Abdel-Malek - Orientalism in Crisis

Diogenes
http://dio.sagepub.com/
Orientalism in Crisis
Anouar Abdel-Malek
Diogenes 1963 11: 103
DOI: 10.1177/039219216301104407
The online version of this article can be found at:

http://dio.sagepub.com/content/11/44/103.citation
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
International Council for Philosophy and Human Studiess
Additional services and information for Diogenes can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://dio.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://dio.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
>> Version of Record - Dec 1, 1963
What is This?
Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

NOTES AND DISCUSSION
Anouar Abdel-Malek
ORIENTALISM IN CRISIS
"It is indispensable to view Europe from the outside, to

view the history of Europe, the failures of Europe as well
as its successes, through the eyes of that vast part of
humanity which is formed by the peoples of Asia and

Africa." Joseph Needham
In order to dispel &dquo;the iron curtain of false enigmas,&dquo; of which

Claude Roy speaks, it is urgent to undertake a revision, a
critical reevaluation of the general conception, the methods and
implements for the understanding of the Orient that have been
used by the West, notably from the beginning of the last
century, on all levels and in all fields.
This is an imperative of every exact science, which aims at
understanding. And yet the resurgence of the nations and the
peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America, in the last two
generations, was required in order to provoke a prise de
Translated by J. W. C.
103

conscience, tardy and frequently reticent, of an exigency of
principle become an unavoidable practical necessity, precisely due

to the decisive influence of the political factor, i.e., the victories
achieved by the various movements of national liberation on a
world scale.
For the time being, the crisis strikes at the heart of ori-
entalism : since 1945, it has been not only the &dquo;terrain&dquo; that
has escaped it, but also the &dquo;men,&dquo; until yesterday the &dquo;object&dquo;
of study, and, henceforth, sovereign &dquo;subjects.&dquo;
The domain of human and social sciences are also proving
to have need of an alteration, an extension, a transformation
which would not be just narrowed to the field; but for the time
being at least no characterized crisis may be perceived. This is
because several factors, and principally the growing role of the
Marxist methodology, universalist and historicizing, but also
methods which tie in with it at such or such a point, that is,
methods of modern science and rationalism, allow more effec-
tive syncretism and flexibility, though still profoundly insufficient.
Let us examine the subject closer. Our study deals naturally
with the Arab world, and more particularly with Egypt; it will
also touch upon the sector of China and Southeast Asia, in a
related fashion.
Numerous works’ are at the disposal of scholars, disparate
material, full of suggestions, rarely precise, on the history of
traditional orientalism-from its foundation, decided on by the
Council of Vienna in 1245, and from the first chairs of Oriental
languages at the Universitas magistrorum et .rcolarium Pari-
.rien.rium, until World War II. *
One will note with interest, however, that the real impetus
of Oriental studies in the two key sectors, that of the Arab world
and the Far East, dates essentially from the period of colonial
establishment, but, above all, from the domination of the
&dquo;forgotten continents&dquo; by the European imperialisms (middle
and second half of the twentieth century): the first wave was
marked by the creation of orientalist societies (Batavia 1781);
Societe Asiatique, Paris 1822; Royal Asiatic Society, London
1834; American Oriental Society, 1842; etc.); the second phase
*
See bibliography and notes at the end of this article.
104

witnessed the appearance of orientalist congresses, the first of
which took place in Paris in 1873; sixteen congresses were then
held up to World War I (the last congress was the one in
Vienna in 1912); since then only four have taken place...
Precisely what kind of studies were these?
The orientalist-&dquo;a scholar versed in the knowledge of the
Orient, its languages, its literatures, etc.&dquo;2-what kind of man,
what kind of scholar is he? What are his motivations? What
occupies him? What objectives does he set himself to attain?
Michelangelo Guidi (1886-1946) placed himself in the
perspective of a philosophy of history as opposed to that of the
hellenocentric peoples, upheld, notably, by Werner Jaeger:~ &dquo;By
orientalists, I understand those who study the Near East; for
the thought of India and China is certainly of the greatest
interest in understanding the spiritual paths (...), but they have
no vital contact with us;&dquo; &dquo;We orientalists, in fact, look towards
the cultures in which the Oriental element appears in its most
complete expression, that is, towards the pure national cultures,
towards Islam, for instance, not only with the aim of recreating
a foreign world, very high nevertheless, very worthy of scientific
consideration, but also as the only means that would enable

us to understand fully the nature of the elements of the
admirable and very fecund fusion that occurred in the zone of
helleni.rm;&dquo;4 &dquo;The orientalist, if he wants to be complete, must
start with the classic world. But it would be anti-historical to
disregard completely a period which is situated between us and
pure antiquity. A homo classicus and a homo orientalis become,
at a certain moment, a recollection or an abstraction. Only a
homo novus of hellenism is a ’living’ product of ’living’
movements and not of movements artificially created by the
scholars; all have been created by an original historical force.&dquo;
Therefore &dquo;we do not study these worlds to arrange a new
series of phenomena in the show window of the human museum,
to describe exotic and marvelous forms, in order to understand
the f3Blpf3cxp(;)v G0p&dquo;«1 we study these worlds rather to relive in
their fullness the phases of intimate union of two different
traditions, endeavoring to distinguish the modes and functions
of one of them, with eyes made more keen by the contemplation
of the manifestations of Oriental culture in its total expression,
105

with the possibility of precise estimation, with a livelier
a more
sensibility,&dquo;’
etc. Is it exaggerated to speak here of romantic
&dquo;europeocentrism,&dquo;6 which animates scientific investigation, while
one finds in a Raymond Schwab identical themes,’ and while
the seven portraits of English orientalists-S. Ockley, W. Jones,
E. H. Palmer, E. G. Browne, R. A. Nicholson, A. J. Arberry-
drawn by this latter very recently,’ are moving essentially
in the same sense? But we must see that we are-historically-
at the epoch of European hegemony; the retrospective criticism
must take this into account.
The most notable works of the principal Western orientalist
schools spring from this current of thought, from this vision of
orientalism (France, Great Britain, Germany, Spain, Italy, Russia
and the United States). Their contribution has been multiple
and fruitful. The Lebanese bibliographer Youssef Assaad Dagher
distinguishes eight positive elements in the field of Arabic and
Islamic studies: the study of ancient civilization; the collection
of Arabic manuscripts in European libraries; the establishment
of catalogues of manuscripts; the publication of numerous
important works; the lesson of method thus given to Oriental
scholars; the organization of orientalist congresses; the editing
of studies, frequently deficient and erroneous from a linguistic
point of view, but precise in the method; and finally, &dquo;this
movement has contributed to arousing the national consciousness
in the different countries of the Orient and to activating the
movement of scientific renaissance and the awakening of the
ideal.&dquo;’ We will see further on what is in it.
This vision of traditional orientalism, however, was not the
dominant vision; or, rather, it represented, in part, the essential
segment of the work, accomplished in the universities and by
scholarly societies, without however ignoring the whole range
of the work that has been carried out and published within
this framework and elsewhere. On the other hand, this study
itself was profoundly permeated by postulates, methodological
habits and historico-philosophical concepts that were to compro-
mise, often, the results and the scientific value of arduous work,
and to lead, objectively, a great number of genuine orientalist
scholars to the politico-philosophical positions of the other group
of researchers.
106

This latter group was formed
an amalgam byof uni-
versity dons, businessmen, military men, colonial officials, mission-
aries, publicists and adventurers, whose only objective was to
gather intelligence information in the area to be occupied, to
penetrate the consciousness of the people in order to better
assure its enslavement to the European powers. &dquo;The optic of the
Arab bureau,&dquo; as Jacques Berque rightly observed, has led to
the result that, &dquo;sustained, nourished at the same time and
limited by action, the study of the North African societies has
been oriented from the start One may guess in which sense...
The phenomenon is general, since it is built into the structure
of the social science of the European countries in the period of
imperialist penetration and implantation: Italian orientalism
under Mussolini, the psycho-political penetration as practiced by
T. E. Lawrence and his school, and previous to them the reports
of missionaries, business circles and orientalists (a notable instance
being the third ~provincial congress of orientalists at Lyons, in
1878), etc.-the examples abound, multiply, for we are still in
the epoch of humiliation, of occupation, before the great
liberating revolutions.ll
Can one speak, however, despite these very real differences,
of a certain similarity in the general conception, the methods
and the instruments introduced by these two schools of traditional
orientalism?
We will answer in the affirmative : the community of
interest, and not only of interests, is fundamental, in the face
of the other, the world which later was to be called &dquo;third&dquo;
with regard to the present as history.
1 ) General conception, that is, the vision of the Orient and

of Orientals by traditional orientalism:
a) On the level of the position of the problem, and the

problematic, the two groups consider the Orient and Orientals
as an &dquo;object&dquo; of study, stamped with an otherness-as all that
is different, whether it be &dquo;subject&dquo; or &dquo;object&dquo;-but of a consti-
tutive otherness, of an essentialist character, as we shall see in a
moment. This &dquo;object&dquo; of study will be, as is customary, passive,
107

non-participating, endowed with a &dquo;historical&dquo; subjectivity, above
all, non-active, non-autonomous, non-sovereign with regard to
itself: the only Orient or Oriental or &dquo;subject&dquo; which could be
admitted, at the extreme limit, is the alienated being, philo-
sophically, that is, other than itself in relationship to itself,
posed, understood, defined-and acted-by others.
b) On the level of the thematic, both groups adopt an
essentialist conception of the countries, nations and peoples of
the Orient under study, a conception which expresses itself
through a characterized ethnist typology; the second group will
soon proceed with it towards racism.
According to the traditional orientalists, an essence should
exist-sometimes even clearly described in metaphysical terms-
which constitutes the inalienable and common basis of all the
beings considered; this essence is both &dquo;historical,&dquo; since it goes
back to the dawn of history, and fundamentally a-historical, since
it transfixes the being, &dquo;the object&dquo; of study, within its inalienable
and non-evolutive specificity, instead of defining it as all other
beings, states, nations, peoples and cultures-as a product, a
resultant of the vection of the forces operating in the field of
historical evolution.
Thus one ends with a typology-based on a real specificity,
but detached from history, and, consequently, conceived as being
intangible, essential-which makes of the studied &dquo;object&dquo; another
being, with regard to whom the studying subject is transcendent:
we will have a homo Sinicu.r, a homo Arabicus (and, why not,
a homo Aegypticus, etc.), a homo Africanus,12 the man-the
&dquo;normal man&dquo; it is understood-being the European man of
the historical period, that is, since Greek antiquity. One sees
how much, from the eighteenth to the twentieth century, the
hegemonism of possessing minorities, unveiled by Marx and
Engels, and the anthropocentrism dismantled by Freud are
accompanied by europeocentrism in the area of human and social
sciences, and more particularly in those in direct relationship
with non-European peoples.
Among the masters of traditional orientalism, none have
expressed this theme better, in speaking of the Arabs, dear to his
mystic heart, than the great scholar Louis Massignon (1883-
1962). In one of his last texts, a short time before his death,
108

he wrote: &dquo;I think that for the problem of the future of the
Arabs, it must be found in semitism. I think, that at the base of
the Arab difficulties there is this dramatic conflict, this fratricidal
hatred between Israel and Ismael. I think that it must be
surmounted. Can we succeed in surmounting it? I believe it
must be placed less in the drama of the mechanical incidence
of actual technocracy in which Israel, in the final analysis, pulls
the strings of the entire world, for due to its superiority of
thought and technique in the construction of the problems-be-
cause Israel has never ceased posing these problems to itself, it
is its strength of hope, an intellectual speculation in a pure
state-the Arabs find themselves in collision with it in the claim
of exclusivity among the semites, the privileged semites of the
right. They, on the contrary, are the outlaws, the excluded; for
many reasons, they proved themselves inferior to the task Israel
had known how to overcome, but it seems to me that between
brothers there should be a reconciliation, for Israel as the Arabs
can bring internal testimony to bear; it is the testimony of their
language, which is a sacred language, and which is also an

instrument of abstract scientific research. The Jewish elite thought
and wrote in Arabic during the entire Middle Ages. That is the
essential problem.&dquo;’3
Thegenerosity of the sentiment could not hide the nature,
profoundly erroneous and capable of pernicious extensions,
of this thematic. It would be, almost, comparable to seeing the
history of contemporary Europe through the deforming prism
of Aryanism.
2. Methods of study and research.

