Ibn Khaldun is one of the most important and influential philosophers, political economists, and sociologists in human history. Born in Tunisia in the 14th century, he was a famous Arab chronicler, historian, and sociologist. His most famous work is the seven volume history of the Arab and Berber peoples (and world history up to his time) called the Muqaddimah (or Prolegomena). From this the first three volumes were the introduction to the history, in which Khaldun lays out his basic scientific and sociological groundwork for the rest of the history. It is the introductory volumes that have garnered most of the attention of scholars ever since its publication. Ibn Khaldun’s reach was so far and wide that even President Ronald Reagan – of all people and most ironically considering the current state of American suspicions toward the Islamic religion – quoted Khaldun while he was President. Here we begin a summary tour of the basic thoughts of Ibn Khaldun – I am reading from the condensed Franz Rosenthal translation published by Princeton University which includes only Book I of the Introduction, but Book I is where most of Khaldun’s most famous ideas come from so it will suffice at a rudimentary level to only be acquainted with these sections of his text.
Book I, Chapter I: Civilization in General
Khaldun begins Chapter I with a long and penetrating discourse and analysis of civilization: where it is found, why it is found where it is, what is the role of geography, climate, and environment in civilization, why do we have civilization to begin with? This is setting the stage for his more in-depth analysis of the Arab and Berbers, but he lays out a universal prognostication of civilization.
Remark 1: Humans are Political Animals
Ibn Khaldun states that “human social organization is necessary.” By that he means men are political by their nature and that political organization is necessary precisely because politics is about social organization (the organization of a body). In this he merely restates from Aristotle in agreement that humans are social animals. This is to say that humans are not solitary and atomized creatures – that they need one another and come into community with one another and that this is fundamental to human nature itself.
There is also a practical reason for social organization being necessary. As Khaldun states, “the power of the individual human being Is not sufficient for him to obtain the food he needs, and does not provide him with as much as he requires to live.” In other words, if we lived separated from each other we would die miserable and alone – moreover, we would likely starve. Thus, in following the Greek political tradition, politics truly is about how to organize and interrelated body of people who are, to use an analogy from the Roman historian Livy, either part of the arms, legs, or stomach of that body. Therefore, Ibn Khaldun also believes there is some sort of natural order which we can discover from observing human society and how they are organized.
Part of the reason of coming into organization is the cooperation that fosters a better and more equitable way of living. But another reason for this organizing is because “aggressiveness is natural in living beings.” In short, humans are aggressive animals who will harm, and kill, in order to obtain what they need. Thus, the political offers a form of collective protection against the aggressiveness of other living beings – from predatory animals to predatory humans who will rape, pillage, and kill in order to satiate their base animalistic desires. Like Greek, Roman, and Christian philosophy before him, Khaldun also states that the gift of reason to man (from God) is to allow him to better think and better organize for his mutual benefit and improvement. But man’s rational capacity does not take away from the fact that he is still an aggressive animal.
Here emerges the theme of cooperation as a motivating force of the political. As Khaldun writes, cooperation allows for greater acquisition of goods and materials needed for human nourishment. Cooperation also allows for greater mutual defense against those who intend harm – or those who will assail one in order to obtain the goods and materials stored by a city or other such society. In other words, man needs other men in order to live a more secure and nourished life. To be off alone is to invite death upon oneself.
The coming together of people is what constitutes the birth of civilization. From this emerges the political head: The ruler of a civilization. For Khaldun it is necessary to have forces of restraint in society because man is still, at his heart, an aggressive beast. Law, customs, and social organizations within the larger apparatus of social organization (civilization) all serve to curb (or restrain) man’s savage nature. (This will later lead to various paradoxes and tragedies that Ibn Khaldun explores in Chapters 2 and 3 of Book I of the Muqaddimah which we will explore later.) In anticipation of Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Locke, Ibn Khaldun notes that “royal authority” is the ruler’s ability to dominate over the rest of society so that “no one of them will be able to attack another.” Rule of law, and rule of the sovereign, is meant to foster cooperation and harmony within the body politic. Justice, then, is redressing the wrongs done to members of society and is therefore always corrective. (In this sense there is no “natural justice” since justice is a corrective dispensation for those who transgress upon their follow man within the body politic.)
