What do you think?
Rate this book
Imperial Identities: Stereotyping, Prejudice and Race in Colonial Algeria
Using colonial Algeria as the starting point of her analysis, Patricia Lorcin explores the manner in which ethnic categories and cultural distinctions are developed and used in society. She focuses on the colonial images of ""good"" Kabyle and ""bad"" Arab (usually referred to as the Kabyle Myth) and examines the circumstances out of which they arose, as well as the intellectual and ideological influences which shaped them. Her study demonstrates how these images were used to negate the underlying beliefs and values of the dominated society and to impose French cultural, social and political values. By tracing the evolution of ethnic categories over time, Lorcin reveals their inherently unstable nature and the continual process of redefinition in accordance with circumstance and political or social expediency.
323 pages, Paperback
First published May 15, 1995
11 people are currently reading
150 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
November 17, 2014
Imperial Identities: Stereotyping and Race in Colonial Algeria by Patricia M. Lorcin, Professor of History at the University of Minnesota, is a detailed description and analysis of the creation and development of the “Kabyle Myth” in French colonial Algeria. While the Kabyle Myth never became policy, its impact on the administration of Algeria is, as Lorcin notes, “undeniable.” Additionally, though the work has a fairly narrow scope, its examination contributes to the larger academic discussion on the mechanics of marginalization and the formation of social hierarchies; a topic not relegated to history books.
Lorcin limits her study to Algeria for four reasons. First, Algeria is a good case study because it is the first French colony. As a result, it served as the experimental arena for imperial policies that France would apply elsewhere. Algeria also offers the benefit of a history of both civilian and military colonial administration. By looking at these two distinct phases, Lorcin attempts to analyze how categorization was formed in relation to society as a whole and to a particular segment of society. “Third, the colonial setting offered the possibility of analyzing category formation and the organizing principles of a given society… as of its inception and over a period of time” (p. 1). Finally, Algeria and the Kabyle Myth offered an existing historiography.
In Imperial Identities, Lorcin attempts to trace “how and why the images of the good Kabyle ad the bad Arab emerged, and having done so, how and when they were buttressed by racial ideas prevailing in Europe at the time” (p. 3) To do this, Lorcin structures the monograph into four sections. Part 1 is chronological, tracing the emergence and evolution of ethnic imagery under military administration, and identifying the social, political, and administrative factors that gave rise to the blanket categories or Kabyle and Arab. Part 2 is a thematic look at the interaction between the social sciences, the emergence of racial theory in France, and military personnel in Algeria. Here, Lorcin attempts to finger the intellectual trends that served as the ideological confirmation of the Kabyle-Arab dichotomy. Part 3 is dedicated to Lorcin’s examination of racial categorization and the Kabyle Myth during the civilian administration of Algeria. Finally, in part 4, Lorcin considers the legacy of the Kabyle Myth.
Lorcin’s focus, the Kabyle Myth, was the predominant French understanding of the Algerian peoples during colonial rule. Spurred by a rather humorous incident involving a fly-swatter, the French invaded Algeria in 1830 and quickly categorized the population into two camps: Arabs, the nomadic plain dwellers, and Berbers, the sedentary peoples living in Algeria’s Atlas mountains. The binary categorization of Algeria’s indigenous population was not only inaccurate, but it quickly took on a normative role: Arabs were bad and Kabyles were good.
The formation of the Kabyle Myth was the result of the early conquest and military occupation of Algeria. Lorcin suggests that the French entered Algeria with biases that aided in the Myth’s development. As a result of the historical imprint of the crusades, the French were ever weary of Islam. More, the French were informed by classical history: because the Romans, Europe’s first colonizers in North Africa, had a relationship with the sedentary Libyans, so too the French should find a similar relationship with the Kabyles. During combat, these expectations were entrenched. While the Arabs were conquered with relative ease, the conquest of Kabylia was more difficult. Lorcin suggests that military admiration was responsible for the early Kabyle-Arab imagery.
