Friday, April 29, 2011

Ibn Khaldun, Father of Economics


In his Prolegomena (The Muqaddimah), 'Abd al-Rahman Ibn Muhammad Ibn Khaldun al-Hadrami of Tunis (A.D. 1332-1406), commonly known as Ibn Khaldun, laid down the foundations of different fields of knowledge, in particular the science of civilization (al-'umran). His significant contributions to economics, however, should place him in the history of economic thought as a major forerunner, if not the "father," of economics, a title which has been given to Adam Smith, whose great works were published some three hundred and seventy years after Ibn Khaldun's death. Not only did Ibn Khaldun plant the germinating seeds of classical economics, whether in production, supply, or cost, but he also pioneered in consumption, demand, and utility, the cornerstones of modern economic theory.

Before Ibn Khaldun, Plato and his contemporary Xenophon presented, probably for the first time in writing, a crude account of the specialization and division of labor. On a non-theoretical level, the ancient Egyptians used the techniques of specialization, particularly in the era of the Eighteenth Dynasty, in order to save time and to produce more work per hour. Following Plato, Aristotle proposed a definition of economics and considered the use of money in his analysis of exchange. His example of the use of a shoe for wear and for its use in exchange was later presented by Adam Smith as the value in use and the value in exchange. Another aspect of economic thought before Ibn Khaldun was that of the Scholastics and of the Canonites, who proposed placing economics within the framework of laws based on religious and moral perceptions for the good of all human beings. Therefore all economic activities were to be undertaken in accordance with such laws.

Ibn Khaldun was cognizant of these ideas, including the one relating to religious and moral perceptions. The relationship between moral and religious principles on one hand and good government on the other is effectively expounded in his citation and discussion of Tahir Ibn al-Husayn's (A.D. 775-822) famous letter to his son 'Abdallah, who ruled Khurasan with his descendants until A.D. 872. From the rudimentary thoughts of Tahir he developed a theory of taxation which has affected modern economic thought and even economic policies in the United States and elsewhere.

This paper attempts to give Ibn Khaldun his forgotten and long overdue credit and to place him properly within the history of economic thought. He was preceded by a variety of economic but elemental ideas to which he gave substance and depth. Centuries later these same ideas were developed by the Mercantilists, the commercial capitalists of the seventeenth century-Sir William Petty (A.D. 1623-1687), Adam Smith (A.D. 1723-1790), David Ricardo (A.D. 1772-1823), Thomas R. Malthus (A.D. 1766-1834), Karl Marx (A.D. 1818-1883), and John Maynard Keynes (A.D. 1883-1946), to name only a few-and finally by contemporary economic theorists.

Labor Theory of Value, Economics of Labor, Labor as the Source of Growth and Capital Accumulation

With the exception of Joseph A. Schumpeter, who discovered Ibn Khaldun's writings only a few months before his death, Joseph J. Spengler, and Charles Issawi, major Western economists trace the theory of value to Adam Smith and David Ricardo because they attempted to find a reasonable explanation for the paradox of value. According to Adam Smith and as further developed by David Ricardo, the exchange value of objects is to be equal to the labor time used in its production. On the basis of this concept, Karl Marx concluded that "wages of labour must equal the production of labour" and introduced his revolutionary term surplus value signifying the unjustifiable reward given to capitalists, who exploit the efforts of the labor class, or the proletariat. Yet it was Ibn Khaldun, a believer in the free market economy, who first introduced the labor theory of value without the extensions of Karl Marx.

