5 ms·

> The expeditionary force that Napoleon Bonaparte sent to Egypt in 1798 included 122 scientists and intellectuals, among them a handful of professional Oriental

by deogeo 7y ago

> The expeditionary force that Napoleon Bonaparte sent to Egypt in 1798 included 122 scientists and intellectuals, among them a handful of professional Orientalists. The history of Orientalism is rich in tales of Westerners assuming Oriental masquerade, as if they wanted to become, and not simply to master, the Other. It would be 30 years after this attempt to 'master' the Other, that the Greek war for independence from the Ottoman empire was won. It boggles the mind how one can write such a long article on history, without even the briefest mention of Arab invasions and colonialism in Europe (or slavery - "between 1 million and 1.25 million Europeans were captured between the 16th and 19th centuries by Barbary corsairs, who were vassals of the Ottoman Empire, and sold as slaves." [1]). As much as this article tries to paint the Orient as being viewed by Europe as some sort of curiosity, it was in fact an existential threat for the better part of a millennium. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade

rudiv 7y ago
I think you regard this article as a tidbit to be understood by itself, but it's more of a reflection on the book. You seem to be aggrieved with it, can I ask why? Or is it specifically because the Ottoman colonization of Greece was not mentioned? Because I can think of many other significant historical events that are not mentioned, but I fail to see how that's relevant.
- deogeo 7y ago
  > You seem to be aggrieved with it, can I ask why? I think I was very clear as to why: the article heavily implies Arab-European relations were that of one-sided colonization by Europeans, when in fact, until very recently, the opposite was the case. This would be understandable if it had limited itself to more recent history, but as it stands, I consider it lying by omission.
  - mxfh 7y ago
    That's what Said's book is for and it couldn't be much clearer: "Not for nothing did Islam come to symbolize terror, devastation, the demonic. hordes of hated barbarians. For Europe. Islam was a lasting trauma. Until the end of the seventeenth century the "Ottoman peril" lurked alongside Europe to represent for the whole of Christian civilization a constant danger" The article reflects on the impact the book had since publication, it's not even close to be mistaken for an introduction or recollection of the whole topic. https://books.google.de/books?id=npF5BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA59&dq=Not+for+nothing+did+Islam+come+to+symbolize+terror,+devastation,+the+demonic.+hordes+of+hated+barbarians.+For+Europe.+Islam+was+a+lasting+trauma.+Until+the+end+of+the+seventeenth+century+the+%22Ottoman+peril%22+lurked+alongside+Europe+to+represent+for+the+whole+of+Christian+civilization+a+constant+danger&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj9vI3f3rziAhXKQxUIHbnABZoQ6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=Not%20for%20nothing%20did%20Islam%20come%20to%20symbolize%20terror%2C%20devastation%2C%20the%20demonic.%20hordes%20of%20hated%20barbarians.%20For%20Europe.%20Islam%20was%20a%20lasting%20trauma.%20Until%20the%20end%20of%20the%20seventeenth%20century%20the%20%22Ottoman%20peril%22%20lurked%20alongside%20Europe%20to%20represent%20for%20the%20whole%20of%20Christian%20civilization%20a%20constant%20danger&f=false https://books.google.de/books?id=npF5BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA59&dq=Not...
Ericson2314 7y ago
That's not an "existential threat". No European state bothered to care about that piracy until Sweden and the US in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars . The bigger states were evidently happy to pay the tribute—this is cost cutting not defense.
- iguy 7y ago
  Some paid, some fought -- it was the fact that they no longer flew the British flag that meant the Americans had to start playing this game too. Piracy certainly wasn't existential. But also wasn't the whole threat -- 1683 must have felt pretty existential in Vienna. As did 1453 in Constantinople. Of course that's not a European state... but that's pretty much the definition.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >As did 1453 in Constantinople. Of course that's not a European state... but that's pretty much the definition. Well, it [Constantinople and Byzantium] certainly was a European state, the Eastern Roman Empire, which kept the lights on when as the Western one was dissolving and finding itself again after Rome declined.
    - iguy 7y ago
      Sure, it was. My point is that claiming something like "no European state faced an existential threat from Arabs" is a bit circular -- the definition of Europe is very close to being those parts of the Roman world which were not (permanently) conquered. (Or if you think it's a geographic term, then the reason this particular geographic lumping is important, as opposed to say Mediterranean.)
- Swizec 7y ago
  Don't know about the Barbary corsairs and piracy, but in Slovenia we very much saw Ottoman invasions as an existential threat. Our history is littered with reference to "The big bad Turk who steals your kids, razes your fields, and rapes your wives". That shit happened. Regularly. To the point that a whole cultural heritage around fortified churches developed. The peasants would retreat into their church behind battlements, and hunker down until the Ottomans left. The village would get burned down and the crops were gone, but at least almost everyone survived. It didn't help that the Habsburg monarchy saw this as a successful strategy. Oh okay they're just burning the peasants, at least they're not getting as far as Vienna. This is working. Of course once or twice they did get as far as Vienna and it was bad ... This period of history left a deep seated distrust of islamic nations so strong that the whole "islam vs. catholic/orthodox" thing still featured as a driving force in the mid 90's Balkan wars. As an interesting curiosity, if you go to Bosnia around the Mostar region you can see a very interesting divide. Left side of the river littered with church spires, right side full of minarets. Barely any mixing.
house_atr 7y ago
They weren't pirates. The Barbary traders were responding to the European inquisition that saw pogroms all over Europe that slaughtered and tortured Muslims and Jews alike. And the attacks and conquest by Christians against Andalusia. There was also a sense of containing European expansion after the crusades. For instance, many of the Jews that settled in North Africa were Iberian refugees rescued by those "pirates".
sonnyblarney 7y ago
More broadly I would think that the negative attitude towards Orientalism is a little xenocentric, because it suggests somehow only Orientalists were a problem of that type during that era. I'd argue it was probably a common 'ism' in the world given one cultures view of another, and frankly demure compared to most past activity. At least Napoleon brought 'scientists' who'd be keenly trying to study something. That's already miles beyond what most entities would do. Side note: Napoleon is weirdly unreferenced entity in North America, I think due to the fact he was French and not part of the Anglosphere directly. So much fodder for pop culture there, It'd be great to see a decent film about his foray into Egypt, or rather, a film in which that was the setting. Or even a cheesy netflix 'game of thrones' type thing that went through the revolution, his rise and demise. So many actual crazy stories there, they don't even need to wait for the author to write it ...
rawTruthHurts 7y ago
The unity of Europe in that era was never such to consider the East "an existential threat"
- baud147258 7y ago
  1683 must have felt pretty existential in Vienna
  - rawTruthHurts 7y ago
    At least we got croissants

