Weights and Measures

For weights and measures, Al-Muqaddasi shows the same attention to specific detail. For each province, he names, measures, compares and explains the fluctuations and variations in each measure and weight. . He would also dwell on the history of each; and so minute it all becomes in the detail, that it ends like the finance page of a broadsheet newspaper, with values, stocks and shares exhibited in all their minute variations, so tedious for the general reader, so fascinating to the expert.

Naval Transport:

During his visit to the bustling port of Old Cairo, al Muqaddasi narrates:

I was one day walking on the bank of the river, and marvelling at the great numbers of ships, both those riding at anchor, and those coming and going, when a man from the locality accosted me, saying: “Where do you hail from?” Said I, “From the Holy City”. Said he, “It is a large city. But I tell you, good sir—may God hold you dear to Him—that of the vessels along this shore, and of those that set sail from here to the towns and the villages—if all these ships were to go to your native city they could carry away its people, with everything that appertains to it, and the stones thereof and the timber thereof, so that it would be said: “At one time here stood a city.”^[117]

Urban Development

The Islamic urban setting, its evolution, diversity, complexity, economy and politics is what attracts most of the attention of Al-Muqaddasi. It re-occurs in each chapter, for every region and place he visits. A. Miquel offers an excellent summary of Al-Muqaddasi’s interest in the subject but in French.^[118] Al-Muqaddasi differentiates between town and city by the presence of the great mosque, and its minbar, symbols of Islamic authority. In connection with this, he adds:

Now, if someone should say: `Why have you considered Halab the capital of the district, while there is a town bearing the same name? I reply to him: `I have already stated that the capitals are compared with generals and towns with troops. Hence it should not be right that we assign to Halab, with all its eminence, and its being the seat of government and the location of the government offices, or to Antakiya with all its excellence, or to Balis, with its teeming population, the position of towns subordinate to a small and ruined city.”^[119]

Al-Muqaddasi focuses most particularly on the defensive structures of every city. Walls, their height, thickness, distances between each, fortifications, access in and out, their location according to the general topography, and in relation to the rest, artificial obstacles, in particular, attract his attention. And so do daily concerns such as trade and exchanges, markets and the urban economy as a whole.

Al-Muqaddasi studies markets, their expansion and decline, providing also a bill of health for each, the revenues derived from them, both daily and monthly, and how such revenues are distributed.^[120] He also studies carefully how a location is run, and its citizens act, dwelling particularly on such factors as order, cleanliness, morality and state of learning, all of which he considers for each and every place visited.

Considering the links between topography and urban expansion, he notes that in places such as Arabia, it is the sea alone that explains the presence of towns and people, opening up frontiers beyond the sea itself for trade and exchange.^[121] Thus on Adan, in the Yemen, he notes:

It is the corridor of Al-Sin, the seaport of Al-Yaman, the granary of Al-Maghrib, and entrepot of kinds of merchandise. There are many mansions in it. It is a source of good fortune to those who visit it, a source of prosperity to those who settle in it… The Prophet- (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) gave his blessing to the markets of Mina and Adan.”^[122]

The impact of space and climate on physical features are well observed, too, the author noting that colder places, such as Ferghana and Khwarizm, thicken beards and increase amounts of fat in bodies. Local customs form a major point of his interest; Al-Muqaddasi narrates one from Pre-Islamic and Newly Islamised Egypt which is of particular interest:

It seems that when Egypt was conquered, its people came to Amr Ibn Al-As during the beginning of the month of Bawna and they said: `Oh Prince, regarding this Nile of ours there is a practice embodied in tradition without which it will not flow. On the twelfth night of this month we select a virgin girl who is the firstborn to her parents, and we recompense them both. We dress her in jewellery and raiment the best there are, then we cast her into the river.’ Said Amr to them, `This will not come to pass, ever, because Islam supersedes what was there before it.’ So they waited that month, and the next month, and the following month, but the Nile flowed with not a little and not a lot. As a result the people were on the point of emigrating, on seeing which Amr wrote to Umar bin Al-Khattab on the matter. He replied, `you acted correctly in what you did, for Islam supersedes whatever preceded it, and he sent a slip of paper within his letter, saying to Amr, `I have sent you a slip of paper which you should throw into the Nile.’ When the letter arrived, Amr opened it and perceived what was on the slip of paper: `From the servant of God, Umar, Commander of the Faithful, to the Nile of Egypt, now then! If you flow by your own power alone, then flow not! If, however, it be the One God, the Conqueror, that causes you to flow then we ask Him-exalted be He-to make you flow. Amr threw the paper into the Nile before the festival of the Cross, for the people had been preparing to emigrate. But when they arose on the morning of the Festival of the Cross, God had caused the river to flow so that it reached a height of sixteen cubits. God had thus prohibited that evil custom among them to this day.”^[123]