According to Ibn Khaldun, labor is the source of value. He gave a detailed account of his labor theory of value, presenting it for the first time in history. It is worth noting that Ibn Khaldun never called it a "theory," but had skillfully presented it (in volume 2 of Rosenthal translation) in his analysis of labor and its efforts. Ibn Khaldun's contribution was later picked up by David Hume in his Political Discourses, published in 1752: "Everything in the world is purchased by labour."7 This quotation was even used by Adam Smith as a footnote. "What is bought with money or with goods is purchased by labour, as much as what we acquire by the toil of our body. That money or those goods indeed save us this toil. They contain the value of a certain quantity of labour which we exchange for what is supposed at the time to contain the value of an equal quantity. The value of any commodity, therefore, to the person who possesses it, and who means not to use or consume it himself, but to exchange it for other commodities, is equal to the quantity of labour which it enables him to purchase or command. Labour, therefore, is the real measure of the exchangeable value of all commodities." If this passage which was published in A.D. 1776 in Adam Smith's major work, is carefully analyzed, one can find its seeds in Ibn Khaldun's Prolegomena (The Muqaddimah). According to Ibn Khaldun, labor is the source of value. It is necessary for all earnings and capital accumulation. This is obvious in the case of craft. Even if earning "results from something other than a craft, the value of the resulting profit and acquired (capital) must (also) include the value of the labor by which it was obtained. Without labor, it would not have been acquired."

Ibn Khaldun divided all earnings into two categories, ribh (gross earning) and kasb (earning a living). Ribh is earned when a man works for himself and sells his objects to others; here the value must include the cost of raw material and natural resources. Kasb is earned when a man works for himself. Most translators of Ibn Khaldun have made a common mistake in their understanding of ribh. Ribh may either mean a profit or a gross earning, depending upon the context. In this instance, ribh means gross earning because the cost of raw material and natural resources are included in the sale price of an object.

Whether ribh or kasb, all earnings are value realized from human labor, that is, obtained through human effort. Even though the value of objects includes the cost of other inputs of raw material and natural resources, it is through labor and its efforts that value increases and wealth expands, according to Ibn Khaldun. With less human effort, a reversal to an opposite direction may occur. Ibn Khaldun placed a great emphasis on the role of "extra effort," which later became known as "marginal productivity," in the prosperity of a society. His labor effort theory gave a reason for the rise of cities, which, as his insightful analysis of history indicated, were the focal points of civilizations.

Whereas labor may be interpreted from Ibn Khaldun's ideas as both necessary and sufficient conditions for earnings and profit, natural resources are only necessary. Labor and its effort lead to production, which is in turn used for an exchange through barter or through the use of money, that is, gold and silver. The process therefore creates incomes and profits which a man derives from a craft as the value of his labor after having deducted the cost of raw material. Long before David Ricardo published his significant contribution to the field of economics in 1817, The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, Ibn Khaldun gave the original explanation for the reasons behind the differences in labor earnings. They may be attributed to differences in skills, size of markets, location, craftsmanship or occupation, and the extent to which the ruler and his governors purchase the final product. As a certain type of labor becomes more precious, that is, if the demand for it exceeds its available supply, its earnings must rise.

High earnings in one craft attract others to it, a dynamic phenomenon which will eventually lead to an increase in its available supply and consequently lower profits. This principle explains Ibn Khaldun's original and insightful analysis of long-term adjustments within occupations and between one occupation and another. However, this point of view was attacked by John Maynard Keynes in his famous statement that in the long run we are all dead. Nevertheless, Ibn Khaldun's analysis has not only proved to be historically correct but has also constituted the core thinking of classical economists.

Ibn Khaldun succinctly observed, explained, and analyzed how earnings in one place may be different from another, even for the same profession. Earnings of judges, craftsmen, and even beggars, for example, are directly related to each town's degree of affluence and standard of living, which in themselves are to be achieved through the fruits of labor and the crystallization of productive communities. Adam Smith explained differences in labor earnings by comparing them in England and in Bengal along the same lines of reasoning given by Ibn Khaldun four centuries earlier as he compared earnings in Fez with those of Tlemcen. It was Ibn Khaldun, not Adam Smith, who first presented the contribution of labor as a means of building up the wealth of a nation, stating that labor effort, increase in productivity, and exchange of products in large markets are the main reasons behind a country's wealth and prosperity. Inversely, a decline in productivity could lead to the deterioration of an economy and the earnings of its people. "A large civilization yields large profits [earnings] because of' the large amount of [available] labor which is the cause of [profit]."

It was also Ibn Khaldun, long before Adam Smith, who made a strong case for a free economy and for freedom of choice.