by deogeo 7y ago

rudiv 7y ago

I think you regard this article as a tidbit to be understood by itself, but it's more of a reflection on the book. You seem to be aggrieved with it, can I ask why? Or is it specifically because the Ottoman colonization of Greece was not mentioned? Because I can think of many other significant historical events that are not mentioned, but I fail to see how that's relevant.

deogeo 7y ago
> You seem to be aggrieved with it, can I ask why? I think I was very clear as to why: the article heavily implies Arab-European relations were that of one-sided colonization by Europeans, when in fact, until very recently, the opposite was the case. This would be understandable if it had limited itself to more recent history, but as it stands, I consider it lying by omission.
- mxfh 7y ago
  That's what Said's book is for and it couldn't be much clearer: "Not for nothing did Islam come to symbolize terror, devastation, the demonic. hordes of hated barbarians. For Europe. Islam was a lasting trauma. Until the end of the seventeenth century the "Ottoman peril" lurked alongside Europe to represent for the whole of Christian civilization a constant danger" The article reflects on the impact the book had since publication, it's not even close to be mistaken for an introduction or recollection of the whole topic. https://books.google.de/books?id=npF5BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA59&dq=Not+for+nothing+did+Islam+come+to+symbolize+terror,+devastation,+the+demonic.+hordes+of+hated+barbarians.+For+Europe.+Islam+was+a+lasting+trauma.+Until+the+end+of+the+seventeenth+century+the+%22Ottoman+peril%22+lurked+alongside+Europe+to+represent+for+the+whole+of+Christian+civilization+a+constant+danger&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj9vI3f3rziAhXKQxUIHbnABZoQ6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=Not%20for%20nothing%20did%20Islam%20come%20to%20symbolize%20terror%2C%20devastation%2C%20the%20demonic.%20hordes%20of%20hated%20barbarians.%20For%20Europe.%20Islam%20was%20a%20lasting%20trauma.%20Until%20the%20end%20of%20the%20seventeenth%20century%20the%20%22Ottoman%20peril%22%20lurked%20alongside%20Europe%20to%20represent%20for%20the%20whole%20of%20Christian%20civilization%20a%20constant%20danger&f=false https://books.google.de/books?id=npF5BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA59&dq=Not...

