By: Okoi Obono-Obla The concept of the “Middle East” as a geographical or political entity is a relatively modern construct, bo...
By: Okoi Obono-Obla
The concept of the “Middle East” as a geographical or political entity is a relatively modern construct, born out of European colonial ambitions in the 18th and 19th centuries. In antiquity, there was no such designation. The lands now grouped under the term “Middle East” were integral parts of Africa and Asia, interconnected through trade, empire, and culture. Ancient civilizations such as Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Levant were not separated by the artificial boundaries later imposed by colonial powers. Indeed, regions like present‑day Israel, Palestine, and surrounding territories were historically linked to Africa through Egypt and the Nile Valley.
The term “Middle East” itself did not exist in ancient geography. It was coined from a Eurocentric worldview that divided Asia into the “Near East,” “Middle East,” and “Far East.” The phrase gained currency in the mid‑19th century, first appearing in British colonial discourse around the 1850s. It was later popularized by American naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan in 1902, who used it to describe the area around the Persian Gulf as strategically vital between Arabia and India. British diplomat Sir Ignatius Valentine Chirol expanded the definition to include territories stretching toward India. By the early 20th century, the term had become entrenched in Western strategic and colonial discourse, especially during World War I, when Britain and France carved spheres of influence in the region.
Thus, the “Middle East” is not an ancient identity but a colonial construct, designed to serve European geopolitical interests. Before this invention, the lands were seen as part of broader civilizational zones—Africa, Asia Minor, and the Fertile Crescent—without the artificial severance that modern terminology imposes.
@ Okoi Obono-Obla
No comments