57

TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011

Michelangelo Guida
Fatih University, mguida@fatih.edu.tr.
Al-Afghn and Namk Kemals Replies to
Ernest Renan: Two Anti-Westernist Works in
the Formative Stage of Islamist Tought
1
Abstract
In the nineteenth-century, intellectuals in the Ottoman Empire were deeply infuenced by West-
ern political thought and technology. Tat said, the West represented not only a military threat,
but also a cultural menace for Ottoman intellectuals. Imperialism was indeed advancing in Mus-
lim lands, carrying with it and legitimizing itself by a strong belief in its civilizations supremacy.
Ottoman plans to acquire military technology and reform its administration proved insufcient in
countering Western claims of genetic and cultural superiority. Tis European attitude generated
anti-Westernist reactions in the Ottoman Empire as well as in many other non-European socie-
ties, such as that in Japan. In the Muslim world, however, anti-Westernist reactions and attempts
to rewrite a glorious Muslim history were at the base of Islamist thought. Tis paper intends to
analyze the responses of two notable early Islamist writers of the Ottoman Empire to a cultural
aggression directed against Islamic civilization by the French Orientalist Ernest Renan. Namk
Kemals Renan Mdafaanamesi and Jaml al-Dn al-Afghns Rponse Renan and al-Islm
wa al-Ilm are particularly interesting because they give an insight into their perceptions of Impe-
rialisms cultural menace to Islam and their attempts to give a new rational image of religion. Fear
of European cultural/military threats and a rational image of Islam were the frst component of
the ideology that, later, would constitute the backbones of Muslim political ideas in the twentieth-
century and of Islamism.
Keywords
Namk Kemal, Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, Islamism, Renan.
1
An early draft of this paper was presented at the 5th International Conference of the Asiatic Philosophical
Association in Fukuoka, Japan, on 7 December 2011. I would like to thank Fatih University Research fund (pro-
ject P51151002), which partially financed this research.
58
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
Introduction
After 9/11, a wide feld of literature
emerged out of the necessity to explain
the reasons behind Muslim resentment
against the democratic and afuent West.
1

However, this literature fails to provide ad-
equate explanations because its writers do
not understand the huge impact of Western
Imperialism and all the forms it assumed
in the twentieth and twenty-frst centuries
on non-Western political intellectuals. Marc
Ferros Resentment in history and Le choc de
lIslam, though, helps us in refecting on the
impact of Western policies through history
and the reactions that they created in non-
European societies. Anti-Westernism, in-
deed, is not something peculiar to Muslim
societies. In nearly the same years of the
emergence of Islamism in the Ottoman Em-
pire, from the Meiji period to World War II,
Japan saw similar intellectual currents that
adopted very similar symbols and method-
ologies against the West (See Aydn 2007).
Obviously, it must be considered a fact that
there were special difculties in the long en-
counter between Islam and Christendom,
which were not present in the encounter be-
tween Europe and the geographically remot-
er civilizations of Asia (Lewis 2002, 36-7).
In this paper, I will argue that it was anti-
Westernism as a reaction to the evolution of
Imperialism and the onset of Western domi-
nation in the Middle East and North Africa
that sparked the emergence of Islamism.
Moreover, I will argue that al-Afghn and
Namk Kemal were the two leading fgures
to launch this ideology into the core of the
Ottoman Empire and that their answers to
Renan are actually the starting point of Is-
2
Te most notorious one is Bernard Lewiss What Went
Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response
and Te Roots of Muslim Rage (Te Atlantic, September
1990), which was published well before 9/11 though.
lamist thought.
Before proceeding any further it may be
appropriate to defne the term Islamism,
used in the title and in the text. Tis term
is widely used, but because it is semanti-
cally imperfect, it lacks an unequivocal
meaning in the literature. By Islamism we
intend a political ideology (not a religious
or theological construct) that emerged in
the second half of the nineteenth-century
Muslim world and continuously evolved
until present times in diferent geographi-
cal and social contexts. Islamist intellectu-
als advocate the islamization of all aspects
of life and promote a reinterpretation of
Islam itselfwhich was allegedly misinter-
preted by previous generations. Tis ideol-
ogy appeared as a reaction to the arrival of
Imperialism in Muslim lands. In the second
half of the nineteenth-century, the West not
only started to represent a military threat
menacing territory, identity, and political
institutions; the West was threatened the
Muslim identity and religion with its ma-
terialism and scientism, and it threatened
Muslim societies with the imposition of
its dominant ethnicity, far from creating a
peaceful world order guided by ascetic and
all-inclusive human rationalism (Moallem
2003, 200). Moreover, imperialism dem-
onstrated the economic, technological, and
military inability to confront the West and
the inadequacy of the political and cultural
institutions of the Muslim world. Finally,
imperialism encouraged the emergence of
Westernized elites that upheld the civilizing
mission among Muslim societies. In Tur-
key as in other Middle Eastern countries,
Westernized elitesperceived as alien to
the local social fabricgained power and
imposed authoritarian regimes that mar-
ginalized those deviating from the project of
Westernization and modernization, trigger-
ing even more resentment. Tus, even if the
Ottoman Empire and Turkey did not know
59
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
direct foreign rule, the presence of Western-
ized elites as well as the continuous threat
(real or perceived) of foreign occupation,
Cold War, neo-imperialism, the state of Is-
rael, and the unequal international division
of labour, maintained the necessary stress
that fed Islamism to the present.
