The term Oriental carried a canonical, taken-for-granted authority in European discourse.

Evidence

Recalling the challenge of J. M. Robertson, the member of Tyneside, Balfour himself put Robertson’s question again: “What right have you to take up these airs of superiority with regard to people whom you choose to call Oriental?” The choice of “Oriental” was canonical; it had been employed by Chaucer and Mandeville, by Shakespeare, Dryden, Pope, and Byron. … It designated Asia or the East, geographically, morally, culturally. One could speak in Europe of an Oriental personality, an Oriental atmosphere, an Oriental tale, Oriental despotism, or an Oriental mode of production, and be understood. Marx had used the word, and now Balfour was using it; his choice was understandable and called for no comment whatever. — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 105

Categorization

• XREF: Direct scaffold for the Islamophobia field: the term Muslim functions in contemporary discourse the way Oriental functioned — a canonical label whose usage ‘called for no comment.’
• DEFINE: Defines how a classificatory word (Oriental) accrues canonical, unquestioned authority through repeated literary and political usage.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Edward W. Said, Orientalism, 105