- but 2ainly by reasserting
the technological- political- and cultural supre2acy of the est! (istory- in such a
union- is radically attentuated if not banished! Biewed as a current of de>elop2ent- as
a narrati>e strand- or as a dyna2ic force unfolding syste2atically and 2aterially in
ti2e and space- hu2an history0of the East or the est 0is subordinated to an
essentialist- idealist conception of 3ccident and 3rient! Because he feels hi2self to
be standing at the >ery ri2 of the East0est di>ide- the 3rientalist not only spea6s in
>ast generalitiesJ he also see6s to con>ert each aspect of 3riental or
2=E
3ccidental life into an un2ediated sign of one or the other geographical half!
1he interchange in the 3rientalistfs writing between his e4pert self and his
testi2onial- beholding self as estern representati>e is pre0e2inently wor6ed out in
>isual ter2s! (ere is a typical passage F9uoted by 5ibbG fro2 .uncan Macdonaldfs
classic wor6 The Religious $ttitude and (i#e in /slam J&@9@+<
1he Arabs show the2sel>es not as especially easy of belief- but as hard0 headed-
2aterialistic- 9uestioning- doubting- scoffing at their own superstitions and
usages- fond of tests of the supernatural0and all this in a curiously light02inded-
al2ost childish fashion!
;2
1he go>erning >erb is show, which here gi>es us to understand that the Arabs display
the2sel>es Fwillingly or unwillinglyG to and for e4pert scrutiny! 1he nu2ber of
attributes ascribed to the2- by its crowded set of sheer appositions- causes ithe
Arabsi to ac9uire a sort of e4istential weightlessnessJ thereby- ithe Arabsi are 2ade
to re@oin the >ery broad designation- co22on to 2odern anthropological thought- of
ithe childish pri2iti>e!i hat Macdonald also i2plies is that for such descriptions
there is a peculiarly pri>ileged position occupied by the estern 3rientalist- whose
representati>e function is precisely to show what needs to be seen! All specific
history is capable of being seen thus at the ape4- or the sensiti>e frontier- of 3rient
and 3ccident together! 1he co2ple4 dyna2ics of hu2an life0what I ha>e been calling
history as narrati>ebeco2es either irrele>ant or tri>ial in co2parison with the circular
>ision by which the details of 3riental life ser>e 2erely to reassert the 3rientalness of
the sub@ect and the esternness of the obser>er!
If such a >ision in so2e ways recalls .antefs- we should by no 2eans fail to
notice what an enor2ous difference there is between this 3rient and .antefs!
E>idence here is 2eant to be Fand probably is consideredG scientificJ its pedigree-
genealogically spea6ing- is European intellectual and hu2an science during the
nineteenth century! Moreo>er- the 3rient is no si2ple 2ar>el- or an ene2y- or a
branch of e4oticaJ it is a political actuality of great and significant 2o2ent! 'i6e
'awrence- Macdonald cannot really detach his representati>e characteristics as a
esterner fro2 his role as a scholar! 1hus his >ision of Isla2- as 2uch as 'awrencefs
of the Arabs- i2plicates de#inition of the ob@ect with the identity of the
2=+
person defining! All Arab 3rientals 2ust be acco22odated to a >ision of an 3riental
type as constructed by the estern scholar- as well as to a specific encounter with the
3rient in which the esterner regrasps the 3rientfs essence as a conse9uence of his
inti2ate estrange2ent fro2 it! For 'awrence as for Forster- this latter sensation
produces the despondency as well of personal failureJ for such scholars as
Macdonald- it strengthens the 3rientalist discourse itself!
And it puts that discourse abroad in the world of culture- politics- and actuality! In
the period between the wars- as we can easily @udge fro2- say- Malrau4fs no>els- the
relations between East and est assu2ed a currency that was both widespread and
an4ious! 1he signs of 3riental clai2s for political independence were e>erywhereJ
certainly in the dis2e2bered 3tto2an E2pire they were encouraged by the Allies
and- as is perfectly e>ident in the whole Arab #e>olt and its after2ath- 9uic6ly
beca2e proble2atic! 1he 3rient now appeared to constitute a challenge- not @ust to
the est in general- but to the estfs spirit- 6nowledge- and i2periu2! After a good
century of constant inter>ention in Fand study ofG the 3rient- the estfs role in an
East itself responding to the crises of 2odernity see2ed considerably 2ore delicate!
1here was the issue of outright occupationJ there was the issue of the 2andated
territoriesJ there was the issue of European co2petition in the 3rientJ there was the
issue of dealing with nati>e elites- nati>e popular 2o>e2ents- and nati>e de2ands for
self0go>ern2ent and independenceJ there was the issue of ci>iliAational contacts
between 3rient and 3ccident! "uch issues forced reconsideration of estern
6nowledge of the 3rient! /o less a personage than "yl>ain 'e>i- president of the
"ociPtP asiati9ue between 1*2, and 1*);- professor of "ans6rit at the Coll]ge de
France- reflected seriously in 1*2; on the urgency of the East0est proble2:
3ur duty is to understand 3riental ci>iliAation! 1he hu2anistic proble2- which
consists- on an intellectual le>el- in 2a6ing a sy2pathetic and intelligent effort to
understand foreign ci>iliAations in both their past and their future for2s- is
specifically posed for us French2en Yalthough si2ilar senti2ents could ha>e
been e4pressed by an English2an: the proble2 was a European oneZ in a
practical way with regard to our great Asiatic colonies!!!!
1hese peoples are the inheritors of a long tradition of history- of art- and of
religion- the sense of which they ha>e not entirely lost and which they are
probably an4ious to prolong! e ha>e assu2ed the responsibility of inter>ening
in their de>elop2ent- so2eti2es without consulting the2- so2eti2es in answer
to their re9uest!!!! e clai2- rightly or wrongly- to represent a superior
2=,
ci>iliAation- and because of the right gi>en us by >irtue of this superiority- which
we regularly affir2 with such assurance as 2a6es it see2 incontestable to the
nati>es- we ha>e called in 9uestion all their nati>e traditions !!!!
In a general way- then- where>er the European has inter>ened- the nati>e has
percei>ed hi2self with a sort of general despair which was really poignant since
he felt that the su2 of his wellbeing- in the 2oral sphere 2ore than in sheer
2aterial ter2s- instead of increasing had in fact di2inished! All of which has
2ade the foundation of his social life see2 to be fli2sy and to cru2ble under
hi2- and the golden pillars on which he had thought to rebuild his life now see2
no 2ore than tinseled cardboard!
1his disappoint2ent has been translated into rancor fro2 one end to the other
of the 3rient- and this rancor is >ery close now to turning to hate- and hate only
waits for the right 2o2ent in order to turn into action!
If because of laAiness or inco2prehension Europe does not 2a6e the effort
that its interests alone re9uire fro2 it- then the $siatic drama will approach the
crisis point.
It is here that that science which is a for2 of life and an instru2ent of policy0
that is- where>er our interests are at sta6e0owes it to itself to penetrate nati>e
ci>iliAation and life in their inti2acy in order to disco>er their funda2ental
>alues and durable characteristics rather than to s2other nati>e life with the
incoherent threat of European ci>iliAational i2ports! e 2ust offer oursel>es to
these ci>iliAations as we do our other products- that is- on the local e4change
2ar6et! YE2phasis in originalZ
;)
'P>i has no difficulty in connecting 3rientalis2 with politics- for the long0or
rather- the prolonged0estern inter>ention in the East cannot be denied either in its
conse9uences for 6nowledge or in its effect upon the hapless nati>eJ together the two
add up to what could be a 2enacing future! For all his e4pressed hu2anis2- his
ad2irable concern for fellow creatures- 'P>i concei>es the present @uncture in
unpleasantly constricted ter2s! 1he 3riental is i2agined to feel his world threatened
by a superior ci>iliAationJ yet his 2oti>es are i2pelled- not by so2e positi>e desire
for freedo2- political independence- or cultural achie>e2ent on their own ter2s- but
instead by rancor or @ealous 2alice! 1he panacea offered for this potentially ugly turn
of affairs is that the 3rient be 2ar6eted for a estern consu2er- be put before hi2 as
one a2ong nu2erous
2=*
wares beseeching his attention! By a single stro6e you will defuse the 3rient Fby
letting it thin6 itself to be an ie9uali 9uantity on the 3ccidental 2ar6etplace of
ideasG- and you will appease estern fears of an 3riental tidal wa>e! At botto2- of
course- 'P>ifs principal point0and his 2ost telling confession0is that unless so2ething
is done about the 3rient- ithe Asiatic dra2a will approach the crisis point!i
Asia suffers- yet in its suffering it threatens Europe: the eternal- bristling frontier
endures between East and est- al2ost unchanged since classical anti9uity! hat
'P>i says as the 2ost august of 2odern 3rientalists is echoed with less subtlety by
cultural hu2anists! Ite2: in 1*2; the French periodical 'es 2ahiers du mois
conducted a sur>ey a2ong notable intellectual figuresJ the writers can>assed included
3rientalists F'P>i- X2ile "enartG as well as literary 2en li6e AndrP 5ide- &aul
BalPry- and Ed2ond Jalou4! 1he 9uestions dealt with relations between 3rient and
3ccident in a ti2ely- not to say braAenly pro>ocati>e- way- and this already indicates
so2ething about the cultural a2bience of the period! e will i22ediately recogniAe
how ideas of the sort pro2ulgated in 3rientalist scholarship ha>e now reached the
le>el of accepted truth! 3ne 9uestion as6s whether 3rient and 3ccident are 2utually
i2penetrable Fthe idea was Maeterlinc6fsG or notJ another as6s whether or not 3riental
influence represented iun peril gra>ei(enri Massisfs words0to French thoughtJ a third
as6s about those >alues in 3ccidental culture to which its superiority o>er the 3rient
can be ascribed! BalPryfs response see2s to 2e worth 9uoting fro2- so forthright are
the lines of its argu2ent and so ti2e0honored- at least in the early twentieth century:
Fro2 the cultural point of >iew- I do not thin6 that we ha>e 2uch to fear now
fro2 the 3riental influence! It is not un6nown to us! e owe to the 3rient all the
beginnings of our arts and of a great deal of our 6nowledge! e can >ery well
welco2e what now co2es out of the 3rient- if so2ething new is co2ing out of
there 0which I >ery 2uch doubt! 1his doubt is precisely our guarantee and our
European weapon!
Besides- the real 9uestion in such 2atters is to digest! But that has always
been- @ust as precisely- the great specialty of the European 2ind through the ages!
3ur role is therefore to 2aintain this power of choice- of uni>ersal
co2prehension- of the transfor2ation of e>erything into our own substance-
powers which ha>e 2ade us what we are! 1he 5ree6s and the #o2ans showed us
2;7
how to deal with the 2onsters of Asia- how to treat the2 by analysis- how to
e4tract fro2 the2 their 9uintessence ! ! ! ! 1he Mediterranean basin see2s to 2e
to be li6e a closed >essel where the essences of the >ast 3rient ha>e always co2e
in order to be condensed! YE2phasis and ellipses in originalZ
;=
If European culture generally has digested the 3rient- certainly BalPry was aware that
one specific agency for doing the @ob has been 3rientalis2! In the world of ilsonian
principles of national self deter2ination- BalPry relies confidently on analyAing the
3rientfs threat away! i1he power of choicei is 2ainly for Europe first to
ac6nowledge the 3rient as the origin of European science- then to treat it as a
superseded origin! 1hus- in another conte4t- Balfour could regard the nati>e
inhabitants of &alestine as ha>ing priority on the land- but nowhere near the
subse9uent authority to 6eep itJ the 2ere wishes of +77-777 Arabs- he said- were of
no 2o2ent co2pared to the destiny of an essentially European colonial Mo>e2ent!
;;
Asia represented- then- the unpleasant li6elihood of a sudden eruption that would
destroy iouri worldJ as John Buchan put it in 1*22:
1he earth is seething with incoherent power and unorganiAed intelligence! (a>e
you e>er reflected on the case of ChinaL 1here you ha>e 2illions of 9uic6 brains
stiffed in tru2pery crafts! 1hey ha>e no direction- no dri>ing power- so the su2
of their efforts is futile- and the world laughs at China!
;E
But if China organiAed itself Fas it wouldG- it would be no laughing 2atter! Europefs
effort therefore was to 2aintain itself as what Balery called iune 2achine
puissante-i
;+
absorbing what it could fro2 outside Europe- con>erting e>erything to
its use- intellectually and 2aterially- 6eeping the 3rient selecti>ely organiAed For
disorganiAedG! Iet this could be done only through clarity of >ision and analysis!
?nless the 3rient was seen for what it was- its power 02ilitary- 2aterial-
spiritual0would sooner or later o>erwhel2 Europe! 1he great colonial e2pires- great
syste2s of syste2atic repression- e4isted to fend off the feared e>entuality! Colonial
sub@ects- as 5eorge 3rwell saw the2 in Marra6ech in 1*)*- 2ust not be seen e4cept
as a 6ind of continental e2anation- African- Asian- 3riental:
hen you wal6 through a town li6e this0two hundred thousand inhabitants-
of who2 at least twenty thousand own
2;1
literally nothing e4cept the rags they stand up in0when you see how the people
li>e- and still 2ore- how easily they die- it is always difficult to belie>e that you
are wal6ing a2ong hu2an beings! All colonial e2pires are in reality founded
upon that fact! 1he people ha>e brown faces0besides they ha>e so 2any of the2^
Are they really the sa2e flesh as yourselfL .o they e>en ha>e na2esL 3r are they
2erely a 6ind of undifferentiated brown stuff- about as indi>idual as bees or coral
insectsL 1hey arise out of the earth- they sweat and star>e for a few years- and
then they sin6 bac6 into the na2eless 2ounds of the gra>eyard and nobody
notices that they are gone! And e>en the gra>es the2sel>es soon fade bac6 into
the soil!
;,
Aside fro2 the pictures9ue characters offered European readers in the e4otic fiction
of 2inor writers F&ierre 'oti- Mar2adu6e &ic6thall- and the li6eG- the non0European
6nown to Europeans is precisely what 3rwell says about hi2! (e is either a figure of
fun- or an ato2 in a >ast collecti>ity designated in ordinary or culti>ated discourse as
an undifferentiated type called 3riental- African- yellow- brown- or Musli2! 1o such
abstractions 3rientalis2 had contributed its power of generaliAation- con>erting
instances of a ci>iliAation into ideal bearers of its >alues- ideas- and positions- which
in turn the 3rientalists had found in ithe 3rienti and transfor2ed into co22on
cultural currency!
If we reflect that #ay2ond "chwab brought out his brilliant biography of
An9uetil0.uperron in 1*)=0and began those studies which were to put 3rientalis2 in
its proper cultural conte4t0we 2ust also re2ar6 that what he did was in star6 contrast
to his fellow artists and intellectuals- for who2 3rient and 3ccident were still the
secondhand abstractions they were for Balery! /ot that &ound- Eliot- Ieats- Arthur
aley- Fenollosa- &aul Claudel Fin his 2onnaissance de lest+, Bictor "Pgalen- and
others were ignoring ithe wisdo2 of the East-i as Ma4 iller had called it a few
generations earlier! #ather the culture >iewed the 3rient- and Isla2 in particular- with
the 2istrust with which- its learned attitude to the 3rient had always been freighted!
A suitable instance of this conte2porary attitude at its 2ost e4plicit is to be found in
a series of lectures gi>en at the ?ni>ersity of Chicago in 1*2= on i1he 3ccident and
the 3rienti by Balentine Chirol- a well06nown European newspaper2an of great
e4perience in the EastJ his purpose was to 2a6e clear to educated A2ericans that the
3rient was not
2;2
as far off as perhaps they belie>ed! (is line is a si2ple one: that 3rient and 3ccident
are irreducibly opposed to each other- and that the 3rient0in particular
iMoha22edanis2i00is one of ithe great world0forcesi responsible for ithe deepest
lines of clea>agei in the world!
;*
Chirolfs sweeping generaliAations are- I thin6-
ade9uately represented by the titles of his si4 lectures: i1heir Ancient BattlegroundiJ
i1he &assing of the 3tto2an E2pire- the &eculiar Case of EgyptiJ i1he 5reat British
E4peri2ent in EgyptiJ i&rotectorates and MandatesiJ i1he /ew Factor of
Bolshe>is2iJ and i"o2e 5eneral Conclusions!i
1o such relati>ely popular accounts of the 3rient as Chirolfs- we can add a
testi2onial by Xlie Faure- who in his ru2inations draws- li6e Chirol- on history-
cultural e4pertise- and the fa2iliar contrast between hite 3ccidentalis2 and colored
3rientalis2! hile deli>ering hi2self of parado4es li6e ile carnage per2anent de
lfindiffPrence orientalei Ffor- unli6e ius-i itheyi ha>e no conception of peaceG- Faure
goes on to show that the 3rientalsf bodies are laAy- that the 3rient has no conception
of history- of the nation- or of patrie, that the 3rient is essentially 2ystical0and so on!
Faure argues that unless the 3riental learns to be rational- to de>elop techni9ues of
6nowledge and positi>ity- there can be no rapprochement between East and est!
E7
A
far 2ore subtle and learned account of the East0est dile22a can be found in
Fernand Baldenspergerfs essay i3_ sfaffrontent If3rient et lf3ccident intellectuels-i
but he too spea6s of an inherent 3riental disdain for the idea- for 2ental discipline-
for rational interpretation!
E1
"po6en as they are out of the depths of European culture- by writers who actually
belie>e the2sel>es to be spea6ing on behalf of that culture- such co22onplaces Ffor
they are perfect id-es reEues+ cannot be e4plained si2ply as e4a2ples of pro>incial
chau>inis2! 1hey are not that- and0as will be e>ident to anyone who 6nows anything
about Faurefs and Baldenspergerfs other wor60are the 2ore parado4ical for not being
that! 1heir bac6ground is the transfor2ation of the e4acting- professional science of
3rientalis2- whose function in nineteenth0century culture had been the restoration to
Europe of a lost portion of hu2anity- but which had beco2e in the twentieth century
both an instru2ent of policy and- 2ore i2portant- a code by which Europe could
interpret both itself and the 3rient to itself! For reasons discussed earlier in this boo6-
2ode2 3rientalis2 already carried within itself the i2print of
2;)
the great European fear of Isla2- and this was aggra>ated by the political challenges
of the entre'deuC'guerres. My point is that the 2eta2orphosis of a relati>ely
innocuous philological subspecialty into a capacity for 2anaging political
2o>e2ents- ad2inistering colonies- 2a6ing nearly apocalyptic state2ents
representing the hite Manfs difficult ci>iliAing 2ission0all this is so2ething at wor6
within a purportedly liberal culture- one full of concern for its >aunted nor2s of
catholicity- plurality- and open02indedness! In fact- what too6 place was the >ery
opposite of liberal: the hardening of doctrine and 2eaning- i2parted by iscience-i
into itruth!i For if such truth reser>ed for itself the right to @udge the 3rient as
i22utably 3riental in the ways I ha>e indicated- then liberality was no 2ore than a
for2 of oppression and 2entalistic pre@udice!
1he e4tent of such illiberality was not0and is not0often recogniAed fro2 within
the culture- for reasons that this boo6 is trying to e4plore! It is heartening-
ne>ertheless- that such illiberality has occasionally been challenged! (ere is an
instance fro2 I! A! #ichardsfs foreword to his Mencius on the Mind F1*)2GJ we can
9uite easily substitute i3rientali for iChinesei in what follows!
As to the effects of an increased 6nowledge of Chinese thought upon the
est- it is interesting to notice that a writer so unli6ely to be thought either
ignorant or careless as M! Etienne 5ilson can yet- in the English &reface of his
The Philosophy o# 4t. Thomas $3uinas, spea6 of 1ho2istic &hilosophy as
iaccepting and gathering up the whole of hu2an tradition!i 1his is how we all
thin6- to us the estern world is still the orld Yor the part of the orld that
countsZJ but an i2partial obser>er would perhaps say that such pro>incialis2 is
dangerous! And we are not yet so happy in the est that we can be sure that we
are not suffering fro2 its effects!
E2
#ichardsfs argu2ent ad>ances clai2s for the e4ercise of what he calls Multiple
.efinition- a genuine type of pluralis2- with the co2bati>eness of syste2s of
definition eli2inated! hether or not we accept his counter to 5ilsonfs pro>incialis2-
we can accept the proposition that liberal hu2anis2- of which 3rientalis2 has
historically been one depart2ent- retards the process of enlarged and enlarging
2eaning through which true understanding can be attained! hat too6 the place of
enlarged 2eaning in twentieth century 3rientalis20that is- within the technical
field0is the sub@ect 2ost i22ediately at hand!
2;=
III
Modern An"lo1+rench
Orientalism in +ullest +loer
Because we ha>e beco2e accusto2ed to thin6 of a conte2porary e4pert on so2e
branch of the 3rient- or so2e aspect of its life- as a specialist in iarea studies-i we
ha>e lost a >i>id sense of how- until around orld ar II- the 3rientalist was
considered to be a generalist Fwith a great deal of specific 6nowledge- of courseG who
had highly de>eloped s6ills for 2a6ing su22ational state2ents! By su22ational
state2ents I 2ean that in for2ulating a relati>ely unco2plicated idea- say- about
Arabic gra22ar or Indian religion- the 3rientalist would be understood Fand would
understand hi2selfG as also 2a6ing a state2ent about the 3rient as a whole- thereby
su22ing it up! 1hus e>ery discrete study of one bit of 3riental 2aterial would also
confir2 in a su22ary way the profound 3rientality of the 2aterial! And since it was
co22only belie>ed that the whole 3rient hung together in so2e profoundly organic
way- it 2ade perfectly good her2eneutical sense for the 3rientalist scholar to regard
the 2aterial e>idence he dealt with as ulti2ately leading to a better understanding of
such things as the 3riental character- 2ind- ethos- or world0spirit!
Most of the first two chapters of this boo6 ha>e 2ade si2ilar argu2ents about
earlier periods in the history of 3rientalist thought! 1he differentiation in its later
history that concerns us here- howe>er- is the one between the periods i22ediately
before and after orld ar I! In both instances- as with the earlier periods- the 3rient
is 3riental no 2atter the specific case- and no 2atter the style or techni9ue used to
describe itJ the difference between the two periods in 9uestion is the reason gi>en by
the 3rientalist for seeing the essential 3rientality of the 3rient! A good e4a2ple of
the prewar rationale can be found in the following passage by "nouc6 (urgron@e-
ta6en fro2 his 1,** re>iew of Eduard "achaufs Muhammedanisches Recht<
! ! ! the law- which in practice had to 2a6e e>er greater concessions to the use and
custo2s of the people and the arbitrariness of
2;;
their rulers- ne>ertheless retained a considerable influence on the intellectual life
of the Musli2s! 1herefore it re2ains- and still is for us too- an i2portant sub@ect
of study- not only for abstract reasons connected with the history of law-
ci>iliAation and religion- but also for practical purposes! 1he 2ore inti2ate the
relations of Europe with the Musli2 East beco2e- the 2ore Musli2 countries fall
under European suAerainty- the 2ore i2portant it is for us Europeans to beco2e
ac9uainted with the intellectual life- the religious law- and the conceptual
bac6ground of Isla2!
E)
Although (urgron@e allows that so2ething so abstract as iIsla2ic lawi did
occasionally yield to the pressure of history and society- he is 2ore interested than
not in retaining the abstraction for intellectual use because in its broad outline
iIsla2ic lawi confir2s the disparity between East and est! For (urgron@e the
distinction between 3rient and 3ccident was no 2ere acade2ic or popular cliche:
9uite the contrary! For hi2 it signified the essential- historical power relationship
between the two! %nowledge of the 3rient either pro>es- enhances- or deepens the
difference by which European suAerainty Fthe phrase has a >enerable
nineteenth0century pedigreeG is e4tended effecti>ely o>er Asia! 1o 6now the 3rient as
a whole- then- is to 6now it because it is entrusted to onefs 6eeping- if one is a
esterner!
An al2ost sy22etrical passage to (urgron@efs is to be found in the concluding
paragraph of 5ibbfs article i'iteraturei in The (egacy o# /slam, published in 1*)1!
After ha>ing described the three casual contacts between East and est up till the
eighteenth century- 5ibb then proceeds to the nineteenth century:
Following on these three 2o2ents of casual contact- the 5er2an ro2antics
turned again to the East- and for the first ti2e 2ade it their conscious ai2 to open
a way for the real heritage of oriental poetry to enter into the poetry of Europe!
1he nineteenth century- with its new sense of power and superiority- see2ed to
clang the gate decisi>ely in the face of their design! 1oday- on the other hand-
there are signs of a change! 3riental literature has begun to be studied again for
its own sa6e- and a new understanding of the East is being gained! As this
6nowledge spreads and the East reco>ers its rightful place in the life of hu2anity-
oriental literature 2ay once again perfor2 its historic function- and assist us to
liberate oursel>es fro2 the narrow and oppressi>e conceptions which would li2it
all that is significant in literature- thought- and history to our own seg2ent of the
globe!
E=
2;E
5ibbfs phrase ifor its own sa6ei is in dia2etrical opposition to the string of reasons
subordinated to (urgron@efs declaration about European suAerainty o>er the East!
hat re2ains- ne>ertheless- is that see2ingly in>iolable o>erall identity of so2ething
called ithe Easti and so2ething else called ithe est!i "uch entities ha>e a use for
each other- and it is plainly 5ibbfs laudable intention to show that the influence on
estern of 3riental literature need not be Fin its resultsG what Bruneti]re had called
ia national disgrace!i #ather- the East could be confronted as a sort of hu2anistic
challenge to the local confines of estern ethnocentricity!
(is earlier solicitation of 5oethefs idea of )elditeratur notwithstanding- 5ibbfs
call for hu2anistic interinani2ation between East and est reflects the changed
political and cultural realities of the postwar era! European suAerainty o>er the 3rient
had not passedJ but it had e>ol>ed0in British Egypt0fro2 a 2ore or less placid
acceptance by the nati>es into a 2ore and 2ore contested political issue co2pounded
by fractious nati>e de2ands for independence! 1hese were the years of constant
British trouble with Raghlul- the afd party- and the li6e!
E;
Moreo>er- since 1*2;
there had been a worldwide econo2ic recession- and this too increased the sense of
tension that 5ibbfs prose reflects! But the specifically cultural 2essage in what he
says is the 2ost co2pelling! (eed the 3rient- he see2s to be telling his reader- for its
use to the estern 2ind in the struggle to o>erco2e narrowness- oppressi>e
specialiAation- and li2ited perspecti>es!
1he ground had shifted considerably fro2 (urgron@e to 5ibb- as had the
priorities! /o longer did it go without 2uch contro>ersy that Europefs do2ination
o>er the 3rient was al2ost a fact of natureJ nor was it assu2ed that the 3rient was in
need of estern enlighten2ent! hat 2attered during the interwar years was a
cultural self0definition that transcended the pro>incial and the 4enophobic! For 5ibb-
the est has need of the 3rient as so2ething to be studied because it releases the
spirit fro2 sterile specialiAation- it eases the affliction of e4cessi>e parochial and
nationalistic selfcenteredness- it increases onefs grasp of the really central issues in
the study of culture! If the 3rient appears 2ore a partner in this new rising dialectic of
cultural self0consciousness- it is- first- because the 3rient is 2ore of a challenge now
than it was before- and second- because the est is entering a relati>ely new phase of
cultural crisis- caused in part by the di2inish2ent of estern suAerainty o>er the rest
of the world!
2;+
1herefore- in the best 3rientalist wor6 done during the interwar period
represented in the i2pressi>e careers of Massignon and 5ibb hi2self0we will find
ele2ents in co22on with the best hu2anistic scholarship of the period! 1hus the
su22ational attitude of which I spo6e earlier can be regarded as the 3rientalist
e9ui>alent of atte2pts in the purely estern hu2anities to understand culture as a
whole, antipositi>istically- intuiti>ely- sy2pathetically! Both the 3rientalist and the
non03rientalist begin with the sense that estern culture is passing through an
i2portant phase- whose 2ain feature is the crisis i2posed on it by such threats as
barbaris2- narrow technical concerns- 2oral aridity- strident nationalis2- and so
forth! 1he idea of using specific te4ts- for instance- to wor6 fro2 the specific to the
general Fto understand the whole life of a period and conse9uently of a cultureG is
co22on to those hu2anists in the est inspired by the wor6 of ilhel2 .ilthey- as
well as to towering 3rientalist scholars li6e Massignon and 5ibb! 1he pro@ect of
re>italiAing philology0as it is found in the wor6 of Curtius- Bossler- Auerbach-
"pitAer- 5undolf- (of2annsthal
EE
0has its counterpart therefore in the in>igorations
pro>ided to strictly technical 3rientalist philology by Massignonfs studies of what he
called the 2ystical le4icon- the >ocabulary of Isla2ic de>otion- and so on!
But there is another- 2ore interesting con@unction between 3rientalis2 in this
phase of its history and the European sciences of 2an Jsciences de lIhomme+, the
>eisteswissenscha#ten conte2porary with it! e 2ust note- first- that non03rientalist
cultural studies were perforce 2ore i22ediately responsi>e to the threats to
hu2anistic culture of a self0aggrandiAing- a2oral technical specialiAation represented-
in part at least- by the rise of fascis2 in Europe! 1his response e4tended the concerns
of the interwar period into the period following orld ar II as well! An elo9uent
scholarly and personal testi2onial to this response can be found in Erich Auerbachfs
2agisterial Mimesis, and in his last 2ethodological reflections as a &hilolog!
E+
(e
tells us that Mimesis was written during his e4ile in 1ur6ey and was 2eant to be in
large 2easure an atte2pt >irtually to see the de>elop2ent of estern culture at
al2ost the last 2o2ent when that culture still had its integrity and ci>iliAational
coherenceJ therefore- he set hi2self the tas6 of writing a general wor6 based on
specific te4tual analyses in such a way as to lay out the principles of estern literary
perfor2ance in all their >ariety- richness- and fertility! 1he ai2 was a
2;,
synthesis of estern culture in which the synthesis itself was 2atched in i2portance
by the >ery gesture of doing it- which Auerbach belie>ed was 2ade possible by what
he called ilate bourgeois hu2anis2!i
E,
1he discrete particular was thus con>erted
into a highly 2ediated sy2bol of the world0historical process!
/o less i2portant for Auerbach0and this fact is of i22ediate rele>ance to
3rientalis20was the hu2anistic tradition of in>ol>e2ent in a national culture or
literature not onefs own! Auerbachfs e4a2ple was Curtius- whose prodigious output
testified to his deliberate choice as a 5er2an to dedicate hi2self professionally to the
#o2ance literatures! /ot for nothing- then- did Auerbach end his autu2nal reflections
with a significant 9uotation fro2 (ugo of "t! Bictorfs Didascalicon< i1he 2an who
finds his ho2eland sweet is still a tender beginnerJ he to who2 e>ery soil is as his
nati>e one is already strongJ but he is perfect to who2 the entire world is as a foreign
land!i
E*
1he 2ore one is able to lea>e onefs cultural ho2e- the 2ore easily is one able
to @udge it- and the whole world as well- with the spiritual detach2ent and generosity
necessary for true >ision! 1he 2ore easily- too- does one assess oneself and alien
cultures with the sa2e co2bination of inti2acy and distance!
/o less i2portant and 2ethodologically for2ati>e a cultural force was the use in
the social sciences of itypesi both as an analytical de>ice and as a way of seeing
fa2iliar things in a new way! 1he precise history of the itypei as it is to be found in
earlytwentieth0century thin6ers li6e eber- .ur6hei2- 'u6acs- Mannhei2- and the
other sociologists of 6nowledge has been e4a2ined often enough:
+7
yet it has not
been re2ar6ed- I thin6- that eberfs studies of &rotestantis2- Judais2- and Buddhis2
blew hi2 Fperhaps unwittinglyG into the >ery territory originally charted and clai2ed
by the 3rientalists! 1here he found encourage2ent a2ongst all those
nineteenth0century thin6ers who belie>ed that there was a sort of ontological
difference between Eastern and estern econo2ic Fas well as religiousG
i2entalities!i Although he ne>er thoroughly studied Isla2- eber ne>ertheless
influenced the field considerably- 2ainly because his notions of type were si2ply an
ioutsidei confir2ation of 2any of the canonical theses held by 3rientalists- whose
econo2ic ideas ne>er e4tended beyond asserting the 3rientalfs funda2ental
incapacity for trade- co22erce- and econo2ic rationality! In the Isla2ic field those
cliches held good for literally hundreds of years0until Ma4i2e #odinsonfs i2portant
study /slam and 2apitalism appeared in 1*EE! "till- the notion of a type
2;*
3riental- Isla2ic- Arab- or whate>er0endures and is nourished by si2ilar 6inds of
abstractions or paradig2s or types as they e2erge out of the 2odern social sciences!
I ha>e often spo6en in this boo6 of the sense of estrange2ent e4perienced by
3rientalists as they dealt with or li>ed in a culture so profoundly different fro2 their
own! /ow one of the stri6ing differences between 3rientalis2 in its Isla2ic >ersion
and all the other hu2anistic disciplines where Auerbachfs notions on the necessity of
estrange2ent ha>e so2e >alidity is that Isla2ic 3rientalists ne>er saw their
estrange2ent fro2 Isla2 either as salutary or as an attitude with i2plications for the
better understanding of their own culture! #ather- their estrange2ent fro2 Isla2
si2ply intensified their feelings of superiority about European culture- e>en as their
antipathy spread to include the entire 3rient- of which Isla2 was considered a
degraded Fand usually- a >irulently dangerousG representati>e! "uch tendencies0it has
also been 2y argu2ent0beca2e built into the >ery traditions of 3rientalist study
throughout the nineteenth century- and in ti2e beca2e a standard co2ponent of 2ost
3rientalist training- handed on fro2 generation to generation! In addition- I thin6- the
li6elihood was >ery great that European scholars would continue to see the /ear
3rient through the perspecti>e of its Biblical iorigins-i that is- as a place of
unsha6ably influential religious pri2acy! 5i>en its special relationship to both
Christianity and Judais2- Isla2 re2ained fore>er the 3rientalistfs idea For typeG of
original cultural effrontery- aggra>ated naturally by the fear that Isla2ic ci>iliAation
originally Fas well as conte2poraneouslyG continued to stand so2ehow opposed to
the Christian est!
For these reasons- Isla2ic 3rientalis2 between the wars shared in the general
sense of cultural crisis adu2brated by Auerbach and the others I ha>e spo6en of
briefly- without at the sa2e ti2e de>eloping in the sa2e way as the other hu2an
sciences! Because Isla2ic 3rientalis2 also preser>ed within it the peculiarly
pole2ical religious attitude it had had fro2 the beginning- it re2ained fi4ed in certain
2ethodological trac6s- so to spea6! Its cultural alienation- for one- needed to be
preser>ed fro2 2odern history and sociopolitical circu2stance- as well as fro2 the
necessary re>isions i2posed on any theoretical or historical itypei by new data! For
another- the abstractions offered by 3rientalis2 For rather- the opportunity for 2a6ing
abstractionsG in the case of Isla2ic ci>iliAation were considered to ha>e ac9uired a
new >alidityJ since it was
2E7
assu2ed that Isla2 wor6ed the way 3rientalists said it did Fwithout reference to
actuality- but only to a set of iclassicali principlesG- it was also assu2ed that 2odern
Isla2 would be nothing 2ore than a reasserted >ersion of the old- especially since it
was also supposed that 2odernity for Isla2 was less of a challenge than an insult!
F1he >ery large nu2ber of assu2ptions and suppositions in this description-
incidentally- are intended to portray the rather eccentric twists and turns necessary for
3rientalis2 to ha>e 2aintained its peculiar way of seeing hu2an reality!G Finally- if
the synthesiAing a2bition in philology Fas concei>ed by Auerbach or! CurtiusG was to
lead to an enlarge2ent of the scholarfs awareness- of his sense of the brotherhood of
2an- of the uni>ersality of certain principles of hu2an beha>ior- in Isla2ic
3rientalis2 synthesis led to a sharpened sense of difference between 3rient and
3ccident as reflected in Isla2!
hat I a2 describing- then- is so2ething that will characteriAe Isla2ic
3rientalis2 until the present day: its retrogressi>e position when co2pared with the
other hu2an sciences Fand e>en with the other branches of 3rientalis2G- its general
2ethodological and ideological bac6wardness- and its co2parati>e insularity fro2
de>elop2ents both in the other hu2anities and in the real world of historical-
econo2ic- social- and political circu2stances!
+1
"o2e awareness of this lag in Isla2ic
For "e2iticG 3rientalis2 was already present towards the end of the nineteenth
century- perhaps because it was beginning to be apparent to so2e obser>ers how >ery
little either "e2itic or Isla2ic 3rientalis2 had sha6en itself loose fro2 the religious
bac6ground fro2 which it originally deri>ed! 1he first 3rientalist congress was
organiAed and held in &aris in 1,+)- and al2ost fro2 the outset it was e>ident to other
scholars that the "e2iticists and Isla2icists were in intellectual arrears- generally
spea6ing! riting a sur>ey of all the congresses that had been held between 1,+) and
1,*+- the English scholar #! /! Cust had this to say about the "e2itic0Isla2ic
subfield:
"uch 2eetings Yas those held in the ancient0"e2itic fieldZ- indeed- ad>ance
3riental learning!
1he sa2e cannot be said with regard to the 2odern0"e2itic sectionJ it was
crowded- but the sub@ects discussed were of the s2allest literary interest- such as
would occupy the 2inds of the dilettanti scholars of the old school- not the great
class of iindicatoresi of the nineteenth century! I a2 forced to go bac6 to &liny to
find a word! 1here was an absence fro2 this section both
2E1
of the 2odern philological and archeological spirit- and the report reads 2ore li6e
that of a congress of ?ni>ersity tutors of the last century 2et to discuss the
reading of a passage in a 5ree6 play- or the accentuation of a >owel- before the
dawn of Co2parati>e &hilology had swept away the cobwebs of the "choliasts!
as it worth while to discuss whether Maho2et could hold a pen or writeL
+2
1o so2e e4tent the pole2ical anti9uarianis2 that Cust described was a scholarly
>ersion of European anti0"e2itis2! E>en the designation i2odern0"e2itic-i which
was 2eant to include both Musli2s and Jews Fand which had its origin in the
so0called ancient0"e2itic field pioneered by #enanG- carried its racist banner with
what was doubtless 2eant to be a decent ostentation! A little later in his report Cust
co22ents on how in the sa2e 2eeting i Mthe Aryanf supplied 2uch 2aterial for
reflection!i Clearly ithe Aryani is a counterabstraction to ithe "e2ite-i but for so2e
of the reasons I listed earlier- such ata>istic labels were felt to be especially pertinent
to "e2ites0with what e4pensi>e 2oral and hu2an conse9uences for the hu2an
co22unity as a whole- the history of the twentieth century a2ply de2onstrates! Iet
what has not been sufficiently stressed in histories of 2odern anti 0"e2itis2 has been
the legiti2ation of such ata>istic designations by 3rientalis2- and 2ore i2portant for
2y purposes here- the way this acade2ic and intellectual legiti2ation has persisted
right through the 2odern age in discussions of Isla2- the Arabs- or the /ear 3rient!
For whereas it is no longer possible to write learned For e>en popularG dis9uisitions
on either ithe /egro 2indi or ithe Jewish personality-i it is perfectly possible to
engage in such research as ithe Isla2ic 2ind-i or ithe Arab characteri0but of this
sub@ect 2ore later!
1hus- in order properly to understand the intellectual genealogy of interwar
Isla2ic 3rientalis20as it is 2ost interestingly and satisfyingly seen Fno irony
intendedG in the careers of Massignon and 5ibb0we 2ust be able to understand the
differences between the 3rientalistfs su22ational attitude towards his 2aterial and
the 6ind of attitude to which it bears a strong cultural rese2blance- that in the wor6 of
philologists such as Auerbach and Curtius! 1he intellectual crisis in Isla2ic
3rientalis2 was another aspect of the spiritual crisis of ilate bourgeois hu2anis2iJ
in its for2 and style- howe>er- Isla2ic 3rientalis2 >iewed the proble2s of 2an6ind
as
2E2
separable into the categories called i3rientali or i3ccidental!i It was belie>ed- then-
that for the 3riental- liberation- self0e4pression- and self0enlarge2ent were not the
issues that they were for the 3ccidental! Instead- the Isla2ic 3rientalist e4pressed his
ideas about Isla2 in such a way as to e2phasiAe his- as well as putati>ely the
Musli2fs- resistance to change- to 2utual co2prehension between East and est- to
the de>elop2ent of 2en and wo2en out of archaic- pri2iti>e classical institutions
and into 2odernity! Indeed- so fierce was this sense of resistance to change- and so
uni>ersal were the powers ascribed to it- that in reading the 3rientalists one
understands that the apocalypse to be feared was not the destruction of estern
ci>iliAation but rather the destruction of the barriers that 6ept East and est fro2
each other! hen 5ibb opposed nationalis2 in the 2odern Isla2ic states- he did so
because he felt that nationalis2 would corrode the inner structures 6eeping Isla2
3rientalJ the net result of secular nationalis2 would be to 2a6e the 3rient no
different fro2 the est! Iet it is a tribute to 5ibbfs e4traordinarily sy2pathetic
powers of identification with an alien religion that he put his disappro>al in such a
way as to see2 to be speaking #or the Isla2ic orthodo4 co22unity! (ow 2uch such
pleading was a re>ersion to the old 3rientalist habit of spea6ing for the nati>es and
how 2uch it was a sincere atte2pt at spea6ing in Isla2fs best interests is a 9uestion
whose answer lies so2ewhere between the two alternati>es!
/o scholar or thin6er- of course- is a perfect representati>e of so2e ideal type or
school in which- by >irtue of national origin or the accidents of history- he
participates! Iet in so relati>ely insulated and specialiAed a tradition as 3rientalis2- I
thin6 there is in each scholar so2e awareness- partly conscious and partly non0
conscious- of national tradition- if not of national ideology! 1his is particularly true in
3rientalis2- additionally so because of the direct political in>ol>e2ent of European
nations in the affairs of one or another 3riental country: the case of "nouc6
(urgron@e- to cite a non0British and non0French instance where the scholarfs sense of
national identity is si2ple and clear- co2es to 2ind i22ediately!
+)
Iet e>en after
2a6ing all the proper 9ualifications about the difference between an indi>idual and a
type For between an indi>idual and a traditionG- it is ne>ertheless stri6ing to note the
e4tent to which 5ibb and Massignon were representati>e types! &erhaps it would be
better to say that 5ibb and Massignon
2E)
fulfilled all the e4pectations created for the2 by their national traditions- by the
politics of their nations- by the internal history of their national ischoolsi of
3rientalis2!
"yl>ain 'e>i put the distinction between the two schools trenchantly:
1he political interest that ties England to India holds British wor6 to a sustained
contact with concrete realities- and 2aintains the cohesion between
representations of the past and the spectacle of the present!
/ourished by classical traditions- France see6s out the hu2an 2ind as it
2anifests itself in India in the sa2e way that it is interested in China!
+=
It would be too easy to say that this polarity results- on the one hand- in wor6 that is
sober- efficient- concrete- and on the other- in wor6 that is uni>ersalistic- speculati>e-
brilliant! Iet the polarity ser>es to illu2inate two long and e4tre2ely distinguished
careers that between the2 do2inated French and Anglo0A2erican Isla2ic
3rientalis2 until the 1*E7sJ if the do2ination 2a6es any sense at all- it is because
each scholar deri>ed fro2 and wor6ed in a self0conscious tradition whose constraints
For li2its- intellectually and politically spea6ingG can be described as 'P>i describes
the2 abo>e!
5ibb was born in Egypt- Massignon in France! Both were to beco2e deeply
religious 2en- students not so 2uch of society as of the religious life in society! Both
were also profoundly worldlyJ one of their greatest achie>e2ents was putting
traditional scholarship to use in the 2ode2 political world!Iet the range of their
wor6 the te4ture of it- al2ost0is >astly different- e>en allowing for the ob>ious
disparities in their schooling and religious education! In his lifelong de>otion- to the
wor6 of al0(alla@00 iwhose traces-i 5ibb said in his obituary notice for Massignon in
1*E2- he ine>er ceased to see6 out in later Isla2ic literature and
de>otioni0Massignonfs al2ost unrestricted range of research would lead hi2 >irtually
e>erywhere- finding e>idence for ilfesprit hu2aine a tra>ers lfespace et le te2ps!i In
an oeuvre that too6 iin e>ery aspect and region of conte2porary Musli2 life and
thought-i Massignonfs presence in 3rientalis2 was a constant challenge to his
colleagues! Certainly 5ibb for one ad2ired0but finally drew bac6 fro20the way
Massignon pursued
2E=
the2es that in so2e way lin6ed the spiritual life of Musli2s and Catholics Yand
enabled hi2 to findZ a congenial ele2ent in the >eneration of Fati2a- and
conse9uently a special field of interest in the study of "hifite thought in 2any of
its 2anifestations- or again in the co22unity of Abraha2anic origins and such
the2es as the "e>en "leepers! (is writings on these sub@ects ha>e ac9uired fro2
the 9ualities that he brought to the2 a per2anent significance in Isla2ic studies!
But @ust because of these 9ualities they are co2posed- as it were- in two registers!
3ne was at the ordinary le>el of ob@ecti>e scholarship- see6ing to elucidate the
nature of the gi>en pheno2enon by a 2asterly use of established tools of
acade2ic research! 1he other was at a le>el on which ob@ecti>e data and
understanding were absorbed and transfor2ed by an indi>idual intuition of
spiritual di2ensions! It was not always easy to draw a di>iding line between the
for2er and the transfiguration that resulted fro2 the outpouring of the riches of
his own personality!
1here is a hint here that Catholics are 2ore li6ely to be drawn to a study of ithe
>eneration of Fati2ai than &rotestants- but there is no 2ista6ing 5ibbfs suspicion of
anyone who blurred the distinction between iob@ecti>ei scholarship and one based on
Fe>en an elaborateG iindi>idual intuition of spiritual di2ensions!i 5ibb was right-
howe>er- in the ne4t paragraph of the obituary to ac6nowledge Massignonfs ifertilityi
of 2ind in such di>erse fields as ithe sy2bolis2 of Musli2 art- the structure of
Musli2 logic- the intricacies of 2edie>al finance- and the organiAation of artisan
corporationsiJ and he was right also- i22ediately after- to characteriAe Massignonfs
early interest in the "e2itic languages as gi>ing rise to ielliptic studies that to the
uninitiate al2ost ri>alled the 2ysteries of the ancient (er2etica!i /e>ertheless- 5ibb
ends on a generous note- re2ar6ing that
for us- the lesson which by his e4a2ple he i2pressed upon the 3rientalists of his
generation was that e>en classical 3rientalis2 is no longer ade9uate without
so2e degree of co22ittedness to the >ital forces that ha>e gi>en 2eaning and
>alue to the di>erse aspects of Eastern cultures!
+;
1hat- of course- was Massignonfs greatest contribution- and it is true that in
conte2porary French Isla2ology Fas it is so2eti2es calledG there has grown up a
tradition of identifying with ithe >ital forcesi infor2ing iEastern cultureiJ one need
only 2ention
2E;
the e4traordinary achie>e2ents of scholars li6e Jac9ues Ber9ue- Ma4i2e #odinson-
I>es 'acoste- #oger ArnaldeA0all of the2 differing widely a2ong the2sel>es in
approach and intention0to be struc6 with the se2inal e4a2ple of Massignon- whose
intellectual i2press upon the2 all is un2ista6able!
