The American Jo urnal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 6. No. 1, 1989 143 

Review Article 

Islamization of Anthropological Knowledge 

A. R. Momin 

The expansion of Western coloniaHsrn during the nineteenth and twentieth 
centuries brought in its wake the economic and political domination and 
exploitation of the Third World countries. Western colonialism and 
ethnocentrism went hand in hand. The colonial ideology was rationalized 
and justified in terms of the white man's burden; it was believed that the 
White races of Europe had the moral duty to carry the torch of civilization-
which was equated with Christianity and Western culture-to the dark comers 
of Asia and Africa. The ideology of Victorian Europe accorded the full status 
of humanity only to European Christians ; the "other" people were condemned, 
as Edmund Leach has bluntly put it, as "sub-human animals, monsters, 
degenerate men, damned souls, or the products of a separate creation" (Leach , 
1982). 

One of the most damaging consequences of colonialism relates to a massive 
undermining of the self-confidence of the colonized peoples. Their cu ltural 
values and institutions were ridiculed and harshly criticized . Worse still, the 
Western pattern of education introduced by colonial governments produced 
a breed of Westernized native elite, who held their own cultural heritage in 
contempt and who consciously identified themselves with the culture of their 
colonial masters. 

During the nineteenth century Orientalism emerged as an intellectual 
ally of Western colonialism. As Edward Said has cogently demonstrated , 
Oriental ism was a product of certain political and ideological forces operating 
in Europe during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and that it was 
inextricably bound up with Western ethnocentrism, racism , and imperialism 
(Said , 1978). 

Most of the colonized countries of the Third World secured political 
liberation from Western powers during the early decades of the present century. 
Regrettably, however, political liberation was not always followed by 
ideological, cultural , and intellectual jndependence. For one thing, most of 
the ex-colonial countries continued with the colonial pattern of education. 
Secondly, most of them were drawn into the political and cultural orbit of 
either the United States or Soviet Russia. A subtle but pervasive form of 

Dr. A. R. Momin is a Professor of Anthropology at the University of Bombay, Jndia . 



144 The Ame rican Journal of Is lamic Social Sciences Vol. 6, No. I, 1989 

neo-colonialism and neo-imperialism thus replaced the blatant colonialism 
of yore. The Western-educated native elite. by and large, continued to play 
their old subversive role. This provides a rough picture of the ex-colonial 
countries of Asia and Africa. including the Muslim countries. 

Since the 1970's, a strong wave of Islamic resurgence has been sweeping 
across the Muslim world. Certain political , economic, and cultural 
developments, such as the oil boom in the Gulf countries, the revolution 
in Iran, the proliferation and revitalization of Muslim organizations, and a 
growing sense of Islamic identity among Muslim intellectuals and students , 
have brought about this resurgence (Momin, 1987). A significant aspect of 
the Islamic resurgence is that a small but growing number of Western-educated 
Muslim intellectuals and scholars in different parts of the world have sought 
to bring the Islamic perspective to bear on the social sciences. A comprehensive 
and ambitious project relating to the lslamiz.ation of knowledge Was launched 
by the Washington-based International Institute of Islamic Thought under the 
inspiring leadership of the late Professor Isma'il al Fariiqi. 

One of the most concerted attempts (though not wholly satisfactory) at 
the application of the Islamic perspective to the social sciences relates to 
Islamic economics. An incipient field of inquiry within the framework of 
lslamization of knowledge, which has engaged the attention of a few Muslim 
scholars, is Islamic anthropology. A fuJJ-length study on the subject has recently 
been published by Ms. Merry I Wyn Davies. Akbar S. Ahmed's book 1, 
under review here , purports to make a contribution to this nascent field of 
study. Dr. Ahmed is a Pakistani anthropologist who has been trained at the 
universities of London, Cambridge. and Birmingham . He previously had the 
privilege of being a scholar-administrator, posted as Commissioner of Quetta, 
Pakistan. 

