Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Book Review: Polonskaya, Ludmila, Alexei Malashenko. 1994. Islam in Central Asia. Ithaca: Reading. [2008]

Book Review: Polonskaya, Ludmila, Alexei Malashenko. 1994. Islam in Central Asia. Ithaca: Reading. [2008]

This text, which was originally published in 1994, is intended to serve as a basic introduction to the topic of Islam in Central Asia. As a rudimentary chronological description of historical events in the region, the book more or less succeeds (although its brevity means it never delves too deeply); as a textured introduction to its putative subject, however, it is barely adequate.

The book begins with a brief description of the socio-religious landscape of Central Asia prior to the Arab conquests, leading up to Islam being introduced in the region. Each chapter thereafter provides a more-or-less rote historical account of a particular era in the region's history, loosely arranged around the theme of Islam -- "Islam and Central Asia before the Russian Conquest," "Islam in Central Asia from the Period of Colonization to the 1917 Revolution," "Islam and Moslems of Central Asia under the Communist Regime," and so forth. Even at this early juncture, however, some historiographical problems become evident: "Nomadic tribes," for instance, are described as being "all but isolated from the cultural life of Ma Wara al-Nahr despite their proximity to major trade routes" (31), which is an almost total misrepresentation of the long history of interactions between nomadic and settled peoples -- sometimes symbiotic, sometimes antagonistic.  Moreover, the gradual adoption of Islam in Central Asia is attributed in part to Islam being "the most down-to-earth and pragmatic of all the religions known in Central Asia" (9). No evidence is produced to support this claim, and what exactly this statement is supposed to mean is left for the reader to gauge. Problems such as this persist throughout.

Indeed, the book’s largest flaw lies in the way it handles Islam itself. Throughout the course of the book, the notion of “Islam in Central Asia” is never adequately explained. In fact, Islam itself is never really discussed as a religion. Instead, it is referred to in vague, totalistic terms. Thus, the reader frequently encounters such assertions as “Islam was the most important factor in [Amir Timur’s] policies” (20) or “Sheikh Mansur approved of Shaibani’s plan to conquer Ma Wara al-Nahr and united Uzbek territories into a single state. A major role in that plan was reserved for Islam” (25). Again, precisely what is meant by statements like these is never explained: Islam is alternately treated as an abstract "thing" or a comprehensive ideology, neither of which the authors seem to feel the need to elucidate on.

At other times, Islam becomes a world-historical actor in its own right. The authors, for example, contend  at one point that “it is hardly likely that Islam will renounce its political presence in the near future” (120). Why individual Muslims have sought to merge religion and modern politics, or how they believe their views are religiously authorized, are never discussed. In fact, throughout Islam in Central Asia, Muslims as people largely disappear beneath the shadow of an abstract "Islam" that decides and acts entirely of its own accord.

Elsewhere in the book, however, Islam itself largely disappears, at least in any meaningful way: in a section entitled “Czarist Russia’s Islamic Policy” (41-44) the authors discuss issues such as mosque construction, pensions for religious figures, the state's printing of copies of the Qur’an, the abolishment of waqf lands, and the gradual imposition of imperial control over Central Asian states. All of these issues are interesting and important, of course, but, contrary to the authors’ claims, they do not amount to an “Islamic policy” so much as a set of institutional initiatives that have little to do with Islam as a religion. To call this an "Islamic policy" is to confuse Islam with certain of its positive manifestations.

There are numerous other criticisms that could be made, but the aforementioned should suffice to indicate some of the more grievous problems. The question then becomes one of why two eminent and reputable scholars (Malashenko, for instance is the co-chair of the Carnegie Moscow Center's "Religion, Society, and Security" program) would publish a book with so little meaningful content about the subject it purports to treat. The most probable explanation is that the book’s failings are rooted, to a large degree, in methodological problems inherited from a distinctly Soviet view of Islam, one that relied heavily on inappropriate and inapplicable epistemological categories. To take but one glaring example, contrary to the authors’ repeated assertions, Islam does not have any such institution as a “clergy." Elsewhere, the authors refer to Islam as "a uniform socio-cultural and political complex existing in space and time" (105), a statement that is more reflective of Soviet attitudes towards religion than of the reality of Islam. Throughout the book, there is evidence of the Soviet tendency to project ethno-nationalist and/or ideological concepts into the past, even when they are wholly inappropriate. Thus, we read that “Islam was a fully established ideology that could be used by political leaders [in the 19th century] to unite Central Asian peoples into ethnic entities” (66) and that “Islam is the most politicized religion in the world” (120). As in other cases, what exactly is meant by assertions like this – and what they have to do with religion – is never adequately explained by the authors.


For the aforementioned reasons, then, this book does not really succeed as an account of Islam in Central Asia. Religion, in all its richness and nuance, is completely obscured by the strange and faceless thing the authors refer to as “Islam.” This “Islam,” in their narrative, is a changeless, leaden entity that lumbers through the ages, becoming little more than a tool in the hands of successive historical actors, albeit a tool that occasionally animates itself to wield some political power of its own. Such a depiction, however, robs Islam of any genuinely religious character. Readers in search of an adequate regional history loosely focused around the theme of Islam may find something of value here; however, scholars looking for insights into Islam in Central Asia would do best to avoid Islam in Central Asia.

No comments:

Post a Comment