While the Kabyle Myth was forged in conquest, it was fleshed out during occupation. Military reconnaissance went hand in hand with French “scientific study.” Military reports also served as the foundation of the academic field. Officers reported that the Arab ties to Islam were impenetrable, while the Kabyle were only reluctantly subservient to the faith. One major reason for the Arab-Kabyle dichotomy was the divergent legal theories: while Arabs practiced Sharia law, the Kabyle were bound to customary law. More, while Arab society was seen as feudal, Kabyles were considered democratic.
The Arab-Kabyle dichotomy was also strengthened due to the difficulties of early military administration. The Arabs, being nomads, were difficult for the military to keep tabs on. Further, the military deduced that their nomadic society would make them resistant to French assimilation during settler colonization. The Kabyle, on the other hand, were sedentary and could be assimilated right away. “The Kabyles, being sedentary and industrious, were defending a patrimony the French could easily identify with; the Arabs, being nomadic and fanatically religious, were defending an ideal the French abhorred” (p. 33)
Lorcin attributes much of the military categorization of Kabyles and Arabs to the intellectual formation of military men. A significant percentage of French officers in Algeria were graduates of the Ecole Polytechnique, where they were exposed to progressive ideas and methodology in the social sciences like Saint-Simonianism. The men saw themselves as enlightened and paternalistic, the means to social revolution in Algeria. For them, the link between progress and hierarchy enforced the concept of French superiority and of Kabyle superiority to Arabs. Because the military had such an unfettered period of administration in Algeria, their ideas, initiatives, and research created the infrastructure upon which colonial practice was based.
Further, the military had a significant impact on society’s greater understanding of Algeria, the Kabyles, and the Arabs. Lorcin notes that military men and scholars in France had a close relationship based on education and participation in academic societies. Based on the findings of the military, French scholars began to posit that the Kabyle may even be descendants of Christians. This corroborated the understanding that Kabyles were not only different than Arabs, but better than Arabs. The theories of Lamarck and Linneus added credence to the theories of societal evolution and the hierarchy it entrenched. Geographical and physical categorization was also applied to the Kabyle-Arab imagery to entrench the myth.
The transfer of administration in Algeria from military to civilian hands did not dispel the Kabyle Myth, though it did diminish its importance. Lorcin suggests that with the shift from military to civilian rule also came a shift from assimilationist to associationist colonial vision. Further, it accompanied a shift from philosophical optimism, as inspired by socialist utopianism, to a pervading pessimism. One major blow to Pro-Kabyle policy during civilian administration was the Insurrection of 1871. Fear of losing European superiority and safety in the colony, inspired by the insurrection, lead to a new Latino-Algerian preference. Instead of a French-Kabyle colony, the new idealized settler “race” for Algeria became an amalgamation of Mediterranean settlers. A new Algerian people derived from the merging Maltese, Italian, Spanish, and southern French settlers were expected to create a race with a zest for life and physical beauty. Kabyles no longer needed to be assimilated; they could develop alongside the new settler society.
Lorcin admits that the Kabye Myth did not influence policy, but its impact is not limited to later colonial attempts or academic discourse; the Kabyle Myth helped shape Algeria. Lorcin notes that the Kabyle Myth likely shaped the fragmented colonial resistence the French experienced in Algeria in the 1950s. Further, the Kabyles seem to maintain a separate identity in Algeria today.
Imperial Identities is thoroughly researched and largely convincing. Lorcin’s description of the emergence and development of the Kabyle Myth during military occupation leaves little to be desired. But, in arguing so persuasively that military ideas matriculated into France and served as the foundation of civil colonial administration, it is unclear if there was much, if any difference, in how categorization was formed in relation to society as a whole and to a particular segment of society. Lorcin’s description of category formation and her acknowledgment of the power of Said’s “orientalist discourse” seems to merge “elite” or educated French society and ignores the rest of French society. Further, her less thorough coverage of civil administration in Algeria shifts the focus from Kabyle-Arab categorization to Latino-Algerian categorization without much delving into either identities, or the role of those identities, other than to say the colonial focus shifted. In this way, the sections of the book dedicated to military occupation in Algeria are much more convincing and informative.
