Fundamentals of Ibn Khaldun’s Historical Science
(From "The Muqaddimah")
Djayadi Hanan
For Ibn Khaldun, history is a science and a branch of philosophy. It is based on scientific objectives, reasoning, and methods. As a science, history must be committed to the effort of getting at the truth and separating it from the falsehood. These scientific characteristics, therefore, must be reflected in the objectives, methods, and subjects of history. The practice of history based on these criteria will enable us to categorize good historian and bad historian and correct the false information revealed by bad history.
The objective of history is about getting at the truth. Hence, it must be about explanation, about how and why, and about the causal factors related to both actors and events. History is about generalization, not merely dealing with particular. History is also about sorting out the information we have to make sure that they are information that conform the facts and logic. History cannot be dealing only with the tradition that is transmitted from time to time from one generation to another. Thus, history is not only about description of information about actors and events from the past. This does not mean however, that descriptive history is unimportant because it can serve larger public in understanding human affairs in general.
To serve this kind of objective, historian must be rigorous in dealing with information. First, there must be strong effort to get at the truth. “Critical eye” only, according to Ibn Khaldun is not enough because errors and false assumptions almost always accompany historical information. Speculative method of thinking, called as enlightening speculation by Ibn Khaldun, is crucial in unmasking the falsehood in historical information. Using good speculative mind and thoroughness will keep historian from slips and errors. Second, the writing of history requires numerous sources and knowledge. Various sources will enable the historian to cross-check the information while varied knowledge makes him be able to evaluate the information values not only by confronting it to, for instance, fundamental facts of politics, the nature of civilization or conditions governing social organizations, but also by comparing the remote/ancient materials with the near/contemporary ones. Ibn Khaldun argues that the accuracy of information is absolutely important, especially when dealing with figures such as sum of money and number of soldiers. For example, it is logically impossible to believe the historical account from al-Mas’udi about the number of Israelites’ army during Moses time which was reported to be 600,000 or more because of various reasons such as the size of territory which will be too small for their battle formation against Egypt and Syiria. In short, to get to the truth of the information, historian must carefully consider the factual proof and circumstantial evidence surrounding it.
Third, in order to be able to implement these two requirements, historian must conduct many steps in his historical examination and account. One is “to know the principles of politics, the nature of things, and the differences among nations, places, and periods” (p. 24). Two is to compare past and present and know the causes of similarities and differences. Three is to be aware of the different factors that bring historical events and actors such as dynasties and religious groups into being. Four is to check the transmitted information with the basic principles of knowledge. And five is to have a goal of having complete knowledge of causality of events and their origins.
The fourth factor to be rigorous in history is to be aware that history is about change. Awareness about this is often difficult because the process of change is sometimes deeply hidden and only becomes apparent after a long period of time. This is also the reason why not many individuals can easily be aware of it. This awareness is crucial in order for historian to identify and explain the causality of historical actors, events, and processes. Finally, history is about generalization. History, argues Ibn Khaldun “refers to events that are peculiar to a particular age or race” (p. 29). The task of the historian is to uncover the underlying general conditions of events and actors across time and space/regions. This task constitutes the foundation of historian. Thus, for instance, the work of al-Mas’udi, Muruj adh-dhahab, which mentions the conditions of regions and nations in the East and the West of his time, because of its capability of generalization, became the basic reference of historians and principal source of historical information.
What does historical science account for? According to Ibn Khaldun, history is an independent science with its own particular subject which is human civilization and social organization. It has its own particular research problem which is to explain “the conditions that attach themselves to the essence of civilization” (p. 39). Ibn Khaldun sometimes refers to the subjects of history more concretely as examination and account of dynasties, leaders, nations, and great events. From this, one could argue that his historical science is elitist because it deals with great actors/men and great events. In explaining about change for example, Ibn Khaldun reveals this elitist view by saying that “the customs of each race depend on the customs of its ruler” (p. 25). This subject of history, Ibn Khaldun further argues, makes it different from other science such as rhetoric which is concerned with convincing the mass through the use of words, or with politics which is concerned with the home or city administration in order to preserve the life of the community. Because of having its own subject and being distinct from other science, Ibn Khaldun claims that history “is an entirely original science” (p. 39).