Iet in choosing to focus his co22ents al2ost anecdotally upon Massignonfs
>arious strengths and wea6nesses- 5ibb 2isses the ob>ious things about Massignon-
things that 2a6e hi2 so different fro2 5ibb and yet- when ta6en as a whole- 2a6e
hi2 the 2ature sy2bol of so crucial a de>elop2ent within French 3rientalis2! 3ne is
Massignonfs personal bac6ground- which 9uite beautifully illustrates the si2ple truth
of 'P>ifs description of French 3rientalis2! 1he >ery idea of iun esprit hu2aini was
so2ething 2ore or less foreign to the intellectual and religious bac6ground out of
which 5ibb- li6e so 2any 2odern British 3rientalists- de>eloped: in Massignonfs
case the notion of iesprit-i as an aesthetic as well as religious- 2oral- and historical
reality- was so2ething he see2ed to ha>e been nourished upon fro2 childhood! (is
fa2ily was friendly with such people as (uys2ans- and in nearly e>erything he wrote
Massignonfs early education in the intellectual a2bience as well as the ideas of late
"y2bolis2e is e>ident- e>en to the particular brand of Catholicis2 Fand "ufi
2ysticis2G in which he was interested! 1here is no austerity in Massignonfs wor6-
which is for2ulated in one of the great French styles of the century! (is ideas about
hu2an e4perience draw plentifully upon thin6ers and artists conte2porary with hi2-
and it is the >ery wide cultural range of his style itself that puts hi2 in a different
category altogether fro2 5ibbfs! (is early ideas co2e out of the period of so0called
aesthetic decadence- but they are also indebted to people li6e Bergson- .ur6hei2- and
Mauss! (is first contact with 3rientalis2 ca2e through #enan- whose lectures he
heard as a young 2anJ he was also a student of "yl>ain 'e>i- and ca2e to include
a2ong his friends such figures as &aul Claudel- 5abriel Bounoure- Jac9ues and
#aissa Maritain- and Charles de Foucauld! 'ater he was able to absorb wor6 done in
such relati>ely recent fields as urban sociology- structural linguistics- psychoanalysis-
conte2porary anthropology- and the /ew (istory! (is essays- to say nothing of the
2onu2ental study of al0(alla@- draw effortlessly on the entire corpus of Isla2ic
literatureJ his 2ystifying erudition and al2ost fa2iliar personality so2eti2es 2a6e
hi2 appear to be a scholar in>ented by Jorge 'uis Borges! (e was >ery sensiti>e to
i3rientali the2es in European literatureJ
2EE
this was one of 5ibbfs interests- too- but unli6e 5ibb- Massignon was attracted
pri2arily neither to European writers who iunderstoodi the 3rient nor to European
te4ts that were independent artistic corroborations of what later 3rientalist scholars
would re>eal Fe!g!- 5ibbfs interest in "cott as a source for the study of "aladinG!
Massignonfs i3rienti was co2pletely consonant with the world of the "e>en "leepers
or of the Abraha2anic prayers Fwhich are the two the2es singled out by 5ibb as
distincti>e 2ar6s of Massignonfs unorthodo4 >iew of Isla2G: offbeat- slightly
peculiar- wholly responsi>e to the daAAling interpretati>e gifts which Massignon
brought to it Fand which in a sense 2ade it up as a sub@ectG! If 5ibb li6ed "cottfs
"aladin- then Massignonfs sy22etrical predilection was for /er>al- as suicide- po]te
2audit- psychological oddity! 1his is not to say that Massignon was essentially a
student of the pastJ on the contrary- he was a 2a@or presence in Isla2ic0French
relations- in politics as well as culture! (e was ob>iously a passionate 2an who
belie>ed that the world of Isla2 could be penetrated- not by scholarship e4clusi>ely-
but by de>otion to all of its acti>ities- not the least of which was the world of Eastern
Christianity subsu2ed within Isla2- one of whose subgroups- the Badaliya "odality-
was war2ly encouraged by Massignon!
Massignonfs considerable literary gifts so2eti2es gi>e his scholarly wor6 an
appearance of capricious- o>erly cos2opolitan- and often pri>ate speculation! 1his
appearance is 2isleading- and in fact is rarely ade9uate as a description of his writing!
hat he wished deliberately to a>oid was what he called ilfanalyse analyti9ue et
stati9ue de lforientalis2e-i
+E
a sort of inert piling up- on a supposed Isla2ic te4t or
proble2- of sources- origins- proofs- de2onstrations- and the li6e! E>erywhere his
atte2pt is to include as 2uch of the conte4t of a te4t or proble2 as possible- to
ani2ate it- to surprise his reader- al2ost- with the glancing insights a>ailable to
anyone who- li6e Massignon- is willing to cross disciplinary and traditional
boundaries in order to penetrate to the hu2an heart of any te4t! /o 2odern
3rientalist0and certainly not 5ibb- his closest peer in achie>e2ent and
influence0could refer so easily Fand accuratelyG in an essay to a host of Isla2ic
2ystics and to Jung- (eisenberg- Mallar2e- and %ier6egaardJ and certainly >ery few
3rientalists had that range together with the concrete political e4perience of which he
was able to spea6 in his 1*;2 essay i'f3ccident de>ant lf3rient: &ri2autP dfune
solution culturelle!i
++
And yet his intellectual world was a clearly defined one! It had
2E+
a definite structure- intact fro2 the beginning to the end of his career- and it was laced
up- despite its al2ost unparalleled richness of scope and reference- in a set of
basically unchanging ideas! 'et us briefly describe the structure and list the ideas in a
su22ary fashion!
Massignon too6 as his starting point the e4istence of the three Abraha2anic
religions- of which Isla2 is the religion of Ish2ael- the 2onotheis2 of a people
e4cluded fro2 the di>ine pro2ise 2ade to Isaac! Isla2 is therefore a religion of
resistance Fto 5od the Father- to Christ the IncarnationG- which yet 6eeps within it the
sadness that began in (agarfs tears! Arabic as a result is the >ery language of tears-
@ust as the whole notion of Nihad in Isla2 Fwhich Massignon e4plicitly says is the epic
for2 in Isla2 that #enan could not see or understandG has an i2portant intellectual
di2ension whose 2ission is war against Christianity and Judais2 as e4terior
ene2ies- and against heresy as an interior ene2y! Iet within Isla2- Massignon
belie>ed he was able to discern a type of countercurrent- which it beca2e his chief
intellectual 2ission to study- e2bodied in 2ysticis2- a road towards di>ine grace!
1he principal feature of 2ysticis2 was of course its sub@ecti>e character- whose
nonrational and e>en ine4plicable tendencies were towards the singular- the
indi>idual- the 2o2entary e4perience of participation in the .i>ine! All of
Massignonfs e4traordinary wor6 on 2ysticis2 was thus an atte2pt to describe the
itinerary of souls out of the li2iting consensus i2posed on the2 by the orthodo4
Isla2ic co22unity- or "unna! An Iranian 2ystic was 2ore intrepid than an Arab one-
partly because he was Aryan Fthe old nineteenth0century labels iAryani and
i"e2itici ha>e a co2pelling urgency for Massignon- as does also the legiti2acy of
"chlegelfs binary opposition between the two language fa2iliesiG and partly because
he was a 2an see6ing the &erfectJ the Arab 2ystic- in Massignonfs >iew- inclined
towards what aardenburg calls a testi2onial 2onis2! 1he e4e2plary figure for
Massignon was al0(alla@- who sought liberation for hi2self outside the orthodo4
co22unity by as6ing for- and finally getting- the >ery crucifi4ion refused by Isla2 as
a wholeJ Moha22ed- according to Massignon- had deliberately re@ected the
opportunity offered hi2 to bridge the gap separating hi2 fro2 5od! Al 0(alla@fs
achie>e2ent was therefore to ha>e achie>ed a 2ystical union with 5od against the
grain of Isla2!
1he rest of the orthodo4 co22unity li>es in a condition of what Massignon calls
isoif ontologi9uei0ontological thirst! 5od presents hi2self to 2an as a 6ind of
absence- a refusal to be present-
2E,
yet the de>out Musli2fs consciousness of his sub2ission to 5odfs will FIsla2G gi>es
rise to a @ealous sense of 5odfs transcendence and an intolerance of idolatry of any
sort! 1he seat of these ideas- according to Massignon- is the icircu2cised heart-i
which while it is in the grip of its testi2onial Musli2 fer>or can- as is the case with
2ystics li6e al0(alla@- also be infla2ed with a di>ine passion or lo>e of 5od! In either
case- 5odfs transcendental unity Jtawhid+ is so2ething to be achie>ed and understood
o>er and o>er by the de>out Musli2- either through testifying to it or through 2ystic
lo>e of 5od: and this- Massignon wrote in a co2ple4 essay- defines the iintentioni of
Isla2!i Clearly Massignonfs sy2pathies lay with the 2ystic >ocation in Isla2- as
2uch for its closeness to his own te2pera2ent as a de>out Catholic as for its
disrupting influence within the orthodo4 body of beliefs! Massignonfs i2age of Isla2
is of a religion ceaselessly i2plicated in its refusals- its lateco2ing Fwith reference to
the other Abraha2anic creedsG- its co2parati>ely barren sense of worldly reality- its
2assi>e structures of defense against ipsychic co22otionsi of the sort practiced by
al0(alla@ and other "ufi 2ystics- its loneliness as the only re2aining i3rientali
religion of the three great 2onotheis2s!
,7
But so ob>iously stern a >iew of Isla2- with its iin>ariants si2plesi
,1
Fespecially
for so lu4uriant a thought as MassignonfsG- entailed no deep hostility towards it on his
part! In reading Massignon one is struc6 by his repeated insistence on the need for
co2ple4 reading0in@unctions whose absolute sincerity it is i2possible to doubt! (e
wrote in 1*;1 that his 6ind of 3rientalis2 was ini une 2anie dfe4otis2e- ni un
renie2ent de lfEurope- 2ais une wise au ni>eau entre nos 2Pthodes de recherches et
les traditions >Pcues dfanti9ues ci>ilisations!i
,2
&ut into practice in the reading of an
Arabic or Isla2ic te4t- this 6ind of 3rientalis2 produced interpretations of an al2ost
o>erwhel2ing intelligenceJ one would be foolish not to respect the sheer genius and
no>elty of Massignonfs 2ind! Iet what 2ust catch our attention in his definition of
his 3rientalis2 are two phrases: inos 2Pthodes de recherchesi and iles traditions
>Pcues dfanti9ues ci>ilisations!i Massignon saw what he did as the synthesis of two
roughly opposed 9uantities- yet it is the peculiar asy22etry between the2 that
troubles one- and not 2erely the fact of the opposition between Europe and 3rient!
Massignonfs i2plication is that the essence of the difference between East and est
is between 2odernity and ancient tradition!And indeed in his writings on political and
conte2porary proble2s-
2E*
which is where one can see 2ost i22ediately the li2itations of Massignonfs 2ethod-
the East0est opposition turns up in a 2ost peculiar way!
At its best- Massignonfs >ision of the East0est encounter assigned great
responsibility to the est for its in>asion of the East- its colonialis2- its relentless
attac6s on Isla2! Massignon was a tireless fighter on behalf of Musli2 ci>iliAation
and- as his nu2erous essays and letters after 1*=, testify- in support of &alestinian
refugees- in the defense of Arab Musli2 and Christian rights in &alestine against
Rionis2- against what- with reference to so2ething said by Abba Eban- he scathingly
called Israeli ibourgeois colonialis2!
,)
Iet the fra2ewor6 in which Massignonfs
>ision was held also assigned the Isla2ic 3rient to an essentially ancient ti2e and the
est to 2odernity! 'i6e #obertson "2ith- Massignon considered the 3riental to be
not a 2odern 2an but a "e2iteJ this reducti>e category had a powerful grip on his
thought! hen- for e4a2ple- in 1*E7 he and Jac9ues Ber9ue- his colleague at the
College de France- published their dialogue on ithe Arabsi in Esprit, a good deal of
the ti2e was spent in arguing whether the best way to loo6 at the proble2s of the
conte2porary Arabs was si2ply to say- in the 2ain instanceJ that the Arab0Israeli
conflict was really a 4emitic proble2! Ber9ue tried to de2ur gently- and to nudge
Massignon towards the possibility that li6e the rest of the world the Arabs had
undergone what he called an ianthropological >ariationi: Massignon refused the
notion out of hand!
,=
(is repeated efforts to understand and report on the &alestine
conflict- for all their profound hu2anis2- ne>er really got past the 9uarrel between
Isaac and Ish2ael or- so far as his 9uarrel with Israel was concerned- the tension
between Judais2 and Christianity! hen Arab cities and >illages were captured by
the Rionists- it was Massignonfs religious sensibilities that were offended!
Europe- and France in particular- were seen as contemporary realities! &artly
because of his initial political encounter with the British during the First orld ar-
Massignon retained a pronounced disli6e of England and English policyJ 'awrence
and his type represented a too0co2ple4 policy which he- Massignon- opposed in his
dealings with Faisal! iJe cherchais a>ec Faysal ! ! !V pPnPtrer dans le sens 2e2e de sa
tradition V lui!i 1he British see2ed to represent ie4pansioni in the 3rient- a2oral
econo2ic policy- and an outdated philosophy of political influence!
,;
1he French2an
was a 2ore 2odern 2an- who was obliged to get fro2
2+7
the 3rient what he had lost in spirituality- traditional >alues- and the li6e! Massignonfs
in>est2ent in this >iew ca2e- I thin6- by way of the entire nineteenth0century
tradition of the 3rient as therapeutic for the est- a tradition whose earliest
adu2bration is to be found in Huinet! In Massignon- it was @oined to a sense of
Christian co2passion:
"o far as 3rientals are concerned- we ought to ha>e recourse to this science of
co2passion- to this iparticipationi0 e>en in the construction of their language and
of their 2ental structure- in which indeed we 2ust participate: because ulti2ately
this science bears witness either to >erities that are ours too- or else to >erities
that we ha>e lost and 2ust regain! Finally- because in a profound sense
e>erything that e4ists is good in so2e way- and those poor coloniAed people do
not e4ist only for our purposes but in and for the2sel>es Yen soilZ!
,E
/e>ertheless the 3riental- en soi, was incapable of appreciating or understanding
hi2self! &artly because of what Europe had done to hi2- he had lost his religion and
his philosophie5 Musli2s had iun >ide i22ensei within the2J they were close to
anarchy and suicide! It beca2e Francefs obligation- then- to associate itself with the
Musli2sf desire to defend their traditional culture- the rule of their dynastic life- and
the patri2ony of belie>ers!
,+
/o scholar- not e>en a Massignon- can resist the pressures on hi2 of his nation or
of the scholarly tradition in which he wor6s! In a great deal of what he said of the
3rient and its relationship with the 3ccident- Massignon see2ed to refine and yet to
repeat the ideas of other French 3rientalists! e 2ust allow- howe>er- that the
refine2ents- the personal style- the indi>idual genius- 2ay finally supersede the
political restraints operating i2personally through tradition and through the national
a2bience! E>en so- in Massignonfs case we 2ust also recogniAe that in one direction
his ideas about the 3rient re2ained thoroughly traditional and 3rientalist- their
personality and re2ar6able eccentricity notwithstanding! According to hi2- the
Isla2ic 3rient was spiritual- "e2itic- tribalistic- radically 2onotheistic- yin0Aryan:
the ad@ecti>es rese2ble a catalogue of late0nineteenth0century anthropological
descriptions! 1he relati>ely earthbound e4periences of war- colonialis2- i2perialis2-
econo2ic oppression- lo>e- death- and cultural e4change see2 always in Massignonfs
eyes to be filtered through 2etaphysical- ulti2ately dehu2aniAed lenses: they are
"e2itic-
2+1
European- 3riental- 3ccidental- Aryan- and so on! 1he categories structured his world
and ga>e what he said a 6ind of deep senseto hi2- at least! In the other direction-
a2ong the indi>idual and i22ensely detailed ideas of the scholarly world-
Massignon 2aneu>ered hi2self into a special position! (e reconstructed and
defended Isla2 against Europe on the one hand and against its own orthodo4y on the
other! 1his inter>ention0for it was that0into the 3rient as ani2ator and cha2pion
sy2boliAed his own acceptance of the 3rientfs difference- as well as his efforts to
change it into what he wanted! Both together- the will to 6nowledge o>er the 3rient
and on its behalf in Massignon are >ery strong! (is al0(alla@ represents that will
perfectly! 1he disproportionate i2portance accorded al0(alla@ by Massignon signifies
first- the scholarfs decision to pro2ote one figure abo>e his sustaining culture- and
second- the fact that al0(alla@ had co2e to represent a constant challenge- e>en an
irritant- to the estern Christian for who2 belief was not Fand perhaps could not beG
the e4tre2e self0sacrifice it was for the "ufi! In either case- Massignonfs al0(alla@ was
intended literally to e2body- to incarnate- >alues essentially outlawed by the 2ain
doctrinal syste2 of Isla2- a syste2 that Massignon hi2self described 2ainly in order
to circu2>ent it with al0(alla@!
/e>ertheless we need not say i22ediately of Massignonfs wor6 that it was
per>erse- or that its greatest wea6ness was that it 2isrepresented Isla2 as an
ia>eragei or ico22oni Musli2 2ight adhere to the faith! A distinguished Musli2
scholar has argued precisely for this last position- although his argu2ent did not na2e
Massignon as an offender!
,,
Much as one 2ay be inclined to agree with such
theses0since- as this boo6 has tried to de2onstrate- Isla2 has been funda2entally
2isrepresented in the est0the real issue is whether indeed ire can be a true
representation of anything- or whether any and all representations- because they are
representations- are e2bedded first in the language and then in the culture-
institutions- and political a2bience of the representer! If the latter alternati>e is the
correct one Fas I belie>e it isG- then we 2ust be prepared to accept the fact that a
representation is eo ipso i2plicated- intertwined- e2bedded- interwo>en with a great
2any other things besides the itruth-i which is itself a representation! hat this 2ust
lead us to 2ethodologically is to >iew representations For 2isrepresentations0the
distinction is at best a 2atter of degreeG as inhabiting a co22on field of play defined
for than- not by so2e inherent co22on sub@ect 2atter alone- but by so2e
2+2
co22on history- tradition- uni>erse of discourse! ithin this field- which no single
scholar can create but which each- scholar recei>es and in which he then finds a place
for hi2self- the indi>idual researcher 2a6es his contribution! "uch contributions-
e>en for the e4ceptional genius- are strategies of redisposing 2aterial within the fieldJ
e>en the scholar who unearths a oncelost 2anuscript produces the ifoundi te4t in a
conte4t already prepared for it- for that is the real 2eaning of #inding a new te4t! 1hus
each indi>idual contribution first causes changes within the field and then pro2otes a
new stability- in the way that on a surface co>ered with twenty co2passes the
introduction of a twenty0first will cause all the others to 9ui>er- then to settle into a
new acco22odating configuration!
1he representations of 3rientalis2 in European culture a2ount to what we can
call a discursi>e consistency- one that has not only history but 2aterial Fand
institutionalG presence to show for itself! As I said in connection with #enan- such a
consistency was a for2 of cultural pra4is- a syste2 of opportunities for 2a6ing
state2ents about the 3rient! My whole point about this syste2 is not that it is a
2isrepresentation of so2e 3riental essence0in which I do not for a 2o2ent
belie>e0but that it operates as representations usually do- for a purpose- according to a
tendency- in a specific historical- intellectual- and e>en econo2ic setting! In other
words- representations ha>e purposes- they are effecti>e 2uch of the ti2e they
acco2plish one or 2any tas6s! #epresentations are for2ations- or as #oland Barthes
has said of all the operations of language- they are defor2ations!1he 3rient as- a
representation in Europe is for2ed0or defor2ed0out of a 2ore and 2ore specific
sensiti>ity towards a geographical region called ithe East!i "pecialists in this region
do their wor6 on it- so to spea6- because in ti2e their profession as 3rientalists
re9uires that they present their society with i2ages of the 3rient- 6nowledge about it-
insight into it! And to a >ery large e4tent the 3rientalist pro>ides his own society with
representations of the 3rient FaG that bear his distincti>e i2print- FbG that illustrate his
conception of what the 3rient can or ought to be- FcG that consciously contest
so2eone elsefs >iew of the 3rient- FdG that pro>ide 3rientalist discourse with what- at
that 2o2ent- it see2s 2ost in need of- and FeG that respond to certain cultural-
professional- national- political- and econo2ic re9uire2ents of the epoch! It will be
e>ident that e>en though it will ne>er be absent- the role of positi>e 6nowledge is far
fro2 absolute! #ather- i6nowledgei00ne>er raw- un2ediated- or si2ply ob@ecti>e0is
what the
2+)
fi>e attributes of 3rientalist representation listed abo>e distribute, and redistribute!
"een in such a way- Massignon is less a 2ythologiAed igeniusi than he is a 6ind
of syste2 for producing certain 6inds of state2ents- disse2inated into the large 2ass
of discursi>e for2ations that together 2a6e up the archi>e- or cultural 2aterial- of his
ti2e! I do not thin6 that we dehu2aniAe Massignon if we recogniAe this- nor do we
reduce hi2 to being sub@ect to >ulgar deter2inis2! 3n the contrary- we will see in a
sense how a >ery hu2an being had- and was able to ac9uire 2ore of- a cultural and
producti>e capacity that had an institutional- or e4trahu2an- di2ension to it: and this
surely is what the finite hu2an being 2ust aspire to if he is not to be content with his
2erely 2ortal presence in ti2e and space! hen Massignon said inous so22es tous
des "2itesi he was indicating the range of his ideas o>er his society- showing the
e4tent to which his ideas about the 3rient could transcend the local anecdotal
circu2stances of a French2an and of French society! 1he category of "e2ite drew its
nourish2ent out of Massignonfs 3rientalis2- but its force deri>ed fro2 its tendency
to e4tend out of the confines of the discipline- out into a broader history and
anthropology- where it see2ed to ha>e a certain >alidity and power!
,*
3n one le>el at least- Massignonfs for2ulations and his representations of the
3rient did ha>e a direct influence- if not an un9uestioned >alidity: a2ong the guild of
professional 3rientalists! As I said abo>e- 5ibbfs recognition of Massignonfs
achie>e2ent constitutes an awareness that as an alternati>e to 5ibbfs own wor6 Fby
i2plication- that isG- Massignon was to be dealt with! I a2 of course i2puting things
to 5ibbfs obituary that are there only as traces- not as actual state2ents- but they are
ob>iously i2portant if we loo6 now at 5ibbfs own career as a foil for Massignonfs!
Albert (ouranifs 2e2orial essay on 5ibb for the British Acade2y Fto which I ha>e
referred se>eral ti2esG ad2irably su22ariAes the 2anfs career- his leading ideas- and
the i2portance of his wor6: with (ouranifs assess2ent- in its broad lines- I ha>e no
disagree2ent! Iet so2ething is 2issing fro2 it- although this lac6 is partly 2ade up
for in a lesser piece on 5ibb- illia2 &ol6fs i"ir (a2ilton 5ibb Between
3rientalis2 and (istory!i
*7
(ourani tends to >iew 5ibb as the product of personal
encounters- personal influences- and the li6eJ whereas &ol6- who is far less subtle in
his general understanding of 5ibb than (ourani- sees 5ibb as the cul2ination
2+=
of a specific acade2ic tradition- what0to use an e4pression that does not occur in
&ol6fs prose0we can call an acade2ic0research consensus or paradig2!
Borrowed in this rather gross fashion fro2 1ho2as %uhn- the idea has a
worthwhile rele>ance to 5ibb- who as (ourani re2inds us was in 2any ways a
profoundly institutional figure! E>erything that 5ibb said or did- fro2 his early career
at 'ondon to the 2iddle years at 34ford to his influential years as director of
(ar>ardfs Center for Middle Eastern "tudies- bears the un2ista6able sta2p of a 2ind
operating with great ease inside established institutions! Massignon was irre2ediably
the outsider- 5ibb the insider! Both 2en- in any case- achie>ed the >ery pinnacle of
prestige and influence in French and Anglo0A2erican 3rientalis2- respecti>ely 1he
3rient for 5ibb was not a place one encountered directlyJ it was so2ething one read
about- studied- wrote about within the confines of learned societies- the uni>ersity- the
scholarly conference! 'i6e Massignon- 5ibb boasted of friendships with Musli2s- but
they see2ed0li6e 'anefs0to ha>e been useful friendships- not deter2ining ones!
Conse9uently 5ibb is a dynastic figure within the acade2ic fra2ewor6 of British
Fand later of A2ericanG 3rientalis2- a scholar whose wor6 9uite consciously
de2onstrated the national tendencies of an acade2ic tradition- set inside uni>ersities-
go>ern2ents- and research foundations!
3ne inde4 of this is that in his 2ature years 5ibb was often to be 2et with
spea6ing and writing for policy0deter2ining organiAations! In 1*;1- for instance- he
contributed an essay to a boo6 significantly entitled The Near East and the >reat
Powers, in which he tried to e4plain the need for an e4pansion in Anglo0A2erican
progra2s of 3riental studies:
! ! ! the whole situation of the estern countries in regard to the countries of Asia
and Africa has changed! e can no longer rely on that factor of prestige which
see2ed to play a large part in prewar thin6ing- neither can we any longer e4pect
the peoples of Asia and Africa or of Eastern Europe to co2e to us and learn fro2
us- while we sit bac6! e ha>e to learn about the2 so that we can learn to wor6
with the2 in a relationship that is closer to ter2s of 2utuality!
*1
1he ter2s of this new relationship were spelled out later in iArea "tudies
#econsidered!i 3riental studies were to be thought of not so 2uch as scholarly
acti>ities but as instru2ents of national policy towards the newly independent- and
possibly intractable-
2+;
nations of the postcolonial world! Ar2ed with a refocused awareness of his
i2portance to the Atlantic co22onwealth- the 3rientalist was to be the guide of
policy2a6ers- of business2en- of a fresh generation of scholars!
hat counted 2ost in 5ibbfs later >ision was not the 3rientalistfs positi>e wor6
as a scholar Ffor e4a2ple- the 6ind of scholar 5ibb had been in his youth when he
studied the Musli2 in>asions of Central AsiaG but its adaptability for use in the public
world! (ourani puts this well:
! ! ! it beca2e clear to hi2 Y5ibbZ that 2odern go>ern2ents and elites were acting
in ignorance or re@ection of their own traditions of social life and 2orality- and
that their failures sprang fro2 this! (enceforth his 2ain efforts were gi>en to the
elucidation- by careful study of the past- of the specific nature of Musli2 society
and the beliefs and culture which lay at the heart of it! E>en this proble2 he
tended to see at first 2ainly in political ter2s!
*2
Iet no such later >ision could ha>e been possible without a fairly rigorous a2ount of
preparation in 5ibbfs earlier wor6- and it is there that we 2ust first see6 to understand
his ideas! A2ong 5ibbfs earliest influences was .uncan Macdonald- fro2 whose
wor6 5ibb clearly deri>ed the concept that Isla2 was a coherent syste2 of life- a
syste2 2ade coherent not so 2uch by the people who led that life as by >irtue of
so2e body of doctrine- 2ethod of religious practice- idea of order- in which all the
Musli2 people participated! Between the people and iIsla2i there was ob>iously a
dyna2ic encounter of sorts- yet what 2attered to the estern student was the
super>ening power of Isla2 to 2a6e intelligible the e4periences of the Isla2ic
people- not the other way around!
For Macdonald and subse9uently for 5ibb- the episte2ological and
2ethodological difficulties of iIsla2i as an ob@ect Fabout which large- e4tre2ely
general state2ents could be 2adeG are ne>er tac6led! Macdonald for his part belie>ed
that in Isla2 one could percei>e aspects of a still 2ore portentous abstraction- the
3riental 2entality! 1he entire opening chapter of his 2ost influential boo6 Fwhose
i2portance for 5ibb cannot be 2ini2iAedG- 1he #eligious $ttitude and (i#e in /slam,
is an anthology of unarguable declarati>es about the Eastern or 3riental 2ind! (e
begins by saying that iit is plain- I thin6-and ad2itted that the conception of the
?nseen is 2uch 2ore i22ediate and real to the 3riental than to the western peoples!i
1he ilarge 2odifying ele2ents which see2- fro2
2+E
ti2e to ti2e- al2ost to upset the general lawi do not upset it- nor do they upset the
other e9ually sweeping and general laws go>erning the 3riental 2ind! i1he essential
difference in the 3riental 2ind is not credulity as to unseen things- but inability to
construct a syste2 as to seen things!i Another aspect of this difficulty0which 5ibb
was later to bla2e for the absence of for2 in Arabic literature and for the Musli2fs
essentially ato2istic >iew of reality0is ithat the difference in the 3riental is not
essentially religiosity- but the lac6 of the sense of law! For hi2- there is no
i22o>able order of nature!i If such a ifacti see2s not to account for the
e4traordinary achie>e2ents of Isla2ic science- upon which a great deal in 2odern
estern science is based- then Macdonald re2ains silent! (e continues his catalogue:
iIt is e>ident that anything is possible to the 3riental! 1he supernatural is so near that
it 2ay touch hi2 at any 2o2ent!i 1hat an occasion0na2ely- the historical and
geographical birth of 2onotheis2 in the 3rient0should in Macdonaldfs argu2ent
beco2e an entire theory off difference between East and est signifies the degree of
intensity to which i3rientalis2i has co22itted Macdonald! (ere is his su22ary:
Inability- then- to see life steadily- and see it whole- to understand that a
theory of life 2ust co>er all the facts- and liability to be sta2peded by a single
idea and blinded to e>erything else0therein- I belie>e- is the difference between
the East and the est!
*)
/one of this- of course- is particularly new! Fro2 "chlegel to #enan- fro2
#obertson "2ith to 1! E! 'awrence- these ideas get repeated and re0repeated! 1hey
represent a decision about the 3rient- not by any 2eans a fact of nature! Anyone who-
li6e Macdonald and 5ibb- consciously entered a profession called 3rientalis2 did so
on the basis of a decision 2ade: that the 3rient was the 3rient- that it was different-
and so forth! 1he elaborations- refine2ents- conse9uent articulations of the field
therefore sustain and prolong the decision to confine the 3rient! 1here is no
percei>able irony in Macdonaldfs For 5ibbfsG >iews about 3riental liability to be
sta2peded by a single ideaJ neither 2an see2s able to recogniAe the e4tent of
3rientalis2fs liability to be sta2peded by the single idea of 3riental difference! And
neither 2an is concerned by such wholesale designations as iIsla2i or ithe 3rienti
being used as proper nouns- with ad@ecti>es attached and >erbs strea2ing forth- as if
they referred to persons and not to &latonic ideas!
2++
It is no accident- therefore- that 5ibbfs 2aster the2e- in al2ost e>erything he
wrote about Isla2 and the Arabs- was the tension between iIsla2i as a transcendent-
co2pelling 3riental fact and the realities of e>eryday hu2an e4perience! (is
in>est2ent as a scholar and as a de>out Christian was in iIsla2-i not so 2uch in the
Fto hi2G relati>ely tri>ial co2plications introduced into Isla2 by nationalis2- class
struggle- the indi>idualiAing e4periences of lo>e- anger- or hu2an wor6! /owhere is
the i2po>erishing character of this in>est2ent 2ore e>ident than in )hither /slamW, a
>olu2e edited and contributed to- in the title essay- by 5ibb in 1*)2! FIt also includes
an i2pressi>e article on /orth African Isla2 by Massignon!G 5ibbfs tas6 as he saw it
was to assess Isla2- its present situation- its possible future course! In such a tas6 the
indi>idual and 2anifestly different regions of the Isla2ic world were to be- not
refutations of Isla2fs unity- but e4a2ples of it! 5ibb hi2self proposed an introductory
definition of Isla2J then- in the concluding essay- he sought fto pronounce on its
actuality and its real future! 'i6e Macdonald- 5ibb see2s entirely co2fortable with
the idea of a 2onolithic East- whose e4istential circu2stances cannot easily be
reduced to race or racial theoryJ in resolutely denying the >alue of racial
generaliAation 5ibb rises abo>e what had been 2ost reprehensible in preceding
generations of 3rientalists! 5ibb has a correspondingly generous and sy2pathetic
>iew of Isla2fs uni>ersalis2 and tolerance in letting di>erse ethnic and religious
co22unities coe4ist peacefully and de2ocratically within its i2periu2! 1here is a
note of gri2 prophecy in 5ibbfs singling out the Rionists and the Maronite Christians-
alone a2ongst ethnic co22unities in the Isla2ic world- for their inability to accept
coe4istence!
*=
But the heart of 5ibbfs argu2ent is that Isla2- perhaps because it finally
represents the 3rientalfs e4clusi>e concern not with nature but with the ?nseen- has
an ulti2ate precedence and do2ination o>er all life in the Isla2ic 3rient! For 5ibb
Isla2 is Isla2ic orthodo4y- is also the co22unity of belie>ers is life- unity-
intelligibility- >alues! It is law and order too- the unsa>ory disruptions of @ihadists and
co22unist agitators notwithstanding! In page after page of 5ibbfs prose in )hither
/slamW, we learn that the new co22ercial ban6s in Egypt and "yria are facts of Isla2
or an Isla2ic initiati>eJ schools and an increasing literacy rate are Isla2ic facts- too-
as are @ournalis2- esterniAation- and intellectual societies! At no point does 5ibb
spea6 of European colonialis2
2+,
when he discusses the rise of nationalis2 and its ito4ins!i 1hat the history of 2odern
Isla2 2ight be 2ore intelligible for its resistance- political and nonpolitical- to
colonialis2- ne>er occurs to 5ibb- @ust as it see2s to hi2 finally irrele>ant to note
whether the iIsla2ici go>ern2ents he discusses are republican- feudal- or
2onarchical!
iIsla2i for 5ibb is a sort of superstructure i2periled both by politics
Fnationalis2- co22unist agitation- esterniAationG and by dangerous Musli2
atte2pts to ta2per with its intellectual so>ereignty! In the passage that follows- note
how the word religion and its cognates are 2ade to color the tone of 5ibbfs prose- so
2uch so that we feel a decorous annoyance at the 2undane pressures directed at
iIsla2i:
Isla2- as a religion- has lost little of its force- but Isla2 as the arbiter of social life
Yin the 2odern worldZ is being dethronedJ alongside it- or abo>e it- new forces
e4ert an authority which is so2eti2es in contradiction to its traditions and its
social prescriptions- but ne>ertheless forces its way in their teeth! 1o put the
position in its si2plest ter2s- what has happened is this! ?ntil recently- the
ordinary Musli2 citiAen and culti>ator had no political interests or functions- and
no literature of easy access e4cept religious literature- had no festi>als and no
co22unal life e4cept in connection with religion- saw little or nothing of the
outside world e4cept through religious glasses! To him, in conse3uence, religion
meant everything. Now, howe>er- 2ore in all the ad>anced countries- his interests
ha>e e4panded and his acti>ities are no longer bounded by religion! (e has
political 9uestions thrust on his noticeJ he reads- or has read to hi2- a 2ass of
articles on sub@ects of all 6inds which ha>e nothing to do with religion- and in
which the religious point of >iew 2ay not be discussed at all and the >erdict held
to lie with so2e 9uite different principles ! ! ! ! YE2phasis addedZ *;
Ad2ittedly- the picture is a little difficult to see- since unli6e any other religion
/slam is or means everything. As a description of a hu2an pheno2enon the hyperbole
is- I thin6- uni9ue to 3rientalis2!'ife itself0politics- literature- energy- acti>ity-
growth 0is an intrusion upon this Fto a esternerG uni2aginable 3riental totality! Iet
as ia co2ple2ent and counterbalance to European ci>ilisationi Isla2 in its 2odern
for2 is ne>ertheless a useful ob@ect: this is the core of 5ibbfs proposition about
2odern Isla2! For iin the broadest aspect of history- what is now happening between
2+*
Europe and Isla2 is the reintegration of western ci>iliAation- artificially sundered at
the #enaissance and now reasserting its unity with o>erwhel2ing force!
*E
?nli6e Massignon- who 2ade no effort to conceal his 2etaphysical speculations-
5ibb deli>ered such obser>ations as this as if they were ob@ecti>e 6nowledge Fa
category he found wanting in MassignonG! Iet by al2ost any standards 2ost of
5ibbfs general wor6s on Isla2 are 2etaphysical- not only because he uses
abstractions li6e iIsla2i as if they ha>e a clear and distinct 2eaning but also because
it is si2ply ne>er clear where in concrete ti2e and space 5ibbfs iIsla2i is ta6ing
place! If on the one hand- following Macdonald- he puts Isla2 definiti>ely outside the
est- on the other hand- in 2uch of his wor6- he is to be found ireintegratingi it with
the est! In 1*;; he 2ade this inside0outside 9uestion a bit clearer: the est too6
fro2 Isla2 only those nonscientific ele2ents that it had originally deri>ed fro2 the
est- whereas in borrowing 2uch fro2 Isla2ic science- the est was 2erely
following the law 2a6ing inatural science and technology ! ! ! indefinitely
trans2issible!i
*+
1he net result is to 2a6e Isla2 in iart- aesthetics- philosophy and
religious thoughti a second0order pheno2enon Fsince those ca2e fro2 the estG- and
so far as science and technology are concerned- a 2ere conduit for ele2ents that are
not sui generis Isla2ic!
Any clarity about what Isla2 is in 5ibbfs thought ought to be found within these
2etaphysical constraints- and indeed his two i2portant wor6s of the forties- Modern
Trends in /slam and Mohammedanism< $n .istorical 4urvey, flesh out 2atters
considerably! In both boo6s 5ibb is at great pains to discuss the present crisis in
Isla2- opposing its inherent- essential being to 2odern atte2pts at 2odifying it! I
ha>e already 2entioned 5ibbfs hostility to 2oderniAing currents in Isla2 and his
stubborn co22it2ent to Isla2ic orthodo4y! /ow it is ti2e to 2ention 5ibbfs
preference for the word Mohammedanism o>er /slam Fsince he says that Isla2 is
really based upon an idea of apostolic succession cul2inating in Moha22edG and his
assertion that the Isla2ic 2aster science is law- which early on replaced theology!
1he curious thing about these state2ents is that they are assertions 2ade about Isla2-
not on the basis of e>idence internal to Isla2- but rather on the basis of a logic
deliberately outside Isla2! /o Musli2 would call hi2self a Moha22edan- nor so far
as is 6nown would he necessarily feel the i2portance of law o>er theology! But what
5ibb does is to
2,7
situate hi2self as a scholar within contradictions he hi2self discerns- at that point in
iIsla2i where ithere is a certain une4pressed dislocation between the for2al outward
process and the inner realities!D
*,
1he 3rientalist- then- sees his tas6 as e4pressing the dislocation and conse9uently
spea6ing the truth about Isla2- which by definition0since its contradictions inhibit its
powers of self0discern2ent 0it cannot e4press! Most of 5ibbfs general state2ents
about Isla2 supply concepts to Isla2 that the religion or culture- again by his
definition- is incapable of grasping: i3riental philosophy had ne>er appreciated the
funda2ental idea of @ustice in 5ree6 philosophy!i As for 3riental societies- iin
contrast to 2ost western societies- YtheyZ ha>e generally de>oted Ythe2sel>esZ to
building stable social organiAations Y2ore thanZ to constructing ideal syste2s of
philosophical thought!i 1he principal internal wea6ness of Isla2 is the ibrea6ing of
association between the religious orders and the Musli2 upper and 2iddle classes!i
But 5ibb is also aware that Isla2 has ne>er re2ained isolated fro2 the rest of the
world and therefore 2ust stand in a series of e4ternal dislocations- insufficiencies-
and dis@unctions between itself and the world! 1hus he says that 2odern Isla2 is the
result of a classical religion co2ing into disynchronous contact with #o2antic
estern ideas! In reaction to this assault- Isla2 de>eloped a school of 2odernists
whose ideas e>erywhere re>eal hopelessness- ideas unsuited to the 2odern world:
Mahdis2- nationalis2- a re>i>ed caliphate! Iet the conser>ati>e reaction to
2odernis2 is no less unsuited to 2odernity- for it has produced a 6ind of stubborn
'uddis2! ell then- we as6- what is Isla2 finally- if it cannot con9uer its internal
dislocations nor deal satisfactorily with its e4ternal surroundingsL 1he answer can be
sought in the following central passage fro2 Modern Trends<
Isla2 is a li>ing and >ital religion- appealing to the hearts- 2inds- and
consciences of tens and hundreds of 2illions- setting the2 a standard by which to
li>e honest- sober- and god0fearing li>es! It is not Isla2 that is petrified- but its
orthodo4 for2ulations- its syste2atic theology- its social apologetic! It is here
that the dislocation lies- that the dissatisfaction is felt a2ong a large proportion of
its 2ost educated and intelligent adherents- and that the danger for the future is
2ost e>ident! /o religion can ulti2ately resist disintegration if there is a
perpetual gulf between its de2ands upon the will and its appeal to the intellect of
its followers!
2,1
1hat for the >ast 2a@ority of Musli2s the proble2 of dislocation has not yet
arisen @ustifies the ule2a in refusing to be rushed into the hasty 2easures which
the 2odernists prescribeJ but the spread of 2odernis2 is a warning that
re0for2ulation cannot be indefinitely shel>ed!
In trying to deter2ine the origins and causes of this petrifaction of the
for2ulas of Isla2- we 2ay possibly also find a clue to the answer to the 9uestion
which the 2odernists are as6ing- but ha>e so far failed to resol>e the 9uestion-
that is- of the way in which the funda2ental principles of Isla2 2ay be
re0for2ulated without affecting their essential ele2ents!
177
1he last part of this passage is fa2iliar enough: it suggests the now traditional
3rientalist ability to reconstruct and refor2ulate the 3rient- gi>en the 3rientfs
inability to do so for itself! In part- then- 5ibbfs Isla2 e4ists ahead o# Isla2 as it is
practiced- studied- or preached in the 3rient! Iet this prospecti>e Isla2 is no 2ere
3rientalist fiction- spun out of his ideas: it is based on an iIsla2i that0since it cannot
truly e4ist0appeals to a whole co22unity of belie>ers! 1he reason that iIsla2i can
e4ist in so2e 2ore or less future 3rientalist for2ulation of it is that in the 3rient
Isla2 is usurped and traduced by the language of its clergy- whose clai2 is upon the
co22unityfs 2ind! "o long as it is silent in its appeal- Isla2 is safeJ the 2o2ent the
refor2ing clergy ta6es on its Flegiti2ateG role of refor2ulating Isla2 in order for it to
be able to enter 2odernity- the trouble starts! And that trouble- of course- is
dislocation!
.islocation in 5ibbfs wor6 identifies so2ething far 2ore significant than a
putati>e intellectual difficulty within Isla2! It identifies- I thin6- the >ery pri>ilege-
the >ery ground on which the 3rientalist places hi2self so as to write about- legislate
for- and refor2ulate Isla2! Far fro2 being a chance discern2ent of 5ibbfs-
dislocation is the episte2ological passageway into his sub@ect- and subse9uently- the
obser>ation platfor2 fro2 which in all his writing- and in e>ery one of the influential
positions he filled- he could sur>ey Isla2! Between the silent appeal of Isla2 to a
2onolithic co22unity of orthodo4 belie>ers and a whole 2erely >erbal articulation
of Isla2 by 2isled corps of political acti>ists- desperate cler6s- and opportunistic
refor2ers: there 5ibb stood- wrote- refor2ulated! (is writing said either what Isla2
could not say or what its clerics would not say! hat 5ibb wrote was in one sense
te2porally ahead of Isla2- in that he allowed that at so2e point in the future
2,2
Isla2 would be able to say what it could not say now! In another i2portant sense-
howe>er- 5ibbfs writings on Isla2 predated the religion as a coherent body of
ili>ingi beliefs- since his writing was able to get hold of iIsla2i as a silent appeal
2ade to Musli2s be#ore their faith beca2e a 2atter for worldly argu2ent- practice-
or debate!
1he contradiction in 5ibbfs wor60for it is a contradiction to spea6 of iIsla2i as
neither what its clerical adherents in fact say it is nor what- if they could- its lay
followers would say about itis 2uted so2ewhat by the 2etaphysical attitude
go>erning his wor6- and indeed go>erning the whole history of 2odern 3rientalis2
which he inherited- through 2entors li6e Macdonald! 1he 3rient and Isla2 ha>e a
6ind of e4trareal- pheno2enologically reduced status that puts the2 out of reach of
e>eryone e4cept the estern e4pert! Fro2 the beginning of estern speculation
about the 3rient- the one thing the 3rient could not do was to represent itself!
E>idence of the 3rient was credible only after it had passed through and been 2ade
fir2 by the refining fire of the 3rientalistfs wor6! 5ibbfs oeuvre purports to be Isla2
For Moha22edanis2G both as it is and as it might be. Metaphysically0and only
2etaphysically0essence and potential are 2ade one! 3nly a 2etaphysical attitude
could produce such fa2ous 5ibb essays as i1he "tructure of #eligious 1hought in
Isla2i or iAn Interpretation of Isla2ic (istoryi without being troubled by the
distinction 2ade between ob@ecti>e and sub@ecti>e 6nowledge in 5ibbfs criticis2 of
Massignon!
171
1he state2ents about iIsla2i are 2ade with a confidence and a
serenity that are truly 3ly2pian! 1here is no dislocation- no felt discontinuity
between 5ibbfs page and the pheno2enon it describes- for each- according to 5ibb
hi2self- is ulti2ately reducible to the other! As such- iIsla2i and 5ibbfs description
of it ha>e a cal2- discursi>e plainness whose co22on ele2ent is the English
scholarfs orderly page!
I attach a great deal of significance to the appearance of and to the intended
2odel for the 3rientalistfs page as a printed ob@ect! I ha>e spo6en in this boo6 about
df(erbelotfs alphabetic encyclopedia- the gigantic lea>es of the Description de
lI?gypte, #enanfs laboratory02useu2 noteboo6- the ellipses and short episodes of
'anefs Modern Egyptians, "acyfs anthological e4cerpts- and so forth! 1hese pages are
signs of so2e 3rient- and of so2e 3rientalist- presented to the reader! 1here is an
order to these pages by which the reader apprehends not only the i3rienti but also the
2,)
3rientalist- as interpreter- e4hibitor- personality- 2ediator- representati>e Fand
representingG e4pert! In a re2ar6able way 5ibb and Massignon produced pages that
recapitulate the history of 3rientalist writing in the est as that history has been
e2bodied in a >aried generic and topographical style- reduced finally to a scholarly-
2onographic unifor2ity! 1he 3riental speci2enJ the 3riental e4cessJ the 3riental
le4icographic unitJ the 3riental seriesJ the 3riental e4e2plu2: all these ha>e been
subordinated in 5ibb and Massignon to the linear prose authority of discursi>e
analysis- presented in essay- short article-scholarly boo6! In their ti2e- fro2 the end
of orld ar I till the early si4ties- three principal for2s of 3rientalist writing were
radically transfor2ed: the encyclopedia- the anthology- the personal record! 1heir
authority was redistributed or dispersed or dissipated: to a co22ittee of e4perts JThe
Encyclopedia o# /slam, The 2ambridge .istory o# /slam+5 to a lower order of ser>ice
Fele2entary instruction in language- which would prepare one not for diplo2acy- as
was the case with "acyfs 2hrestomathie, but for the study of sociology- econo2ics- or
historyG- to the real2 of sensational re>elation Fha>ing 2ore to do with personalities
or go>ern2ents0'awrence is the ob>ious e4a2ple0than with 6nowledgeG! 5ibb- with
his 9uietly heedless but profoundly se9uential proseJ Massignon- with the flair of an
artist for who2 no reference is too e4tra>agant so long as it is go>erned by an
eccentric interpretati>e gift: the two scholars too6 the essentially ecumenical
authority of European 3rientalis2 as far as it could go! After the2- the new
reality0the new specialiAed style was- broadly spea6ing- Anglo0A2erican- and 2ore
narrowly spea6ing- it was A2erican "ocial "cientese! In it- the old 3rientalis2 was
bro6en into 2any partsJ yet all of the2 still ser>ed the traditional 3rientalist dog2as!
I*
The Latest (hase
"ince orld ar II- and 2ore noticeably after each of the Arab0Israeli wars- the
Arab Musli2 has beco2e a figure in A2erican popular culture- e>en as in the
acade2ic world- in the policy
2,=
plannerfs world- and in the world of business >ery serious attention is being paid the
Arab! 1his sy2boliAes a 2a@or change in the international configuration of forces!
France and Britain no longer occupy center stage in world politicsJ the A2erican
i2periu2 has displaced the2! A >ast web of interests now lin6s all parts of the
for2er colonial world to the ?nited "tates- @ust as a proliferation of acade2ic
subspecialties di>ides Fand yet connectsG all the for2er philological and
European0based disciplines li6e 3rientalis2! 1he area specialist- as he is now called-
lays clai2s to regional e4pertise- which is put at the ser>ice of go>ern2ent or
business or both! 1he 2assi>e- 9uasi2aterial 6nowledge stored in the annals of
2odern European 3rientalis20as recorded- for e4a2ple- in Jules Mohlfs
nineteenth0century logboo6 of the field0has been dissol>ed and released into new
for2s! A wide >ariety of hybrid representations of the 3rient now roa2 the culture!
Japan- Indochina- China- India- &a6istan: their representations ha>e had- and continue
to ha>e- wide repercussions- and they ha>e been discussed in 2any places for ob>ious
reasons! Isla2 and the Arabs ha>e their own representations- too- and we shall treat
the2 here as they occur in that frag2entary0yet powerfully and ideologically
coherent0persistence- a far less fre9uently discussed one- into which- in the ?nited
"tates- traditional European 3rientalis2 disbursed itself!
