It is no easy task to present the state of Arabic studies as a whole in Spain. Furthermore, the situation is constantly and normally evolving. I will nonetheless try to give a summary picture here.

In the first place one must present the bibliography of the other studies on this subject already published.

Anything coming after the floor show we have just seen can only be an anticlimax, and my impulse is to tear up my prepared text and just quote two great men: Thomas Carlyle, who described economics as “the dismal science” and Henry Ford, who said “history is bunk” — from which it presumably follows that economic history is dismal bunk. Instead, I should like to take advantage of this captive audience and speak to you in praise of economic history. This is an old Arabic genre : mahasin al-iqtisad. And of course economic history means giving as little history for as much money as possible, so you will not expect a long speech.

The term “social sciences” (‘ulūm-i-ijtimā’ī) has gained currency in Iran only during the last fifteen years or so, but some of the disciplines falling within its purview have been in existence for a longer period. Thus the first institution for teaching political science was established in 1899, and the first chair of sociology was created in 19 35 in the University of Tehran. Besides, iike Molière’s bourgeois gentillhomme who belatedly realized that he had been making prose all his life without being aware of it, some Iranian scholars too have long been engaged in writing, translating and conducting research on social problems or using sociological concepts without being conscious of themselves as social scientists.

Since from a chronological viewpoint, political science appeared in Iran prior to other disciplines of social sciences and its studies involve problems of a distinct nature, the present paper is divided into two parts: the first dealing with political science, and the second with sociology and related disciplines.

In comparison with other ethnic groups in the U.S., the Arab-American community has received little study. In part this is due, no doubt, to its relatively small size, which is estimated to be about one and one half to two millions. Recently however, there has been an ethnic revival in the urban areas of the U.S. It became obvious in the late ’60s and early ‘70’s that many members of ethnic groups had not “melted”, had not lost their pride and cultural values, and that some had been forced to be ashamed of their foreign origin in public, and lived in a form of dual existence. The politics of ethnicity, always a part of the American class and political structure, also became more publically discussed in the 1960s. In large part this was due to the success of the Black expressions of identity and unity, but in the case of the Middle Eastern Arab communities, it was also in response to the conflicts in the Mid-East, and to the U.S. policies in relation to those conflicts. The heavy governmental support of the expanding settler state of Israel, and the inability to find expression of the Arab side through the mass media caused a growing alienation from U.S. policies and a new feeling of cultural and political awareness. This was particularly true after the 1967 Mid-East War, and more recently as a result of such a policy as Operation Boulder, a special surveillance policy instituted by President Nixon which specifically included Arab “ethnics.” The October War and the oil situation has also added a new and different dimension. It should be added, that in certain of the social sciences, there is a renewed emphasis upon migration studies, both in the national and international context.

This report summarizes the results of a survey of Kansas high school teachers of World History conducted in the Spring of 1972. Though the data were gathered in the state of Kansas, the textbooks used in the World History course are “national” in the sense that (1) the authors are not local or even regional and (2) the books are widely used in various parts of the country.

It was agreed that the full report that was prepared by Mr. Griswold about the various books examined by the members of the Committee be published in the MESA Bulletin, but with the addition of the Canadian material plus some observations that some of us might have on that report.

Dates in parentheses at the end of each statement represent the combined holdings of the Stanford University-Hoover Institution libraries and are meant to serve as a guide to the publication history of the documents.

The bibliography is arranged by country and then by issuing agency. The Arabic form of the agency has been used when available.

This bibliography is not a comprehensive listing, but rather serves as an introduction to the wealth of material buried in the confusing array of publications of statistical agencies in the Middle East.

IJMES continued to be published on schedule during 1973, with the Editor performing his functions while on sabbatical leave in Istanbul, with generous assistance from the members of the Editorial Board and the Book Review Board, as well as the secretarial staff of the Near Eastern Center, University of California, Los Angeles.

