Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T17:34:40.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ibn Khaldûn in World Philosophy of History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2009

Hayden V. White
Hayden V. White
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is a distinguishing feature of modern Western historical thought that it has striven self-consciously to free itself from the use of non-historical categories of explanation in order to consitute itself as an autonomous, self-explanatory and self-justifying form of thought. Croce believed this movement to be a late phase of humanism and identified it as the main ingredient in the Western intellectual tradition. In his view, the history of historiography in the West has been one long struggle to expel the category of transcendence from historical analysis, that is, a struggle of history against philosophy of history.

Unlike modern historical thought with its value free orientation, most previous historiography has been informed, either consciously or unconsciously, by a specific set of social values and has used historical materials as either a mine of examples for support of the position pre-chosen (like Cicero) or as evidence for the study of phenomena the noumena of which lie just outside the range of history proper (like Marx). The former approach never really arrives at history, the latter passes through it too rapidly to the goal which it believes lies beyond it. In so far as most previous historiography has been governed by these two tendencies, it has always been philosophy of history rather than history proper.

Type
Articles
Information
Comparative Studies in Society and History , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , October 1959 , pp. 110 - 125
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 1959

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* Khaldûn, Ibn, The Muqaddimah, An Introduction to History. Translated from the Arabic by Rosenthal, Franz. 3 vols. Bollingen Series, XLIII (New York, 1958).Google Scholar

The Editor of this quarterly, assuming no doubt that Professor Rosenthal's translation would be reviewed by a number of Islamists as a monument of Islamic civilization, requested the present review from a non-Islamist who would approach it in terms of its place in philosophy of history. In advancing into a field in which the content of the work is alien to him, the reviewer has sought aid and counsel on a number of special problems which arose. He therefore wishes to thank Professors Willson H. Coates and R. James Kaufmann, of the University of Rochester, and Professor Isaac Rabinowitz, of the Department of Classics, Cornell University, for aid given in analyzing and presenting this evaluation of Ibn Khaldûn's work.

1 Croce, Benedetto, History as the Story of Liberty, trans. Sprigge, Sylvia (New York, 1955), pp. 312–17Google Scholar; Collingwood, R. G., The Idea of History (New York, 1956), pp. 245 ff.Google Scholar

2 Croce, op. cit., pp. 132–38.

3 On Cicero's conception of history, see Cochrane, C. N., Christianity and Classical Culture; a Study of Thought and Action from Augustus to Augustine (New York, 1944), pp. 149 ff.Google Scholar; on Marx, see Löwith, Karl, Meaning in History; the Theological Implications of the Philosophy of History (Chicago, 1949), pp. 33–51.Google Scholar

4 On Voltaire and Comte: Löwith, op. cit., pp. 67–91, 104–114; on Comte specifically: Weber, Alfred, Einführung in die Soziologie (München, 1955), pp. 81–102Google Scholar; on Burckhardt: Croce, op. cit., pp. 93–103; Nichols, James Hastings' introduction to Burckhardt, Force and Freedom; an Interpretation of History (New York, 1955), pp. 19 ff.Google Scholar; Löwith, op. cit., pp. 20–32; Heller, Eric, The Disinherited Mind (New York, 1959), pp. 68–88Google Scholar; and on Spengler: Hughes, H. Stuart, Oswald Spengler; a Critical Estimate (New York, 1952)Google Scholar; Heller, op. cit., pp. 181–196; and the work of a brilliant young Italian historian, Rossi, Pietro, Lo Storicismo tedesco contempraneo (Milano, 1956), pp. 389 ff.Google Scholar

5 Cochrane, op. cit., pp. 474 ff. My conception of St. Augustine's philosophy of history is not shared by Dawson, Christopher, in M. C. D’Arcy and others, St. Augustine (New York, 1957), p. 71Google Scholar. According to Dawson, for St. Augustine secular history “was the spectacle of humanity perpetually engaged in chasing its own tail”. I feel that Cochrane's view does more justice to the complexity of Augustine's historical speculation. See the analysis of Mommsen, Theodore, “St. Augustine and the Christian Idea of Progress”, Journal of the History of Ideas, XII (1951), pp. 346–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar, who incorporates both views into a synthesis.