These are inevitably determined by the general conception:
a) The past of Oriental nations and cultures quite naturally
constitutes the preferred field of study:14 in &dquo;admitting implicitly
that the most brilliant periods of the Orient belong to the past,&dquo;
one admits, by the same token, &dquo;that their decadence is
ineluctable.&dquo; And Jean Chesneaux rightly notes that &dquo;the road
followed since the second half of the nineteenth century, by
the Greco-Latin studies and their rebirth as studies of &dquo;dead&dquo;
109

civilizations, completely cut off from their contemporary heirs,
furnished an eminent model to the orientalists.&dquo;15
b) This past itself was studied in its cultural aspects-notably
the language and religion-detached from social evolution. If
the general offensive of anti- and post-Hegelian irrationalism in
Europe explains the accent placed on the study of the religious
phenomenon, as well as its para-psychical, esoteric aura, this
is tantamount to the rebirth of the studies of Antiquity, at the
end of the last century, in the light of the historical method,
and more precisely of historical philology, which explains the
primacy accorded simultaneously to linguistic and philological
studies by traditional orientalists. But the study of Oriental
languages-such as Arabic, very much a living language-as
dead languages was bound to great number of
cause a
mistakes, contradictions, errors, just intended

as ifto furnish
one
a commentary on the French language (of R. Martin du Gard,
of Sartre, or of Aragon) on the basis only of the knowledge
of the &dquo;Chansons de geste,&dquo; of the English of Shaw or Russell
on the basis of Saxon, or of the Italian of Croce, Gramsci or
Moravia on the basis of Church Latin. 16
c) History, studied as &dquo;structure&dquo; was projected, at its best, on
the recent past. That which re-emerged, appeared as a pro-
longation of the past, grandiose but extinct. From historicizing,
history became exotic.
~ The scientific work of the scholars of different Oriental
countries was passed over in silence, and for the most part
completely ignored, except for a few rare works which are
conceived in the sense of orientalism of the cities. The rest was
declared to be without value, denigrated, and the retardation,
imputable to historical conditions, notably to colonialism, became
a specific constitutive characteristic of Oriental mentalities.
3. The instruments of study and re.rearch:
a) These are constituted essentially by the accumulation and

concentration of the treasures belonging to the countries of Asia,
Africa and Latin America in the great European cities: the
history of the Cernuschi and Guimet museums in Paris, of the
110

great collections of the British Museum, for example, follows
the same trajectory, which is that of the immigration of the
scholarly treasures of Europe in the direction of the United
States, since 1919. In the field of Arabic studies, especially, the
situation is particularly serious: several tens of thousands of
manuscripts (the number 140,000 has been mentioned) are
outside the Arab world, that is, practically out of reach of
Arab researchers themselves; hence, they must work most of
the time on the basis of indirect sources dealing with the
matters at the core itself of their own national and cultural
history. The League of Arab States, as well as several countries,
principally Egypt, has established various organisms, publications
and projects, whose aim is to restitute to the Arab world its
irreplaceable sources.17
b) In the field of modern and contemporary history, the
greatest and even the essential part of the materials concerning
the colonial and dependent countries (notably India, Egypt and
the Arab Near East, the Maghreb, dark Africa, etc.), which are
collected in the state archives of the great ex-colonial powers,
are for the most part inaccessible, subject to various kinds of
interdictions (the least serious being the famous rule of &dquo;fifty
years&dquo;). The approximative knowledge of the past is thus
prolongated into a quest of one’s self, full of perilous gaps.
c) The secondary sources used by traditional Western ori-
entalists-reports by colonial administrators,&dquo; by Catholic or
Protestant religious missions,19 balance sheets and reports of
boards of directors of companies, travel descriptions, etc.-are
profoundly tainted by all the variants of ethnism and racism;
the most moderate are exotic and paternalistic. One may see
that, though furnishing numerous data, these secondary sources
hide many other facts and could not, in any case, validly
sustain scientific research work.
These are the main characteristics of traditional orientalism,
that which represented the whole of orientalism up to the end
of World War II, and which continues to occupy a dispro-
portionate place to the present day.
But the rebirth of the nations and peoples of Asia, Africa
and Latin America, since the end of the nineteenth century, and
the very rapid acceleration of this process due to the victory
111

of the national liberation movements in the ex-colonial world
but also to the appearance of the group of socialist states and the
subsequent differentiation between the &dquo;two Europes,&dquo;2° has
shaken the edifice of traditional orientalism to its foundations.
Suddenly, specialists and the public at large became aware
of the time-lag, not only between orientalist science and the
material under study, but also-and this was to be determin-
ing- between the conceptions, the methods and the instru-
ments of work in the human and social sciences and those
of orientalism.
Rejected by history and the national rebirth of the Orient,
traditional orientalism found itself out of step with regard to the
progress of scientific research.
Therefore, the whole problem had to be thought anew.
TWO FACES OF NEO-ORIENTALISM
&dquo;Two Europes&dquo; are rethinking this complex: the Europe (and

European America) of the colonial powers; the Europe of the
socialist states and movements, soon joined by the revolutions on
the three &dquo;forgotten continents.&dquo; The divorce is profound, no-
tably in the matter of general conception.
A. THE NEO-ORIENTALISM OF WESTERN EUROPE
Two essential documents-the inaugural lecture of Jacques

Berque at the College de France (December 1956), and the
Hayter Report (1961)-and also several methodological works
permit an analysis of this renewal of traditional orientalism in
the Western colonial powers.
1. General conception:
J. Berque observes that &dquo;the personality of the world (of
Islam) appears rather uncommunicable. To whomever frequents
it, it awakens rightly images of a &dquo;cave&dquo; or of a &dquo;labyrinth&dquo; (...)
it defends itself against the outside, the aberrant. Evasive,
menacing or a charmer, it disappears by turns in mystery, injury
112

or seduction. It bars its true access, and hides its truth. Many
stop at the first obstacle, and remain taken in by the caress of
the picturesque, snared by the equivocal, the combativity of the
gesture. Research must go much further (...) We must make
ourselves more and more attentive and sensitive to the Arab
other side of things.&dquo; The work that he undertook, and whose
first balance sheet he uncovers in this lesson, leads him to think
that &dquo;the modern history for the Arab countries begins after
World War I, or even World War II.&dquo; According to him, &dquo;the
tragic age of revision&dquo; results from this; however, he says, &dquo;under
the gesticulation, let us recognize the testimony, this word so dear
to Louis Massignon.&dquo; Trouble set in everywhere: &dquo;The tension
deforms them. Their structures become transient, their determi-
nations ambiguous. The concrete with them is continuously
surpassed by affectivity, and the act by the symbol. Every
phenomenon is disposed for them on several levels, every attitude
must be understood from more than one angle. Hence the
extreme difficulties of expression for them, and of interpretation
for us.&dquo; Naturally, &dquo;these structures are incomprehensible, if
isolated from their historic context and entirely from social
psychology.&dquo; But the verdict is nonetheless decisive : 21 &dquo;The vast
bustle of ideas that have established themselves (...) have associ-
ated confusedly structure with existence, true or false causalities
with the needs of the heart and with the expansion of the
gesture;&dquo; all attempts &dquo;seem to me to correspond, in the first
place, to a search for solidity. A search frequently unskillful,
summary, disfiguring, and sometimes insincere: a friend at least
should have the right to say so. It has been inexpert, hasty in
the majority of cases. In addition, the analysis of present-day
political forms in the Orient does not lead us very far.&dquo; Referring
several times to Renan,~ he continues: &dquo;this history is not
autonomous (...). Until the present this humanity has refused
what has been called ’the parti-pris of things.’ For, so far as
things are concerned, history contests either its savour or
precision (...). Harrassed by what an Egyptian essayist has called
’the heavy history,’ they are tempted to search for their
affirmations outside of continuity, of logic, and perhaps even of
history (...). Now, can one fight against facts with tokens, even
were they as august as that of freedom?&dquo;
113

Having thus established this afhrmation of non-autono-
my-that is, the impotence of the Arab and Islamic peoples to
define themselves and to forge the instruments of knowledge,
which alone would be capable of initiating in depth action and
progress-J. Berque has naturally advanced to fill this vacancy,
particularly in Les Arabes d’hier à demain, published in 1960:
&dquo;The Arab soul today maintains or restores a reference to itself,
an autonomy of sensation and of expression that no exterior
system, as enriching as it might have been, should ever have

denied it. Should this be a sufficient reason for the foreign
researcher, because he is from the start suspected and held to
innumerable precautions for fear of hurting live susceptibilities,
to abstain from contributing his own theory? Entirely the
contrary, the opportunity of his contribution will increase the
spontaneity recovered by the Arabs. If then I dare submit
to them a system of their contemporary history, it is in the hope
of submitting it to their judgement. The more criticism from
the inside that it excites, the better it will help to progress
those it claims to serve. No doubt handicapped, in what it
emanates, despite everything, of a foreigner, it will on the other
hand have the advantage of distance. Its chances and misfortunes
are, in the final analysis, only those of a new orientalism, at
the same time disinterested and committed.&dquo;’ The reactions
evoked by this view of the work undertaken prompted, two
years later, this rectification : &dquo;An Egyptian essayist has pointed
out, in connection with my last book, that I address the
Oriental as well as the Western reader. He saw a novelty in
this! Is it too ambitious? The study conceived in this fashion
requires that its object become a partner in the dialogue, critical
and participating.&dquo;24 The instrument of this research is French
culture, &dquo;for French culture, I dare say it even today, remains
the hellenism of the Arab peoples.1125
The two works of this author-on the Arabs, then on the
Maghreb-set up the framework of this new typology. Being
preoccupied here with methodology, we cannot examine its
postulates, its theses, or its conclusions. However, it should be
noted that the new typology, while remaining essentialist in
its central core, is made more flexible by taking into consideration
the economic f actor.26
114