In his short but thought-provoking foreword to the book, Professor Isma'il 
al Fariiqf offers a lucid exposition of the aim and scope of Islamization of 
knowledge. He takes into consideration the impact of colonialism and neo-
colonialism on the intellectual history of Muslim people, and points out that 
Islamization of knowledge should necessarily entail a correction and redress 
of the conceptual and methodological shortcomings of Western social sciences. 
He emphasizes that the reorientation of anthropology should be inspired by 
the Islamic ethos, particularly by the principles of unity and transcendence 
of God, reason, universalism, communitarianism, and the moral vision . He 
rightly points an accusing finger at Eurocentrism and cultural relativism, 
which have been the bane of Western anthropology, and pleads for a 

1Toward Islamic Anthropology: Definition, Dogma, and Directions. By Akbar S. Ahmed. 
(Lahore. Pakis tan : Vanguard Books, 1987), pp. 79. 



A.R. Momin lslamization of Anthropological Knowledge 145 

reorientation of the science of man within the framework of Islamization 
of knowledge. 

Dr. Ahmed's book is divided into two parts. P"cUt I deals with the corpus 
of Western anthropology; Part D is concerned with the aim and scope of 
Islamic anthropology. 

P'art I, which purportedly provides the backdrop for an examination of 
the possibility and promise of Islamic anthropology, discusses the theoreticaJ 
and methodological framework of (British) social anthropology. Dr. Ahmed 
takes into consideration the historical linkage between anthropology, on the 
one hand, and colonialism and Orientalism. on the other. This is followed 
by a discussion of theoretical issues in social anthropology. The author then 
dwells on certain arbitrarily selected and rather loosely connected themes 
such as sociaJ structure, kinship, politicaJ organization, religion and magic, 
economic anthropology, and social change. He then undertakes a discussion 
of Orientalist anthropology ad shows how anthropological works on Islam 
have drawn on the distorted and biased researches and perspectives of Western 
Orientalists. 

P'art II, which is devoted to a discussion of Islamic anthropology. barely 
spans twelve pages. Dr. Ahmed defines Islamic anthropology as "the study 
of Muslim groups by scholars committed to the universalistic principles of 
Islam-humanity, knowledge, tolerance - relating micro village tribal studies 
in particular to the larger historicaJ and ideological frames of Islam" (p. 56). 
This definition, according to him, does not exclude non-Muslims from the 
purview of Islamic anthropology. The author offers an exposition of the Islamic 
world -view, and points out that Islamic anthropology should provide a 
corrective to distorted views of £slam and Muslims presented by Western 
anthropologists. He takes into consideration the historical and cultural variations 
exhibited by Muslim communities in different parts of the world and criticizes 
Western anthropologists and other scholars for characterizing these differences 
in terms of Indian Islam, Moroccan Islam, Turkish Islam, etc. He points 
out that there is only one universal Islam, although there are many Muslim 
societies. 

Dr. Ahmed presents a historical model or taxonomy of Muslim societies, 
which supposedly provides a theoretical and methodological orientation for 
Islamic anthropology. The five-fold taxonomy comprises the following 
categories: 1. tribal segmentary Islam (represented by Bedouins, Berbers, 
and Pukhtuns); 2. the Ottoman or cantonment model (represented by the 
Safawis, Onomans, and Moghuls); 3. Great-River Islamic civilizations along 
the Indus, Tigris, and Euphrates; 4. Islam under Western colonialism: 5. 
Resurgent Islam as represented by Pakistan and Islamic Iran. 

Dr. Ahmed suggests that Islamic anthropology should present an authentic 
picture of Muslim society during the time of the Prophet, which has provided 



146 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 6, No. I. 1989 

a viable model for Muslims all over the world during the past fourteen Hijri 
centuries. He aJso emphasizes the value of comparative, historical studies 
of Muslim communities in terms of this ideal-typical framework. In conclusion 
he points out that Muslim scholars need not completely disown Western 
anthropology. Rather, they should seek a redress of its limitations in terms 
of Islamic ideals and principles. 

We now tum to a critical appraisal of Dr. Ahmed's contribution. It is 
unfortunate that he takes a rather superficial, ahistorical and uncritical view 
of Western anthropology. For one thing, he uncritically takes for granted the 
currently prevalent definition of anthropology as the study of "other" cultures. 
Thus he says: "The major task of anthropology . . . is to enable us to 
understand ourselves through understanding other cultures" (p. 13). His 
discussion of the anthropological method of field work is informed by the 
same view. It may be pointed out that anthropology emerged during the 
Enlightenment period and that it was envisioned by the French philosophers 
and the Scottish rationalist philosophers as a holistic discipline whose subject 
matter encompassed the whole of mankind . 