6 In Rosenthal's introduction are also included a résumé of Ibn Khaldûn's career and a perceptive analysis of his thought, which I have drawn upon as guides to my reading of the Muqaddimah. See especially, Muqaddimah, I, pp. xxix–lxxxviiGoogle Scholar.

7 Readers of Rosenthal, 's A History of Muslim Historiography (Leiden, 1952), pp. 1–16Google Scholar, will not need to be told this.

8 Toynbee, A. J., A Study of History, 2nd ed. (London, 1935), III, p. 322.Google Scholar

9 See the introduction to An Arab Philosphy of History; Selections from the Prolegomena of Ibn Khaldûn of Tunis (1332–1406). Translated and Arranged by Issawi, Charles (London, 1950), pp. 6–14Google Scholar, and the works on Ibn Khaldûn as sociologist listed in the twenty-seven page bibliography by Walter J. Fischel at the end of Vol. Ill of Rosenthal's Muqaddimah.

10 Rosenthal, , Muqaddimah, p. lxvii, n. 86.Google Scholar

11 Ibid., p. 68.

12 Ibid., pp. 61, 86.

13 One example of the constrictive character of Ibn Khaldûn's typological thinking must suffice here. In his discussion of the downfall of the Barmekids, he recounts al-Mas‘ûdî's ascription of drunkenness and adultery to ar-Rashid's sister, al-‘Abbâsah. He rejects the story as being “irreconcilable with her position, her religiousness, her parentage and her exalted rank”. Muqaddimah, I, 28–29Google Scholar. Al-‘Abbâsah could not be associated with such sins because, “She was close in time to the desert attitude of true Arabism, to that simple state of Islam still far from the habits of luxury and lush pastures of sin. Where should one look for chastity and modesty, if she did not possess them? Where could cleanliness and purity be found, if they no longer existed in her house?” Ibid., I, p. 29. In this case, Ibn Khaldûn's critical spirit, which proceeds on the basis of his comprehension of “the nature of things” to a criticism of historical traditions, is strikingly similar, formally if not in spirit, to Bradley's acute The Presuppositions of Critical History (London, 1874)Google Scholar. Unfortunately, Ibn Khaldûn was unable to heed his own warnings as to the dangers of “analogical reasoning and comparison”, which are, as he asserts, “not safe from error”. Ibid., p. 58.

14 Ibid., III, p. 49. Cfr Moore, G. F., History of Religions (New York, 1924), II, 423–30.Google Scholar

15 Cochrane, op. cit., pp. 456–74.

16 See the remarks of Professor Von Grunebaum, who has, I believe, hit the mark in noting: “The weakness of Arabic historiography is its concentration on personalities and on military incidents and court cabals.” He goes on to say that the lesson learned from traditional Arabic historiography “was merely one of morality, insight into human character, and the vagaries of fate”, and adds: “Perhaps with the lone exception of Ibn Haldûn, who, in addition to outlining principles of source criticism, essayed to grasp the underlying regularities, both social and psychological, the historians and their audiences watched the pageant of events with rapture, … but remained satisfied with accepting them at their face value and did not bother about their economic, social or cultural significance.” Medieval Islam; a Study in Cultural Orientation (Chicago, 1946), pp. 282–83Google Scholar. But, as Rosenthal notes in his preface, Ibn Khaldûn's results “often seem superficial and arbitrary to modern scholarship. They are, however, deceptively convincing, … and thus testify to the insight, vigor and skill of Ibn Khaldûn.” Muqaddimah, I, lxx.

