Suzanne Marchand's finely-grained rendering of German Orientalism as scholarly practice is an incisive and engaging work of intellectual history. In addition to tackling an underexplored and difficult topic, the author also takes on a daunting set of methodological challenges, up to and including sustained critiques of Saidian postcolonialism and Foucaultian-inspired forms of discourse analysis. These are no mean feats, and part of the pleasure of reading German Orientalism in the Age of Empire is observing how meticulously Marchand chips away at their intertwined legacies by formulating an alternative narrative that incorporates some of their pioneering contributions while reaching a very different set of conclusions. The results are fascinating and promise to make this impressive text a touchstone of debate for many years to come. Despite the sometimes dizzying complexities of her subject matter, Marchand's basic strategy is remarkably straightforward. Other than self-serving, hagiographic accounts of the field written by Orientalists themselves, Marchand notes, scholars outside the discipline have largely failed to examine the process by which Orientalism formed within the German university system. While paying heed to Said's forceful indictment of Western discourses of the East as a source of imperial legitimacy, Marchand treats imperialism as one enabling factor among many that shaped the development of the field, but without overdetermining its outcome. Orientalism, in her words, was not ‘primordially or perpetually defined by imperialist relationships’ (p. xx). German Orientalism, she contends, first emerged out of an earlier theological interest in the lands and peoples of the Old Testament who influenced the development of Christianity. Such religious concerns did not fade away as Orientalism evolved into a scientific and professional pursuit but morphed into new modes of inquiry into Eastern religious practices, customs and mythologies. The powerful shaping force of Christian humanism on the development of German Orientalism as a ‘not fully secular science’ (p. xxviii) lasted well into the twentieth century, restricting its appeal as a utilitarian form of imperial knowledge suited to the tasks of colonial administration and conquest.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 337 citations exist upstream.