Hobson, John. "Countering the Eurocentric Myth of the Pristine West: Discovering the Oriental West" In The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization, by John Hobson, 1-26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Hobson, John. "Countering the Eurocentric Myth of the Pristine West: Discovering the Oriental West" In The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization, by John Hobson, 1-26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

• History is often taught as if the West had a separate history from the rest of the world, developing in Greece and then progressing forward into Europe and the Americas. This version of history assumes that European power and technological advances are the driving force of history, beginning with the discovery of the Americas in 1492, due to their scientific rationality and democratic values, and that it is Europe that created the modern world (1-2). This version of history focuses on the West as an actor and assumes that the East is largely passive in history (4-5). 
• This traditional version of history begins in Ancient Greece and Rome, moves to Italian commerce in the Mediterranean, then the Enlightenment, and finally to the emergence of modern capitalism as a triumphful endpoint for human history (10). In this version, Europe is the driving force of historical progress and it has accomplished modernity all on its own, independent of the East (11).
• The author contests this interpretation on the grounds that the West and East were deeply interconnected for centuries following the collapse of the Roman Empire, and that these connections supplied Europe with technologies and ideas that were fundamental to its own eventual rise (2, 5, 22).
• The Eurocentric view of history is not fundamentally incorrect because Europe did become dominant and European dominance shaped the modern world. Thus, a good history should explain why and how Europe become dominant (19-20).
• 'Orientalism', coined by Edward Said in 1978, describes a view of the world as split between an essentialized West -- which is modern, dynamic, and rational -- and East -- which is stagnant, despotic, and irrational (8). This dichotomy began to be constructed between 1700 and 1850 as Western power and technological dominance became secured (7).
• The dichotomy of values between East and West are very similar to those traditional ascribed to the masculine-feminine divide. This is because gendered values are part of Orientalism, with the masculine West being contrasted with the feminine East (9).
• Orientalism as an idea gave birth to both a Eurocentric conception of history, where the East is passive and the West is the sole driver of historical progress, and justified Western imperialism, as Western domination is necessary and natural if only the is West capable of change and development (9).
• Karl Marx also placed Europe at the center of his theories and relegated the East to the periphery. In his view, European capitalism was the driving force of historical change, while the East stagnated at an earlier stage of civilization that it did not have the power to leave without Western intervention (12-13).
• Karl Marx also subscribed to the same course of Western history as other Eurocentric historians, tracing the development of capitalism from Ancient Greece through European history to the eventual invention of capitalism in Europe and the future creation of communism, also in Europe (13).
• The work of Max Weber focused on some of the core assumptions underlying Orientalism: what had made predestined the West for domination and made the East stagnant? His conclusions were that Western civilization possessed an underlying rationality not found in the East, making Western society suited to capitalist relations (15-16).
• Both Max Weber and other historians explain the development of rational societies in the West as a consequence of intense warfare in Europe from the collapse of the Roman Empire onward. This constant struggle prevented individual rulers from becoming despots because there were too many threats. This meant that rulers had to depend on the support of different social groups and give them some degree of independence. According to Max Weber, it was these independent societal groups that allowed for the development of rationality, individualism, and civil society. The East suffered under powerful and unchallenged despots, preventing these civil society groups from emerging  (17).
• Max Weber's understanding of Western history and success is important because his theories influenced essentially every other subsequent historian of the West. It also set the stage for using the contemporary state of Western supremacy as evidence of inevitable dominance (18).
• The expedition of Vasco da Gama is a good example of the inaccurate historiography of the rise of the West. His voyages are normally portrayed as exemplary of Europe's rise and expansion. In fact, Vasco da Gama's voyage was unique only in Europe: Indian, Javanese, and Chinese explorers had all rounded the Cape of Good Hope in previous centuries, and Ahmad ibn-Majid had sailed from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean in the mid-1400s. Additionally, Vasco da Gama only made the voyage with the assistance of a Gujarati pilot. Most importantly, the success of his voyage depended on an array of navigational instruments and techniques developed in either China or the Middle East (21).
• Discussions about Eastern contributions to the foundations of Western civilization often fall back on tropes to dismiss Eastern countries center the narrative around the West. Technologies innovations by other countries, like China, are dismissed because they are 'dead ends' because the Industrial Revolution begins in Britain, not anywhere else. The philosophical concepts taken from Muslim scholars are reclassified as Ancient Greek concepts, thus allowing Europe to claim heritage from Ancient Greece while ignoring connections with the Middle East (23).