Ericson2314 7y ago

That's not an "existential threat". No European state bothered to care about that piracy until Sweden and the US in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_Wars . The bigger states were evidently happy to pay the tribute—this is cost cutting not defense.

iguy 7y ago
Some paid, some fought -- it was the fact that they no longer flew the British flag that meant the Americans had to start playing this game too. Piracy certainly wasn't existential. But also wasn't the whole threat -- 1683 must have felt pretty existential in Vienna. As did 1453 in Constantinople. Of course that's not a European state... but that's pretty much the definition.
- coldtea 7y ago
  >As did 1453 in Constantinople. Of course that's not a European state... but that's pretty much the definition. Well, it [Constantinople and Byzantium] certainly was a European state, the Eastern Roman Empire, which kept the lights on when as the Western one was dissolving and finding itself again after Rome declined.
  - iguy 7y ago
    Sure, it was. My point is that claiming something like "no European state faced an existential threat from Arabs" is a bit circular -- the definition of Europe is very close to being those parts of the Roman world which were not (permanently) conquered. (Or if you think it's a geographic term, then the reason this particular geographic lumping is important, as opposed to say Mediterranean.)
Swizec 7y ago
Don't know about the Barbary corsairs and piracy, but in Slovenia we very much saw Ottoman invasions as an existential threat. Our history is littered with reference to "The big bad Turk who steals your kids, razes your fields, and rapes your wives". That shit happened. Regularly. To the point that a whole cultural heritage around fortified churches developed. The peasants would retreat into their church behind battlements, and hunker down until the Ottomans left. The village would get burned down and the crops were gone, but at least almost everyone survived. It didn't help that the Habsburg monarchy saw this as a successful strategy. Oh okay they're just burning the peasants, at least they're not getting as far as Vienna. This is working. Of course once or twice they did get as far as Vienna and it was bad ... This period of history left a deep seated distrust of islamic nations so strong that the whole "islam vs. catholic/orthodox" thing still featured as a driving force in the mid 90's Balkan wars. As an interesting curiosity, if you go to Bosnia around the Mostar region you can see a very interesting divide. Left side of the river littered with church spires, right side full of minarets. Barely any mixing.

house_atr 7y ago

They weren't pirates. The Barbary traders were responding to the European inquisition that saw pogroms all over Europe that slaughtered and tortured Muslims and Jews alike. And the attacks and conquest by Christians against Andalusia. There was also a sense of containing European expansion after the crusades. For instance, many of the Jews that settled in North Africa were Iberian refugees rescued by those "pirates".

sonnyblarney 7y ago

More broadly I would think that the negative attitude towards Orientalism is a little xenocentric, because it suggests somehow only Orientalists were a problem of that type during that era. I'd argue it was probably a common 'ism' in the world given one cultures view of another, and frankly demure compared to most past activity. At least Napoleon brought 'scientists' who'd be keenly trying to study something. That's already miles beyond what most entities would do. Side note: Napoleon is weirdly unreferenced entity in North America, I think due to the fact he was French and not part of the Anglosphere directly. So much fodder for pop culture there, It'd be great to see a decent film about his foray into Egypt, or rather, a film in which that was the setting. Or even a cheesy netflix 'game of thrones' type thing that went through the revolution, his rise and demise. So many actual crazy stories there, they don't even need to wait for the author to write it ...

rawTruthHurts 7y ago

The unity of Europe in that era was never such to consider the East "an existential threat"

baud147258 7y ago
1683 must have felt pretty existential in Vienna
- rawTruthHurts 7y ago
  At least we got croissants