From the perspective of Orientalism

The Western World’s Strategy of Lies and Distortion in Islamic History: From an Orientalist Perspective

The study of history is not just about knowing the past—it is a struggle for power, perspective, and control. Who is writing history, how is it being written, and why are these questions important, as is whose perspective is being written. The Western world has practiced a systematic distortion and falsification of the history of Islam and Muslims for centuries, the main background of which was created through an academic and political framework called so-called ‘Orientalism.’ This framework was not just a practice of knowledge, but a strategy for establishing cultural dominance. In this discussion, we will see how Orientalists have distorted Islam and Muslims, what their intentions were, and what their impact is on the world today.

Explaining the term Orientalism, the famous Palestinian intellectual and literary theorist Edward Said said in his historical book Orientalism (1978), “Orientalism is a style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the Orient.” That is, Orientalism is a type of strategy that is used to establish authority over the Orient (mainly Muslim and Eastern civilizations) through epistemological and cultural means. At the root of this practice was European colonial ambition—where the East was established as ‘advanced’ and ‘civilized’ by proving the East ‘other’ and ‘inferior’ through the interpretation of knowledge, literature, history, religion, and language.

This distorted strategy of Orientalism around Islam began around the 12th century, when the Crusades awakened European society to the existence of Muslims. Muslims were at the peak of knowledge, philosophy, medicine, and literature. For Europe, this was both a threat and a source of envy. From then on, a propaganda historiography against Islam began—in which the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was misrepresented, the Quran was ridiculed, and Islamic civilization was shown as a symbol of barbarity and backwardness.

This trend later took institutional form during the British and French colonial rule. Orientalists like Sir William Jones in England, Sylvester de Sacy in France, and Goldsier in Germany conducted in-depth research on Islam, but the underlying purpose of their research was to show Islam as weak, confusing, and divided. They interpreted Islam as if it were not in favor of rational thought, moral development, and social justice. Their analysis was a ‘Muslim burden’ from a European perspective—but the purpose was to create an explanation that would facilitate the rule.

This Orientalism was used politically by colonial policymakers. During the British rule in India, many translations of the Quran were made in such a way that the message of Islam was distorted. Some excerpts were selected from the Hadith—which presented the original form of Islam as extremist, violent, and backward. The colonialists made Muslims doubt their own history—instilling in them the idea that Islamic civilization was a backward system based solely on religious precepts, devoid of reason, science, or human rights.

This historical practice was not limited to that time—rather, in the modern era, this view has been established in Western universities and research institutions as the ‘neutral knowledge’ of Islam. Much research on the Middle East, Islamic law, women’s rights, or Islamic philosophy is still conducted under Western auspices—the main perspective of which is that Islam is the source of the problem, an ‘other’ civilization that is incompatible with Western modernity and democracy. This research produces movie scripts, media analysis, and even guidelines for international policymaking.

For example, the attempt to establish Islam as the ‘source of terrorism’ after 9/11 was a consequence of this distorted historiography. Even then, many so-called experts, who have academic knowledge about Islam, openly said in the media that ‘Islam is inherently violent’. Yet, they never present the true nature of this religion in the light of the life of Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH). They tarnish Islam by misquoting specific episodes or verses of history.

In this situation, we have to ask ourselves—what are we doing? Do we know our own history? Do we have our own academic structure to respond to the distorted writings of orientalists? It is sad to say, no—we have left the power of interpreting history to the West. Even today, we learn our history by reading books written by Western historians. The practice of research, analysis, and institutional writing is almost extinct in Muslim society.

So what needs to be done is: we must write our own history—the glorious past of Islam, the contributions of science, the beauty of culture, the depth of philosophy—and present them from our own language and perspective. Following the path of Edward Said, many more Muslim researchers must come forward who can challenge the Western academic structure. Islamic universities must become centers of research. The curriculum must include scientific and intellectual responses to distorted ideas about Islamic history, philosophy, culture, and law.

To free our generation from this distorted history, we need to practice history based on truth, in our own language, and with a sense of self-respect. The Muslim world must unite in this knowledge-war—because this is not just a battle of knowledge, but a struggle for identity and existence.