Western knowledge of Southwest Arabia, the scene of an important ancient civilization and a flourishing center of early Islamic culture, has until recently owed as much to legend and hearsay as to analytical research. During the past few centuries access to Yemen by Western scholars and observers was sparse and intermittent, inhibition by the land’s forbidding terrain, its remoteness, and by the isolationist policy of its Zaidi monarchs. When the imamate was overthrown in 1962 there ensued a protracted civil war which opposed Egypt to Saudi Arabia in an intra-Arab “Vietnam”, and also prolonged the country’s inaccessibility to scholarly inquiry. Only in the late 1960s did research become even theoretically possible in Yemen on a scale approaching what had been going on for decades in most other Middle Eastern countries. Since then the territory has attracted a growing number of researchers, and information about Yemen’s past and contemporary life is now beginning to appear on a regular basis. It is widely dispersed, however, and the need is clear for a summary of the existing research tools and facilities both outside and within Yemen, the climate for scientific investigation in the country, the projects recently completed or in progress, and the researchers involved.

The Program Committee (Paul English, Coordinator; Ahmet Evin, Irene Gendzier, Carl Leiden, members; Barbro Ek, Nicholas S. Hopkins, ex officio) met on April 26, 1974, in Boston, and worked out the following program. In addition to the papers, panels and workshops listed here, there will be films, lunches, business meetings of associated associations and entertainment. Full details will appear on the final printed program.

An asterisk indicates that an abstract has been received. Double citation marks (““like this””) means that the title was not given by the author and has been constructed by the committee. The Program Committee decided to try to give times to all panels early this year in the hope that this would enable people to make plans ahead of time. Changes will be held to a minimum.

The following is a summary of the discussions and decisions at the 16th Board of Directors meeting in New York on February 1, 1974. Those present were President Leonard Binder, Past President Charles Issawi, Board Members Amin Banani, Kathleen Burrill, Iliya Harik, Ira Lapidus, Ernest McCarus, and Don Peretz, Acting Executive Secretary Nicholas S. Hopkins, and MESA’S Administrative Assistant Elana Mashberg.

Syria, its contemporary life as well as its long history, presents immensely rewarding possibilities for the student of the Middle East. Moreover, there is a great deal of published material on Syria’s geography, ethnography, and social and political institutions, but — as one would expect in view of the modern history of the Levant — the overwhelming majority of these studies have flowed from the pens of French scholars. Indeed, most Americans, even those highly conversant with Middle Eastern affairs, regard Syria with befuddlement if not consternation. As a result, Syria is truly a neglected area in American scholarship. There have been few attempts to investigate the country seriously even from the outside, let alone to conduct research within its borders. On the other hand, those Americans who have worked in Syria, including the present writer, have found it a good place to carry out scientific research, so long as one observes certain commonsense rules. In the following paragraphs, I shall try to sketch the areas where research is permitted, research facilities available in Syria, the varying procedures necessary to gain research permission, and living conditions. Because of the nature of my own work there, most of my comments refer specifically to Damascus unless otherwise stated. Likewise, all the data presented in this paper was gathered before the outbreak of fighting on October 6, 1973, and may thus be only partly valid as of this writing.

‘Area studies’ developed later in Great Britain than in North America. The period of rapid growth began in 1962, as a result of a report by a government committee (the Hayter Committee) set up to consider the future of Oriental, Slavonic, East European and African studies. The report recommended that the government give special grants to encourage historians and social scientists to extend their interests and apply their methods to the world outside Western Europe, and to make possible the creation of a number of inter-disciplinary centres. The report was accepted and grants were given for these purposes until 1972. By that time there were approximately a dozen universities which had some kind of regular degree course in Arabic, Islamic or Middle Eastern studies, and a number of other universities and colleges where some teaching of these subjects took place. There was a growing demand for a professional association which would make it possible for those who taught and studied Middle Eastern subjects to discuss matters of common interest and to coordinate their work in what might well be a period of financial stringency. After long discussions between interested bodies, the Society was formally brought into existence at a meeting held in London in May 1973.