&. Popular images and social science representations. (ere are a few e4a2ples
of how the Arab is often represented today! /ote how readily ithe Arabi see2s to
acco22odate the transfor2ations and reductions0all of a si2ply tendentious
6ind0into which he is continually being forced! 1he costu2e for &rincetonfs
tenthreunion class in 1*E+ had been planned before the June ar! 1he 2otif0for it
would be wrong to describe the costu2e as 2ore than crudely suggesti>e0was to ha>e
been Arab: robes- headgear- sandals! I22ediately after the war- when it had beco2e
clear that the Arab 2otif was an e2barrass2ent- a change in the reunion plans was
decreed! earing the costu2e as had been originally planned- the class was now to
wal6 in procession- hands abo>e heads in a gesture of ab@ect defeat! 1his was what
the Arab had beco2e! Fro2 a faintly outlined stereotype as a ca2el0riding no2ad to
an accepted caricature as the e2bodi2ent of inco2petence and easy defeat: that was
all the scope gi>en the Arab!
Iet after the 1*+) war the Arab appeared e>erywhere as so2ething 2ore
2enacing! Cartoons depicting an Arab shei6 standing behind a gasoline pu2p turned
up consistently! 1hese Arabs- howe>er-
2,;
were clearly i"e2itici: their sharply hoo6ed noses- the e>il 2ustachioed leer on their
faces- were ob>ious re2inders Fto a largely non0"e2itic populationG that i"e2itesi
were at the botto2 of all iouri troubles- which in this case was principally a gasoline
shortage! 1he transference of a popular anti0 "e2itic ani2us fro2 a Jewish to an
Arab target was 2ade s2oothly- since the figure was essentially the sa2e!
1hus if the Arab occupies space enough for attention- it is as a negati>e >alue! (e
is seen as the disrupter of Israelfs and the estfs e4istence- or in another >iew of the
sa2e thing- as a sur2ountable obstacle to Israelfs creation in 1*=,! Insofar as this
Arab has any history- it is part of the history gi>en hi2 For ta6en fro2 hi2: the
difference is slightG by the 3rientalist tradition- and later- the Rionist tradition!
&alestine was seen0by 'a2artine and the early Rionists 0as an e2pty desert waiting to
burst into bloo2J such inhabitants as it had were supposed to be inconse9uential
no2ads possessing no real clai2 on the land and therefore no cultural or national
reality! 1hus the Arab is concei>ed of now as a shadow that dogs the Jew! In that
shadow0because Arabs and Jews are 3riental "e2ites0can be placed whate>er
traditional- latent 2istrust a esterner feels towards the 3riental! For the Jew of
pre0/aAi Europe has bifurcated: what we ha>e now is a Jewish hero- constructed out
of a reconstructed cult of the ad>enturer0pioneer03rientalist FBurton- 'ane- #enanG-
and his creeping- 2ysteriously fearso2e shadow- the Arab 3riental! Isolated fro2
e>erything e4cept the past created for hi2 by 3rientalist pole2ic- the Arab is chained
to a destiny that fi4es hi2 and doo2s hi2 to a series of reactions periodically
chastised by what Barbara 1uch2an gi>es the theological na2e iIsraelfs terrible swift
sword!i
Aside fro2 his anti0Rionis2- the Arab is an oil supplier! 1his is another negati>e
characteristic- since 2ost accounts of Arab oil e9uate the oil boycott of 1*+)01*+=
Fwhich principally benefitted estern oil co2panies and a s2all ruling Arab eliteG
with the absence of any Arab 2oral 9ualifications for owning such >ast oil reser>es!
ithout the usual euphe2is2s- the 9uestion 2ost often being as6ed is why such
people as the Arabs are entitled to 6eep the de>eloped Ffree- de2ocratic- 2oralG world
threatened! Fro2 such 9uestions co2es the fre9uent suggestion that the Arab oil
fields be in>aded by the 2arines!
In the fil2s and tele>ision the Arab is associated either with lechery or
bloodthirsty dishonesty! (e appears as an o>erse4ed degenerate-
2,E
capable- it is true- of cle>erly de>ious intrigues- but essentially sadistic- treacherous-
low! "la>e trader- ca2el dri>er- 2oneychanger- colorful scoundrel: these are so2e
traditional Arab roles in the cine2a! 1he Arab leader Fof 2arauders- pirates- inati>ei
insurgentsG can often be seen snarling at the captured estern hero and the blond girl
Fboth of the2 steeped in whole0so2enessG- iMy 2en are going to 6ill you- but 0they
li6e to a2use the2sel>es before!i (e leers suggesti>ely as he spea6s: this is a current
debase2ent of Balentinofs "hei6! In newsreels or newsphotos- the Arab is always
shown in large nu2bers! /o indi>iduality- no personal characteristics or e4periences!
Most of the pictures represent 2ass rage and 2isery- or irrational Fhence hopelessly
eccentricG gestures! 'ur6ing behind all of these i2ages is the 2enace of Nihad.
Conse9uence: a fear that the Musli2s For ArabsG will ta6e o>er the world!
Boo6s and articles are regularly published on Isla2 and the Arabs that represent
absolutely no change o>er the >irulent anti0Isla2ic pole2ics of the Middle Ages and
the #enaissance! For no other ethnic or religious group is it true that >irtually
anything can be written or said about it- without challenge or de2urral! 1he 1*+;
course guide put out by the Colu2bia College undergraduates said about the Arabic
course that e>ery other word in the language had to do with >iolence- and that the
Arab 2ind as ireflectedi in the language was unre2ittingly bo2bastic! A recent
article by E22ett 1yrrell in .arperIs 2agaAine was e>en 2ore slanderous and racist-
arguing that Arabs are basically 2urderers and that >iolence and deceit are carried in
the Arab genes!
172
A sur>ey entitled The $rabs in $merican TeCtbooks re>eals the
2ost astonishing 2isinfor2ation- or rather the 2ost callous representations of an
ethnic0religious group! 3ne boo6 asserts that ifew people of this YArabZ area e>en
6now that there is a better way to li>e-i and then goes on to as6 disar2ingly- ihat
lin6s the people of the Middle East togetherLi 1he answer- gi>en unhesitatingly- is-
i1he last lin6 is the Arabfs hostility0hatred0toward the Jews and the nation of Israel!i
Along with such 2aterial goes this about Isla2- in another boo6: i1he Mosle2
religion- called Isla2- began in the se>enth century! It was started by a wealthy
business2an of Arabia- called Moha22ed! (e clai2ed that he was a prophet! (e
found followers a2ong other Arabs! (e told the2 that they were pic6ed to rule the
world!i 1his bit of 6nowledge is followed by another- e9ually accurate: i"hortly after
Moha22edfs death- his teachings
2,+
were recorded in a boo6 called the %oran! It beca2e the holy boo6 of Isla2!i
17)
1hese crude ideas are supported- not contradicted- by the acade2ic whose
business is the study of the Arab /ear East! FIt is worth noting incidentally that the
&rinceton e>ent I referred to abo>e too6 place in a uni>ersity that prides itself on its
depart2ent of /ear Eastern "tudies founded in 1*2+- the oldest such depart2ent in
the country!G 1a6e as an instance the report produced in 1*E+ by Morroe Berger- a
professor of sociology and /ear Eastern studies at &rinceton- at the behest of the
.epart2ent of (ealth- Education- and elfareJ he was then president of the Middle
East "tudies Association FME"AG- the professional association of scholars concerned
with all aspects of the /ear East- ipri2arily since the rise of Isla2 and fro2 the
>iewpoint of the social science and hu2anistic disciplines-i
17=
and founded in 1*E+!
(e called his paper iMiddle Eastern and /orth African "tudies: .e>elop2ents and
/eeds-i and had it published in the second issue of the ME4$ 1ulletin. After
sur>eying the strategic- econo2ic- and political i2portance of the region to the
?nited "tates- and after endorsing the >arious ?nited "tates go>ern2ent and pri>ate
foundation pro@ects to support progra2s in uni>ersities0the /ational .efense
Education Act of 1*;, Fa directly "putni60inspired initiati>eG- the establishing of
lin6s between the "ocial "cience #esearch Council and Middle Eastern studies- and
so onBerger ca2e to the following conclusions:
1he 2odern Middle East and /orth Africa is not a center of great cultural
achie>e2ent- nor is it li6ely to beco2e one in the near future! 1he study of the
region or its languages- therefore- does not constitute its own reward so far as
2odern culture is concerned!
! ! ! 3ur region is not a center of great political power nor does it ha>e the
potential to beco2e one!!!! 1he Middle East Fless so /orth AfricaG has been
receding in i22ediate political i2portance to the ?!"! Fand e>en in iheadlinei or
inuisancei >alueG relati>e to Africa- 'atin A2erica and the Far East!
! ! ! 1he conte2porary Middle East- thus- has only in s2all degree the 6inds
of traits that see2 to be i2portant in attracting scholarly attention! 1his does not
di2inish the >alidity and intellectual >alue of studying the area or affect the
9uality of wor6 scholars do on it! It does- howe>er- put li2its- of which we
should be aware- on the fieldfs capacity for growth in the nu2bers who study and
teach!
17;
2,,
As a prophecy- of course- this is fairly la2entableJ what 2a6es it e>en 2ore
unfortunate is that Berger was co22issioned not only because he was an e4pert on
the 2odern /ear East but also0as is clear fro2 the reportfs conclusion0because he was
e4pected to be in a good position to predict its future- and the future of policy! (is
failure to see that the Middle East was of great political significance- and potentially
of great political power- was no chance aberration of @udg2ent- I thin6! Both of
Bergerfs 2ain 2ista6es deri>e fro2 the first and last paragraphs- whose genealogy is
the history of 3rientalis2 as we ha>e been studying it! In what Berger has to say
about the absence of great cultural achie>e2ent- and in what he concludes about
future study0that the Middle East does not attract scholarly attention because of its
intrinsic wea6nesses we ha>e an al2ost e4act duplication of the canonical 3rientalist
opinion that the "e2ites ne>er produced a great culture and that- as #enan fre9uently
said- the "e2itic world was too i2po>erished e>er to attract uni>ersal attention!
Moreo>er- in 2a6ing such ti2ehonored @udg2ents and in being totally blind to what
is before his eyes0after all- Berger was not writing fifty years ago- but during a period
when the ?nited "tates was already i2porting about 17 percent of its oil fro2 the
Middle East and when its strategic and econo2ic in>est2ents in the area were
uni2aginably huge0Berger was ensuring the centrality of his own position as
3rientalist! For what he says- in effect- is that without people such as he the Middle
East would be neglectedJ and that without his 2ediating- interpretati>e role the place
would not be understood- partly because what little there is to understand is fairly
peculiar- and partly because only the 3rientalist can interpret the 3rient- the 3rient
being radically incapable of interpreting itself!
1he fact that Berger was not so 2uch a classical 3rientalist when he wrote Fhe
wasnft and isnftG as he was a professional sociologist does not 2ini2iAe the e4tent of
his indebtedness to 3rientalis2 and its ideas! A2ong those ideas is the specially
legiti2ated antipathy towards and downgrading of the 2aterial for2ing the 2ain
basis of his study! "o strong is this in Berger that it obscures the actualities before his
eyes! And 2ore i2pressi>ely still- it 2a6es it unnecessary for hi2 to as6 hi2self
why- if the Middle East iis not a center of great cultural achie>e2ent-i he should
reco22end that anyone de>ote his life- as he has- to the study of its culture! "cholars
2ore than- say- doctors0study what they li6e and what interests the2J only an
e4aggerated sense of cultural duty dri>es a scholar
2,*
to the study of what he does not thin6 well of! Iet it is @ust such a sense of duty
3rientalis2 has fostered- because for generations the culture at large put the
3rientalist at the barricades- where in his professional wor6 he confronted the East0its
barbarities- its eccentricities- its unruliness0and held it at bay on behalf of the est!
I 2ention Berger as an instance of the acade2ic attitude towards the Isla2ic
3rient- as an instance of how a learned perspecti>e can support the caricatures
propagated in the popular culture! Iet Berger stands also for the 2ost current
transfor2ation o>erta6ing 3rientalis2: its con>ersion fro2 a funda2entally
philological discipline and a >aguely general apprehension of the 3rient into a social
science specialty! /o longer does an 3rientalist try first to 2aster the esoteric
languages of the 3rientJ he begins instead as a trained social scientist and iappliesi
his science to the 3rient- or anywhere else! 1his is the specifically A2erican
contribution to the history of 3rientalis2- and it can be dated roughly fro2 the period
i22ediately following orld ar II- when the ?nited "tates found itself in the
position recently >acated by Britain and France! 1he A2erican e4perience of the
3rient prior to that e4ceptional 2o2ent was li2ited! Cultural isolatos li6e Mel>ille
were interested in itJ cynics li6e Mar6 1wain >isited and wrote about itJ the A2erican
1ranscendentalists saw affinities between Indian thought and their ownJ a few
theologians and Biblical students studied the Biblical 3riental languagesJ there were
occasional diplo2atic and 2ilitary encounters with Barbary pirates and the li6e- the
odd na>al e4pedition to the Far 3rient- and of course the ubi9uitous 2issionary to the
3rient! But there was no deeply in>ested tradition of 3rientalis2- and conse9uently
in the ?nited "tates 6nowledge of the 3rient ne>er passed through the refining and
reticulating and reconstructing processes- whose beginning was in philological study-
that it went through in Europe! Further2ore- the i2aginati>e in>est2ent was ne>er
2ade either- perhaps because the A2erican frontier- the one that counted- was the
westward one! I22ediately after orld ar II- then- the 3rient beca2e- not a broad
catholic issue as it had been for centuries in Europe- but an ad2inistrati>e one- a
2atter for policy! Enter the social scientist and the new e4pert- on whose so2ewhat
narrower shoulders was to fall the 2antle of 3rientalis2! In their turn- as we shall
see- they 2ade such changes in it that it beca2e scarcely recogniAable! In any e>ent-
the new 3rientalist too6 o>er the attitudes of cultural hostility and 6ept the2!
2*7
3ne of the stri6ing aspects of the new A2erican social0science attention to the
3rient is its singular a>oidance of literature! Iou can read through rea2s of e4pert
writing on the 2odern /ear East and ne>er encounter a single reference to literature!
hat see2 to 2atter far 2ore to the regional e4pert are ifacts-i of which a literary
te4t is perhaps a disturber! 1he net effect of this re2ar6able o2ission in 2odern
A2erican awareness of the Arab or Isla2ic 3rient is to 6eep the region and its people
conceptually e2asculated- reduced to iattitudes-i itrends-i statistics: in short-
dehu2aniAed! "ince an Arab poet or no>elist0and there are 2any0writes of his
e4periences- of his >alues- of his hu2anity Fhowe>er strange that 2ay beG- he
effecti>ely disrupts the >arious patterns Fi2ages- cliches- abstractionsG by which the
3rient is represented! A literary te4t spea6s 2ore or less directly of a li>ing reality! Its
force is not that it is Arab- or French- or EnglishJ its force is in the power and >itality
of words that- to 2i4 in Flaubertfs 2etaphor fro2 'a Tentation de 4aint $ntoine, tip
the idols out of the 3rientalistsf ar2s and 2a6e the2 drop those great paralytic
children0which are their ideas of the 3rient0that atte2pt to pass for the 3rient!
1he absence of literature and the relati>ely wea6 position of philology in
conte2porary A2erican studies of the /ear East are illustrations of a new
eccentricity in 3rientalis2- where indeed 2y use of the word itself is ano2alous! For
there is >ery little in what acade2ic e4perts on the /ear East do now that rese2bles
traditional 3rientalis2 of the sort that ended with 5ibb and MassignonJ the 2ain
things that are reproduced are- as I said- a certain cultural hostility and a sense based
not so 2uch on philology as on ie4pertise!i 5enealogically spea6ing- 2odern
A2erican 3rientalis2 deri>es fro2 such things as the ar2y language schools
established during and after the war- sudden go>ern2ent and corporate interest in the
non0estern world during the postwar period- Cold ar co2petition with the "o>iet
?nion- and a residual 2issionary attitude towards 3rientals who are considered ripe
for refor2 and reeducation! 1he nonphilological study of esoteric 3riental languages
is useful for ob>ious rudi2entary strategic reasonsJ but it is also useful for gi>ing a
cachet of authority- al2ost a 2ysti9ue- to the ie4perti who appears able to deal with
hopelessly obscure 2aterial with firsthand s6ill!
In the social0science order of things- language study is a 2ere tool for higher
ai2s- certainly not for reading literary te4ts! In 1*;,- for e4a2ple- the Middle East
Institute0a 9uasi0go>ern2ental
2*1
body founded to o>ersee and sponsor research interest in the Middle East0produced a
Report on Current Research. 1he contribution i&resent "tate of Arabic "tudies in the
?nited "tatesi Fdone- interestingly enough- by a professor of (ebrewG is prefaced by
an epigraph announcing that ino longer is 6nowledge of foreign languages- for
instance- the sole pro>ince of the scholars in the hu2anities! It is a wor6ing tool of
the engineer- the econo2ist- the social scientist- and 2any other specialists!i 1he
whole report stresses the i2portance of Arabic to oil0co2pany e4ecuti>es- tech0
nicians- and 2ilitary personnel! But the reportfs 2ain tal6ing point is this trio of
sentences: i#ussian uni>ersities are now producing fluent Arabic spea6ers! #ussia
has realiAed the i2portance of appealing to 2en through their 2inds- by using their
own language! 1he ?nited "tates need wait no longer in de>eloping its foreign
language progra2!i
17E
1hus 3riental languages are part of so2e policy ob@ecti>e0as to
a certain e4tent they ha>e always been000or part of a sustained propaganda effort! In
both these ai2s the study of 3riental languages beco2es the instru2ent carrying out
(arold 'asswellfs theses about propaganda- in which what counts is not what people
are or thin6 but what they can be 2ade to be and thin6!
1he propagandist outloo6 in fact co2bines respect for indi>iduality with
indifference to for2al de2ocracy! 1he respect for indi>iduality arises fro2 the
dependence of large scale operations upon the support of the 2ass and upon
e4perience with the >ariability of hu2an preferences!!!! 1his regard for 2en in
the 2ass rests upon no de2ocratic dog2atis2s about 2en being the best @udges
of their own interests! 1he 2odern propagandist- li6e the 2odern psychologist-
recogniAes that 2en are often poor @udges of their own interests- flitting fro2 one
alternati>e to the ne4t without solid reason or clinging ti2orously to the
frag2ents of so2e 2ossy roc6 of ages! Calculating the prospect of securing a
per2anent change in habits and >alues in>ol>es 2uch 2ore than the esti2ation
of the preferences of 2en in general! It 2eans ta6ing account of the tissue of
relations in which 2en are webbed- searching for signs of preference which 2ay
reflect no deliberation and directing a progra2 towards a solution which fits in
fact!!!! ith respect to those ad@ust2ents which do re9uire 2ass action the tas6 of
the propagandist is that of in>enting goal sy2bols which ser>e the double
function of facilitating adoption and adaptation! 1he sy2bols 2ust induce
acceptance spontaneously ! ! ! ! It follows that the 2anage2ent ideal is control of
a situation not by i2position but by di>ination!!!! 1he propagandist ta6es
2*2
it for granted that the world is co2pletely caused but that it is only partly
predictable! ! ! !
17+
1he ac9uired foreign language is therefore 2ade part of a subtle assault upon
populations- @ust as the study of a foreign region li6e the 3rient is turned into a
progra2 for control by di>ination!
Iet such progra2s 2ust always ha>e a liberal >eneer- and usually this is left to
scholars- 2en of good will- enthusiasts to attend to! 1he idea encouraged is that in
studying 3rientals- Musli2s- or Arabs iwei can get to 6now another people- their
way of life and thought- and so on! 1o this end it is always better to let the2 spea6 for
the2sel>es- to represent the2sel>es Fe>en though underlying this fiction stands
Mar4fs phrase0with which 'asswell is in agree2ent0for 'ouis /apoleon: i1hey
cannot represent the2sel>esJ they 2ust be representediG!But only up to a point- and
in a special way! In 1*+)- during the an4ious days of the 3ctober Arab0Israeli ar-
the New Xork Times Maga6ine co22issioned two articles- one representing the
Israeli and one the Arab side of the conflict! 1he Israeli side was presented by an
Israeli lawyerJ the Arab side- by an A2erican for2er a2bassador to an Arab country
who had no for2al training iii 3riental studies! 'est we @u2p i22ediately to the
si2ple conclusion that the Arabs were belie>ed incapable of representing the2sel>es-
we would do well to re2e2ber that both Arabs and Jews in this instance were
"e2ites Fin the broad cultural designation I ha>e been discussingG and that both were
being made to be represented for a estern audience! It is worthwhile here to
re2e2ber this passage fro2 &roust- in which the sudden appearance of a Jew into an
aristocratic salon is described as follows:
1he #u2anians- the Egyptians- the 1ur6s 2ay hate the %ews. But in a French
drawing0roo2 the differences between those people are not so apparent- and an
Israelite 2a6ing his entry as though he were e2erging fro2 the heart of the
desert- his body crouching li6e a hyaenafs- his nec6 thrust obli9uely forward-
spreading hi2self in proud isalaa2s-i co2pletely satisfies a certain taste for the
oriental 7un gont pour lIorientalisme;.
17,
R. 2ultural relations policy! hile it is true to say that the ?nited "tates did not
in fact beco2e a world e2pire until the twentieth century- it is also true that during
the nineteenth century the ?nited "tates was concerned with the 3rient in ways that
prepared for its later- o>ertly i2perial concern! 'ea>ing aside the
2*)
ca2paigns against the Barbary pirates in 1,71 and 1,1;- let us consider the founding
of the A2erican 3riental "ociety in 1,=2! At its first annual 2eeting in 1,=) its
president- John &ic6ering- 2ade the >ery clear point that A2erica proposed for itself
the study of the 3rient in order to follow the e4a2ple of the i2perial European
powers! &ic6eringfs 2essage was that the fra2ewor6 of 3riental studies0then as
now0was political- not si2ply scholarly! /ote in the following su22ary how the lines
of argu2ent for 3rientalis2 lea>e little roo2 for doubt as to their intention:
At the first annual 2eeting of the A2erican "ociety in 1,=)- &resident &ic6ering
began a re2ar6able s6etch of the field it was proposed to culti>ate by calling
attention to the especially fa>orable circu2stances of the ti2e- the peace that
reigned e>erywhere- the freer access to 3riental countries- and the greater
facilities for co22unication! 1he earth see2ed 9uiet in the days of Metternich
and 'ouis &hilippe! 1he treaty of /an6ing had opened Chinese ports! 1he
screw0propellor had been adopted in oceangoing >esselsJ Morse had co2pleted
his telegraph and he had already suggested the laying of a trans0Atlantic cable!
1he ob@ects of the "ociety were to culti>ate learning in Asiatic- African- and
&olynesian language- and in e>erything concerning the 3rient- to create a taste
for 3riental "tudies in this country- to publish te4ts- translations and
co22unications- and to collect a library and cabinet! Most of the wor6 has been
done in the Asiatic field- and particularly in "ans6rit and the "e2itic
languages!
17*
Metternich- 'ouis0&hilippe- the 1reaty of /an6ing- the screw propellor: all
suggest the i2perial constellation facilitating Euro0A2erican penetration of the
3rient! 1his has ne>er stopped! E>en the legendary A2erican 2issionaries to the
/ear East during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries too6 their role as set not so
2uch by 5od as by their 5od- their culture- and their destiny!
117
1he early 2issionary
institutions0printing presses- schools- uni>ersities- hospitals- and the li6e0contributed
of course to the areafs wellbeing- but in their specifically i2perial character and their
support by the ?nited "tates go>ern2ent- these institutions were no different fro2
their French and British counterparts in the 3rient! .uring the First orld ar- what
was to beco2e a 2a@or ?nited "tates policy interest in Rionis2 and the coloniAation
of &alestine played an esti2able role in getting the ?nited "tates into the warJ British
discussions prior to and after the Balfour .eclaration F/o>e2ber 1*1+G reflect the
seriousness with which the declaration was ta6en
2*=
by the ?nited "tates!
111
.uring and after the "econd orld ar- the escalation in
?nited "tates interest in the Middle East was re2ar6able! Cairo- 1eheran- and /orth
Africa were i2portant arenas of war- and in that setting- with the e4ploitation of its
oil- strategic- and hu2an resources pioneered by Britain and France- the ?nited "tates
prepared for its new postwar i2perial role!
/ot the least aspect of this role was ia cultural relations policy-i as it was defined
by Morti2er 5ra>es in 1*;7! &art of this policy was- he said- the atte2pt to ac9uire
ie>ery significant publication in e>ery i2portant /ear Eastern language published
since 1*77-i an atte2pt iwhich our Congress ought to recogniAe as a 2easure of our
national security!i For what was clearly at sta6e- 5ra>es argued Fto >ery recepti>e
ears- by the wayG- was the need for i2uch better A2erican understanding of the
forces which are contending with the A2erican idea for acceptance by the /ear East!
1he principal of these are- of course- co22unis2 and Isla2!i
112
3ut of such a
concern- and as a conte2porary ad@unct to the 2ore bac6ward0loo6ing A2erican
3riental "ociety- was born the entire >ast apparatus for research on the Middle East!
1he 2odel- both in its fran6ly strategic attitude and in its sensiti>ity to public security
and policy Fnot- as is often postured- to pure scholarshipG- was the Middle East
Institute- founded May 1*=E in ashington under the aegis of- if not entirely within
or by- the federal go>ern2ent!
11)
3ut of such organiAations grew the Middle East
"tudies Association- the powerful support of the Ford and other foundations- the
>arious federal progra2s of support to uni>ersities- the >arious federal research
pro@ects- research pro@ects carried out by such entities as the .efense .epart2ent- the
#A/. Corporation- and the (udson Institute- and the consultati>e and lobbying
efforts of ban6s- oil co2panies- 2ultinationals- and the li6e! It is no reduction to say
of all this that it retains- in 2ost of its general as well as its detailed functioning- the
traditional 3rientalist outloo6 which had been de>eloped in Europe!
1he parallel between European and A2erican i2perial designs on the 3rient
F/ear and FarG is ob>ious! hat is perhaps less ob>ious is FaG the e4tent to which the
European tradition of 3rientalist scholarship was- if not ta6en o>er- then
acco22odated- nor2aliAed- do2esticated- and populariAed and fed into the postwar
efflorescence of /ear Eastern studies in the ?nited "tatesJ and FbG the e4tent to which
the European tradition has gi>en rise in the ?nited "tates to a coherent0 attitude
a2ong 2ost scholars- institutions-
2*;
styles of discourse- and orientations- despite the conte2porary appearance of
refine2ent- as well as the use of FagainG highly sophisticated0appearing social0science
techni9ues! I ha>e already discussed 5ibbfs ideasJ it needs to be pointed out- howe>er-
that in the 2iddle 1*;7s he beca2e director of the (ar>ard Center for Middle East
"tudies- fro2 which position his ideas and style e4erted an i2portant influence!
5ibbfs presence in the ?nited "tates was different in what it did for the field fro2
&hilip (ittifs presence at &rinceton since the late 1*27s! 1he &rinceton depart2ent
produced a large group of i2portant scholars- and its brand of 3riental studies
sti2ulated great scholarly interest in the field! 5ibb- on the other hand- was 2ore
truly in touch with the public0policy aspect of 3rientalis2- and far 2ore than (ittifs
at &rinceton his position at (ar>ard focused 3rientalis2 on a Cold ar area0studies
approach!
5ibbfs own wor6- ne>ertheless- did not o>ertly e2ploy the language of cultural
discourse in the tradition of #enan- Bec6er- and Massignon! Iet this discourse- its
intellectual apparatus- and its dog2as were i2pressi>ely present- principally
Falthough not e4clusi>elyG in the wor6 and institutional authority- at Chicago and then
at ?C'A- of 5usta>e >on 5runebau2! (e ca2e to the ?nited "tates as part of the
intellectual i22igration of European scholars fleeing fascis2!i
11=
1hereafter he
produced a solid 3rientalist oeu>re that concentrated on Isla2 as a holistic culture
about which- fro2 beginning to end of his career- he continued to 2a6e the sa2e set
of essentially reducti>e- negati>e generaliAations! (is style- which bore often chaotic
e>idence of his Austro05er2anic poly2athy- of his absorption of the canonical
pseudoscientific pre@udices of French- British- and Italian 3rientalis2- as well as of
an al2ost desperate effort to re2ain the i2partial scholar0obser>er- was ne4t to
unreadable! A typical page of his on the Isla2ic self0i2age will @a2 together
half0a0doAen references to Isla2ic te4ts drawn fro2 as 2any periods as possible-
references as well to (usserl and the pre0"ocratics- references to 'P>i0"trauss and
>arious A2erican social scientists! All this- ne>ertheless- does not obscure >on
5runebau2fs al2ost >irulent disli6e of Isla2! (e has no difficulty presu2ing that
Isla2 is a unitary pheno2enon- unli6e any other religion or ci>iliAation- and
thereafter he shows it to be antihu2an- incapable of de>elop2ent- self06nowledge- or
ob@ecti>ity- as well as uncreati>e- unscientific- and authoritarian! (ere are two typical
e4cerpts0and we 2ust re2e2ber that >on 5runebau2 wrote with the uni9ue authority
of a European scholar in the ?nited "tates- teaching-
2*E
ad2inistering-gi>ing grants to a large networ6 of scholars in the field!
It is essential to realiAe that Musli2 ci>iliAation is a cultural entity that does not
share our pri2ary aspirations! It is not >itally interested in the structured study of
other cultures- either as an end in itself or as a 2eans towards clearer
understanding of its own character and history! If this obser>ation were to be
>alid 2erely for conte2porary Isla2- one 2ight be inclined to connect it with the
profoundly disturbed state of Isla2- which does not per2it it to loo6 beyond itself
unless forced to do so! But as it is >alid for the past as well- one 2ay perhaps
see6 to connect it with the basic anti0hu2anis2 of this YIsla2icZ ci>iliAation- that
is- the deter2ined refusal to accept 2an to any e4tent whate>er as the arbiter or
the 2easure of things- and the tendency to be satisfied with the truth as the
description of 2ental structures- or in other words- with psychological truth!
YArab or Isla2ic nationalis2Z lac6s- in spite of its occasional use as a catchword-
the concept of the di>ine right of a nation- it lac6s a for2ati>e ethic- it also lac6s-
it would see2- the later nineteenth century belief in 2echanistic progressJ abo>e
all it lac6s the intellectual >igor of a pri2ary pheno2enon! Both power and the
will to power are ends in the2sel>es! Y1his sentence see2s to ser>e no purpose in
the argu2entJ yet it doubtless gi>es >on 5runebau2 the security of a
philosophical0sounding nonsentence- as if to assure hi2self that he spea6s wisely-
not disparagingly- of Isla2!Z 1he resent2ent of political slights Yfelt by Isla2Z
engenders i2patience and i2pedes long0range analysis and planning in the
intellectual sphere!
11;
In 2ost other conte4ts such writing would politely be called pole2ical! For
3rientalis2- of course- it is relati>ely orthodo4- and it passed for canonical wisdo2 in
A2erican study of the Middle East after orld ar II- 2ainly because of the cultural
prestige associated with European scholars! 1he point is- howe>er- that >on
5runebau2fs wor6 is accepted uncritically by the field- e>en though the field itself
today cannot reproduce people li6e hi2! Iet only one scholar has underta6en a
serious criti9ue of >on 5runebau2fs >iews: Abdullah 'aroui- a Moroccan historian
and political theorist!
?sing the 2otif of reducti>e repetition in >on 5runebau2fs wor6 as a practical
tool of critical anti03rientalist study- 'aroui 2anages his case i2pressi>ely on the
whole! (e as6s hi2self what it is that
2*+
caused >on 5runebau2fs wor6- despite the enor2ous 2ass of its detail and its
apparent range- to re2ain reducti>e! As 'aroui says- ithe ad@ecti>es that >on
5runebau2 affi4es to the word Isla2 F2edie>al- classical- 2odernG are neutral or
e>en superfluous: there is no difference between classical Isla2 and 2edie>al Isla2
or Isla2 plain and si2ple !!!! 1here is therefore Yfor >on 5runebau2Z only one Isla2
that changes within itself!i
11E
Modern Isla2- according to >on 5runebau2- has turned
away fro2 the est because it re2ains faithful to its original sense of itselfJ and yet
Isla2 can 2oderniAe itself only by a self0reinterpretation fro2 a estern point of
>iew0which- of course- >on 5runebau2 shows is i2possible! In describing >on
5runebau2fs conclusions- which add up to a portrait of Isla2 as a culture incapable
of inno>ation- 'aroui does not 2ention that the need for Isla2 to use estern
2ethods to i2pro>e itself has- as an idea- perhaps because of >on 5runebau2fs wide
influence- beco2e al2ost a truis2 in Middle Eastern studies! FFor e4a2ple- .a>id
5ordon- in 4el#'Determination and .istory in the Third )orld-
11+
urges i2aturityi
on Arabs- Africans- and AsiansJ he argues that this can be gained only by learning
fro2 estern ob@ecti>ity!G
'arouifs analysis shows also how >on 5runebau2 e2ployed A! '! %roeberfs
culturalist theory to understand Isla2- and how this tool necessarily entailed a series
of reductions and eli2inations by which Isla2 could be represented as a closed
syste2 of e4clusions! 1hus- each of the 2any di>erse aspects of Isla2ic culture could
be seen by >on 5runebau2 as a direct reflection of an un>arying 2atri4- a particular
theory of 5od- that co2pels the2 all into 2eaning and order: de>elop2ent- history-
tradition- reality in Isla2 are therefore interchangeable! 'aroui rightly 2aintains that
history as a co2ple4 order of e>ents- te2poralities- and 2eanings cannot be reduced
to such a notion of culture- in the sa2e way that culture cannot be reduced to
ideology-nor ideology to theology! Bon 5runebau2 has fallen prey both to the
3rientalist dog2as he inherited and to a particular feature of Isla2 which he has
chosen to interpret as a shortco2ing: that there is to be found in Isla2 a highly
articulated theory of religion and yet >ery few accounts of religious e4perience-
highly articulate political theory and few precise political docu2ents- a theory of
social structure and >ery few indi>idualiAed actions- a theory of history and >ery few
dated e>ents- an articulated theory of econo2ics and >ery few 9uantified series- and
so on!i
11,
1he net result is a historical >ision of Isla2
2*,
entirely hobbled by the theory of a culture incapable of doing @ustice to- or e>en
e4a2ining- its e4istential reality in the e4perience of its adherents! Bon 5runebau2fs
Isla2- after all- is the Isla2 of the earlier European 3rientalists 2onolithic- scornful
of ordinary hu2an e4perience- gross- reducti>e- unchanging!
At botto2 such a >iew of Isla2 is political- not e>en euphe2istically i2partial!
1he strength of its hold on the new 3rientalist Fyounger- that is- than >on
5runebau2G is due in part to its traditional authority- and in part to its use0>alue as a
handle for grasping a >ast region of the world and proclai2ing it an entirely coherent
pheno2enon! "ince Isla2 has ne>er easily been enco2passed by the est
politically0and certainly since orld ar II Arab nationalis2 has been a 2o>e2ent
openly declaring its hostility to estern i2perialis20the desire to assert intellectually
satisfying things about Isla2 in retaliation increases! 3ne authority has said of Isla2
Fwithout specifying which Isla2 or aspect of Isla2 he 2eansG that it is ione prototype
of closed traditional societies!i /ote here the edifying use of the word Isla2 to
signify all at once a society- a religion- a prototype- and an actuality! But all this will
be subordinated by the sa2e scholar to the notion that- unli6e nor2al FiouriG
societies- Isla2 and Middle Eastern societies are totally ipolitical-i an ad@ecti>e
2eant as a reproach to Isla2 for not being iliberal-i for not being able to separate Fas
iwei doG politics fro2 culture! 1he result is an in>idiously ideological portrait of iusi
and ithe2i:
1o understand Middle Eastern society as a whole 2ust re2ain our great ai2!
3nly a society Yli6e ioursiZ that has already achie>ed a dyna2ic stability can
afford to thin6 of politics- econo2ics- or culture as genuinely autono2ous real2s
of e4istence and not 2erely con>enient di>isions for study! In a traditional
society that does not separate the things of Caesar fro2 those of 5od- or that is
entirely in flu4- the connection between- say- politics and all other aspects of life
is the heart of the issue! 1oday- for e4a2ple- whether a 2an is to 2arry four
wi>es or one- fast or eat- gain or lose land- rely on re>elation or reason- ha>e all
beco2e political issues in the Middle East !!!! /o less than the Mosle2 hi2self-
the new 3rientalist 2ust in9uire anew what the significant structures and
relationships of Isla2ic society 2ay be!
11*
1he tri>iality of 2ost of the e4a2ples F2arrying four wi>es- fasting or eating- etc!G is
2eant as e>idence of Isla2fs all0inclusi>eness- and its tyranny! As to where this is
supposed to be happening- we
2**
are not told! But we are re2inded of the doubtless nonpolitical fact that 3rientalists
iare largely responsible for ha>ing gi>en Middle Easterners the2sel>es an accurate
appreciation of their past-i
127
@ust in case we 2ight forget that 3rientalists 6now
things by definition that 3rientals cannot 6now on their own!
If this su2s up the ihardi school of the new A2erican 3rientalis2- the isofti
school e2phasiAes the fact that traditional 3rientalists ha>e gi>en us the basic
outlines of Isla2ic history- religion- and society but ha>e been iall too often content
to su2 up the 2eaning of a ci>iliAation on the basis of a few 2anuscripts!i
121
Against
the traditional 3rientalist- therefore- the new area0studies specialist argues
philosophically:
#esearch 2ethodology and disciplinary paradig2s are not to deter2ine what is
selected for study- and they are not to li2it obser>ation! Area studies- fro2 this
perspecti>e- hold that true 6nowledge is only possible of things that e4ist- while
2ethods and theories are abstractions- which order obser>ations and offer
e4planations according to non0e2pirical criteria!
122
5ood! But how does one 6now the ithings that e4ist-i and to what e4tent are the
ithings that e4isti constituted by the 6nowerL 1his is left 2oot- as the new >alue0free
apprehension of the 3rient as so2ething that e4ists is institutionaliAed in area0studies
progra2s! ithout tendentious theoriAing- Isla2 is rarely studied- rarely researched-
rarely 6nown: the nai>etP of this conception scarcely conceals what ideologically it
2eans- the absurd theses that 2an plays no part in setting up both the 2aterial and the
processes of 6nowledge- that the 3riental reality is static and ie4ists-i that only a
2essianic re>olutionary Fin .r! %issingerfs >ocabularyG will not ad2it the difference
between reality out there and in his head!
Between the hard and soft schools- howe>er- 2ore or less diluted >ersions of the
old 3rientalis2 flourish0in the new acade2ic @argons in so2e cases- in the old ones in
others! But the principal dog2as of 3rientalis2 e4ist in their purest for2 today in
studies of the Arabs and Isla2! 'et us recapitulate the2 here: one is the absolute and
syste2atic difference between the est- which is rational- de>eloped- hu2ane-
superior- and the 3rient- which is aberrant- unde>eloped inferior! Another dog2a is
that abstractions about the 3rient- particularly those based on te4ts representing a
iclassicali 3riental ci>iliAation- are always preferable to direct e>idence drawn fro2
2odern 3riental realities! A third dog2a is
)77
that the 3rient is eternal- unifor2- and incapable of defining itselfJ therefore it is
assu2ed that a highly generaliAed and syste2atic >ocabulary for describing the
3rient fro2 a estern standpoint is ine>itable and e>en scientifically iob@ecti>e!i A
fourth dog2a is that the 3rient is at botto2 so2ething either to be feared Fthe Iellow
&eril- the Mongol hordes- the brown do2inionsG or to be controlled Fby pacification-
research and de>elop2ent- outright occupation whene>er possibleG!
1he e4traordinary thing is that these notions persist without significant challenge
in the acade2ic and go>ern2ental study of the 2odern /ear 3rient! 'a2entably-
there has been no de2onstrable effect0if there has been a challenging gesture at
all02ade by Isla2ic or Arab scholarsf wor6 disputing the dog2as of 3rientalis2J an
isolated article here or there- while i2portant for its ti2e and place- cannot possibly
affect the course of an i2posing research consensus 2aintained by all sorts of
agencies- institutions- and traditions! 1he point of this is that Isla2ic 3rientalis2 has
led a conte2porary fife 9uite different fro2 that of the other 3rientalist
subdisciplines! 1he Co22ittee of Concerned Asia "cholars Fwho are pri2arily
A2ericansG led a re>olution during the 1*E7s in the ran6s of East Asia specialistsJ the
African studies specialists were si2ilarly challenged by re>isionistsJ so too were
other 1hird orld area specialists! 3nly the Arabists and Isla2ologists still function
unre>ised! For the2 there are still such things as an Isla2ic society- an Arab 2ind- an
3riental psyche! E>en the ones whose specialty is the 2odern Isla2ic world
anachronistically use te4ts li6e the %oran to read into e>ery facet of conte2porary
Egyptian or Algerian society! Isla2- or a se>enthcentury ideal of it constituted by the
3rientalist- is assu2ed to possess the unity that eludes the 2ore recent and i2portant
influences of colonialis2- i2perialis2- and e>en ordinary politics! Cliches about how
Musli2s For Moha22edans- as they are still so2eti2es calledG beha>e are bandied
about with a nonchalance no one would ris6 in tal6ing about blac6s or Jews! At best-
the Musli2 is a inati>e infor2anti for the 3rientalist! "ecretly- howe>er- he re2ains
a despised heretic who for his sins 2ust additionally endure the entirely than6less
position of being 6nown0negati>ely- that is0as an anti0Rionist!
1here is of course a Middle East studies establish2ent- a pool of interests- iold
boyi or ie4perti networ6s lin6ing corporate business- the foundations- the oil
co2panies- the 2issions- the 2ilitary- the foreign ser>ice- the intelligence co22unity
together
)71
with the acade2ic world! 1here are grants and other rewards- there are organiAations-
there are hierarchies- there are institutes- centers- faculties- depart2ents- all de>oted
to legiti2iAing and 2aintaining the authority of a! handful of basic- basically
unchanging ideas about Isla2- the 3rient- and the Arabs! A recent critical analysis of
the Middle East studies operation in the ?nited "tates shows- not that the field is
i2onolithic-i but that it is co2ple4- that it contains oldstyle 3rientalists- deliberately
2arginal specialists- counterinsurgency specialists- policy2a6ers- as well as ia s2all
2inority ! ! ! of acade2ic power bro6ers!i
12)
In any e>ent- the core of 3rientalist
dog2a persists!
As an instance of what- in its highest and 2ost intellectually prestigious for2- the
field now produces- let us consider briefly the two0>olu2e 2ambridge .istory o#
/slam, which was first published in England in 1*+7 and is a regular su22a of
3rientalist orthodo4y! 1o say of this wor6 by nu2erous lu2inaries that it is an
intellectual failure by any standards other than those of 3rientalis2 is to say that it
could ha>e been a different and better history of Isla2! In fact- as se>eral 2ore
thoughtful scholars ha>e noted-
12=
this 6ind of history was already doo2ed when first
planned and could not ha>e been different or better in e4ecution: too 2any ideas were
uncritically accepted by its editorsJ there was too 2uch reliance on >ague conceptsJ
little e2phasis was placed on 2ethodological issues Fwhich were left as they ha>e
been standing in 3rientalist discourse for al2ost two centuriesGJ and no effort was put
forth to 2a6e e>en the idea of Isla2 see2 interesting! Moreo>er- not only does The
2ambridge .istory o# /slam radically 2isconcei>e and 2isrepresent Isla2 as a
religionJ it also has no corporate idea of itself as a history! 3f few such enor2ous
enterprises can it be true- as it is of this one- that ideas and 2ethodological
intelligence are al2ost entirely absent fro2 it!
Erfan "hahidfs chapter on pre0Isla2ic Arabia- which opens the history-
intelligently s6etches the fruitful consonance between topography and hu2an
econo2y out of which Isla2 appeared in the se>enth century! But what can one fairly
say of a history of Isla2- defined by &! M! (oltfs introduction rather airily as a
icultural synthesis-i
12;
that proceeds directly fro2 pre0Isla2ic Arabia to a chapter on
Moha22ed- then to a chapter on the &atriarchal and ?2ayyad caliphates- and
entirely bypasses any account of Isla2 as a syste2 of belief- faith- or doctrineL For
hundreds of pages in >olu2e 1- Isla2 is understood to 2ean an unrelie>ed
)72
chronology of battles- reigns- and deaths- rises and heydays- co2ings and passings-
written for the 2ost part in a ghastly 2onotone!
1a6e the Abbasid period fro2 the eighth to the ele>enth century as an instance!
Anyone who has the slightest ac9uaintance with Arab or Isla2ic history will 6now
that it was a high point of Isla2ic ci>iliAation- as brilliant a period of cultural history
as the (igh #enaissance in Italy! Iet nowhere in the forty pages of description does
one get an in6ling of any richnessJ what is found instead is sentences li6e this: i3nce
2aster of the caliphate- Yal0Maf2unZ see2ed henceforth to shrin6 fro2 contact with
Baghdad society and re2ained settled at Mer>- entrusting the go>ern2ent of Ira9 to
one of his trusted 2en- al0(asan b! "ahl- the brother of al0Fadl- who was faced al2ost
at once with a serious "hifi re>olt- that of Abufl0"araya- who in Ju2ada lI 1**jJanuary
,1; sent out a call to ar2s fro2 %ufa in support of the (asanid Ibn 1abataba!i
12E
A
non0Isla2icist will not 6now at this point what a "hifi or a (asanid is! (e will ha>e
no idea what Ju2ada 11 is- e4cept that it clearly designates a date of so2e sort! And
of course he will belie>e that the Abbasids- including (arun al0#ashid- were an
incorrigibly dull and 2urderous lot- as they sat sul6ing in Mer>!
1he Central Isla2ic lands are defined as e4cluding /orth Africa and Andalusia-
and their history is an orderly 2arch fro2 the past till 2odern ti2es! In >olu2e 1-
therefore- Isla2 is a geographical designation applied chronologically and selecti>ely
as it suits the e4perts! But nowhere in the chapters on classical Isla2 is there an
ade9uate preparation for the disappoint2ents in store for us when we co2e to irecent
ti2es-i as they are called! 1he chapter on the 2odern Arab lands is written without
the slightest understanding of the re>olutionary de>elop2ents in the area! 1he author
ta6es a school2ar2ish- openly reactionary attitude towards the Arabs Fiit 2ust be
said that during this period the educated and uneducated youth of the Arab countries-
with their enthusias2 and idealis2- beca2e a fertile soil for political e4ploitation and-
at ti2es- perhaps without realiAing it- the tools of unscrupulous e4tre2ists and
agitatorsi
12+
G- te2pered by occasional praise of 'ebanese nationalis2 Falthough we
are ne>er told that the appeal of fascis2 to a s2all nu2ber of Arabs during the
thirties also infected the 'ebanese Maronites- who in 1*)E founded the Falanges
libanaises as a copy of Mussolinifs Blac6 "hirtsG! i?nrest and agitationi are ascribed
to 1*)E without a 2ention of Rionis2- and the >ery notions of anticolonialis2 and
antii2perialis2 are ne>er allowed to >iolate the
)7)
serenity of the narrati>e! As for the chapters on ithe political i2pact of the esti and
iecono2ic and social changei0ideas left no 2ore specific than thatthey are tac6ed on
as reluctant concessions to Isla2 as ha>ing so2ething to do with iouri world in
general! Change is unilaterally e9uated with 2oderniAation- e>en though it is nowhere
2ade clear why other 6inds of change need be so i2periously dis2issed! "ince it is
assu2ed that Isla2fs only worthwhile relations ha>e been with the est- the
i2portance of Bandung or of Africa or of the 1hird orld generally is ignoredJ this
blithe indifference to a good three09uarters of reality so2ewhat e4plains the
a2aAingly cheerful state2ent that ithe historical ground has been cleared Yby who2-
for what- in what wayLZ for a new relationship between the est and Isla2 ! ! ! based
on e9uality and cooperation!i
12,
If by the end of >olu2e 1 we are 2ired in a nu2ber of contradictions and
difficulties about what Isla2 really is- there is no help to be had in >olu2e 2! (alf the
boo6 is de>oted to co>ering the tenth to the twentieth centuries in India- &a6istan-
Indonesia- "pain- /orth Africa- and "icilyJ there is 2ore distinction in the chapters on
/orth Africa- although the sa2e co2bination of professional 3rientalist @argon with
unguided historical detail pre>ails pretty 2uch e>erywhere! "o far- after
appro4i2ately twel>e hundred pages of dense prose- iIsla2i appears to be no 2ore a
cultural synthesis than any other roll call of 6ings- battles- and dynasties! But in the
last half of >olu2e 2- the great synthesis co2pletes itself with articles on i1he
5eographical "etting-i i"ources of Isla2ic Ci>iliAation-i i#eligion and Culture-i and
iarfare!i
/ow onefs legiti2ate 9uestions and ob@ections see2 2ore @ustified! hy is a
chapter co22issioned on Isla2ic warfare when what is really discussed
Finterestingly- by the wayG is the sociology of so2e Isla2ic ar2iesL Is one to assu2e
that there is an Isla2ic 2ode of war different- say- fro2 Christian warfareL
Co22unist war >ersus capitalist war proposes itself as a suitably analogous topic- 3f
what use for the understanding of Isla200e4cept as a display of 5usta>e >on
5runebau2fs indiscri2inate eruditionare the opa9ue 9uotations fro2 'eopold >on
#an6e which- along with other e9ually ponderous and irrele>ant 2aterial- dot his
pages on Isla2ic ci>iliAationL Is it not 2endacious thus to disguise the real
5runebau2ian thesis- that Isla2ic ci>iliAation rests on an unprincipled borrowing by
Musli2s fro2 the Judeo0Christian- (ellenistic- and Austro05er2anic ci>iliAationsL
Co2pare with this idea
)7=
that Isla2 is by definition a plagiaristic culture0the one put forward in >olu2e 1 that
iso0called Arabic literaturei was written by &ersians Fno proof offered- no na2es
citedG! hen 'ouis 5ardet treats i#eligion and Culture-i we are told su22arily that
only the first fi>e centuries of Isla2 are to be discussedJ does this 2ean that religion
and culture in i2odern ti2esi cannot be isynthesiAed-i or does it 2ean that Isla2
achie>ed its final for2 in the twelfth centuryL Is there really such a thing as iIsla2ic
geography-i which see2s to include the iplanned anarchyi of Musli2 cities- or is it
2ainly an in>ented sub@ect to de2onstrate a rigid theory of geographical0racial
deter2inis2L As a hint we are re2inded of ithe #a2adan fast with its acti>e nights-i
fro2 which we are e4pected to conclude that Isla2 is a religion idesigned for town
!dwellers!i 1his is e4planation in need of e4planation!