However, it is far from the case that Is-
lamism is an anti-modern movement or
simply a kind of protectionist counter-
movement of Polanyi. Te emergence of Is-
lamism was possible only because of a new
education system and the spread of new
media, which were useful in propagating its
ideas: at frst journals, then cassettes, satel-
lite TV, and the internet. Islamists dream of
a return to pristine Islam (the Asr- Saadet,
the happy era when the Prophet and his
followers were alive or to a glorious era of
Muslim history such as the Ayyubid or Ot-
toman eras) is a modern reinterpretation of
the pastvery frequently idealized and not
linked to historical evidences. Te return
to the past was needed for the building of
a methodology necessary for the shaping
of a new Islamic identity which would ft in
the contemporary world. Tere is not even
an Occidentalism imprinted in the Islamist
DNA; Indeed, the West remains one of the
main sources of Islamist thought, yet since
its inception, there is a genuine fght against
political and economic Western discriminat-
ing hegemony.
Mussulmans are Temselves the
First Victims of Islam
2
Te French Orientalist Joseph Ernest
2
Renan [1883] 2000, 215. All English translations
of Ernest Renans conference LIslamisme et la Science
are taken from Renan, E. 1896. Te Poetry of the Celtic
Races and Other Studies, 84-108, London: Water Scott
reproduced in Orientalism: Early Sources; Readings in
Orientalism, edited by Bryan Turner, 199-217, London-
New York: Routledge, 199-217.
Renan (1823-1892) spent most of his aca-
demic career attempting to show how posi-
tive science was in confict with religion,
particularly with Roman Catholicism. Re-
nan thought that science would eventually
supplant religion in developed societies and
he understood religion as an enquiry that
exhibits a comparative, sceptical, and non-
judgmental attitude toward its subject. Dur-
ing a trip to Egypt, Asia Minor, and Greece
in 1864, he composed Prire sur lAcropole,
which expressed what he called his religious
revelation that the perfection promised by
Judaism, Christianity, and Islam actually
existed in the Greek civilization that cre-
ated art, science, and philosophy. However,
Renans historical sense was not always the
best, and he clearly preferred to draw his
conclusions from what he thought were psy-
chological patterns of the races and religions
he studied (Resh 1987, 334). An evidence is
the letter of the qd of Mosul to Sir Henry
Layard used in Renans conference as evi-
dence of lack of the scientifc spirit, super-
stition and dogmatism (Renan [1883] 2000,
211) among Muslim religious authorities.
Namk Kemal already doubted its genuine-
ness (Namk Kemal 1962, 61). Massignon
defned it as a work edited by Renan himself
with un humour si dlicieusement sarcas-
tique (Massignon 1927, 301). Al-Afghn
did not spend many words to confute the
weak historical knowledge of the French au-
thor whereas Namk Kemal went through a
lengthy critique of the episodes mentioned
by Renan, yet missing the real challenge
posed by the lecture, as we will see. Edward
Said even indicated Renan as a model of how
the private man interferes with the schol-
ar: their [Renan and Louis Massignons]
personal, in some instances their intimate
problems, concerns, and predilections are
very much a part of their public work and
position as Orientalists. Moreover, they
grasp Islam, they also lose it (Said 1980,
60
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
60). Namely their personal approach and
their beliefs did not allow them to really un-
derstand the complexity of Islam.
However, his provocative prose helped
him in becoming professor of history of reli-
gions at the Collge de France twice: in 1862,
but he was soon suspended after a lecture on
the life of Christ where he doubted Jesus di-
vinity, and again in 1879. In 1878, he was
elected to the Acadmie Franaise where he
delivered his famous lecture LIslamisme et la
Science, which sparked so many reactions in
the Muslim world.
In his lecture delivered on 29 March
1883,
3
organized by LAssociation scientifque
de France in the grand amphitheatre of Sor-
bonne University, Renan applied to Islam all
his main ideas on religion. Initially, he re-
called the prejudice common to that period:
All those who have been in the East,
or in Africa, are struck by the way in
which the mind of a true believer is fa-
tally limited, by the species of iron circle
that surrounds his head, rendering it
absolutely closed to knowledge, incapa-
ble of either learning anything, or of be-
ing open to any new idea (Renan [1883]
2000, 200).
Ten, to a period from about the year 775
to nearly the middle of the thirteenth-cen-
tury of progress and splendour it followed
a long and steady decadence of the Muslim
world, the French Orientalist remembered.
It might almost be said that, during this
period, the Mohammedan world was supe-
rior in intellectual culture to the Christian
world (Renan [1883] 2000, 201). However,
3
Te conference was delivered on Tursday 29 March
1883 and published on page two and three of the fol-
lowing days morning edition of the Journal des dbats
politiques et littraires available on the website of Bib-
liothque nationale de France: http://gallica.bnf.fr/
ark:/12148/btp6k4621949 (retrieved 19/07/2011).
much of their science was produced by the
Nestorian Christians that lived in the Sassa-
nid lands newly conquered by the Arabs. Te
Nestorians and the Iranian elements (the
Indo-European elements) soon surrounded
caliphs and became chief physicians.
Parsis and Christians took the lead-
ing part; the administration, the police
in particular, was in the hands of the
latter. All those caliphs, the contempo-
raries of our Carlovingian monarchs,
Mansour, Haroun al-Raschid, Mamoun,
can scarcely be called Mussulmans (id.,
203)
Because they were in internal revolt
against their own religion, curious, and
continuously questioning Indian, Persian
and, above all, Greek authors. Moreover, the
great intellectuals use of Arabic as a medi-
um of communication does not make them
Arabic or Muslim intellectuals; the same
thing can also be said of the many European
intellectuals that wrote in Latin (id., 206).
