Middle East Studies Association (fccbb4d3)

The Middle East Studies Association (MESA) is a professional association represented in Edward Said’s account through its published statements and leadership addresses. Its bulletin provides a documentary record of the field’s institutional development: a statement of purpose appeared in the association’s first issue in 1967, and its bulletin later carried a presidential address in 1975. The available evidence establishes this publishing role but does not describe the association’s internal structure or the full range of its work.

Purpose and Early Record

The association’s “Statement of Purpose” was published in the first issue of the MESA Bulletin in May 1967. Its appearance at the start of the bulletin’s publication history makes the association’s stated aims part of the documentary record through which the development of Middle Eastern studies in the United States can be traced. The cited material identifies the statement but does not reproduce its contents, so its specific goals cannot be detailed here.

The association also appears in a 1967 discussion of developments and needs in Middle Eastern and North African studies. Morroe Berger’s article on the subject was published in the Bulletin’s second issue, in November of that year. The placement of this field-wide discussion in the association’s own periodical shows the bulletin functioning as a venue for documenting contemporary questions about the organization and needs of the area-studies field; the available evidence does not specify the recommendations Berger made.

Presidential Addresses and Institutional Discussion

The bulletin later published a presidential address by Leonard Binder. The address appeared in February 1975, in volume 9, number 1. A subsequent citation to the same address points specifically to page 5, alongside the citation to the address as a whole. Together, these references establish that the publication record included a statement from the association’s president and that the address was cited in connection with discussion of Middle East studies.

These dated publications provide a small but concrete institutional chronology: an opening statement of purpose in 1967, an article on developments and needs in the field later that year, and a presidential address in 1975. The evidence supports treating MESA’s bulletin as a channel for professional self-description and debate, while leaving the content and consequences of individual statements beyond what can be confirmed from the cited record.

Significance in the Book’s Account

Said situates MESA within a broader account of how academic knowledge about the Middle East is produced, circulated, and institutionally sustained. His discussion of Orientalist scholarship emphasizes that learned fields acquire authority not only through individual research but also through publications, professional organizations, and established channels of dissemination. MESA’s bulletin and presidential address belong to this institutional landscape, although the cited references alone do not establish that the association adopted any particular Orientalist position.

The distinction matters: the association’s presence in Said’s account is evidence of an organized scholarly forum and a published record of debate, not proof of a uniform intellectual program. The available material gives MESA a traceable role in the history of American Middle East studies while setting clear limits on what can be said about its aims, policies, or influence.