1he sections on econo2ic and social institutions- on law and @ustice- 2ysticis2-
art and architecture- science- and the >arious Isla2ic literatures are on an altogether
higher le>el than 2ost of the .istory. Iet nowhere is there e>idence that their authors
ha>e 2uch in co22on with 2odern hu2anists or social scientists in other
disciplines: the techni9ues of the con>entional history of ideas- of Mar4ist analysis- of
the /ew (istory- are noticeably absent! Isla2- in short- see2s to its historians to be
best suited to a rather &latonic and anti9uarian bias! 1o so2e writers of the .istory
Isla2 is a politics and a religionJ to others it is a style of beingJ to others it is
idistinguishable fro2 Musli2 societyiJ to still others it is a 2ysteriously 6nown
essenceJ to all the authors Isla2 is a re2ote- tensionless thing- without 2uch to teach
us about the co2ple4ities of todayfs Musli2s! (anging o>er the whole dis@ointed
enterprise which is The 2ambridge .istory o# /slam is the old 3rientalist truis2 that
Isla2 is about te4ts- not about people!
1he funda2ental 9uestion raised by such conte2porary 3rientalist te4ts as The
2ambridge .istory is whether ethnic origins and religion are the best- or at least the
2ost useful- basic- and clear- definitions of hu2an e4perience! .oes it 2atter 2ore in
understanding conte2porary politics to 6now that \ and I are disad>antaged in
certain >ery concrete ways- or that they are Musli2s or JewsL 1his is of course a
debatable 9uestion- and we are >ery li6ely in rational ter2s to insist on both the
religious0ethnic and the socioecono2ic descriptionsJ 3rientalis2- howe>er- clearly
posits the Isla2ic category as the do2inant one- and this is the 2ain consideration
about its retrograde intellectual tactics!
)7;
S. Merely /slam. 4o deeply entrenched is the theory of "e2itic si2plicity as it is
to be found in 2odern 3rientalis2 that it operates with little differentiation in such
well06nown anti0"e2itic European writings as The Protocols o# the Elders o# .ori
and in re2ar6s such as these by Chai2 eiA2ann to Arthur Balfour on May )7-
1*1,:
1he Arabs- who are superficially cle>er and 9uic6 witted- worship one thing- and
one thing only0power and success!!!! 1he British authorities ! ! ! 6nowing as they
do the treacherous nature of the Arabs ! ! ! ha>e to watch carefully and
constantly!!!! 1he fairer the English regi2e tries to be- the 2ore arrogant the Arab
beco2es!!!! 1he present state of affairs would necessarily tend toward the creation
of an Arab &alestine- if there were an Arab people in &alestine! It will not in fact
produce that result because the fellah is at least four centuries behind the ti2es-
and the effendi ! ! ! is dishonest- uneducated- greedy- and as unpatriotic as he is
inefficient!
12*
1he co22on deno2inator between eiA2ann and the European anti0"e2ite is the
3rientalist perspecti>e- seeing "e2ites For subdi>isions thereofG as by nature lac6ing
the desirable 9ualities of 3ccidentals! Iet the difference between #enan and
eiA2ann is that the latter had already gathered behind his rhetoric the solidity of
institutions whereas the for2er had not! Is there not in twentieth0century 3rientalis2
that sa2e unaging igracious childhood heedlessly allied now with scholarship- now
with a state and all its institutions0that #enan saw as the "e2itesf unchanging 2ode of
beingL
Iet with what greater har2 has the twentieth0century >ersion of the 2yth been
2aintained! It has produced a picture of the Arab as seen by an iad>ancedi
9uasi03ccidental society! In his resistance to foreign colonialists the &alestinian was
either a stupid sa>age- or a negligible 9uantity- 2orally and e>en e4istentially!
According to Israeli law only a Jew has full ci>ic rights and un9ualified i22igration
pri>ilegesJ e>en though they are the landfs inhabitants- Arabs are gi>en less- 2ore
si2ple rights: they cannot i22igrate- and if they see2 not to ha>e the sa2e rights- it
is because they are iless de>eloped!i 3rientalis2 go>erns Israeli policy towards the
Arabs throughout- as the recently published %oenig #eport a2ply pro>es! 1here are
good Arabs Fthe ones who do as they are toldG and bad Arabs Fwho do not- and are
therefore terroristsG! Most of all there are all those Arabs who- once defeated- can be
e4pected to sit obediently behind an infallibly fortified line- 2anned by the
)7E
s2allest possible nu2ber of 2en- on the theory that Arabs ha>e had to accept the
2yth of Israeli superiority and will ne>er dare attac6! 3ne need only glance through
the pages of 5eneral Iehoshafat (ar6abifs $rab $ttitudes to /srael to see how0as
#obert Alter put it in ad2iring language in Co22entary
1)7
0 the Arab 2ind-
depra>ed- anti0"e2itic to the core- >iolent- unbalanced- could produce only rhetoric
and little 2ore! 3ne 2yth supports and produces another! 1hey answer each other-
tending towards sy22etries and patterns of the sort that as 3rientals the Arabs
the2sel>es can be e4pected to produce- but that as a hu2an being no Arab can truly
sustain!
3f itself- in itself- as a set of beliefs- as a 2ethod of analysis- 3rientalis2 cannot
de>elop! Indeed- it is the doctrinal antithesis of de>elop2ent! Its central argu2ent is
the 2yth of the arrested de>elop2ent of the "e2ites! Fro2 this 2atri4 other 2yths
pour forth- each of the2 showing the "e2ite to be the opposite of the esterner and
irre2ediably the >icti2 of his own wea6nesses! By a concatenation of e>ents and
circu2stances the "e2itic 2yth bifurcated in the Rionist 2o>e2entJ one "e2ite went
the way of 3rientalis2- the other- the Arab- was forced to go the way of the 3riental!
Each ti2e tent and tribe are solicited- the 2yth is being e2ployedJ each ti2e the
concept of Arab national character is e>o6ed- the 2yth is being e2ployed! 1he hold
these instru2ents ha>e on the 2ind is increased by the institutions built around the2!
For e>ery 3rientalist- 9uite literally- there is a support syste2 of staggering power-
considering the ephe2erality of the 2yths that 3rientalis2 propagates! 1his syste2
now cul2inates in the >ery institutions of the state! 1o write about the Arab 3riental
world- therefore- is to write with the authority of a nation- and not with the
affir2ation of a strident ideology but with the un9uestioning certainty of absolute
truth bac6ed by absolute force!
In its February 1*+= issue Co22entary ga>e its readers an article by &rofessor
5il Carl Alroy entitled i.o the Arabs ant &eaceLi Alroy is a professor of political
science and is the author of two wor6s- $ttitudes Towards %ewish 4tatehood in the
$rab orld and /mages o# Middle East ConflictJ he is a 2an who professes to
i6nowi the Arabs- and is ob>iously an e4pert on i2age 2a6ing! (is argu2ent is 9uite
predictable: that the Arabs want to destroy Israel- that the Arabs really say what they
2ean Fand Alroy 2a6es ostentatious use of his ability to cite e>idence fro2 Egyptian
newspapers- e>idence he e>erywhere identifies with iArabsi as if the
)7+
two- Arabs and Egyptian newspapers- were oneG- and so on and on- with unflagging-
one0eyed Aeal! Huite the center of his article- as it is the center of pre>ious wor6 by
other iArabistsi Fsynony2ous with i3rientalistsiG- li6e 5eneral (ar6abi- whose
pro>ince is the iArab 2ind-i is a wor6ing hypothesis on what Arabs- if one peels off
all the outer nonsense- are really li6e! In other words- Alroy 2ust pro>e that because
Arabs are- first of all- as one in their bent for bloody >engeance- second-
psychologically incapable of peace- and third- congenitally tied to a concept of @ustice
that 2eans the opposite of that- they are not to be trusted and 2ust be fought
inter2inably as one fights any other fatal disease! For e>idence Alroyfs principal
e4hibit is a 9uotation ta6en fro2 (arold ! 5liddenfs essay i1he Arab orldi Fto
which I referred in Chapter 3neG! Alroy finds 5lidden able to ha>e icaptured the
cultural differences between the estern and the Arab >iewi of things i>ery well!i
Alroyfs argu2ent is clinched- therefore0the Arabs are unregenerate sa>ages0and thus
an authority on the Arab 2ind has told a wide audience of presu2ably concerned
Jews that they 2ust continue to watch out! And he has done it acade2ically-
dispassionately- fairly- using e>idence ta6en fro2 the Arabs the2sel>es 0who- he says
with 3ly2pian assurance- ha>e ie2phatically ruled out ! ! ! real peacei0and fro2
psychoanalysis!
1)1
3ne can e4plain such state2ents by recogniAing that a still 2ore i2plicit and
powerful difference posited by the 3rientalist as against the 3riental is that the
for2er writes about- whereas the latter is written about! For the latter- passi>ity is the
presu2ed roleJ for the for2er- the power to obser>e- study- and so forthJ as #oland
Barthes has said- a 2yth Fand its perpetuatorsG can in>ent itself Fthe2sel>esG
ceaselessly!i
1)2
1he 3riental is gi>en as fi4ed- stable- in need of in>estigation- in need
e>en of 6nowledge about hi2self! /o dialectic is either desired or allowed! 1here is a
source of infor2ation Fthe 3rientalG and a source of 6nowledge Fthe 3rientalistG- in
short- a writer and a sub@ect 2atter otherwise inert! 1he relationship between the two
is radically a 2atter of power- for which there are nu2erous i2ages! (ere is an
instance ta6en fro2 #aphael &ataifs >olden River to >olden Road<
In order properly to e>aluate what Middle Eastern culture will willingly
accept fro2 the e2barrassingly rich storehouses of estern ci>iliAation- a better
and sounder understanding of Middle Eastern culture must #irst be ac3uired. The
sa2e prere9uisite is necessary in order to gauge the probable effects of newly
introduced
)7,
traits on the cultural conte4t of tradition directed peoples! Also- the ways and
2eans in which new cultural offerings can be 2ade palatable 2ust be studied
2uch 2ore thoroughly than was hitherto the case! In brief- the only way in which
the 5ordian 6not of resistance to esterniAation in the Middle East can be
unra>eled is that of studying the Middle East- of obtaining a fuller picture of its
traditional ulture- a better understanding of the processes of change ta6ing place
in it at present- and a deeper insight into the psychology of hu2an groups brought
up in Middle Eastern culture! 1he tas6 is ta4ing- but the priAe- har2ony between
the est and a neighboring world area of crucial i2portance- is well worth it!
1))
1he 2etaphorical figures propping up this passage FI ha>e indicated the2 by italicsG
co2e fro2 a >ariety of hu2an acti>ities- so2e co22ercial- so2e horticultural- so2e
religious- so2e >eterinary- so2e historical! Iet in each case the relation between the
Middle East and the est is really defined as se4ual: as I said earlier in discussing
Flaubert- the association between the 3rient and se4 is re2ar6ably persistent! 1he
Middle East is resistant- as any >irgin would be- but the 2ale scholar wins the priAe
by bursting open- penetrating through the 5ordian 6not despite ithe ta4ing tas6!i
i(ar2onyi is the result of the con9uest of 2aidenly coynessJ it is not by any 2eans
the coe4istence of e9uals! 1he underlying power relation between scholar and sub@ect
2atter is ne>er once altered: it is unifor2ly fa>orable to the 3rientalist! "tudy-
understanding- 6nowledge- e>aluation- 2as6ed as blandish2ents to ihar2ony-i are
instru2ents of con9uest!
1he >erbal operations in such writing as &ataifs Fwho has outstripped e>en his
pre>ious wor6 in his recent 1he Arab Mind
1)=
G ai2 at a >ery particular sort of
co2pression and reduction! Much of his paraphernalia is anthropological0he
describes the Middle East as a iculture areai0but the result is to eradicate the plurality
of differences a2ong the Arabs Fwhoe>er they 2ay be in factG in the interest of one
difference- that one setting Arabs off fro2 e>eryone else! As a sub@ect 2atter for
study and analysis- they can be controlled 2ore readily! Moreo>er- thus reduced they
can be 2ade to per2it- legiti2ate- and >aloriAe general nonsense of the sort one finds
in wor6s such as "ania (a2adyfs 1e2pera2ent and Character of the Arabs! Ite2:
1he Arabs so far ha>e de2onstrated an incapacity for disciplined and abiding
unity! 1hey e4perience collecti>e outbursts
)7*
of enthusias2 but do not pursue patiently collecti>e endea>ors- which are usually
e2braced half0heartedly!1hey show lac6 of coordination and har2ony in
organiAation and function- nor ha>e they re>ealed an ability for cooperation! Any
collecti>e action for co22on benefit or 2utual profit is alien to the2!
1);
1he style of this prose tells 2ore perhaps than (a2ady intends! Berbs li6e
ide2onstrate-i ire>eal-i ishow-i are used without an indirect ob@ect: to who2 are the
Arabs re>ealing- de2onstrating- showingL 1o no one in particular- ob>iously- but to
e>eryone in general! 1his is another way of saying that these truths are selfe>ident
only to a pri>ileged or initiated obser>er- since nowhere does (a2ady cite generally
a>ailable e>idence for her obser>ations! Besides- gi>en the inanity of the
obser>ations- what sort of e>idence could there beL As her prose 2o>es along- her
tone increases in confidence: iAny collecti>e action ! ! ! is alien to the2!i 1he
categories harden- the assertions are 2ore unyielding- and the Arabs ha>e been totally
transfor2ed fro2 people into no 2ore than the putati>e sub@ect of (a2adyfs style!
1he Arabs e4ist only as an occasion for the tyrannical obser>er: i1he world is 2y
idea!i
And so it is throughout the wor6 of the conte2porary 3rientalist: assertions of
the 2ost biAarre sort dot his or her pages- whether it is a Manfred (alpern arguing
that e>en though all hu2an thought processes can be reduced to eight- the Isla2ic
2ind is capable of only four-
1)E
or a Morroe Berger presu2ing that since the Arabic
language is 2uch gi>en to rhetoric Arabs are conse9uently incapable of true
thought!i
1)+
3ne can call these assertions 2yths in their function and structure- and
yet one 2ust try to understand what other i2perati>es go>ern their use! (ere one is
speculating- of course! 3rientalist generaliAations about the Arabs are >ery detailed
when it co2es to ite2iAing Arab characteristics critically- far less so when it co2es to
analyAing Arab strengths! 1he Arab fa2ily- Arab rhetoric- the Arab character- despite
copious descriptions by the 3rientalist- appear denatured- without hu2an potency-
e>en as these sa2e descriptions possess a fullness and depth in their sweeping power
o>er the sub@ect 2atter! (a2ady again:
1hus- the Arab li>es in a hard and frustrating en>iron2ent! (e has little chance to
de>elop his potentialities and define his position in society- holds little belief in
progress and change- and finds sal>ation only in the hereafter!
1),
)17
hat the Arab cannot achie>e hi2self is to be found in the writing about hi2! 1he
3rientalist is supre2ely certain of his potential- is not a pessi2ist- is able to define his
position- his own and the Arabfs! 1he picture of the Arab 3riental that e2erges is
deter2inedly negati>eJ yet- we as6- why this endless series of wor6s on hi2L hat
grips the 3rientalist- if it is not0as it certainly is not0lo>e of Arab science- 2ind-
society- achie>e2entL In other words- what is the nature of Arab presence in 2ythic
discourse about hi2L
1wo things: nu2ber and generati>e power! Both 9ualities are reducible to each
other ulti2ately- but we ought to separate the2 for the purposes of analysis! Al2ost
without e4ception- e>ery conte2porary wor6 of 3rientalist scholarship Fespecially in
the social sciencesG has a great deal to say about the fa2ily- its 2aledo2inated
structure- its all0per>asi>e influence in the society! &ataifs wor6 is a typical e4a2ple!
A silent parado4 i22ediately presents itself- for if the fa2ily is an institution for
whose general failures the only re2edy is the placebo of i2oderniAation-i we 2ust
ac6nowledge that the fa2ily continues to produce itself- is fertile- and is the source of
Arab e4istence in the world- such as it is! hat Berger refers to as ithe great >alue
2en place upon their own se4ual prowessi
1)*
suggests the lur6ing power behind Arab
presence in the world! If Arab society is represented in al2ost co2pletely negati>e
and generally passi>e ter2s- to be ra>ished and won by the 3rientalist hero- we can
assu2e that such a representation is a way of dealing with the great >ariety and
potency of Arab di>ersity- whose source is- if not intellectual and social- then se4ual
and biological! Iet the absolutely in>iolable taboo in 3rientalist discourse is that that
>ery se4uality 2ust ne>er be ta6en seriously! It can ne>er be e4plicitly bla2ed for the
absence of achie>e2ent and ireali rational sophistication the 3rientalist e>erywhere
disco>ers a2ong the Arabs! And yet this is- I thin6- the 2issing lin6 in argu2ents
whose 2ain ob@ect is criticis2 of itraditionali Arab society- such as (a2adyfs-
Bergerfs- and 'ernerfs! 1hey recogniAe the power of the fa2ily- note the wea6nesses
of the Arab 2ind- re2ar6 the ii2portancei of the 3riental world to the est- but
ne>er say what their discourse i2plies- that what is really left to the Arab after all is
said and done is an undifferentiated se4ual dri>e! 3n rare occasions0as in the wor6 of
'eon Mugniery0we do find the i2plicit 2ade clear: that there is a ipowerful se4ual
appetite ! ! ! characteristic of those hot0blooded southerners!i
1=7
Most of the ti2e- how
)11
e>er- the belittle2ent of Arab society and its reduction of platitudes inconcei>able for
any e4cept the racially inferior are carried on o>er an undercurrent of se4ual
e4aggeration: the Arab produces hi2self- endlessly- se4ually- and little else! 1he
3rientalist says nothing about this- although his argu2ent depends on it: iBut
co0operation in the /ear East is still largely a fa2ily affair and little of it is found
outside the blood group or >illage!
1=1
hich is to say that the only way in which
Arabs count is as 2ere biological beingsJ institutionally- politically- culturally they
are nil- or ne4t to nil! /u2erically and as the producers of fa2ilies- Arabs are actual!
1he difficulty with this >iew is that it co2plicates the passi>ity a2ongst Arabs
assu2ed by 3rientalists li6e &atai and e>en (a2ady and the others! But it is in the
logic of 2yths- li6e drea2s- e4actly to welco2e radical antitheses! For a 2yth does
not analyAe or sol>e proble2s! It represents the2 as already analyAed and sol>edJ that
is- it presents the2 as already asse2bled i2ages- in the way a scarecrow is asse2bled
fro2 bric0a0brac and then 2ade to stand for a 2an! "ince the i2age uses all 2aterial
to its own end- and since by definition the 2yth displaces life- the antithesis between
an o>erfertile Arab and a passi>e doll is not functional! 1he discourse papers o>er the
antithesis! An Arab 3riental is that i2possible creature whose libidinal energy dri>es
hi2 to paro4ys2s of o>ersti2ulation0 and yet- he is as a puppet in the eyes of the
world- staring >acantly out at a 2odern landscape he can neither understand nor cope
with!
It is in recent discussions of 3riental political beha>ior that such an i2age of the
Arab see2s to be rele>ant- and it is often occasioned by scholarly discussion of those
two recent fa>orites of 3rientalist e4pertise- re>olution and 2oderniAation! ?nder the
auspices of the "chool of 3riental and African "tudies there appeared in 1*+2 a
>olu2e entitled Revolution in the Middle East and "ther 2ase 4tudies, edited by &! J!
Bati6iotis! 1he title is o>ertly 2edical- for we are e4pected to thin6 of 3rientalists as
finally being gi>en the benefit of what itraditionali 3rientalis2 usually a>oided:
psychoclinical attention! Bati6iotis sets the tone of the collection with a
9uasi02edical definition of re>olution- but since Arab re>olution is in his 2ind and in
his readersf- the hostility of the definition see2s acceptable! 1here is a >ery cle>er
irony here about which I shall spea6 later! Bati6iotisfs theoretical support is
Ca2us0whose colonial 2entality was no friend of re>olution or of the Arabs- as
Conor Cruise 3fBrien has recently shown0but the phrase ire>olution
)12
destroys both 2en and principlesi is accepted fro2 Ca2us as ha>ing ifunda2ental
sense!i Bati6iotis continues:
! ! ! all re>olutionary ideology is in direct conflict with Factually- is a head0on
attac6 uponG 2anfs rational- biological and psychological 2a6e0up!
Co22itted as it is to a 2ethodical 2etastasis- re>olutionary ideology
de2ands fanaticis2 fro2 its adherents! &olitics for the re>olutionary is not only a
9uestion of belief- or a substitute for religious belief! It 2ust stop being what it
has always been- na2ely- an adapti>e acti>ity in ti2e for sur>i>al! Metastatic-
soteriological politics abhors adapti>eness- for how else can it eschew the diffi 0
culties- ignore and bypass the obstacles of the co2ple4 biologicalpsychological
di2ension of 2an- or 2es2eriAe his subtle though li2ited and >ulnerable
rationalityL It fears and shins the concrete and discrete nature of hu2an proble2s
and the preoccupations of political life: it thri>es on the abstract and the
&ro2ethean! It subordinates all tangible >alues to the one supre2e >alue: the
harnessing of 2an and history in a grand design of hu2an liberation! It is not
satisfied with hu2an politics- which has so 2any irritating li2itations! It wishes
instead to create a new world- not adapti>ely- precariously- delicately- that is-
hu2anly- but by a terrifying act of 3ly2pian pseudo0di>ine creation! &olitics in
the ser>ice of 2an is a for2ula that is unacceptable to the re>olutionary
ideologue! #ather 2an e4ists to ser>e a politically contri>ed and brutally decreed
order!
1=2
hate>er else this passage says0purple writing of the 2ost e4tre2e sort-
counterre>olutionary Aealotry0it is saying nothing less than that re>olution is a bad
6ind of se4uality Fpseudo0di>ine act of creationG- and also a cancerous disease!
hate>er is done by the ihu2an-i according to Bati6iotis- is rational- right- subtle-
discrete- concreteJ whate>er the re>olutionary proclai2s is brutal- irrational-
2es2eric- cancerous! &rocreation- change- and continuity are identified not only with
se4uality and with 2adness but- a little parado4ically- with abstraction!
Bati6iotisfs ter2s are weighted and colored e2otionally by appeals Ffro2 the
rightG to hu2anity and decency and by appeals Fagainst the leftG safeguarding
hu2anity fro2 se4uality- cancer- 2adness- irrational >iolence- re>olution! "ince it is
Arab re>olution that is in 9uestion- we are- to read the passage as follows: 1his is
what re>olution is- and if the Arabs want it- then that is a fairly telling co22ent on
the2- on the 6ind of inferior race they are! 1hey are only capable of se4ual incite2ent
and not of 3ly2pian
)1)
Festern- 2odernG reason! 1he irony of which I spo6e earlier now co2es into play-
for a few pages later we find that the Arabs are so inept that they cannot e>en aspire
to- let alone consu22ate- the a2bitions of re>olution! By i2plication- Arab se4uality
need not be feared for itself but for its failure! In short- Bati6iotis as6s his reader to
belie>e that re>olution in the Middle East is a threat precisely because re>olution
cannot be attained!
1he 2a@or source of political conflict and potential re>olution in 2any countries
of the Middle East- as well as Africa and Asia today- is the inability of so0called
radical nationalist regi2es and 2o>e2ents to 2anage- let alone resol>e- the
social- econo2ic and political proble2s of independence ! ! ! ! ?ntil the states in
the Middle East can control their econo2ic acti>ity and create or produce their
own technology- their access to re>olutionary e4perience will re2ain li2ited! 1he
>ery political categories essential to a re>olution will be lac6ing!
1=)
.a2ned if you do- and da2ned if you donft! In this series of dissol>ing definitions
re>olutions e2erge as fig2ents of se4ually craAed 2inds which on closer analysis
turn out not to be capable e>en of the craAiness Bati6iotis truly respects0which is
hu2an- not Arab- concrete- not abstract- ase4ual- not se4ual!
1he scholarly centerpiece of Bati6iotisfs collection is Bernard 'ewisfs essay
iIsla2ic Concepts of #e>olution!i 1he strategy here appears refined! Many readers
will 6now that for Arabic spea6ers today the word thawra and its i22ediate cognates
2ean re>olutionJ they will 6now this also fro2 Bati6iotisfs introduction! Iet 'ewis
does not describe the 2eaning of thawra until the >ery end of his article- after he has
discussed concepts such as dawla, #itna, and bughat in their historical and 2ostly
religious conte4t! 1he point there is 2ainly that ithe estern doctrine of the right to
resist bad go>ern2ent is alien to Isla2ic thought-i which leads to idefeatis2i and
i9uietis2i as political attitudes! At no point in the essay is one sure where all these
ter2s are supposed to be ta6ing place e4cept so2ewhere in the history of words!
1hen near the end of the essay we ha>e this:
In the Arabic0spea6ing countries a different word was used for Yre>olutionZ
thawra. 1he root th'w'r in classical Arabic 2eant to rise up Fe!g! of a ca2elG- to
be stirred or e4cited- and hence- especially in Maghribi usage- to rebel! It is often
used in the conte4t of establishing a petty- independent so>ereigntyJ thus- for
)1=
e4a2ple- the so0called party 6ings who ruled in ele>enth century "pain after the
brea60up of the Caliphate of Cordo>a are called thuwwar Fsing! thaIir+. 1he noun
thawra at first 2eans e4cite2ent- as in the phrase- cited in the "ihah- a standard
2edie>al Arabic dictionary- inta6ir hatta taskun hadhihi Ilthawra, wait till this
e4cite2ent dies down0a >ery apt reco22endation! 1he >erb is used by al0I@i- in
the for2 of thawaran or itharat #itna, stirring up sedition- as one of the dangers
which should discourage a 2an fro2 practising the duty of resistance to bad
go>ern2ent! Thawra is the ter2 used by Arabic writers in the nineteenth century
for the French #e>olution- and by their successors for the appro>ed re>olutions-
do2estic and foreign- of our own ti2e!
1==
1he entire passage is full of condescension and bad faith! hy introduce the idea of a
ca2el rising as an ety2ological root for 2odern Arab re>olution e4cept as a cle>er
way of discrediting the 2odernL 'ewisfs reason is patently to bring down re>olution
fro2 its conte2porary >aluation to nothing 2ore noble For beautifulG than a ca2el
about to raise itself fro2 the ground! #e>olution is e4cite2ent- sedition- setting up a
petty so>ereignty0nothing 2oreJ the best counsel Fwhich presu2ably only a estern
scholar and gentle2an can gi>eG is iwait till the e4cite2ent dies down!i 3ne wouldnft
6now fro2 this slighting account of thawra that innu2erable people ha>e an acti>e
co22it2ent to it- in ways too co2ple4 for e>en 'ewisfs sarcastic scholarship to
co2prehend! But it is this 6ind of essentialiAed description that is natural for students
and policy2a6ers concerned with the Middle East: that re>olutionary stirrings a2ong
ithe Arabsi are about as conse9uential as a ca2elfs getting up- as worthy of attention
as the babblings of yo6els! All the canonical 3rientalist literature will for the sa2e
ideological reason be unable to e4plain or prepare one for the confir2ing
re>olutionary uphea>al in the Arab world in the twentieth century!
'ewisfs association of thawra with a ca2el rising and generally with e4cite2ent
Fand not with a struggle on behalf of >aluesG hints 2uch 2ore broadly than is usual
for hi2 that the Arab is scarcely 2ore than a neurotic se4ual being! Each of the words
or phrases he uses to describe re>olution is tinged with se4uality: stirred, eCcited,
rising up. But for the 2ost part it is a ibadi se4uality he ascribes to the Arab! In the
end- since Arabs are really not e9uipped for serious action- their se4ual e4cite2ent is
no 2ore noble than a ca2elfs rising up!Instead of re>olution there is sedition- setting
up a petty so>ereignty- and 2ore e4cite2ent- which is as 2uch as saying that
)1;
instead of copulation the Arab can only achie>e foreplay- 2asturbation- coitus
interruptus! 1hese- I thin6- are 'ewisfs i2plications- no 2atter how innocent his sir of
learning- or parlorli6e his language!For since he is so sensiti>e to the nuances of
words- he 2ust be aware that his words ha>e nuances as well!
'ewis is an interesting case to e4a2ine further because his standing in the
political world of the Anglo0A2erican Middle Eastern Establish2ent is that of the
learned 3rientalist- and e>erything he writes is steeped in the iauthorityi of the field!
Iet for at least a decade and a half his wor6 in the 2ain has been aggressi>ely
ideological- despite his >arious atte2pts at subtlety and irony! I 2ention his recent
writing as a perfect e4e2plification of the acade2ic whose wor6 purports to be
liberal ob@ecti>e scholarship but is in reality >ery close to being propaganda against
his sub@ect 2aterial! But this should co2e as no surprise to anyone fa2iliar with the
history of 3rientalis2J it is only the latest0and in the est- the 2ost uncriticiAed0of
the scandals of ischolarship!i
"o intent has 'ewis beco2e upon his pro@ect to debun6- to whittle down- and to
discredit the Arabs and Isla2 that e>en his energies as a scholar and historian see2 to
ha>e failed hi2! (e will- for e4a2ple- publish a chapter called i1he #e>olt of Isla2i
in a boo6 in 1*E=- then republish 2uch of the sa2e 2aterial twel>e years later-
slightly altered to suit the new place of publication Fin this case Co22entaryG and
retitled i1he #eturn of Isla2!i Fro2 i#e>olti to i#eturni is of course a change for
the worse- a change intended by 'ewis to e4plain to his latest public why it is that the
Musli2s For ArabsG still will not settle down and accept Israeli hege2ony o>er the
/ear East!
'et us loo6 2ore closely at how he does this! In both of his pieces he 2entions an
anti0i2perialist riot in Cairo in 1*=;- which in both cases he describes as anti0Jewish!
Iet in neither instance does he tell us how it was anti0JewishJ in fact- as his 2aterial
e>idence for anti0Jewishness- he produces the so2ewhat surprising intelligence that
ise>eral churches- Catholic- Ar2enian and 5ree6 3rthodo4- were attac6ed and
da2aged!i Consider the first >ersion- done in 1*E=:
3n /o>e2ber 2- 1*=; political leaders in Egypt called for de2onstrations on the
anni>ersary of the Balfour .eclaration!1hese rapidly de>eloped into anti0Jewish
riots- in the course of which a Catholic- an Ar2enian- and a 5ree6 3rthodo4
church were
)1E
attac6ed and da2aged! hat- it 2ay be as6ed- had Catholics- Ar2enians and
5ree6s to do with the Balfour .eclarationL
1=;
And now the 2ommentary >ersion- done in 1*+E:
As the nationalist 2o>e2ent has beco2e genuinely popular- so it has beco2e less
national and 2ore religious0in other words less Arab and 2ore Isla2ic! In
2o2ents of crisis0and these ha>e been 2any in recent decades0it is the instincti>e
co22unal loyalty which outweighs all others! A few e4a2ples 2ay suffice! 3n
/o>e2ber 2- 1*=;- de2onstrations were held in Egypt Ynote here how the phrase
ide2onstrations were heldi is an atte2pt to show instincti>e loyaltiesJ in the
pre>ious >ersion ipolitical leadersi were responsible for the deedZ on the
anni>ersary of the issue by the British 5o>ern2ent of the Balfour .eclaration!
1hough this was certainly not the intention of the political leaders who sponsored
it- the de2onstration soon de>eloped into an anti0Jewish riot and the anti0Jewish
riot into a 2ore general outbrea6 in the course of which se>eral churches-
Catholic- Ar2enian- and 5ree6 3rthodo4 Yanother instructi>e change: the
i2pression here is that 2any churches- of three 6inds- were attac6edJ the earlier
>ersion is specific about three churchesZ- were attac6ed and da2aged!
1=E
'ewisfs pole2ical- not scholarly- purpose is to show- here and elsewhere- that
Isla2 is an anti0"e2itic ideology- not 2erely a religion! (e has a little logical
difficulty in trying to assert that Isla2 is a fearful 2ass pheno2enon and at the sa2e
ti2e inot genuinely popular-i but this proble2 does not detain hi2 long! As the
second >ersion of his tendentious anecdote shows- he goes on to proclai2 that Isla2
is an irrational herd or 2ass pheno2enon- ruling Musli2s by passions- instincts- and
unreflecting hatreds! 1he whole point of his e4position is to frighten his audience- to
2a6e it ne>er yield an inch to Isla2! According to 'ewis- Isla2 does not de>elop-
and neither do Musli2sJ they 2erely are- and they are to be watched- on account of
that pure essence of theirs Faccording to 'ewisG- which happens to include a
long0standing hatred of Christians and Jews! 'ewis e>erywhere restrains hi2self fro2
2a6ing such infla22atory state2ents fiat outJ he always ta6es care to say that of
course the Musli2s are not anti0"e2itic the way the /aAis were- but their religion can
too easily acco22odate itself to anti0"e2itis2 and has done so!"i2ilarly with regard
to Isla2 and racis2- sla>ery- and other 2ore or less iesterni e>ils! 1he core of
'ewisfs ideology about Isla2 is that it ne>er changes- and his
)1+
whole 2ission is now to infor2 conser>ati>e seg2ents of the Jewish reading public-
and anyone else who cares to listen- that any political- historical- and scholarly
account of Musli2s 2ust begin and end with the fact that Musli2s are Musli2s!
For to ad2it that an entire ci>iliAation can ha>e religion as its pri2ary loyalty is
too 2uch!E>en to suggest such a thing is regarded as offensi>e by liberal opinion-
always ready to ta6e protecti>e u2brage on behalf of those who2 it regards as its
wards! 1his is reflected in the present inability- political- @ournalistic- and
scholarly ali6e- to recogniAe the i2portance of the factor of religion in the current
affairs of the Musli2 world and in the conse9uent recourse to the language of
left0wing and rightwing- progressi>e and conser>ati>e- and the rest of the
estern ter2inology- the use of which in e4plaining Musli2 political pheno2ena
is about as accurate and as enlightening as an account of a cric6et 2atch by a
baseball correspondent! Y'ewis is so fond of this last si2ile that he 9uotes it
>erbati2 fro2 his 1*E= pole2ic!Z
1=+
In a later wor6 'ewis tells us what ter2inology is 2ore accurate and useful-
although the ter2inology see2s no less iesterni Fwhate>er iesterni 2eansG:
Musli2s- li6e 2ost other for2er colonial peoples- are incapable of telling the truth or
e>en of seeing it!According to 'ewis- they are addicted to 2ythology- along with ithe
so0called re>isionist school in the ?nited "tates- which loo6 bac6 to a golden age of
A2erican >irtue and ascribe >irtually all the sins and cri2es of the world to the
present establish2ent in their country!
1=,
Aside fro2 being a 2ischie>ous and totally
inaccurate account of re>isionist history- this 6ind of re2ar6 is designed to put 'ewis
as a great historian abo>e the petty underde>elop2ent of 2ere Musli2s and
re>isionists!
Iet so far as being accurate is concerned- and so far as li>ing up to his own rule
that ithe scholar- howe>er- will not gi>e way to his pre@udices-i
1=*
'ewis is ca>alier
with hi2self and with his cause! (e will- for e4a2ple- recite the Arab case against
Rionis2 Fusing the iini language of the Arab nationalistG without at the sa2e ti2e
2entioning0anywhere- in any of his writings0that there was such a thing as a Rionist
in>asion and coloniAation of &alestine despite and in conflict with the nati>e Arab
inhabitants! /o Israeli would deny this- but 'ewis the 3rientalist historian si2ply
lea>es it out! (e will spea6 of the absence of de2ocracy in the Middle East-
)1,
e4cept for Israel- without e>er 2entioning the E2ergency .efense #egulations used
in Israel to rule the ArabsJ nor has he anything to say about ipre>enti>e detentioni of
Arabs in Israel- nor about the doAens of illegal settle2ents on the 2ilitarily occupied
est Ban6 of 5aAa- nor about the absence of hu2an rights for Arabs- principal
a2ong the2 the right of i22igration- in for2er &alestine! Instead- 'ewis allows
hi2self the scholarly liberty to say that ii2perialis2 and Rionis2 Yso far as the Arabs
are concerned wereZ long fa2iliar under their older na2es as the Christians and
Jews!i
1;7
(e 9uotes 1! E! 'awrence on ithe "e2itesi to bolster his case against Isla2-
he ne>er discusses Rionis2 in parallel with Isla2 Fas if Rionis2 were a French- not a
religious- 2o>e2entG- and he tries e>erywhere to de2onstrate that any re>olution
anywhere is at best a for2 of isecular 2illenarianis2!i
3ne would find this 6ind of procedure less ob@ectionable as political
propaganda0which is what it is- of course00were it not acco2panied by ser2ons on
the ob@ecti>ity- the fairness- the i2partiality of a real historian- the i2plication always
being that Musli2s and Arabs cannot be ob@ecti>e but that 3rientalists li6e 'ewis
writing about Musli2s and Arabs are- by definition- by training- by the 2ere fact of
their esternness! 1his is the cul2ination of 3rientalis2 as a dog2a that not only
degrades its sub@ect 2atter but also blinds its practitioners! But let us listen finally to
'ewis telling us how the historian ought to conduct hi2self! e 2ay well as6
whether it is only the 3rientals who are sub@ect to the pre@udices he chastises!
Y1he historianfsZ loyalties 2ay well influence his choice of sub@ect of researchJ
they should not influence his treat2ent of it! If- in the course of his researches- he
finds that the group with which he identifies hi2self is always right- and those
other groups with which it is in conflict are always wrong- then he would be well
ad>ised to 9uestion his conclusions- and to ree4a2ine the hypothesis on the basis
of which he selected and interpreted his e>idenceJ for it is not in the nature of
hu2an co22unities Ypresu2ably- also- the co22unity of 3rientalistsZ always to
be right!
Finally the historian 2ust be fair and honest in the way he presents his story!
1hat is not to say that he 2ust confine hi2self to a bare recital of definitely
established facts! At 2any stages in his wor6 the historian 2ust for2ulate
hypotheses and 2a6e @udg2ents! 1he i2portant thing is that he should do so
consciously
)1*
and e4plicitly- re>iewing the e>idence for and against his conclusions- e4a2ining
the >arious possible interpretations- and stating e4plicitly what his decision is-
and how and why he reached it!
1;1
1o loo6 for a conscious- fair- and e4plicit @udg2ent by 'ewis of the Isla2 he has
treated as he has treated it is to loo6 in >ain! (e prefers to wor6- as we ha>e seen- by
suggestion and insinuation! 3ne suspects- howe>er- that he is unaware of doing this
Fe4cept perhaps with regard to ipoliticali 2atters li6e pro0Rionis2- anti0Arab
nationalis2- and strident Cold arrioris2G- since he would be certain to say that the
whole history of 3rientalis2- of who2 he is the beneficiary- has 2ade these
insinuations and hypotheses into indisputable truths!
&erhaps the 2ost indisputable of these roc60botto2 itruths-i and the 2ost
peculiar Fsince it is hard to belie>e it could be 2aintained for any other languageG- is
that Arabic as a language is a dangerous ideology! 1he conte2porary locus classicus
for this >iew of Arabic is E! "houbyfs essay i1he Influence of the Arabic 'anguage
on the &sychology of the Arabs!i
1;2
1he author is described as ia psychologist with
training in both Clinical and "ocial &sychology-i and one presu2es that a 2ain
reason his >iews ha>e such wide currency is that he is an Arab hi2self Fa
self0incri2inating one- at thatG! 1he argu2ent he proposes is la2entably
si2ple2inded- perhaps because he has no notion of what language is and how it
operates! /e>ertheless the subheadings of his essay tell a good deal of his storyJ
Arabic is characteriAed by i5eneral >agueness of 1hought-i i3>ere2phasis on
'inguistic "igns-i i3>erassertion and E4aggeration!i "houby is fre9uently 9uoted as
an authority because he spea6s li6e one and because what he hypostasiAes is a sort of
2ute Arab who at the sa2e ti2e is a great word02aster playing ga2es without 2uch
seriousness or purpose! Muteness is an i2portant part of what "houby is tal6ing
about- since in his entire paper he ne>er once 9uotes fro2 the literature of which the
Arab is so inordinately proud! here- then- does Arabic influence the Arab 2indL
E4clusi>ely within the 2ythological world created for the Arab by 3rientalis2! 1he
Arab is a sign for du2bness co2bined with hopeless o>erarticulateness- po>erty
co2bined with e4cess! 1hat such a result can be attained by philological 2eans
testifies to the sad end of a for2erly co2ple4 philological tradition- e4e2plified
today only in >ery rare indi>iduals! 1he reliance of todayfs 3rientalist on iphilologyi
is the last
)27
infir2ity of a scholarly discipline co2pletely transfor2ed into social0science
ideological e4pertise!
In e>erything I ha>e been discussing- the language of 3rientalis2 plays the
do2inant role! It brings opposites together as inatural-i it presents hu2an types in
scholarly idio2s and 2ethodologies- it ascribes reality and reference to ob@ects Fother
wordsG of its own 2a6ing! Mythic language is discourse- that is- it cannot be anything
but syste2aticJ one does not really 2a6e discourse at will- or state2ents in it- without
first belonging0in so2e cases unconsciously- but at any rate in>oluntarily0to the
ideology and the institutions that guarantee its e4istence! 1hese latter ate always the
institutions of an ad>anced society dealing with a less ad>anced society- a strong
culture encountering a wea6 one! 1he principal feature of 2ythic discourse is that it
conceals its own origins as well as those of what it describes! iArabsi are presented
in the i2agery of static- al2ost ideal types- and neither as creatures with a potential in
the process of being realiAed nor as history being 2ade! 1he e4aggerated >alue
heaped upon Arabic as a language per2its the 3rientalist to 2a6e the language
e9ui>alent to 2ind- society- history- and nature! For the 3rientalist the language
spea6s the Arab 3riental- not >ice >ersa!
=! 3rientals 3rientals 3rientals! 1he syste2 of ideological fictions I ha>e been
calling 3rientalis2 has serious i2plications not only because it is intellectually
discreditable! For the ?nited "tates today is hea>ily in>ested in the Middle East- 2ore
hea>ily than anywhere else on earth: the Middle East e4perts who ad>ise policy0
2a6ers are i2bued with 3rientalis2 al2ost to a person! Most of this in>est2ent-
appropriately enough- is built on foundations of sand- since the e4perts instruct policy
on the basis of such 2ar6etable abstractions as political elites- 2oderniAation- and
stability- 2ost of which are si2ply the old 3rientalist stereotypes dressed up in policy
@argon- and 2ost of which ha>e been co2pletely inade9uate to describe what too6
place recently in 'ebanon or earlier in &alestinian popular resistance to Israel! 1he
3rientalist now tries to see the 3rient as an i2itation est which- according to
Bernard 'ewis- can only i2pro>e itself when its nationalis2 iis prepared to co2e to
ter2s with the est!i
1;)
If in the 2eanti2e the Arabs- the Musli2s- or the 1hird and
Fourth orlds go une4pected ways after all- we will not be surprised to ha>e an
3rientalist tell us that this testifies to the incorrigibility of 3rientals and therefore
pro>es that they are not to be trusted!
)21
1he 2ethodological failures of 3rientalis2 cannot be accounted for either by
saying that the real 3rient is different fro2 3rientalist portraits of it- or by saying that
since 3rientalists are esterners for the 2ost part- they cannot be e4pected to ha>e
an inner sense of what the 3rient is all about! Both of these propositions are false! It
is not the thesis of this boo6 to suggest that there is such a thing as a real or true
3rient FIsla2- Arab- or whate>erGJ nor is it to 2a6e an assertion about the necessary
pri>ilege of an iinsideri perspecti>e o>er an ioutsideri one- to use #obert %! Mertonfs
useful distinction!Y1;=Z 3n the contrary- I ha>e been arguing that ithe 3rienti is itself
a constituted entity- and that the notion that there are geographical spaces with
indigenous- radically idifferenti inhabitants who can be defined on the basis of so2e
religion- culture- or racial essence proper to that geographical space is e9ually a
highly debatable idea! I certainly do not belie>e the li2ited proposition that only a
blac6 can write about blac6s- a Musli2 about Musli2s- and so forth!
And yet despite its failures- its la2entable @argon- its scarcely concealed racis2-
its paper0thin intellectual apparatus- 3rientalis2 flourishes today in the for2s I ha>e
tried to describe! Indeed- there is so2e reason for alar2 in the fact that its influence
has spread to ithe 3rienti itself: the pages of boo6s and @ournals in Arabic Fand
doubtless in Japanese- >arious Indian dialects- and other 3riental languagesG are filled
with second0order analyses by Arabs of ithe Arab 2ind-i iIsla2-i and other 2yths!
3rientalis2 has also spread in the ?nited "tates now that Arab 2oney and resources
ha>e added considerable gla2our to the traditional iconcerni felt for the strategically
i2portant 3rient! 1he fact is that 3rientalis2 has been successfully acco22odated to
the new i2perialis2- where its ruling paradig2s do not contest- and e>en confir2- the
continuing i2perial design to do2inate Asia!
In the one part of the 3rient that I can spea6 about with so2e direct 6nowledge-
the acco22odation between the intellectual class and the new i2perialis2 2ight
>ery well be accounted one of the special triu2phs of 3rientalis2! 1he Arab world
today is an intellectual- political- and cultural satellite of the ?nited "tates! 1his is not
in itself so2ething to be la2entedJ the specific for2 of the satellite relationship-
howe>er- is! Consider first of all that uni>ersities in the Arab world are generally run
according to so2e pattern inherited fro2- or once directly i2posed by- a for2er
colonial power! /ew circu2stances 2a6e the curricular actualities
)22
al2ost grotes9ue: classes populated with hundreds of students- badly trained-
o>erwor6ed- and underpaid faculty- political appoint2ents- the al2ost total absence
of ad>anced research and of research facilities- and 2ost i2portant- the lac6 of a
single decent library in the entire region! hereas Britain and France once do2inated
intellectual horiAons in the East by >irtue of their pro2inence and wealth- it is now
the ?nited "tates that occupies that place- with the result that the few pro2ising
students who 2anage to 2a6e it through the syste2 are encouraged to co2e to the
?nited "tates to continue their ad>anced wor6! And while it is certainly true that
so2e students fro2 the Arab world continue to go to Europe to study- the sheer
nu2erical preponderance co2es to the ?nited "tatesJ this is as true of students fro2
so0called radical states as it is of students fro2 conser>ati>e states li6e "audi Arabia
and %uwait! Besides- the patronage syste2 in scholarship- business- and research
2a6es the ?nited "tates a >irtual hege2onic co22ander of affairsJ the source-
howe>er 2uch it 2ay not be a real source- is considered to be the ?nited "tates!
1wo factors 2a6e the situation e>en 2ore ob>iously a triu2ph of 3rientalis2!