Having laid out his fundamentals of historical science, Ibn Khaldun is now able to judge good and bad history as well as good and bad historian. A bad historian deals with bad history. Bad history, contrary to the fundamentals described above, is basically non-scientific history or history with bad method. It is featured by mere description of information or just following the transmitted information from the previous accounts, particularistic account, negligence of the change, or too brief in its presentation, making it not more that the list of names, facts, or events. The basis of this kind of history is unreliable, often fictitious, information and bad method. There are a lot of accounts fall into this category. One example is the story of “Copper City” from al-Mas’udi which says that the city was built of copper in desert of Sijilmasah during Musa b. Nusayr time which contradicts the principles of building and planning the cities. Ibn Khaldun cites numerous stories of this fictitious kind to argue that there are a lot of bad histories and historians out there.
A bad historian is a historian who cannot reveal or uncover the untruth that afflicts his historical information. There are many reasons why this problem is often unavoidable. First is because of partisanship. When a historian is too committed to a certain opinion or school of thought, he runs the risk of being not impartial in receiving and processing information. Second is the reliance upon the transmitter. Many transmitters are not authoritative and do not know the significance of their observation. Third is unawareness of the purpose of event. When an unknowledgeable transmitter passes down the historical information he will attach his own understanding of event’s significance which leads to the falsehood. Fourth is unfounded assumption about the truth. This is still related to the reliance upon the transmitter. Fifth is the ignorance of conformity between conditions and reality. This is related to inability of confronting the information with the facts or unavailability of checking and cross-checking methods. Sixth is too much focus of high ranking persons with a lot of fame and praise as information sources. Information from such a person is not reliable because of the tendency of human soul for fame and praise. And finally, the bad historian is characterized by the ignorance of the contexts of civilization. If historian has no knowledge of the nature of the world of existence, he can be misled by the peculiarity and particularity of the context of civilization. This will make him unable to separate the truth from the untruth, the particular from the general, and the reliable history from the absurd story.
In conclusion, Ibn Khaldun’s historical science is based on the scientific approach to history. History for him deals with uncovering the truth and explanation of causality in events, actors, human social organization and civilization in general. Such a history must have a rigorous method which will enable the historian to carefully and systematically crafting the historical information to be a good history.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
The Legacy of Greece, Alexandria, and the Orient
In the Early Islamic Science and Philosophy
(Summarized from Majid Fakhry's A History of Islamic Philosophy)
By 641 CE, the Arab conquest over Near East had been completed. Welcomed by most of the people there as the liberator, the Arab ruler did not interfere so much on various academies that had become the centers of studying theology, philosophy, and other subjects for centuries. During this Arab rule, therefore, studies centers such as Edessa, Qinnesrin, Harran and Jundishapur were still flourishing and continued their contribution in the development of theology, philosophy, and other scientific subjects of the time.
The expansion of administrative area, not surprisingly, brought new challenges to Arab ruler. One of the main challenges is practical problem such as how to keep the accounts and record of the state in which the Arab ruler did not have experience before. At the beginning, the policy was to leave it as it was both in terms of bookkeeping and the bookkeepers. Minister of finance in the Mu’awiya period for instance, was held by Sarjun b. Mansur (the grandfather of St. John of Damascus) who held the same position during the Byzantines. Triggered by the use of Arabic as the new official language, the change, especially the translation of texts from Greek and Persian, soon initiated particularly during the reign of Umayyad caliph ‘Abdul Malik (685-705).
The translation of various texts had been made possible by several factors. First, practical consideration—to solve certain practical problems and to develop certain type of practical knowledge (practical discipline)—called for the translation of bookkeeping, and earliest scientific and medical texts in medicine, alchemy, and astrology. Initiator of this translation is the Umayyad Prince Khalid b. Yazid, followed by various translators such as Masarjawaih on medical compendium, Abdullah b. al-Muqaffah on texts like Kalilah wa Dimnah, Khudai Nameh, Ayin Nameh, the Book of Mazda and Biography of Anushirwan. The second factor is the availability of patrons. Well-known among these patrons are the Barmakid family who was very enthusiastic on Greek learning especially on the Emperor of Anushirwan, the Banu Musu family who provided generosity on the acquisition and translation of Greek texts such as Treatise on the Atom and Treatise on the Eternity of the World, and of course the caliphs themselves such as Harun al Rashid and al-Ma’mun of the ‘Abbasid. The third factor is the policy of the caliph or the state. During Harun’s time, astronomical works such as Indian’s Siddhanta, Quadripartius of Ptolemy, and several of Persians’ were translated. During al-Ma’mun’s reign, the tendency or theological bias of the caliph toward rationalist thinkers (Mu’tazilah) provided opportunities for many theological and philosophical works, especially from Greek.
