In an Antique Land: History in the Guise of a Traveler's Tale

In an Antique Land uses its dual narratives to examine the changes colonialism caused historically, while questioning what the impacts of modern globalization—the process of increasing international interaction and integration across the world—are. Accordingly, the impacts of colonialism and globalization form a key theme in the work, as it does throughout much of Ghosh’s writing.

Colonialism’s influence on the Indian Ocean trade routes begins with Portugal’s naval domination after 1509. Subsequently, wealth was redirected into Europe, making the area less wealthy. Ghosh also emphasizes the more subtle change of spreading the colonial worldview: This is presented as the belief that military and scientific prowess are the standards by which a nation (or group of nations) must be judged. Ghosh argues that, due to colonial rule, the essentials of this worldview were internalized by postcolonial nations, including Egypt. He states the Egyptians place themselves on a “ladder of Development” (237), where they are lower than the modern Western-centric standard, making them insecure interacting with their “shamefully anachronistic” (200) objects and technology.

Ghosh’s argument with Imam Ibrahim demonstrates the impact of the colonial mindset, as he frames their reliance on “realist” terms as “the only language we had been able to discover in common” (237). Ghosh holds that these insecurities and sense of inferiority are consequences of colonial domination, thereby destroying the possibility of alternate means of comparison. Moreover, through using this language, both men implicitly reinforce colonial ideology as they must compete for who is more like a Western power. Ghosh thus seeks to establish that colonialism’s impacts continued into his time and extended beyond material damage. Colonial power structures, he argues, are still essential to the way postcolonial nations view the world and themselves.

Ghosh expands on this argument by linking the colonial mindset to the changes to Nashawy and Lataifa, where the wish to “modernize,” as instilled by a fear of inferiority combined with the economic opportunities made available by globalization, have dramatic results. Even before he discusses the movement of people to Iraq, Ghosh highlights movement towards change within the village, exemplified by people eschewing old authorities and traditional medicine for radical teachers and modern medicines. The cash influx from Iraq provides a unique opportunity for an area already wishing to change, one which is capitalized on to improve their standing on the “ladder of Development” (237). The result is that “Everything’s changed” (115) between Ghosh’s visits. Cumulatively, Ghosh examines how colonialism instilled a fear of being less-advanced than Western nations and how the opportunities from globalization played into these fears, prompting massive changes in the village.

However, Ghosh reveals an attitude of uncertainty towards these changes. He emphasizes the human cost of the work in Iraq, which is illustrated by Nabeel’s wish to build a larger house for himself. Nabeel places himself in danger in Iraq to work on a house he cannot be in and, due to global instability, cannot finish. This negative analysis of globalization’s impacts connects to Ghosh’s broader argument that “development” in the sense of colonial priorities should not automatically be regarded as the highest goal. It is through the culture of the Indian Ocean trade routes that Ghosh seeks an alternative worldview.