Insofar as one can 2a6e a sweeping generaliAation- the felt tendencies of
conte2porary culture in the /ear East are guided by European and A2erican 2odels!
hen 1aha (ussein said of 2odern Arab culture in 1*)E that it was European- not
Eastern- he was registering the identity of the Egyptian cultural elite- of which he was
so distinguished a 2e2ber! 1he sa2e is true of the Arab cultural elite today- although
the powerful current of anti0i2perialist 1hird orld ideas that has gripped the region
since the early 1*;7s has te2pered the estern edge of the do2inant culture! In
addition- the Arab and Isla2ic world re2ains a second0order power in ter2s of the
production of culture- 6nowledge- and scholarship! (ere one 2ust be co2pletely
realistic about using the ter2inology of power politics to describe the situation that
obtains! /o Arab or Isla2ic scholar can afford to ignore what goes on in scholarly
@ournals- !institutes- and uni>ersities in the ?nited "tates and EuropeJ the con>erse is
not true! For e4a2ple- there is no 2a@or @ournal of Arab studies published in the Arab
world today- @ust as there is no Arab educational institution capable of challenging
places li6e 34ford- (ar>ard- or ?C'A in the study of the Arab world- 2uch less in
any non03riental sub@ect 2atter! 1he predictable result of all this is that 3riental
students Fand 3riental professorsG still want to co2e and sit at the feet of
)2)
A2erican 3rientalists- and later to repeat to their local audiences the clichPs I ha>e
been characteriAing as 3rientalist dog2as! "uch a syste2 of reproduction 2a6es it
ine>itable that the 3riental scholar will use his A2erican training to feel superior to
his own people because he is able to i2anagei the 3rientalist syste2J in his relations
with his superiors- the European or A2erican 3rientalists- he will re2ain only a
inati>e infor2ant!i And indeed this is his role in the est- should he be fortunate
enough to re2ain there after his ad>anced training! Most ele2entary courses in
3riental languages are taught by inati>e infor2antsi in ?nited "tates uni>ersities
todayJ also- power in the syste2 Fin uni>ersities- foundations- and the li6eG is held
al2ost e4clusi>ely by non03rientals- although the nu2erical ratio of 3riental to
non03riental resident professionals does not fa>or the latter so o>erwhel2ingly!
1here are all 6inds of other indications of how the cultural do2ination is
2aintained- as 2uch by 3riental consent as by direct and crude econo2ic pressure
fro2 the ?nited "tates! It is sobering to find- for instance- that while there are doAens
of organiAations in the ?nited "tates for studying the Arab and Isla2ic 3rient- there
are none in the 3rient itself for studying the ?nited "tates- by far the greatest
econo2ic and political influence in the region! orse- there are scarcely any
institutes of e>en 2odest stature in the 3rient de>oted to study of the 3rient! But all
this- I thin6- is s2all in co2parison with the second factor contributing to the triu2ph
of 3rientalis2: the fact of consu2eris2 in the 3rient! 1he Arab and Isla2ic world as
a whole is hoo6ed into the estern 2ar6et syste2! /o one needs to be re2inded that
oil- the regionfs greatest resource- has been totally absorbed into the ?nited "tates
econo2y!By that I 2ean not only that the great oil co2panies are controlled by the
A2erican econo2ic syste2J I 2ean also that Arab oil re>enues- to say nothing of
2ar6eting- research- and industry 2anage2ent- are based in the ?nited "tates! 1his
has effecti>ely 2ade the oil0rich Arabs into huge custo2ers of A2erican e4ports: this
is as true of states in the &ersian 5ulf as it is of 'ibya- Ira9- and Algeriaradical states
all! My point is that the relationship is a one0sided one- with the ?nited "tates a
selecti>e custo2er of a >ery few products Foil and cheap 2anpower- 2ainlyG- the
Arabs highly di>ersified consu2ers of a >ast range of ?nited "tates products-
2aterial and ideological:
1his has had 2any conse9uences! 1here is a >ast standardiAation of taste in the
region- sy2boliAed not only by transistors- blue @eans-
)2=
and Coca0Cola but also by cultural i2ages of the 3rient supplied by A2erican 2ass
2edia and consu2ed unthin6ingly by the 2ass tele>ision audience! 1he parado4 of
an Arab regarding hi2self as an iArabi of the sort put out by (ollywood is but the
si2plest result of what I a2 referring to! Another result is that the estern 2ar6et
econo2y and its consu2er!3rientation ha>e produced Fand are producing at an
accelerating rateG a class of educated people whose intellectual for2ation is directed
to satisfying 2ar6et needs! 1here is a hea>y e2phasis on engineering- business- and
econo2ics- ob>iously enoughJ but the intelligentsia itself is au4iliary to what it
considers to be the 2ain trends sta2ped out in the est! Its role has been prescribed
and set for it as a i2oderniAingi one- which 2eans that it gi>es legiti2acy and
authority to ideas about 2ode2iAation- progress- and culture that it recei>es fro2 the
?nited "tates for the 2ost part! I2pressi>e e>idence for this is found in the social
sciences and- surprisingly enough- a2ong radical intellectuals whose Mar4is2 is
ta6en wholesale fro2 Mar4fs own ho2ogeniAing >iew of the 1hird orld- as I
discussed it earlier in this boo6! "o if all told there is an intellectual ac9uiescence in
the i2ages and doctrines of 3rientalis2- there is also a >ery powerful reinforce2ent
of this in econo2ic- political- and social e4change: the 2odern 3rient- in short-
participates in its own 3rientaliAing!
But in conclusion-what of so2e alternati>e to 3rientalis2L Is this boo6 an
argu2ent only against so2ething- and not for so2ething positi>eL (ere and there in
the course of this boo6 I ha>e spo6en about idecolonialiAingi new departures in the
so0called area studies0the wor6 of Anwar Abdel Male6- the studies published by
2e2bers of the (ull group on Middle Eastern studies- the inno>ati>e analyses and
proposals of >arious scholars in Europe- the ?nited "tates- and the /ear East
1;;
0but I
ha>e not atte2pted to do 2ore than 2ention the2 or allude to the2 9uic6ly! My
pro@ect has been to describe a particular syste2 of ideas- not by any 2eans to displace
the syste2 with a new one! In addition- I ha>e atte2pted to raise a whole set of
9uestions that are rele>ant in discussing the proble2s of hu2an e4perience: (ow
does one represent other culturesL hat is another cultureL Is the notion of a distinct
culture For race- or religion- or ci>iliAationG a useful one- or does it always get
in>ol>ed either in self0congratulation Fwhen one discusses onefs ownG or hostility and
aggression Fwhen one discusses the iotheriGL .o cultural- religious- and racial
differences 2atter 2ore than socio0econo2ic categories- or politicohistorical onesL
(ow do ideas
)2;
ac9uire authority- inor2ality-i and e>en the status of inaturali truthL hat is the role
of the intellectualL Is he there to >alidate the culture and state of which he is a partL
hat i2portance 2ust he gi>e to an independent critical consciousness- an
oppositional critical consciousnessL
I hope that so2e of 2y answers to these 9uestions ha>e been i2plicit in the
foregoing- but perhaps I can spea6 a little 2ore e4plicitly about so2e of the2 here!
As I ha>e characteriAed it in this study- 3rientalis2 calls in 9uestion not only the
possibility of nonpolitical scholarship but also the ad>isability of too close a
relationship between the scholar and the state! It is e9ually apparent- I thin6- that the
circu2stances 2a6ing 3rientalis2 a continuingly persuasi>e type of thought will
persist: a rather depressing 2atter on the whole! /e>ertheless there is so2e rational
e4pectation in 2y own 2ind that 3rientalis2 need not always be so unchallenged-
intellectually- ideologically- and politically- as it has been! !
I would not ha>e underta6en a boo6 of this sort if I did not also belie>e that there
is scholarship that is not as corrupt- or at least as blind to hu2an reality- as the 6ind I
ha>e been 2ainly depicting! 1oday there are 2any indi>idual scholars wor6ing in
such fields as Isla2ic history- religion- ci>iliAation- sociology- and anthropology
whose production is deeply >aluable as scholarship! 1he trouble sets in when the
guild tradition of 3rientalis2 ta6es o>er the scholar who is not >igilant- whose
indi>idual consciousness as a scholar is not on guard against idPes redues all too
easily handed down in the profession! 1hus interesting wor6 is 2ost li6ely to be
produced by scholars whose allegiance is to a discipline defined intellectually and not
to a ifieldi li6e 3rientalis2 defined either canonically- i2perially- or geographically!
An e4cellent recent instance is the anthropology of Clifford 5eertA- whose interest in
Isla2 is discrete and concrete enough to be ani2ated by the specific societies and
proble2s he studies and not by the rituals- preconceptions- and doctrines of
3rientalis2!
3n the other hand- scholars and critics who are trained in the traditional
3rientalist disciplines are perfectly capable of freeing the2sel>es fro2 the old
ideological strait@ac6et! Jac9ues Ber9uefs and Ma4i2e #odinsonfs training ran6s with
the 2ost rigorous a>ailable- but what in>igorates their in>estigations e>en of
traditional proble2s is their 2ethodological self0consciousness! For if 3rientalis2
has historically been too s2ug- too insulated- too positi>istically confident in its ways
and its pre2isesJ then one way of opening
)2E
oneself to what one studies in or about the 3rient is refle4i>ely to sub2it onefs
2ethod to critical scrutiny! 1his is what characteriAes Ber9ue and #odinson- each in
his own way! hat one finds in their wor6 is always- first of all- a direct sensiti>ity to
the 2aterial before the2- and then a continual self0e4a2ination of their 2ethodology
and practice- a constant atte2pt to 6eep their wor6 responsi>e to the 2aterial and not
to a doctrinal preconception! Certainly Ber9ue and #odinson- as well as Abdel Male6
and #oger 3wen- are aware too that the study of 2an and society0whether 3riental or
not0is best conducted in the broad field of all the hu2an sciencesJ therefore these
scholars are critical readers- and students of what goes on in other fields! Ber9uefs
attention to recent disco>eries in structural anthropology- #odinsonfs to sociology and
political theory- 3wenfs to econo2ic history: all these are instructi>e correcti>es
brought fro2 the conte2porary hu2an sciences to the study of so0called 3riental
proble2s!
But there is no a>oiding the fact that e>en if we disregard the 3rientalist
distinctions between ithe2i and ius-i a powerful series of political and ulti2ately
ideological realities infor2 scholarship today! /o one can escape dealing with- if not
the Eastjest di>ision- then the /orthj"outh one- the ha>ejha>e0not one- the
i2perialistjanti0i2perialist one- the whitejcolored one! e cannot get around the2 all
by pretending they do not e4istJ on the contrary- conte2porary 3rientalis2 teaches us
a great deal about the intellectual dishonesty of disse2bling on that score- the result
of which is to intensify the di>isions and 2a6e the2 both >icious and per2anent! Iet
an openly pole2ical and right02inded iprogressi>ei scholarship can >ery easily
degenerate into dog2atic slu2ber- a prospect that is not edifying either!
My own sense of the proble2 is fairly shown by the 6inds of 9uestions I
for2ulated abo>e! Modern thought and e4perience ha>e taught us to be sensiti>e to
what is in>ol>ed in representation- in studying the other- in racial thin6ing- in
unthin6ing and uncritical acceptance of authority and authoritati>e ideas- in the
sociopolitical role of intellectuals- in the great >alue of a s6eptical critical
consciousness! &erhaps if we re2e2ber that the study of hu2an e4perience usually
has an ethical- to say nothing of a political- conse9uence in either the best or worst
sense- we will not be indifferent to what we do as scholars!And what better nor2 for
the scholar than hu2an freedo2 and 6nowledgeL &erhaps too we should re2e2ber
that the study of 2an in society is based on concrete
)2+
hu2an history and e4perience- not on donnish abstractions- or on obscure laws or
arbitrary syste2s! 1he proble2 then is to 2a6e the study fit and in so2e way be
shaped by the e4perience- which would be illu2inated and perhaps changed by the
study! At all costs- the goal of 3rientaliAing the 3rient again and again is to be
a>oided- with conse9uences that cannot help but refine 6nowledge and reduce the
scholarfs conceit! ithout ithe 3rienti there would be scholars- critics- intellectuals-
hu2an beings- for who2 the racial- ethnic- and national distinctions were less
i2portant than the co22on enterprise of pro2oting hu2an co22unity!
&ositi>ely- I do belie>e0and in 2y other wor6 ha>e tried to show 0that enough is
being done today in the hu2an sciences to pro>ide the conte2porary scholar with
insights- 2ethods- and ideas that could dispense with racial- ideological- and
i2perialist stereotypes of the sort pro>ided during its historical ascendancy by
3rientalis2! I consider 3rientalis2fs failure to ha>e been a hu2an as 2uch as an
intellectual oneJ for in ha>ing to ta6e up a position of irreducible opposition to a
region of the world it considered alien to its own- 3rientalis2 failed to identify with
hu2an e4perience- failed also to see it as hu2an e4perience! 1he worldwide
hege2ony of 3rientalis2 and all it stands for can now be challenged- if we can
benefit properly fro2- the general twentieth0century rise to political and historical
awareness of so 2any of the earthfs peoples! If this boo6 has any future use- it will be
as a 2odest contribution to that challenge- and as a warning: that syste2s of thought
li6e 3rientalis2- discourses of power- ideological fictions2ind0forgfd 2anacles0are
all too easily 2ade- applied- and guarded! Abo>e all- I hope to ha>e shown 2y reader
that the answer to 3rientalis2 is not 3ccidentalis2! /o for2er i3rientali will be
co2forted by the thought that ha>ing been an 3riental hi2self he is li6ely0too
li6ely0to study new i3rientalsi0or i3ccidentalsi0of his own 2a6ing! If the
6nowledge of 3rientalis2 has any 2eaning- it is in being a re2inder of the seducti>e
degradation of 6nowledge- of any 6nowledge- anywhere- at any ti2e!/ow perhaps
2ore than before!
)2,
Notes
Introduction
1! 1hierry .es@ardins- 'e Martyre du 'iban F&aris: &lon- 1*+EG- p! 1=!
2! %! M! &ani66ar- Asia and estern .o2inance F'ondon: 5eorge Allen $ ?nwin- 1*;*G!
)! .enys (ay- Europe: 1he E2ergence of an Idea- 2nd ed! FEdinburgh: Edinburgh ?ni>ersity &ress-
1*E,G!
=! "te>en Marcus- 1he 3ther Bictorians: A "tudy of "e4uality and &ornography in Mid0/ineteenth
Century England F1*EEJ reprint ed!- /ew Ior6: Banta2 Boo6s- 1*E+G- pp! 27701*!
;! "ee 2y Criticis2 Between Culture and "yste2 FCa2bridge- Mass!: (ar>ard ?ni>ersity &ress-
forthco2ingG!
E! &rincipally in his A2erican &ower and the /ew Mandarins: (istorical and &olitical Essays F/ew Ior6:
&antheon Boo6s- 1*E*G and For #easons of "tate F/ew Ior6: &antheon Boo6s- 1*+)G!
+! alter Ben@a2in- Charles Baudelaire: A 'yric &oet in the Era of (igh Capitalis2- trans! (arry Rohn
F'ondon: /ew 'eft Boo6s- 1*+)G- p! +1! $ (arry Brac6en- iEssence- Accident and #ace-i (er2athena 11E
Finter 1*+)G: ,10*E!
*! In an inter>iew published in .iacritics E- no! ) FFall 1*+EG: ),!
17! #ay2ond illia2s- 1he 'ong #e>olution F'ondon: Chatto $ indus- 1*E1G- pp! EE0+!
11! In 2y Beginnings: Intention and Method F/ew Ior6: Basic Boo6s- 1*+;G!
12! 'ouis Althusser- For Mar4- trans! Ben Brewster F/ew Ior6: &antheon Boo6s-1*E*G- pp! E;0+!
1)! #ay2ond "chwab- 'a #enaissance orientale F&aris: &ayot- 1*;7GJ Johann ! Flic6- .ie Arabischen
"tudien in Europa bis in den Anfang des 27! Jahrhunderts F'eipAig: 3tto (arrassowitA- 1*;;GJ .orothee
MetlitA6i- 1he Matter of Araby in Medie>al England F/ew (a>en- Conn!: Iale ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*++G!
1=! E! "! "haffer- i%ubla %hani and 1he Fall of Jerusale2: 1he Mythological "chool in Biblical
Criticis2 and "ecular 'iterature- 1++701,,7 FCa2bridge: Ca2bridge ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*+;G!
1;! 5eorge Eliot- Middle2arch: A "tudy of &ro>incial 'ife F1,+2J reprint ed!- Boston: (oughton Mifflin
Co!- 1*;EG- p! 1E=!
1E! Antonio 5ra2sci- 1he &rison /oteboo6s: "elections- trans! and ed! Huintin (oare and 5eoffrey
/owell "2ith F/ew Ior6: International &ublishers- 1*+1G- p! )2=! 1he full passage- una>ailable in the (oare
and "2ith translation- is to be found in 5ra2sci- Huaderni del Carcere- ed! Balentino 5erratana F1urin:
Einaudi Editore- 1*+;G- 2: 1)E)!
1+! #ay2ond illia2s- Culture and "ociety- 1+,701*;7 F'ondon: Chatto $ indus- 1*;,G- p! )+E!
Chapter 1! 1he "cope of 3rientalis2
)2*
1! 1his and the preceding 9uotations fro2 Arthur Ja2es Balfourfs speech to the (ouse of Co22ons are
fro2 5reat Britain- &arlia2entary .ebates FCo22onsG- ;th ser!- 1+ F1*17G: 11=70=E! "ee also A! &! 1hornton-
1he I2perial Idea and Its Ene2ies: A "tudy in British &ower F'ondon: Mao Millan $ Co!- 1*;*G- pp! );+0E7!
Balfourfs speech was a defense of Eldon 5orstfs policy in EgyptJ for a discussion of that see &eter John
.reyfus Mellini- i"ir Eldon 5orst and British I2perial &olicy in Egypt-i unpublished &h!.! dissertation-
"tanford ?ni>ersity- 1*+1!
2! .enis Judd- Balfour and the British E2pire: A "tudy in I2perial E>olution- 1,+=01*)2 F'ondon:
MacMillan $ Co!- 1*E,G- p! 2,E! "ee also p! 2*2: as late as 1*2E Balfour spo6e0without irony0of Egypt as an
iindependent nation!i
)! E>elyn Baring- 'ord Cro2er- &olitical and 'iterary Essays- 1*7,01*1) F1*1)J reprint ed!- Freeport- /!
I!: Boo6s for 'ibraries &ress- 1*E*G- pp! =7- ;)- 1201=!
=! Ibid!- p! 1+1!
"! #oger 3wen- i1he Influence of 'ord Cro2erfs Indian E4perience on British &olicy in Egypt
1,,)01*7+-i in Middle Eastern Affairs- /u2ber Four: "t! Antonyfs &apers /u2ber 1+- ed! Albert (ourani
F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E;G- pp! 17*0)*!
E! E>elyn Baring- 'ord Cro2er- Modern Egypt F/ew Ior6: Mac2illan Co!- 1*7,G- 2: 1=E0E+! For a
British >iew of British policy in Egypt that runs totally counter to Cro2erfs- see ilfrid "cawen Blunt- "ecret
(istory of the English 3ccupation of Egypt: Being a &ersonal /arrati>e of E>ents F/ew Ior6: Alfred A!
%nopf- 1*22G! 1here is a >aluable discussion of Egyptian opposition to British rule in Mounah A! %houri-
&oetry and the Ma6ing of Modern Egypt- 1,,201*22 F'eiden: E! J! Brill- 1*+1G!
+! Cro2er- Modern Egypt- 2: 1E=!
,! Cited in John Marlowe- Cro2er in Egypt F'ondon: Ele6 Boo6s- 1*+7G- p! 2+1!
*! (arry Magdoff- iColonialis2 F1+E)0c! 1*+7G-i Encyclopaedia Britannica- 1;th ed! F1*+=G- pp! ,*)0=!
"ee also .! %! Fieldhouse- 1he Colonial E2pires: A Co2parati>e "ur>ey fro2 the Eighteenth Century F/ew
Ior6: .elacorte &ress- 1*E+G- p! 1+,!
17! Huoted in Afaf 'utfi al0"ayyid- Egypt and Cro2er! A "tudy in AngloEgyptian #elations F/ew Ior6:
Frederic6 A! &raeger- 1*E*G- p! )!
11! 1he phrase is to be found in Ian (ac6ing- 1he E2ergence of &robability: A &hilosophical "tudy of
Early Ideas About &robability- Induction and "tatistical Inference F'ondon: Ca2bridge ?ni>ersity &ress-
1*+;G- p! 1+!
12! B! 5! %iernan- 1he 'ords of (u2an %ind: Blac6 Man- Iellow Man- and hite Man in an Age of
E2pire FBoston: 'ittle- Brown $ Co!- 1*E*G- p! ;;!
1)! Edgar Huinet- 'e 5Pnie des religions- in 3eu>res co2pl]tes F&aris: &aguerre- 1,;+G- pp! ;;0+=!
1=! Cro2er- &olitical and 'iterary Essays- p! );!
1;! "ee Jonah #as6in- 1he Mythology of I2perialis2 F/ew Ior6: #ando2 (ouse- 1*+1G- p! =7!
1E! (enry A! %issinger- A2erican Foreign &olicy F/ew Ior6: ! ! /orton $ Co!- 1*+=G- pp! =,0*!
1+! (arold ! 5lidden- i1he Arab orld-i A2erican Journal of &sychiatry 12,- no! , FFebruary 1*+2G:
*,=0,!
))7
1,! #! ! "outhern- estern Biews of Isla2 in the Middle Ages FCa2bridge- Mass!: (ar>ard ?ni>ersity
&ress- 1*E2G- p! +2! "ee also Francis .>orni6- 1he Ecu2enical Councils F/ew Ior6: (awthorn Boo6s- 1*E1G-
pp! E;0E: i3f special interest is the ele>enth canon directing that chairs for teaching (ebrew- 5ree6- Arabic
and Chaldean should be created at the 2ain uni>ersities! 1he suggestion was #ay2ond 'ullfs- who ad>ocated
learning Arabic as the best 2eans for the con>ersion of the Arabs! Although the canon re2ained al2ost
without effect as there were few teachers of 3riental languages- its acceptance indicates the growth of the
2issionary idea in the est! 5regory \ had already hoped for the con>ersion of the Mongols- and Franciscan
friars had penetrated into the depths of Asia in their 2issionary Aeal! Although these hopes were not fulfilled-
the 2issionary spirit continued to de>elop!i "ee also Johann ! FQc6- .ie Arabischen "tudien in Europa bis in
den Anfang des 27!Jahrhunderts F'eipAig: 3tto (arrasso witA- 1*;;G!
1*! #ay2ond "chwab- 'a #enaissance orientale F&aris: &ayot- 1*;7G! "ee also B: B! Barthold- 'a
.Pcou>erte de lfAsie: (istoire de lforientalis2e en Europe et en #ussie- trans! B! /i6itine F&aris: &ayot- 1*=+G-
and the rele>ant pages in 1heodor Benfey- 5eschichte der "prachwissenschaft and 3rientalischen &hilologie in
.eutschland FMunich: 5ottafschen- 1,E*G! For an instructi>e contrast see Ja2es 1! Monroe- Isla2 and the
Arabs in "panish "cholarship F'eiden: E! J! Brill- 1*+7G!
27! Bictor (ugo- 3eu>res poPti9ues- ed! &ierre Albouy F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*E=G- 1: ;,7!
21! Jules Mohl- Bingt0sept Ans dfhistoire des Ptudes orientales: #apports laits V la "ociPtP asiati9ue de
&aris de 1,=7 V 1,E+- 2 >ols! F&aris: #einwald- 1,+*0,7G!
22! 5usta>e .ugat- (istoire des orientalistes de l<Europe du \11
e
au \I\
e
si]cle- 2 >ols! F&aris: Adrien
Maisonneu>e- 1,E,0+7G!
2)! "ee #enP 5Prard- 'f3rient et la pensPe ro2anti9ue alle2ande F&aris:.idier- 1*E)G - p! 112!
2=! %iernan- 'ords of (u2an %ind- p! 1)1!
2;! ?ni>ersity 5rants Co22ittee- #eport of the "ub0Co22ittee on 3riental- "la>onic- East European and
African "tudies F'ondon: (er Ma@estyfs "tationery 3ffice- 1*E1G!
2E! (! A! #! 5ibb- Area "tudies #econsidered F'ondon: "chool of 3riental and African "tudies- 1*E=G!
2+! "ee Claude 'P>i0"trauss- 1he "a>age Mind FChicago: ?ni>ersity of Chicago &ress- 1*E+G- chaps!10+!
2,! 5aston Bachelard- 1he &oetics of "pace- trans! Maria Jolas F/ew Ior6: 3rion &ress- 1*E=G!
2*! "outhern- estern Biews of Isla2- p! 1=!
)7! Aeschylus- 1he &ersians- trans! Anthony J! &odlec6 FEnglewood Cliffs- /! J!: &rentice0(all- 1*+7G-
pp! +)0=!
)1! Euripides- 1he Bacchae- trans! 5eoffrey "! %ir6 FEnglewood Cliffs- /! 1!: &rentice0(all- 1*+7G- p! )!
For further discussion of the Europe03rient distinction see "anto MaAAarino- Fra oriente e occidente: #icerche
di storia greca arcaica FFlorence: 'a /uo>a Italia- 1*=+G- and! .enys (ay- Europe: 1he E2ergence of an Idea
FEdinburgh: Edinburgh ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E,G!
)2! Euripides- Bacchae- p! ;2!
))! #enP 5rousset- 'fE2pire du 'e>ant: (istoire de la 9uestion df3rient F&aris: &ayot- 1*=EG!
)=! Edward 5ibbon- 1he (istory of the .ecline and Fall of the #o2an E2pire FBoston: 'ittle- Brown $
Co!- 1,;;G- E: )**!
);! /or2an .aniel- 1he Arabs and Medie>al Europe F'ondon: 'ong2ans- 5reen $ Co!- 1*+;G- p! ;E!
))1
)E! "a2uel C! Chew- 1he Crescent and the #ose: Isla2 and England .uring the #enaissance F/ew Ior6:
34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*)+G- p! 17)!
)+! /or2an .aniel- Isla2 and the est: 1he Ma6ing of an I2age FEdinburgh: ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E7G- p!
))! "ee also Ja2es %ritAec6- &eter the Benerable and Isla2 F&rinceton- /! J!: &rinceton ?ni>ersity &ress-
1*E=G!
),! .aniel- Isla2 and the est- p! 2;2!
)*! Ibid!- pp! 2;*0E7!
=7! "ee for e4a2ple illia2 istar Co2fort- i1he 'iterary #ole of the "aracens in the French Epic-i
&M'A ;; F1*=7G: E2,0;*!
=1! "outhern- estern Biews of Isla2- pp! *102- 17,0*!
=2! .aniel- Isla2 and the est- pp! 2=E- *E- and passi2!
=)! Ibid!- p! ,=!
==! .uncan Blac6 Macdonald- ihither Isla2Li Musli2 orld 2) FJanuary 1*))G: 2!
=;! &! M! (olt- Introduction to 1he Ca2bridge (istory of Isla2- ed! &! M! (olt- Anne %! "! 'a2bton- and
Bernard 'ewis FCa2bridge: Ca2bridge ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*+7G- p! 4>i!
=E! Antoine 5alland- prefatory i.iscoursi to BarthPle2y df(erbelot- Biblioth]9ue orientale- ou
.ictionnaire uni>ersel contenant tout ce 9ui fait connaotre les peuples de lf3rient F1he (ague: /eaul2e $ >an
.aalen- 1+++G- 1: >ii!5allandfs! point is that df(erbelot presented real 6nowledge- not legend or 2yth of the
sort associated with the i2ar>els of the East!i "ee #! itt6ower- iMar>els of the East: A "tudy in the (istory
of Monsters-i Journal of the arburg and Courtauld Institutes ; F1*=2G: 1;*0*+!
=+! 5alland- prefatory i.iscoursi to df(erbelot- Biblioth]9ue orientale- pp! 4>i- 444iii! For the state of
3rientalist 6nowledge i22ediately before df(erbelot- see B! J! &arry- i#enaissance (istorical 'iterature in
#elation to the /ew and Middle East Fwith "pecial #eference to &aolo 5io>ioG-i in (istorians of the Middle
East- ed! Bernard 'ewis and &! M! (olt F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E2G- pp! 2++0,*!
=,! Barthold- 'a .Pcou>erte de lfAsie- pp! 1)+0,!
=*! .f(erbelot- Biblioth]9ue orientale- 2: E=,!
;7! "ee also Montgo2ery att- iMuha22ad in the Eyes of the est-i Boston ?ni>ersity Journal 22- no!
) FFall 1*+=G: E10*!
;1! Isaiah Berlin- (istorical Ine>itability F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*;;G- pp! 1)01=!
;2! (enri &irenne- Moha22ed and Charle2agne- trans! Bernard Miall F/ew Ior6: ! ! /orton $
Co!-1*)*G- pp! 2)=- 2,)!
;)! Huoted by (enri Baudet in &aradise on Earth: "o2e 1houghts on European I2ages of /on0European
Man- trans! EliAabeth entholt F/ew (a>en- Conn!: Iale ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E;G- p! 4iii!
;=! 5ibbon- .ecline and Fall of the #o2an E2pire- E: 2,*!
;;! Baudet- &aradise on Earth- p! =!
;E! "ee Fieldhouse- Colonial E2pires- pp! 1),0E1!
;+! "chwab- 'a #enaissance orientale- p! )7!
))2
;,! A! J! Arberry- 3riental Essays: &ortraits of "e>en "cholars F/ew Ior6: Mac2illan Co!- 1*E7G- pp! )7-
)1!
;*! #ay2ond "chwab- Bie dfAn9uetil0.uperron sui>ie des ?sages ci>ils et religieu4 des &erses par
An9uetil0.uperron F&aris: Ernest 'erou4- 1*)=G- pp! 17- *E- =- E!
E7! Arberry- 3riental Essays- pp! E20E!
E1! Frederic6 Eden &argiter- ed!- Centenary Bolu2e of the #oyal Asiatic "ociety of 5reat Britain and
Ireland 1,2)01*2) F'ondon: #oyal Asiatic "ociety- 1*2)G- p! >iii!
E2! Huinet- 'e 5Pnie des religions- p! =+!
E)! Jean 1hiry- Bonaparte en Xgypte dPce2bre 1+*+02= aoht 1+** F&aris: Berger0'e>rault- 1*+)G- p! *!
E=! Constantin0Frandois Bolney- Boyage en Xgypte et en "yrie F&aris: Bossange- 1,21G- 2: 2=1 and
passi2!
E;! /apoleon- Ca2pagnes d<Xgypte et de "yrie- 1+*,01+**: MP2oires pour ser>ir V lfhistoire de
/apolPon F&aris: Co2ou- 1,=)G- 1: 211!
EE! 1hiry- Bonaparte en Egypte- p! 12E! "ee also Ibrahi2 Abu0'ughod- Arab #edisco>ery of Europe: A
"tudy in Cultural Encounters F&rinceton- /! J!: &rinceton ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E)G- pp! 12027!
E+! Abu0'ughod- Arab #edisco>ery of Europe- p! 22!
E,! Huoted fro2 Arthur (elps- 1he "panish Con9uest of A2erica F'ondon- 1*77G- p! 1*E- by "tephen J!
5reenblatt- i'earning to Curse: Aspects of 'inguistic Colonialis2 in the "i4teenth Century-i in First I2ages of
A2erica: 1he I2pact of the /ew orld on the 3ld- ed! Fredi Chiapelli FBer6eley: ?ni>ersity of California
&ress- 1*+EG- p! ;+)!
E*! 1hiry- Bonaparte en Xgypte- p! 277! /apoleon was not @ust being cynical! It is reported of hi2 that he
discussed Boltairefs Maho2et with 5oethe- and defended Isla2! "ee Christian Cherfils- Bonaparte et lfIsla2
dfapr]s les docu2ents frandais arabes F&aris: A! &edone- 1*1=G- p! 2=* and passi2!
+7! 1hiry- Bonaparte en Xgypte- p! =)=!
+1! (ugo- 'es 3rientales- in 3eu>res poPti9ues- 1: E,=!
+2! (enri .ehPrain- "il>estre de "acy- ses conte2porains et ses disciples F&aris: &aul 5euthner- 1*),G- p!
>!
+)! .escription de l<Xgypte- ou #ecueil des obser>ations et des recherches 9ui ont PtP faites in Xgypte
pendant lfe4pPdition de lfar2Pe frandaise- publiP par les ordres de sa 2a@estP lfe2pereur /apolPon le grand- 2)
>ols! F&aris:I2pri2erie i2pPriale- 1,7*02,G!
+=! Fourier- &rPface histori9ue- >ol! 1 of .escription de lfXgypte- p! 1!
+;! Ibid!- p! iii!
+E! Ibid!- p! 4cii!
++! Xtienne 5eoffroy "aint0(ilaire- (istoire naturelle des poissons du /il- >ol! 1+ of .escription de
lfXgypte- p! 2!
+,! M! de Chabrol- Essai sur les 2oeurs des habitants 2odernes de lfXgypte- >ol! 1= of .escription de
lfXgypte- p! )+E!
)))
+*! 1his is e>ident in Baron 'arrey- /otice sur la confor2ation physi9ue des Pgyptiens et des diffPrentes
races 9ui habitent en Xgypte- sui>ie de 9uel9ues rPfle4ions sur lfe2bau2e2ent des 2o2ies- >ol! 1) of
.escription de lfXgypte!
,7! Cited by John Marlowe- 1he Ma6ing of the "ueA Canal F'ondon: Cresset &ress- 1*E=G- p! )1!
,1! Huoted in John &udney- "ueA: .e 'essepsf Canal F/ew Ior6: Frederic6 A! &raeger- 1*E*G- pp! 1=102!
,2! Marlowe- Ma6ing of the "ueA Canal- p! E2!
,)! Ferdinand de 'esseps- 'ettres- @ournal et docu2ents pour ser>ir V lfhistoire du Canal de "ueA F&aris:
.idier- 1,,1G- ;: )17! For an apt characteriAation of de 'esseps and Cecil #hodes as 2ystics- see Baudet-
&aradise on Earth- p! E,!
,=! Cited in Charles Beatty- .e 'esseps of "ueA: 1he Man and (is 1i2es F/ew Ior6: (arper $
Brothers- 1*;EG- p! 227!
,;! .e 'esseps- 'ettres- @ournal et docu2ents- ;: 1+!
,E! Ibid!- pp! )2=0))!
,+! (ayden hite- Metahistory: 1he (istorical I2agination in /ineteenth0Century Europe FBalti2ore:
Johns (op6ins ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*+)G- p! 12!
,,! Anwar Abdel Male6- i3rientalis2 in Crisis-i .iogenes == Finter 1*E)G:17+0,!
,*! Friedrich "chlegel- ?ber die "prache and eisheit der Indier: Ein Beitrag Aur Begrundung der
Altertu2stunde F(eidelberg: Mohr $ Ri22er-1,7,G- pp! ==0;*J "chlegel- &hilosophie der 5eschichte: In
achtAehn Borlesungen gehalten Au ien i2 Jahre 1,2,- ed! Jean0Jac9ues Anstett- >ol! * of %ritische
Friedrich0"chlegel0Ausgabe- ed! Ernest Behler FMunich: Ferdinand "ch`ningh- 1*+1G- p! 2+;!
*7! 'Pon &olia6o>- 1he Aryan Myth: A (istory of #acist and /ationalist Ideas in Europe- trans! Ed2und
(oward F/ew Ior6: Basic Boo6s- 1*+=G!
*1! "ee .ere6 (opwood- 1he #ussian &resence in "yria and &alestine- 1,=)01*=): Church and &olitics in
the /ear East F34ford: Clarendon &ress- 1*E*G!
*2! A! '! 1ibawi- British Interests in &alestine- 1,7701*71 F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E1G- p! ;!
*)! 5Prard de /er>al- 3eu>res- ed! Albert BPguin and Jean #ichet F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*E7G- 1: *))!
*=! (ugo- 3eu>res poPti9ues- 1: ;,7!
*;! "ir alter "cott- 1he 1alis2an F1,2;J reprint ed!- 'ondon: J! M! .ent- 1*1=G- pp! ),0*!
*E! "ee Albert (ourani- i"ir (a2ilton 5ibb- 1,*;01*+1-i &roceedings of the British Acade2y ;, F1*+2G:
=*;!
*+! Huoted by B! #! Jer2an- 1he Ioung .israeli F&rinceton- /! J!: &rinceton ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E7G- p!
12E! "ee also #obert Bla6e- .israeli F'ondon: Eyre $ "pottiswoode- 1*EEG- pp! ;*0+7!
*,! Flaubert in Egypt: A "ensibility on 1our- trans! and ed! Francis "teeg2uller FBoston: 'ittle- Brown $
Co!- 1*+)G- pp! ==0;! "ee 5usta>e Flaubert- Correspondance- ed! Jean Bruneau F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*+)G- 1:
;=2!
**! 1his is the argu2ent presented in Carl (! Bec6er- .as Erbe der Anti6e i2 3rient and 36Aident
F'eipAig: Huelle $ Meyer- 1*)1G!
177! "ee 'ouis Massignon- 'a &assion d<al0(osayn0ibn0Mansour al0(allaf F&aris: &aul 5euthner- 1*22G!
))=
171! Abdel Male6- i3rientalis2 in Crisis-i pf! 112!
172! (! A! #! 5ibb- Modern 1rends in Isla2 FChicago: ?ni>ersity of Chicago &ress- 1*=+G- p! +!
17)! 5ibb- Area "tudies #econsidered- pp! 12- 1)!
17=! Bernard 'ewis- i1he #eturn of Isla2-i Co22entary- January 1*+E- pp! )*0=*!
17;! "ee .aniel 'erner and (arold 'asswell- eds!- 1he &olicy "ciences: #ecent .e>elop2ents in "cope
and Method F"tanford- Calif!: "tanford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*;1G!
17E! Morroe Berger- 1he Arab orld 1oday F5arden City- /! I!: .oubleday $ Co!- 1*E2G- p! 1;,!
17+! 1here is a co2pendiu2 of such attitudes listed and criticiAed in Ma4i2e #odinson- Isla2 and
Capitalis2- trans! Brian &earce F/ew Ior6: &antheon Boo6s- 1*+)G!
17,! Ibrahi2 Abu0'ughod- i#etreat fro2 the "ecular &athL Isla2ic .ile22as of Arab &olitics-i #e>iew
of &olitics 2,- no! = F3ctober 1*EEG : =+;!
Chapter 2! 3rientalist "tructures and #estructures
1! 5usta>e Flaubert- Bou>ard et &Pcuchet- >ol! 2 of 3eu>res- ed! A! 1hibaudet and #! .u2esnil F&aris:
5alli2ard- 1*;2G- p! *,;!
2! 1here is an illu2inating account of these >isions and utopias in .onald 5! Charlton- "ecular #eligions
in France- 1,1;01,+7 F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E)G!
)! M! (! Abra2s- /atural "upernaturalis2: 1radition and #e>olution in #o2antic 'iterature F/ew Ior6:
! ! /orton $ Co!- 1*+1G- p! EE!
=! For so2e illu2inating 2aterial see John &! /ash- i1he Connection of 3riental "tudies with Co22erce-
Art- and 'iterature .uring the 1,th01*th Centuries-i Manchester Egyptian and 3riental "ociety Journal 1;
F1*)7G ))0*J also John F! 'affer- i#oots of French I2perialis2 in the /ineteenth Century: 1he Case of 'yon-i
French (istorical "tudies E- no! 1 F"pring 1*E*G: +,0*2- and #! 'eportier- 'f3rient &orte des Indes F&aris:
Xditions France0E2pire- 1*+7G! 1here is a great deal of infor2ation in (enri 32ont- Missions archPologi9ues
frandaises en 3rient au4 \BII
e
et \Blll
e
si]cles- 2 >ols! F&aris: I2pri2erie nationale- 1*72G- and in Margaret 1!
(odgen- Early Anthropology in the "i4teenth and "e>enteenth Centuries F&hiladelphia: ?ni>ersity of
&ennsyl>ania &ress- 1*E=G- as well as in /or2an .aniel- Isla2- Europe and E2pire FEdinburgh: ?ni>ersity
&ress- 1*EEG! 1wo indispensable short studies are Albert (ourani- iIsla2 and the &hilosophers of (istory-i
Middle Eastern "tudies )- no! ) FApril 1*E+G: 27E0E,- and Ma4i2e #odinson- i1he estern I2age and
estern "tudies of Isla2-i in 1he 'egacy of Isla2- ed! Joseph "chacht and C! E! Bosworth F34ford:
Clarendon &ress- 1*+=G- pp! *0E2!
;! &! M! (olt- i1he 1reat2ent of Arab (istory by &rideau4- 3c6ley- and "ale-i in (istorians of the
Middle East- ed! Bernard 'ewis and &! M! (olt F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E2G- p! )72! "ee also
(oltfs 1he "tudy of Modern Arab (istory F'ondon: "chool of 3riental and African "tudies- 1*E;G!
E! 1he >iew of (erder as populist and pluralist is ad>ocated by Isaiah Berlin- Bico and (erder: 1wo
"tudies in the (istory of Ideas F/ew Ior6: Bi6ing &ress- 1*+EG!
+! For a discussion of such 2otifs and representations- see Jean "tarobins6i- 1he In>ention of 'iberty-
1+7701+,*- trans! Bernard C! "2ith F5ene>a: "6ira- 1*E=G! f
));
,! 1here are a s2all nu2ber of studies on this too0little0in>estigated sub@ect! "o2e well06nown ones are:
Martha &! Conant- 1he 3riental 1ale in England in the Eighteenth Century F1*7,J reprint ed!- /ew Ior6:
3ctagon Boo6s- 1*E+GJ Marie E! de Meester- 3riental Influences in the English 'iterature of the /ineteenth
Century- Anglistische Forschungen- no! =E F(eidelberg- 1*1;GJ Byron &orter "2ith- Isla2 in English 'iterature
FBeirut: A2erican &ress- 1*)*G! "ee also Jean0'uc .outrelant- i'f3rient tragi9ue au \BIII
e
si]cle-i #e>ue des
"ciences (u2aines 1=E FApril0June 1*+2G: 2;;,2!
*! Michel Foucault- 1he 3rder of 1hings: An Archaeology of the (u2an "ciences F/ew Ior6: &antheon
Boo6s- 1*+7G- pp! 1),- 1==! "ee also Francois Jacob- 1he 'ogic of 'ife: A (istory of (eredity- trans! Betty E!
"pill2ann F/ew Ior6: &antheon Boo6s- 1*+)G- p! ;7 and passi2- and 5eorges Canguilhe2- 'a Connaissance
de la >ie F&aris: 5usta>e0Joseph Brin- 1*E*G- pp! ==0E)!
17! "ee John 5! Bur6e- i1he ild Manfs &edigree: "cientific Method and #acial Anthropology-i in 1he
ild Man ithin: An I2age in estern 1hought fro2 the #enaissance to #o2anticis2- ed! Edward .udley
and Ma4i2illian E! /o>a6 F&ittsburgh- &a!: ?ni>ersity of &ittsburgh &ress- 1*+2G- pp! 2E20,! "ee also Jean
Biou- i'u2i]res et anthropophagie-i #e>ue des "ciences (u2aines 1=E FApril0June 1*+2G: 22)0)=!
11! (enri .ehPrain- "il>estre de "acy: "es Conte2porains et ses disciples F&aris: &aul 5euthner- 1*),G- p!
111!
12! For these and other details see ibid!- pp! i0444iii!
1)! .uc de Broglie- iXloge de "il>estre de "acy-i in "acy- MPlanges de littPrature orientale F&aris: E!
.ucroc9- 1,))G- p! 4ii!
1=! Bon Joseph .acier- 1ableau histori9ue de lfPrudition frandaise- ou #apport sur les progr]s de lfhistoire
et de la littPrature ancienne depuis 1+,* F&aris: I2pri2erie i2pPriale- 1,17G- pp! 2)- );- )1!
1;! Michel Foucault- .iscipline and &unish: 1he Birth of the &rison- trans! Alan "heridan F/ew Ior6:
&antheon Boo6s- 1*++G- pp! 1*)0=!
1E! Broglie- iXloge de "il>estre de "acy-i p! 17+!
1+! "acy- MPlanges de littPrature orientale- pp! 17+- 117- 111012!
1,! "il>estre de "acy- Chresto2athie arabe- ou E4traits de di>ers Pcri>ains arabes- tant en prose 9ufen
>ers- a>ec une traduction frandaise et des notes- d lfusage des Pl]>es de lf Xcole royale et spPciale des langues
orientales >i>antes F>ol! 1- 1,2EJ reprint ed!- 3snabrpc6: Biblio Berlag- 1*+)G- p! >iii!
1*! For the notions of isupple2entarity-i isupply-i and isupplication-i see Jac9ues .errida- .e la
gra22atologie F&aris: Xditions de Minuit- 1*E+G- p! 27) and passi2!
27! For a partial list of "acyfs students and influence see Johann ! Flic6- .ie Arabischen "tudien in
Europa bis in den Anfang des 27!Jahrhunderts F'eipAig: 3tto (arrassowitA- 1*;;G- pp! 1;E0+!
21! Foucaultfs characteriAation of an archi>e can be found in 1he Archaeology of %nowledge and the
.iscourse on 'anguage- trans! A! M! "heridan "2ith and #upert "awyer F/ew Ior6: &antheon Boo6s- 1*+2G-
pp! +*01)1! 5abriel Monod- one of #enanfs younger and >ery perspicacious conte2poraries- re2ar6s that
#enan was by no 2eans a re>olutionary in linguistics- archaeology- or e4egesis- yet because he had the widest
and the 2ost precise learning of anyone in his period- he was its 2ost e2inent representati>e F#enan- 1aine-
Michelet Y&aris: Cal2ann0'P>y- 1,*=Z- pp! =701G! "ee also Jean0'ouis .u2as- i'a &hilosophic de lfhistoire de
#enan-i #e>ue de MPtaphysi9ue et de Morale ++- no! 1 FJanuary0March 1*+2: 17702,!
))E
22! (onorP de BalAac- 'ouis 'a2bert F&aris: Cal2ann0'e>y- n!d!G- p! =!
2)! /ietAschefs re2ar6s on philology are e>erywhere throughout his wor6s! "ee principally his notes for
iir &hilologeni ta6en fro2 his noteboo6s for the period January0July 1,+;- translated by illia2
Arrows2ith as i/otes for fe &hilologists-if Arion- /! "! 1h F1*+=G : 2+*0),7J also the passages on language
and perspecti>is2 in 1he ill to &ower- trans! alter %auf2ann and #! J! (ollingdale F/ew Ior6: Bintage
Boo6s- 1*E,G!
2=! Ernest #enan- 'fA>enir de la science: &ensPes de 1,=,- =th ed! F&aris: Cal2ann0'P>y- 1,*7G- pp! 1=1-
1=20;- 1=E- 1=,- 1=*!
2;! Ibid!- p! 4i> and passi2!
2E! 1he entire opening chapter0b6! 1- chap! 1000of the (istoire gPnPrale et syst]2e co2parP des langues
sP2iti9ues- in 3eu>res co2pl]tes- ed! (enriette &sichari F&aris: Cal2ann0'P>y- 1*=+0E1G- ,: 1=)0E)- is a
>irtual encyclopedia of race pre@udice directed against "e2ites Fi!e!- Mosle2s and JewsG! 1he rest of the
treatise is sprin6led generously with the sa2e notions- as are 2any of #enanfs other wor6s- including 'fA>enir
de la science- especially #enanfs notes!
2+! Ernest #enan- CorrespondanceJ 1,=E01,+1 F&aris: Cal2ann0'P>y- 1*2EG- 1: +012!
2,! Ernest #enan- "ou>enirs dfenfance et de @eunesse- in 3eu>res co2pl]tes- 2: ,*2! 1wo wor6s by Jean
&o22ier treat #enanfs 2ediation between religion and philology in >aluable detail: #enan- dfapr]s des
docu2ents inPdits F&aris: &errin- 1*2)G- pp! =,0E,- and 'a Jeunesse clPricale dfErnest #enan F&aris: 'es Belles
'ettres- 1*))G! 1here is a 2ore recent account in J! Chai40#uy- Ernest #enan F&aris: E22anuel Bitte- 1*;EG-
pp! ,*0111! 1he standard description00done 2ore in ter2s of #enanfs religious >ocation 0is still >aluable also:
&ierre 'asserre- 'a Jeunesse dfErnest #enan: (istoire de la crise religieuse au \I\
e
si]cle- ) >ols! F&aris:
5arnier Fr]res- 1*2;G! In >ol! 2- pp! ;71EE and 2E;0*, are useful on the relations between philology-
philosophy- and science!
2*! Ernest #enan- i.es ser>ices rendus au4 sciences histori9ues par la philologie-i in 3eu>res co2pl]tes
,: 122,!
)7! #enan- "ou>enirs- p! ,*2!