The book is, if nothing else, a glimpse into the ways in which a supposedly progressive and advanced modern nation rationalizes the subjugation and exploitation of another population. Consideration of “us” and “the other” remains important today and understanding of the processes that lead to these distinctions is important. Perhaps, in closing the book, Lorcin says it best: “The Kabyle Myth is an exceptionally well documented example of stereotyping and image-making and it is here, above all, that its importance lies.”
Lorcin limits her study to Algeria for four reasons. First, Algeria is a good case study because it is the first French colony. As a result, it served as the experimental arena for imperial policies that France would apply elsewhere. Algeria also offers the benefit of a history of both civilian and military colonial administration. By looking at these two distinct phases, Lorcin attempts to analyze how categorization was formed in relation to society as a whole and to a particular segment of society. “Third, the colonial setting offered the possibility of analyzing category formation and the organizing principles of a given society… as of its inception and over a period of time” (p. 1). Finally, Algeria and the Kabyle Myth offered an existing historiography.
In Imperial Identities, Lorcin attempts to trace “how and why the images of the good Kabyle ad the bad Arab emerged, and having done so, how and when they were buttressed by racial ideas prevailing in Europe at the time” (p. 3) To do this, Lorcin structures the monograph into four sections. Part 1 is chronological, tracing the emergence and evolution of ethnic imagery under military administration, and identifying the social, political, and administrative factors that gave rise to the blanket categories or Kabyle and Arab. Part 2 is a thematic look at the interaction between the social sciences, the emergence of racial theory in France, and military personnel in Algeria. Here, Lorcin attempts to finger the intellectual trends that served as the ideological confirmation of the Kabyle-Arab dichotomy. Part 3 is dedicated to Lorcin’s examination of racial categorization and the Kabyle Myth during the civilian administration of Algeria. Finally, in part 4, Lorcin considers the legacy of the Kabyle Myth.
Lorcin’s focus, the Kabyle Myth, was the predominant French understanding of the Algerian peoples during colonial rule. Spurred by a rather humorous incident involving a fly-swatter, the French invaded Algeria in 1830 and quickly categorized the population into two camps: Arabs, the nomadic plain dwellers, and Berbers, the sedentary peoples living in Algeria’s Atlas mountains. The binary categorization of Algeria’s indigenous population was not only inaccurate, but it quickly took on a normative role: Arabs were bad and Kabyles were good.
The formation of the Kabyle Myth was the result of the early conquest and military occupation of Algeria. Lorcin suggests that the French entered Algeria with biases that aided in the Myth’s development. As a result of the historical imprint of the crusades, the French were ever weary of Islam. More, the French were informed by classical history: because the Romans, Europe’s first colonizers in North Africa, had a relationship with the sedentary Libyans, so too the French should find a similar relationship with the Kabyles. During combat, these expectations were entrenched. While the Arabs were conquered with relative ease, the conquest of Kabylia was more difficult. Lorcin suggests that military admiration was responsible for the early Kabyle-Arab imagery.
While the Kabyle Myth was forged in conquest, it was fleshed out during occupation. Military reconnaissance went hand in hand with French “scientific study.” Military reports also served as the foundation of the academic field. Officers reported that the Arab ties to Islam were impenetrable, while the Kabyle were only reluctantly subservient to the faith. One major reason for the Arab-Kabyle dichotomy was the divergent legal theories: while Arabs practiced Sharia law, the Kabyle were bound to customary law. More, while Arab society was seen as feudal, Kabyles were considered democratic.
