The main theoretical ground of Ahmad's critique of Said's _Orientalism_ is that Said, despite his nod of recognition in the direction of Gramsci, fails to take a historical materialist approach to the critique of Orientalism. Said writes: "Almost from earliest times in Europe the Orient was something more than what was empirically known about it" (55). Said goes on to produce his "evidence" that Orientalism existed "from earliest times in Europe" by turning to ancient Greek drama:
***** Two of the most profoundly influential qualities associated with the East appear in Aeschylus's _The Persians_, the earliest Athenian play extant, and in _The Bacchae_ of Euripides, the very last one extant. Aeschylus portrays the sense of disaster overcoming the Persians when they learn that their armies, led by King Xerxes, have been destroyed by the Greeks. The chorus sings the following ode:
Now all Asia's land Moans in emptiness. Xerxes led forth, oh oh! Xerxes' plans have all miscarried In ships of the sea. Why did Darius then Bring no harm to his men When he led them into battle, That beloved leader of men from Susa?
What matters here is that Asia speaks through and by virtue of the European imagination, which is depicted as victorious over Asia, that hostile "other" world beyond the seas. To Asia are given the feelings of emptiness, loss, and disaster that seem thereafter to reward Oriental challenges to the West; and also, the lament that in some glorious past Asia fared better, was itself victorious over Europe. (Said 56) *****
Now, Said's reading of _The Persians_ is patently anachronistic. The Athenians who staged _The Persians_ did not possess what Said calls "the European imagination." They thought of themselves in terms of class, gender, their city state, and Hellene; "Europe" as (we think) we know it did not exist in ancient Greece, much less "the European imagination"! _The Persians_ does express Athens's pride in its democratic virtue (which Aeschylus credits for a victory over Persia), but many Athenians were proud of its democracy, not because they thought their "European" virtue made them democratic unlike the Persians, but because they often felt, rightly or wrongly, superior to all other peoples, including free citizens of other Greek city states such as Sparta. In fact, _The Persians_ is remarkable in its empathetic identification with the defeated Persians, whose sorrows are compellingly portrayed, in contrast to what Orientalism (which, pace Said, has its origin in modernity, capitalism, and imperialism) says about the Orientals' cruelty, indifference to pain & suffering, etc.
Further, whether Said likes it or not, it is a historical truth that Persia _was_ defeated by the Hellenic league, which doesn't make the denizens of Greek city states "orientalist." Also, as a matter of fact, the Greek unity against Persia was very short-lived. The Peloponnesian War came to its virtual end in 405 B.C.E. when the Persian-backed Spartans defeated the Athenians decisively in the battle of Aegospotami.
In short, Said obscures the origin of Orientalism by falsely assimilating the world before capitalism (including ancient Greece!) to our modern world.
Yoshie