)1! Foucault- 1he 3rder of 1hings- pp! 2*70)77! Along with the discrediting of the Edenic origins of
language- a nu2ber of other e>ents0the .eluge- the building of the 1ower Babel0also were discredited as
e4planations! 1he 2ost co2prehensi>e history of theories of linguistic origin is Arno Borst .er 1ur2bau >on
Babel: 5eschichte der Meinungen pber ?rsprung and Bielfalt der "prachen and Bol6er- E >ols! F"tuttgart:
Anton (ierse2ann- 1*;+0E)G!
)2! Huoted by #ay2ond "chwab- 'a #enaissance orientale F&aris: &ayot- 1*;7G- p! E*! 3n the dangers of
too 9uic6ly succu2bing to generalities about 3riental disco>eries- see the reflections of the distinguished
conte2porary- "inologist Abel #P2usat- MPlanges postu2es dfhistoire et littPrature orientales F&aris:
I2pri2erie royale- 1,=)G- p! 22E and passi2!
))! "a2uel 1aylor Coleridge- Biographia 'iteraria- chap! 1E- in "elected &oetry and &rose of Coleridge-
ed! .onald A! "tauffer F/ew Ior6: #ando2 (ouse- 1*;1G- pp! 2+E0+!
)=! Ben@a2in Constant- 3eu>res- ed! Alfred #oulin F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*;+G- p! +,!
);! Abra2s- /atural "upernaturalis2- p! 2*!
))+
)E! #enan- .e lforigine du langage- in 3eu>res co2pl]tes- ,: 122!
)+! #enan- i.e la part des peuples sP2iti9ues dans lfhistoire de la ci>ilisation-i in 3eu>res co2pl]tes- 2:
)27!
),! Ibid!- p! )))!
)*! #enan- i1rois &rofesseurs au Coll]ge de France: Xtienne Huatre2]re-i in 3eu>res co2pl]tes- 1: 12*!
#enan was not wrong about Huatre2]re- who had a talent for pic6ing interesting sub@ects to study and then
2a6ing the2 9uite uninteresting! "ee his essays i'e 5oht des li>res cheA les orientau4i and i.es sciences cheA
les arabes-i in his MPlanges dfhistoire et de philologie orientales F&aris: E! .ucroc9- 1,E1G- pp! 10;+!
=7! (onorP de BalAac- 'a &eau de chagrin- >ol! * FEtudes philosophi9ues 1G of 'a Co2Pdie hu2aine- ed!
Marcel Bouteron F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*;7G- p! )*J #enan- (istoire gPnPrale des langues sP2iti9ues- p! 1)=!
=1! "ee- for instance- .e lforigine du langage- p! 172- and (istoire gPnPrale- p! 1,7!
=2! #enan- 'fA>enir de la science- p! 2)! 1he whole passage reads as follows: i&our 2oi- @e ne connais
9ufun seul rPsultat V la science- cfest de rPsoudre lfPnig2e- cfest de dire dPfiniti>e2ent V lfho22e le 2ot des
choses- cfest de lfe4pli9uer V lui02e2e- cfest de lui donner- au no2 de la seule autoritP lPgiti2e 9ui est la nature
hu2aine toute enti]re- le sy2bole 9uP les religions lui donnaient tout fait et 9ufils ne peut plus accepter!i
=)! "ee Madeleine B!0.a>id- 'e .Pbat sur les Pcritures et lfhiProglyphe au4 \Bll
e
et \BIII
e
si]cles et
lfapplication de la notion de dPchiffre2ent au4 Pcritures 2ortes F&aris: "!E!B!&!E!/!- 1*E;G- p! 1)7!
==! #enan is 2entioned only in passing in "chwabfs 'a #enaissance orientale- not at all in Foucaultfs 1he
3rder of 1hings- and only so2ewhat disparagingly in (olger &edersonfs 1he .isco>ery of 'anguage:
'inguistic "cience in the /ineteenth Century- trans! John ebster "pargo F1*)1J reprint ed!- Bloo2ington:
Indiana ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*+2G! Ma4 Mpller in his 'ectures on the "cience of 'anguage F1,E10E=J reprint ed!-
/ew Ior6: "cribner- Ar2strong- $ Co!- 1,+;G and 5usta>e .ugat in his (istoire des orientalistes de lfEurope
du \ll
e
au \I\
e
si]cle- 2 >ols! F&aris: Adrien Maisonneu>e- 1,E,0+7G do not 2ention #enan at all! Ja2es
.ar2esteterfs Essais 3rientau4 F&aris: A! 'P>y- 1,,)G 0whose first ite2 is a history- i'f3rientalis2e en
Francei0is dedicated to #enan but does not 2ention his contribution! 1here are half 0adoAen short notices of
#enanfs production in Jules Mohlfs encyclopedic Fand e4tre2ely >aluableG 9uasi 0logboo6- Bingtsept ans
dfhistoire des Ptudes orientales: #apports!Faits V la "ociPtP asiati9ue de &aris de 1,=7 V 1,E+- 2 >ols! F&aris:
#einwald- 1,+*0,7G!
=;! In wor6s dealing with race and racis2 #enan occupies a position of so2e i2portance! (e is treated in
the following: Ernest "eilli]re- 'a &hilosophiede lfi2pPrialis2e- = >ols! F&aris: &lon- 1*7)0,GJ 1hPophile
"i2ar- Xtude criti9ue sur la for2ation de la doctrine des races au \BIII
e
si]cle et son e4pansion au \I\
e
si]cle
FBrussels: (ayeA- 1*22GJ Erich Boegelin- #asse and "taat F1pbingen: J! C! B! Mohr- 1*))G- and here one 2ust
also 2ention his .ie #assenidee in der 5eistesgeschichte >on #ay bis Carus FBerlin: Jun6er and .unnhaupt-
1*))G- which- although it does not deal with #enanfs period- is an i2portant co2ple2ent to #asse and "taatJ
Jac9ues BarAun- #ace: A "tudy in Modern "uperstition F/ew Ior6: (arcourt- Brace $ Co!- 1*)+G!
=E! In 'a #enaissance orientale "chwab has so2e brilliant pages on the 2useu2- on the parallelis2
between biology and linguistics- and on Cu>ier- BalAac- and othersJ see p! )2) and passi2! 3n the library and
its i2portance for 2idnineteenth0century culture- see Foucault- i'a Biblioth]9ue fantasti9ue-i which is his
preface to Flaubertfs 'a 1entation de "aint Antoine F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*+1G- pp! +0))! 1 a2 indebted to
)),
&rofessor Eugenio .onato for drawing 2y attention to these 2attersJ see his iA Mere 'abyrinth of 'etters:
Flaubert and the Huest for Fiction-i Modern 'anguage /otes ,*- no! E F.ece2ber 1*+=G: ,,;0*17!
=+! #enan- (istoire gPnPrale- pp! 1=;0E!
=,! "ee 'fA>enir de la science- p! ;7, and passi2!
=*! #enan- (istoire gPnPrale- p! 21=!
;7! Ibid!- p! ;2+! 1his idea goes bac6 to Friedrich "chlegelfs distinction between organic and agglutinati>e
languages- of which latter type "e2itic is an instance! (u2boldt 2a6es the sa2e distinction- as ha>e 2ost
3rientalists since #enan!
;1! Ibid!- pp! ;)102!
;2! Ibid!- p! ;1; and passi2!
;)! "ee Jean "eAnec- /ou>elles Xtudes sur i'a 1entation de "aint Antoinei F'ondon: arburg Institute-
1*=*G- p! ,7!
;=! "ee qtienne 5eoffroy "aint0(ilaire- &hilosophie anato2i9ue: .es 2onstruositPs hu2aines F&aris:
published by the author- 1,22G! 1he co2plete title of Isidore 5eoffroy "aint 0(ilairefs wor6 is: (istoire
gPnPrale et particuli]re des ano2alies de lforganisation cheA lfho22e et les ani2au4- ou>rage co2prenante des
recherches sur les caract]res- la classification- lfinfluence physiologi9ue et pathologi9ue- les rapports gPnPrau4-
les lois et les causes des 2onstruositPs- des >ariPtPs et >ices de confor2ation- ou traitP de tPratologie- ) >ols!
F&aris: J!0B! Bailli]re- 1,)20)EG! 1here are so2e >aluable pages on 5oethefs biological ideas in Erich (eller-
1he .isinherited Mind F/ew Ior6: Meridian Boo6s- 1*;*G- pp! )0)=! "ee also Jacob- 1he 'ogic of 'ife- and
Canguilhe2- 'a Connaissance de la >ie- pp! 1+=0,=- for >ery interesting accounts of the "aint0(ilairesf place in
the de>elop2ent of the life sciences!
;;! E! "aint0(ilaire- &hilosophie anato2i9ue- pp! 44ii044iii!
;E! #enan- (istoire gPnPrale- p! 1;E!
;+! #enan- 3eu>res co2pl]tes- 1: E2102 and passi2! "ee (! ! ard2an- Ernest #enan: A Critical
Biography F'ondon: Athlone &ress- 1*E=G- p! EE and passi2- for a subtle description of #enanfs do2estic lifeJ
although one would not wish to force a parallel between #enanfs biography and what I ha>e called his
i2asculinei world- ard2anfs descriptions here are suggesti>e indeed0at least to 2e!
;,! #enan- i.es ser>ices rendus au sciences histori9ues par la philologie-i in 3eu>res co2pl]tes- ,: 122,-
12)2!
;*! Ernst Cassirer- 1he &roble2 of %nowledge: &hilosophy- "cience- and (istory since (egel- trans!
illia2 (! oglo2 and Charles ! (endel F/ew (a>en- Conn!: Iale ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*;7G- p! )7+!
E7! #enan- i#Pponse au discours de rPception de M! de 'esseps F2) a>ril 1,,;G-i in 3eu>res co2pl]tes-
1: ,1+! Iet the >alue of being truly conte2porary was best shown with reference to #enan by "ainte0Beu>e in
his articles of June 1,E2! "ee also .onald 5! Charlton- &ositi>ist 1hought in France .uring the "econd E2pire
F34ford: Clarendon &ress- 1*;*G- and his "ecular #eligions in France! Also #ichard M! Chadbourne- i#enan
and "ainte0Beu>e-i #o2anic #e>iew ==- no! 2 FApril 1*;)G: 12E0);!
E1! #enan- 3eu>res co2pl]tes- ,: 1;E!
E2! In his letter of June 2E- 1,;E- to 5obineau- 3eu>res co2pl]tes- 17: 27)0=! 5obineaufs ideas were
e4pressed in his Essai sur lfinPgalitP des races hu2aines F1,;)0;;G!
))*
E)! Cited by Albert (ourani in his e4cellent article iIsla2 and the &hilosophers of (istory-i p! 222!
E=! Caussin de &erce>al- Essai sur lfhistoire des Arabes a>ant lfIsla2is2e- pendant lfPpo9ue de Maho2et
et @us9ufV la rPduction de toutes les tribus sous la loi 2usul2ane F1,=+0=,J reprint ed!- 5raA- Austria:
A6ade2ische .ruc60 and Berlagsanstalt- 1*E+G- ): ))20*!
E;! 1ho2as Carlyle- 3n (eroes- (ero0orship- and the (eroic in (istory F1,=1J reprint ed!- /ew Ior6:
'ong2ans- 5reen $ Co!- 1*7EG- p! E)!
EE! Macaulayfs Indian e4periences are described by 5! 3tto 1re>elyan- 1he 'ife and 'etters of 'ord
Macaulay F/ew Ior6: (arper $ Brothers-
1,+;G- 1: )==0+1! 1he co2plete te4t of Macaulayfs iMinutei is con>eniently to be found in &hilip .!
Curtin- ed!- I2perialis2: 1he .ocu2entary (istory of estern Ci>iliAation F/ew Ior6: al6er $ Co!- 1*+1G-
pp! 1+,0*1! "o2e conse9uences of Macaulayfs >iews for British 3rientalis2 are discussed in A! J! Arberry-
British 3rientalists F'ondon: illia2 Collins- 1*=)G!
E+! John (enry /ew2an- 1he 1ur6s in 1heir #elation to Europe- >ol! 1 of his (istorical "6etches F1,;)J
reprint ed!- 'ondon: 'ong2ans- 5reen $ Co!- 1*27G!
E,! "ee Marguerite0'ouise Ancelot- "alons de &aris- foyers Pteints F&aris: Jules 1ardieu- 1,;,G!
E*! %arl Mar4- "ur>eys fro2 E4ile- ed! .a>id Fernbach F'ondon: &elican Boo6s- 1*+)G- pp! )7E0+!
+7! Ibid!- p! )27!
+1! Edward illia2 'ane- Authorfs &reface to An Account of the Manners and Custo2s of the Modern
Egyptians F1,)EJ reprint ed!- 'ondon: J! M! .ent- 1*)EG- pp! 44- 44i!
+2! Ibid!- p! 1!
+)! Ibid!- pp! 1E701! 1he standard biography of 'ane- published in 1,++- was by his great 0nephew-
"tanley 'ane0&oole! 1here is a sy2pathetic account of 'ane by A! J! Arberry in his 3riental Essays: &ortraits
of "e>en "cholars F/ew Ior6: Mac2illan Co!- 1*E7G- pp! ,+0121!
+=! Frederic6 Eden &argiter- ed!- Centenary Bolu2e of the #oyal Asiatic "ociety of 5reat Britain and
Ireland- 1,2)1*2) F'ondon: #oyal Asiatic "ociety- 1*2)G - p! 4!
+;! "ociPtP asiati9ue: 'i>re du centenaire- 1,2201*22 F&aris: &aul 5euthner- 1*22G- pp! ;0E!
+E! Johann olfgang >on 5oethe- estostlicher .iwan F1,1*J reprint ed!- Munich: ilhel2 5ol2ann-
1*;,G- pp! ,0*- 12! "acyfs na2e is in>o6ed with >eneration in 5oethefs apparatus for the .iwan!
++! Bictor (ugo- 'es 3rientales- in 3eu>res poPti9ues- ed! &ierre Albouy F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*E=G- 1:
E1E01,!
+,! Frandois0#enP de Chateaubriand- 3eu>res ro2anes9ues et >oyages- ed! Maurice #egard F&aris:
5alli2ard- 1*E*G- 2: +72!
+*! "ee (enri Bordeau4- Boyageurs df3rient: .es pPlerins au4 2Pharistes de &al2yre F&aris: &lon- 1*2EG!
I ha>e found useful the theoretical ideas about pilgri2s and pilgri2ages contained in Bictor 1urner- .ra2as-
Fields- and Metaphors: "y2bolic Action in (u2an "ociety FIthaca- /!I!: Cornell ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*+=G- pp!
1EE02)7!
,7! (assan al0/outy- 'e &roche03rient dans la littPrature frandaise de /er>al V Barr]s F&aris: /iAet-
1*;,G- pp! =+0,- 2++- 2+2!
,1! Chateaubriand- 3eu>res- 2: +72 and note- 1E,=- +E*0+7- +E*- +71- ,7,- *7,!
)=7
,2! Ibid!- pp! 1711- *+*- **7- 17;2!
,)! Ibid!- p! 17E*!
,=! Ibid!- p! 17)1!
,;! Ibid!- p! ***!
,E! Ibid!- pp! 112E02+- 17=*!
,+! Ibid!- p! 11)+!
,,! Ibid!- pp! 11=,- 121=!
,*! Alphonse de 'a2artine- Boyage en 3rient F1,);J reprint ed!- &aris: (achette- 1,,+G- 1: 17- =,0*- 1+*-
1+,- 1=,- 1,*- 11,- 2=;0E- 2;1!
*7! Ibid!- 1: )E)J 2: +=0;J 1: =+;!
*1! Ibid!- 2: *20)!
*2! Ibid!- 2: ;2E0+- ;))! 1wo i2portant wor6s on French writers in the 3rient are Jean0Marie CarrP-
Boyageurs et Pcri>ains frandais en Xgypte- 2 >ols! FCairo: Institut frandais dfarchPologie orientale- 1*)2G- and
Moanis 1aha0(ussein- 'e #o2antis2e frandais et lfIsla2 FBeirut: .ar0el0Maeref- 1*E2G!
*)! 5Prard de /er>al- 'es Filles du feu- in 3eu>res- ed! Albert BPguin and Jean #ichet F&aris: 5alli2ard-
1*E7G- 1: 2*+,!
*=! Mario &raA- 1he #o2antic Agony- trans! Angus .a>ison FCle>eland- 3hio: orld &ublishing Co!-
1*E+G!
*;! Jean Bruneau- 'e iConte 3rientalei de Flaubert F&aris: .enoel- 1*+)G- p! +*!
*E! 1hese are all considered by Bruneau in ibid!
*+! /er>al- Boyage en 3rient- in 3eu>res- 2: E,- 1*=- *E- )=2!
*,! Ibid!- p! 1,1!
**! Michel Butor- i1ra>el and riting-i trans! John &owers and %! 'is6er- Mosaic ,- no! 1 FFall 1*+=G:
1)!
177! /er>al- Boyage en 3rient- p! E2,!
171! Ibid!- pp! +7E- +1,!
172! Flaubert in Egypt: A "ensibility on 1our- trans! and ed! Francis "teeg2uller FBoston: 'ittle- Brown
$ Co!- 1*+)G- p! 277! I ha>e also consulted the following te4ts- in which all Flaubertfs i3rientali 2aterial is to
be found: 3eu>res co2pl]tes de 5usta>e Flaubert F&aris: Club de lf(onnete ho22e- 1*+)G- >ols! 17- 11J 'es
'ettres dfXgypte- de 5usta>e Flaubert- ed! A! Ioussef /aa2an F&aris: /iAet- 1*E;GJ Flaubert- Correspondance-
ed! Jean Bruneau F&aris- 5alli2ard- 1*+)G- 1: ;1, ff!
17)! (arry 'e>in- 1he 5ates of (orn: A "tudy of Fi>e French #ealists F/ew Ior6: 34ford ?ni>ersity
&ress- 1*E)G- p! 2,;!
17=! Flaubert in Egypt- pp! 1+)- +;!
17;! 'e>in- 5ates of (orn- p! 2+1!
17E! Flaubert- Catalogue des opinions chic- in 3eu>res- 2: 171*!
17+! Flaubert in Egypt- p! E;!
17,! Ibid!- pp! 227- 1)7!
)=1
17*! Flaubert- 'a 1entation de "aint Antoine- in 3eu>res- 1: ,;!
117! "ee Flaubert- "ala22b`- in 3eu>res- 1: ,7* ff! "ee also Maurice R! "hroder- i3n #eading
"ala22b`-i 'fEsprit crPateur 17- no! 1 F"pring 1*+7G 2=0);!
111! Flaubert in Egypt- pp! 1*,0*!
112! Foucault- i'a Biblioth]9ue fantasti9ue-i in Flaubert- 'a 1entation de "aint Antoine- pp! +0))!
11)! Flaubert in Egypt- p! +*!
11=! Ibid!- pp! 21102!
11;! For a discussion of this process see Foucault- Archaeology of %nowledgeJ also Joseph Ben0.a>id-
1he "cientistfs #ole in "ociety FEnglewood Cliffs- /!1!: &rentice0(all- 1*+1G! "ee also Edward ! "aid- iAn
Ethics of 'anguage-i .iacritics =- no! 2 F"u22er 1*+=G: 2,0)+!
11E! "ee the in>aluable listings in #ichard Be>is- Bibliotheca Cisorientalia: An Annotated Chec6list of
Early English 1ra>el Boo6s on the /ear and Middle East FBoston: 5! %! (all $ Co!- 1*+)G!
11+! For discussions of the A2erican tra>elers see .orothee Metlits6i Fin6elstein- Mel>illefs 3rienda
F/ew (a>en- Conn!: Iale ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E1G- and Fran6lin al6er- Irre>erent &ilgri2s: Mel>ille-
Browne- and Mar6 1wain in the (oly 'and F"eattleJ ?ni>ersity of ashington &ress- 1*+=G!
11,! Ale4ander illia2 %ingla6e- Eothen- or 1races of 1ra>el Brought (o2e fro2 the East- ed! .! 5!
(ogarth F1,==J reprint ed!- 'ondon: (enry Frowde- 1*7EG- pp! 2;- E,- 2=1- 227!
11*! Flaubert in Egypt- p! ,1!
127! 1ho2as J! Assad- 1hree Bictorian 1ra>ellers: Burton- Blunt and .oughty F'ondon: #outledge $
%egan &aul- 1*E=G- p! ;!
121! #ichard Burton- &ersonal /arrati>e of a &ilgri2age to al0Madinah and Meccah- ed! Isabel Burton
F'ondon: 1ylston $ Edwards- 1,*)G- 1: *- 17,017!
122! #ichard Burton- i1er2inal Essay-i in 1he Boo6 of the 1housand and 3ne /ights F'ondon: Burton
Club- 1,,EG- 17: E)0)72!
12)! Burton- &ilgri2age- 1: 112- 11=!
Chapter )! 3rientalis2 /ow
1! Friedrich /ietAsche- i3n 1ruth and 'ie in an E4tra0Moral "ense-i in 1he &ortable /ietAsche- ed! and
trans! alter %auf2ann F/ew Ior6: Bi6ing &ress- 1*;=G- pp! =E0+!
2! 1he nu2ber of Arab tra>elers to the est is esti2ated and considered by Ibrahi2 Abu0'ughod in Arab
#edisco>ery of Europe: A "tudy in Cultural Encounters F&rinceton- /!J!: &rinceton ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E)G-
pp! +;0E and passi2!
)! "ee &hilip .! Curtin- ed!- I2perialis2: 1he .ocu2entary (istory of estern Ci>iliAation F/ew Ior6:
al6er $ Co!- 1*+2G- pp! +)017;!
=! "ee Johann ! Mic6- iIsla2 as an (istorical &roble2 in European (istoriography since 1,77-i in
(istorians of the Middle East- ed! Bernard 'ewis and &! M! (olt F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E2G- p!
)7+!
;! Ibid!- p! )7*!
)=2
E! "ee Jac9ues aardenburg- 'fIsla2 dans le 2iroir de lf3ccident F1he (ague: Mouton $ Co!- 1*E)G!
+! Ibid!- p! )11!
,! &! Masson03ursel- i'a Connaissance scientifi9ue de lfAsie en France depuis 1*77 et les >ariPtPs de
lf3rientalis2e-i #e>ue &hilosophi9ue 1=)- nos! +0* FJuly0"epte2ber 1*;)G: )=;!
*! E>elyn Baring- 'ord Cro2er- Modern Egypt F/ew Ior6: Mac2illan Co!- 1*7,G- 2: 2)+0,!
17! E>elyn Baring- 'ord Cro2er- Ancient and Modern I2perialis2 F'ondon:John Murray- 1*17G- pp!
11,- 127!
11! 5eorge /athaniel CurAon- "ub@ects of the .ay: Being a "election of "peeches and ritings F'ondon:
5eorge Allen $ ?nwin- 1*1;G- pp! =0;- 17- 2,!
12! Ibid!- pp! 1,=- 1*102! For the history of the school- see C! (! &hillips- 1he "chool of 3riental and
African "tudies- ?ni>ersity of 'ondon- 1*1+01*E+: An Introduction F'ondon: .esign for &rint- 1*E+G!
1)! Eric "to6es- 1he English ?tilitarians and India F34ford: Clarendon &ress- 1*;*G!
1=! Cited in Michael Edwardes- (igh /oon of E2pire: India ?nder CurAon F'ondon: Eyre $
"pottiswoode- 1*E;G- pp! ),0*!
1;! CurAon- "ub@ects of the .ay- pp! 1;;0E!
1E! Joseph Conrad- (eart of .ar6ness- in Iouth and 1wo 3ther "tories F5arden City- /!I!: .oubleday-
&age- 1*2;G- p! ;2!
1+! For an illustrati>e e4tract fro2 de Battelfs wor6 see Curtin- ed!- I2perialis2- pp! =20;!
1,! Cited by M! de Cai4- 'a "yrie in 5abriel (anotau4- (istoire des colonies frandaises- E >ols! F&aris:
"ociPtP de lfhistoire nationale- 1*2*0))G- ): =,1!
1*! 1hese details are to be found in Bernon Mc%ay- iColonialis2 in the French 5eographical
Mo>e2ent-i 5eographical #e>iew ))- no! 2 FApril 1*=)G: 21=0)2!
27! Agnes Murphy- 1he Ideology of French I2perialis2- 1,1+01,,1 Fashington: Catholic ?ni>ersity of
A2erica &ress- 1*=,G- pp! =E- ;=- )E- =;!
21! Ibid!- pp! 1,*- 117- 1)E!
22! Ju66a /e>a6i>i- Britain- France- and the Arab Middle East- 1*1=01*27 F'ondon: Athlone &ress-
1*E*G- p! 1)!
2)! Ibid!- p! 2=!
2=! .! 5! (ogarth- 1he &enetration of Arabia: A #ecord of the .e>elop2ent of estern %nowledge
Concerning 1he Arabian &eninsula F/ew Ior6: Frederic6 A! "to6es- 1*7=G! 1here is a good recent boo6 on the
sa2e sub@ect: #obin Bidwell- 1ra>ellers in Arabia F'ondon: &aul (a2lyn- 1*+EG!
2;! Ed2ond Bre2ond- 'e (ed@aA dans la guerre 2ondiale F&aris: &ayot- 1*)1G- pp! 2=2 ff!
2E! 'e Co2te de Cressaty- 'es IntPrets de la France en "yrie F&aris: Floury- 1*1)G!
2+! #udyard %ipling- Berse F5arden City- /!I!: .oubleday $ Co!- 1*;=G- p! 2,7!
2,! 1he the2es of e4clusion and confine2ent in nineteenth0century culture ha>e played an i2portant role
in Michel Foucaultfs wor6- 2ost recently in his .iscipline and &unish: 1he Birth of the &rison F/ew Ior6:
&antheon Boo6s- 1*++G- and 1he (istory of "e4uality- Bolu2e 1: An Introduction F/ew Ior6: &antheon
Boo6s- 1*+,G!
)=)
2*! 1he 'etters of 1! E! 'awrence of Arabia- ed! .a>id 5arnett F1*),J reprint ed!- 'ondon: "pring Boo6s-
1*E=G- p! 2==!
)7! 5ertrude Bell- 1he .esert and the "own F'ondon: illia2 (eine2ann- 1*7+G- p! 2==!
)1! 5ertrude Bell- Fro2 (er- &ersonal &apers- 1,,*01*1=- ed! EliAabeth Burgoyne F'ondon: Ernest Benn-
1*;,G- p! 27=!
)2! illia2 Butler Ieats- iByAantiu2-i 1he Collected &oe2s F/ew Ior6: Mac2illan Co!- 1*;*G- p! 2==!
))! "tanley .ia2ond- In "earch of the &ri2iti>e: A Criti9ue of Ci>iliAation F/ew Brunswic6- /!J!:
1ransaction Boo6s- 1*+=G- p! 11*!
)=! "ee (arry Brac6en- iEssence- Accident and #ace-i (er2athena 11E Finter 1*+)G: pp! ,10*E!
);! 5eorge Eliot- Middle2arch: A "tudy of &ro>incial 'ife F1,+2J reprint ed!- Boston: (oughton Mifflin
Co!- 1*;EG- p! 1)!
)E! 'ionel 1rilling- Matthew Arnold F1*)*J reprint ed!- /ew Ior6: Meridian Boo6s- 1*;;G- p! 21=!
)+! "ee (annah Arendt- 1he 3rigins of 1otalitarianis2 F/ew Ior6: (arcourt Brace Jo>ano>ich- 1*+)G- p!
1,7- note ;;!
),! ! #obertson "2ith- %inship and Marriage in Early Arabia- ed!"tanley Coo6 F1*7+J reprint ed!-
3esterhout- /!B!: Anthropological &ublications- 1*EEG- pp! 4iii- 2=1!
)*! ! #obertson "2ith- 'ectures and Essays- ed! John "utherland Blac6 and 5eorge Chrystal F'ondon:
Ada2 $ Charles Blac6- 1*12G- pp! =*20)!
=7! Ibid!- pp! =*2- =*)- ;11- ;77- =*,0*!
=1! Charles M! .oughty- 1ra>els in Arabia .eserta- 2nd ed!- 2 >ols! F/ew Ior6: #ando2 (ouse- n!d!G- 1:
*;! "ee also the e4cellent article by #ichard Be>is- i"piritual 5eology: C! M! .oughty and the 'and of the
Arabs-i Bictorian "tudies 1E F.ece2ber 1*+2G- 1E)0,1!
=2! 1! E! 'awrence- 1he "e>en &illars of isdo2: A 1riu2ph F1*2EJ reprint ed!- 5arden City- /!I!:
.oubleday- .oran $ Co!- 1*);G- p! 2,!
=)! For a discussion of this see 1alal Asad- i1wo European I2ages of /on0European #ule-i in
Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter- ed! 1alal Asad F'ondon: Ithaca &ress- 1*+;G- pp! 17)01,!
==! Arendt- 3rigins of 1otalitarianis2- p! 21,!
=;! 1! E! 'awrence- 3riental Asse2bly- ed! A! ! 'awrence F/ew Ior6: E! &! .utton $ Co!- 1*=7G- p!
*;!
=E! Cited in "tephen Ely 1abachnic6- i1he 1wo Beils of 1! E! 'awrence-i "tudies in the 1wentieth
Century 1E FFall 1*+;G: *E0+!
=+! 'awrence- "e>en &illars of isdo2- pp! =20)- EE1!
=,! Ibid!- pp! ;=*- ;;702!
=*! E! M! Forster- A &assage to India F1*2=J reprint ed!- /ew Ior6: (arcourt- Brace $ Co!- 1*;2G- p! )22!
;7! Maurice Barr]s- ?ne En9uete au4 pays du 'e>ant F&aris: &lon- 1*2)G- 1: 27J 2: 1,1- 1*2- 1*)- 1*+!
;1! .! 5! (ogarth- 1he andering "cholar F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*2=G! (ogarth describes
his style as that of ithe e4plorer first and the scholar secondi Fp! =G!
)==
;2! Cited by (! A! #! 5ibb- i"tructure of #eligious 1hought in Isla2-i in his "tudies on the Ci>iliAation
of Isla2- ed! "tanford J! "haw and illia2 #! &ol6 FBoston: Beacon &ress- 1*E2G- p! 1,7!
;)! FrPdPric 'ef]>re- i?ne (eure a>ec "yl>ain 'P>i-i in MP2orial "yl>ain 'P>i-ed! Jac9ues Bacot F&aris:
&aul (art2ann- 1*)+G- pp! 12)0=!
;=! &aul BalPry- 3eu>res- ed! Jean (ytier F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*E7G- 2: 1;;E0+!
;;! Cited in Christopher "y6es- Crossroads to Israel F1*E;J reprint ed!- Bloo2ington: Indiana ?ni>ersity
&ress- 1*+)G- p! ;!
;E! Cited in Alan "andison- 1he heel of E2pire: A "tudy of the I2perial Idea in "o2e 'ate /ineteenth
and Early 1wentieth Century Fiction F/ew Ior6: "t! Martinfs &ress- 1*E+G- p! 1;,! An e4cellent study of the
French e9ui>alent is Martine Astier 'outfi- 'ittPrature et colonialis2e: 'fE4pansion coloniale >ue dans la
littPrature ro2anes9ue frandaise- 1,+101*1= F1he (ague: Mouton $ Co!- 1*+1G!
;+! &aul BalPry- BariPtP F&aris: 5alli2ard- 1*2=G- p! =)!
;,! 5eorge 3rwell- iMarra6ech-i in A Collection of Essays F/ew Ior6: .oubleday Anchor Boo6s-
1*;=G- p! 1,+!
;*! Balentine Chirol- 1he 3ccident and the 3rient FChicago: ?ni>ersity of Chicago &ress- 1*2=G- p! E!
E7! Elie Faure- i3rient et 3ccident-i Mercure de France 22* FJuly 1August 1- 1*)1G: 2E)- 2E=- 2E*- 2+7-
2+2!
E1! Fernand Baldensperger- i3_ sfaffrontent lf3rient et lf3ccident intellectuels-i in Etudes dfhistoire
littPraire- )rd ser! F&aris: .roA- 1*)*G- p! 2)7!
E2! I! A! #ichards- Mencius on the Mind: E4peri2ents in Multiple .efinitions F'ondon: #outledge $
%egan &aul- 1*)2G- p! 4i>!
E)! "elected or6s of C! "nouc6 (urgron@e- ed! 5! (! Bous9uet and 1! "chacht F'eiden: E! J! Brill-
1*;+G- p! 2E+!
E=! (! A! #! 5ibb- i'iterature-i in 1he 'egacy of Isla2- ed! 1ho2as Arnold and Alfred 5uillau2e
F34ford: Clarendon &ress- 1*)1G- p! 27*!
E;! 1he best general account of this period in political- social- econo2ic- and cultural ter2s is to be found
in Jac9ues Ber9ue- Egypt: I2perialis2 and #e>olution- trans! Jean "tewart F/ew Ior6: &raeger &ublishers-
1*+2G!-
EE! 1here is a useful account of the intellectual pro@ect infor2ing their wor6 in Arthur #! E>ans- Jr!- ed!-
3n Four Modern (u2anists: (of2annsthal- 5undolf- Curtius- %antorowicA F&rinceton- /!J!: &rinceton
?ni>ersity &ress- 1*+7G!
E+! Erich Auerbach- Mi2esis: 1he #epresentation of #eality in estern 'iterature- trans! illard #!
1ras6 F1*=EJ reprint ed!- &rinceton- /!J!: &rinceton ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E,G- and his 'iterary 'anguage and Its
&ublic in 'ate 'atin Anti9uity and in the Middle Ages- trans! #alph Manhei2 F/ew Ior6: Bollingen Boo6s-
1*E;G!
E,! Erich Auerbach- i&hilology and eltliteratur-i trans! M! and E! ! "aid- Centennial #e>iew 1)- no! 1
Finter 1*E*G: 11!
E*! Ibid!- p! 1+!
)=;
+7! For e4a2ple- in (! "tuart (ughes- Consciousness and "ociety: 1he #econstruction of European
"ocial 1hought- 1,*701*)7 F1*;,J reprint ed!- /ew Ior6: Bintage Boo6s- 1*E1G!
+1! "ee Anwar Abdel Male6- i3rientalis2 in Crisis-i .iogenes == Finter 1*E)G:17)0=7!
+2! #! /! Cust- i1he International Congresses of 3rientalists-i (ellas E- no! = F1,*+G: )=*!
+)! "ee ! F! erthei2- iCounter0insurgency #esearch at the 1urn of the Century0"nouc6 (urgron@e
and the Acheh ar-i "ociologische 5ids 1* F"epte2ber0.ece2ber 1*+2G!
+=! "yl>ain 'P>i- i'es &arts respecti>es des nations occidentales dans les progr]s de lfindianis2e-i in
MP2orial "yl>ain 'P>i- p! 11E!
+;! (! A! #! 5ibb- i'ouis Massignon F1,,201*E2G-i Journal of the #oyal Asiatic "ociety F1*E2G- pp! 127-
121!
+E! 'ouis Massignon- 3pera Minora- ed! I! Moubarac FBeirut: .ar0el0Maaref- 1*E)G- ): 11=! I ha>e used
the co2plete bibliography of Massignonfs wor6 by Moubarac: 'f3eu>re de 'ouis Massignon FBeirut: Editions
du CPnacle libanais- 1*+20+)G!
++! Massignon- i'f3ccident de>ant lf3rient: &ri2autP dfune solution culturelle-i in 3pera Minora- 1:
27,02)!
+,! Ibid!- p! 1E*!
+*! "ee aardenburg- 'fIsla2 dans le 2iroir de lf3ccident- pp! 1=+- 1,)- 1,E- 1*2- 211- 21)!
,7! Massignon- 3pera Minora- 1: 22+!
,1! Ibid!- p! );;!
,2! Huoted fro2 Massignonfs essay on Biruni in aardenburg- 'fIsla2 dans le 2iroir de lf3ccident- p!
22;!
,)! Massignon- 3pera Minora- ): ;2E!
,=! Ibid!- pp! E17011!
,;! Ibid!- p! 212!Also p! 211 for another attac6 on the British- and pp! =2)0+ for his assess2ent of
'awrence!
,E! Huoted in aardenburg- 'fIsla2 dans le 2iroir de lf3ccident- p! 21*!
,+! Ibid!- pp! 21,01*!
,,! "ee A! '! 1ibawi- iEnglish0"pea6ing 3rientalists: A Criti9ue of 1heir Approach to Isla2 and Arab
/ationalis2- &art I-i Isla2ic Huarterly ,- nos! 1- 2 FJanuary0June 1*E=G: 2;0==J i&art II-i Isla2ic Huarterly ,-
nos! )- = FJuly0.ece2ber 1*E=G: +)0,,!
,*! i?ne figure do2ine tous les genres Yof 3rientalist wor6Z- celle de 'ouis Massignoni: Claude Cahen
and Charles &ellat- i'es Xtudes arabes et isla2i9ues-i Journal asiati9ue 2E1- nos! 1- = F1*+)G: 17=! 1here is a
>ery detailed sur>ey of the Isla2ic03rientalist field to be found in Jean "au>aget- Introduction V lfhistoire de
lf3rient 2usul2an: XlP2ents de bibliographie- ed! Claude Cahen F&aris: Adrien Maisonneu>e- 1*E1G!
*7! illia2 &ol6- i"ir (a2ilton 5ibb Between 3rientalis2 and (istory-i International Journal of Middle
East "tudies E- no! 2 FApril 1*+;G: 1)10*! I ha>e used the bibliography of 5ibbfs wor6 in Arabic and Isla2ic
"tudies in (onor of (a2ilton A! #! 5ibb- ed! 5eorge Ma6disi FCa2bridge- Mass!: (ar>ard ?ni>ersity &ress-
1*E;G- pp! 1027!
)=E
*1! (! A! #! 5ibb- i3riental "tudies in the ?nited %ingdo2-i in 1he /ear East and the 5reat &owers- ed!
#ichard /! Frye FCa2bridge- Mass!: (ar>ard ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*;1G- pp! ,E0+!
*2! Albert (ourani- i"ir (a2ilton 5ibb- 1,*;01*+1-i &roceedings of the British Acade2y ;, F1*+2G: p!
;7=!
*)! .uncan Blac6 Macdonald- 1he #eligious Attitude and 'ife in Isla2 F1*7*J reprint ed!- Beirut:
%hayats &ublishers- 1*E;G- pp! 2011!
*=! (! A! #! 5ibb- ihither Isla2Li in hither Isla2L A "ur>ey of Modern Mo>e2ents in the Mosle2
orld- ed! (! A! #! 5ibb F'ondon: Bictor 5ollancA- 1*)2G- pp! )2,- ),+!
*;! Ibid!- p! ));!
*E! Ibid!- p! )++!
*+! (! A! #! 5ibb- i1he Influence of Isla2ic Culture on Medie>al Europe-i John #ylands 'ibrary
Bulletin ),- no! 1 F"epte2ber 1*;;G: *,!
*,! (! A! #! 5ibb- Moha22edanis2: An (istorical "ur>ey F'ondon: 34ford ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*=*G- pp!
2- *- ,=!
**! Ibid!- pp! 111- ,,- 1,*!
177! (! A! #! 5ibb- Modern 1rends in Isla2 FChicago: ?ni>ersity of Chicago &ress- 1*=+G- pp! 17,- 11)-
12)!
171! Both essays are to be found in 5ibbfs "tudies on the Ci>iliAation of Isla2- pp! 1+E027, and )0))!
172! #! E22ett 1yrell- Jr!- iChi2era in the Middle East-i (arperfs- /o>e2ber 1*+E- pp! );0,!
17)! Cited in Ayad al0HaAAaA- #uth Afiyo- et al!- 1he Arabs in A2erican 1e4tboo6s- California "tate
Board of Education- June 1*+;- pp! 17- 1;!
17=! i"tate2ent of &urpose-i ME"A Bulletin 1- no! 1 FMay 1*E+G: ))!
17;! Morroe Berger- iMiddle Eastern and /orth African "tudies: .e>elop2ents and /eeds-i ME"A
Bulletin 1- no! 2 F/o>e2ber 1*E+G: 1E!
17E! Menache2 Mansoor- i&resent "tate of Arabic "tudies in the ?nited "tates-i in #eport on Current
#esearch 1*;,- ed! %athleen (! Brown Fashington: Middle East Institute- 1*;,G- pp! ;;0E!
17+! (arold 'asswell- i&ropaganda-i Encyclopedia of the "ocial "ciences F1*)=G- 12: ;2+! 1 owe this
reference to &rofessor /oa2 Cho2s6y!
17,! Marcel &roust- 1he 5uer2antes ay- trans! C! %! "cott Moncrieff F1*2;J reprint ed!- /ew Ior6:
Bintage Boo6s- 1*+7G- p! 1);!
17*! /athaniel "ch2idt- iEarly 3riental "tudies in Europe and the or6 of the A2erican 3riental
"ociety- 1,=201*22-i Journal of the A2erican 3riental "ociety =) F1*2)G: 11! "ee also E! A! "peiser- i/ear
Eastern "tudies in A2erica- 1*)*0=;-i Archi> 3rientalni 1E F1*=,G: +E0,,!
117! As an instance there is (enry Jessup- Fifty01hree Iears in "yria- 2 >ols! F/ew Ior6: Fle2ing (!
#e>ell- 1*17G!
111! For the connection between the issuing of the Balfour .eclaration and ?nited "tates war policy- see
.oreen Ingra2s- &alestine &apers 1*1+1*22: "eeds of Conflict F'ondon: Co4 $ "y2an- 1*+2G- pp! 17 ff!
)=+
112! Morti2er 5ra>es- iA Cultural #elations &olicy in the /ear East-i in 1he /ear East and the 5reat
&owers- ed! Frye- pp! +E- +,!
11)! 5eorge Ca2p %eiser- i1he Middle East Institute: Its Inception and Its &lace in A2erican
International "tudies-i in 1he /ear East and the 5reat &owers- ed! Frye- pp! ,7- ,=!
11=! For an account of this 2igration- see 1he Intellectual Migration: Europe and A2erica- 1*)701*E7-
ed! .onald Fle2ing and Bernard Bailyn FCa2bridge- Mass!: (ar>ard ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E*G!
11;! 5usta>e >on 5runebau2- Modern Isla2: 1he "earch for Cultural Identity F/ew Ior6: Bintage
Boo6s- 1*E=G- pp! ;;- 2E1!
11E! Abdullah 'aroui- i&our une 2Pthodologie des Ptudes isla2i9ues! 'fIsla2 au 2iroir de 5usta>e >on
5runebau2-i .iog]ne ), FJuly0"epte2ber 1*+)G: )7! 1his essay has been collected in 'arouifs 1he Crisis of
the Arab Intellectuals: 1raditionalis2 or (istoricis2L trans! .iar2id Ca22ell FBer6eley: ?ni>ersity of
California &ress- 1*+EG!
11+! .a>id 5ordon- "elf0.eter2ination and (istory in the 1hird orld F&rinceton- /!J!: &rinceton
?ni>ersity &ress- 1*+1G!
11,! 'aroui- i&our une 2Pthodologie des Ptudes isla2i9ues-i p! =1!
11*! Manfred (alpern- iMiddle East "tudies: A #e>iew of the "tate of the Field with a Few E4a2ples-i
orld &olitics 1; F3ctober 1*E2G: 12102!
127! Ibid!- p! 11+!
121! 'eonard Binder- i1*+= &residential Address-i ME"A Bulletin *- no! 1 FFebruary 1*+;G: 2!
122! Ibid!- p! ;!
12)! iMiddle East "tudies /etwor6 in the ?nited "tates-i ME#I& #eports ), FJune 1*+;G: ;!
12=! 1he two best critical re>iews of the Ca2bridge (istory are by Albert (ourani- 1he English
(istorical #e>iew ,+- no! )=) FApril 1*+2G : )=,0;+- and #oger 3wen- Journal of Interdisciplinary (istory =-
no! 2 FAutu2n 1*+)G: 2,+0*,!
12;! &! M! (olt- Introduction- 1he Ca2bridge (istory of Isla2- ed! &! M! (olt- Anne %! "! 'a2bton- and
Bernard 'ewis- 2 >ols! FCa2bridge: Ca2bridge ?ni>ersity &ress- 1*+7G- 1: 4i!
12E! .! "ourdel- i1he Abbasid Caliphate-i Ca2bridge (istory of Isla2- ed! (olt et al!- 1: 121!
12+! R! /! Reine- i1he Arab 'ands-i Ca2bridge (istory of Isla2- ed! (olt et al!- 1: ;+;!
12,! .an6wart A! #ustow- i1he &olitical I2pact of the est-i Ca2bridge (istory of Isla2- ed! (olt et
al!- 1: E*+!
12*! Cited in Ingra2s- &alestine &apers- 1*1+01*22- pp! )102!
1)7! #obert Alter- i#hetoric and the Arab Mind-i Co22entary- 3ctober 1*E,- pp! E10,;! Alterfs article
was an adulatory re>iew of 5eneral Iehoshafat (ar6abifs Arab Attitudes to Israel FJerusale2: %eter &ress-
1*+2G!
1)1! 5il Carl Alroy- i.o 1he Arabs ant &eaceLi Co22entary- February 1*+=- pp! ;E0E1!
1)2! #oland Barthes- Mythologies- trans! Annette 'a>ers F/ew Ior6: (ill $ ang- 1*+2G- pp! 17*0;*!
1))! #aphael &atai- 5olden #i>er to 5olden #oad: "ociety- Culture- and Change in the Middle East
F&hiladelphia: ?ni>ersity of &ennsyl>ania &ress- 1*E2J )rd re>! ed!- 1*E*G- p! =7E! -
)=,
1)=! #aphael &atai- 1he Arab Mind F/ew Ior6: Charles "cribnerfs "ons- 1*+)G! For an e>en 2ore racist
wor6 see John 'affin- 1he Arab Mind Considered: A /eed for ?nderstanding F/ew Ior6: 1aplinger
&ublishing Co!- 1*+EG!
1);! "ania (a2ady- 1e2pera2ent and Character of the Arabs F/ew Ior6: 1wayne &ublishers- 1*E7G- p!
177! (a2adyfs boo6 is a fa>orite a2ongst Israelis and Israeli apologistsJ Alroy cites her appro>ingly- and so
does A2os Elon in 1he Israelis: Founders and "ons F/ew Ior6: (olt- #inehart $ inston- 1*+1G! Morroe
Berger Fsee note 1)+ belowG also cites her fre9uently! (er 2odel is 'anefs Manners and Custo2s of the
Modern Egyptians- but she has none of 'anefs literacy or general learning!
1)E! Manfred (alpernfs thesis is presented in iFour Contrasting #epertories of (u2an #elations in Isla2:
1wo &reModern and 1wo Modern ays of .ealing with Continuity and Change- Collaboration and Conflict
and the Achie>ing of Justice-i a paper presented to the 22nd /ear East Conference at &rinceton ?ni>ersity on
&sychology and /ear Eastern "tudies- May ,- 1*+)! 1his treatise was prepared for by (alpernfs iA
#edefinition of the #e>olutionary "ituation-i Journal of International Afairs 2)- no! 1 F1*E*G: ;=0+;!
1)+! Morroe Berger- 1he Arab orld 1oday F/ew Ior6: .oubleday Anchor Boo6s- 1*E=G- p! 1=7! Much
the sa2e sort of i2plication underlies the clu2sy wor6 of 9uasi 0Arabists li6e Joel Car2ichael and .aniel
'ernerJ it is there 2ore subtly in political and historical scholars such as 1heodore .raper- alter 'a9ueur-
and Elie %edourie! It is strongly in e>idence in such highly regarded wor6s as 5abriel Baerfs &opulation and
"ociety in the Arab East- trans! (anna "Ao6e F/ew Ior6: Frederic6 A! &raeger- 1*E=G- and Alfred BonnPfs
"tate and Econo2ics in the Middle East: A "ociety in 1ransition F'ondon: #outledge $ %egan &aul- 1*;;G!
1he consensus see2s to be that if they thin6 at all- Arabs thin6 differently 0 i!e!- not necessarily with reason-
and often without it! "ee also Adel .aherfs #A/. study- Current 1rends in Arab Intellectual 1hought
F#M0;*+*0FF- .ece2ber *E*G and its typical conclusion that ithe concrete proble20sol>ing approach is
conspicuously absent fro2 Arab thoughti Fp! 2*G! In a re>iew0essay for the Journal of Interdisciplinary (istory
Fsee note 12= abo>eG- #oger 3wen attac6s the >ery notion of iIsla2i as a concept for the study of history! (is
focus is 1he Ca2bridge (istory of Isla2- which- he finds- in certain ways perpetuates an idea of Isla2 Fto be
found in such writers as Carl Bec6er and Ma4 eberG idefined essentially as a religious- feudal- and
antirational syste2- YthatZ lac6ed the necessary characteristics which had 2ade European progress possible!i
For a sustained proof of eberfs total inaccuracy- see Ma4i2e #odinsonfs Isla2 and Capitalis2- trans! Brian
&earce F/ew Ior6: &antheon Boo6s- 1*+=G- pp! +E011+!
