Social Theories Of The Historian Ibn Khaldun

Categories: Biography

Essay, Pages 5 (1156 words)

Views

Who was Ibn Khaldun? Ibn Khaldun was social theorist and a historian in the late thirteen hundreds to the early fourteen hundreds’. Ibn Khaldun is still valued for his material in the twelfth and thirteenth century tribes of Northern Africa. Ibn Khaldun had numerous theories but let’s take a deeper look into two of his theories. The first theory I am going to talk about is how dynasties only have certain amount of land and provinces and that is it.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get your custom essay on

“ Social Theories Of The Historian Ibn Khaldun ”

Get custom paper

NEW! smart matching with writer

The second theory I am going to talk about is, the greatness of a dynasty and the size of its territory and the duration of the dynasty depends on the strength of numbers of its supporters.

In Ibn Khaldun first theory I choose he is trying to state that the dynasties only have so much land to conquer. When the dynasties have reached their max expansion if they continue to expand they will begin to form a belt around their capital and the outer lying cities will be without military protection.

If they continue to widen and expand the cities on the outer edge are exposed to potentially being attacked by an enemy or a neighbor. According to Muqaddimah, “When the groups have spread over the border regions and provinces, their numbers are necessarily exhausted. This, then, is the time when the territory has reached its farthest extension” (Khaldun 216).

But, in contrast, if a dynasty were to have numbers large enough when after expanding its territory and be strong enough to protect all areas then they are able to go as far as possible until they can not go any further.

A dynasty strongest point is the middle of its territory. When a dynasty becomes to large it becomes senescent and feeble it starts to break down from the outside to the inside of the territory. The center of the dynasty will remain strong until the whole dynasty is to be broken down. On the other hand, though, if the dynasty were to begin to break down from the middle of its territory the whole dynasty will fall. As seen in the example on page 216 of Muqaddimah, “The Persian dynasty, its center was al-Mada’in (Ctesiphon). When the Muslims took over al-Mada’in, the entire Persian empire came crumbling down” (Khaldun, 216).

The Persian dynasty did not fit Ibn Khalud’s model because it fell from the middle of its territory and the entire dynasty crumbled to pieces. But, in another example the Byzantine empire. The Byzantine empire which its middle was Constantinople, which was located in Syria. When the Byzantine lost Syria to the muslims they fell back onto its center, Constantinople, and began to repair its self. One final example of this Ibn Khaldun theory begins with the Arabs.

At the launch of the Arabs in Islam they were a very large group and they grew very, very quickly, taking control of neighboring countries to the East, South, and West. But they became thirsty for more and kept expanding their territory even further west and later expanded into Spain. They did not have the numbers at the end of their expansion and could no longer expand any more. Once they hit this point it is then they began to crumble from the outside, until the dynasty was permitted to be destroyed. This theory of Ibn Khaldun was the same for later dynasties as well, as they relied on the strength of their numbers to see how far they could expand their territories.

The second theory I choose in Muqaddimah called, “The greatness of a dynasty, the extent of its territory, and the length of its duration depend upon the numerical strength of its supporters” (Khaldun, 218). In a dynasty the ruling exists only through the group. The people who represent the dynasty are the men who live within the territories and its boundaries. The larger the group of a dynasty the stronger it becomes and larger its territories become, therefore, they are able to expand wider further and still be strong.

Ibn Khaldun talks about an example in Muqaddimah stating, “The Muslin dynasty united with in the power of the Arabs in Islam, when the Muslims raided against Tabuk, there were one hundred and ten thousand soldiers consisting of Mudar and Qahtin, with soldiers on horseback and men on foot. When after the raid these people set out to seek for themselves, the royal authority held by other nations, they had no protection against them nor any refuge. They were able to conquer the two greatest dynasties at the time the Byzantine and the Persian and were able to take control of the Turks in the East, the European Christians and Berbers in the West, and the Goths in Spain. They were able to gain control of all seven zones” (Khaldun, 218).

You may also take a look at the Sinhajah and the Almohad dynasties and their connection to the ‘Ubaydid. The apologist of the ‘Ubaydid, was vast more numerous than the supporters of the Sinhajah, therefore, their dynasty was larger (Khaldun 218). The ‘Ubaydid took control of many territories, such as, Syria and Egypt. On the other hand, the Zanatah dynasty had way smaller numbers than the Masmt dah dynasty, thus their Royal Authority feel short that of the Almohads. On page 218 of Muqaddimah, Ibn Khaldun talks about expansion and power based on numbers and here he says, “Thus, the expansion and power of a dynasty corresponds to the numerical strength of those who obtain superiority at the beginning of the rule. The length of its duration also depends upon it. The life of anything that comes into being depends upon the strength of its temper. The temper of dynasties is based upon group feeling. If the group feeling is string, the (dynasty’s) temper is likewise strong too, and its life of long-lasting duration. Group feeling, in turn, depends on numerical strength” (Khaldun, 218).

Larger dynasties last longer because they are larger in numbers. The more territories you have the better off you and your people are. With more territory the collapse begins with the outer lying regions which gives more territory to fall back onto the center point of the dynasty. Each asconding that happens takes time, thus, for a larger dynasty to fully fall it will need more time to collapse due to the number of regions it has. The time span of a larger dynasty is thus longer. In Muqaddimah, Ibn Khaldun talks about the Arab Muslim dynasty and his words are “The Arab Muslim dynasty, which lasted the longest of all muslim dynasties. Their rules collapsed only after the fourth [tenth] century. The ‘Ubaydid lasted nearly two hundred and eighty years. The Sinhajah dynasty did not last as long as the ‘Ubaydid dynasty lasted. Finally, the Almohad dynasty lasted nearly two hundred and seventy years” (Khaldun, 219). The life of a dynasty thus depends on the number of people it has supporting it.