17 Cfr. Antoni, Carlo, From History to Sociology; the Transition in German Historical Thinking, trans, by White, Hayden V. (Detroit, 1959), chaps. I, II, IV.Google Scholar

18 Muqaddimah, I, pp. 385 ffGoogle Scholar.

19 Ibid., 2, pp. 411 ff.

20 Ibid., 2, pp. 416–19.

21 Ibid., 2, pp. 419–33; 3, pp. 308 ff.

22 Ibid., I, pp. 89 ff.

23 Ibid., I, p. 53.

24 Cfr. Rosenthal's discussion of the term umrân, with its double meaning of “civilization” and “population”, in ibid., p. lxxvi, and 313–330.

25 Ibid., I, p. 67.

26 “Sedentary culture is merely a diversification of luxury and a refined knowledge of the crafts employed for the diverse aspects and ways of (luxury).” Ibid., I, p. 347.

27 Ibid., I, pp. 258, 286–90, 336–46.

28 Ibid., I, p. 67.

29 Ibid., I, pp. 94 ff.

30 According to Lane, the primary root meaning is “to twist, wind around”, then “to fold tightly, bind, tie”. (This was pointed out to me by Professor Rabinowitz.) See Muqaddimah, I, pp. 260–65 passimGoogle Scholar, 414, and Rosenthal's discussion, pp. 78–80.

31 Ibid., I, pp. 305, 319–27.

32 Ibid., I, 282–310, 347 ff.

33 Ibid., I, p. 299. Cfr. Rosenthal's discussion of the Arabic word malakah, “habit”. Ibid., I pp. lxxxiii–lxxxiv.

34 Toynbee, , Study, VII, 500–501.Google Scholar

35 See Price, K. B., “Ernst Cassirer and the Enlightenment”, Journal of the History of Ideas, XVIII (1957), pp. 107–112.Google Scholar

36 Moore, op. cit., p. 427; Khaldûn, Ibn in Muqaddimah, I, pp. 190 ffGoogle Scholar.

37 On Buckle, see Aubyn, Giles St., A Victorian Eminence; the Life and Works of Thomas Buckle (London, 1958), chaps. V–VI.Google Scholar

38 Muqaddimah I, pp. 291 ff., 314 ffGoogle Scholar.

39 Cfr. Antoni, Carlo, La Lotta contra la ragione (Firenze, 1942), chaps. I–IIGoogle Scholar. Compare Muqaddimah, I, 253 ffGoogle Scholar.

40 Moore, op. cit., p. 427.

41 Muqaddimah, III, p. 257Google Scholar.

42 See Thucydides, , Pelop. War (Crawley, trans.), i. 22–24.Google Scholar

43 I owe this insight to Professor Kauffmann.

44 A typical case: Niebuhr, Reinhold, Faith and History; a Comparison of Christian and Modern Views of History (New York, 1949), pp. 14–18.Google Scholar

45 Cochrane, op. cit., pp. 410 ff.; Mommsen, op. cit., p. 374.

46 Muqaddimah, I, pp. 89, 262, 282, 330–32, 380–82Google Scholar.

47 Ibid., III, pp. 308 ff.

48 Thucydides, , Pelop. War, iv. 136–37Google Scholar; Plato, , Gorgias (Jowett, trans.), 480 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cfr. also Jaeger, Werner, Paideia: the Ideals of Greek Culture, trans. Highet, Gilbert (Oxford, 1946), I, pp. 382 ff.Google Scholar

49 Muqaddimah, I, pp. 278, 279–8, 343Google Scholar.

50 See Momigliano, Arnoldo, “M. I. Rostovtzeff”, The Cambridge Journal, VII (1954), pp. 334–346Google Scholar, reprinted in Momigliano, , Contributo alia storia degli studi classici (Roma, 1955) pp. 341–54.Google Scholar

51 Ibn Khaldûn makes no real distinction between art, craft and science, so far as I can see. Cfr. his discussion of architecture in Muqaddimah, I, pp. 356 ff., 2, 241 ff.Google Scholar, and literary criticism, ibid., I n, pp. 336 ff.

52 Ibid., 3, pp. 367 ff., 410–15. On the eighteenth-century idealization of nature and its influence upon poetry and poetic theory, see Antoni, , La Lotta contra la ragione, pp. 28 ffGoogle Scholar.