Thus, we can conclude from Ibn Khaldun’s short introductory remarks about man being a political animal is as such: That man naturally seeks community as part of his nature; that there is also a practical side to seeking community (well-being, nourishment, and security); that political organization and law “civilizes” men from their base desires and instincts (hence why the word “civilized” comes from civilization because civilization, as Khaldun notes, is about retraining one’s aggressive and animalistic desires); that political organization becomes codified in the rule of law and rule of authority. Political authority and organization then, is natural to the human condition. We see this throughout history: From sedentary city and agrarian life; to the organization of tribalistic and nomadic societies; to hunter-gatherer societies even longer ago – organizing a body, in which there is some degree of authority being employed in organization itself, is a natural condition of being human. Any rational person knows this.
Remark 2: The Role of Geography and Environment in Civilization
In his second remark Ibn Khaldun shifts to examining the role of geography and environment on the development of civilization. This is more straightforward and somewhat self-evident for moderns today, but that was not always the case in the past. Khaldun notes that all civilization is found on land (but by water).
This goes back to ancient mytho-ontology where humans are created from the dust of the ground. Humans are terrestrial beings rather than water beings. However, in order for human life to flourish or continue, we must be by water. Thus, while civilizations are found always on land (instead of in or under water), it is also found near water. As he notes in observation, civilizations are generally found near seas or rivers as natural water ways and sources of agriculture. This is because agriculture has made living easier than roaming and scavenging (which does not constitute civilization). Those familiar with Jared Diamond’s book Guns, Germs, and Steel will find resonance in reading Ibn Khaldun for the rest of the first chapter in Book I of the Muqaddimah. Of course geography and environmental conditions influence civilization.
Remarks 3-4: Role of Environment in Shaping Human Races and Sentiments
Building off of his second remark Ibn Khaldun continues to examine the role of environment in shaping human races and sentiments. Some of what Khaldun states in these sections can be forgiving in light of more modern advancements in science (such as his comments about the African race), but they are nevertheless intriguing in seeing an early scientist seek completely naturalistic explanations for human behavior rather than ascribing it to spirits or divinities. That said, what Khaldun got right is what science calls “environmental conditioning.”
Environmental conditioning is the claim that the environment, over time, conditions humans to become acclimated to it. That is, humans will adapt and act in accordance to the environment in which they have grown accustom to experiencing and living in. Differences in behavior, human concerns and activities, and customs, according to Khaldun, are actually the result of environmental conditions exerting themselves on peoples. This, moreover than language and religion (as the European Romantics would later argue), is the best explanation for difference among human races and communities around the world.
Ibn Khaldun’s treatment of environment on the human condition and development will be a recurring theme throughout his work. He is one of the fathers of geopolitical theory, the understanding that geography (or the environment) influences human activity and action. It is important to remember this as we begin to read Chapter II, especially, in which environmental conditions impact the development of civilization and what the ramifications of this are. Among “ancient” writers, I can only think of Thucydides who gives such considerable treatment to the role of geography and environment to understanding human history and the human condition.
Remark 5: Struggle for Scarcity of Resources, Resources and Its Influence of Humans
Although one of the shorter remarks in Chapter I, his fifth remark on the struggle for resources and resource plenty or scarcity and its impact on human development is something that helps define Ibn Khaldun’s thought and generally “tragic” or “pessimistic” outlook. We have – not a contradiction – but a paradox in observing the human condition: First is that humans need to cooperate for their own betterment; second is that humans are often in conflict with each other despite some form of cooperation in expanding society. Khaldun will explore further as to why we have this dilemma later in his work. Nevertheless there is, without argue, the recognition that history and civilizations are defined by the struggle, or competition, over resources. Thus, we see in Khaldun, long before Marx, a recognition of resource competition (material dialectic if you will) as being fundamental to human life and existence.
