ABSTRACT
That Europe works as a silent referent in historical knowledge itself becomes obvious in a highly ordinary way. There are at least two everyday symptoms of the subalternity of non-Western, third-world histories. Third-world historians feel a need to refer to works in European history; historians of Europe do not feel any need to reciprocate. For generations now, philosophers and thinkers shaping the nature of social science have produced theories embracing the entirety of humanity. The project of ‘provincializing Europe’ refers to a history which does not yet exist; the author can therefore only speak of it in a programmatic manner. However, to forestall misunderstanding, he must spell out what it is not while outlining what it could be. To begin with, it does not call for a simplistic, out-of-hand rejection of modernity, liberal values, universals, science, reason, grand narratives, totalizing explanations, etc.