The approach to the problem is different in the Anglo-Saxon
world. In 1946, the &dquo;Middle East Institute&dquo; was founded in
Washington, soon to be followed, in 1949, by the &dquo;Council
for Middle Eastern Affairs&dquo; in New York. In 1947, the
Scarborough Commission, on the advice of A. J. Arberry,
undertook a renewal of orientalism in Great Britain: the end of
the war required the rearranging of &dquo;the responsibilities that
remain to us in the’ colonies, in our relations with the Dominions,
the close neighbors of the peoples of Asia and Africa, and our
new relations with India, Burma and Ceylon.&dquo; The report
formulates an undisguised criticism of &dquo;europeocentrism&dquo; and
notes that the retardation of orientalist studies in Great Britain,
compared to France, Germany, Italy, Holland, the Soviet Union
and the United States (in that order) &dquo;is in disagreement with
our situation of a great power, and is not adequate to our
imperial responsibilities.&dquo; It will be a question of organizing

modern studies, finally, in order to aid notably the scientists,
physicians, engineers and economists, who intend to make a
career in the Middle East, and to integrate themselves well
there.2’
The Hayter Commission, four years later, reacted in vigorous
political terms to a situation which remained faltering. The
center of gravity of the world having been displaced from
Europe, the time is not for linguists but rather for a &dquo;surplus
of historians, jurists, economists and other specialists in the
social sciences.&dquo; The main objectives envisaged are the following:
&dquo;to furnish the nation with a more important and better
equilibrated reserve of researchers and of published materials
on the subject of these countries;&dquo; &dquo;to stimulate indirectly the
interest in Oriental languages;&dquo; and finally, &dquo;to increase the
proportion of modern studies, as well as the study of modern
languages, by comparison with classical studies.&dquo;28 The Com-
mission analysed the work undertaken by the United States,
formerly one of the lagging behind countries at the time bf the
Scarborough report; it declared itself very much impressed
by the &dquo;extent of the effort undertaken, the type of organization
on which this effort was based, and the accent placed on modern
studies.&dquo; It called the attention of the British government to the
following points: &dquo;The power of the support accorded by the
115

United States government to Oriental and Slav studies, due to
their national importance; the efforts deployed, by means of
study centers by area, to break down at last the barriers between
the various disciplines, and to promote balanced studies of these
areas; the enlivening emphasis placed on modern studies; the
role of the scholarships granted to graduates in order to channel
their activity towards new fields of work; the value of intensive
language courses and mechanical aids destined to overcome the
difficulties of languages that are not taught in the schools and
to reduce the period of apprenticeship.&dquo;
Did this mean that the United States should be copied? &dquo;The
traditions of classical erudition, hellenistic and Oriental, are
weaker than in Europe (...). The British field of research in
this area, and more particularly in the Oriental languages, is
situated between the classicial and severe linguistic traditions
of Western Europe and the more modernist developments, with
the emphasis on social sciences, in America.&dquo;29 The difference of
the conception from that of J. Berque may be seen: the dialogue
and the interests of state must be assured through the en-
largement and the publication of works, as well as the im-
provement of the qualification of the researchers, not through
a &dquo;penetration&dquo; of the object studied-not capable of being
autonomous- by European orientalism.
That this fundamental postulate, which is at the heart of
all European orientalism, whether it be traditional or renewed,
remains subjacent among all the non-socialist scholars of the
West, could not be contested. Thus, Sir Hamilton A. R. Gibb,
making a review of the history of Islam, from its origins to our
times, relies on nineteen European authors; one sole Ori-
ental-A.-E. Afifi-figures in their company.30 The recent confer-
ence on Moslem sociology, at Brussels (September 11-14, 1961),
heard twenty speakers, not including a single scholar from the
Orient; a circumstance to which J. Berque rightly took ex-
ception.31 Yet it was the question of the evolution of the Arab
and Moslem societies that was essentially dealt with The ...
Egyptian historian Hussein Mo’nes easily demonstrated that a

great number of the speeches were profoundly out of date in
regard to current history 32 The recent writings of G. E. von
Grunebaum proceed from the same vision; nevertheless, the
116

serious philosophical culture of their author frequently enables
him to furnish structured analyses, in which the effort to
overcome the old habits are evident.33 The recent thesis by
Vincent Monteil on L’Arabe moderne is full of errors-as
opposed to the work of Hans Wehr-and is the culminating
point of a will to theorize without understanding the inside
of the studied area.34
2. Methods of study and re.rearch:
a) The past continues to occupy the first place in Oriental

studies. But it is now no longer alone. The requirements of poli-
tics, the displacement of the center of gravity outside of the
European glacis, the emotion caused by the thrust of the peoples
of the Orient, yesterday still in varying degrees submissive and
malleable, the needs of the modernization of working habits, if
only to keep pace with the other social sciences-so many factors
have contributed decisively to direct the new orientalist studies
towards the modern, or even the contemporary, age.
b) This present, finally having been admitted as an object
of study (often at the price of serious difliculties), nevertheless
does not escape the requirements for the constitution of typologies
appropriate to the different peoples of the Orient. The mediation
-between the socio-political requirements for the constitution
of these typologies and modernism-will be carried out by
means of the structuralist philosophy. The philosophy, as is
known, is the study of sectors of reality as such, as &dquo;structures,&dquo;

and hardly, any more, as a product, a resultant or vection, of an
historical evolution. Thus conceived, structuralism in human
sciences appears as the most acceptable expression-the most
&dquo;objectivized&dquo;-of phenomenology, the dominant form of the
irrationalist philosophy of our times. But, in the field of
orientalism, the structuralist method moves in known terrain, so
to speak, as it is from linguistics that structuralism got its
impetus, with F. de Saussure’s Cour.r de lingui.rtique générale
in 1906-1911 (the course was edited in 1916). The traditional
orientalists, in great majority language or religion specialists,
used to structuralism, thus easily recognize their modernist, neo-
117

orientalist colleagues, for whom the structuralist method provides
the surest means-but also the most &dquo;modernist&dquo;-on which to
found their elaboration of typologies in ’novelties’.
c) The scientific work carried out in the Orient will continue
to be denigrated, either because of ignorance (since it becomes
more and more difficult, even impossible, to theorize on the
subject of a whole sector-Arab, Chinese, Asian, Latin-American,

Islamic-on the basis of a necessarily restricted documentation,
while the autochtonous production grows continually), or in order
to continue to maintain the (theoretical) primacy of knowlegde.3’
d) The method of participation and penetration, elaborated
and applied by J. Berque, appears more interesting: &dquo;In a
matter so alive, so burning and also so long-suffering, the
habitual means of science have immense value, but one that
could not suffice. One must live in contact with these people,
attempt to become friendly with them, almost to the point of
connivance. Is this possible without involving passion?&dquo; It is
certainly the question, considering this willingness and these
procedures, of a &dquo;quest more than ever participating,&dquo; cherished
by the author. The latter writes, a few pages farther on,
forestalling the others: &dquo;Impressionism will not be my strong
point. Our role is one of understanding. Only the analysis, to be
efficacious, to penetrate sufficiently in depth, should not dissociate
the facts either from their emotional context or from the sense
in which they are colored by lived experience.&dquo;36 Is this otherwise
elsewhere?
For W. Cantwell Smith, whose Canadian environment is non-
&dquo;imperial,&dquo; the value of this participation is to be judged by
the autochtones: &dquo;The work will equally fail, if intelligent and
honest Moslems are incapable of recognizing the precision of its
observations, the extent and the desire for clarification of its
interpretations as well as of its analyses.&dquo;37
3. In.rtrument.r of study and research,.
a) The Western powers, notably the United States, intend

to add new centers of accumulation of treasures and cultural
materials to the depots already existing; the means, employed
118

here, are out of all proportion to those at the disposal of the
Orient, its scholarly institutions and researchers.&dquo;
b) Collaboration with the scholars and researchers of Oriental
countries is recognized as an objective necessity. One will note,
however, that in the United States, they dispose of university
posts and means of dissemination relatively vast in scope/9
whereas in Western Europe, this collaboration is arranged on a
subordinate level.40
However, the realism of H.A.R. Gibb leads him, at the
conclusion of a balance sheet of failure of the historical studies
on the modern Orient, to propose a division of labor: &dquo;The
first task of the Western universitarian is to research, coordinate
and evaluate critically the Western sources. The special domain
of the autochtonous universitarian is to research and to organize
the archives and the local documentary materials.&dquo; One will
note that there is hardly a question, in this latter case, of
&dquo;critically evaluating&dquo; the elements collected Simultaneously, ...
&dquo;it must be established, with no possible equivocation, that the

Western universitarian cannot realize any work on an academic
level in his own field without having an adequate knowledge
of Arabic, Persian or Turkish, according to the case, as well
as of the historical and cultural background.&dquo; This means, surely,
that &dquo;the adult student of Middle-Eastern history, must be, to
some extent, a kind of orientalist;&dquo; but it is &dquo;only when a
historian possesses technical qualifications in a broader field that
he can be a good historian in the Middle-Eastern field.&dquo;41 Hence,
the primacy of specialized scientific formation, alongside of an
adequate ethno-cultural and linguistic formation, is well recog-
nized.
So far we have dealt with Western scholarly neo-orientalism,
as it is required. Parallel to it, the persistence of &dquo;Europeo-
centrism&dquo; by the means of modernist manifestations, which it
took on after World War II, and the accentuation of the direct
struggle between the colonized countries (of the Orient) and
the imperialist powers (of the West), favored the formation of
a new sub-group, that of the publicists and journalists specialized
particularly in Asian and African affairs with, here and there,

some universitarian extensions. The ignorance of the languages
of the Oriental peoples was very frequently aggravated by a
119

deficient scientific formation; the procedures of rhetoric and
stylistics, the brilliance of great journalism served both as gua-
rantee and a platform for specious publications, which requested
to be taken as sources of direct and &dquo;specialized&dquo; information, at
the same time by intellectuals of the Orient and by the general
public in the West.42
B. NEO-ORIENTALISM IN THE SOCIALIST SECTOR
The socialist sector of Europe (states and movements) will be

considered here primarily. In fact, despite a common sphere, the
work accomplished in China appears closer to the conceptions
of the independent non-socialist national states and the socialist
movements of Asia, Africa and Latin America.
Immediately following World War II, researchers in the
socialist sector became preoccupied with basic studies of the
countries of the Orient. Maxime Rodinson, after a long stay in
the Near East, undertook, from 1950 on, a basic analysis of the
conceptions, methods, and area of application of traditional
orientalism, in view of the advance of the movements of national
liberation in the Arab and Islamic countries;43 at the same time
Jean Chesneaux began his work on Le mouvement ouvrier
chinoi.r de 1919 à 1927;44 the eminent Cambridge biologist
Joseph Needham, after twenty years of preparation, started
publication, in 1954, of the first volume of his Science and
Civilization in China, a monumental, encyclopedic work, which
endeavors to restore to the civilization and culture of our times
its second dimension-the Chinese dimension-which had fallen
into disuse from the eighteenth century (European) on, a model
of erudition, of scientific precision, of theoretical depth, which
has rightly been defined as &dquo;the greatest action of historical
synthesis and of intercultural communication, to which a human
being has ever applied himself.&dquo; (L. Picken)45
In the socialist countries, the question was to take up again
an already ancient tradition, then to direct it towards the new
preoccupations of Marxist methodology and the political re-

surgence of the Orient.46
The conference on the solidarity of the Afro-Asian peoples
120

in Bandoeng (April 195 5 ) gave a decisive impetus to cultural
renewal-notably in the matter of history, of the social sciences
and of literature-in the two continents. It was soon to be
followed by the 20th Congress of the CPSU (1956), which
determined the &dquo;new course&dquo; of Soviet orientalism. The first
congress of Soviet orientalists, held at Tashkent (1957), dealt
explicitly with three general themes: 1. The collapse of the
imperialist system; 2. The tasks of Soviet orientalism after the
20th Congress; 3. The worldwide importance of the Bandoeng
Conference. The 21st Congress of the C.P. of the Soviet Union
further accentuated this orientation, which was to reach its
culminating point in the 25th international congress of ori-
entalists, held in Moscow, in August 1960.
This short historical introduction will serve to situate the
analysis of neo-orientalism in the socialist sector.
1. General conception:
a) On the level of the problematic, the end of European

hegemony in political matters-recognized simultaneously by
the Bandoeng Conference, Unesco, the Hayter Report, the
ideological theses of the Chinese leaders, among others-must
be accompanied by a fundamental critique of &dquo;europeocentrism,&dquo;
that is, its final rejection, in terms of principle. &dquo;Western
civilization continues to suffer from an unjustified cultural pride,
which falsifies its contacts with other peoples of the world; this
may rightly be defined as ’spiritual meanness on a high level’
and also as Toc 7tVEU[1.Cl&dquo;t’LXac T~jç 7tOV1JP(ClÇ ev T0ig É:7tOUpClVf.OLç -’the
spirit of evil in divine things&dquo;’; and J. Needham, after having &dquo;
denounced &dquo;the psychology of domination always at work :