Te stress on language is relevant because
Renan, as a dedicated philologist, believed
that language determines the spirit of its
people. Indo-European languages manifest
a capability to change and diferentiate dur-
ing the centuries whereas Semitic languages
remain fxed and immutable. From here de-
rives an intellectualnot racialsuperior-
ity of the Aryans (Renan 2005, 11). Renan
had in some way imposed on the university
circles the pro-Aryan thesis of Arthur de
Gobineau of the ineptitude of the Semites in
arts and sciences.
Starting from about 1275, the Muslim
world plunged into the most pitiable intel-
lectual decadence whereas Western Europe
entered that great highway of the scientifc
search for truth (Renan [1883] 2000, 206).
Islamism continued to persecute science and
philosophy thanks to the advent of Tartar
61
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
and Berber races, which are heavy, brutal,
and without intelligence (id., 208). As in
the West, when religion dominates civil life,
there is no liberty and no curiosity. And in-
deed Western theology has not persecuted
less than that of Islam; only it has not been
successful, it has not crushed out the mod-
ern spirit, as Islamism has trodden out the
spirit of the lands it has conquered (id.,
209). In the West, reason managed to limit
the infuence of Christian theology and to
create military and industrial superiority.
In Muslim lands, though, Islam slew science
and became condemned in the world to a
complete inferiority.
Tis lecture sparked in the Muslim
world a series of refutations, the most no-
table of which is the one of Jaml al-Dn
al-Afghn frst published in Arabic and in
French a few days after the publication of
the text of Renans lecture. Al-Afghn also
received a reply from Renan from the pages
of the Journal des Dbats the following day
(on 19 May 1883).
4
Te Ottoman intellec-
tual Namk Kemal also prepared a refusal
of Renans lecture but it was published only
posthumously in 1908. Ernest Renans repu-
tation as a prominent secular European in-
tellectual, though, cannot alone explain the
Muslim response to his ideas. Muslims took
these arguments seriously because Renans
thesis about the history of Islamic science
was seen as a symbol of a larger European
justifcation for Europes racial superiority
over Semitic and Turkic Muslims as a way to
justify its imperialistic civilizing mission in
the Muslim world. Moreover,
What made Renans ideas diferent
from the frequent anti-Muslim writings
in the European media was their precise
4
Te English translation of the reply is also
reproduced in Orientalism: Early Sources; Readings in
Orientalism, edited by Bryan Turner, 199-217, London-
New York: Routledge.
attack on the historical consciousness of
optimistic Muslim modernists, who saw
their own history as part of the history
of European civilization and progress
(Aydn 2007, 48).
Muslim reformists believed that if Mus-
lims had once achieved a golden age in sci-
ence and technology, there was no reason
why they could not reach a similar achieve-
ment in scientifc progress after the process
of modernization. Te Tanzimat reformers,
for instance, believed in the capacity of non-
European societies to attain the same prog-
ress of European civilization. Namk Ke-
mal belonged to the Young Ottomans that
strongly criticized the Tanzimat reformers
for their naive interpretation of modernity.
On his side, al-Afghn was a strong critic
of Sayyid Ahmad Khan (1817-1898), Indian
modernist and founder of the Aligarh Mus-
lim College.
Furthermore, Renans lecture came after
three major events that strongly infuenced
the Muslim intellectual approach to Europe:
the Treaty of Berlin and the occupations of
Tunis and Egypt. Te Treaty of Berlin (13
July 1878) greatly reduced Ottoman do-
mains in the Balkans, thanks to Western
powers infuence. Te occupation of Tunis
by France in 1881 and of Egypt by England
in 1882, marked a radical change in the Im-
perialist policies of these two countries and
brought them closer to the core of the Mus-
lim world and the seat of the Caliphates for-
eign domination. Occupation followed the
already existent control of Egyptian and Ot-
toman state fnances by foreigners.
Renan, then, ofered an alternative his-
torical explanation for the past achieve-
ments in science and progress in Muslim
societies between the eighth and thirteenth
centuries, arguing that it was due to either
Aryans or Christian Arabs, as stated above.
62
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
Te Semitic and Turkic elements were in-
capable of recognizing the relevance of the
natural sciences and philosophy. Tis implic-
itly meant that Muslims needed colonial tu-
telage to overcome their backwardness, and
any attempt to modernize their societies
was destined to fail.
We will now concentrate on three distin-
guished replies to Renans arguments.
Jaml al-Dn al-Afghn
Born in Asadabad in northwest Iran in
1838/9,
5
Jaml al-Dn al-Afghn received
higher education in the Shiite shrines of
Ottoman Iraq in the 1850s. Here he was
probably infuenced by rationalist Muslim
philosophers. He then travelled to India
and he was probably there during the 1857
mutiny. In India, he developed his hatred
toward British colonialism and foreign
occupation. He moved to Afghanistan but,
in 1868, he was expelled and he directed
himself toward Istanbul. His intelligence
and personality quickly brought him into
the Tanzimat circles. On 20 February
1870, al-Afghn participated in the open-
ing of the Dr al-Fnn directed by Hoca
Tahsin, an Albanian member of the ilmiyye
educated in Paris and passionate about the
natural sciences. Hoca Tahsin had already
attracted the resentment of the conserva-
tives among the ilmiyye. During the month
of Ramadan (December) of the same year,
they held lectures open to the public which
abruptly interrupted Hoca Tahsins career
and al-Afghn frst sojourn in Istanbul.