Where greater plentitude of resources are found there is a higher concentration of civilizations. Where fewer resources are found there are fewer civilizations to be found. Ibn Khaldun influenced Marx, here, in which there was a recognition that labor alone is not the source of wealth and economic prosperity (as the German Gotha Program declared in 1875). Instead, wealth and economic prosperity is linked to whether or not nature has provided such wealth to be extracted. In this recognition we return to the “geographic lottery” that Jared Diamond discusses in Guns, Germs, and Steel at greater length than Khaldun’s short observations that where there is an abundance of resources there is also an abundance of civilizations. Thus, the greater proximity to such resources leads to a greater chance of civilizational conflict as different civilizations compete over the acquisition of said resources.
Furthermore, Khaldun discusses learned conditioning from resource abundance or scarcity. Those who lack resources become prudent and cautious with what they have. They understand that they lack abundance so go to great lengths to ration and protect what they possess. Over time, as Khaldun says, they become acclimated to the possibility of famine. Because they consume less for rationing purposes, such people and civilizations are better able to cope with disaster. Conversely, those people and civilizations that live a life of luxury and abundance grow soft and decadent – when disaster strikes they do not know how to cope with disaster. Relating this to famines Khaldun observes that, ironically, it is luxurious civilizations that are most harshly effected by famine because their people had grown used to a life of lavish consumption and therefore cannot adjust to the harshness of famine. Rural civilizations, where resources are more scarce, though they suffer too, suffer less harshly because they are better acclimated with dealing with disaster, famine, and better resource management. As Khaldun writes, the man who has lived a life of luxury, “finds it painful to give it up or to make any changes.”
Those who have a scarcity of resources have a sort-of predisposed ascetic of accepting hunger as part of their daily life and routine. Thus, they are not as detrimentally affected by natural disasters, famines, or other such environmental catastrophes. Those who have grown accustomed to eating great portions on a daily basis, on the other hand, are the ones who suffer most. (Furthermore, we can see the internal logic that will play out: The wealthy and luxurious will hoard goods in times of crisis and not distribute to the lesser, weaker, and poorer in times of crises because they are unable to make sacrifices – this causes internal societal division; Ibn Khaldun will return to this theme later in his work.) Again, this is not to say that the poor or those who are accustomed to scarcity do not suffer. They do. And they die as well. What he is merely saying is that they are more resilient in times of crisis thanks to their learned conditioning from the environment in which they have grown accustomed to dwelling in.
This contrast between luxurious living and scare living will become an ever more important theme in Khaldun’s reading of the rise and decline of civilizations.
Remark 6: “Supernatural” People and their Roles, a Note on “Evolution”
The final remark in Chapter is an analysis of different types of people in society: the Prophets, saints, and commoners especially. Moreover, I am more interested in noting Khaldun’s “theory of evolution” long before Darwin. However, Khaldun says that prophecy is about speaking the truth (prophecy in Greek simply means “to speak”). In religious society people are remembered by their actions and insights. Thus, the prophets are very fondly remembered by society. Saints, on the other hand, are generally only remembered by a few in society – those whom they were often closest with. Commoners fade away and are forgotten.
He also states that prophets are those who come to know the natural order of the world and speak of it. Prophets contribute to the advancement of natural knowledge, which is why they are most remembered of all peoples. “This world with all created thins in it has a certain order and solid construction,” Ibn Khaldun begins in his subsection on “The real meaning of prophecy,” and thus continues, “It shows nexuses between causes and things caused, combinations of some parts of creation with others…” In short, there is a rhyme and rythem to creation that can be known by the faculty of human reasoning. It is that coming to understand which the prophet “speaks” of in his prophecy (because prophecy simply means to speak). “Beginning with the world of body and sensual perception, and therein first with the world of visible elements, one notices how these elements are arranged gradually and continually in an ascending order.” Because humans have sense perception and the ability to interpret, they can come to know the order of the world. The true prophet is he who speaks of the natural world and thereby enlightens his fellow man in the process.