Since anthropology by definition is the science of mankind , it cannot 
legitimately confine itself to the study of "other" cultures. The current view 
of anthropology as the study of other cultures emerged during the latter half 
of the nineteenth century when an unfortunate separation between anthropology 
and sociology came about and when anthropology came to be confined to 
the study of small-scale, primitive cultures of the non-Western world. 
Furthermore, this view has been significantly conditioned by the Cartesian 
epistemology (Momin , 1984). 

Dr. Ahmed's uncritical approach to the corpus of Western anthropology 
is similarly reflected in his acquiescence in the positivist doctrine of objectivity 
and value-neutrality. Thus, he states: "Anthropology is a science based on 
extended participant observation of (other) cultures using the data collected , 
for value-neutral dispassionate analysis employing the comparative method" 
(sic, p. 56). It may be pointed out that the notion of value-neutrality, which 
was appropriated by the social sciences from the methodology of the natural 
sciences, is no longer a commonly accepted article of faith among 
anthropologists and :>OCiologists (Maquet, 1966; Gough , 1969; Berreman , 
1981; Bernstein, 1983). 

Dr. Ahmed's survey of anthropology is rather superficial, ahistorical, 
and narrow. What he offers is mainly a survey-that, too, a rather uncritical 
one - of British social anthropology. He makes only passing reference to a 
couple of French philosophers and rationalist philosophers who laid the 
foundations of anthropology during the eighteenth century. Similarly, there 
is hardly any mention of the pioneering contributions of Franz Boas and 
the American school of historical particularism. Furthermore, his discussion 



A.R. Momin Islamization of Anthropological Knowledge 147 

of theoretical developments in Western anthropology betrays considerable 
confusion and naivete. He speaks, for example, of the "holistic, analytical 
(sic) intellectualism of French social philosophy" (p. 17). Referring to 
Durkheim's view of religion, he says: "What he did was to raise to the level 
of a sociological principle the Christian maxim that all men are members 
one of another" (p. 43) . 

Now we turn to an examination of Dr. Ahmed's formulation of Islamic 
anthropology. In fairness to him, it should be pointed out at the outset that 
his endeavor is sincere and weU intentioned, in that it is guided by a genuine 
commitment to Lslamic ideals. 'j\Jl actions," the Prophet (~AAS) is reported 
to have said, "are to be judged on the basis of intentions ." Our main criticism 
of Dr. Ahmed's formulation of Islamic anthropology is that it is rather 
fragmentary and disjointed and, consequently, suffers from a lack of conceprual 
and methodological systematization. For one thing, his definition of Islamic 
anthropology is rather vague and vacuous. Secondly, the two sections of the 
book appear to be disjointed . There is hardly any serious attempt to bring 
the discussion on Western anthropology contained in J>-art I to bear on the 
aim and scope of Islamic anthropology. Thirdly, though the author states 
that there is only one universal Islam , and though he criticizes Orientalists 
and Western anthropologists for characterizing Muslim societies in terms of 
variants of Islam , he allows himself to fall into the same trap. This is evident, 
for example, when he speaks of "tribal segmentary Islam" (p. 61) . It is also 
reflected in his recent publication, Discovering Islam (1988), wherein he speaks 
of Indian Islam (p. 73) and South Asian Islam (p. 84, 95). 

It appears that Dr. Ahmed has not really made a serious attempt to grapple 
with the question of the stance of Islamic anthropology vis-a-vis Western 
anthropology. Thus, he states that anthropology must study (society) as it 
is and not as it should be (p. 60). One is tempted to ask: How does this 
positivist and objectivist stance of Western anthropology (with which he seems 
to agree) accord with the nonnative epistemology of Islam , which is supposed 
to infonn Islamic anthropology? One wishes that Dr. Ahmed had undertaken 
a critical examination of the epistemological and ontological premises of 
Western anthropology, which are inextricably bound up with the world-view 
of Western civilization, and evaluated their adequacy or inadequacy in the 
framework of Islamization of knowledge. 