While the practical disciplines such as medicine and astrology marked the beginning of translation of works from Greek, Persian and Indian, it was during the reign of caliphs Harun and al-Ma’mun that marked the flourish of the translation of philosophical works. Among the early translators is Yahia b. al-Bitriq who translated the Plato’s Timeous, Aristotle’s De Anima which greatly contributed to Arab’ conception of Aristotle’s psychology, and other works of Aristotle such as the zoological corpus, Analytica Priora, and the Secret of Secrets. Al-Ma’mun also established Bait al-Hikmah (House of Wisdom) which became the center of translation and research of the “ancient learning.” Another important translator of Greek philosophy and science is Hunain b. Ishaq (809-973) who under the patron of Banu Musa not only translated the original texts but also re-translated and scrutinized the existing translations to look at their accuracy. He translated and retranslated Galen’s Treatise on Demonstration, Hypothetical Syllogism, Ethics, paraphrasing Plato’s Sophist, Parmenides, Crytyalus, Euthydemus, Timeous, Statesman, Republic, and Laws. There were also other translation of Aristotelian works by Hunain’s associates including his son Ishaq, his nephew Hubaish, and his disciple Isa b. Yahya who were responsible for the translation of Catogories, the Hermeneutica, the Physica, the Ethica, De Plantis and several others. Equal to the greatness of Hunain was Qusta b. Luqa who translated many Greek’s works and revised the existing translations. His works include The Saying of the Philosophers, The Difference between Soul and Spirit, A Treatise of the Atom, A Political Treatise, The Physica, and many others. Other translators were Abu Bishr Matta and Yahia b. Adi whose works were on, for instance, Analytica Posteriora, Introduction to Analytica, and Treatise on Conditional Syllogism.
Most of these translators were Christian of the Nestorian or Jacobite sect with the exception of the pagan astrologer-philosopher Thabit al-Qurra whose famous works were on, among others, Nature of Stars and Their Influence, Principles of Ethics, and Music. There were abundant other translators whose works in general encompass wide range of topics in science, theology and philosophy, long range of time from early Greek, Persian and Indian, and across languages at the time.
Categorized further, these works of translations and retranslations from Greek include the Pre-Socratic, Peripatetics, and Stoics types of works. From Pre-Socratic, the two most prominent are Empedocles and Phytagoras. Phytagoras’ influence was later institutionalized in a fraternity movement called Ikhwan al Shafa (the Brethren of Purity) which arose in Basrah during the mid of eight century. From Peripatetic philosophers, the most well known translated works were of Theoprastus, Eudemus, Alexander of Aphrodisias, Themistius, and Olympiodorus. Works can be mentioned here are Alexander’s On the Intellect, Eudemian Ethics, and Repositoty of Wisdom (Siwan al Hikmah). From Stoic type of philosophy, Arabic sources mentioned the works of Chrisippus and Zeno of Citium.
The Neo-Patonic elements of philosophical works during Arab rule also important to be mentioned. The most important influence of Greek in this case was not the Aristotle’s famous Metaphysica, but rather, the alleged Aristotle’s compilation of the Theologia. Translated for al-Kindi by a Syirian Christian ‘Abd al-Masih b. Na’imah of Emessa, the Theologia, together with another Greek work, the De Causis, illuminated the dogma of emanation in Islamic philosophy. Emanation is a doctrine of “the One and the manner in which it generates the whole order of being beneath it” (p.22). This doctrine, more elaborately, explains that the divine nature is “the First Cause and that time and the aeon (al-dahr) are both beneath it, and that it is the cause of the causes and their author, after a fashion; and that the luminous virtue (or power) shines forth from it upon Reason;… Soul; … Nature” (p.23). All things according to this dogma are the emanation of the One (the First) and the Soul orders or governs either the world of forms or the particular. Islamic Neo-Platonism philosophy was then surrounded by discussion of the First Principle or God, the emanation of things from Him, the role of Reason as a God instrument of creation, the position of the Soul, and about the matter as the basest creation and the lowest rung in the cosmic scale.
The great influence of Greek philosophy did not obstruct the absorption of other influence from Persian and Indian works into the Islamic philosophy and science. It must be noted however, that the Muslims’ interest in Indian philosophy was not as great as their interest in Indian astronomy and medicine. Of this not so great influence, the anonymous treatise on Religious Beliefs of the Indians seems to be important among Arab philosophers. The copy of this work had been reported as part of the handwriting of al-Kindi, for instance. Part of the works of Indian philosophy appeared in a significant portion in the work of al-Biruni (ca. 1048) in his treatise On the Truth about the Beliefs of India. However this work came too late to have an influential impact on Muslim philosophy compared to the one from the Greek. It is also possible that through the work of al-Razi about Atomism, as a reaction against Aristotelianism, Indian philosophy can be traced. The discussion of Barahima and Sumaniya are another possibility of looking at the Indian influence on Muslim philosophy. Barahima views that prophethood or commissioning of prophet by God is altogether unnecessary. Sumaniya was an Indian sect which was also mentioned in the Arab sources, cited as a kind of skeptical epistemology which sees any supersensible knowledge as impossible.