Diets, clothing, dialects, differences of all sorts, form other elements of study for the many ethnic groups of the vast Muslim lands. A diversity in union, which Miquel notes in his conclusion, was to be completely shattered by the Mongol irruption.^[124]

Ibn-Khaldun

Nearly four centuries would elapse after Al-Muqaddasi before Ibn-Khaldun enters the frame of Islamic scholarship to set up the foundations for our modern social, economic, historical and political sciences.  There is no need to go into the life and works of Ibn Khaldun here; so much good quality material is available elsewhere, which is needless to repeat here. Should we even try to sum up Ibn Khaldun’s accomplishment, a whole large book is necessary, which is far beyond the remit of this essay. There are a couple of web-sites devoted to him and his works, some of them quite good, and a few excellent. These are to be consulted by any person seeking to know more about Ibn Khaldun. Here, we only focus on a couple of points or issues which take priority. First and foremost many people tend to set aside the fact that the Muqadimah is only part of the voluminous work Kitab al Ibar. The latter refers to the whole work of Ibn Khaldun including the Muqaddima. Its long title is as follows: The Book of Lesson (Ibar) and Achievements of Early and Subsequent History, Dealing with the Political Events Concerning the Arabs, Non-Arabs, and the Supreme Rulers who were Contemporary with Them. The Kitaab al-Ibar is a multivolume effort that, in his words, sets forth “the record of the beginning and the suite of the days of the Arabs, Persians, Berbers, and the most powerful of their contemporaries.”^[125] Its Introduction, Butterworth competently sums up:

Consists of six very long chapters that explore the character of human civilization in general and Bedouin civilization in particular, as well as the basic kinds of political associations, and then the characteristics of settled civilization, the arts and crafts by which humans gain their livelihoods, and, finally, the different human sciences.”^[126]

Ibn Khaldun starts by explaining the merit of history and how to go about writing it, and also the purpose for writing it;

[To get] “at the truth, subtle explanation of the causes and origins of existing things, and deep knowledge of the how and why of events.”^[127]

Ibn Khaldun acknowledges a problem with the way history has come down to us:

Many unqualified people have trammeled with the books of history written by competent Muslim historians; they have introduced tales of gossip imagined by themselves as well as false reports. Moreover, other historians have compiled partial reports of particular dynasties and events without looking to the way things have changed over time, without looking at natural conditions and human customs. Consequently, Ibn Khaldun considers his task to be that of showing the merit of writing history, investigating the various ways it has been done, and showing the errors of previous historians. What needs to be known, and thus what he sets out to make known, are “the principles of politics, the nature of existent things, and the differences among nations, places and periods with regard to ways of life, character, qualities, customs, sects, schools, and everything else … plus a comprehensive knowledge of present conditions in all these respects … complete knowledge of the reasons for every happening and … [acquaintance] with the origin of every event.”^[128]

In a work published in 1975, Shrait, the author, judiciously noted how Ibn Khaldun’s

Eminence in medieval civilization has to be linked to his adherence to the pure Islamic intellectual tradition to which he was exposed in the Muslim Maghreb. The Muslim Mashreq was less immune from the widespread distorting influences from mythical, magical and metaphysical Greek, Israelite, Persian or Christian doctrines and beliefs. The purer Islamic cultural context in the Maghreb must have played a significant role, [according to Shrait] in producing the clarity, the Positivism and the originality of Ibn Khaldun’s sociological thought.”^[129]

