Impact of Oriental despotism and the idea of otherness Premium

The concept of Oriental despotism, shaped by Greek thought and later enriched by European philosophers, travellers, and diplomats, has significantly influenced European culture and perceptions of Asian societies. It evolved through various interpretations, emphasizing the contrast between Europe’s perceived freedom and Asia’s supposed tyranny, and was used to justify colonial attitudes and policies.

A concept shaped and enriched by philosophers, political theorists, travellers, administrators and diplomats, Oriental despotism is an idea intertwined with European culture, greatly impacted by travel literature. The roots of the concept can be traced back to Greek thought, where terms like “despot” and “despotism” were used to establish Greek identity and superiority over “barbarous” nations, notably the Persians. Many Greek philosophers distinguished the Greeks from the Persians, believing that Persians were subordinate slaves, in contrast to the freedom-loving Greeks.

It was Aristotle who provided a clearer and more theoretical foundation for the concept in his book Politics. He regarded despotism as a legitimate and hereditary form of monarchy, particularly suitable for societies perceived as more barbarous, such as those in Persia, where the monarch wielded absolute power, due to people’s inclination towards subordination. However, this differed significantly from tyranny, which was illegitimate and against the wishes of the subjects.

The limited understanding of Asiatic societies, shaped by a Eurocentric perspective, led to misconceptions about Asians, particularly the Persians, resulting in various interpretations of Oriental despotism. These preconceived notions about the Persians persisted through the Byzantine Empire and medieval European thought.

Medieval authors and theorists, influenced by Aristotle’s classification of governments, cited Oriental societies as examples of tyrannical governments to justify political struggles in their own countries. These works reinforced the idea of Oriental otherness, creating a separation between the so-called superior European societies and the inferior Asiatic societies.

By the 16th century, new connotations were attributed to the concepts. For instance, Florentine philosopher and diplomat Niccolò Machiavelli used it to distinguish between a state governed by citizens (republics) and a state governed by a single ruler, such as a prince (principalities). The Ottoman Empire, a centralised monarchical government, became the new example used to explain despotic rule, contrasting with the decentralised European monarchies.

French philosopher Jean Bodin further explained the concept. Using the term monarchie seigneuriale, he described a political system where the prince wields unlimited authority over his subjects, similar to the relationship between the master and the slave. This was contrasted with monarchie royale, where the king’s authority was limited by property rights and fundamental, divine, and natural laws of the state. With no private property rights, monarchie seigneuriale Bodin believed it was the most ancient form of monarchy, which was very different from tyranny, which was unstable and illegitimate.

By the late 17th and early 18th centuries, travellers’ accounts of Persian monarchies shaped the understanding of Oriental despotism. French physician François Bernier criticised the despotic government of the Mughal Empire he visited. He highlighted the stark wealth disparity between rich princes and poor subjects, attributing it to the lack of private ownership rights.