Orientalisms May Differ

Abstract

The article examines a new book by R. Yu. Pochekaev “State and Law in Central Asia through the Eyes of Russian and Western Travelers of the 18th — early 20th centuries”. As a theoretical basis for his research, the author uses the concept of “Orientalism” in a truncated version. That is, “Orientalism” in the Western sense is used in the analysis of works of only Western travelers. The author also contrasts “local” sources with the works of travelers. The main idea of the author is that travelers’ notes are the key to understanding the legal and state structure of the countries of Central Asia. The author insists that records by “the other” will become the channel for promoting the idea that Islam was not a comprehensive tool for explaining statehood and law in Central Asia. The author claims that “local” sources ignore the pre-Islamic and nomadic “remnants” of the law (adat). It should be noted that the historians of Central Asia, especially the Orientalists from Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, have discovered a considerable layer of archival documents that change our understanding of the late Middle Ages of Central Asia. It is worth pointing out that local religious practices actively used and assimilated both “customary” law and Sharia. The coexistence of different religious, nomadic and pre-Islamic practices is a specific feature of history of the population of Central Asia. The author tries to reconsider the Eurocentric approach to statehood and law in Central Asia. Unfortunately, the superficiality of the reconsideration gives rise to justification of imperialism and revival of the “positive” Soviet positivism in understanding the history of Central Asia.