Band 91, Heft 1

Abstract: This article introduces the question of periodization in a comparative perspective under three headings: space, subject matter, and agency. The issue of space has deeply influenced reflections on periodization as is, evident, for instance, within changed frameworks such as global history and new fields of study, such as Mediterranean or Indian Ocean Studies. For the Middle East, the rise of the concept of Late Antiquity has proven to be a particularly fruitful spatial reconfiguration that has changed established notions of periodization. The second major impact on the questions of periodization has come from changing thematic foci, most importantly, the diversification of historical studies away from the primacy of political history. In the field of Middle Eastern history, this has been particularly pertinent on account of the prominent position that dynastic periodizations have held. Finally, notions of periodization have undergone changes as the question of historical agency has been reconsidered. In the study of non-European history, such changes emerged in particular as an outcome of reflections on the degree to which such societies’ histories followed patterns derived from European models. The article argues that the contributions to this volume open up new venues to think of the question of periodization in Middle Eastern history by taking a long-term perspective from early Islam to the present day.

Abstract: The article discusses periodization and spatialization – delimiting a particular length of time, a particular region of the globe, or both – as necessary strategems for studying history, since the seamless web of human life cannot be analyzed in toto. It discusses different notions of periodization, in particular those advanced by Fernand Braudel and others of the Annales School and the concept of “Zeitschichten” proposed by Reinhart Koselleck. It surveys some of the periodizations that have traditionally been applied specifically in the realm of the history of the Islamic Near East and a number of essays discussing the periodization of Islamic history (especially those of S. D. Goitein and M. Morony). It argues that the notion of an “ideal” or “perfect” periodization of history (or of any subsection of it) that meets all needs is futile. Periodization must be seen, rather, as a tool employed by the historian that highlights a particular set of developments in a society, so that many different periodizations are possible and, indeed, desirable depending on what the historian wishes to understand. The historian must consider what development she wishes to articulate from the past and choose or fashion a periodization that most clearly illuminates that development.

Abstract: This article argues that the agreed-upon periodization of early Islam is an Abbasid-era construct that became a binding framework for later generations of historians down to modern times. It also contends that scholars have tended to ignore the fact that this periodization was first and foremost an Abbasid claim to power. It investigates the Abbasid-era construction of the past and demonstrates that alternative periodizations were used prior to these massive efforts to enclose the past into a rigid structure, and so it sheds light on forgotten alternative pasts. The links between periodization and space are emphasized, focusing on the example of early Islamic Syria. Indeed, this province largely vanished from the map with the coming of the Abbasids to power since Syria’s memory came to be limited to its Umayyad past. Elaborating upon alternative periodizations, the paper offers a fresh attempt at a history of the meanings ( Sinngeschichte ) of a long Syrian eighth century, articulated around memory and power.

Abstract: “ Al-Jāhiliyya ” evokes vivid images of idol worship, tribalist antagonisms, and violence commonly assumed to be emblematic of the Muslim representation of pre-Islamic Arabia as a “barbaric” anarchical society. Such associations, however, overlook manifold complexities of the era’s portrayal in classical Arabic literature, and this paper calls for a more nuanced reading of classical narratives of al-Jāhiliyya . Exploration of the word’s semantic shifts evidenced in Arabic lexicography and Qurʾānic exegesis between the third/ninth and seventh/ thirteenth centuries reveals that only after the fourth/tenth century did the now common Jāhiliyya stereotypes become virtually synonymous with pre-Islam. Via a survey of third/ninth century Arabic writings, this paper also explores how and why certain discourses articulated rather positive memories of pre-Islamic times.

Abstract: Over the last decades, a number of scholars have studied how historiography served to legitimize different Arab regimes. These scholars have, however, given little attention to the role of periodization. By contrast, this study suggests that periodization has been a central element of historiography in the monarchies. Many textbooks and other major works in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Jordan, and Morocco follow two broad tendencies in terms of periodization. The first tendency is to merge dynastic and national periods and to start the history of the country essentially with the rise of the contemporary ruling family. The second tendency is to integrate the contemporary dynasty into the history of a longer, sometimes perennial, monarchy. Nevertheless, official dynastic periodization has not determined all historical writing in the monarchies. Local and tribal historians often developed periodizations centered on specific cities or tribes and also imagined a much longer history than that of the contemporary dynasty.

Abstract: A major point of critique in contemporary debates on universals is that a particular history – a “Western” one – is falsely represented as universal. This problem also underlies Dipesh Chakrabarty’s widely discussed call for “provincializing Europe.” In this article, I discuss the relationship between universals and practices of periodization, i. e., certain ways of shaping time, in the works of the Moroccan historian and intellectual Abdallah Laroui (*1933). I present Laroui’s contribution to this debate by focusing on how his approach makes possible to historicize representations of time from a universalist, dialectical, and post-foundationalist perspective. I discuss how he develops a distinction between time and temporalities in relation to forms of historiography and how he distinguishes between the preservation of memory and tradition as a process of canonization on the one hand and analytic critique and profane politics on the other hand. I argue that by spelling out these temporal presuppositions, Laroui effectively opens up a post-foundationalist view of the social and concepts such as Islam and modernity. I conclude with a brief observation of how Laroui’s account of multiple temporalities challenges ahistorical representations of “the human.”

Abstract: This article explores the ways in which contemporary Algerians relate to their past. More specifically, it asks how the past is split into chunks and seeks to understand the assessments people make of these periods. It also looks at perceptions of different events as turning points and particularly at the nationbuilding period of the 1970s, which simultaneously informs judgments about the present and is reimagined according to present subjectivities. It argues that despite a post-colonial official historiography that ends abruptly with independence in 1962 and takes the colonial period and the War of Independence as the total meaning of history, Algerians are making judgments about the past and the present based on more recent periods and are thereby questioning the salience of official narratives of the past.