The Arab-Kabyle dichotomy was also strengthened due to the difficulties of early military administration. The Arabs, being nomads, were difficult for the military to keep tabs on. Further, the military deduced that their nomadic society would make them resistant to French assimilation during settler colonization. The Kabyle, on the other hand, were sedentary and could be assimilated right away. “The Kabyles, being sedentary and industrious, were defending a patrimony the French could easily identify with; the Arabs, being nomadic and fanatically religious, were defending an ideal the French abhorred” (p. 33)
Lorcin attributes much of the military categorization of Kabyles and Arabs to the intellectual formation of military men. A significant percentage of French officers in Algeria were graduates of the Ecole Polytechnique, where they were exposed to progressive ideas and methodology in the social sciences like Saint-Simonianism. The men saw themselves as enlightened and paternalistic, the means to social revolution in Algeria. For them, the link between progress and hierarchy enforced the concept of French superiority and of Kabyle superiority to Arabs. Because the military had such an unfettered period of administration in Algeria, their ideas, initiatives, and research created the infrastructure upon which colonial practice was based.
Further, the military had a significant impact on society’s greater understanding of Algeria, the Kabyles, and the Arabs. Lorcin notes that military men and scholars in France had a close relationship based on education and participation in academic societies. Based on the findings of the military, French scholars began to posit that the Kabyle may even be descendants of Christians. This corroborated the understanding that Kabyles were not only different than Arabs, but better than Arabs. The theories of Lamarck and Linneus added credence to the theories of societal evolution and the hierarchy it entrenched. Geographical and physical categorization was also applied to the Kabyle-Arab imagery to entrench the myth.
The transfer of administration in Algeria from military to civilian hands did not dispel the Kabyle Myth, though it did diminish its importance. Lorcin suggests that with the shift from military to civilian rule also came a shift from assimilationist to associationist colonial vision. Further, it accompanied a shift from philosophical optimism, as inspired by socialist utopianism, to a pervading pessimism. One major blow to Pro-Kabyle policy during civilian administration was the Insurrection of 1871. Fear of losing European superiority and safety in the colony, inspired by the insurrection, lead to a new Latino-Algerian preference. Instead of a French-Kabyle colony, the new idealized settler “race” for Algeria became an amalgamation of Mediterranean settlers. A new Algerian people derived from the merging Maltese, Italian, Spanish, and southern French settlers were expected to create a race with a zest for life and physical beauty. Kabyles no longer needed to be assimilated; they could develop alongside the new settler society.
Lorcin admits that the Kabye Myth did not influence policy, but its impact is not limited to later colonial attempts or academic discourse; the Kabyle Myth helped shape Algeria. Lorcin notes that the Kabyle Myth likely shaped the fragmented colonial resistence the French experienced in Algeria in the 1950s. Further, the Kabyles seem to maintain a separate identity in Algeria today.
Imperial Identities is thoroughly researched and largely convincing. Lorcin’s description of the emergence and development of the Kabyle Myth during military occupation leaves little to be desired. But, in arguing so persuasively that military ideas matriculated into France and served as the foundation of civil colonial administration, it is unclear if there was much, if any difference, in how categorization was formed in relation to society as a whole and to a particular segment of society. Lorcin’s description of category formation and her acknowledgment of the power of Said’s “orientalist discourse” seems to merge “elite” or educated French society and ignores the rest of French society. Further, her less thorough coverage of civil administration in Algeria shifts the focus from Kabyle-Arab categorization to Latino-Algerian categorization without much delving into either identities, or the role of those identities, other than to say the colonial focus shifted. In this way, the sections of the book dedicated to military occupation in Algeria are much more convincing and informative.
The book is, if nothing else, a glimpse into the ways in which a supposedly progressive and advanced modern nation rationalizes the subjugation and exploitation of another population. Consideration of “us” and “the other” remains important today and understanding of the processes that lead to these distinctions is important. Perhaps, in closing the book, Lorcin says it best: “The Kabyle Myth is an exceptionally well documented example of stereotyping and image-making and it is here, above all, that its importance lies.”
February 23, 2022
كتاب أقل ما يقال عنه أنه تحفة، تناول قضية الصراع الطبقي والعرقي الذي لا تزال تداعياته متواصلة إلى يومنا هذا في الجزائر بين مختلف سكان البلد الواحد.