1),! (a2ady- Character and 1e2pera2ent- p! 1*+!
1)*! Berger- Arab orld- p! 172!
1=7! Huoted by Irene 5endAier in FrantA Fanon: A Critical "tudy F/ewf Ior6: &antheon Boo6s- 1*+)G- p!
*=!
1=1! Berger- Arab orld- p! 1;1!
1=2! &! J! Bati6iotis- ed!- #e>olution in the Middle East- and 3ther Case "tudiesJ proceedings of a
se2inar F'ondon: 5eorge Allen $ ?nwin- 1*+2G- pp! ,0*!
1=)! Ibid!- pp! 12- 1)!
1==! Bernard 'ewis- iIsla2ic Concepts of #e>olution-i in ibid!- pp! ))- ),0*! 'ewisfs study #ace and
Color in Isla2 F/ew Ior6: (arper $ #ow- 1*+1G e4presses si2ilar disaffection with an air of great learningJ
)=*
2ore e4plicitly politicalbut no less acid0is his Isla2 in (istory: Ideas- Men and E>ents in the Middle East
F'ondon: Alco>e &ress- 1*+)G!
1=;! Bernard 'ewis- i1he #e>olt of Isla2-i in 1he Middle East and 1he est FBloo2ington: Indiana
?ni>ersity &ress- 1*E=G- p! *;!
1=E! Bernard 'ewis- i1he #eturn of Isla2-i Co22entary- January 1*+E- p! ==!
1=+! Ibid!- p! =7!
1=,! Bernard 'ewis- (istory0#e2e2bered- #eco>ered- In>ented F&rinceton- /!J!: &rinceton ?ni>ersity
&ress- 1*+;G- p! E,!
1=*! 'ewis- Isla2 in (istory- p! E;!
1;7! 'ewis- 1he Middle East and the est- pp! E7- ,+!
1;1! 'ewis- Isla2 in (istory- pp! E;0E!
1;2! 3riginally published in Middle East Journal ; F1*;1G!Collected in #eadings in Arab Middle Eastern
"ocieties and Cultures- ed! Abdulla 'utfiyye and Charles ! Churchill F1he (ague: Mouton $ Co!- 1*+7G- pp!
E,,0+7)!
1;)! 'ewis- 1he Middle East and the est- p! 1=7!
1;=! #obert %! Merton- i1he &erspecti>es of Insiders and 3utsiders-i in his 1he "ociology of "cience:
1heoretical and E2pirical In>estigations- ed! /or2an ! "torer FChicago: ?ni>ersity of Chicago &ress- 1*+)G-
pp! **1)E!
1;;! "ee- for e4a2ple- the recent wor6 of Anwar Abdel Male6- I>es 'acoste- and the authors of essays
published in #e>iew of Middle East "tudies 1 and 2 F'ondon: Ithaca &ress- 1*+;- 1*+EG- the >arious analyses
of Middle Eastern politics by /oa2 Cho2s6y- and the wor6 done by the Middle East #esearch and
Infor2ation &ro@ect FME#I&G! A good prospectus is pro>ided in 5abriel Ardant- %ostas A4elos- Jac9ues
Ber9ue- et al!- .e lfi2pPrialis2e V la dPcolonisation F&aris: Xditions de Minuit- 1*E;G!
);7
Index
Abbas I Fof EgyptG- 1,E Andalusia- )7)
Abbasids- )7) Anni>ersary .iscourses FJonesG- 1);
Abdel Male6- Anwar- *E0+-17; An9uetil0.uperron- Abraha2
17,-)2;-)2+-))=-));-)=E (yacinthe- 22- ;1- +E0+- +*- 11+-
Abduction fro2 the "eraglio- 1he 122-2;2
FMoAartG- 11, anthropocentris2- *+- *,- 17,
Abraha2anic religions- 2E;- 2E+- anti0"e2itis2- 2+0,- *,0*- 1))0=-
2E,0* 1=102-1=;0E-1=*0;7-1;1-1*)-
Abra2s- M! (!- 11=- ));- )), 2)10=-2)+-2E2-2,E-)1+-))+-
Abu0'ughod- Ibrahi2- )))- ));- )=) )=*
Account of the Manners and Custo2s Aphrodite F'ouisG- 27,
of the Modern Egyptians- An Arab Attitudes to Israel F(ar6abiG-
F'aneG- ,- 1;- 2)- ,,- 111- 1;,0 )7+-)=*
1E=-1E,-1+7-1+1-1,)-2)*-)=1- Arab0Israeli ars- 2,=0;- 2*)
)=* Arab Mind- 1he F&ataiG- )7*- )=*
accu2ulation- 3rientalist discipline Arab #edisco>ery of Europe FAbu
of- 12)- 1E;0E 'ughodG-)))-)=)
Adanson- Michel- 11+ Arab #e>olt- 2),- 2=20)- 2=,
iAdieu4 de lfhEtesse arabei F(ugoG- iArab orld- 1hei F5liddenG- =,-
177 )7,-))1
Ad>entures of (aiii Baba of Ispahan Arab orld 1oday- 1he FBergerG-
FMorierG- 1*) ));-)=*-);7
Aeneas "il>ius: see &ius 11- &ope Arabi- Ah2ed- );- )+- 1+7- 22)
Aeschylus- )- 21- ;E0+- 2=)- ))2 Arabia- 1+- E)- *E- 1;*- 22=- 2);0E-
Africa- Africans- )1- );- )+- =1- =E- 2,+- )7)
,=- *1- *2- *,- 17=- 17+- 11*- 217- Arabian /ights- E=- 1E=- 1+E- 1*)-
21E-21,-22E-2;1-2;2-2+;-2*=- 1*=-1*E-)=)
2*,-)7)-)7=-)1= A1abic FlanguageG- =2- ;7- ;2- E=-
Ah2ed- "hei6h- 1E701 +=-++-*2-,)-*E-12)0=-12E-
Ale4ander the 5reat- ;,- ,7- ,=- ,;- 12,- 1=2- 1;*- 1E=- 1EE- 1+,- 1,2-
1E, 1*;-27*-2),-2;;-2E,-2,+-2*2-
Ale4andria- ,2- 2== )17-)1=01;-)2701-)22-))1-)=*
Algeria- 21,- )71- )2= Arabischen "tudien in Europa bis in
Alliance for &rogress- 17+0, den A nfang des 27! Jahrhunderts-
al2ehs- 1,E .ie FF?c6G- 1E- )2*- ))1- ))+
Alroy- 5il Carl- )7+0,- )=* Arabs: Bell on- 22*0) 1J Caussin de
Alter- #obert- )7+- )=* &erce>al on- 1;102J collecti>e en0
Althusser- 'ouis- 1E- )2* tity to esterner- 2)7- 2))- 2)E0+-
A2e ro2anti9ue et le re>e- 'f 2;2-2E7-2E2-2,;0,-2*E0*-)77
FguinG- 177 )71-)7;-)7E011-)1+01,-)21-
A2erican 3riental "ociety- =)- **- );7J Cro2er on- )E0=1J 5ibbfs
2*=-2*; i2po>erished >iew of- 2+,J 5lid
A2erican &ower and the /ew Man0 den on >alue syste2 of- =,0*J
darins FCho2s6yG- )2* 'awrence on- 22,0)7- 2),- 2=10)-
anato2y: co2parati>e- 12- =7- =)- 2=+0,J 3c6ley on- +;0EJ politi
11+J philosophical- and linguistics- ciAed conte2porary >iew of- 2E0+-
1=7-1=2-1=)0=-2)1 17+0,-2,;0,-)7)0=-)7E021-
Ancient and Modern I2perialis2 )=*- ) ;7J "ale on- 11+J se4ual
FCro2erG- 212- )=) dentity for est- )1101EJ "2ith
);1
$rabs'continued Bec6er- Carl .einrich, &:, &9S, &9K,
on, RST'85 social sciences on- &9:, R9@,R@U,SST,ST9
R::'@S, SR9'&. 4ee also /slam, 1eck#ord, )illiam, RR, &9&, &&:
Near "rient Bede- E1- 8&
$rabs in $merican TeCtbooks, The, 1eguin, $lbert, &99
R:8,SK8 1eirut, &, &:S
$rberry, $. %., 8:, SSS, SK9, SK& 1ell, 5ertrude- 1*+- RRK, RRT, RR@
$rchaeology o# Hnowledge, The RS&,RST,RS8,RS:,RKU,SKK
J!oucault+, S, SS8, SKR Ben@a2in- alter- &S, T&, SR@
area studies, R, TS, &9U'8, RTT, R8T' Bentha2- Jere2y- R&K
R8U,R@U,S99,SRT Berger- Morroe, R::'@9, S&9, S&&,
M$rea 4tudies #econsideredi F5ibbG- SST,SK:,SK@,ST9
&9U,R8T,SS&,SST Bergson- (enri- S&, RUU
Arendt- (annah. RK9, SKK,SKT 1erlin, 4ir /saiah, 89, SSS, SSU
$rianism, US, UT, 8U 1er3ue, %ac3ues, RUU, R89, SRU'8,
$riosto, (odovico, US SKU,ST9
$ristotle, U@ Bertrand- Co2te .enri >ratien, :&
ArnaldeA- #oger- RUU 1evan, $nthony, RRK
$rnold, Matthew, &K, &KT,RR8,RR: Bhaga>ad05ita- +,
$rnold, Thomas, RRK, SKU Bible- *)5 and &:th'century seculari
$ryans, @@, R9U, RSR, RSS, RUR, RU:, 6ation, &R9, &ST'U5 as "rientalist
R8&'R province, K, US, UT, 8U'8, &885
$sia and )estern Dominance and pilgrimage idea, &U:, &8K5 and
F&ani66arG- ;. SR@ Romantic idea o# regeneration,
$siatic 4ociety o# 1engal, 8: &&K'&T5 and estern in>ol>e2ent
$ssad, Thomas %., &@T, SKS with Near "rient, T:, 8K, &89, RU9
$tala FChateaubriandG- 1+=- &8: 1iblical scholarship, impulse toward
Athens- ;=- TU, T8, &8&, &:S "rientalism o#, &8, &:, T&, 8U'8,
$ttitudes Towards %ewish 4tatehood &89,R9R,R@9
in the $rab )orld J$lroy+, S98 1ibliothe3ue orientale Fdf(erbelotG-
Auerbach- Erich- RT:'@, RU9, RU&, US'8, 8&, 8R, 8T, SSR
RUR,SKU M1iological ,iew o# "ur Foreign
$ venir de la science, (I F#enanG- &olicy- $M JMichel+, RSS
&SR'S,&KT,SS8,SS:,SS@ biology< and politics, S&R'&S5 and
$verroYs, U@, 89, &9K racial classi#ication, R9U'8, RS&'S5
$vesta, 8U'8. 4ee also Rend0A>esta types in, &&@, &KS'K, RS&, SS@
$vestan Jlanguage+, T&, 8U'8 1iology o# 1ritish Politics, The
A>icenna- E@,.89 J.arvey+, RSS
1lu2enbach- Johann Friedrich- 11*
1acchae, The JEuripides+, TU'8, SSR 1lunt, )il#rid 4cawen, &@T, RS8, SS9
Bachelard- 5aston- TK'T, SS& Bopp- !ran6, &:, @:, &&T, &SS, &ST,
1acon, Roger, 8& &SU,&S@,RSR
1adaliya 4odality, RU8 Bordeau4- (enri- 1+7- SK&
Baldensperger- Fernand- 2;)- SKU Borges- %orge (uis, RUU
1al#our, $rthur %ames, (ord, S&'U, Bornier- Bico2te .enri de, @9
S:, S@, K9, KU, K8, K@, 8:, @R, @T, 1ossuet, %ac3ues 1)Enigne- 12=- &RT
@U,&9T,RKK,RT&,S9U,SS9 Bougain>ille- 'ouis $ntoine de, &&8
1al#our .eclaration- 2*=- S&U'&8, Bounoure- >abriel, RUU
SK: 1ouvard et PZuchet FFlaubertG-
Ballanche- &ierre 4imon, &K8 &&S'&U,&R&,&SS,&88,&:@,SST
BalAac- (onorE de, &S, &S&, &S@, Brac6en- (arry- &S, SR@, SKK
&KK,SS8,SS:,SS@ 1rahma, &T9
Bandung Conference- 17=- S9K 1rahmanism, 8U
Barbary pirates- R@9, R@K Bre2ond- Ed2ond- 22;- SKK
Baring- E>elyn: see 2romer 1ritain< colonial philosophy o#, R&R
1arrUs, Maurice, @@, RKK'T, SKT R&S, R&K'&T, R895 occupation o#
Barthes- #oland- 2+)- S9:, SK@ Egypt, &&, &8, &@, S&'@, ::, R&&
Baudelaire- Charles- &:9 R&R, RRS'K, RTS, RT8, SS95 3rien
Baudet- (enri- 8T, SSS, SSK talist school contrasted with
);2
French- 22;- 2==- 2E=0EJ priority 2ampagnes dI'KIgypte et de 4yrie,
in 3rientalis2- 1- 1+- 1*- E7- ++0 1+*,01+** F/apoleonG- ,1- )))
+*-*,-1;,0E=-1+E-1*=0+-22=- Ca2us- Albert- )1201)
22,0)1-2)=0==-2=E-2E=-2+=0 2andide FBoltaireG- *2
2,=-2*E-)720; Carlyle- 1ho2as- 1=- *;- 1;2- 22,-
Broc6el2ann- Carl- 1, =7
Broglie- Achille0Charies0'Eonce0 2arnets de ,oyage FFlaubertG- 1,1
Bictor- .uc de- 12=- 12+- ))E Carthage- 1+1- 1+;- 1++- 1,;
Brosses- Charles de- 11+ Cassirer- Ernst- 1=+- )=7
Browne- Edward 5ran>ille- 22= Catafago- Joseph- 1+7
Browning- #obert- 1, Caussin de &erce>al- Ar2and0&ierre-
Bruneau- Jean- 1,7- 1,1- )=2 1=+-1;102-2)1-2=E-)=7
BrunetiEre- Bincent de &aul0Marie0 Cecil- #obert Arthur 1albot 5as
Ferdinand- 2;+ coyne- 'ord "alisbury- )1- =1
Buchan- John- 2;1 Center for Middle Eastern "tudies
Buddhis2- 127- 2)2- 2;* F(ar>ardG- 17E- 2+;- 2*E
Buffon- Co2te 5eorges0'ouis 2entenary ,olume o# the Royal
'eclerc de- ,+- 11* $siatic 4ociety Fed! &argiterG- +*-
Bunsen Co22ittee- 227 )))-)=1
Burchard of Mount "yon- +1 Cer>antes "aa>edra- Miguel de- E)-
Burc6hardt- Jacob- *;- 1E7- 27, *2
Bur6e- Ed2und- ++ Chaldeans FsectG- 227
Burnouf- Eugene- *,- **- 1)) Cha2pollion- Jean0Frangois- 1,- 121-
Burton- "ir #ichard- 1*- 2)- ;1- ,,- 1)+-1=7-1+7
**-172-1*)-22)-2);-2,E-)=)J 2hanson de Roland, E1- E)- +1
absorbs 3riental syste2s of be0 2hapters on the Principles o# /nter
ha>ior and belief- 1*;0EJ coe4is0 national (aw Festla6eG- 27E0+
tence of indi>idualis2 and i20 Charles0#ou4- F! J!- ,+
perialis2 in- 1*;- 1*E- 1*+- 22=- Char2es- 5abriel- 21*
2=EJ co2bati>eness of- 1*=- 1*EJ Chateaubriand- Francois0#enE-
contrasted with 'ane- 1;*- 1+701- Bico2te de- 1- 1*- ,1- ,,- **- 177-
1*=J inter2ediate between 3rien0 11;- 1)E- 1,1- 1*)- )=1J and cita
talist ob@ecti>ity and personal tionary nature of 3rientalis2-
aesthetic- 1;,- 1;*- 1+1- 1*=J 1+E0+J e4e2plifies personal
3rient defined by 2aterial posses0 aesthetic in 3rientalis2- 1E*- 1+7
sion- 1E*- 217J as scholar- 1*=- 1+1- 1+)- 1+;- 1+EJ in Jerusale2-
1*EJ and se4uality of 3rient- 1*7 1+=J @ustifies con9uest of 3rient-
Butor- Michel- 1,)- )=2 1+2J and 'a2artine- 1+,- 1+*J self
Byron- 5eorge 5ordon- 'ord- 22- co2pletion in 3rient- 1+1- 1+)
)1-**-171-11,-1E+-1*2 Chaucer- 5eoffrey- )1
ByAantiu2- +E- 1*2 Chew- "a2uel- E7- ))2
iByAantiu2i FIeatsG- 2)7- )== Chicago- ?ni>ersity of- 17;- 2;2-
2*E
Cabanis- &ierre0Jean05eorges- 11= 2himYres, (es F/er>alG- 1,1
Cabet- Etienne- 11= China- 1- *- 1+- =2- =E- ;1- ;*- E2-
Caesar- Julius- ;+- ,; +)- *7- 17,- 11+- 11,- 127- 1)*-
Cagliostro- Count Alessandro di- ,,- 1E;-2;1-2;=-2E=-2,;-2*=
1;2 Chirol- Balentine- 2;20)- )=;
2ahiers du mois, (es, 2;7 Cho2s6y- /oa2- 11- )2*- )=,- );7
Cairo- ,2- 172- 1+7- 1,2- 1,)- 1*=- 2hrestomathie arabe F"acyG- ,- 12E-
22=-2*;-)1E01+ 12,0*-2,=-))+
2alila and Dumna, 12E Christianity: e4igencies of- and 3ri
2aliphate, /ts Rise, Decline and !all, entalis2- E+- *1J and i2perialis2-
The FMuirG- 1;1 177- )1*J i2portance of "e2itic
Caliphate of Cordo>a- )1; languages to- +=J 'a2artine and-
caliphates- Arabian- +=- 2,1- )720) 1+,J Massignon and- 17=- 27*-
2ambridge .istory o# /slam, The 2=E-2E=-2EE-2E,0*-2+7-2+1-
Fed! (olt- 'a2bton- and 'ewisG- 2+2J 2edie>al i2age of Isla2- ;*
E)-17*-2,=-)720;-))2-)=,0* E)J 2inorities in East- 1*1- 21+-
);)
Christianity0continued Coo6- 1ho2as- ,,0*
227- 2E+- 2+,- )7)J #enan and- Council of Bienne- =*0;7- ;1- 12=
1)=0;-1),-1=7-1=E-1=+-))+J Count #obert of &aris F"cottG- 1*2
as sacred history- E=- 1)EJ secular Cournot- Antoine0Augustin- 11=
post0Enlighten2ent i2pulse of- Cousin- Bictor- 11=- 1)=- 1=+
11=01;-127-121-122-12=-1)=- Crescent and the Cross- 1he Far
1),-1;=-1;,-1E,-1+2-27EJ burtonG- 1*;
threatened by Isla2- ;*0E7- +=- Crescent and the #ose- 1he FChewG-
*1-177-2E7-2E,-))1 E7-))2
CitiAen of the orld- 1he F5old0 Cressaty- Co2te de- 22;- )==
s2ithG- 11+ iCri de guerre du 2uftii F(ugoG-
classicis2: contrasted with scope of 1E,
3rientalis2- ;7J of (igh #enais0 Cri2ean ay- 1;)
sance- ;1J Massignon @oins to Cro2er- E>elyn Baring- 'ord- 21=-
i>ital forcesi of East- 2E;- 2E+J of ))7- ))1- )=)J i6nowledgei of-
3rientalist >is0A0>is 2ode2 3rient- ),0=7- =E- =+- =*- *;- *E- 17;-
+*-,7-*2-*,-27=-27+-222-2)2- 22)- 2==J reflects spatial attitudes
2))- 2)=- 2=7- 2E1- )77J within to 3rient- 211012J on social 2an
3rientalis2- ;2- +*- ,E- *2- 2E; age2ent of 6nowledge- ==0;J on
classification- 2)10)- 2)+- 2E2J of 11 sub@ect races-i )E0*- =7- =1- ==
languages- 1);- 1)+- 1=7- 1=)- =;- *;- 1+2- 21201)J tenure in
1EE- 22+- 2)1- 2E2- 2E,J of physi0 Egypt- );- )E- ),- 22)- 22,
ological and 2oral types- 11*027- CroAier- John B!- 2))
22+ Crusades- ;,- +;- 171- 1E,- 1+7- 1+2-
Claudel- &aul- 2;2- 2EE 1*2
Cler2ont05anneau- Charles- 1+7 Culture and "ociety- 1+,701*;7
Clot- Antoine0BartMle2y FClot Fillia2sG- ))7
BeyG-1,E Curtin- &hilip .!- )=7- )=)- )==
Cold ar- 2*1- 2*E- )27 Curtius- Ernst #obert- 2;,- 2;*- 2E1-
Colebroo6e- (enry 1ho2as- +* 2E2
Coleridge- "a2uel 1aylor- 1,- 1)E- CurAon- 5eorge /athaniel- 'ord-
)), 21)01E-22*-)=)
Colet- 'ouise- 1,+ CurAon- #obert- 1*;
CoMge de France- 12=- 1),- 2=,- Cust- #obert /eedha2- 2E102- )=E
2+7 Cu>ier- Baron 5eorges0'Eopold
Colu2bia College- 2,+ ChrEtien0FrEdEric0.agobert- 1)-
Colu2bus- Christopher- ;, 12=- 1)2- 1))- 1=1- 1=2- 1==- 1=E-
Co2!idie hu2aine- 'a FBalAacG- 1)- 1;)-27E-))*
1==-)),
Co2itE de IfAsie frangaise- 227
Co2itE df3rient- 227 .acier- Joseph- 12=- 12E- 12+- ))E
Co22entary- )7+- )1E- )1+- ));- .a2ascus- 22*- 2=1- 2=2
)=*-);7 .a2pier- illia2- 11+
Co22ittee of Concerned Asia .aniel- /or2an- E7- ))2- ));0E
"cholars- )71 .aniel .eronda FEliotG- 1E*- 1*2
co22unis2- 17,- 2+,- 2+*- 2*;- )7) .ante- )- E,0+7- +1- +2- *;- 12)-
Co2pagnie uni>erselle- ,*0*7 1++-217-211-2=E
Co2te- Auguste- 11=- 11;- 22, .ar6 #aces of Man- 1he F%no4G-
Condorcet- Mar9uis de- 1=+ 27E
Confucius- E* .arwin- Charles- 22- 27E0+- 22+-
congress- first 3rientalist- 217- 2E1 2)20)
Cor2aissance de 1fest FClaudelG- 2;2 .e la religion FConstantG- 1)+
Conrad- Joseph- 1,E- 1*7- 1**- 21E- .e 'ingua 'atina FBarroG- 1==
2=2-)=) .efre2ery- Charles- 1+7
Considgrations sur la guerre actuel .ehErain- (enri- )))- ))E
de 1urcs FBolneyG- ,1 .elacroi4- Ferdinand0Bictor0Eug$ne-
Constant--Ben@a2in- 1)+- )), 11*
contraferentia- E1- 127 .epping- 5uillau2e- 21,
Coo6- Ja2es- 11+ i.es ser>ices rendus au4 sciences
);=
histori9ues par la philologiei i.o2estic "tructure and Foreign
F#enanG-1)=-)),-)=7 &olicyi F%issingerG- =E
Description de /IEgypte, =2- ,=- ,;0 Don %uan FByronG- 1+,
,+-*;-17)-1;*0E7-1E,-2,)- Don DuiCote FCer>antesG- *2- *)
)))0= .onato- Eugenio- ))*
Description de /IEgypte F'e .oughty- Charles Montagu- **- 1+1-
MascrierG- ,= 1*;-22)-2);-2)+-)=;
.estutt de 1racy- Co2te Antoine0 i.ouleur du &acha- 'ai F(ugoG
'ouis0Claude- 11= 1E,
.eutsche Morgenldndische .ou2er- &aul- 22;
5esellschaft- =) .oAy- #einhart- **- 1;1
Dialogues des morts F1+EnelonG- E* .ruAes- 1,- 172- 12E- 1*1- 1*2
Dialogues philosophi3ues F#enanG- .ryden- John- )1
1=+ .ugat- 5usta>e- ;2- ))1- ))*
Dictionnaire des idYes reYues .ur6hei2- F02ile- 2;*- 2EE
FFlaubertG- 1,;- 1,*
Didascalicon F(ugo of "t! BictorG- Eban- Abba- 2+7
2;* Ecole publi9ue des langues orientales-
.iderot- .enis- 11* ,)
.iodorus "iculus- 1+; Education sentimentale, (I FFlau
.ionysiac cults- ;E0+ bertG- 1,+
Discipline and Punish FFoucaultG- )- Egypt: attitudes to French and Brit
))E-)== ish- 211012J as British colony- 11-
discourse: contribution of i2agina0 1+- 1*- )10+- +E- ,7- ,+- ,,- 1E*-
ti>e literature to 3rientalist- 20)- 1*=-21101)-227-22)0=-2;)-
**J definition of- *=J do4ology of 2;+- ))7J Cha2pollion and- 12 1-
3rientalist- 121J e4pertise as new 1)+- 1=7- 1+7J Chateaubriand on-
for2 of 3rientalist- 2),0*J and 1+=0;J European culture of in
for2s of power- 12- )2,J Fou0 tellectuals in- )2)J focal point of
cault on- )- *=J historical i2pact 3rientalis2- ,=J 'ane on- 1;- 2)-
of 3rientalist- *=0;J as i2perial 1;*0E=- 1EE0+- 1+EJ /apoleonic
institution- *;J latent 3rientalis2 in>asion of- 22- =20)- +E- ,70,-
within European- 27;0E- 22102J ,*- 122- 1)+- 1==- 1;EJ national
2ethodological issues within 3ri0 is2 in- )1- );- )+- )*- 1+7- 22)-
entalist- 121- 12=- 12+- )72J 2;+- )1E01+J post01*=,- 17*J and
2ythic- )11- )21J 3rientalis2 as- "ueA Canal- ,,0*7! 4ee also Isla2J
2- )- E- 12- 210;- +10)- ,7- ,E0+- /ear 3rient
*=0;- **- 12102- 1)7- 1=E- 1;E- Eichhorn- Johann 5ottfried- 1+
1E2-2710;-217-222-2)701-)110 Eighteenth 1rumaire o# (ouis 1ona
)12- )21J philological- 1)+- 1=E- parte, The FMar4G- 21- 1))
1=,J #enan solidifies 3rientalist- Eliot- 5eorge- 1=- 1,01*- **- 1E*-
1)7J as representation- 2102- +10 1*2-2)2-)==
+)- 2+20=J strength of estern- Eliot- 1! "!- 2;2
2;- *=J supersedes indi>idual Encyclopedia o# /slam, The, 2,=
writer- *=- 272- 2+)J typology in Engels- Friedrich- *+
3rientalist- 2)70=J >ocabulary of England in Egypt FMilnerG- )1
3rientalist- =1- ==- E7- +10)- *7- En3uZe auC pays du (evant, =ne
121- 12+- 2)7- )21J >on 5rune0 FBarrEsG- 2==- )=;
bau2 e4e2plifies 3rientalist- 2*E0 Eothen F%ingla6eG- 1*)- )=2
2*+ Erche2bert- ;*
Erpenius- 1ho2as- ;7- E;
Discoveries in the Ruins o# Nineveh Essai sur Phistoire des $ rabes avant
iand 1ahylon F'ayardG- 1*; Nslamisme FCaussin de &erce>alG-
. sraeli- Ben@a2in- Ist Earl of 1;1-)=7
Beaconsfield- ;- 1*- ==- **- 172- Essai sur Pin,Ygaliti des races
1;+-1EE-1E*-1*2-21+ humaines F5obineauG- 27E- )=7
Divine 2omedy, The F.anteG- E,0* Euripides- ;E0+- ))2
i.o the Arabs ant &eaceLi FAl0 Europe: Asia will regenerate- 11)
royG- )7+- )=* 11EJ colonialis2 in 3rient, 1, 2- )-
);;
Europe0continued 1;,- 1*)- 1*+- 1**- 22)- 2)1- 2==-
+- 11- 1=01;- 1E01+- )10*- =1- ,+- 2*1- ));- ))*- )=2J associates
*2- *;- 177- 1;E- 1*7- 1*;- 27+- 3rient and se4- 1,,0*7- )7*J and
217- 21101E- 21+02;- 22E0,- 2)2- assu2ptions of latent 3rientalis2-
2=E-2;1-2;E0+-2+7-2+,0*J 27EJ on bourgeois cycle of enthu
cultural hege2ony- and 3riental0 sias2 and disillusion2ent- 11)01=J
is2- +0*- 12- 2;- ,E0+J cultural use detached powerlessness of- 1,,0*J
of 3rientalis2- )- 12,- 1=,- 1;)J detail in- 1;- 1,EJ on English a2
iday0drea2i of 3rient- ;20)- +)J bitions in Egypt- 1*=J e4e2plifies
idigestsi 3rient- 2;701J i2agina0 i2aginati>e genre in 3rientalis2-
ti>e 6nowledge of 3rient- ;;0,- ,- ;)- ,,- **- 172- 1;+- 1;*- 1E,-
;*0E+- +102J linguistic roots of- 1E*- 1+7- 1+*0,1- 1,=0*7J in
+,0*- *,- 1)E0+J 2eta2orphosis dependence of 3rientalis2- 1,1-
in appropriation of East- 2 17011J 1,*- 1*1- 1*2J 3rient answers to
and 2inorities in East- 1*1J per>ersity in- 1,7- 1,=0;J 3riental
#enaissance ascendancy of- +J re>i>alis2 of- 1,;J and 3riental
representation of 3rient- 10)- ;0E- wo2an- E- 1,7- 1,E0+- 27+J 3ri
+-1E-2702-)*0=7-;;0+-E70+)- entalist constraints upon- =)- 1++-
,E0+- *,0*- 1710,- 1*)- 27)- 1,*J satiriAes global and recon
2+20=- 2,)0=- )11J seculariAation structi>e >ision- 11=01E- 121- 1,*J
of- 11=01E- 1270)- 1);0E- 1),J search for ho2eland- 1,7J as
and se4uality of East- 1*7- ) 11 0 tra>eler- 1,;0EJ and i>isionary
)1EJ societal self0awareness of- alternati>e-i 1,;
1*+J strength >is=0>is 3rient- )- Ford Foundation- 2*;
;0E- +- 11- 12- 2;- )20;- =701- ==- Forster- E! M!- **- 2==- 2=,- )=;
=;- ;+- E7- +2- +,- +*- ,;0,- *2- Foucauld- Charles de- 2EE
*=- 17=- 17,0*- 11+- 1=1- 1;7- Foucault- Michel- )- 1=- 22- 2)- *=-
1;20)-1;E-1E7-1*)0=-1*+-27=- 11*-1)7-1);-1,,-))E-)),-))*-
22E0,-2)+-2=E-2=,0*-)7*J )=2-)==
transcendent to 3rientalist iob0 Fourier- Fran9ois0Marie0Charles-
@ect-i *+J trau2a of Isla2 to- ;*0 11=
E2- +)0=J BalEry on role of- 2;70 Fourier- Jean0Baptiste0Joseph- 2*-
2;1! "ee also i2perialis2J 3rien0 ,=0;-,E-))=
talis2J na2es of countries France: colonial co2petition with
Europocentris2- *+- *,- 17, England- =1- +E- 1E*- 1*1- 211
e4pertise- 3rientalist- 1*E0+- 2220;- 212-21;-21+021-22=0;-2==J
22,0)1- 2);0EJ acti>ist aspect of- Far Eastern interests influence
2),0*-2=7-2=20)-2=E-2;)0=Jon interest in /ear East- 1+J geograpb
Arab politics and se4uality- )120 ical 2o>e2ent in- 21+027- )==J in
) 1EJ collecti>e >erity of- 2)7- 2)E- India- +EJ 3riental pilgri2s fro2-
2=E0+J of conte2porary iarea e40 1E*0*7J 3rientalist industry in-
pert-i 2,;- 2*701- )21J French 1*701J 3rientalist tradition con
contrasted with British- 2==0E! trasted with Englandfs- 22;- 2==-
"ee also 3rientalis2J scholarship- 2E=0EJ priority in 3rientalis2- 1-
3rientalist 1+- 1*- ;1- E)0+- +E0+- ,1- ,)0,-
*,-17=-12)0*-1)70=,-1;*0E7-
Fabre df3li>et- Antoine- ,+ 1E;-1E*0+E-1++0*1-2)+-2==-
Faisal- 2+7 2=E- 2=,0;7- 2E=0+2- 2*EJ repre
Falanges libanaises- )7) sents spirituality in 3rient- 2=;-
Fashoda Incident F1,*,G- )1 2E=- 2+701J and "ueA Canal- ,,
Faure- Elie- 2;)- )=E *7! "ee also /apoleon I
Fauriel- Claude- 1=+ Franco0&russian ar F1,+701,+1G-
1+Enelon- Frangois de "alignac de 'a 21+01,
Mothe0- E* Fran6lin- Ben@a2in- ++
Fenollosa- Ernest Francisco- 2;2 Fran6lin0Bouillon- (enry- 22;
Filles du teu- 'es F/er>alG- 1,7- )=1 FraAer- "ir Ja2es 5eorge- 1=;
FitA5erald- Edward- ;)- 1*) Fi@c6- Johann !- 1E- )2*- ))1- ))+-
Flandin- &tienne- 22; )=)
);E
Flaubert- 5usta>e- 11- 2)- *=- 1==- Fundgraben des 3rients- =)
5alland- Antoine- E)0;- ))2 5olds2ith- 3li>er- 11+
5ardet- 'ouis- )7; 5oldAiher- IgnaA- 1,- 17;- 27*
5arnier- Francis- 21, 5olius- Jacobus- E;
5autier- 1hEophile- **- 177- 171- 5ordon- Charles 5eorge- )1
1,7 5ordon- .a>id- 2*,- )=,
5eertA- Clifford- )2E i5o>ern2ent of "ub@ect #aces-
>enie des religions, (e FHuinetG- +*- frhei FCro2erG- ==
1)+-))1-))) 5ra2sci- Antonio- E0+- 11- 1=- 2;-
>Unie du 2hristianisme, (e 2E- )2*0)7
FChateaubriandG- 1+= 5ra>es- Morti2er- 2*;- )=,
5eoffroy "aint0(ilaire- ttienne- 1)- 5ra>es- #obert- 2=)
,E-1=1-1=2-1=)0;-))=-))*0=7 5reece- 21- ;2- ;E0+- E,- ++- ,,- *+-
5eoffroy "aint0(ilaire- Isidore- 1=1- 17)0=-1++-27*-2;701-2,1-)7=
1==-))*0=7 5ri22- Ja6ob- *,
geography: beco2es icos2opolitani 5rousset- #enE- ;,- ))2
science- 21;01*- 227J ico22er0 5runebau2- 5usta>e >on- 17;- 2*E
cial-i 21,J de 'esseps transcends- 2*,-)7=-)=,
,,0*2J and essentialiAing >ision of 5uibert of /ogent- +1
3rientalis2- 17,- 2=E0+- )7)- )7;J 5uiAot- Frangois0&ierre05uillau2e-
for2 of racial deter2inis2- )7;J 1=+
i2aginati>e and arbitrary- ;=0;- 5undolf- Friedrich- 2;,
;+0,-E,-+1-+)-++-*;-271-)7;J
i2perialis2 o>erco2es- *;- 217
211- 21)J 2an02ade- =0;J 3rien0 (afiA! 1E,
talist elaboration of- 12- ;7- ;)- (alla@- Mansur al- 17=- 2=E- 2E=-
E=- E;- ++- +,- ,E- 12E- 1E;- 271- 2EE-2E,0*-2+2
2 t ;01EJ and 3rientalist pro@ects- (alpern- Manfred- )17- )=,- )=*
,,0*2J relationship to 6nowledge- (a2ady- "ania- )7*017- )11- )12-
;)0=-,E-21E )=*-);7
5er2any- 1- 1+01*- 2=- =)- ;2- +1- (a2ann- Johann 5eorg- 11,
*,- 177- 12*- 1)+- 1*1- 27,-0 211- (ariri- Abu Muha22ad al0Hasi2
212-22;-2),-2=;-2;E aG0- 12E
i5iaouri FByronG- 1E+ (ar6abi- Iehoshafat- )7+- )7,- )=*
5ibb- "ir (a2ilton A! #!- 11- ;)- (arun al0#ashid- )7)
171-17+-2=+-2;,-2E2-2*1-))1- (ar>ard ?ni>ersity- 17E- 2+;- 2*E
));- )=;- )=E- )=+J on Arab 2en0 (ar>ey- Charles- 2))
tality- 17;0EJ contrasted with (asanids- )7)
Massignon- 2=E- 2E=- 2EE- 2E+- (ashi2ites- 2=E
2+=- 2+;J dynastic figure- 2+;- (astings- arren- +,
2*EJ influences on- 2+E0+- 2,)J on (ay- .enys- +- )2*- ))2
Massignon- 2E;- 2,)J 2etaphysi0 (ayter #eport- ;)
cal abstraction of- 2+,0,)J opposes .eart o# Darkness FConradG- 1**-
nationalis2 in /ear East- 2E)- 21E-)=)
2+*J public0policy role of- 17E0+- (ebrew- 22- ;7 - ;2-+=-++-*,-12)-
2;+- 2E=- 2+;0E- 2*EJ on estern 12,-1);-1)*-1=2-2*2-))1
need of 3rient- 2;E0+ i(egirei F5oetheG- 1E+
5ibbon- Edward- ;;- ;*- +=- 11+- (eisenberg- erner- 2E+
127-))2-))) (e@aA- 22;- 2);- 2)+
5ide- AndrE- 1*7- 2;7 (ellenis2- ;1- ++- 12+- 1)7J and
5ilson- "tienne- 2;= Isla2- +=- 17)0=- 27*- )7=
5irardin- "aint0Marc- 21+ (erbelot de Molain>ille- BarthEle2y
5lidden- (arold !- =,0*- )7,- ))1 df- E)0+- f+1- +2- +;- *;- 12)- 217-
5obineau- Joseph0Arthur- Co2te de- 211-2,)-))2
,-**-1;7-27E-22,-)=7 (erder- Johann 5ottfried >on- 1+-
5oethe- Johann olfgang >on- 1*- *,-11,-1))-1);-1)+-1),-1=+-
22-;1-**-177-11,-1==-1;=-1;;- 1;;-))E
1;+- 1E+0,- 2;+- ))), ))*- )=1 .erodias FFlaubertG- 1,1
>olden River to >olden Road (erodotus- ;,- *7- 1+;
F&ataiG- )7,0*- )=* .istoire des K rabes FMarignyG- ,7
);+
.istoire des Mussulmans dIEspagne .istory o# the 4aracens F3c6leyG-
F.oAyG- 1;1 E)-+;0E
.istoire des navigations auC terres (itti- &hilip- 2*E
australes Fde BrossesG- 11+ (obson- J! A!- *2
.istoire des orientalistes de /IEurope (of2annsthal- (ugo >on- 2;,- )=E
du [&&I au [/[I sikle F.ugatG- (ogarth- .a>id 5eorge- 1*+- 22)0=-
;2- ))1- ))* 2);-2)+-2),-2=;- 2=E-)=2-)==-
.istoire du peuple d8sraYl F#enanG- )=;
2); (olt- &! M!- 17;- )72- ))2-))E-)=)-
.istoire generale et particuliYre des )=*
anomalies de lIorganisation che6 (o2er- 11- 27- ,=- ,;
/Ihomme et les animauC J( 5eof0 (ottinger- Johann (!- E=
froy"aint0(ilaireG- ))* (ourani- Albert- 2+=- 2+;-2+E-))7-
.istoire ginZale et systeme companY ));-))E-)=7-)=+- )=,
des 8angues simiti3ues F#enanG- (ugo- Bictor- )- 22- ;1- ;)- ,20)-
1=2-1=E-1;7-))+-)),-))*-)=7 **- 171- 1;+- 1E+0,- ))1- )))-
.istoire naturelle des poissons du Nil ))=-)=1
FE! 5eoffroy "aint0(ilaireG- ))= (ugo of "t! Bictor- 2;*
.istoria "rientalis F(ottingerG- E= (u2boldt- Baron Ale4ander >on-
.istorians o# the Middle East Fed! 1)=
'ewis and (oltG- ))2- ))E- )=) (u2boldt- Baron ilhel2 >on- **-
i(istorische Frag2entei FBurc60 1))-))*
hardtG- 27, (u2e- .a>id- 1)
history: alternati>e to religious0ethnic (urgron@e- C! "nouc6- 27*- 217-
approach- )2;- );7J Arabs seen as 2;;0E-2;+-2E)-)=E
e4e2pt fro2- 2)701- 2);- 2+,0*J (usein ibn0Ali Fgrand sherif of
Balfour on 3riental- )20)J of MeccaG- 2),
2ambridge .istory o# /slam, )720 (ussein- 1asha- )2)
)7=- );7J cultural- of #enan- 1=E0 (usserl- Ed2und- 2*E
1=+J and essentialist >ision of (u4ley- 1ho2as (enry- 2))
3rientalis2- *+- 2)1- 2=7- 2=EJ (uys2ans- Joris %arl- 1,7- 2EE
geopolitical awareness within- 12-
1=- ;7J of ideas- and 3rientalis2- ibn0%haldun- 1;1
2)- 1)7- )7;J i2position of scien0 /deen 6ur Philosophie der >eschichte
tific typing upon- 2)1- 2E7J 'ewis der Menschheit F(erderG- 11,
on practice of- )1*027J 2an02ade- idees re3ues, *=- 11;- 1,*- 2;)- )2E
;- ;=- 11;J in 2anifest 3rientalis2- I@i- Adudu fI0.in al0- )1;
27EJ Mar4 on necessary transfor0 /mages o# Middle East 2on#lict
2ations of- 1;)0=J as narrati>e- FAlroyG- )7+
1E10=- 2)*- 2=7- 2=EJ of 3rient in i2perialis2J acco22odates Arab in
1,th century- 11+01,- 127J 3ri0 tellectual class- )220=J A2erican-
ental superseded by European- )0=- 11- 1;- 1E01+- 1,- 2;- 2+-
,=0;- ,E- 17,0*J 3rientalist dis0 17=-17+0,-2,;-2*7-2*)0;-2**-
regard of- 17;- 17+- 2)1- 2)=- 2=E- )21- )22J Balfourfs defense of-
2E7-2+1-2+,0*-)1,-)21J )10EJ British- )0=- 11- 1;- 1E01+-
3rientalist generaliAation of- *E- 1,- 1*- 2;- )10*- =1- ==- =+- +;-
17*- 2)10)J as 3rientalist repre0 +E- *;- 177- 1;)- 1;E- 1E*- 1*1-
sentation- 21- )20)J reduced by 1*;-1*E0+-21101E-21+-21,-
cultural theory in >on 5runebau2- 2270=-22;-22E0+-2)*-2==-2=E-
2*,0*J re>isionist- )1,J sacred and 2;+J connection to Anglo0French
profane in df(erbelot- E=J seen as 3rientalis2- =- 1,- =1- ,E- *=0E-
dra2a by Huinet and Michelet- 17=-1*;-1*E-1*+-27=-21=-221
1)+-1), 22=J Cro2er on policies of- )E0*-
.istory o# /ntellectual Development ==- 21201)J French- )0=- 11- 1;-
on the (ines o# Modern Evolution 1E01+- 1,- 1*- 2;- =1- +E- ,E- *;-
FCroAierG- 2)) 177- 12=- 1;E- 1*1- 211- 21+021-
.istory o# the Decline and !all o# 22)- 22=0;- 2==0;J go>erns 3rien
the Roman Empire, The F5ibbonG- talist culture- 1=- 1;- =)- ,E- *;-
+=-))2-))) 17=-1220)-27=-217-21=Ji20
);,
pact on 3rientals- 21)- 2;102- Macdonald on- 27*- 217- 2=+0,-
)220)J inter0European ri>alry in- 2+E0+J Massignonfs ideas of- 2E,
=1-+;-+E-,+-1*1-211012-21+0 +2J 2ysticis2 in- 27*- 2;)- 2;,-
221- 22=0;- 2==- 2=,J new con0 2E+- 2E,0*J /apoleonfs ad2ira
figuration in ?!"! and ?!"!"!#!- tion for- ,2- )))J percei>ed as
17=- 17+0,- 2,;J 3rientalist agents doctrinal i2posture of Christian
of- 1*E0+- 2220;- 22,0)1- 2)+0 ity- ;*- E7- E1- E20)- E;0E- +102-
2=E- )21- )22J and 3rientalist 27*J political rather than spiritual
doctrines- ,- 12- 1)- 1,- ==- ,E- instru2ent- 1;102J reintegration
*=0E-27E0+-2220;-2=E-2*70)- with est- 2;E0+- 2,7J religion of
2*;- 2**- )22- )2,J tutelage of resistance- 2E,- 2E*J religious
ibac6wardi East- );- )+- ,E tolerance of- 27*- 2+,J ireturni of-
I2perialis2 Fed! CurtinG- )=7- )=)- 17+- 22;- )1EJ "chlegel on- *,0*-
)== 1;7J "cott on- 17102J as sha2e
India: An9uetil0.uperron to- +E0+- culture- =,0*J silence and articu
+*- 1;EJ British in- 11- 1+- 1*- ) 1- lation in- 2,20)- )27J "2ith de
)E- )+-=2-+)-+;-+E-++0*-1)+- 2ythologiAes- 2);0EJ and static
1;)0=-1E*-21=-21+-22=-22E- 2ale 3rientalis2- 27,J >on 5rune
22*- 2E=J classical ci>iliAations the bau2 on- 2*E0*- )7=J estern
igoodi 3rient- **J and French fear of- ;*0E7- +=0;- *2- 2;20)-
aspiration to iFrench India-i 21,J 2;=- 2E7- 2,+! "ee also ArabsJ
inter0European ri>alry in- +;- +EJ /ear 3rient
Isla2 spreads to- ;*- +=J Jones in- Isla2 and Capitalis2 F#odinsonG-
++0*J languages and dialects of- 2;*-));-);7
;2- +;0*- *,- 1)E0+- )22J Mar4 Isla2 dans le tniroir de If3ccident- 'f
on regeneration of- 1;)0;J 3rien0 FaardenburgG- 27*- )=)- )=E-
talist study of religions in- ;7- E+- )=+
+;- 1;7- 2;;J succeeds to Edenic iIsla2ic Concepts of #e>olutioni
fallacy- 1)+ F'ewisG- )1=01;- );7
Indochina- 2- =1- =E- 21,- 2,; Isla2ic law- ;7- E;0E- 27*- 2;;0E-
Indo0European languages- 22- ;1- 2+,J 5ibb on- 2,7
+;- +,0*- *,- 1);0+- 1)*- 1=7- Israel: 2E0+- 17+0,- 2+7- 2,E0+-
1=1-1=2-1=)-1=;-1=*-2)2 2*)-)7E0,-)1E-)1,01*-)21-
Indonesia- ;*- 217- )7= )=*! "ee also JewsJ Rionis2
Inferno F.anteG- E,0+7- +1 Italy- 1- 1+- 2=- +)- ,7- 2*E
iInfluence of the Arabic 'anguage Itin$aire de &aris d Mrusale2
on the &sychology of the Arabs- FCbateaubriandG- ,,- 1+10;- 1,)
1hei F"houbyG- )27
Institut de France- 12E Jabarti- Abd0al0#ah2an al0- ,2
Institut df&0gypte- ;2- ,1- ,)- ,=- ,+ Jalou4- Ed2ond- 2;7
Institutes of Manu- +, Janet- &aul- 11=
iInterpretation of Isla2ic (istory- Japan- 1- 2- 1+- +)- 127- 2,;- )22
Ani F5ibbG- 2,) Jaur$s- Jean 1SEon- 2=;
Ira9- *E- 17*- )7)- )2= Jean 5er2ain- E1
Ish2ael- 2E,- 2+7 Jesuits- ;1- 11+
Isla2: ibadi 3rient of philologists- Jews- 172- 1=1- 1;;- 1++- 1*1- 1*2-
**- 1=1 J Christian representation 2=1- 2,+- )71- )7;- )1*- ))+J
of- E70*- +102- ,1- 1+2- 27*J as Abraha2anic religion of- 2E,0*J
con9uering 2o>e2ent- ;,- ;*- E1- A2erican- and Arabs- 2E- )7,-
+1- +=0;- *1- 27;- 2E,- )7)- )7=J )1,J and Aryan 2yth- **J
conte2porary dog2as on- )7701J Chateaubriand on- 1+=J and di>ine
.ante on- E,0+7- +1J idefeatis2i dynasty of language- 12,- 1);0EJ
of- )1=J epito2e of outsider- +701- .oAy on- 1;1J in Israel- )7EJ and
27,J essentially itent and tribe-i 1*=; Cairo riot- )1E01+J pri2iti>e
17;- 2)=- )7+J e4ception to est0 origins- 2)=- 2);J &roust on 3rien
ern do2ination of 3rient- +)0;J talis2 of- 2*)J #enan on- 1=1-
5ibb on- 17;0E- 2=E- 2+E0,=J 1=2- 1=EJ sacred history of- E=!