Apparently the second night of Ramadan
5
Jaml al-Dn later pretended to be of Afghan
origin, from that the name al-Afghn, from a village
three day walk from Kabul probably to conceal his
Shiite background. Tis version was reported by the of-
fcial biographies of Abduh and Makhzm (Mahzum
Paa 2010, 3-4) but the Iranian origin was proved by
Keddie (1972).
the lesson was on how oxygen is necessary
for life; they also made the experiment of
depriving a bird from air. Many among the
public found the words of the two intellec-
tuals ofending to Islamic religious values
and complaints forced authorities to act
(Akn, 1998).
From 1871 to 1879, al-Afghn lived in
Cairo supported by the statesman Riyd Pa-
sha. Here he was involved in teaching and
in promoting political newspapers. He soon
became the guide and unofcial teacher of a
group of young men who were to play an im-
portant part in Egyptian life: among others,
Muhammad Abduh and Sad Zaghll. He
taught them, mainly in his home, what he
conceived to be the true Islam: theology, ju-
risprudence, mysticism, and philosophy. But
he taught them also the danger of European
intervention, the need for national unity to
resist it, the need for a broader unity of the
Ummah, and the need for a constitution to
limit the rulers power (Hourani 1983, 109).
In 1879, because of his anti-British
propaganda he was expelled again and took
refuge in the Indian state of Hyderabad.
Between 1883 and 1885 he was in Paris
where he started the publication of the Ara-
bic newspaper al-Urwah al-wuthq with his
Egyptian pupil Muhammad Abduh.
He kept travelling, to Iran and then Rus-
sia, until he was invited to Istanbul in 1892
by Sultan Abdlhamid II, who insisted on
seeing al-Afghn in the Ottoman capital be-
cause of the letter that he wrote to the Sul-
tan from London. It suggested some subtle
diplomatic ways to achieve the goal of Pan-
Islamism by bringing about, at frst, an alli-
ance of the Ottoman state with Afghanistan
and, then, with Iran realizing a Shii-Sunni
unity (zcan 1995, 286). However, his ac-
tions were limited very soon by an increasing
suspicion of him by Ottoman authorities;
63
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
his relations with Abbas Hilmi, the Khedive
of Egypt and with members of the opposi-
tion were found to be intolerable. In 1896,
al-Afghn was held responsible by the Irani-
an authorities for the murder of Shah Nasr
al-Dn, but Ottoman authorities refused to
hand him over but put him under house ar-
rest. In 1897, al-Afghn died of cancer and
was buried in the Maka cemetery.
Ernest Renan had the chance to meet
al-Afghn in February or April of 1883, in-
troduced by Khall Ghnim (Halil Ganem)
(Renan [1883] 2000, 213). Khall Ghnim
was a Maronite activist elected as deputy
for Beirut in the short-lived Ottoman Parlia-
ment. In Paris, he was a collaborator for the
Journal des Dbats and published an Arabic
journal called al-Basr, which promoted con-
stitutionalism and Ottomanism and had
been published with ofcial support since
April 1881 (Kedourie 1977, 40). Later Khall
Ghnim became an activist for the Commit-
tee of Union and Progress (Haniolu 1996,
45-6 and Hourani 1983, 264-5). Renan had
a very good impression of Jaml al-Dn al-
Afghn and considered him an Afghan
[sic!], entirely emancipated from the preju-
dices of Islam; he belongs to those energetic
races of the Upper Iran bordering upon In-
dia, in which the Aryan spirit still fourishes
so strongly, under the superfcial garb of of-
fcial Islamism (Renan [1883] 2000, 213).
Renan also appreciated al-Afghns con-
demnation of fanaticism and the decline of
the Muslim worlds, an opinion shared also
by Khall Ghnim who saw the reason be-
hind Ottoman decadence in religious fanati-
cism and despotism. Moreover, he stressed
the authoritarian and exclusive character as
well as the attitude toward political intoler-
ance and violence of the Turks that emerged
from the long fghts with the Christians
(Ganem 1902, II, 295-6).
Tere is no doubt that Jaml al-Dn al-
Afghn was fascinated with modern sci-
ence or, rather, the mechanistic side of it.
He saw it as the secret of Western strength
which Muslims had to acquire in order to
fght back. In his view, science ruled the
world and the European hegemony, thanks
to its scientifc knowledge, was in keeping
with a pattern where ancient civilizations
were able to afrm themselves over others
by beings comparatively more technically
advanced (Cortese 2000, 505).
Te most well-known response of al-
Afghn to Renan was published on the
pages of the Journal des dbats on 18 May
1883 (al-Afghn 1883c). According to Lewis
Freeman Mott, the author of a biography of
Renan published in 1921, the translation of
al-Afghns letter to the Journal des dbats
(published on 18 May 1883) from Arabic
into French was done by Ernest Renan him-
self (Cndiolu 1996, 29-31). Mohammad
Hamidullah, the well-known Indian scholar,
among others, believed that the article pub-
lished in the Journal des dbats was translat-
ed and forged by Renan . Hamidullah advo-
cated that al-Afghn did not know French
and sent the Arabic text to the journal a few
days after the lecture but was not capable
of following the long publishing process.
Moreover, his article was never published by
the Arabic journal of his pupil Abduh, who
followed with care all of his masters work
(Hamidullah 1958, 5-7). Keddie, however,
believes that, even if al-Afghns written
and spoken French was imperfect and he
read the lecture in a more or less faithful
translation
6
, the French text was genuine
and accurate since Afghn soon came to
read French quite well, and never made any
recorded complaint about the way the An-
swer was translated (Keddie 1983, 86).
