The ongoing gulf between generalist social science disciplines and specialist area studies—where the former is associated with theoretical knowledge and the latter with the secondary role of producing descriptive information—informs the study of Middle Eastern nationalisms. This article’s specific references are to Iranian and Turkish nationalisms. “Theoretical poverty” of their specialized literature partly follows from and arises in response to the subordinate role the area studies are allocated and, equally importantly, how the subfields of Iranian Studies and Turkish Studies have developed within this setting. To demonstrate this claim, the article reviews relevant scholarship regarding the modernity of nations. This comparative analysis reveals that the contrasting ways the question of modernity is answered are a symptom of the differing development trajectories of Iranian and Turkish Studies as branches of Middle East Studies.
Read full abstract