hege2ony of- ;*- 27;J interwar "ee also "e2itesJ Rionis2
study of- 2;;0+- 2E70+2- 2+,J iihad-2E,-2+,-2,+
);*
John of "ego>ia- E1- 127 residence- 1;,- 1E1- 1+701- 1+)-
Johnson- "a2uel- ++- 11* 1+;- 1+E- 1+*- 222- 2)*J i2itates
Jones- "ir illia2- ,- 1,- 22- ;1- +;- 3rient- 1E701- 1E)J i2portance of
++0*- *,- 11+- 122- 1);- 1;E- 1E,- detail in style- 1;- 1E102- 1E=-
1E*-21; 1+;J and 2odern 3rientalist struc
Jouffroy- 1heodore- 1=+ tures- 122- 1*+- 2)1J narrati>e
%ournal intime FConstantG- 1)+ structure of- 1E1- 1E20=- 1+;- 2)*-
Judas- Auguste- 1+7 2=7- 2,)J proprietary attitude in-
Jung- Carl 5usta>- 2E+ 211- 2))J self0e4cision of- 1E)0=-
1E,- 1+701J ti2eless authority of-
%ant- I22anuel- 11*- 1)2 1E1- 1E)0=J translates $rabian
%hadduri- Ma@id- =, Nights, 1E=- 1+EJ use by i2agina
khawals, 1,E ti>e writers- 2)- 1E,- 1,1- 1,)-
%idd- Ben@a2in- 2)) 1,=- 1,E
%ier6egaard- "bren- 2E+ language: disco>ered as hu2an phe
%iernan- B! 5!- ;2- ))7- ))1 no2enon- 1);0E- )),J /ietAsche
Hirn F%iplingG- 22E on- 27)J origins of- 1);0,- 2)102J
%ingla6e- Ale4ander illia2- **- #enan on- 1),J as representation-
1;+- 1E*- 1*)0=- )=2 21- 2+2J science and- 1=7! 4ee also
%ipling- #udyard- =;- 22=- 22E0+- philology
22,- )== languages- 3riental: An9uetil
%issinger- (enry A!- =E0,- )77- ) )1 .uperronfs achie>e2ent in- ;1-
%itchener- (oratio (erbert- 'ord- +E0+J Biblical- ;1- 12,- 1);0EJ
2), and conte2porary e4pertise- 2*1-
%1Eber- Jean0Baptiste- ,2 2*2- )1=01;- )2701J differences
%no4- #obert- 27E contribute to 3rientalist types-
%oenig #eport- )7E 2)10)- 2)+J identified with "e2itic-
%oran- E7- E)- E;- E*- ,2- *E- 11+- +;- 1)*J i2petus to 3rientalis2-
1;1-1;2-1E7-1+1-2)E-2,,-)71 22- =2- =)- =*0;7- ;1- ;2- E=- +E
%roeber- A! '!- 2*, ++- *2- *,- 121- 1);0E- )17J Jones
MHubla Hhan and the !all o# %eru' and- ;1- +;- ++0*J and 2anifest
salemM F"hafferG- 1,- )2* 3rientalis2- 27EJ 3rientalist ide
%uchu6 (ane2- E- 1,E0+- 1,,- 27+ ology applied to- )27- )21J recon
%uhn- 1ho2as- 2+; struction of- and colonialis2- 12-
%uwait- )2) *2- 12)J #enan and- =)- ,,- 1))-
1)E-1)*0=)-1=;-1=*-2)1J
'a #onciEre 'e /oury- Baron spiritual use to Europe- =*0;7-
Ca2ille de- 21* 11;- 121- 2;E0+- ) ) 1J study of as
'acoste- I>es- 2EE- );7 instru2ent of propaganda- 2*20)-
'a2artine- Alphonse de- 1*- 2)- ,1- ))1J in estern curricula- =*0;7-
,,- **- 111- 1+7- 1+E- 1++0,1- ;)-*E-17+-1E;0E-2*2-)2=-))1J
1*1-1*)-21E-2)1-2==-2,E-)=1 estern ilaboratoryi for- 1)*-
'a2ennais- FE1icitE0#obert de- 11= 1=7- 1=10)- 1=;0E! 4ee also spe
(and o# Midian Revisited, The cific languages and language
FBurtonG- 1*= fa2ilies
'ane- Edward illia2- ,- 1*- ;1- **- 'aroui- Abdullah- 2*+0,- )=,
111-1E*-1+=-1*7-22=-2=E-2,E- 'asswell- (arold- 17+- 2*20)- ));-
)=1- )=*J and assu2ptions of )=,
latent 3rientalis2- 27E- 22)J and latent 3rientalis2: iclassicali e2
citationary growth of 3rientalis2- phasis of- 222J constancy of- 27E-
1+E0+J contrasted with Burton- 27,J con>erges with 2anifest
1;,- 1;*- 1+701- 1*=J contrasted 3rientalis2- 2220=J elaborated in
with "acy and #enan- 1*)J disen0 i2perial agents- 22=J of fi>e Isla2ic
gage2ent fro2 Egyptian life- 1E)0 scholars- 27*017J and i2perialis2-
1E=-1E,-1+7-1+)-1,,-2))-2=7- 2210=J racist assu2ptions of- 27E
2=2- 2=EJ edits 3rient for Euro0 27+J rooted in geography- 21EJ
pean sensibility- 1EE0+- 27+J and se4ist assu f 2ptions of- 27+0,
English priority- 1,- ,,J e4e2pli0 'awrence- 1! E!- **- 2)+- 2=;- 2=E-
fies scientific purpose of 3riental 2+7- 2++- )1*- )=;- )=+J colonial
)E7
authority with (ashi2ites- 2=EJ 'oc6e- John- 1)
contrasted with Burton- 1*;J defi0 (ois psychologi3ues de lI@volution
nition and >ision in narrati>e of- des peuples, (es F'e .onG- 27+
22,0*- 2)*- 2=7- 2=+J i2perial 'ondon ?ni>ersity "chool of 3rien
agent- 1*E- 22=- 22;- 2),- 2=701- tal and African "tudies- 21=
2=EJ 3rientalis2 as sensational (ong Revolution, The Fillia2sG-
re>elation in- 2,=J personal >ision 1=-)2*
of- 2=1- 2=20)- 2=,J and pri2iti>e 'orrain- Claude- 1+,
clarity of the Arab- 22*0)1J re0 'oti- &ierre- **- 2;2
>erse pilgri2age of- 1+701J (ouis (ambert FBalAacG- 1)1- ))+
struggle to arouse 3rient- 2=102 'ouis0&hilippe- 2*=
'ayard- Austen- 1*; 'ouys- &ierre- 27,
'e Bon- 5usta>e- 27+ 'owth- #obert- 1+
'e Mascrier- AbbE- ,= 'ugard- Frederic6 .ealtry- Ist
'e "trange- 5uy- 22= Baron 'ugard- 21)
'ebanon- 1- 17*- 1++- 1,2- 1*1- 1*2- i'uii F(ugoG- ,20)
)21 'u6acs- 5eorg- 2;*
'econte- Casi2ir- *7 i'ustful 1ur6- 1he-i ,
(egacy o# /slam, The F1*)1- ed! 'uther- Martin- E1- +1
Arnold and 5uillau2eG- 2;E- )=E 'yall- "ir Alfred Co2yn- ),- =+- 1;1
'egrain- 5eorges- 1+7 'yall- "ir Charles Ja2es- 22=
'eibnitA- Baron 5ottfried ilhel2 'ycurgus- ,;
>on-12=-12;
'eopardi- Conte 5iaco2o- 1)1 Macaulay- 1ho2as Babington- 1=-
'epanto- battle of- += 1;2-1*E-)=7
'epic- 'udo>ic- 1+7 Macdonald- .uncan Blac6- 17;- 17E-
'erner- .aniel- )11- ));- )=* 27*- 217- 2=+- 2=,- 2+E0,- 2,7-
'eroy0Beaulieu- &aul- 21* 2,)-))2-)=+
'esseps- Ferdinand0Marie de- ,,0*2- Maeterlinc6- Maurice- 2;7
*=0;-1=,-21,-21*-227-))= Magic !lute, The FMoAartG- 11,
'esseps- Mathieu de- ,* Mahdis2- 2,1
(ettres dTgypte, de >ustave !lau' Mahomet FBoltaireG- )))
bert, (es Fed! /aa2anG- )=2 iMaho2etgesangi F5oetheG- 177
'E>i- "yl>ain- 2=,0*- 2;7- 2E=- 2EE- Mallar2E- "tEphane- 2E+
)=E Malrau4- Andrr- 2=,
'E>i0"trauss- Claude- ;)- 2*E- ))1 Ma2elu6es- ,2
'e>in- (arry- 1,=- )=2 Mande>ille- "ir John- )1- ;,
'ewis- Bernard- 17;- 17+- )1;021- 2anifest 3rientalis2- 27E- 27*J con
))2-));-))E-)=)-)=*-);7 >erges with latent 3rientalis2-
'ibya- )2= 2220=
(i#e o# Mahomet FMuirG- 1;1 Mani#esto F/apoleonG- 12=
'innaeus- Carolus- 11* Mannhei2- %arl- 2;*
i'iteraturei F5ibbG- 2;E Mans- #aphael du- E;
literature- i2aginati>e: contrasted Manu- +,- 127
with professional 3rientalis2- Ma3amat Fal0(aririG- 12E
1;+0,- 1E,0*- 1+701- 1,1- 1,)- Marcus- "te>en- ,- )2*
1,*- 1*2J English 3rientalist con0 Marcus Aurelius- 1=+
trasted with French- 1*20)J and Margoliouth- .a>id "a2uel- 22=
3riental residence- 1;+0,J 3rien0 Mariette- Auguste0gdouard- 1+7
talist genre of- 20)- ,- 1,- 21- 22- Marigny- Frangois Augier de- ,7
2E-=7-=)-;20)-E7-,,-**-1770 Maritain- Jac9ues and #aissa- 2EE
172-1;+0,-1E+0*-1+70E-1++0 Marlowe- Christopher- E)
1*7-1*20=-22=-2;E-2E+-2,=J Marlowe- John- ,*- ))7- ))=
and pilgri2age to 3rient- 1E,0*- Maronites- 1*1- 227- 2+,- )7)
1+7- 1+10;- 1++0*7- 1*20)J polit0 Marra6ech- 2;1
ical bearing on- *011- 1=01;- 2=- Mar4- %arl- )-1=- 1E- 21- )2- *+-
1E*J social0cultural constraints 172-1;)0E-1;+-27E-2)1-2*)-
upon- =)- 1E*- 27102! 4ee also )2;-)=7
indi>idual writers Mar4is2- 1)- =)- )7;- )2;
)E1
Maspero- "ir 5aston- 1+7 +1-+2-+=-,2-17=-127-1;102-
Massignon- 'ouis- 2;,- 2E2- 2+,- 27*-2)E-2E,-2,7-2,+0,-)72
2*1- 2*E- ));- )=E- )=+J Christian Mohammedanism F5ibbG- 2,7- )=+
co2passion in- 2+1J co2bines Mohl- Jules- ;102- 2*;- ))*
scholarship and spiritual intuition- Mongols- 1E;- )71- ) )1
2E;- 2EE- 2,7- 2,)J on el0(alla@- Montes9uieu- Baron de la Brrdc et
17=-27*-2=E-2E=-2E,0*-2+2J de- 11*- 1))
influence of- 2+=J @oins scholarship Moore- 1ho2as- 11,
with co22it2ent to i>ital forces-i MoraAE- Charles- 11)
2E;- 2E+J and national tradition- Morier- Ja2es Justinian- 1*)
2E)0=- 2EE- 2+1J outsider- 2+;J Morse- "a2uel F!- 2*=
political role of- 217- 2E+J struc0 MoAart- olfgang A2adeus- 11,
ture and ideas of- 2E,0+7J as Mugniery- 'eon- )11
stylist- 2EE- 2E+- 2,=J unorthodo4 Muhammedanisches Recht F"achauG-
>iew of Isla2- 2=E- 2E+- 2E,- 2+2J 2;;
wea6ness of- 2+102 Muir- "ir illia2- **- 1;1- 22=
Massis- (enri- 2;7 Mfiller- Friedrich Ma4- 1,- 2=E- 2;2-
Masson03ursel- &!- 217- )=) )),0*
Matter o# $raby in Medieval Eng' Musli2s: see Arabs- Isla2
land, The FMetlitA6iG- 1E- )2*
Maugha2- ! "o2erset- 1*7 /apoleon 1- 1+- ;2- 12=- 1E*- 1+*-
Mauss- Marcel- 2EE 21+J and birth of 2odern 3riental
Mecca- +=- 1;1- 1+1- 1*;- 1*E- 2)* is2- ,+J 3rientalist and te4tual
Mel>ille- (er2an- 1*2-2*7 i2petus of- ,702- ,)- ,=- *=0;-
Mencius on the Mind F#ichardsG- 1+7J significance of Egyptian in
2;=-)=E >asion- 22- =20)- +E- +*- ,70,- ,*-
Merton- #obert %!- )22- );7 122-12E-1)+-1==-1;E-1E,-1+1J
ME"A Bulletin- 2,,- )=, sy2pathetic identification with
Mesopota2ia- **- 227- 22; 3rient- ,2- 11,- )))
MetlitA6i- .orothee- 1E- )2* /apoleon 111- 2*)
Metternich- &rince Cle2ens 'othar /asser- 5a2al Abdel- *1
enAel- 2*= /ear East: see /ear 3rient
Michaelis- Johann .a>id- 1+ Near East and the >reat Powers,
Michel- &! Charles- 2)) The Fed! FryeG- 2+;- )=+- )=,
Michelet- Jules- +)- *;- 11=- 1)=- /ear Eastern "tudies F&rincetonG-
1)+0,-1=+ 2,,
Middle Ages- ;*- E102- E)- +7- 2,+ /ear 3rient: A2erican policy and-
Middle East: see /ear 3rient 2- 2E0+- 2*=0;- )21- )220=J Arab
Middle East Institute- 2*1- 2*; Israeli relations in- 2E0+- 17+- 2+7-
Middle East "tudies Association 2,E- 2,+- )7E0,- )1,01*J chief
FME"AG- 2,,- 2*; Anglo0French encounter with
iMiddle Eastern and /orth African 3rient- 1+- 2E- =1- **0177- 271-
"tudiesi FBergerG- 2,,- )=, 227J Christian pri2acy of- ;*- +=-
Middlemarch FEliotG- 1,01*- )2*- 1+7- 2E7J connection to Anglo
)== French interest in Far East- 1+-
Mill- Ja2es- 21= 1*2J conte2porary scholarship on-
Mill- John "tuart- 1=- 21=- 22, 2,,0*)-2*E0)7;-)7+021-)=*-
Milner- Alfred- I st Biscount Milner- );7J French colonial a2bition in-
)1 ,1- 1)+- 22701- 22=0;J reducti>e
Milton- John- E) categories for- 2)* 2*E0*J "2ith
Mimesis FAuerbachG- 2;,0*- )=E on- 2)=0EJ stereotyped conte2
iMinutei FMacaulayG- 1;2- )=7 porary >iew of- 2E0+- 2E2- 2,;0,-
Modern Egypt FCro2erG- ),- 212- )770;- )7E021J in 1hird orld-
))7-)=) =E- )7=J tra>elers to est fro2-
Modern /slam F>on 5runebau2G- 27=! 4ee also Arabs- Egypt- Isla2
)=, /er>al- 5Erard de- 1- ,- 1*- 2)- ;)-
Modern Trends in /slam F5ibbG- 11- **-172-1*1-1*)-2==-))=-)=1-
17;0E-2,7-2,102-));-)=+ )=2J and citationary nature of
Moha22ed- ;*- E7- E2- E;0E- E,0*- 3rientalis2- 1+E- 1++J e4e2plifies
)E2
personal aesthetic in "rientalist &KT'U, &K:, RR&5 crisis in, &9K'@,
writing, &T:, &U:, &U@, &89, &8@, R9T, RK@'T95 current dogmas o#,
&:9' &5 and #emale types, &:9, &:R, S99'R, S&@5 de#initions o#, &'U,
&:K5 imagination o# "rient dis' &R, K&, KR, T&, 8S, @R, @T, &R&,
appointed, &99, &9&, &:&, &:K, R9R'S5 demarcation o# East and
RKS5 importance to "rientalism, )est in, S@'K9, KR, KS, KT'@, TU,
&:&, &:S5 internal dream world, T8,8S,@U,R9&,R9U,R&U,RR8'S9,
&:S'K5 Nourney contrasted with RK:,RT9,RTS,RTU,RT8,RT@,RU@'
2hateaubriandIs, &:S5 MassignonIs R89,R88,R@@,S99'&,S9U'8,S9:
predilection #or, RU85 meaning o# S9@, SR85 essentialist vision o#, @8,
"rient to, &:9'K, &@9, R9U5 nega' &9R':,&K:,&TK'T,&TU,R9S,R9T,
tive vision o# "rient, &:K5 "rien' R9@'&9,RR&,RRS,RR@'SK,RSU'K9,
talist constraints upon, KS RKU,RK:,RT&,RTT,RTU,RUR,
Nestorians, RR9 R8:':9,R:S,R@U'@,S99'&,S9T,
Newman, %ohn .enry, 2ardinal, &K, S9U'&9,S&T, Y&&8'&:, SR&, SRR,
&TS,RR:,SK9 SK@, ST95 eCteriority o#, R9'&, :U
Nicholas o# 2usa, U& :8, @8, &9K, &9T':, &&:, &R8, &UR,
Niet6sche, !riedrich )ilhelm, &S&, RR@'S9, RS:, RK8':5 general and
&SR,R9S,R9K,SS8,SKS particular perspectives on, :, && \
Nicholson, Reynold $lleyne, RRK &R, &S'&T, T95 in interwar years,
Nile, &UR, &8K, &:8 RK:'TK, RTT'8R5 as mode o# )est
NU&deke, Theodor, &:, R9@ ern dominance, S, T'U, 8, &&, &S,
North $#rica, &@, TR, 8K, @@, &@&, &T, RT, R:, S&'K&, KU, K:, TS, U9,
R&9, R&:, RRS, RRT, R8:, R::, R@T, 8S, :9'&, :U'8, @R, @K'U, &9K,
S9S,S9K &9:'@,&RR'S,&K&,&KU,&TR'S,
Notes of a %ourney fro2 2ornhill to &U9, &UU, &8@, &@R'K, &@T, &@8,
>rand Cairo JThackeray+, &@T R9K, RRR'K, RRT, RS&'K, RKU, RTS
Nouty, .assan al', &89, SK& RTK,S9&,S9U,S9@'&&,SR&'T5
Novalis, &&T moderni6ation o#, KS, T&, 8S, 8U
8@,:U'8,@R,@T,&&U,&R9'S,&RK,
M"bNects o# En3uiry During My &R8,&R@'S9,&TU,&@8,R&9,RTT
Residence in $siaM J%ones+, 8: R:K5 retrogressive position o# /s
"I1rien, 2onor 2ruise, S&R lamic, RU9'S, RU@'89, R8:':9,
M"ccident and the "rient, TheM R@U':, S99'T, S98'R&5 schernati
J2hirol+, RTR'S, SKT 6ation o# "rient, U:'8R, :9, :S,
M"ccident devant /I"rient, (I :T'8,@T,@:'@,&99':,&KU':,
JMassignon+, RU8, SKU &K@'T9, &TK'T, &TU, &:@, R9@,
"ckley, 4imon, US, UK, 8T'U RR@'S9, RS@, S99'&5 on 4emitic
"mar &, 8K, &8R cultural decadence, &K&, &KT'U,
"n (iberty JMill+, &K R9:,RS&'K,RSU'8,RU9,R:@,S99
"rder o# Things, The J!oucault+, S9&, S9U'85 supplies agents and
RR,SSU,SS: eCpertise to Empire, &@U'8, RRR
"riental literature, 8:, @U, &9T, S9T5 RRT,RR:'S&,RSK,RS8'KU,R:K,
anthologies o# eCtracts #rom, R9, SR&, SRR5 three senses o#, R'U. 4ee
UK,&RT,&R:'@,&S9,&KR,&K8, also scholarship, "rientalist
&T%, &UT, &8U, R:S, R:K5 avoided M"rientalism in 2risisM J$bdel
in social'scientist "rientalism, R@&5 Malek+, SSK, SST, SKU
>ibb on, RTU'8, R885 Min#inityM o#, "rientali6ing, o# "rient, T'U, UT'8,
885 Hinglake on, &@S5 and man' @U, &9K, &9@, &TT, &U:, &:&, R9R,
i#est "rientalism, R9U5 Massignon SR:5 by modern "rient o# itsel#,
and, R9@, RUK, RUU5 Nerval emu' SRT
lates, &:R, &:S5 poetry, @U, &R:, "rwell, >eorge, RT&'R, SKT
&U:, &8:, R9@, RTU5 religious, R8@5 "thello J4hakespeare+, 8&
tale in, SR, TR5 value to )est o#, "ttoman Empire, T@'U9, 8K, 8T, 8U,
&R:, RTU'85 )estern tribute to, &U: &99, &@&, R98, RR9, RRT, RK:, RTS
"rientales, (es J.ugo+, T&, &9&, M9U sIa##rontent /I"rient et X"cci
&U8,SSS,SK& dent intellectuelsM J1aldensperger+,
"rientalism< creates "rient, T, K9, RTS,SKU
:8, @K, &R&, &R@'S9, &K9, &KS, "wen, Roger, SR8, SS9, SK:, ST9
)E)
34ford ?ni>ersity- ;7- ;)- +E- 21)- Philosophy o# 4t. Thomas $3uinas,
2+;- )2) The F5ilsonG- 2;=
3Aana2- Antoine0FrEdEric- 1=+ &ic6ering- John- 2*=
&ic6thall- Mar2adu6e illia2- 2;2
&a6istan- 217- 2,;- )7= &icot- 5eorges- 227
&alestine- 2;0,- 171- log- 1+2 1++- &iranesi- 5ia2battista- 11,
1+,- 1*2- 2;1- 2+7- 2,E- 2*r- )7E- &irenne- (enri- +701- )))
)1, &itt- illia2- ++
&algra>e- illia2 5ifford- 1*+ &ius 11- &ope- E1
&al2er- Edward (enry- **- 1*E0+- &lato- E*- ,=- ,;
22) &liny- 2E1
&ani66ar- %- M!- ;- )2* &oc6o6e- Edward- E;
&aracelsus- &bilippus Aureolus- 1* Poema del 2id, E)- +1
&aris- 1+- 1*- ;7- ;1- ++- *,- 227- &olia6o>- ?on- **- ))=
22;- 2E1 political 6nowedge- *011J bearing on
Passage to /ndia, $ FForsterG- 2==- literature and culture- 12- 1=01;-
)=; 2=J in 3rientalis2- 11- )2- );- )E-
&atai- #aphael- )7,0*- )11- )12- )=* ) ,0=1- =)- =;- ;)- E7- ,1- ,=0+-
Peau de 2hagrin, (a FBalAacG- 1)*- *2- *=0+- 117- 1E*- 1*;- 1*+- 27=-
)) , 217-2)7-2*=-2**-)1E-)1,-)2+
&eloponnesian ar- ;+ &ol6- illia2- 2+=0;- )=;- )=+
Penetration o# $ rahia, The F(e0 &olo- Marco- ;,
garthG- 22=- )== &ope- Ale4ander- )1- =;
&ersia- 7- 1,- ;*- +;- +E- ++- )7; &ortugal- 1- 1+- +)- +;
&ersian FlanguageG- E=- ++- +,- ,)- &ostel- 5uillau2e- ;1- E;
*, &ound- EAra- 2;2
Persians, The FAeschylusG- 21- ;E- &oussin- /icolas- 1+,
))2 &raA- Mario- 1,7- )=1
Personal Narrative o# a Pilgrimage to &rester John- E)
al'Madinah and Meccah FBurtonG- &rideau4- (u2phrey- +2
,,-1;,-1*)-1*E-)=) &rinceton ?ni>ersity- ;)- 2,;- 2,,-
&eter the Benerable- +1 2*E-)=*
&eters- Carl- 27+ Principes de grammaire gMYrale
&hilby- (arry "t! John Bridges- 1*+! F"acyG- 12;- 12E
22=-2);-2)+- 2=E Prison Notebooks, The F5ra2sciG-
philology: and biological idegrada0 2;-)2*0)7
tion of types-i 1=)0;J central to Protocols o# the Elders o# Lion, The,
2ode2 6nowledge- 1)20)J co20 )7E
parati>e discipline- 11+- 1)7- 1)2- &roudhon- &ierre Joseph- 11=
1=7- 1=2- 1=)- 1;2J disco>ers hu0 &roust- Marcel- 1=;- 2*)- )=,
2an pheno2enon of language- &udney- John- ))=
1);0EJ Jonesfs contribution to- &ythagoras- ,=- ,;
+,0*- *,J /ietAsche on- 1)102J
racial conco2itant of- **- 1))0=- HaAAaA- Ayad aZ0- )=
1=102-1=;0E-1=,-1;7-22+-2)10 Huatre2Ere- &0tienne0Marc- 1)*- 1+7-
2)=J re>italiAed in interwar years- )),
2;,- 2E1- 2E2J re>olution in- *,- Huinet- Edgar- =2- +;- +*- 11)- 1)+-
1;2J scientific character of- 22- =7- 1),-1=+-1,7-2+7-))1-)))
+;- *,- **- 121- 122- 1)7- 1)1-
1)20)- 1)=- 1),- 1)*- 1=7- 1=2- racial theory: adopted by latent 3ri
1=E0,- 1=*- 1;7- ))*: strategic entalis2- 27E0+J and Arab &ales
for2ation within 3rientalis2- 27- tinian in est- 2+- 2,;0+J of
;2- *,J wea6 position in A2erican Balfour- )=0;- )EJ biological bases
3rientalis2- 2*1- )2701 of- 27E- 2)10)J in classical world-
i&hilology and )eltliteraturM ;+J conco2itant of co2parati>e
FAuerbach- trans! M! and E! ! linguistics- **- 1=,- 2)102J of
"aidG- )=E Cro2er- )E0*J and l,th0century
Philosophie anatomi3ue JE. 5eof0 classification into types- 11*- 127J
froy "aint0(ilaireG- 1==- ))*- )=7 and e2piricis2- 1)- 2)20)J
)E=
founded in language types and Reng FChateaubriandG- 1+=
prototypes- 2)10=- 2E2J 5ibb Report on 2urrent Research FMiddle
opposes- 2+,r in>o6es generality of East InstituteG- 2*2
origins- 2)=J in %ingla6e- 1*)J Representative >overnment FMillG-
3rientalis2 and- +0,- 1;- 22- 2+- 1=
)=- =)- *2- *E- *+- 17+- 1;=0;- i#etreat fro2 the "ecular &athLi
27=-)7;-)7E01,-)22-)2;-)2+- FAbu0'ughodG-));
)2,- )=*J produces hite Man- i#eturn of Isla2- 1hei F'ewisG-
22E0,J of #enan- ,- 1;- )*- =)- )1E-));-);7
**-1))0=-1=102-1=;0E-1=,- i#E>esi F#enanG- 1=+
1=*0;7-1;1-1;;-1+7-22+-2)10 i#e>olt of Isla2- 1hei F'ewisG- )1E-
2)2-2)=-2,*-)7E-))+-))*Jof );7
"chlegel- *,0*J studies of- ))*J Revolution in the Middle East Fed!
1rilling on- 2)2J and Bictorian Bati6iotisG- )1201)- );7
i2perialis2- 1=- 27E0+ #ichards- 1! A!- 2;=- )=E
#A/. Corporation- 2*;- )=* #ichards- B! !- 22,
#an6e- 'eopold >on- *;- 27,- )7= #obertson- J! M!- )1- )2
#aphael- E* #odinson- Ma4i2e- 2;*- 2EE- )2E
regeneration: of Asia by Europe- )2+-));-))E-);7
1;=- 1;,- 1+2- 27EJ of Europe by Romantic $gony, The F&raAG- 1,7-
Asia- 11)- 11=- 11;J in 1*th0 )=1
century #o2anticis2- 11=0;- 1E, #o2anticis2: and biology- 1==J of
Regne animal, (e FCu>ierG- ;)- 27E Byron and "cott- 1*2J of Chateau
#einaud- Joseph- 12) briand- 1+2J of Flaubert and /er
Religious $ttitude and (i#e in /slam, >al- 1,7J 5er2an- E+- 2;EJ in
The FMacdonaldG- 2=+- 2+E- )=+ Mar4fs conception of 3rient- 1;=J
#E2usat- Jean0&ierre0Abel- **- )), and 2odern Isla2- 2,1J and
#enaissance- +- ;2- E7- E1- +2- ++- 3rient as e4otic locale- 11,J of 3ri
17=-11E-2,7-)7) entalist drea2 betrayed- 177- 1,=J
Renaissance orientale, (a F"chwabG- 3rientalist roots in- 1)7J and post
1E-;1-11;-1)+-)2*-))1-)))- Enlight2ent >ersions of Christian
)),-))* rede2ption- 11=01;- 1),- 1;=-
#enan- Ernest- E- 2)- 1;E- 1;+- 1E,- 1;,- 1E,- 1+2- 1,;- 1*+J "chlegel
1+7-1,1-1*)-1*+-27E-211-222- on 3rient as purest for2 of- *,-
2);-2=E-2EE-2++-2,E-2*E-)),- 1)+J "haffer on- 1,J and theory of
)=7J adapts 3rientalis2 to philol0 frag2ents- 12,
ogy- 1)701J artificial creation of- #o2e- ;+- +7- +=- ,=- ,,- 11+- 1E,-
1),- 1=7- 1=1- 1=;0,J and Chris0 1+1-1++-1,)-2;701
tianity- 1)=0;- 1),- 1=7- 1=E- 1=+J #osetta "tone- 121- 1=7
detail in- ;- 1)=J espouses anti0 #oss- E! .!- 22=
dynastic tenets of new philology- #ousseau- Jean0Jac9ues- 11*- 12;-
1)E- 1)*J essentialist >iew of Is0 1),-1=+-1+,
la2- 17;- 2)10=J ilaboratoryi of- #oyal Asiatic "ociety- =)- +*- **-
1)*-1=7-1=10)-1=;0E-1=,-2,)J 1E=
on language- 1),J and 2ale con0 Rubdiyiit o# "mar Hhayyam FFitA
ception of world- 1=E0+- 27+- )=7J 5eraldG- 1*)
and 2odern 3rientalist structures- #us6in- John- 1=- 22,
122- 1)70=,- 2,*J and natural #ussia- 1- 17011- 1+- 2E- 177- 17=-
science- 1)20)- 1),0*- 1=1- 1=2- 1*1-1*=-21;-22;-22*
1=)- 1=;0E- 1=+- 2)2J parado4ical
positions of- 1))0=- 1=;J on
philology- 1)20)- 1)=0;- 1)*01 "achau- Eduard- 2;;
racial ideas of- ,- 1;- )7- =) f ** "acy- Antoine0Isaac- Baron "il>estre
1))0=-1=102-1=E-1=,-1=*0;7- de- ,- 2)- *,- 1)E- 1)*- 1=+- 1;2-
1;1-1;;-1+7-22+0,-2)102-2)=- 1E,-1++-1,1-1*)-2=E-2,=-))E-
2=)- 2,*- ))+- ))*J on role of sci0 ))+- )=1J canoniAes the 3rient-
ence- 1=7J studies "e2itic lan0 12*J co2pilatory wor6- 12;0+-
guages- =)- ,,- 1))- 1)*0=)- 1=;- 1;E0+- 2,)J first 2odern and in
1=*-2)102
)E;
"acy0continued participation in 3rient- 1E701-
stitutional 3rientalist- 1,- ,)- 12+- 1E)J and /apoleonic in>asion of
12*- 1)7J frag2ents- theory of- Egypt- ,70+- *=J ioriginali cate
12,0*-1)7-1=2-1=+-1;1-2,)0=J gories of- 2)20=- 2)+J orthodo4
and generaliAation of 3rient- 12;- su22a of- )720;- );7J philology
12E- 1=*0;7J lin6s scholarship and and race in- *,0*- 1))0=- 1=102-
public policy- t2=- 22)J and 1=;0E-1=,-1=*0;7-27E0+-2)1
2odern 3rientalist structures- 122- 2)=: role in postcolonial world-
1)7- 1+E- 1*+J on i2useurn-i 1E;0 2+;0E- )2;0,J scope of- =*0;2-
1EEJ as pedagogue- 1,- ,)- 12)0,- ,E0+- *2- *,- 11+- 1);0+- 1E;-
12*- 2,=J rationality in- 12;- 12*J 1*1- 27=- 217J social0cultural con
as translator- 12=- 12E- 12+ straints upon- 27102J itruthi in-
"aid- Edward !- )2*- )=2 27)0=- 2+2- )27J unity in- 2 17J
"aint0"i2on- Co2te de- 11= >ocabulary of power and ac9uisi
"a6untala F%alidasaG- *, tion in- 12+- 1E7! "ee also dis
"aladin- E*- 171- 2E+ courseJ e4pertise- 3rientalistJ
"ala22M FFlaubertG- 11- ,,- 1,1- 3rientalis2J philology
1,=-1,;-1,E-1,+-)=2 "chool of Athens- 1he F#aphaelG- E*
"ale- 5eorge- E)- E=- 11+- 1E, "chopenhauer- Arthur- ( ;- 1)1
"alisbury- 'ord: see Cecil "chwab- #ay2ond- 1E- 1,- ;1- +E0+-
"ans6rit- 1+- =2- ;1- +;- +,0*- *E- 11;-1)+-2;2-)2*-))1-)))-)),-
*,- 127- 1)E0+- 1)*- 1=*- 2=,- ))*
2*= "cott- "ir alter- =)- E7- **- 17102-
"aracens- E7- E1- +=- 171 1;+-1E*-1*2-2E+-))=
"assanids- 1,- 12; "EA13- 17,
"aud- house of- 2=E "Egalen- Bictor- 2;2
"audi Arabia- )2) "elf0.eter2ination and (istory in
"aulcy- 'ouis0FE1icien0Joseph de- 1+7 the 1hird orld F5ordonG- 2*,-
"aussure- 'eopold de- 27+ )=,
"caliger- Joseph Justus- E; "e2ites- 1))- 1=7- 2=1J and Aryan
"chelling- Friedrich ilhel2 Joseph 2yth- **- 2E,J bifurcate into 3ri
>on-1=+-1;7 ental and 3rientalist- 2,E- )7+J
"chlegel- Friedrich- 1*- 2)- ;1- *,- .oughty on- 2),J present and
11;-1)+-1;7-2E,-2++-))=-))* origin seen together in- 2)=0E-
scholarship- 3rientalist: beco2es in0 2)+J as reducti>e- transindi>idual
stru2ental attitude- 2),0*- 2=E- type- 2)70=- 2)*- 2=7- 2+7- 2,*-
2;)0=- 2,;- 2*7- )21J Burtonfs )7EJ #enan on- 1=102- 1=;- 1=*-
>ictory o>er- 1*=- 1*E- 1*+J codi0 2)=- 2=)- 2,*- ))+J represented to
fication of- ++0*- 12+- 1,*J and estern audience- 2*)J retrogres
co2parati>e attitude- 1=*0;7J si>e position of study of- 2EJ02J
connections to interwar hu2anistic "2ithfs de2ythologiAing of- 2);!
studies- 2;,0*- 2E7- 2E1- 2E2J "ee also anti0"e2itis2- Arabs-
cu2ulati>e identity of- 12)- 1E;0E- Isla2- Jews
1E*- 272- 217- 22102: and debased "e2itic languages- =)- ;1- +=- +;- ,,-
iob@ecti of study- *E0+- 22,0*- *,-1))-1)E-1)*0=)-1=;0E-1=*-
2))0=- )1*J disse2ination of- 1E=0 2)102-2);-2E2-2E;-2E,-2*=
1E;- 1*701- 221J focus on classical "enart- E2ile- 2;7
periods- ;2- +*- ,7- *2- 27=- 2)2- "e>en &illars of isdo2- 1he
2))- )77J fosters colonialis2- )*- F'awrenceG- 2),0*- )=;
=1- ,701- ,E0+- *=0E- 177- 217- "haffer- E! "!- 1,- )2*
22)J geographical deno2ination "hahid- Erfan- )72
of- ;7- )22: her2eneutical relation "ha6espeare- illia2- )1- E)- +1
to 3rient-22- 2;;J and indi>idual0 "hifites- 2E;- )7)
istic agents of e2pire- 1*=0+- 22=- "houby- E!- )27
2)+0,J institutional progra2s of- "icily- ;*- +;- )7=
1E=0;- 1*1J latent assu2ptions of- "il>estre de "acy- ses conte2porains
27;017J le4icography of- 1;- E;- et ses disciples F.ehErainG- )))-
121- 1;;- 1;E- 1E)- 1E=- 1EE- 27)J ))E
2irror i2age in- 27*J as 2oc6 "i2ar- 1hEophile- ))*
)EE
i"ir (a2ilton 5ibb Between 3rien0 Tableau histori3ue de ,erudition
talis2 and (istoryi F&ol6G- 2+=0 #ranYaise, 12E0+- ))E
2+;- )=+ i1ale of the Caliph (a6i2i F/er>alG-
"2ith- illia2 #obertson- 2)=0E- 1,)
2(-2+7-2++-)==0; i1ale of the Hueen of the Morning-
4ocial Evolution F%iddG- 2)) 1hei F/er>alG- 1,)
"ocial "cience #esearch Council- 2,, Talisman, The F"cottG- 17t- 1*2- ))=
social sciences- )2;J and tradition of 1alleyrand0&Erigord- Charles0Mau
authority o>er 3rient- 1*- =,0*- rice de- ,7
17,-17*-2,=-2,,0*)-2*E-)21J Tancred F.israeliG- ;- 172- 1E*- 1*2
Europocentris2 of- *+J interdis0 1asso- 1or9uato- E)- 1+,
ciplinary with 3rientalis2- 17+- Temperament and 2haracter o# the
)7;J on /ear East- 2,,0*)J itypesi $rabs F(a2adyG- )7*017- )=*-
in-2;*0E7 );7
"ociEtE acadE2i9ue indo0chinoise- 1e2ple- Charles- 27+
21, Tentation de 4aint $ntoine, (a
"oci#E asiati9ue- =)- ;1- **- 12=- FFlaubertG- 1,1- 1,=- 1,;- 1,+-
1E;-227-2=, 1,,-1**-2*1-))*-)=2
"ociEtE de gEographie de &aris- 21+0 i1er2inal Essayi FBurtonG- 1*E-
21, )=)
"oe22erring- "a2uel 1ho2as >on- te4tual attitude- *20)J in 1ouvard et
11* PZuchet, 11=- 1,*J in 2ambridge
"oli2ans- pre0Ada2ite- E= .istory o# /slam, )7;J dialectic of
"olon- ,=- ,; reinforce2ent in- *=J disenchant
"orbonne- 1)= 2ent with 2odern 3rient- 17701-
"outhern- #! !- ;;- E102- ))1- ))2 17)J in 3rientalis2- *=0;- 1;E0+-
4ouvenirs dIen#ance et de Neunesse 1,*J transition to ad2inistrati>e
F#enanG-))+-)), practice- *E- 217- 22)- 2),0*- 2=E-
"o>iet ?nion- *- 17011- 17=- 2* 1- 2;)0=
2*2! 4ee also #ussia 1hac6eray- illia2 Ma6epeace! 1*;
space- ;=0;- 1E+- 21701)- 21*- 2)= thawra, )1=01;
"pain- 1- 1+- ;*- +=- ,2- *)- )7=- )1; 1hiry- Jean- ,7- )))
"pengler- 3swald- 27, 1ho2as- 'owell- 2=)
"pitAer- 'eo- 2;, 1iepolo- 5io>anni Battista- 11,
"tanhope- 'ady (ester 'ucy- 1++- ti2e- ;;- 1E+- 2)1- 2)=
2=E 1oc9ue>ille- Ale4is de- *
"teinthal- (ey2ann- 1,- ** 1ournefort- Joseph &itton de- 11+
"tendhal- 1+1 1ranscaspian #ailroad- 1*1
"te>ens- allace- ; 1ranscendental ists- 2*7
"to6es- Eric- 21=- )=) Travels in $rabia Deserta F.oughtyG-
"torrs- #onald- 1*+- 2)+- 2=E 2)+-)=;
i"tructure of #eligious 1hought in 1reaty of Chana6- 1*1
Isla2- 1hei F5ibbG- 2,)- )=; 1reaty of /an6ing- 2*=
4truggle #or ECistence in .uman 1rilling- 'ionel- 2)2- )==
4ociet 0 I- The F(u4leyG- 2)) truchement, 1EE
"ueA Canal- ,,0*1- *;- 1*)- 1*=- 227 True Nature o# /mposture !ully De
"ufi 2ysticis2- 2=E- 2EE- 2E*- 2+2 ployed in the (i#e o# Mahomet
"u2er- 127 F&rideau4G- +2
"unna-2=E-2E, 1uch2an- Barbara- 2,E
"urat- +E- ++ 1urgot- Anne0#obert0Jac9ues- 1=+
"wettenha2- "ir Ale4ander- 21) 1ur6ey- ;*- E=- **- 1,)- 21+- 227-
"winburne- Algernon Charles- 1,7 22)-2),-2=2-2;,
"y6es- "ir Mar6- 22701- 22;- 2)+ 1wain- Mar6- 177- 1;+- 1*2- 2*7
"yria- 1+- 1*- 2)- ;*- +E- **- 17*- 1yrrell- E22ett- 2,+- )=+
1*=-21+-227-22)-22=0;-2+,
4yrie, (a Fde Cai4G- )==
4ysteme compare et histoire ginirale =ber die 4prache und )eisheit der
des langues simiti3ues F#enan2, /ndier F"chlegelG- 1*- **- 1)+- ))=
,, ?C'A- 2*E- )2)
)E+
?nited "tates: Arab world satellite Boltaire- +E0+- *2- )))
of- )220=r ascendancy in East- )0 Bossler- %ar 1- 2;,
=- 11- 1+- 2;- 17=- 17+- 2*7- 2*)J ,oyage en tgypte et eii 4.vrie
awareness of 3rient- 1- 2- 11012- FBolneyG- ,1- )))
2E- 17+0,- 2;20)J cultural rela0 ,oyage en "rient F'a2artineG- ,,-
tions with East- 2*)0)72J geo0 111-1++0*-)=1
political identity >is0A0>is 3rient- ,oyage en "rient F/er>alG- 177-
11- 12J ideal of pure scholarship 1;,-1,70=-)=2
in- 17- 1)J i2perialist 9uality of
6nowledge in- It- 2*)0;- )2 1- aardenburg- Jac9ues- 27*017- 2E,-
)22J inherits 3rientalist tradition- )=)-)=E-)=+
E-=+0*-17+0,-2E=-2+;-2,=- afd party- 2;+
2,;0*)-2*;0)72-)7+021-)220=- agner- #ichard- 1)1
)=,J interest in Rionist coloniAa0 aley- Arthur- 2;2
tion of &alestine- 2*=- )=,J li2ited )andering 4cholar, The F(ogarthG-
e4perience with 3rient before 2=;-)=;
!! 11- 2*7J 3riental pilgri2s arburton- Eliot- 1E*- 1*;
fro2- 1*2- )=2J and 3rientalis2- eber- Ma4- 2;*- );7
E- 11- 12- 1;- 1E01+- 2;- =)J eil- 5usta>- **
3rientalist confidence of- =E0*- eiA2ann- Chai2- )7E
17+0,J popular i2age of Arab in- ellhausen- Julius- 27*
2E0+- 2,;0,J role in /ear 3rient- )eltgeschichte F#an6eG- 27,
2-2E0+-2*=0;-)21-)220=Jand est: see Europe- ?nited "tates
1hird orld- =E0+- 17=- 17+0,- esterniAation- in Isla2ic world-
)21 2+,-2+*-)7,0*-)210;
uni>ersities- Arab- )220) estla6e- John- 27E0+
=ntergang des $bendlandes, Der )estbstlicher Diwan F5oetheG- 1*-
F"penglerG- 27, ;1-1;=-1;;-1E+-)=1
?panishads- ++- *, histon- illia2- +E
utilitarianis2- and i2perialis2- 21=0 hite Man- 22E0)1- 2);0=)- 2=;0E
21; )hither /slamW Fed! 5ibbG- 2+,- )=+
ilde- 3scar- 1=;
il6ins- Charles- +,
BalEry- &aul- 2;701- 2;2- )=; illia2 of 1ripoli- +1
Balle- &ietro delta- ;, illia2s- #ay2ond- 1=- 2,- )2*- ))7
Barro- Marcus 1erentius- 1== ilson- oodrow- 221- 2;1
Barthe2a- 'odo>ico di- ;, olf- Friedrich August- 1)1- 1)2-
Bati6iotis- &! J!- )1201=- );7 1))
Battel- E2er de- 21E- )== ordsworth- illia2- 11;
&&Iergleichende >rammatik FBoppG- orld ar 1- 17=-17;- 12)- 227-
1); 22)-22=-2=7-2=E-2;;0E-2+7-
Berne- Jules- 21, 2,=-2*=
Bice- 5io>anni Battista- =- 2;- ;)- orld ar 11- =- 1+- 1,- ;)- 17+-
11+- 11,- 11*- 127- 1)2- 1))- 1)+- 2;;-2;,-2,=-2*7-2*;-2*+-2**
1),-1=+-1=,
,ico and .erder FBerlinG- ))E \er4es 1- ;E- ;+
Bictoria- Hueen- )1
,ictory FConradG- 1,E Ieats- illia2 Butler- 117- 2)7- 2;2-
,ie de Msus F#enanG- 1=E )==
Bietna2 ar- I I Ie2en- 17*
Bigny- Alfred0Bictor de- **- 1E* Ie2en- "outhern- 17*
,ingt'sept $ns dIhistoire des Zudes
orientales FMohlG- ;1 Raghlul &asha- "aad- 2;+
,isit to the Monasteries o# the Rend0A>esta- 1+- =2- +E0+- *,
(evant FCurAonG- 1*; Rionis2- 2+- 221- 2+7- 2+,- 2,E- 2*=-
Bog?e- Mar9uis de- 1+7 )71-)7)-)7E0+-)1,-)1*-)27-
Bolney- Constantin0Frangois de )=,
Chasseboeuf- )*- ,1- 1E,- 1E*- Roroastrianis2- 127- 2)2! 4ee also
1+7-))) Rend0A>esta
)E,
$bout the $uthor
Edward ! "aid- one of the countryfs 2ost distinguished
literary critics- is &arr &rofessor of English and Co2parati>e
'iterature at Colu2bia ?ni>ersity! (e was Bisiting &rofessor
in Co2parati>e 'iterature at (ar>ard and a Fellow of the
Center for Ad>anced "tudy in the Beha>ioral "ciences at
"tanford- and deli>ered the 5auss lectures in criticis2 at
&rinceton in 1*++! In 1*+E his boo6 1eginnings< /ntention
and Method won the first annual 'ionel 1rilling Award gi>en
at Colu2bia ?ni>ersity!
)E*
Also by Edward ! "aid
1(E H?E"1I3/ 3F &A'E"1I/E
In this study of one of the 2ost intractable of international proble2s- "aid for2ulates
a plea to the est to recogniAe the real proble2s of &alestine and its people-
particularly with reference to the &alestinian0Israeli war! 1o 2any IsraelJ s- &alestine
is not only a threat to national security- it is aiso an un2entionable sub@ect!
1heestern 2edia- "aid argues- ha>e largely concurred in the >iew of the &alestinian
as either a refugee- an e4tre2ist- or a terroristJ he shows that this deri>es fro2 an
entrenched cultural attitude towards &alestinians- re>ealing age0old pre@udices about
Isla2- the Arabs and the 3rient! 1here is no other way- as "aid shows- to e4plain how
funda2ental concepts of freedo2- such as self0deter2ination fro2 colonialis2- and
freedo2 of infor2ation- are denied the &alestinians in the councils of the est!
$vailable in cloth only
&rinted in 5reat Britain
For copyright reasons- this boo6 2ay not be sold or iss loan or otherwise disposed of
e4cept in its original paper co>er!
)+7