by Bonine, Michael E. ; Amanat, Abbas; Gasper, Michael Ezekiel
76. Kayserling, “Richelieu, Buxtorf père et fils et Jacob Roman,” 74–95.
77. Lamport, “Légende Ateniénne,” 402–4; “Flora Orientalis,” La Rivista Europea (1873): 423–24; Amadori-Virgilj, La questione Rumeliota (Macedonia, Vecchia Serbia, Albania, Epiro) e la politica Italiana, 639; Fernández y González, Historia general de España, 58.
78. Goethe, West-oestlicher Divan, 301.
79. For the reception of Goethe’s conceptualization, see, for example, Michelet, Das System der Philosophie, 258.
80. Laffitte, Les grands types de l’humanité, 345; Ludlow, Age of the Crusades, 60; “Talk About New Books,” Catholic World 64 (February 1897): 700; Bernard, De Toulon au Tonkin, 88; Stanley, “New Books of Travels,” 330–38; Beazley, Dawn of Modern Geography, 6; Morey, Outlines of Ancient History, 25.
81. Curzon, Problems of the Far East, 6–7.
82. “Problems of the Far East,” Book News 13 (November 1895): 85.
83. Pall Mall Gazette (October 30, 1895); Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine 158 (December 1895): 930.
84. Gordon, “Problem of the Middle East,” 413–24.
85. Mahan, “Persian Gulf and International Relations,” 237.
86. Chirol, Middle Eastern Question.
87. Vambéry, Western Culture in Eastern Lands.
88. Dickins, “The Far East,” 577–78; Eliot, Letters from the Far East, 91; Wilser, “Weltbetrachtung eines Ariers,” 409–29; Steed, “Quintessence of Austria,” 225–47; Dyer, Japan in World Politics, 6; Seymour, Diplomatic Background of the War, 85, 122–25, 159–62; “A Missionary Survey of the Year 1917,” The Biblical World 51 (March, 1918), 170; Holdich, Boundaries in Europe and the Near East, 1.
89. Toynbee, Western Question in Greece and Turkey, 5–10.
90. Ibid.; see the map at the end of the book.
91. “The Near Eastern Question” Review of Reviews 12 (December 1895), 475; “The Near Eastern Question,” Review of Reviews 13 (January 1896), 4; Miller, “Europe and the Ottoman Power Before the Nineteenth Century,” 452–72; Monroe, Turkey and the Turks, 301; Courtney, Nationalism and War in the Near East, 1; Gibbons, Introduction to World Politics, 96.
92. Hart, “Reservations as to the Near Eastern Question,” 120–24.
93. McCarthy, Story of Gladstone’s Life, 459; Daubeny, Strength and Decay of Nations, 29; Phillips, Modern Europe, 341.
94. The number of writings on the conceptual transition from the Eastern Question to the region-based conception of the Question is simply overwhelming; the following provides a representative selection. For the Nearer Eastern Question, see Mc-Carthy, Story of Gladstone’s Life, 459; Daubeny, Strength and Decay of Nations, 29. For the Near Eastern Question, see Perris, Eastern Crisis of 1897, 46; Williams, “Russian Advance in Asia,” 306–19; Miller, “Europe and the Ottoman Power Before the Nineteenth Century,” 452–72; Monroe, Turkey and the Turks, 301; Courtney, Nationalism and War in the Near East, 1; Gibbons, Introduction to World Politics, 96. For the Middle Eastern Question, see Gordon, “Problem of the Middle East,” 413–24; Chirol, Middle Eastern Question; Birdwood, “Province of Sind,” 593–610; Kawakami, What Japan Thinks, 176. For the Far Eastern Question, see Faber, Mind of Mencius, 3; O’Donovan, The Merv Oasis, 448; Duncan, Corea and the Powers.
95. Turhan, Other Empire, 4.
96. The sick man metaphor became the staple of the Eastern Question debate after the Ottoman victory against Russia in the Crimean War, and it has a colorful conceptual history of its own in Western imagination. It could be attributed to the sultan himself or to the Ottoman Empire in association with a geographical location, a civilizational entity, or some abstraction. It was mainly used with respect to the Near East. For the sick man of the Near East, see Meadows, Chinese and Their Rebellions, 188; Adler, Voice of America on Kishineff, 283; Barrett, Russia’s New Era, 40. For the sick man of the Orient, see “Geography and Travels,” Christian Examiner 64 (1858), 139–42. For the sick man of the East, see Comte de Montalembert, “Sardinia and Rome,” Brownson’s Quarterly Review 2 (July 1861): 403–16. For the sick man of the Bosporus, see Cook, Biology, 137. For the sick man of the Golden Horne, see Gilpin, Cosmopolitan Railway, 147. For the sick man of Europe, see Hulburt, “The Mexican Question,” Knickerbocker 53 (March 1859): 224–33. For the sick man of the Balkan Peninsula, see “Slav and Moslem,” Critic 21 (March, 1894), 321. For the sick man of nations, see W. H. Allen, “From Advance Shifts of the Protectionist Theory of Money,” American Economist 54 (September 1914), 152.