6
Quotations from the Rponse Renan are
taken from the translation of Keddie published in An
Islamic Response to Imperialism, pp. 181-187.
64
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
Moreover, the Journal des dbats was widely
read among al-Afghns close circles. Abduh
knew about the article and in a private corre-
spondence with his master he frst expressed
interest in translating it. Later, when a draft
was ready, he dropped the idea of publishing
it, waiting for al-Afghns new elaboration
in Arabic (Kedourie 1977, 44-5). Moreover,
it appears that Renans Arabic was too poor
for him to have translated such an article.
Te translator of al-Afghns letter might
have been Khall Ghnim, who published
another answer to Renan speach in Arabic
ffteen days earlier on the pages of his jour-
nal. As we will see, the Arabic text was very
diferent in style and context, but probably
written with completely diferent aims.
Te Rponse du Cheik Gemmal Eddine
printed on the Journal des dbats was pub-
lished in French and intended for a Western
audience. As in other writings addressed to a
French or British public, al-Afghn could be
almost the image of logic, clarity, and ratio-
nality, appealing to the liberal sentiments of
his audience in a way that would be impossi-
ble for a man who did not have a fairly sym-
pathetic acquaintance with modern West-
ern ideas. When writing a book or articles
intended for mass circulation in the Mus-
lim world, he was less rational and strongly
anti-Westernist, even more anti-British
(Keddie 1983, 36). Moreover, in his writings
addressed to the Muslim world, what he in-
tended by Islam was a desideratumbased
on a modernist reinterpretation of religion
forgetting tradition. Namk Kemal and all
Islamists after him would keep on present-
ing an ideal image of Islam. In Rponse, la
religion musulmane has a negative conno-
tation and what he intends by it is the cor-
rupt, unscientifc contemporary Muslim so-
cieties (Keddie 1983, 39-40). A translation
of the Rponse would have created confu-
sion among al-Afghn and Abduhs readers.
Later, other Islamist writers had the oppor-
tunity, when the ilmiyye lost their grip even
further, to openly blame the learned class
for their backwardness and their incapabil-
ity in promoting progress and knowledge
throughout the centuries. Al-Afghn, as
Keddie believed, was accustomed to adapt-
ing his discourse to his audience and also
avoiding certain arguments with the wider
Muslim public infuenced by a traditional
mystic and philosophical background, which
particularly stressed speaking diferently
to the initiated, and to the masses (Ked-
die 1963, 27). Moreover, al-Afghn also hid
his Iranian and Shiite background to avoid
Sunni blame or mistrust. Adjusting argu-
ments and words to the context appears to
be something quite normal for a public in-
tellectual; he was also sponsored by diferent
notables and probably in diferent occasions
he refrained from making comments that
might have been unwanted by his patron.
However, in al-Afghns approach, rather
than intellectual unfairness, there is a good
dose of elitism and paternalism, common to
many Islamist writers before the difusion
of public education and the mass media.
Tis approach comes from authors like Ibn
Rud who believed in people of diverse in-
telligence and diferent natural capacities,
probably inherited from Greek philosophy.
Tis is also an attitude of Shiite Islam and
many mystical confraternities, to which al-
Afghn was exposed.
In the Journal des dbats, al-Afghn
summarized Renans speech in two main
points: Islam is opposed to the development
of science and Arabs by nature do not love
metaphysical sciences or philosophy. As for
the frst point, al-Afghn believed that, at
its origin, no nation is capable of letting it-
self be guided by pure reason because it is
incapable of rationally tracing back causes
or to discerning efects. Tis is certainly a
humiliating yoke but it is the frst step to-
ward a more advanced civilization. Islam is
65
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
not diferent in this respect from other reli-
gions. However, if the Western world has ad-
vanced and emancipated itself from religion,
Renan noticed, Muslim society has not yet
freed itself from the tutelage of religion
(Keddie 1972, 183). Muslims, however, have
undoubtedly a taste for science, as they
demonstrated in the past.
As for the second point, the one where
Renan showed his belief in racial theories,
al-Afghn stated that Greek and Persian
contribution to the development of Muslim
sciences was immense. At the same time,
though, these sciences, which they usurped
by right of conquest, they developed, ex-
tended, clarifed, perfected, completed and
coordinated with a perfect taste and rare
precision and exactitude (p. 184-5). Europe-
ans learned from the Arabs the philosophy
of Aristotle, who had emigrated and become
Arab (p. 185). Tis proves the fact that Ar-
abs have a natural attachment to philosophy
even if they fall into ignorance and into reli-
gious fanaticism.
However, al-Afghn is very categorical
when analysing the reasons of the later fall
into darkness of Arab civilizations:
Here the responsibility of the Mus-
lim religion [la religion musulmane] ap-
pears complete. It is clear that wherever
it become established, this religion tried
to stife the sciences and it was marvel-
lously served in its designs by despotism
(p. 187).
Te frst reply to Renan from al-Afghn,
however, was published on the pages of
Ghnims journal on 3 May 1883 and titled
al-Islm wa al-ilm (al-Afghn 1883b). In-
tended for the Ottoman Arabic-speaking
public, its theme and aims were political,
and Renans lecture was criticized for its op-
portunism and not really for its content. Af-
ter quoting the verse So learn a lesson, O ye
who have eyes! (59, 2), inviting the reader to
make a comparison, he called Renans speech
disrespectful, but he noticed how illustrious
Frenchmen strongly condemned his words.