صراع بدأت بوادره قبل الاستعمار والذي استغله المستعمر من أجل تسهيل عملية احتلاله للجزائر عن طريق سياسة فرق تسد.
يظهر لنا هذا الكتاب أن عملية استعمار الجزائر لم تكن على أسس عسكرية وقوة السلاح فقط، حيث تظهر لنا الكاتبة دور خريجي المدرسة السان سيمونية والمدرسة المتعددة التقنيات بباريس والأطباء، الذين كانوا أيضا جنود، في دراسة سكان المنطقة المحتلة والأساليب التي استعملت من أجل تسهيل هذه العملية والتي يمكن تلخيصها في أربعة عوامل لعب عليها المستعمر ألا وهي: العرق وعامله التاريخي (إشكالية السكان الأصليين ومن أتوا بعدهم) ونمط الحياة ( بدوي / حضري) والدين (الاسلام وترسخه في قيم كل مجتمع) واللغة (العربية والبربرية).
لعبت هذه المدارس المدرسة الانثروبولوجية التي تأسست بعد ذلك دورا هاما في توسيع الشرخ بين أطياف المجتمع الواحد من أجل تسهيل عملية الاستعمار، وقد قامت الكاتبة بشرح هذا بالتفصيل وبطريقة وأسلوب رائعين.
صراع بدأت بوادره قبل الاستعمار والذي استغله المستعمر من أجل تسهيل عملية احتلاله للجزائر عن طريق سياسة فرق تسد.
يظهر لنا هذا الكتاب أن عملية استعمار الجزائر لم تكن على أسس عسكرية وقوة السلاح فقط، حيث تظهر لنا الكاتبة دور خريجي المدرسة السان سيمونية والمدرسة المتعددة التقنيات بباريس والأطباء، الذين كانوا أيضا جنود، في دراسة سكان المنطقة المحتلة والأساليب التي استعملت من أجل تسهيل هذه العملية والتي يمكن تلخيصها في أربعة عوامل لعب عليها المستعمر ألا وهي: العرق وعامله التاريخي (إشكالية السكان الأصليين ومن أتوا بعدهم) ونمط الحياة ( بدوي / حضري) والدين (الاسلام وترسخه في قيم كل مجتمع) واللغة (العربية والبربرية).
لعبت هذه المدارس المدرسة الانثروبولوجية التي تأسست بعد ذلك دورا هاما في توسيع الشرخ بين أطياف المجتمع الواحد من أجل تسهيل عملية الاستعمار، وقد قامت الكاتبة بشرح هذا بالتفصيل وبطريقة وأسلوب رائعين.
August 25, 2025
Colonial schools with an anthropological orientation played a pivotal role in reinforcing divisions to facilitate tighter control. The book reveals that the colonizer did not rely solely on military power, but rather on a meticulous study of the region, employing its findings to devise instruments of domination. These instruments revolved around several key axes: ethnicity, modes of living, religious affiliation (sects), and language/culture.
October 23, 2024
Excellent on what colonization brought with it.
March 20, 2021
Solid stuff.
Lorcin really focuses in on enlightenment ideologies, deconstructs their roots and analyses their application in Algeria through French colonialism and pseudo-academics.
The book is split up into digestible chunks which are written in a clear and concise way.
The competing, but equally damaging, interests of the French military and settlers provide for a more in-depth understanding of the terrors inflicted on Algerians.
Lorcin admirably steers clear of conflating Islam and culture.
Lorcin really focuses in on enlightenment ideologies, deconstructs their roots and analyses their application in Algeria through French colonialism and pseudo-academics.
The book is split up into digestible chunks which are written in a clear and concise way.
The competing, but equally damaging, interests of the French military and settlers provide for a more in-depth understanding of the terrors inflicted on Algerians.
Lorcin admirably steers clear of conflating Islam and culture.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews