Historical writing by Syrians on Syria up to the 20th century followed the traditional patterns of annals, in chronicle form, biographical notes, and general histories. These histories, when written by Muslims, were mainly concerned with Islamic and Arab countries. Interest in other countries, especially Europe, discerned in the writings of Christians (a noted example is the history by Mīkhāīl Barīk, Tārīkh al-Shām 1720-1782, ed. Q. al-Bāshā [Harīsā, 1930J ) , became widespread in the writings of both Christians and Muslims in the 19th century as a result of the growing influence of Europe in Near Eastern affairs.

Apart from the exposition and interpretation of Quranic teaching, which is a vast subject, the critical problems that have preoccupied students of the Qur'ān fall for the most part into four divisions. First there is the question of the origins of the Qur'an in the broadest sense. How did the substance of the book come to be and what sort of material does it constitute? From what kind of roots in the social situation or the personal life of Muhammad does it spring? What is the relation to the literary deposits of other preceding religious traditions? It may be argued that this problem might more properly be considered as an aspect of study of the Prophet since it has to do with the modes of revelation, the nature of prophetic psychology and experience, and the possible prophetic acquaintance with or dependence upon religious writings of Christians and Jews, whether directly or through informants.

In July of 2006, I published an article in the journal Eighteenth Century Studies that I trust none of you ever read. Why should you? Eighteenth-Century Studies is not a venerable site for the study of the Middle East or Islam. However, it was the journal where I first considered a question in early American history that has since gained some currency in contemporary American political discourse. The question: “Could a Muslim be president?”

Although the first contact between Korea and the Middle East dates back to the ninth or twelfth century, academic interests in Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies began in 1965 with the establishment of the Department of Arabic Language and Literature at the Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul.

The birth of the Third Republic of Korea in 1961 signaled a new diplomatic move into the non-aligned world, particularly the Arab Middle East as it gained in importance in the international political and economic community. At the same time, the Korean economy began to expand and her trade found markets in the Middle East. These developments are some of the important factors which gave birth to the Department of Arabic Language and Literature.

Although Americans of Middle Eastern origin—be they of Arab, Turkish, Armenian, Sephardic Jewish, Assyrian, Greek, or Central Asian heritage—comprise one of the fastest growing groups in the United States, their music may seem invisible to the American musical connoisseur. Many of the recordings of Middle Eastern American musicians are produced and distributed within community networks. Walk into an Armenian grocer in Watertown, Massachusetts or into a Lebanese audio-video store in Dearborn, Michigan, and you will find hundreds of hours of music by Middle Eastern Americans for your listening pleasure. Walk into your public library and you may not find a thing. Middle Eastern music made in America is simply not widely available on the major or alternative recording labels to which we habitually turn for our fare of world music.

The world is now undergoing a transformation as profound as that experienced with the rise of the territorial state system after the religious wars of Europe’s feudal period. Modern technology in defense and communications and “emerging trans-state patterns of commerce, politics, and cultural life” are rendering traditional notions of “frontier” obsolete. Dispersed transnational communities—Sikhs in Canada, Muslims in Britain, Germany, France, and the U.S.—sectarian and ethnic militias sustained by emigré and foreign funds, and transnational banking, commercial, religious, and intellectual links often opaque to state authorities may not threaten the existence of the nation-state everywhere, but they serve as a poignant reminder that nation-states are not the only significant political actors in the late twentieth century.

This article provides a brief overview of the heuristic framework of the Modern Muslim Subjectivities Project that is being conducted at the University of Southern Denmark as of the writing of this article. The project explores ways in which Islamic traditions have played a role in the construction of modern Muslim subjectivities. Applying a problem-driven perspective, it selectively borrows from theories of successive modernities, sociology of religion, and poststructuralist approaches to modern subjectivity formation, introducing a novel heuristic framework to the field of Islamic studies. In posing the question as to the ways in which Muslims have constructed modern selfhoods, the project combines studies on Islamic reform, young Muslims in Egypt and Denmark, (post)modern Sufism, Islamic higher education, and changing notions of intimacy in two Egyptian revolutions. In criticizing the alleged exclusivity of Western modernity, the project wants to make original contributions to both conceptual discussions in the humanities and our knowledge of modern Muslim societies.

Since the middle of the twentieth century there have been three waves of historiography on the late Ottoman world. Each rose to prominence in a different global setting, functioned as a broad intellectual orientation, and was replaced by another somewhat less hegemonic theoretical current after about two decades. The key differences between the three episodes are evident in terms of their thematic priorities, analytical frameworks, and the research designs and methodological choices of scholars. These three waves of Ottoman history writing can be classified as modernization approaches, macro models, and post-structural agendas.

Outside the disciplines of communication and cultural studies, scholarly interest in television programming, especially scripted entertainment, has been overshadowed by attention to digital media, reality TV, and smart phone connectivity. A 2017 University of Maryland conference offered a reconsideration of popular Middle East-produced television dramas and their surprising impacts on national and transnational politics and culture. As conference papers showed, social and historical themes resonated in unexpected ways inside and outside national borders, with state authorities responding, not just with the usual censoring, but with investment in social and historical dramas of their own.

Five days after the attempted coup d’état of 15 July 2016, a state of emergency was declared in Turkey. Under the emergency rule, constitutional rights and liberties are suspended and parliament and the courts are reduced to the regime's rubber stamp, while the country is ruled by one man through decrees. While many question how the legal and political developments in Turkey will unfold, and whether and how the democratic backslide and decline in rule of law can be reversed, Indira Gandhi's emergency (1975–77) offers a useful historical heuristic case. With striking similarities to the conditions in Turkey today, during the Indian emergency the judiciary, especially the Indian Supreme Court (ISC), was subjugated to the will of Prime Minister Gandhi through means of constitutional amendments and political appointments that compromised the integrity of justices. Yet, shortly after the end of emergency the ISC regained the trust and respect of the Indian people, thereby playing an instrumental role in the restoration of Indian democracy. Through a close analysis of the Indian emergency rule, the present article explores the conditions of democratic survival and whether and how the Turkish judiciary can reclaim its independence, spearhead a rights revolution, and help restore the democratic order.