97. Brockhaus’ Konversations-Lexikon, 14th ed., vol. 17 (Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1892–1897), 818a, s.v. “Historische Karte zur Orientalischen Frage.”
98. İsmail Hami’s understanding of “the Near East” (Şark-ı Karib) consisted of the Ottoman Empire and Iran. See his essays “İran İhtilafnamesi,” 10–15, and “Avrupa’nın Beyhude Te şebbüsleri,” 214–16.
99. Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi (1919–20) MV 217/45, 219/35, 219/70, 221/257, 223/48, 252/1, 253/74, 256/122, 256/34; İ.DUİT 12/41, 71/97, 71/111, 71/127, 100/1–7.
100. The association was founded in 1921 in İzmir while the city was under Greek occupation; it pleaded with the Greek government for recognition of their rights as a nationality. See Gingeras, “Notorious Subjects, Invisible Citizens,” 89–108.
101. See, for example, “Şark-ı Karîb Buhranı ve İçinden Çıkmanın Çaresi” [The Crisis of the Near East and the Way Out of It], İrşad Dergisi 19 (Aralık 1921).
102. Aydın, Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia, 71–93.
103. Toynbee, Murderous Tyranny of the Turks, 7.
104. St. Clair and Brophy, Twelve Years’ Study of the Eastern Question in Bulgaria, v.
105. Urquhart mocks this attitude of his generation further: “These prejudices, all dictated by self-love, hinder him from seeing what is different from himself; diversities offend him. He discovers that a Turk believes that a public debt is a bad thing. ‘The ignoramus!’ he exclaims. That a Turk regards this debt as contrary to religion. ‘Ah, the fanatic!’ He discovers again that a Turk has a repugnance to the idea of an assembly which makes laws. ‘Ah, the slave!’ That a Turk despises a representative chamber. ‘Ah, the tool of despotism!’” Urquhart, “Islam and the Constitutional System,” 177–82.
106. See, for example, Kemal, Renan müdaafanamesi.
Chapter 2
1. The expansion of the Middle East may be traced in recent U.S. college textbooks: Aroian and Mitchell, Modern Middle East and North Africa; Eickelman, The Middle East and Central Asia; Cleveland, History of the Modern Middle East; Cleveland’s second edition (2000) included “Expanding the Middle East: The Regional Reintegration of Central Asia and Transcaucasia,” 517–23, which was dropped in his third and fourth editions. For a similar expansion of the region among geography textbooks, see Bonine, Chapter 3, this volume.
2. Yapp, Making of the Modern Near East, 47–265.
3. Adelson, London and the Invention of the Middle East, 24–25.
4. Hogarth, Nearer East. Hogarth’s “Nearer East” included the Balkans, South-west Asia, and Northeast Africa (Egypt). See the map that accompanies this chapter.
5. Mahan, “The Persian Gulf and International Relations,” 39.
6. Adelson, London and the Invention of the Middle East, 24–25.
7. Mahan, “The Persian Gulf and International Relations,” 39.
8. Ibid.
9. For an excellent biography of Valentine Chirol, showing his influence and work as the foreign editor of the Times of London, see Fritzinger, Diplomat Without Portfolio.
10. Chirol, Far Eastern Question.
11. Chirol, Middle East Question.
12. Ibid., 176.
13. Mackinder, “Geographical Pivot of History,” 421–44.
14. Adelson, London and the Invention of the Middle East, 27–108.
15. Adelson, “Winston Churchill and the Middle East,” 138; Adelson, London and the Invention of the Middle East, 96–100.
16. Ad
elson, London and the Invention of the Middle East, 31–34, 56, 92–93.