Though Dr. Ahmed's study tends to be rather fragmentary and 
impressionistic, he makes a couple of valuable points that could provide a 
promising start to Islamic anthropology. He rightly emphasizes the need for 
an authentic anthropological picture of Muslim society during the time of 
the Prophet. It may be pointed out, however, that this kind of historical 
reconstruction cannot be carried out within the conventional framework of 
social anthropology as outlined - approvingly, one may add-by the author. 



148 The American Journal of lslamic Social Sciences Vol. 6. No. I. 1989 

Secondly, he makes a passing reference to the holistic Islamic framework 
(p. 55) without realizing its import. It may be added that in retrospect Dr. 
Ahmed does not seem to be satisfied with his own formulation (Ahmed 1988, 
p. 215). 

In the remainder of this paper we shall make an attempt to indicate the 
direction in which Islamic anthropology could profitably move and thereby 
make a worthwhile contribution to the discipline of anthropology, as well 
as to cross-cultural understanding. In our view. no discussion on Islamic 
anthropology or the Islamic social sciences in general can proceed without 
setting out the ontological and epistemological premises of Islam. The 
theoretical and methodological framework for the Islamization of knowledge 
should be informed and guided by the Islamic approach towards knowledge. 
It may be pointed out that Islam does not favor a dogmatic and doctrinaire 
attitude toward the acquisition and dissemination of knowledge. The Qur'an 
exhorts people to ponder and reflect over the mysteries of the universe as 
well as those of human nature. It does not demand an unreflective and blind 
allegiance to Islamic principles and ideals. Rather, it appeals to the 
quintessentially human faculties of reason and understanding. 

The Islamic approach toward knowledge is neither xenophobic nor 
solipsistic. The Prophet is reported to have said: "Wisdom is (like) the lost 
animal of a Muslim; wherever he finds it he catches hold of it." He regarded 
the acquisition of knowledge as not only obligatory on Muslim men and 
women, but also exhorted them to go in quest of it as far as China, which 
was the farthest-known stretch of hospitable land during the time of the Prophet. 
Though himself unlettered, the Prophet accorded a high priority to literacy. 
Thus, after the battle of Badr, he made the generous offer to the prisoners 
of war that each one of them could secure his freedom by teaching ten Muslim 
children how to read and write. Islamic anthropology, therefore, should be 
informed by the Islamic epistemology. In our view, three distinctive. but 
interrelated, dimensions of Islamic anthropology may be outlined: (1) an 
authentic anthropology of Islam as a living faith and culture, (2) the contribution 
of Muslim scholars to anthropological research, (3) the relevance and utility 
of Islamic insights and perspectives to a universal science of man. 

The Islamic faith and Islamic civilization have attracted the attention 
of a large number of Western Orientalists, social scientists. and other scholars. 
By and large, their approach to Islam has been conditioned by a combination 
of historical, cultural, and psychological factors, including the legacy of the 
Crusades. Consequently, they have tended to present a biased and distorted 
picture oflslam (Said, 1978; Daniel, 1960; Asad, 1954; Southern, 1962; Abdul 
Rauf, 1985; Fazlur Rahman, 1985). 

There is a need to offer a corrective to the distorted view of Islam presented 
by Orientalists and Western social scientists. Three distinct but interrelated 



A .R . Momin Islamization of Anthropological Knowledge 149 

dimensions of the problems may be noted: l. the distortion and 
misrepresentation of Islamic principles and doctrines through textual studies 
(Goldziher, Schacht) ; 2. the distortion of Islamic history (Bernard Lewis, 
von Grunebaum, Montgomery Watt); and 3. the biased and distorted accounts 
of Muslim communities and the contemporary Muslim world by Western 
social scientists, literary writers, and journalists (Daniel Lerner, V.S. Naipaul) . 