&dquo;The realization is very slow to come that the peoples of Asia
themselves could also participate in all the benefits of modern
science, that they could study the world of nature in a new way,
that they could comment on, read, study and digest the Journal
of Biophy.ric.r (for example), and regain respect for themselves
in acceding to a higher level of life, as fine as that of any other
part of the world, while keeping the best of their cultural and
religious traditions. ,17
121

&dquo;The fundamental of
error is the tacit
europeocentrism
postulate, according to which, due
to the fact that modern science
and technique, which originated in Renaissance Europe, are
universal, everything that is European is equally universal.&dquo; He
shows that this is erroneous, both in the field of science and of
history, and stresses the role of religion as a means of penetration
by, and integration to, Europe.41
The tone was quite different in the important speech given
by Anastas I. Mikoyan at the opening session of the 25th
orientalist congress: &dquo;It goes without saying that the revo-
lutionary changes in the life of Asia and Africa alter in a radical
way the character and content of orientalism. It can even be said
that the new theoretical particularity of principle of ori-
entalism is that, now, the peoples of the Orient create themselves
their own science, elaborate their own history, their culture,
their economy; in this way, the peoples of the Orient have
been promoted from being objects (matter) of history to the rank
of creators. This is what differentiates this congress from the
others.&dquo;
b) At the very same time, this affirmation of princi-
ple-which is in accordance with the fundamental core of the
thought of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America, and
their intelligentsia-is enhanced by a political vision, that of
the world anti-imperialist front. &dquo;The duty of the orientalists in
their work&dquo;-A. I. Mikoyan continued-&dquo;is to reflect objectively
on the most important processes of the countries of Asia and
Africa, to contribute, in a creative manner, to the elaboration
of the fundamental problems of the struggle of the peoples of the
Orient for their national and social liberation and to recover
from their economic backwardness. One may rightly say that
only then can orientalism count on a broad consideration and on
success, from the time that it serves the interests of the peoples
of the Orient.&dquo;49 B. G. Gafurov, director of the Moscow institute
of orientalism, expressed the following thought, in his speech
closing the congress: &dquo;We Soviet orientalists consider it our
scientific duty, our conscience also obliges us, to help the peoples
of the Orient, continuously, in their struggle for a better future;
we are convinced that our discoveries and scientific results, our
basic scientific Marxist-Leninist method, whose reality has con-
122

firmed its truth, as well as the experience of our country in the
building of socialism, an experience based on a progressive
scientific theory, we are convinced that all this will help the
peoples of Asia and Africa find the best and most efficient
way to achieve progress.&dquo;&dquo;
One will note that orientalism thus acquires value, scienti-
fically, in direct relation with of its objectivity and of the support
it will eventually give the work of national liberation and
edification. It is above all on this last level that it must &dquo;provide
aid,&dquo; that is, participate with the &dquo;subject,&dquo; &dquo; the creators.&dquo;
c) However-on the level of the thematic-some socialist
European neo-orientalists continue to think, along with J.
Chesneaux, that &dquo;to reduce purely and simply the scientific study
of the countries of Asia and Africa into the generality of
historical or linguistic science would be tantamount, at the present
stage of world evolution, to a relapse into europeocentrism. Not
only does the linguistic barrier justify an organization for special
work, but also still today too many common traits among all
the countries of Asia and Africa continue to differentiate them
from Europe, so that it is necessary to take them largely into
account. Orientalism is an antiquated and outmoded concept, but
Asian and African studies continue to pose problems proper to
themselves: underdevelopment, the history of imperialist ex-
pansion and of national movements, their own mediaeval tra-
ditions, etc. »51
The author rightly points out the enrichment of &dquo;the general
Marxist theory of the history of the world&dquo; by the following
elements, gathered in the study of specific national particularities
of Asia and Africa: the importance of the &dquo;Oriental mode of
production,&dquo; within the general framework of the periodization
of human history according to the five basic modes of pro-
duction;S2 the balance sheet of colonial imperialism, &dquo;taking into
account its internal contradictions,&dquo; of which &dquo;the principal aspect
is the brutal domination and all the phenomena of regression
and stagnation that accompany it,&dquo; but without &dquo;ignoring its
secondary though very real aspect, that is, the new elements of
society,&dquo; mentioned by Marx when he spoke of &dquo;the twofold
character of British imperialism in India.&dquo;53 The appearance of
the movements of national liberation in the colonies as an
123

element objectively more advanced than the working-class
movement in the European countries; the importance of the
factor known as &dquo;national psyche,&dquo;54 the appearance of a third
type of nation (in addition to the two types distinguished by
J. V. Stalin) within the Afro-Asian group, according to the degree
of their cohesion in history; &dquo;the universalization of Marxist
thought;&dquo;&dquo; the different role of the working class, which tends
to become the central element of the popular forces, of the
people, and not of a unique dominating class 56
The official Soviet formulation-after the 21st Congress of
the C.P. (1958)-is more traditional: &dquo;The multitude of new
problems and phenomena in relationship with the accession of
the great countries of the Orient to the road of sovereign
development, in particular the struggle of the working class to
raise its standard of living in the process of industrialization of
the countries weakly developed from the economic point of
view, and in the social life of the entire state;&dquo; &dquo;the study of
problems, relative to class differentiation within the peasantry
and those of accelerated capitalist development in agriculture
and its consequences;&dquo; &dquo;the problems of the struggle of the
working class for hegemony within the peasant movement, in
the framework of this new phase of development, are par-
ticularly interesting and important;&dquo; &dquo;penetrating research into
the creation and development of the national literatures of
the countries of Africa and Asia will give the destructive blow
to the theories of europeocentrism; to this effect, the study of
the problems bearing on the interactions among the literatures
of the Orient and the West is of first importance. ,17
2. Methods of study and of re.rearch:
a) In the first place, the question will be to define &dquo;a new

attitude towards the problem of the relationships between
orientalism and every one of the human sciences, each of
them conceived in its planetary universality (...). Whether it be
history, economics, sociology, literature, linguistics, the perspective
must be ’disorientalize’ the studies relative to Asia (...), to
to
lead these studies back to what could be called ’the common
124

law’ of each discipline.&dquo; And J. Chesneaux continues thus: &dquo;The
obstacles of language and of the social and attitudinal heritage
should not be shunned; but, once these two difliculties are
surmounted, one must tackle, according to a similar method and
with a similar problematic, the study of the Italian bourgeoisie
and that of the Indonesian bourgeoisie, the analysis of the
Auf klärun g movement and that of the movement of the literary
renaissance in China in 1920, the examination of the British
economy under the continental blockade and that of the Indian
economy since independence. This orientation will not only
benefit Asian studies; it will provide at the same time a truly
universal foundation to each of our human sciences, whose
conceptual equipment and the basic data up to now were derived,
with a few exceptions, from the sole study of Western Europe.&dquo;
Nevertheless, the idea of a certain general specificity of the Afro-
Asian whole remains: &dquo;This perspective of universalization, of
normalization of Asian studies, does not exclude, however, the
fact that there still remain factual relationships and stronger ties
among the various countries of Asia.58 The name of Bandoeng is
enough. The similarities which the contemporary evolution in the
countries of Asia (and of Africa also) continue to show should
be taken into account with the greatest care, as they still
today differentiate them from the West. But this is another
question, from the point of view of the method, than to preserve
the traditional conception of orientalism. This is perfectly
compatible with a methodological unity of the study of the
societies of the Orient and the West.&dquo;59
Western ignorance of the Orient has many times been put
on trial, particularly by J. Needham and R. Etiemble.60 The study
of philosophy in the universities of Europe and America, up to
the level of the agrégation and the doctorate, is essentially that
of European philosophy, when Chinese philosophy, to talk only
of it, covers 3000 years of continuous development,&dquo; when Greek
philosophy was deeply penetrated by the religious thought and
the myths of Egypt and the Orient, when Arab philosophy,
during the Middle Ages, was quite a different thing than a
mere &dquo;transmission of the Greek heritage,&dquo;62 when the idealism
of Indian thought has nourished an ample, diverse and brilliant
civilization. The same could be said of the history of the sciences,
125

notably of mathematics, biology, medicine and astronomy. One
begins only to discover what had been the traditional literatures
of Asia and Africa, particularly thanks to the action of the
different national commissions of Unesco; the modern field
remains almost entirely ignored.
b) The emphasis is placed on the study of the present as a
privileged field, the process of evolution of Oriental societies in
the modern and contemporary period.’ &dquo;The study in depth of the
actual problems of the contemporary period must become central
and fundamental;&dquo; whereupon the Soviet author quickly adds
that &dquo;it will contribute to put forth creative solutions of the
problems of Soviet foreign policy in the future vis-h-vis the
countries of the Orient, which should constitute a question of
honor for the orientalists.64 The 25th congress of Orientalists in
Moscow marked the rapid growth of the proportion of modern
studies, even among traditional orientalists, as well as the mul-
tiplication of the national sections, an irrefutable index of the
emergence of the nations and states which can no longer be
grouped together under &dquo;typological labels.&dquo;65
Yet this decisive and ineluctable modification of the respective
weight of the &dquo;classical&dquo; and &dquo;modern&dquo; sectors, in the field of
Oriental studies, should not be achieved at the expense of the
past. &dquo;I have certainly not the intention&dquo;-writes J. Needham-
&dquo;of minimizing, in any way, the extraordinary amelioration
brought about by the present Chinese government, under the
direction of the Communist Party, in the condition of ’the
hundred ancient names.’ At the same time, this work can be
understood by Westerners with difhculty, if the latter do not
take into account certain ancestral characteristics of Chinese
culture, which they ignore most often in a lamentable fashion.
In fact, contemporary writers themselves, preoccupied with
demonstrating the profound renewal in the rebirth of their
country, sometimes tend to denigrate their own past, either
by emphasizing its somber aspects, such as the subjugation of
women, the rapacity of landowners, or by underestimating the
philosophy or the art of the preceding periods. This is tantamount
to sawing off the branch on which one sits. It is necessary that
the rest of the world learn, in all humility, not only about
contemporary China, but also about ageless China, for in Chinese
126