17. Ibid., 59–62.
18. Adelson, Mark Sykes, 249–55.
19. Adelson, London and the Invention of the Middle East, 190–97.
20. Ibid., 197–201; Dodge, Inventing Iraq, 5–41; Polk, Understanding Iraq, 67–101.
21. Davison, “Where Is the Middle East?” 668.
22. Balakian, Burning Tigris, 354–72; Khalidi, Resurrecting Empire, 9–36.
23. Yergen, Prize, 303–88; Yapp, Near East Since the First World War, 1–47.
24. Satia, “Defense of Inhumanity.” 34; Monroe, Britain’s Moment in the Middle East, 71–95.
25. Davison, “Where Is the Middle East?” 669; Kirk, Middle East in the War, v; Adelson, Churchill, British Power, and the Middle East.
26. Davison, “Where Is the Middle East?” 669–70.
27. McAlister, Epic Encounters, 31–42.
28. However, Bonine notes in Chapter 3 (this volume) that the November 1947 U.S. conference on the study of world regions designated this region as the “Near East,” although by the time the Middle East Studies Association of North America had been founded in 1966, the term “Middle East” was being used by academics studying the contemporary and Islamic world.
29. Monroe, Britain’s Moment in the Middle East, 151–206; see also Kirk, Middle-East in the War.
30. Yergen, The Prize, 563–744.
31. Sick, “The United States in the Persian Gulf,” 315–31.
32. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 270–538.
33. Quandt, “New Policies for a New Middle East?” 493–503. [0]
Chapter 3
1. Bonine, “Where Is the Geography of the Middle East?”
2. Marston, Knox, and Liverman, World Regions in Global Context, 2.
3. Ibid., emphasis in the original.
4. Ibid.
5. Lewis and Wigen, Myth of Continents, 8.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid., 14.
9. Survival on Land and Sea, prepared by the Ethnographical Board and the Staff of the Smithsonian Institution.
10. See Bennett, Ethnogeographic Board; Price, Anthropological Intelligence, 97–106.
11. Lewis and Wigen, Myth of Continents, 166.
12. Ibid., 167.
13. Wagley, Area Research and Training.
14. Ibid., 28.
15. Ibid., 29–31.
16. Ibid., 29.
17. Ibid., 30.
18. Ibid.
19. Cressey, Asia’s Lands and Peoples.
20. Ibid., 373.
21. Ibid., viii.
22. Ginsburg, Pattern of Asia.
23. Ibid., 700.
24. Fisher, Middle East, 1950.
25. Fisher, Middle East, 7th rev.ed.,1.
26. Ibid., 3
27. Ibid., 3, 5, my emphasis.
28. Ibid., 5
29. Fisher, Middle East, 6th rev. ed., xi.
30. The Middle East and North Africa, Handbook 2008, vol. 54 (London: Europa Publications, 2007).
31. Brice, South-West Asia.
32. Ibid., 5.
33. Beaumont, Blake, and Wagstaff, Middle East.
34. Ibid., 3.
35. Ibid.
36. Held, Middle East Patterns.
37. Ibid., xix.
38. Held and Cummings, Middle East Patterns. The 2011 fifth edition has nineteen chapters compared with the twenty-two chapters in the first edition; it has fewer chapters in the “Physical and Cultural Geography” section, although there are the same divisions and number of chapters under the section “Regional Geography.” The fifth edition has 659 pages whereas the first edition has 442 pages, an indication of the amount of material added to some chapters.
39. Pearcy, Middle East—An Indefinable Region.
40. Held, Middle East Patterns, 7. In later editions because of the unification of North and South Yemen, there are sixteen rather than seventeen states.
41. Ibid., 3.
42. Ibid., 7. Held’s (and Held and Cummings’s) definition does not change in any of the editions; the Middle East remains Pearcy’s “core” of Southwest Asia and Egypt.
43. Drysdale and Blake, Middle East and North Africa.
44. Ibid., 5.
45. Ibid., 11.
46. A more recent (2000) political geography textbook is The Middle East: Geography and Geopolitics by Ewan Anderson, a professor of geopolitics at the University of Durham. Anderson uses the same definition of the Middle East that W. B. Fisher uses (Iran on the east and Libya, Egypt, and Sudan in Africa), and, in fact, his book is specifically a revision and reorientation of Fisher’s last (1978) edition of The Middle East. It also lacks a theoretical framework such as Drysdale and Blake’s.
47. Marston, Knox, and Liverman, World Regions in Global Context.
48. De Blij and Muller, Geography.
49. De Blij and Muller, Geography, 10th ed., 282.
50. Ibid., 297, emphasis in original.
51. Ibid.
52. See the brief discussion on Southwest Asia by Martin Kramer, posted on Middle East Strategy at Harvard (MESH), a project of the John M. Olin Institute for Strategic Studies at the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University. Martin Kramer, “Southwest Asia,” Middle East Strategy at Harvard, March 2, 2009, http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mesh/2009/03/southwest-asia/.