However, the rest of the article was a politi-
cal statement quite far from the content of
Renans speech. Al-Afghn believed that Re-
nans words were inappropriate for a coun-
try that ruled over such wide Muslim lands,
mainly those of Algeria and Tunisia. More-
over France was a country that, in matters
of justice and rights, was so diferent from
Britain, which ruled over ffty-million Mus-
lims in India. Ten the author attacked dis-
respectful British rule in the Muslim world
and its sponsorship for protestant mission-
ary activities. He concluded: So look, O ye
who see [al-basr], to the existing diferences
among these two nations and do justice.
Al-Afghn saw the British government as
an enemy of the Muslims not only because
of the direct military attack that he feared.
He feared the British for their subtler ways
of working; they had conquered India by a
trick, insinuating themselves into the Mo-
gul Empire under the pretext of helping the
Moguls. Tey sowed division and weakened
the resistance of their victims by weakening
their beliefs. It was thus that General Gor-
don had brought missionaries from Egypt
to spread the idea of Protestant Christianity
in Sudan, while in India the false gospel of
naturalism was encouraged (Hourani 1983,
113).
It is interesting to note the distinction
between French and British rule in Mus-
lim lands made by al-Afghn. Al-Afghn
experienced British colonial rule in India
and Egypt and based on these experiences
he formed an aversion toward Imperialism,
starting to think about its deleterious ef-
fects on Muslim culture and identity.
When he wrote his article on Ghnims
al-Basr, he was in Paris, writing for the
66
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
pages of a journal that was fnanced by the
French government, initially to contrast
Italian propaganda in Tunisia with the aim
of letting Arabs love France. Ten, after the
occupation of Egypt, it assumed an anti-
British stand, in line with French foreign
policy (Kedourie 1966, 40). Tus, al-Afghn
wrote the piece perfectly aligning himself to
the editorial policy. Paradoxically, the West-
ern powers, Russia and Japan fnanced and
supportedgranting asylum and recogni-
tionto transnational movements which
held and anti-Western and anti-Imperialist
agenda until recent times (just remember
the emergence of the Taliban and al-Qida).
A similar attack on the British hostility
toward Islam had already been expressed.
In April of 1883, in another letter published
in the Journal des dbats, al-Afghn warned
Europeans that Muslim Indians were con-
vinced that the British campaign in Egypt
was only the frst step to the conquest of
the Hijaz and Mecca, centres of Islam: they
unanimously say that the English already
had put their hand on the cradle of Islam,
and that they will make a great efort to
erase this religion. If that would ever have
happened, the reaction of the Muslim popu-
lation would have been devastating.
Namk Kemal
Mehmet Namk Kemal is probably
the founder of modern, Islamist political
thought in the Turkish speaking area of the
Ottoman Empire. Born in December 1840
to a family of bureaucrats, one year after
the beginning of the Tanzimat reforms,
he started a career, frst in the Translation
Bureau of the Customs, and then in the
Ottoman Porte (1861-7)Turkeys open
window to the West (Lewis 1961, 137),
which brought him into contact with West-
ern culture, especially through the medium
of works in French. In 1865, Namk Ke-
mal took over the editing of inasi Efendis
Tasvir-i Efkar newspaper, where he started
to advocate the introduction of constitu-
tional and parliamentary institutions. In
1867, the government became uneasy with
his criticism of its conduct of foreign afairs
that urged a more forceful defence of Otto-
man interests against the European powers.
Soon, Namk Kemal was appointed as assis-
tant governor of the province of Erzurum,
a gentle way of getting rid of him. Instead
of accepting the appointment, he left the
country for Paris and then London with his
friend Ziya Bey, where they began the pub-
lication of the newspaper Hrriyet with the
fnancial help of a member of the Egyptian
royal family, Prince Mustafa Fazl Paa. Hr-
riyet was outspokenly critical of the Otto-
man government for its lack of direction and
its despotism.
In 1870, Namk Kemal returned to Istan-
bul where he established a more moderate
newspaper, bret. Two years later he was ap-
pointed to an administrative post in Gallipo-
li in order to reduce his powerful opposition.
After a short period back in the capital, he
was again exiled to Cyprus (1876) and then
to the isle of Mytilene in July 1877, this time
purportedly for the disturbance created by
his play Vatan yahut Silistre (Te Fatherland
or Silistre). In the play, written in a clear and
simple Turkish able to address the common
people, Namk Kemal tried to promote love
and attachment for the Ottoman father-
land. Te term that he used was the Arabic
word watan, which has the original meaning
of home, the place where somebody lives
(Ibn Manzr 1997, XV, 338). Namk Kemals
innovation is his attempt to indicate with
the word a place and not just an ideal com-
munity, like the more common words umma
and milla. A simple translation of the French
concept of patrie was very complicated, both
because there was (and probably still there
67
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
is) no general understanding of a nation
that includes a community within a spe-
cifc region and because of the political and
cultural circumstances in which the author
lived. Te play, in fact, is about the heroic de-
fence of Silistre, a city strategically located
on the Danube, today northern Bulgaria,
with a small Muslim population surrounded
by Bulgarian and Romanian speaking non-
Muslims.
Namk Kemal died in December 1888,
again in exile on the isle of Chios. According
to his sonAli Ekrem (Bolayr)the reason
of death was pneumonia, strongly worsened
by the protracted and unfair exile as well as
the depression following the censure by the
Porte of his Ottoman history book, pub-
lished just a few months before his death
(Ali Ekrem 1992, 111-113).
In June of 1883 in his exile in Mytilene,
Namk Kemal with profound emotions start-
ed to write his Renan Mdafaanamesi, a task
which he consideredas he wrote in a let-
ter to his fathera great act of worship. He
intended to refute Renans lecture with evi-
dences taken from European literature and
from Renans own work (Tansel 1955, 89).