This is why the prophet is fondly remembered: The prophet enlightened us to a truth that we had not previously been aware of. Because, in ancient theology, God is Reason and Reason is God, and the Prophet comes to know the truths of the world via reason, this is why the ancients said Prophets had the truth “revealed by God” (e.g. revealed by Reason itself to them).
Some have also noted that Ibn Khadlun applies this logic of ordered causation he just defined and, albeit briefly, writes a theory of evolution about how mankind came to be based on his principles or orderly causation:
One should then look at the world of creation. It started out from the minerals and progressed, in an ingenious, gradual manner, to plants and animals. The last stage of minerals is connected with the first stage of plants, such as herbs and seedless plants. The last stage of plants, such as palms and vines, is connected with the first stage of animals, such as snails and shellfish which have only the power of touch. The word ‘connection’ with regard to these created things means that the last stage of each group is fully prepared to become the first stage of the next group.
The animal world then widens, its species become numerous, and, in a gradual process of creation, it finally leads to man, who is able to think and to reflect. The higher stage of man is reached from the world of the monkeys, in which both sagacity and perception are found, but which has not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking. At this point we come to the first stage of man. This is as far as our (physical) observation extends.
In actuality, Khaldun, influenced by Greek metaphysics, is really describing the “great chain of being” in this passage, not an early account of evolution like Wikipedia or other modern writers seem to suggest. That is, the lowest forms of life on the great chain are as he describes: minerals, progressing to plants, and progressing to animals. The connectivity and overlap between groups is also attested to in the great chain of being. Furthermore, as Ibn Khaldun remarks, what sets man apart from the rest of creation is his ability to think and reflect, which we do share with monkeys and apes, but unlike monkeys and apes, who “[have] not reached the stage of actual reflection and thinking,” man can know the good and true whereas lesser primates simply have low levels of reflective and emotional capacity.
Thus, we can say that Ibn Khaldun maintains that the authentic prophet, as the man who has learned the natural ways of the world, is the most fondly remembered of all types of people in a society. This completes our cursory analysis of Chapter I of Book I of the Muqaddimah. Admittedly this is the driest chapter of the work. Chapters II and III, along with IV, are the big highlights of his work so to speak. Nevertheless, they are rooted in some of the basic outlining and sketching done in Chapter I. In Chapter II we will explore rural savagery, the Beduins, and group solidarity and tribalism (asabiyyah) as the basis of civilization and the political.
This is the first part of a serialized examination and summary of Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddimah.
________________________________________________________________
Hesiod, Paul Krause in real life, is the editor-in-chief of VoegelinView. He is writer, classicist, and historian. He has written on the arts, culture, classics, literature, philosophy, religion, and history for numerous journals, magazines, and newspapers. He is the author of Finding Arcadia, The Odyssey of Love and the Politics of Plato, and a contributor to the College Lecture Today and Making Sense of Diseases and Disasters. He holds master’s degrees in philosophy and religious studies (biblical studies & theology) from the University of Buckingham and Yale, and a bachelor’s degree in economics, history, and philosophy from Baldwin Wallace University.
________________________________________________________________
Support Wisdom: https://paypal.me/PJKrause?locale.x=en_US
Venmo Support: https://www.venmo.com/u/Paul-Krause-48
My Book on Literature: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1725297396
My Book on Plato: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08BQLMVH2
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/paul_jkrause/ (@paul_jkrause)
Twitter: https://twitter.com/paul_jkrause (@paul_jkrause)
Discourses on Minerva 