Also influential is the Persian works. Through the works of Ibn al-Mukaffa this Persian impact can be traced. The main theme of this Persian influence is related to Manichean dualism. The polemics against heretic well-known as Zindiq are related very much to Manicheanism. A greater influence of Persian works and culture came later from new generation of Persian thinkers and philosophers. Most of this influence were marked by the works of Muslim thinkers of Persian origin such as Sibawayh (a grammarian), Ibn Sina (a philosopher), al-Razi (a physician), and al-Ghazali (a theologian).
In the Early Islamic Science and Philosophy
(Summarized from Majid Fakhry's A History of Islamic Philosophy)
By 641 CE, the Arab conquest over Near East had been completed. Welcomed by most of the people there as the liberator, the Arab ruler did not interfere so much on various academies that had become the centers of studying theology, philosophy, and other subjects for centuries. During this Arab rule, therefore, studies centers such as Edessa, Qinnesrin, Harran and Jundishapur were still flourishing and continued their contribution in the development of theology, philosophy, and other scientific subjects of the time.
The expansion of administrative area, not surprisingly, brought new challenges to Arab ruler. One of the main challenges is practical problem such as how to keep the accounts and record of the state in which the Arab ruler did not have experience before. At the beginning, the policy was to leave it as it was both in terms of bookkeeping and the bookkeepers. Minister of finance in the Mu’awiya period for instance, was held by Sarjun b. Mansur (the grandfather of St. John of Damascus) who held the same position during the Byzantines. Triggered by the use of Arabic as the new official language, the change, especially the translation of texts from Greek and Persian, soon initiated particularly during the reign of Umayyad caliph ‘Abdul Malik (685-705).
The translation of various texts had been made possible by several factors. First, practical consideration—to solve certain practical problems and to develop certain type of practical knowledge (practical discipline)—called for the translation of bookkeeping, and earliest scientific and medical texts in medicine, alchemy, and astrology. Initiator of this translation is the Umayyad Prince Khalid b. Yazid, followed by various translators such as Masarjawaih on medical compendium, Abdullah b. al-Muqaffah on texts like Kalilah wa Dimnah, Khudai Nameh, Ayin Nameh, the Book of Mazda and Biography of Anushirwan. The second factor is the availability of patrons. Well-known among these patrons are the Barmakid family who was very enthusiastic on Greek learning especially on the Emperor of Anushirwan, the Banu Musu family who provided generosity on the acquisition and translation of Greek texts such as Treatise on the Atom and Treatise on the Eternity of the World, and of course the caliphs themselves such as Harun al Rashid and al-Ma’mun of the ‘Abbasid. The third factor is the policy of the caliph or the state. During Harun’s time, astronomical works such as Indian’s Siddhanta, Quadripartius of Ptolemy, and several of Persians’ were translated. During al-Ma’mun’s reign, the tendency or theological bias of the caliph toward rationalist thinkers (Mu’tazilah) provided opportunities for many theological and philosophical works, especially from Greek.
While the practical disciplines such as medicine and astrology marked the beginning of translation of works from Greek, Persian and Indian, it was during the reign of caliphs Harun and al-Ma’mun that marked the flourish of the translation of philosophical works. Among the early translators is Yahia b. al-Bitriq who translated the Plato’s Timeous, Aristotle’s De Anima which greatly contributed to Arab’ conception of Aristotle’s psychology, and other works of Aristotle such as the zoological corpus, Analytica Priora, and the Secret of Secrets. Al-Ma’mun also established Bait al-Hikmah (House of Wisdom) which became the center of translation and research of the “ancient learning.” Another important translator of Greek philosophy and science is Hunain b. Ishaq (809-973) who under the patron of Banu Musa not only translated the original texts but also re-translated and scrutinized the existing translations to look at their accuracy. He translated and retranslated Galen’s Treatise on Demonstration, Hypothetical Syllogism, Ethics, paraphrasing Plato’s Sophist, Parmenides, Crytyalus, Euthydemus, Timeous, Statesman, Republic, and Laws. There were also other translation of Aristotelian works by Hunain’s associates including his son Ishaq, his nephew Hubaish, and his disciple Isa b. Yahya who were responsible for the translation of Catogories, the Hermeneutica, the Physica, the Ethica, De Plantis and several others. Equal to the greatness of Hunain was Qusta b. Luqa who translated many Greek’s works and revised the existing translations. His works include The Saying of the Philosophers, The Difference between Soul and Spirit, A Treatise of the Atom, A Political Treatise, The Physica, and many others. Other translators were Abu Bishr Matta and Yahia b. Adi whose works were on, for instance, Analytica Posteriora, Introduction to Analytica, and Treatise on Conditional Syllogism.