However, in a letter written on 1 September
he wrote that his Renan Mdafaanamesi
as he himself called his workwas complet-
ed, yet revisions were progressing slowly. Fi-
nally, in a letter on 4 November he admitted
to be profoundly unsatisfed with his work
and that he did not intend to publish it (id.,
89-90). His work was published by his son
Ali Ekrem in 1908 and presented as one of
his greatest success (Ali Ekrem 1992, 56),
probably unaware of the correspondence
with his grandfather.
In fact Renan Mdafaanamesi ap-
pears to the reader a weak refutation of
Ernest Renans argument.
Kemals specifc target was this
French thinkers allegation that there
existed no philosophy in the true sense
of the word in Islam. Renan had relied
on an argument similar to the one that
has been advanced in this study, namely,
that Islam had not been able to achieve
so great a distinction in the feld of sci-
ence as Europe because it did not have
a major tradition of secular thought in-
dependent of theology. Namk Kemals
defense, even though passionate, was
quite weak, for he obviously was unable
to understand his adversarys position
(Mardin 2000, 324).
Te Ottoman author gave, indeed, plenty
of evidences that Renan did not have good
knowledge of Islamic history, something
that, as we have already seen, was also
known to the French public. Besides a re-
view of the historical evidences brought by
Renan, the author of Renan Mdafaanamesi
mentions the imperative of Islam to search
and investigate, from verses like My Lord!
Increase me in knowledge (XX:114) and Are
those who know equal with those who know
not? (XXXIX:9) or sayings of the Prophet
like Seek knowledge from the cradle to the
grave. Namk Kemal then asks how it is pos-
sible that a religion with so strong a commit-
ment to the search for knowledge then act as
an obstacle to science. Namk Kemal failed
to tackle the main point of Renans thesis,
namely the accusation that Islamic societ-
ies have failed to develop as fast as those in
Europe. We do not know the exact reasons
behind the decision of Namk Kemal not to
print his latest work, but one hypothesis is
the fact that he himself realized the weak-
ness of his argument.
Tus, while on the one hand Namk Ke-
mal defended the thesis that nothing in Is-
lam forbade the study of the exact sciences
and mathematics, on the other he showed
his own inclination in the matter by stat-
68
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
ing that science was not merely an instru-
ment to gain control over nature and create
wealth. It can never be known, of those
who use science for practical goals, if they
have been able to attain a higher status [ie.
if they have evolved morally] or reached ma-
turity (Namk Kemal 1962, 25 translated
by Mardin 2000, 324). Namk Kemal makes
here an anti-utilitarian and strongly moral-
istic-religious comment, which will become
the frequent critique of European material-
ism. Again, Namk Kemal protested that Re-
nan should have equated science with math-
ematics and the natural sciences only. If this
method were to be adopted, he stated, he
would agree that Islamic culture had thwart-
ed the growth of science. He, however, did
not recognize the fact that the Islamic scho-
lastic approach to philosophy was quite bar-
ren and that the spirit of hair-splitting was
no more part and parcel of European philos-
ophy. Namk Kemal did not recognize that
Ernest Renan attributed a great part of the
progress that had been accomplished in Eu-
rope to the gradually widening limits of free-
dom of thought, and, in particular, to the
rise of the political liberalism that had been
associated with two parallel movements: the
emancipation of philosophy from religion
and the conceptualization of a mechanistic
system of nature (Mardin 2000, 324).
Nonetheless, the Ottoman author did
not fail to strongly criticise the European
approach to Islamic culture, something that
we would today call Orientalism. On one
side, Christian believers intentionally con-
trast and censure the investigation of Islam.
Secular researchers on the other side, look
into Islam with a prejudice believing that,
as all religions in Europe, Islam also is the
heaviest chain enslaving human thought
and the stronger impediment to the prog-
ress of knowledge (Namk Kemal 1962, 17).
One of the possible reasons of Renan
Mdafaanamesis weakness is the fact that
its author could not really distinguish the
idealized image of Islam (and Christendom)
from Muslim societies even though he had
been an outspoken critic, not only of the
Ottoman regime, but also of society in gen-
eral. Tis actually constitutes a very good ex-
ample of the attempt to de-historicize Islam
and separate it from the various contexts in
which it has fourished over the centuries.
Tis de-contextualization of religion
7
allows
Namk Kemaland all Islamist authors that
will follow in his pathin theory to ignore
the social, economic, and political milieus
within which Muslim societies exist.
It provides Islamists a powerful ide-
ological tool that they can use to purge
Muslim societies of the impurities and
accretions that are the inevitable ac-
companiments of the historical process,
but which they see as the reason for
Muslim decline (Ayoob 2004, 1).
Conclusion
Nevertheless, Namk Kemals work was
yet another expression of the early Islamist
intellectuals urge to expose the cultural ag-
gression coming from the West, making Re-
nan Mdafaanamesi a relevant text, probably
also because it marks the starting point of
Islamism in the Turkish speaking provinces
of the Empire.
As evident also in al-Afghns texts,
Muslim intellectuals were now facing a new
challenge from the West. Rather than repre-
senting the military, technological, and sci-
entifc superiority over the Muslim world,
Renan introduced a racial and religious dis-
crimination. Tus the gap between the two
civilizations could have not been flled by
7
Mainly Islam but it applies also to its image of
Christianity.