wisdom and experience there are remedies for many diseases
of the mind, as well as the indispensable elements of the future
philosophy of humanity
c) The Marxist conception of history and its methodology
quite naturally permeate most of these works. However,
one will note that the scholars of the socialist sector also include
eminent non-Marxists-such as J. Needham-who take place
within the larger spectrum of philosophical rationalism.
However, sometimes the needs of practical action, in par-
ticular for regroupings, invite the neo-orientalists of the socialist
sector-notably in Western European countries-to accomodate
themselves with irrational methods-essentially those of a certain
phenomenology, which expresses itself by the subterfuge of
typology, directly related to the fashionable structuralism-thus
compromising scientific precision as well as the fraternity of
basic work, which ought to be seeked with intelligentsia of the
countries of the Orient in its struggle for liberation and
67
progress.
3. In.rtrument.r of study and research:
a) The socialist states, mainly the Soviet Union, did not

have access to the same sources of materials-direct and me-
diate-which were a monopoly of the colonial powers. In return,
the ever closer relations between the USSR and the Afro-Asian
states and popular movements, since the Bandoeng Conference
particularly, have led it to undertake a truly colossal effort
in the field of modern orientalism : the &dquo;Institute of the peoples
of Asia,&dquo; attached to the Academy of Sciences is the biggest
in the world; all the universities organize studies on Asia, Africa
and Latin America; new and important scientific reviews have
been established;&dquo; all the academies of science of the Republics
include sections or organs relating to these studies; the per-
sonnel who work in them (professors, research workers, technical
assistants, translators, librarians, etc.) number from 18,000 to
20,000 persons; one publishing house alone, specializing-, in
Oriental books, publishes a new title every two or three days;
modern studies are on a par with classical orientalism, much in
127

honor in the Russia of yesterday; finally, in 1959, an &dquo;Africa
Institute&dquo; was created under the direction of the academician I.
Potehkin.69 In a few years, the scientific data on the modern and
contemporary Orient have changed abruptly: it is now impossible
to undertake deep studies related to these sectors without the
knowledge of the Russian language, in addition to the traditional
European languages and one or more Oriental languages.
b) The scientific work of the research workers and scholars of
the various Oriental countries is not only recognized, appreciated
and solicited-which should be a matter of course-but placed, as
it ought to be, in a privileged rank. J. Chesneaux refers, among
other things, to &dquo;the problem of the aptitude of foreigners to
study contemporary social facts with the same chances of success
as the nationals;&dquo; in fact, &dquo;the latter are evidently privileged
vis-~-vis of these facts, because of their knowledge of the lan-
guage and also because of their innate familiarity with the entire
attitudinal environment, the whole heritage of these peoples
of Asia;&dquo; &dquo;in pushing this reasoning to the extreme, one could
ask oneself whether it would not be reasonable to consider that
the study of contemporary problems is essentially in the province
of the nationals, while the further a theme recedes into the
past, the more accessible it is to non-Asian scholars.&dquo; His
conclusion in part is similar to that reached by H.A.R. Gibb,
quoted above: &dquo;If one may speak here of a national privilege,
one cannot speak of a national exclusive, insofar as the study
of the contemporary world is concerned. Foreigners, who come
from far away with another cultural and social heritage, can
frequently penetrate rapidly into, and give an original interpre-
tation of, the life of other peoples. For example, Anglo-Saxon
studies for the past five years figure among the best works on
political life.&dquo;’°
The cultural policy of China, at present, is not as open to
foreign researchers: &dquo;The first thing to be noted is that academic
research (for foreign researchers) is extremely rare,&dquo; for it appears
as &dquo;not distinguishable from espionage;&dquo; the central thesis is
that &dquo;foreigners are incapable of understanding us: the field of
sinology belongs to the Chinese;&dquo; however, &dquo;if this study can be
conducted by the means of materials, official documents and with
the help of a watchful orientation, it is perhaps possible to
128

approach even a delicate subject. But, if a study includes direct
observation in the area, without orientation, the free and
extensive access to people and independent work,&dquo; obstacles
emerge, &dquo;except for the most secure of the foreigners;&dquo; &dquo;it would
appear ab initio that archaeology is not a delicate field politically;
but, on the other hand, it falls within an area exclusively
reserved, in all evidence, to the Chinese, that is, the study of
their own national treasures and the interpretation of their own
history with authority. Here, the specialist on Japan will recall
how delicate the character of archaeology was in pre-war Japan.&dquo;
Yet, the American author of this study&dquo; points to the intelligent
and massive aid given to J. Needham, and that, more reticent,
accorded to J. Chesneaux, while R. Dumont, Geddes and C. P.
Fitzgerald (New Zealand), and S. Chandrasekhar (India) benefited
by a very open reception. Here, the attitude of the Communist
leaders of the P. R. of China is closer to that of the new
independent national states of Asia and Africa than to that
of the socialist countries and movements of Europe.
c) The type even of the scientific researcher must change
radically. The study of mediaeval classical Arabic and that of
Islamic mysticism entitle one to speak of them, but not to
understand the differentiation into several sectors of the bour-
geoisie of any particular Arab country, the problems or Arab
realist literature after 1945, nor the ideology of the different
components of the national and democratic movement.
The &dquo;normalization&dquo; of modern Oriental studies requires on
the first level a solidity and profundity of specialized formation
in a particular sector of the human and social sciences (economics,
law, history, sociology, political science, philosophy, esthetics, etc.).
This will have to be accompanied by a rapid but nevertheless
reasonably sufficient study of the language of the country or the
sector under study, such as it presents itself in the modern and
contemporary period, both in its written and spoken variants.
The aim of this linguistic study is to permit direct access to basic
materials, on the one hand, and to improve the psychological
and sociological understanding of everyday life in the country
studied, on the other. In the Soviet Union, eight years are now
devoted to this &dquo;double formation,&dquo; while in the United States,
only an &dquo;accelerated&dquo; linguistic formation following the termi-
129

nation of specializedstudies is required.72 On this point, the
official preoccupations of the Anglo-Saxon countries come to-
gether at the same time with those of the European socialist
sector and, essentially, with the vision of the Oriental countries
themselves.
It is this last question that we now propose to explore.
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND NOTES
1. On the general history of traditional orientalism, more particularly in the

Arab and Islamic field, is an abundant bibliography, notably: V. V. Barthold,
La découverte de l’Asie, histoire de l’orientalisme en Europe et en Russie , Fr. tr.,
Paris, 1947; nothing in the Encyclopédie de l’Islam , nor in the Encyclopedia
Britannica; "Orientalistika," Soviet Encyclopedia , Moscow, 1951, Vol. IX, 193-202;
Giovanni Vacca, "Orientalismo," Enciclopedia italiana di scienze, lettere ed arti,
Rome, 1935, vol. XXV, 537; G. Levi della Vida, "Per gli studi arabi in Italia,"
Nuova Antologia
, Dec. 1912, 1-10; A. Bausani, "Islamic Studies in Italy in the
XIXth and XXth Centuries," East and West , VIII, 1957, 145-155 and Journal of
Pakistani Historical Society, V, 1957, 185-199; Z. M. Holt, "The Origin of Arabic
Studies in England," al-Kulliyya , Khartum, 1952, No. 1, 20-7; A. J. Arberry,
Oriental Essays , London, 1960; M. Horten, "Die Probleme der Orientalistik,"
Beiträge zur Kenntnis des Orient, XIII, 1916, 143-61; G. Germanus, "Hungarian
Orientalism—Past and Present," Indo-Asian Culture , VI, 1957, 291-8; L. Bouvat,
"Les Hongrois et les études musulmanes," Revue du monde musulman , I, 1907,
No. 3, 305-24; Naguîb Al-’Aqiqi, Al-moustachriqoûn
, Cairo, 1947; Youssef A.
Dagher, Dalîl al-A’âreb ilâ ’ilm’al-koutoub wa fann al-makâteb
, Beyrouth, 1947,
bibl. trav. étrangers, 150-60, Arabes, 161-7; Y. A. Dagher, Fahâress al-maktaba
, Beyrouth, 1947, 105-12; Y. A. Dagher, Massâder al-
al-’Arabiyya fî’l-khâfiqayn
dirâssa al-adabiyya
, vol. II, 1800-1955, Beyrouth, 1955, 771-84; J. Fueck, Die
arabischen Studien in Europa, Leipzig, 1955; etc.
2. "Orientaliste," Grand Larousse encyclopédique
, Paris, 1963, VII, 1003-4.
3. This is the famous book of the master from Berlin: Paideia, Die Formung
des griechischen Menschen (I, Berlin-Leipzig, 1934), thus synopsized by M. Guidi,
"No broadening of the historical horizon can change anything of the fact that
our history starts with the Greeks (...). Evidently, this history cannot have the
whole planet for its theatre, but only the "hellenocentric" peoples (...), since it is
they who have taken from the Greeks the conscious principle of the true
Kultur (...). It is not at all difficult to draw the practical consequences from this
theoretical formula: the absolute and central value of antiquity, as the eternal
and unique source of the constitutive principle of our culture, and, consequently,
as the force of formation and education. Total humanism." (M. Guidi, "Trois
conférences sur quelques problèmes généraux de l’orientalisme," Annuaire de
l’Institut de philologie et d’histoire orientales—volume offert à Jean Capart ,
Brussels, 1935, 171-2.)
4. Our italics. They point out well the reference to one’s own self, i.e.,
to Europe.
130

., 171-80. He defined thus orientalism in 1954: "The
5. M. Guidi, op. cit
scholar from the Orient, or orientalist worthy of this name, does not limit
himself to the knowledge of certain ignored languages, or who can describe the
foreign customs of some peoples, but he is the one who unites rather the study of
certain sides of the Orient to the knowledge of the great spiritual and moral
forces which have influenced the formation of human culture, the one who has
been nourished on the lesson of ancient civilizations and who has been able to
evaluate the role of the different factors which have participated in the constitution
of the civilization of the Middle Ages, for example, or in the course of the
’, rabie
modern Renaissance." ("’Ilm al-Charq wa târikh al-’oumrân," Al-Zahrâ
awwal 1347 H., August-September 1928, quoted by Y. A. Dagher, Massâder ...,
771.)
6. On the definition of "europeocentrism," cf., among others, J. Needham,
"Le dialogue entre l’Europe et l’Asie," Comprendre, No. 12, 1954, 1-8; equally,
the preface of our Egypte, société militaire, Paris, 1962, 9-13.
7. R. Schwab, "L’orientalisme dans la culture et les littératures de l’Occident
, XXXII, 1952, Nos. 1-2, 136.
moderne," Oriente Moderno
8. A. J. Arberry, op. cit.
9. Y. A. Dagher, Massâder
..., 779-80.
10. J. Berque, "Cent vingt-cinq ans de sociologie maghrébine," Annales
, XI,
1956, No. 3, 299-321.
11. "The advanced studies, and in particular Oriental, philological and histori-
cal studies, are they not, on the contrary, the most valuable auxiliary of the
colonial expansionist policies of Italy?" (A. Cabaton, "L’orientalisme musulman
et l’Italie moderne," Rev Md. Mus . VII, 1914, No. 27, p. 24); the moving
postscript of Lawrence in The Seven Pillars of Wisdom (London, 1926), showing
how he was caught himself at his own game, is known: "Damascus had not
seemed a sheath for my sword, when I landed in Arabia; but its capture disclosed
,the exhaustion of my main springs of action. The strongest motive throughout
had been a personal one, not mentioned here, but present to me, I think, every
hour of these two years. Active pains and joys might fling up, like towers, among
my days: but, refluent as air, this hidden urge re-formed, to be the persistent
element of life, till near the end. It was dead before we reached Damascus;"
"The French nation works, accumulates. From its adventurous consuls to its
utopian designers of railroad lines, to its moved travelers, a Lamartine, a Barrès,
it edifies in the Orient a work, of which the Champollions, Sacys and Renans
erect the scientific counterpart. In this period the Arabs neglect their own past,
and stammer their noble language. Contemporary orientalism was born from
this vacancy. The exploration, the resurrection of such moral treasures was the
chance of the erudite Christian, who as well as the Christian of the Bank
concurrently revived the wasted space and filled the warehouses (...). For instance,
look at the Arab tribe, at beduinism in general, Orientalism approaches them
through three great political thrusts: the phase of our ’Arab Bureau,’ in Algeria,
until about .1870; the phase of the ’revolt in the desert,’ the triumph of British
agents in the Near East; the contemporary petroleum expansion." (J. Berque,
"Perspectives de l’Orientalisme contemporain," Ibla , XX, 1957, 220-1); in 1822,
the founders of the "Société Asiatique" pledge themselves to "permit to the
historians the explanation of the Antiquities of the peoples of the Orient," and to
131