53. English and Miller, World Regional Geography: A Question of Place.
54. Paul English, who taught at the University of Texas at Austin, conducted research in Iran in the 1960s and is author of the now classic City and Village in Iran: Settlement and Economy in the Kirman Basin (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1966). James Miller was a student of Paul English (his second Ph.D. student; I was his first), who conducted research in Morocco and wrote Imlil: A Moroccan Mountain Community in Change (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1984).
55. English and Miller, World Regional Geography, 3rd ed., 469.
56. English, “Geographical Perspectives on the Middle East.”
57. Hepner and McKee, World Regional Geography.
58. Cole, Geography of the World’s Major Regions.
59. Pulsipher, World Regional Geography.
60. Ibid., 269.
61. Rand, McNally and Co., Indexed Atlas of the World, 177.
62. Ibid., 221.
63. Ibid.
64. Rand McNally, Goode’s World Atlas.
65. Rand McNally, Quick Reference World Atlas.
66. Rand McNally, New International Atlas.
67. National Geographic Society, National Geographic Atlas of the World.
68. Bartholomew, World Atlas.
69. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Encyclopaedia Britannica World Atlas.
70. Times Books, Times Atlas of the World.
71. National Geographic Society, National Geographic Atlas of the Middle East.
72. Ibid., 6.
73. Ibid., 10.
74. Central Intelligence Agency, Atlas: Issues in the Middle East.
75. Ibid., 2.
76. Blake, Dewdney, and Mitchell, Cambridge Atlas of the Middle East and North Africa.
77. Ibid., 3.
78. Anderson and Anderson, Atlas of Middle Eastern Affairs.
79. Ibid.
80. Lewis and Wigen, Myth of Continents, 186.
81. Ibid.
82. Ibid.,188.
83. Eickelman, Middle East; Eickelman, Middle East and Central Asia.
84. Keddie, “Is There a Middle East?” 273.
85. English, “Geographical Perspectives on the Middle East.”
Chapter 4
1. In this chapter, the Maghrib refers to Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia. Although Libya and Mauritania are sometimes included in the Maghrib, I have limited the scope of this chapter to these three countries. Maghribis are the people of the Maghrib.
2. In order to highlight the fact that I do not presume a particular definition of these terms, I
first put them in quotation marks. This is particularly useful because I do not intend to shed light on what the categories referred to and focus only on what it means for Maghribis to use them in the way they do. Although I stop using quotation marks after this point, I do so only to suggest that the reader is responsible for not taking the categories for granted.
3. Both the Middle East and the Maghrib are products of specific historical conditions. See Brown, “Maghrib Historiography,” 4–16; Burke “Towards a History of the Maghrib,” 306–23; Seddon, “Dreams and Disappointments,” 197–231.
4. Adelson, London and the Invention of the Middle East, 22–23. The term “Middle East” appears in newspapers in the first decade of the twentieth century. Its earliest appearance in the New York Times was in 1903; see “The Persian Riddle,” New York Times, March 21, 1903, BR9.
5. Middle East Institute, “Mission and History,” http://www.mei.edu/Home/MissionandHistory.aspx, accessed April 10, 2011. The institute was originally associated with the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at the Johns Hopkins University. This future secretary of state also cofounded SAIS with Paul Nitze in 1943.
6. The Oxford English Dictionary cites a 1952 article in The Public Opinion Quarterly as the earliest occurrence of “Middle Easterner,” although reference to Middle Easterners occurs slightly earlier. See Roosevelt, “Middle East and the Prospect for World Government,” 57.
7. Edmund Burke remarked that it was “striking how historians of the colonial Maghrib as different as Julien, Ageron, Berque, and Montagne all accepted the basic legitimacy of the colonial system.” Burke, “Theorizing the Histories of Colonialism and Nationalism in the Arab Maghrib,” 20.
8. Montagne, “France, England, and the Arab States,” 286–87. “Fashoda” refers to the 1898 Fashoda Incident, which brought the imperial designs of France in East Africa against those of Britain and almost led to a war between the two.
9. “As soon as the motley armies of the Arab countries of the Middle East had been defeated by Israel, and the Arab League had broken up, all our people of the Maghrib, who are men of common sense, understood that the great renaissance movement of the Arab countries was only an illusion, talk, and political incitement.” Ibid., 288 (italics added).