Here, as Dhaouadi remarks, Ibn Khaldun sees Islam as a corrective social force, or a force for the good of society, and Islam’s manifestly hostile position with regard to excessive materialism reinforces Ibn Khaldun’s belief in the validity of his cyclic theory of civilizations.^[130] Islam in its essence, let alone through the behaviour of the Prophet and his Companions, Abu Bakr and Omar, in particular, utterly shuns excessive material possessions and rabid consumption. In fact, whether the Prophet, or the first two Caliphs, they all distinguished themselves not just by their probity but also their simplicity. In regard to Omar, for instance. at the height of Islamic power, when the immense riches of Byzantium and Persia were reaching Madinah, the Caliph retained the same modest needs. When one day he was entrusted chests filled with precious stones from the treasures of the Great Persian King, the Caliph in earnest asked the messenger to take the chests away, sell the contents and distribute the proceeds among the soldiers.^[131] Prisoners-of-war brought to Madinah ‘expected to see palaces and imperial pageantry such as they had witnessed in Constantinople or in (Persia’s) Ctesiphon. Instead, in the glaring, dusty square of a little mud-brick town, they would find a circle of Arabs sitting on the ground. One of them, a tall lean man, barefoot and wearing a coarse woollen cloak, would prove to be ‘the world’s most powerful emperor,’ Caliph Omar.^[132] He slept on a bed of palm leaves and had no concern other than the maintenance of the purity of the faith, the upholding of justice and the ascendancy and security of Islam.^[133] Ibn Khaldun himself led a life of utter simplicity, nothing is known of him having ever owned even a house, or any sort of possession, his science, in fact, his only possession. Ibn Khaldun does compare and consolidate his own theory of human civilization’s downfall with the Qur’anic statement, spelled out in the Muqqaddimah:

When we decide to destroy a population, we first send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then We destroy them utterly.”^[134]

Figure 5. An autograph of Ibn Khaldun (upper left corner) in a manuscript held in Istanbul (MS C, Atif Effendi, 1936). (Source)

Whilst being strongly opposed to quantitative materialistic development, Ibn Khaldun believes, in what Dhaouadi terms ‘qualitative development: the preservation of the primitive (innate) goodness of human nature, strong social solidarity and religious ethics.’^[135]

Related to this is another central element of Ibn Khaldun thought. He explains that the rise of the Arab-Muslim civilization was the result of a combination of true Bedouin forces (al-asabiyya, bravery, and similar traits) and of the new forces (Muslim brotherhood/solidarity, sacrifice for the greater cause) which Islam had brought with it to the New Society. Bedouin lifestyle was essentially good by nature, as well as moderate in its materialistic needs, hence close to Islam, which, as described in the Qur’an, is the religion of al-fitrah (innate human goodness) and also of moderation.^[136]

Sedentary society, on the other hand, compares poorly in Ibn Khaldun’s view. He finds that a sedentary, over-materialistic environment corrupts human nature and, consequently, undermines the basis of Islamic values, which eventually led to decline of Arab-Islamic civilization.^[137] Ibn Khaldun insists that both religiosity and bravery are greatly undermined by sedentary environmental conditions. In his view, excessive materialism has negative effects not only on human civilizations and societies, but on the personality of the individual as well.^[138] In such civilizations and societies, the individual tends to become more egoistic; his own materialistic interests take priority, which hence causes an increased rate of deviance and crime in materialistic societies.^[139] Under the pressure of satisfying their materialistically oriented needs, sedentary individuals often appear to be ready to do away with society’s means of social control. Thus, the breakdown of the socio-cultural rules in sedentary societies is strongly linked in the Arab/Muslim society of Ibn Khaldun’s time to the materialistic over domination of the individual.^[140]

Ibn Khaldun writes:

Corruption of the individual inhabitants is the result of painful and trying efforts to satisfy their needs caused by their luxurious customs; the result of the negative qualities they have acquired in the process of satisfying (those needs), and the damage the soul suffers after it has obtained them. Immorality, wrong-doing, insincerity and deceit for the purpose of making a living in a proper or improper43 manner has increased among them. The soul comes to think about (making a living), to study it, and use all possible deceit for that purpose. People are now devoted to lying, gambling, cheating, fraud, theft, perjury, usury… Thus, the affairs of people are disordered, and the affairs of the individual deteriorate one by one, the city becomes disorganized and falls into ruin.”^[141]

Ibn Khaldun clearly insists on the following, though. Compared with Bedouin life style, Islam as a system has more to offer for the qualitative development of society. On the materialistic side, the Islamic faith asks for the practice of moderation, not the severe restrictions by which the Bedouins were obliged to live. While the Bedouin community is a somewhat inwardly closed system, Islam, as a religio-social system, is outwardly open to all humans, regardless of their language, colour, creed, and other distinctive features.^[142] To Ibn Khaldun, finally, societies cannot survive if their existence was not monitored and controlled by religious ethics; these can help maintain the social order of a civilization, keeping it in balance.^[143]

Ibn Khaldun on Taxing Farmers

Extracts from Ibn khaldun’s Muqqadima on his passage on the cause which increases or reduces the revenues of empire, in Bulletin d’Etudes Arabes, Vol 7, pp. 11-15, derived from De Slane’s edition, vol II, pp. 91-4:

The text on Ibn-Khaldun‘s attitude towards taxing farmers is simple and yet perfectly constructed as to the aims and the construction of the argument.