collect a "valuable documentation on the diplomatic operations in the Levant and
the commercial operations in all of Asia;" among the questions posed to the
orientalists, at Lyon, let us point out the following: "Is it in the interest of the
Europeans to demand that treaties give them the right of residence in the interior
of China, in order to buy themselves cocoons and silk directly from the producers;
in order to establish spinning factories, and to engage in business in general?
What are the advantages and disadvantages of the coming of Chinese coolies into
foreign countries?" (Texts quoted by J. Chesneaux: "La recherche marxiste et le
, No. 95, Jan.-Feb.
réveil contemporain de l’Asie et de l’Afrique," La Pensée
1961, 4-5.)
12. On ethnist typology, cf. M. Rodinson, "L’Egypte nassérienne au miroir
marxiste," Les Temps Modernes , No. 203, April 1963, 1859-65.
13. J. Berque and L. Massignon, "Dialogue sur Les Arabes," Esprit , XXVIII,
1960, No. 288, 1506. On the relationship between orientalism and colonialism,
these words from L. Massignon, "I myself, strongly colonial at the time, wrote
to ’him about my hopes for a coming conquest of Morocco by arms, and he
answered me approvingly (letter No. 1 from In-Salah, Oct. 2, 1906). Let us
admit that Morocco then was in a terrible state. But fifty years of occupation,
without Lyautey and his high Franco-Moslem ideal, would have left nothing
that was essential." ("Foucauld in the desert before the God of Abraham, Agar
and Ismaël," Les mardis de Dar el-Salam, 1959, p. 59.)
14. Precise criticisms in University Grants Committee: Report of the Subcom-
mittee on Oiental, Slavonic, East European and African Studies (London, H.M.S.O.,
1961), under the presidency of Sir William Hayter; "Modern Far Eastern studies
are a closed book in almost every other history or social science faculty." (p. 38)
"The more inward looking characteristics of the language departments and their
lack of interest in modern studies and languages have contributed to a number of
unfortunate results." (p. 46), etc. A very recent selection, Etudes d’orientalisme
dédiées à la mémoire de Lévi-Provençal (2 vol., Paris, 1962), groups sixty-one
articles, only eight of which deal with the modern period, and three are of a
bio-bibliographical nature related to it.
15. J. Chesneaux, La recherche ..., 5.
16. Omar Al-Dassoûqui, Fî-’l-adab al-hadîth , 3rd edit., Cairo, 1954, 325-6;
Y. A. Dagher, Massâder ..., 779; N. al-Aqîqi, op. cit ., 207-9; Mohamed Hussein
Heykal, ’Hayât Mo’hammad, preface to the 2nd edit. (6th edit., Cairo, 1956), 60-1;
Anouar al-Guindi, Al-adab al-’Arabi al-’hadîth fî ma’rakat al-mouqâwama wa’l-
tagammo’ min’al-mou’hît ila’l-khalîg , Cairo, 1959, 621-4; then : Al-fikr al-’Arabi
al-mou’âsser fî maarakat al-taghrîb wa’l taba’iyya al-thaqâfiyya , Cairo, s.d.c., 1962,
271-85, etc.
17. Particularly the "Institute of Arab Manuscripts," directed by Prof. Salah
Eddine al-Mounajjed, attached to the Arab League; the review Magallat al-
makhtôutât al-’Arabiyya, which has been published in Cairo since 1955; the
creation of the new "Institute of Islamic Research," at the University Al-Azhar,
under the direction of Prof. Abdallah al-’Arabî , Al-Ahram Nov. 23, 1961); the
(
effort of restoration undertaken by the Ministry of Culture and National Guidance
of Egypt, mainly under the impetus of Fat’hi Radouân, Hussein Fawzi and Tharwat
’Okâcha, must be mentioned; similar efforts in Syria and Iraq, in particular. In
Egypt, the existentialist philosopher ’Abd al-Ra’hman Badawî has undertaken,
132

since 1940, a gigantic work of publication and has given the impetus to many
works on Moslem thought, while the great philologist, Mourad Kâmel, authori-
tatively cleared the ground in the Coptic, Ethiopian and Semitic field.
18. J. Berque mentions it at length, critically, both in Le Maghreb entre
les deux guerres (Paris 1962), and in his lectures at the Collège de France. Equally,
J. P. Naish, "The Connection of Oriental Studies with Commerce, Art and
Literature during the XVIIIth and XIXth Centuries," Journ. Manch. Eg. and Or.
Soc., XV, 1930, 33-9; J. Chesneaux, "French Historiography and the Evolution of
Colonial Vietnam," in D.G.E. Hall, Historical Writing on the Peoples of
Asia—Historians of South-East Asia, Oxford-London, 1961, 235-44.
19. Cf. M. Khalidi and O. Farroûkh, Al-tabchîr wa’l-isti’mâr fî’l-bilâd al-
’Arabiyya, Sayda-Beyrouth, 1953.
20. On this idea, cf. R. Makarius, La jeunesse intellectuelle d’Egypte au
lendemain de la Deuxième Guerre Mondiale (Paris-The Hague, 1960), and our
article "La vision du problème colonial par le monde afro-asiatique," publ. in
Cahiers inter. de sociologie, vol. 35, 1963, 145-56.
21. Jacques Berque, who stands as the friend of Arab renewal and the
link between our cultures, did not fail to honor several of our intellectuals.
I thank him myself for the mention he made, many times, of our works—par-
ticularly those of Mahmoûd al-’Alem and myself, as well as of the narrators and
novel writers of the Egyptian realist school—both in his lectures at the Collège
de France, in "L’inquiétude arabe des temps modernes" (Rev. des Et. Islamiques
XXVI, 1958, No. 1, 87-107, Les Arabes..., p. 102).
22. Yet it was Renan in France who theorized on the differentiation between
semitism and aryanism, the peoples of the first group being inferior, in every
respect, to those of the second group (cf. Histoire générale et système comparé
, 1st part, Paris, 1855); D. Kimson is influenced by it in
des langues sémitiques
his Pathologie de l’Islam et les moyens de le détruire (Paris, 1897). This theory
has since been continuously combated by all the thinkers and scholars of the
Arab world.
23. P. 10-11; a critical analysis of this book is not our purpose here.
24. Le Maghreb entre deux guerres , Paris, 1962, 8.
25. Perspectives
..., p. 237.
26. Exposé of the theoretical results in "Expression et signification dans la vie
arabe," L’Homme
, I, 1961, No. 1. 50-67.
27. Report of the Interdepartmental Commission of Enquiry on Oriental,
Slavonic, East European and African Studies, London, H.M.S.O., 1947; commen-
tary by A. J. Arberry, op. cit., pp. 240-9, analysis and balance sheet in Hayter
Report, 6-40.
Report 45-52.
28. Hayter ,
29. Hayter Report, 53-63. General P. Rcndot, who studies "Les Etats-Units
devant l’Orient d’aujourd’hui" (in Orient, 1957, No. 2, 19-52; No. 3, 31-80),
points to the role of the foundations, of the Language and Near-Eastern Area
School, attached to the American Embassy in Beyrouth, and the two American
universities of Beyrouth and Cairo (the latter, we should note, being the only
establishment of higher learning authorized in the U.A.R.); the statement of the
reasons given by the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor), for enlarging its
study program on the modern Orient, is expressed thus: "1) To make the greatest
133

possible number of Americans acquainted with the Near East; 2) To encourage
the idea that the United States have a vital interest in the present and future
developments in this area; 3) to constitute an elite group of intelligent Americans,
experts in the questions of the Near East." The judgement of the author on
the work accomplished is, however, most reserved. Cf. R. Bayly Windsor, "Arabic
and Islamic Studies in the U.S." (in Middle East Forum, No. 31, June 1956, 19-22).
30. "An Interpretation of Islamic History," Cahiers d’histoire mondiale, I,
1953, 39-62.
31. "Pour l’étude des sociétés orientales contemporaines," in Colloque sur la
sociologie musulmane—Actes, 11-14 Septembre 1961 (Brussels, 1962): "The fact
that we have congregated here to speak of Oriental societies in the absence of
our Oriental colleagues is an anomaly (...), which must be meditated upon.
Since our interpretations lead us, I think, beyond the political state of affairs,
bringing us to a questioning of the methods of our discipline, and, perhaps of its
object." (p. 85): "The regrettable absence of our Oriental colleagues among us
does not correspond, as might be thought, to a political situation, but to a
profound uneasiness, corresponding to the nature itself of the society we are
studying, in its relations with ours;" yet "we are not wrong in being such as I
describe us." (p. 457).
32. "Arâ’wa chata’hât ’annâ wa ’an târikhinâ," Al-Ahram, Dec. 21, 1962.
33. It must be pointed out, notably: "Le problème des échanges culturels,"
..., I. 141-51, which gives a résumé of the theses of the
in Etudes Lévi-Provençal
volumes edited by the author, particularly Unity and Variety in Moslem Civilization
(Chicago, 1955), and, with W. Hartner, Klassizismus und Kulturverfall (Frankfurt,
1960); "An Analysis of Islamic Civilization and Cultural Anthropology," in Actes
Coll. Bruxelles
, 21-71.
34. In one page alone—where the author laments: "Alas! the semantic
anarchy is only too real. And the escape, far from the facts, into verbalism, all
too frequent..." The following errors may be pointed out: al-’hiyâd al-îgâbî
(positive neutralism), which since 1959 has been substituted by ’adam al-in’hiyâz
(non-commitment), has not been made to disappear because the first expression
was "judged obsolete" and the second "considered to be more satisfactory," but
rather because of the new orientation of Egyptian policies, after the Bandoeng
period, at the moment of the repression of 1959 (cf. our Egypte ..., 219-42);
"cadres," translated by itârât in North Africa, is not called milâk in the Orient,
; "structure," as every philosophy student, every intellectual from
but simply, kâdr
the Arab countries knows, is called tarkîb in philosophical terminology, but never
; one learns, with the greatest stupefaction, that it was the
haykal, gihâz or nizâm
speech by M. Abdallah Ibrahim, on April 6, 1959, which opened "the road to a
modern Arab language in which words correspond to reality" (and before?); and
to quote niqâbât (trade unions), in use since 1908, in Cairo, al-gihâz al-
, while al-tarkib al-’ilwî designates
assâsi (infrastructure), in Egypt, al-tarkib al-assâsi
"superstructure," these two last terms have been in use since 1940-1945, among
Marxist intellectuals of the Orient, engaged in the struggle for liberation and
national edification ( , Paris 1960, 360). Cf. n. c. by M. Rodinson
L’arabe moderne
in Cahiers de l’Orient contemporain
, No. 50, 1952.
35. "Those countries that intend to accede to history and make history—says
J. Berque—probably have not even now chairs of modern history in their
134