Most of these translators were Christian of the Nestorian or Jacobite sect with the exception of the pagan astrologer-philosopher Thabit al-Qurra whose famous works were on, among others, Nature of Stars and Their Influence, Principles of Ethics, and Music. There were abundant other translators whose works in general encompass wide range of topics in science, theology and philosophy, long range of time from early Greek, Persian and Indian, and across languages at the time.
Categorized further, these works of translations and retranslations from Greek include the Pre-Socratic, Peripatetics, and Stoics types of works. From Pre-Socratic, the two most prominent are Empedocles and Phytagoras. Phytagoras’ influence was later institutionalized in a fraternity movement called Ikhwan al Shafa (the Brethren of Purity) which arose in Basrah during the mid of eight century. From Peripatetic philosophers, the most well known translated works were of Theoprastus, Eudemus, Alexander of Aphrodisias, Themistius, and Olympiodorus. Works can be mentioned here are Alexander’s On the Intellect, Eudemian Ethics, and Repositoty of Wisdom (Siwan al Hikmah). From Stoic type of philosophy, Arabic sources mentioned the works of Chrisippus and Zeno of Citium.
The Neo-Patonic elements of philosophical works during Arab rule also important to be mentioned. The most important influence of Greek in this case was not the Aristotle’s famous Metaphysica, but rather, the alleged Aristotle’s compilation of the Theologia. Translated for al-Kindi by a Syirian Christian ‘Abd al-Masih b. Na’imah of Emessa, the Theologia, together with another Greek work, the De Causis, illuminated the dogma of emanation in Islamic philosophy. Emanation is a doctrine of “the One and the manner in which it generates the whole order of being beneath it” (p.22). This doctrine, more elaborately, explains that the divine nature is “the First Cause and that time and the aeon (al-dahr) are both beneath it, and that it is the cause of the causes and their author, after a fashion; and that the luminous virtue (or power) shines forth from it upon Reason;… Soul; … Nature” (p.23). All things according to this dogma are the emanation of the One (the First) and the Soul orders or governs either the world of forms or the particular. Islamic Neo-Platonism philosophy was then surrounded by discussion of the First Principle or God, the emanation of things from Him, the role of Reason as a God instrument of creation, the position of the Soul, and about the matter as the basest creation and the lowest rung in the cosmic scale.
The great influence of Greek philosophy did not obstruct the absorption of other influence from Persian and Indian works into the Islamic philosophy and science. It must be noted however, that the Muslims’ interest in Indian philosophy was not as great as their interest in Indian astronomy and medicine. Of this not so great influence, the anonymous treatise on Religious Beliefs of the Indians seems to be important among Arab philosophers. The copy of this work had been reported as part of the handwriting of al-Kindi, for instance. Part of the works of Indian philosophy appeared in a significant portion in the work of al-Biruni (ca. 1048) in his treatise On the Truth about the Beliefs of India. However this work came too late to have an influential impact on Muslim philosophy compared to the one from the Greek. It is also possible that through the work of al-Razi about Atomism, as a reaction against Aristotelianism, Indian philosophy can be traced. The discussion of Barahima and Sumaniya are another possibility of looking at the Indian influence on Muslim philosophy. Barahima views that prophethood or commissioning of prophet by God is altogether unnecessary. Sumaniya was an Indian sect which was also mentioned in the Arab sources, cited as a kind of skeptical epistemology which sees any supersensible knowledge as impossible.
Also influential is the Persian works. Through the works of Ibn al-Mukaffa this Persian impact can be traced. The main theme of this Persian influence is related to Manichean dualism. The polemics against heretic well-known as Zindiq are related very much to Manicheanism. A greater influence of Persian works and culture came later from new generation of Persian thinkers and philosophers. Most of this influence were marked by the works of Muslim thinkers of Persian origin such as Sibawayh (a grammarian), Ibn Sina (a philosopher), al-Razi (a physician), and al-Ghazali (a theologian).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