Genuinely committed Muslim scholars, including historians, 
anthropologists and sociologists, can make a valuable contribution to the 
presentation of an authentic picture of Islam. The life and works of the eminent, 
Indian-born scholar, Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah, should provide an inspiring 
model of commitment, dedication and scholarship in this connection. The 
factor of personal commitment to Islam on the part of Muslim scholars cannot 
be over-emphasi.Led. It is a sad commentary on the Western-educated Muslim 
elite that many of them made the grievous mistake of looking at their own 
faith and culture through the (blinkered) eyes of their European mentors. 
Consequently, many of them developed a jaundiced. view of Islam and Muslims. 

Islamic anthropology can make a significant contribution to the study 
of Muslim communities in a historical and comparative framework, as Nancy 
Tupper and Richard Tapper (1987) suggest. There are significant historical 
and cultural variations among Muslim communities in different parts of the 
world. However, these variations are overshadowed by the universality of 
the great Islamic tradition. As Ernest Gellner has observed, among all the 
world religions only Islam survives as a serious faith pervading both folk 
and great traditions (Gellner, 1984). Comparative studies of Muslim 
communities, therefore, should be rooted in the universalist context of the 
Islamic Great tradition. Needless to say, such studies have to be historically 
informed . It may be pointed out that comparative studies of Muslim 
communities, informed by Islamic epistemology, should not be the exclusive 
preserve of Muslim anthropologists. Islamic anthropology should guard itself 
against the danger of cultural and academic solipsism, and this can be done 
by including within its fold the researches of non-Muslim anthropologists 
as well, provided their researches are not colored by prejudice against Islam 
and Muslims. We s hould not lose sight of the fact that at least some 
anthropological studies of Muslim people undertaken by Western 
anthropologists are sympathetic in intent. 

The second theme in Islamic anthropology relates to the contribution 
made by Muslim scholars to cross-cultural and comparative studies. The 
contributions of Al Biriini and Ibn Khaldiin are of seminal importance, not 
only to Islamic anthropology but also to the history of anthropological thought. 
It may be pointed out that Western accounts of the history of anthropology 
hardly take into account the contributions of non-Western people to the 
development of comparative studies. Regna Darnell, for example, has observed 



150 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 6. No. I, 1989 

that the inspiration for ideas and methods of an anthropological nature in 
Europe was rooted in Judaeo-Christianity and classical antiquity. She states 
that "non-European folk have had no part in their formuJation. Buddhist ideas, 
Muslim ideas, East Indian or Chinese ideas on cultural problems are 
unrepresented" (Darnell , 1974). Regrettably, this statement does not take into 
account the role of Muslims in transmitting the classical heritage of Greece 
and India to Europe during the Middle Ages, nor does it consider the 
contributions of Muslim scholars such as Al Biriini. 

The Renaissance in Europe paved the way for the emergence of 
anthropology. It is significant to note that the intellectual stimulus to the 
Renaissance was provided by the rediscovery of Latin and Greek manuscripts 
on science and philosophy. Muslim scholars played a significant role during 
the Middle Ages in passing the Hellenic heritage to Europe through translations 
(Voget. 1975). The Latin translations undertaken by lbn Sina (Avicenna) and 
lbn Rushd (Averroes) between the 12th and 13th centuries introduced to 
Christian theologians the philosophical heritage of ancient Greece (Hayes, 
L983) . 

During the Enlightenment, the philosophers repudiated Christianity and 
drew inspiration from classical antiquity, and in doing so they relied on the 
translations of Muslim scholars, Frank Manuel has observed that "the anti-
clerical philosophers would naturally see the new millennium come from 
Islam than from Christendom" (Manual, 1962). 

Finally, Islamic anthropology can make a worthwhile contribution to a 
humanistic and genuinely universal science of man. Since the eighteenth 
century, anthropology, as well as the other related disciplines, has been 
dominated by Cartesian-Newtonian cosmology. Consequently, they 
unretlectively appropriated the concepts and methods of the natural sciences. 
The notion of objectivity and value-neutrality, which is one of the cardinal 
principles of the methodology of the human sciences, was influenced by 
Cartesian epistemology. Human society was considered a mechanism or an 
organism, which was supposedly governed by invariant principles or laws. 
The same mechanistic principle was applied to the study of human nature 
and behavior. 