69
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
simply making administrative and political
reforms. A total alienation from its culture,
traditions, and values was needed maybe al-
lowing white colonial authorities to shoul-
der the burden of civilization. Islamism was
the ideology reacting precisely to this new
threat that urged a reinterpretation and re-
evaluation of its past and religion together
with reforms based on Islam.
References
Akn, mer Faruk. 1998. Hoca Tahsin. DA,
XVIII.
[al-Afghn, Jaml al-Dn] Cheik Gemmal Eddine
El-Afghani. 6 April 1883a. Egypte. Journal des dbats,
2.
[al-Afghn, Jaml al-Dn] Gemmal Eddine
Afghan. 18 May 1883c. Au Directeur du Journal des
dbats. Journal des dbats, 3.
al-Afghn, Jaml al-Dn al-Hussayn. 3 May
1883b. al-Islm wa al-ilm. Al-Basr, 3.
Ali Ekrem. 1992. Namk Kemal. stanbul: MEB.
Aydn, Cemil. 2007. Te Politics of Anti-Westernism
in Asia. Columbia University Press: New York.
Ayoob, Mohammed. 2004. Political Islam: Image
and Reality. World Policy Journal 21, 3, 1-14.
Cortese, Delia. 2000. Medieval Sapiential Knowl-
edge and Modern Science in Islam. Some Consider-
ations on a Missed Link based on the Tought of
aml al-Dn al-Afgn. Oriente Moderno 19, 503-517.
Cndiolu, D. 1996. Ernest Renan ve reddiyeler
Balamnda slam-bilim Tartmalarna Bibliyografk
bir Katk. Divn 2, 1-94.
Esenbel, Seluk. 2011. Japan, Turkey and the World
of Islam. Forlkerstone: Global Oriental.
Ferro, Marc. 2002. Le choc de lIslam: XVIII
e
-XXI
e

sicle. Paris: Odile Jacob.
Ferro, Marc. 2010. Resentment in history. Cam-
bridge: Polity.
Ganem, Halil. 1902. Les Sultans Ottomans. Paris:
Chevalier-Marescq.
Hamidullah, Muhammad. 1958. Ernest Renan ve
slamiyet slm 14, 4-7.
Haniolu, M. kr. 1995. Te Young Turks in Op-
position. New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hourani, Albert. 1983. Arabic Tought in the Liberal
Age, 1798-1939. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Ibn Manzr. 1997 (1418). Lisn al-arab. Bayrt:
Dr ihy al-Turth al-arab.
Keddie, Nikki R. 1963. Symbol and Sincerity in
Islam. Studia Islamica 19, 27-63.
Keddie, Nikki R. 1972. Sayyid Jaml ad-Dn al-
Afghn. Berkley-Los Angeles: University of California
Press.
Keddie, Nikki R. 1983. An Islamic Response to Im-
perialism: Political and Religious Writings of Sayyid Jaml
ad-Dn al-Afghn. Berkley-Los Angeles: University of
California Press.
Kedourie, Elie. 1966. Afghani and Abduh; an Essay
on Religious Unbelief and Political Activism in Modern
Islam. London: Frank Cass.
Lewis, Bernard. 1961. Te Emergence of Modern
Turkey. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lewis, Bernard. 2002. What Went Wrong? Western
Impact and Middle Eastern Response. Oxford-New York:
Oxford University Press.
Mahzum Paa, Muhammed. 2010. Cemaleddin
Afgannin Hatralar. stanbul: Klasik.
Mardin, erif. 1995. Kemal, Mehmet Namk. In
Te Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World
edited by John L. Esposito, vol. 2, 409-410, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Mardin, erif. 2000. Te Genesis of Young Ottoman
Tought. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
Massignon, Louis. 1927. La lettre du Cadi de
Mossoul Layard. Critique par Nameq Kemal dune
source cite par Renan. Revue des tudes islamiques,
1, 297-301.
Moallem, Minoo. 2003. Cultural Nationalism
and Islamic Fundamentalism: the Case of Iran. In
Antinomies of Modernity, edited by Vasant Kaiwar and
Sucheta Mazumdar. Durham-London: Duke University
Press.
Namk Kemal. 1962. Renan Mdfaanmesi
(slamiyet ve Marif). Translittered by M. Fuad
Kprl. Ankara: Mill Kltr Yaynlar.
zcan, Azmi. 1995. Jamaladdin Afghanis Honor-
able Confnement in Istanbul and Irans Demands for
his Extradition. Te Journal of Ottoman Studies 15,
285-291.
Renan, Ernest. 2000. Islamism and Science. In
Orientalism: Early Sources; Readings in Orientalism,
edited by Bryan Turner, 199-217, London-New York:
Routledge.
Renan, Ernest. 2005. LIslam et la science; avec la
rponse dal-Afghn. Apt: LArchange Minotaure.
Resh, Richard J. 1987. Renan, Ernest. In Te
70
TJP Turkish Journal of Politics Vol. 2 No. 2 Winter 2011
Encyclopedia of Religion edited by Mircea Eliade, vol. 12,
334-5, New York: Macmillan.
Said, Edward W. 1980. Islam, the Philological
Vocation, and French Culture: Renan and Massignon.
In Malcolm H. Kerr (ed.), Islamic Studies: a Tradition
and its Problems. Malibu: Undema Publications.
[Tansel], Fevziye Abdullah. 1955. Namk Kemalin
Midilliye nefyi. Trkiyat Mecmuas, 12, 58-90.
Ylmaz, hsan. 2009. Was Rumi the Chief Archi-
tect of Islamism? A Deconstruction Attempt of the
Current (Mis)Use of the Term Islamism. EJEPS 2, 2,
71-84.