faculties." (ialogue p. 1508). This text, which dates from 1960, seems to
...,
D
ignore the work in modern and contemporary history carried on at the University
of Cairo for the past two generations, as well as in Damascus, Bagdad and
Alexandria. In just one issue of the Proceedings of the Royal Society of Historical
Studies (Cairo, I, 1951, publ. in 1952), 77 pages in 194 are devoted to
contemporary history (article by M. M. Safwat and by G. E. al-Chayyâl). Chairs of
modern and contemporary history exist in the faculties of letters and political
science, in particular. These, of course, are examples, without pretending to
exhaust the subject. Cf. criticism of contemporary Arab historiography by A. G.
Chejne, "The Use of History by Modern Arab Writers," in Middle East Journ .,
XIV (1960, 4, 382-96).
us point to the fact that a great effort at understanding was made in
Let
European countries not directly engaged in traditional colonialism: in Germany,
cf. L. Rathmann, "Zur Widerspiegelung des antiimperialistischen Befreiungs-
bewegung der arabischen Völker in der bürgerlichen deutschen Historiographie,"
Zeitschriftfür Geschichtswissenschaft
, Berlin, X, 1962, No. 3, 548-74); in Spain,
F. Cantera Burgos, "Los estudios orientales en la España actual," Oriente Moderno,
XXXV, 1955, No. 1, 236-47, etc.
36. Perspectives de l’Orientalisme
..., 218-32. Same theme, at the Conference
of Brussels: "Orientalist sociology should aim at integrating itself in the oriental
societies, not by knowledge formerly tied to colonial expansion, but through a
contribution to the analysis, that is, to the construction from within." ..., Actes
(
458-9); H. Kruse-Elbeshausen, "Islamic Studies in Post-War Germany," Islamic
Culture, XXVI, 1952, No. 2, 51-6; on Spain, F. Cantera Burgos, "Los estudios
orientales en la España actual," in Oriente Moderno, XXXV, 1955, No. 1. 236-47;
on Belgium, G. Ryckmans, "L’orientalisme en Belgique," Revue gén. Belge, 1947,
No. 23, 724-38; on Italy, E. Rossi, "Near Eastern Studies in Italy," Middle Eastern
, VIII, 1957, No. 2, 57-60; on Finland, P. Aalto, "Les études orientales en
Affairs
Finlande," Archiv Orientalny, 1951, No. 19, 79-84; A. Abel, "Approches critiques
d’une étude sociologique du monde musulman contemporain," Etudes (Brussels),
I, 1962, Nos. 1-2, 3-16; etc.
37. Islam and Modern History , Princeton, 1960; in the same spirit : "A great
number of Christians, in addition to the author, would be profoundly happy if a
Moslem writer should undertake a similar study on contemporary Christianism."
This book overflows with interesting analyses and gives an overall view of Islamic
reality in Africa as well as in Asia.
38. The budget of one sole university institute in the United States—the
"Near Eastern Center" of the University of California in Los Angeles— is six
times the annual budget of a particular small European country.
39. Several Arab professors hold teaching positions in various American
universities, while others direct research departments.
40. The analysis of the "articles and studies" of the "table of contents for
years 1957-1962" of the new modernist review Orient gives clear indications about
this subject: four autochtonous authors out of nearly seventy-five; it is true that
a good part is constituted by the presentation of texts on the
literature, thought,
religion and politics of our countries. But these are materials of study for an
analyst who remains transcendent.
41. "Problems of Middle Eastern History" (Washington, 1956), in Studies
135

on the Civilization of Islam (London, 1962, 342-3); the author does not want to
take into consideration the historical and sociological research work carried out
in the Middle East (p. 339-40), except Introduction to the History of Education
in Modern Egypt, by J. Heyworth-Dunne (London, 1938). The important work of
W. Montgomery Watt, Islam and the Integration of Society (London, 1961), based
on the theories of K. Mannheim, is silent on recent Arab works; M. Rodinson
points out the most serious in his "Bilan des études mohammadiennes" (in Rev.
, fasc. 465, Jan-Mar., 1963), 169-220.
Historique
42. On the academic level, two works by J. Austruy, who theorizes on
, on the basis of a total ignorance of the Arab language and
the homo Islamicus
culture: Structure économique et civilisation—l’Egypte et le destin économique
de l’Islam (th. Dr., 1960), then L’Islam face au développement économique (Paris,
1961). On the side of journalism, J. and S. Lacouture decree in the matter of
culture and religion: "May the author be forgiven for having approached this
subject, not reading Arabic?"; then, referring to certain omissions: "We are dealing
here only with ’national’ culture"... ( , 2d. ed., Paris,
L’Egypte en mouvement
1962, 306-343); yet, the work abounds in good pieces. At the same time, S.
Lacouture publishes an Egypte (coll. "Petite Planète," Paris, 1962), in which
literature, thought, esthetics, etc., are judged peremptorily, which singles
out foreign writers living in Egypt who are totally unknown to the public.
Of course, these examples could be multiplied... "Consider only the question of
literatures. A non-European, who might visit the great reading room of the
British Museum or the Bibliothèque Nationale, and ask himself what this
enormous mass of books is good for, would be considered a dreadful barbarian.
But there are in the world other literatures of more or less equal span, such as,
for instance, Chinese literature, of which the average European, even the educated,
does not understand a single word. Is he not in his turn a barbarian?" (J. Needham,
Le dialogue..., p. 3, n. 1). C. Bremond, in a quick study on "Les Communications
, II, 1962,
de masse dans les pays en voie de développement" (in Communications
56-67), judges the overall problem on the basis of reports of European experts,
without any reference to an autochtonous work, of any country whatsoever.
43. A first selection of his studies and essays will be published soon :
, marxisme
Islam, idéologie .
44. "When at this date (1950) I decided to orient my research towards the
history of the Chinese proletariat and the Chinese working-class movement in the
wake of the October Revolution and World War I, it was essentially a sort of
Pascalian bet for me, expressing the conviction that it was possible and necessary
at the same time to constitute in a truly scientific discipline the study of the
contemporary history of China ("Recherches sur l’histoire du mouvement ouvrier
chinois," in Mouvement Social, No. 41, Oct. 1962, 1-12). The choice of the
central theme of research "the workers’ movement" and not "the national move-
ment" issued from the problematic of European Marxism.
45. The author disposes both of a library unique in the world of works and
documents relating to science and technology, as well as of groups of collaborators
who surround him at the "Caius and Gonville College," of which he is the
principal: Wang-Ching-Ning, Lu-Gwei-Djen, Ho Ping-Yü, Kenneth Robinson,
Rs’ao T’ien-Ch’in. The following volumes have already been published: vol. I:
Introductory Orientations (Cambridge-London, 1954); II: History of Scientific
136

Thought (1956); III: Mathematics and Sciences of the Heavens and the Earth
(1959); IV (A): Physics and Physical Technology-Physics (1963).
46. W. Z. Laqueur notes that the new central periodical of Soviet orientalism
Sovetskoe Vostokvedenie
, appeared in April 1955, the month of Bandoeng; he
points out the decisive role of A. I. Mikoyan, B. G. Gafurov (at the same time
member of the Academy of Sciences and the Central Committee of the C. P.),
N. A. Mukhtidinov and A. F. Sultanov, all of them leaders of non-European
origin, and he designates some publications that he thinks important, namely:
Contemporary Persia, Contemporary Syria, the book by E. A. Lebedev on Jordan
(1956), that of A. N. Kotlov on the Iraqi Revolution (1958), of I. P. Belaev,
American Imperialism in Saudi Arabia (1957), and of M. F. Gataulin, Agrarian
Relations in Syria (1957), etc. ( The Soviet Union and the Middle East , London,
1959, 168-86). The most important publications on neo-orientalism in the socialist
countries are: M. Perlmann, "The Study of the Islamic Middle East in the Soviet
Union 1940-1956" (in Report on Current Research , 1957, 17-26); B. G. Gafurov,
"Immediate Tasks of Soviet Oriental Studies" (in Vestnik Akademii Nauk , 9,
K novym uspekham sovietskogo vostokvedenia (Moscow,
1957); A. N. Mukhtidinov,
1957); M. Guboglu, "40 ans d’études orientales en U.R.S.S. 1917-1957" (in Studia
et Acta Orientalia, I, 1958, 281-316), in which he speaks of the "crushing in the
Trotzkyite manner of the ’mode of Asian production,’ in 1934" (p. 295); "La
prima conferenza Pansovietica degli Orientalisti, Tashkent, 4-11 June 1957" (in
Or. Mod. 38, Feb. 1958, 202); W. Z. Laqueur, "The Shifting Line in Soviet
Orientalogy (in Problems of Communism , 5, 1956, 20-6); R. Loewenthal, "Russian
materials on Islam and Islamic Institutions, a Selective Bibliography (in Der Islam ,
XXXIII, 1958, Nos. 1-2, 280-309); then: "Russian Materials on Arabs and Arab
Countries, a Select. Bibl." (in idem, XXXIV, 1959, 174-87); "Dix ans d’études
orientales en Pologne" (in Rocz. Orj ., 20, 1956, 7-14); D. Sinor, "Dix années
d’orientalisme hongrois" (in Journal Asiatique, 239, 1951, 211-37); Les actes des
, 20-25 June 1949; J. Reychman,
journées scientifiques d’orientalisme, Praha-Dobrí&scaron;
"Les études orientales (islamiques) en Pologne" (in Stud. et Acta Orient., II, 1959,
161-87); J. Kabrda, "Les études orientales en Yougoslavie" (in Arch. Or. 25, 1957,
146-55); J. Blaskovic, "Les buts, l’organisation et l’activité de l’école orientalistique
Tchécoslovaque" (in Stud. et Acta Or., 2, 1959, 61-9); K. Petrá&ccaron;ek, "Les études
arabes et islamiques et la sémitologie en Tchécoslovaquie" (in Arch. Or., 19, 1951,
98-107); J. Rypka, "L’Orientalisme en Tchécoslovaquie" (in Arch. Or. 19, 1951,
15-26); M. Guboglu, "Contributions roumaines aux études orientales" (in Arch.
Or., 24, 1956, 459-75); D. Zbaritel, Die Orientalistik in der Tschechoslovakei ,
Prague, 1959; etc.
47. "Christianity and the Asian Cultures" (in Theology, LXV, 1962, 1-8).
48. "There were long centuries of preparation during which Europe was
assimilating Arab teaching, Indian thought and Chinese technology;" "Europe is
not interested in the inventions which have made these voyages (of the explorers)
possible. The compass and the stern-post rudder, originally from China; the
multiple masts, from India and Indonesia; the latin artimon sails due to the
sailors of Islam;" "frequently one hears talk to the effect that the Europeans alone
had discovered the whole rest of the world. A limited conception, and not
at all true before the Renaissance. Bactrian Greeks did not discover the Chinese;
on the contrary, it was the Chinese who discovered the Greeks (in the person
137