la recent years there has come about a reaction to the dominance of 
the natural science model in the human sciences. Significantly, this reaction 
has been influenced by the emergence of a post-Cartesian, post-empiricist 
conception of science (Tudor, 1982; Bernstein, 1983 ; Giddens, 79; Geertz, 
1983) . The notion of value-neutrality and objectivity has been subjected to 
a searching criticism. There is now serious concern with the bearing of moral 
responsibility on social science research. The view of society as a natural 
system has become one of the most contentious and debatable issues in the 
contemporary human sciences. Similarly, there is growing dissatisfaction with 



A.R. Momin Islamizatioo of Anthropological Knowledge 151 

the reductionistic and deterministic view of human nature. There now seems 
to be a virtual swing from a positivistic to a humanistic orientation in 
anthropology, sociology, and psychology. 

Islamic anthropology can significantly contribute to this emerging post-
modern paradigm in anthropology: 

1. Islamic anthropology, which is informed by Islamic epistemology, can 
contribute to the emergence of a genujnely universal science of man. It can 
assist in the process of de-westernization of anthropology which is under 
way. 

2. Islamic anthropology can lend its illuminating insights to what has 
come to be known as indigenous or native ethnography, and thereby offer 
a much-needed corrective to the currently prevalent, but constrictive, view 
of anthropology as the study of "other" cultures. 

3. The ethical dimension of Islamic ontology can further illuminate certain 
significant developments in the human sciences. Mention may be made in 
this connection of the emergence of the symbolic or moral view of man in 
psychology, psychiatry, philosophy, and anthropology. The eminent American 
psychiatrist Thomas Szasz (1967) has proposed the view of moral man as 
a model for the human sciences. The Islamic conception of moral man (Davies. 
1988) has a significant parallel with this view. Similarly, the emerging view 
of society as a symbolic or moral system has a close affinity with the Islamic 
world view. 

4. Islamic anthropology can make a significant contribution to the 
reinforcement of the holistic perspective that is now emphasized by a growing 
number of anthropologists (Berreman , 1981) . 

5. Islamic anthropology can contribute its special insights to the debate 
on the psychic unity of mankind and thereby provide a corrective to extreme 
cultural relativism , which is implicit in functional anthropology. 

6. There are scores of themes of an anthropological nature in the Qur'an 
and in the Traditions of the Prophet, believed by Muslims to be divinely 
inspired. Islamic anthropology can examine such themes in a comparative 
and cross-cultural perspective and bring out their scientific validity and import. 
What has been attempted by Maurice Bucaille (1982) in regard to a 
substantiation of Qur'anic data on the natural sciences and by Keith Moore 
(1982) in respect of embryological data in the Qur'an, can be done in relation 
to anthropological data. 

So what should be the status of Is lamic anthropology vis-a-vis Western 
anthropology? Is it to be considered a significant theoretical perspective within 
the broad stream of Western anthropology, as Dr. Ahmed seems to imply? 
Or is it to be offered a radical alternative to Western anthropology, as Ms . 
Merryl Wyn Davies (1988) seems to suggest? 

This question should be necessarily considered in the context of the close 



152 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 6. No. I. 1989 

linkage between Western anthropology, on the one band, and the ontological 
and epistemological premises of Western civilization, on the other. Since 
Islamic epistemology, which informs Islamic anthropology, is at variance 
with the positivist epistemology of Western anthropology, Islamic anthropology 
cannot legitimately and authentically function within the ethnocentric and 
positivist framework of Western anthropology. On the other hand , since Islamic 
anthropology is to be necessarily informed and guided by the universalistic 
framework of Islamic epistemology, it has to guard itself against the danger 
of cultural solipsism. In our view, both the extremes are avoidable. 

Anthropology has to hark back to its original and genuine calling by 
reaffirming its commitment to the wholeness and unity of mankind, which 
constitutes its subject matter. [n other words, anthropology needs to rediscover 
that it is a universal, or a potentially universal, science. Consequently, it 
encompasses the totality of man and the wholeness of mankind. Undoubtedly, 
anthropology bears the unmistakable imprint of Eurocentrism , but that can 
be corrected. With the emergence of indigenous ethnography and national 
traditions of anthropology in Third World countries, the process of de-
Westernization or de-Occidentization has already begun. Islamic anthropology 
can make a valuable contribution to this process and thereby to the emergence 
of a genuinely universal science of man. Historically, Islam has played a 
key role in cross-cultural understanding and integration. Islamic anthropology 
has the potential and the promise to carry on this historic mission. 

