| Abstract: | This article examines the historiographical debate concerning the origins of Arab nationalism as postulated by George Antonius in his book, The Arab Awakening: The Story of the Arab National Movement and the theory of historical construction. After establishing the theoretical framework of the study with an overview of Hayden White's views on how history is written, it progresses into a study of the historiography of Arab nationalism. Here, the scholars Sylvia G. Haim, C. Ernest Dawn, Rashid Khalidi, and Fruma Zachs and their writings are chronologically dissected, with each academic analyzed via White's theories of historical construction. Through studying their respective positions, it is shown that these texts are culturally relative according to the era in which they were written. It is argued that no work of scholarship can be fully removed from outside influences. Specifically, politicization of academics and the consequences of such endeavors are shown as inextricable from the created narrative. Because of the need for culturally relative knowledge so that it can be applicable to audiences outside of academia, scholars who write for an express purpose (such as answering a question for the benefit of others) should not be considered inherently biased. This article poses that academics have a moral obligation to disseminate knowledge to their respective societies due to their assumed removed status as academics. By doing so, human error is acknowledged and room is made for improvement within the field of history. Knowledge does not need to be created for its own sake, but rather so that it might be utilized by society at large. It is suggested that to foster a deeper understanding of a scholar's relationship with society, there should be an increase in academics' civic engagement. This additionally requires serious reflection and enquiry into the standards that would consequently need to be implemented to maintain the integrity of the produced scholarship. |