of Tchang Tchien about 125 B.C.). Two centuries later, Kan Ying penetrated
as far as the Persian Gulf, that is, a lot farther West than any Roman had
traveled East. At the end of the Ming dynasty, the Chinese flag could be seen
flown everywhere, in the Pacific and the Indian Ocean, from Zanzibar to Borneo,
and Borneo to Kamtchatka;" "The idea one hears expressed quite frequently,
namely, that it is due to European civilization that the true historic sense was
developed, is altogether inadmissible. The honor rather reverts to Chinese civili-
zation, whose 24 historic dynasties, beginning in 90 B.C., form a body of work
by historians without equal anywhere. (...) Even if one persists in considering
’historical sense’ as ’philosophy of history,’ the European contributions were also
not the first, since Ibn Kaldoun lived three centuries before Vico;" "One cannot
accept the thesis, according to which it was from Europe that the idea of making
one single society of the human race radiated. The Confucean proposition, ’between
the four seas all men are brothers,’ dates back to the fourth century B.C. In India,
Kabir was only one of the voices in the choir of poets and prophets of human
solidarity;" "Certain European scholars consider that modern science and technology,
in their victorious radiation across the whole world, have been accompanied by a
secularized form, which has branched out, mutilated, from European civilization.
They assert, not without sadness, that the European system of religious values
has been rejected by all the national independence movements of Asia and Africa.
Since, for these thinkers, Christianity is inseparable from the spirit of modern
science; it provided, so to speak, the intellectual climate for its evolution. In
accepting such theories, one was not far from admitting the predication for a
new crusade, in order to impose European religious ideas on other cultures. Its
flags could well bear the sign of the cross, but they would be born by capitalism
and imperialism. But what precisely are the philosophical elements inseparable
from science and technology, this is what no one has as yet been able to determine."
...) Since then the deeply human encyclica, Pacem in terris
Le dialogues
( , of
John XXIII has marked the will of catholicism to put an end to this vision
of things.
49. "A. I. Mikoyan’s Speech at the 25th International Congress of Orientalists"
, 1950, No. 5, 3-6). The (disinterested) aim of
(in Problemi Vostokvedenia
orientalism is that of "the military engineer studying the offensive or defensive
works of the enemy: its destruction," said Goguyer in his translation of Ibn Mâlik’s
Alfiyya (quoted by L. Massignon, Mardis de Dar el-Salâm
, IX, 1958, 59); etc.
50. K. Mueller, "Der Ostblok und die Entwicklungsländer," Das Parlament
,
July 12, 1961, 397-411.
51. Exposé in Colloque sur les recherches des instituts français de sciences
humaines en Asie , org. by the Foundation Singer-Polignac, 23-31 Oct. 1959 (Paris,
1960), 39-41.
52. The theses established in Oriental Despotism have been severely criticized,
particularly by E. E. Leach, "Hydraulic Society in Ceylon" (in Past and Present
,
1959, No. 15, 2-29); J. Needham, "The Past in China’s Present" (in Centennial
Review, IV, 1960, No. 2, 164-5); J. Chesneaux, La recherche
..., 12, No. 5. A
recent lecture by the Hungarian scholar F. Tokei, Sur le "mode de
production
," at C.E.R.M. (Paris, June 1962, 35 pages), on the basis of a recent text
asiatique
by Marx, Formen, die der kapitalistischen Produktion vorgehen: Grundrisse der
138

Kritik der politiachen Oekonomie. Rohentwurf (Berlin, 1953), inaugurates a new
moment of Marxist research on this problem.
53. Marx-Engels, The First Indian War of Independence, Moscow, 1960,
36-37. It is an entirely different problem than "mutual fault" based on the theory
called the "reciprocity of perspectives"...
54. Remarkable theoretical report by F. Althusser, "Contradiction et surdé-
, No. 106, 1962,
termination," then "Sur la dialectique matérialiste," La Pensée
3-20, and No. 116, 1963, 5-46. Several studies, to be published in 1963-64,
formulate the first lines of our concept of civilization, national-cultural, of social
evolution in the Arab world; the first, "Problematica del socialismo nel mondo
arabo," in Nuovi Argomenti (61-66, 1963-64, 141-83).
55. According to our opinion, the theoretical basis of the Sino-Soviet di-
vergencies consists in the refusal as a matter of principle by the Chinese leaders
of any kind of perpetuation of "europeocentrism" in Marxist theory and in
revolutionary strategy. Already, in 1955, Georg Lukács wrote: "In the course of
their march towards modern civilization, in their effort to liquidate the residues
of their own Middle Ages, countries such as India follow a road which gives a
place at least partially to socialism. It is entirely conceivable that the original
characteristics of these social transformations will express themselves through new
literary forms, which could not be reduced to abstract schemata." ( Die Gegenwarts-
, 1955, Hamburg, sub. Wider den missver-
bedeutung des kritischen Realismus
, Fr. trans. by de Gandillac, Paris, 1960, 137).
standenen Realismus
..., 11-16.
56. J. Chesneaux, La recherche
57. "The 21st Congress of the C.P.S.U. and the Tasks of Orientalogy" (in
Probl. Vostokv
., I, 1959, 18-25); also M. Mancall, "The 21st Party Congress and
Soviet Orientalogy" (in J. Asian Studies
, XIX, 1960, No. 2, 18-25).
58. Enrica Collotti-Pischel, in Cina, India ed Egitto e la " fase di transizione
,"
rightly points out the geographic and historical affinities of the Arab and Moslem
researchers with their European colleagues, while the gap deepens as soon as China
is approached ( Problemi del Socialismo
, VI, 1963, No. 2, 193-213). Her book,
La rivoluzione ininterrotta (Turin, 1962) constitutes the most sympathetic effort
undertaken by European Marxism to understand the Chinese vision of history.
59. Colloque sur la recherche
, cf. note 51.
60. The latter, in his remarkable lectures at the Sorbonne, namely: L’Orient
philosophique: généralités, définitions; Missionaires et philosophes; Sinophiles et
Sinophobes (stencilled issues, Paris, 1960-62).
61. Fung Yeou Lan, History of Chinese Philosophy , Peking, 1937, Princeton,
2 vol. (1952-3) and J. Needham, Science and Civilization..., vol. II.
62. Under the impetus of the rector Cheikh Moustapha ’Abd al-Râziq (1882-
1947), the method of history of Moslem philosophy was renovated, particularly
in his Tamhîd lî târîkh al-falsafâ al-Islâmiyya
, Cairo, 1944. Cf. works by ’Abd
al-Rahmân Badawî, ’Abbâs al’Aqqâd, ’Osmân Amin, Mohammad Youssef Moussa,
Ibrahim Madkoûr, Isma’îl Mazhar, Mohammad ’Abd al-Hâdi Aboû Rîda, ’Omar
Farroûkh, etc. Cf. Al-fikr al-falsafi fî mi’at ’âm (Amer. Univ., Beyrouth, 1962),
pp. 9-70, 102-241, 298-392; our review of "How Greek Science Passed to the
Arabs," by De Lacy O’Leary (London, 1951), in Al-Magalla, I, 1957, No. 4,
125-7, etc.
63. Paul Sweezy, The Present as History
, New York, 1953.
64. Cf. Acts of the conference Probleme des Neokolonialismus und die Politik
139

der beiden deutschen Staaten gegenüber dem nationalen Befreiungskampf der Völker
April 5-8 1961, Leipzig), 2 vol. The text quoted is from the article by Mancall.
65. J. Chesneaux established (in La recherche..., 10-11) the following approxi-
mate table from the 20th Congress of Orientalists (Paris, 1948), to the 25th,
held in Moscow, in 1960:
66. The Past

... (in Centennial Review, IV, 1960, No. 3, 308).
67. La Revue d’histoire économique et sociale de l’Orient
, dir. by Cl. Cahen
(in Leyden since 1957), deals primarily with the classical periods. In the sum-
mary of the main Marxist or near-Marxist historical journals of Western
Past and Present (Oxford), Recherches internationales (Paris), Studi Sto-
Europe—
rici (Rome)—the contemporary Orient continues to occupy a largely secondary
place. The English Marxists (namely Lawrence and Wishart Publishers) devote
much more attention to it, notably R. Palme Dutt, The Crisis of Britain and the
British Empire (London, 1957), Problems of Contemporary History (1963), the
works of J. Woddis on Africa, etc.
68. Quoted several times in the preceding notes.
69. On this institute, cf. Probl. Vostokv
., 1960, No. 6, 221 sqq.
70. Colloque sur les recherches
...
71. H. Passin, China’s Cultural Diplomacy, London, 1962, 107-15.
72. In the United States, it is interesting to note that the "main emphasis
has been put on six ’critical’ languages, which are Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Japanese,
Portuguese and Russian; however, eighteen other Slav and Asian languages have
been selected to receive attention," says the Hayter Report (p. 55), which formulates
its own conclusions for Great Britan, p. 92-99.
140

Abdel-Malek - Orientalism in Crisis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abdel-Malek - Orientalism in Crisis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abdel-Malek - Orientalism in Crisis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the main topic being discussed in the text?

What is the main topic being discussed in the text?

What factors have contributed to a crisis in orientalism according to the author?

What factors have contributed to a crisis in orientalism according to the author?

Diogenes

The online version of this article can be found at:

Additional services and information for Diogenes can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://dio.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

>> Version of Record - Dec 1, 1963

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

"It is indispensable to view Europe from the outside, to

humanity which is formed by the peoples of Asia and

In order to dispel &dquo;the iron curtain of false enigmas,&dquo; of which

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

principle become an unavoidable practical necessity, precisely due

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

consideration, but also as the only means that would enable

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

1 ) General conception, that is, the vision of the Orient and

a) On the level of the position of the problem, and the

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

language, which is a sacred language, and which is also an

2. Methods of study and research.

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

mistakes, contradictions, errors, just intended

3. The instruments of study and re.rearch:

a) These are constituted essentially by the accumulation and

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

TWO FACES OF NEO-ORIENTALISM

&dquo;Two Europes&dquo; are rethinking this complex: the Europe (and

Two essential documents-the inaugural lecture of Jacques

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

system, as enriching as it might have been, should ever have

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

imperial responsibilities.&dquo; It will be a question of organizing

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

Egyptian historian Hussein Mo’nes easily demonstrated that a

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

2. Methods of study and re.rearch:

a) The past continues to occupy the first place in Oriental

known, is the study of sectors of reality as such, as &dquo;structures,&dquo;

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

subject of a whole sector-Arab, Chinese, Asian, Latin-American,

3. In.rtrument.r of study and research,.

a) The Western powers, notably the United States, intend

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

&dquo;it must be established, with no possible equivocation, that the

particularly in Asian and African affairs with, here and there,

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

B. NEO-ORIENTALISM IN THE SOCIALIST SECTOR

The socialist sector of Europe (states and movements) will be

preoccupations of Marxist methodology and the political re-

Downloaded from dio.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on January 11, 2013

a) On the level of the problematic, the end of European