REFERENCES 

M. Abdul Rauf. "Outsiders' Interpretation of Islam: A Muslim's Point 
of View," in Richard C. Martin, ed., Approaches to Islam in Religious Studies, 
(Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1985), pp. 179-188. 

Akbar Ahmed, Discovering Islam: Making Sense of Muslim Society and 
History, (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1988). 

Muhammad Asad , The Road to Mecca (London: Max Reinhardt), 1954. 
R. J. Bernstein , Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science. 

Hermeneutics and Praxis, (London: Basil Blackwell , 1983). 
Gerald D. Berreman, The Politics of Truth: Essays in Critical 

Anthropology, (New Delhi: South Asian Publishers, 1981). 
Gerald D. Berreman, "After Dinner Speech: .f\ otes of a Native Son ," 

34th Annual North-Western Anthropological Conference, Portland, Oregon 
(mimeographed), 1981. 

Maurice Bucaille, 171e Bible, the Quran and Science (Pa.ris: Editions 
Seghers, 1982). 

Norman Daniel, Islam and the Uiist: The Making ofan Image (Edinburgh: 



A.R. Momin lslam1zat1on of Anthropological Knowledge 153 

Edinburgh University Press, 1960). 
Regna Darnell, ed ., Readings in the History of Anthropology (New York: 

Harper and Row, 1974). 
Merry! Wyn Davies, Knowing One Another: Shaping an Islamic 

Anthropology (London: Mansell Publishing Co., 1988) . 
Ernest Gellner, Muslim Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 

1984) . 
Clifford Geertz , local Knowledge (New York: Basic Books, 1983) . 
Anthony Giddens, Central Problems in Social Theo!)• (London: 

Macmillan, 1979) . 
Kathleen Gough, "World Revolution and the Science of Man", in Theodore 

Roszak, ed . , The Disse111i11g Academy (New York: Random House, 1969) . 
J. R . Hayes, ed ., The Genius of Arab Civililtltion: Source of Renaissa11ce 

(Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1983). 
Edmund Leach, Social Altthropology (New York: Oxford University Press, 

1982). 
Frank Manuel , The Prophets of Paris (Cambridge, Mass . : Harvard 

University Press, 1962) . 
J. J. Maguet, J. , "Objectivity in Anthropology:' Current Anthropology, 

Vol. V, No. I , pp. 45-55, 1966. 
A . R. Momin , "On the Study of One's Own Culture," in M . Bhuriya 

and S. M. Michael , eds. Anthropology as a Historical Science, (Indore: Sat 
Prakashan , 1984) , pp. 163-183 

A. R. Momin , "On Islamic Fundamentalism : The Genealogy of a 
Stereotype," (Karachi: Hamdard Islamicus) , Vol. X, No. 4, pp. 35-46, 1987. 

Keith L . Moore, "Highlights of Human Embryology in the Koran and 
the Hadith ," Proceedings of the Seventh Saudi Medical Meeting, 1982 . 

Fazlur Rahman, "Approaches to Islam in Religious Studies: Review Essay.fl 
in R. C. Martin , ed . , Approaches to !slam in Religious Studies, 1985, pp. 
189-202. 

Ed.ward Said, Orienta/ism (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul), 1978. 
R. W. Southern, Western Views of Islam in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 

Mass. : Harvard University Press, 1962) . 
Thomas Szasz, "Moral Man : A Model of Man for Humanistic Psychology." 

in J.F.T. Bugental , ed., Challenges of Humanistic Psychology (New York: 
McGraw-Hill 1967), pp. 45 -51. 

Nancy Tapper and Richard Tapper, "The Birth of the Prophet: Ritual 
and Gender in Turkish Islam ," Man, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 69-92. 1967. 

A. Tudor, Beyond Empiricism : Philosophy of Science in Sociology 
(London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1982). 

F. W. Voget , A History of Ethnology (New York: Hott , Rinehart and 
Winston , 1975) .