In an empire that has just been founded, taxes are light, and yet bring much revenue. However, when it (the empire) approaches its end, they become heavy and bring very little revenue. Here is the reason: if the founders of the empire follow the road of religion, they only apply the taxes authorized by Divine law, that includes Zaquat (alms), Kharaj (land tax), and Djizia. The amount of each is not too hard to bear, as everybody knows that tax on corn and livestock is not heavy; it is the same for Djizia and Kharaj. The rate of such taxes is fixed by law and so cannot be raised. If the empire is founded on a tribal system and conquest, civilisation must have been first that of a nomadic sort. The impact of such civilisation is to engage the rulers towards kindness, forbearance, and indifference towards the acquisition of wealth, except in rare cases. Thus, taxes and personal duties which finance the revenues of the empire are light. This being the case, the subjects carry their tasks with energy and enthusiasm. Work on the land grows because everyone wants to make the most of the lightness of the taxes, and this in turn raises the numbers of those engaged in the task, hence raising the revenues of the state.

When the empire has endured a rather long period, under many successive sovereigns, the heads of states acquire more ability in their business, and lose with their habits (links with) nomadic life. Then simplicity of manners, forbearance, and casualness which characterised them hitherto disappear. The administration becomes more demanding and harsh; sedentary customs promote shrewdness amidst state employees, and they become more able men of business. And as they experience well being and pleasure, they also indulge in a life of luxury, and acquire new needs. This drives them to raise taxes on all, including farmers. They want taxes to bring in more revenues to the state. They also impose duties on farm products on sales in towns and cities.

Expenditure on luxuries gradually rise in the government, and as the needs of the state increase, taxes rise further, and become heavier to bear by the people. This charge appears, however, as an obligation due to the fact that the increase has been imposed gradually, without it being too much noticed, and who did it remaining unseen. The increase, thus, taking the form of an obligation long accustomed to. With time, taxes grow beyond the bearable, and destroy in farmers the urge and love for work. When they compare their charges and expenses with their profits, they become disheartened; and so many leave farming. This leads directly to a fall in taxes collected by the state, which affects its revenues. Sometimes, when the heads of states notice such a fall, they believe they can resolve it by raising taxes further, and so they do more and more until the point is reached whereby no profit could any longer be made by farmers. All charges and taxes leave no hope whatsoever of any profit. In the meantime, the government is still raising taxes. Farming is now abandoned. Farmers leave the land which has become worthless.

All ill consequences fall upon the state… The reader thus gathers that the best way to make agriculture prosper is to reduce as much as possible the charges that the state imposes. Then farmers work with enthusiasm knowing the great benefits they derive-and God is the Master of all Things.

Ibn Khaldun is realistic enough to realize we don’t live in a perfect world, far from it in fact. The vagaries of life must have taught him some harsh lessons, which without making him profoundly cynical, had left a touch of realism in his thought which might ‘offend’ purists and idealists. We see this in respect to his view of the right, not perfect ruler.

He explains that a noteworthy example is his observation that a good political leader should be neither too stupid nor too clever. Excessive intelligence and cleverness renders him incapable of understanding normal people; he then tends to make demands on his clients that they can neither comprehend nor meet.^[144]

An alert and very shrewd person rarely has the habit of mildness … The least of the many draw- backs of alertness [in a ruler] is that he imposes tasks upon his subjects that are beyond their ability, because he is aware of things they do not perceive and, through his genius, foresees the outcome of things at the start … The quality of shrewdness is accompanied by tyrannical and bad rulership and by a tendency to make the people do things that it is not in their nature to do. The conclusion is that it is a drawback in a political leader to be [too] clever and shrewd. Cleverness and shrewdness imply that a person thinks too much, just as stupidity implies that he is too rigid. In the case of all human qualities the extremes are reprehensible and the middle road is praiseworthy.”^[145]