Orientalism holds unmatched philological access to the Other’s texts

Evidence

Orientalism occupies an epistemic position that can allow it to accomplish this task, precisely due to its specific location in the current systems of knowledge. First, it is, along with anthropology, the most obvious academic discipline whose declared purpose is nothing other than the study of the Other, the “Oriental” Other who can now instruct in the art of forming the new self. Second, it is uniquely equipped with proficient philological tools and direct access to texts and archives of that Other. In this respect, Orientalism dwarfs anthropology, which on the whole continues to suffer from a serious deficit in philological talent, although anthropology has developed a cutting-edge theoretic still lacking in several quarters of the Orientalist discipline. Third, and related to the foregoing consideration, Orientalism is the single academic discipline in the Western hemisphere that has access to the “esoteric” and highly complex philosophical, moral, “legal,” and mystical expressions of the Orient. — Wael Hallaq, Restating Orientalism, 477

Categorization

• SEED: The claim that anthropology lacks Orientalism’s philological depth, and Orientalism lacks anthropology’s theory, is a defensible disciplinary comparison essay.