around the Maghreb collecting tribal levies and negotiating with the various tribal groupings on behalf of several rulers. It is this period that has proved central for Ibn Khaldun’s intellectual development: during one of his expeditions into the Dawawida tribal region he decided to retire to the Sufi shrine, near contemporary Mascara in Algeria, and devote his time to scholarship.
The result of his four-year retreat to this shrine was The Muqaddimah (1377), the most significant proto-sociological study written before the modern era. The search for more extensive library resources and ill health forced Ibn Khaldun to move to Tunis in 1378, where he spent the next four years as a teacher and scholar. The persistent court intrigues and intellectual animosities with other scholars and imams led to another period of exile – this time to Alexandria where Ibn Khaldun was appointed a grand Maliki judge at the Mamluk court of Abu Sa’id Barquaq, in 1384. During his stay in Egypt he held several high positions including the Superior at the Baibarsiya Sufi lodge and the professor of Maliki law at Quamhiyyah College in Cairo. However, most of his time was devoted to research and the writing of what he considered to be his main work, to which The Muqaddimah was merely an introduction – The Book of Exemplaries and the Record of Narrative and its Principles concerning Arabs, Persians, and the Berbers, and those Nations of Great Might Contemporary with Them. During his time in Cairo Ibn Khaldun made pilgrimages to Mecca and Jerusalem and had highly eventful visits to Damascus where he experienced the siege and destruction of the city by Tamerlane. The famous conqueror invited Ibn Khaldun to spend time in his company and to write a geographical report on North Africa. Ibn Khaldun died in 1406 and was buried in the Sufi cemetery outside Cairo’s main gates.
At first glance it might seem that, unlike Confucius whose ideas developed in a protracted struggle with competing schools of thought, Ibn Khaldun was an intellectual loner removed from the leading scholarly networks of his day. Some commentators insist that because he was ‘remote from the intellectual centres’ and ‘without significant structural ties of his own’ Ibn Khaldun’s teachings had little impact on the development of Islamic philosophy (Collins, 1998: 428). It is true that, unlike Confucius, Ibn Khaldun did not have any recognisable followers and that his work has largely been forgotten for centuries (Lacoste, 1984: 1). Nevertheless, the creativity of his social thought did not emerge in an intellectual vacuum. On the contrary, for much of his life Ibn Khaldun was in a dialogue with the dominant intellectual perspectives of his time.
In his early years Ibn Khaldun was profoundly influenced by the leading logician Abelli. His education in philosophy and theology was largely built on the works of leading ninth-, tenth- and eleventh-century rationalist philosophers such as Al-Kindi, al-Farabi, Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and Ibn Rochd (Averroes). He was very well versed in historiography, which at that time was a highly developed research field in the Islamic world. In this context much of Ibn Khaldun’s work represents a direct or indirect engagement with rationalist philosophy and logic, mysticism, theology and the historiography of his day. Although all his main works are rooted in the rationalist principles derived from the work of Ibn Sina, Ibn Tatmiyah, Ibn Rochd or al-Kindi, he is also a fierce critic of their philosophies. In contrast to the dynastic narratives and hagiographies that dominated the historiography of his day Ibn Khaldun advocated the development of historical science rooted in the principles of causality and rationality. For Ibn Khaldun, history is an empirical endeavour that relies upon observation with a view of generating universalist findings. History is not to be viewed as a branch of literature but ‘is firmly rooted in science’ (2005: 6). More specifically he distinguishes between conventional views of history and its scientific purpose:
On the surface, history is no more that information about political events, dynasties, and occurrences of the remote past, clearly presented and spiced with proverbs. It serves to entertain large, crowded gatherings… The inner meaning of history, on the other hand, involves speculation and an attempt to get at the truth, subtle explanations of the causes and origins of existing things, the deep knowledge of the how and why of events. (Ibn Khaldun, 2005: 6)
In a similar vein to Confucius, Ibn Khaldun was deeply responsive to the dominant intellectual currents of his period. He wrote commentaries on the works of leading philosophers such as al Roushd and Razi and he was involved in stringent debates in theology, history, logic and politics. Although he too, just like Confucius, was living in times of civilisational decline characterised by continuous political and ideological conflicts, he was an heir of the highly advanced Islamic civilisation. His ideas and teachings were well known and debated throughout North Africa and the Middle East. Although the rationalist discourses were on defence as much of the medieval Muslim world was gradually moving away from rationalism towards religious mysticism, the cities Ibn Khaldun inhabited, namely Fez, Grenada, Bougie and Cairo, were still important university centres with prolific intellectual life. These intellectual disputes have found their reflection in many of Ibn Khaldun’s works where he continuously attempts to reconcile his analytical rationalism with the religious mysticism that was slowly but surely gaining the upper hand all over the Maghreb and the rest of the Islamic world.
Historical, Social and Political Context
Ancient China
As Collins (1998) argues, intellectual creativity is rarely if ever a product of an individual genius. Original and influential thinking is regularly created in direct or indirect collective interaction. Scholars develop new conceptual and analytical models in dialogue with others and in many historical instances the rise of influential and competing schools of thought tend to reinforce each other. Confucianism is no exception as its key principles have developed in creative disagreements with Mohism, Legalism and Daoism. Furthermore, the new ideas also often entail the presence of historically turbulent times. In this context the origins of Confucian ideas owe a great deal to the blustery social and historical context of the Spring and Autumn and Warring States periods. In contrast to the previous age of relative stability, rooted in the dominance of the Western Zhou dynasty that was focused on fighting the ‘barbarian tribes’ in the north while maintaining peace among its feudal fiefdoms at home, the Spring and Autumn periods initiated a new era defined by protracted violent conflicts. When the ‘barbarians’ inflicted a decisive blow to the Zhou, the internal geopolitical stability crashed: from 771 bce onwards a series of wars led to the emergence of several relatively powerful states which had managed to subdue their weaker neighbours and were competing between each other for supremacy. These two long periods were defined not only by incessant warfare and political instability, but also by organisational and intellectual creativity as the competing local powers tried to build a sturdy state and powerful military apparatuses. Hence they all attempted to recruit the best scholars, soldiers, scientists and engineers in order to achieve the ultimate military victory. In the Spring and Autumn periods the key states were Jin, Chu, Qin, Qi, Wu and Yue, most of which also controlled smaller, tributary states in the Central Plains. By the end of this period some states such as Jin had collapsed and others emerged from their ruins. Thus during the Warring States period the key players were Qin, Qi, Wei, Zhao, Han, Chu and Yan. This period was characterised by intensive military, technological and organisational developments including the invention and mass use of the crossbow, the shift from chariots to massed infantry and the establishment of efficient bureaucratic institutions (Tinbor-Hui, 2005).
By the end of the Warring States period Chinese states were world leaders in state formation and in the development of military capacity. The seven leading states were able to field massive armies and provide complex logistical systems, and establish effective bureaucratic structures capable of training, supplying and controlling hundreds of thousands of soldiers. In other words this period was defined on the one hand, by intensive warfare with an unprecedented number of human casualties and, on the other, by substantial organisational advancements, economic growth and significant bureaucratic, legislative and military reforms. Some of these developments, such as the Shang Yang reforms, were instrumental in eventually bringing about a unified and centralised authority for the whole of China. Before unification in 221 bce, the rulers of the Qin state tended to avoid major conflicts with other states, using their unique and beneficial geographical position