Among the most oppressive measures, and the ones most deeply harming society, is the compelling of subjects to perform forced work unjustly. For labour is a commodity, as we shall show later, in as much as incomes and profits represent value of labour of their recipients...nay most men have no source of income other than their labour. If, therefore, they should be forced to do work other than that for which they have been trained, or made to do forced work in their own occupation, they would lose the fruit of their labour and be deprived of the greater part, nay of the whole, of their income.

To maximize both earnings and levels of satisfaction, a man should be free to perform whatever his gifted talents and skilled abilities dictate. Through natural talents and acquired skills, man can freely produce objects of' high quality, and, often, more units of labor per hour.

Demand, Supply, Prices, and Profits

In addition to his original contribution to the economics of labor, Ibn Khaldun introduced and ingeniously analyzed the interplay of several tools of economic analysis; such is demand, supply, prices, and profits.

Demand for an object is based on the utility of acquiring it and not necessarily the need for it. Utility is therefore the motive force behind demand. It creates the incentives for consumer spending in the marketplace. Ibn Khaldun had therefore planted the first seed of modern demand theory, which since been developed and expanded by Thomas Robert Malthus, Alfred Marshall, John Hicks, and others. As a commodity in demand attracts increased consumer spending, both the price and the quantity sold are increased. Similarly, if the demand for certain crafts decreases, its sales fall and consequently its price is reduced.

Demand for a certain commodity also depends upon the extent to which it will be purchased by the state. The king and his ruling class purchase much larger quantities than any single private individual is capable of purchasing. A craft flourishes when the state buys its product. With his ingenious analytical mind, Ibn Khaldun had further discovered the concept known in modern economic literature as "derived demand." "Crafts improve and increase when the demand for their products increases." Demand for a craftsman is therefore derived from the demand for his product in the marketplace.

As is commonly known, modern price theory states that cost is the backbone of supply theory. It was Ibn Khaldun who first examined analytically the role of the cost of production on supply and prices. In observing the differences between the prices of foodstuffs produced in fertile land and of that produced in poor soils, he traced them mainly to the disparity in the cost of production.

[In] the coastal and hilly regions, whose soil is unfit for agriculture, (inhabitants) were forced to apply themselves to improving the conditions of those fields and plantations. This they did by applying valuable work and manure and other costly materials. All this raised the cost of agricultural production, which costs they took into account when fixing their price for selling. And ever since that time Andalusia has been noted for its high prices ....The position is just the reverse in the land of the Berbers. Their land is so rich and fertile that they do not have to incur any expenses in agriculture; hence in that country foodstuffs are cheap.

Besides individual and state demand and cost of production, Ibn Khaldun introduced other factors which affect the price of goods or services, namely, the degree of affluence and the prosperity of districts, the degree of concentration of the wealthy, and the degree of customs duties being levied on middlemen and traders. The direct functional relationship between income and consumption as presented by Ibn Khaldun paved the road to the theory of consumption function as a cornerstone of Keynesian economics.

Ibn Khaldun also made an original contribution in his concept of profits. In economic literature, a theory of profit as a reward for undertaking risk in a future of uncertainties is generally attributed to Frank Knight, who published his ideas in 1921. There is no doubt that Frank Knight substantially advanced a well-established theory of profit. Nevertheless, it was Ibn Khaldun, not Frank Knight, who originally planted the seed of this theory: "Commerce means the buying of merchandise and goods, storing them, and waiting until fluctuation of the market brings about an increase in the prices of (these goods). This is called profit (ribh)." In another context, Ibn Khaldun stated again the same idea: "Intelligent and experienced people in the cities know that it is inauspicious to hoard grain and to wait for high prices, and that the profit (expected) may be spoiled or lost through (hoarding)." Profit is therefore a reward for undertaking a risk. In the face of future uncertainties, a risk-bearer may very well lose instead of gain. Similarly, profits or losses may accrue as a result of speculation which is carried out by profit-seekers in the marketplace. To maximize profits, Ibn Khaldun introduced a gospel for traders, "Buy cheap and sell dear," which has been widely quoted ever since. In his translation of the Muqaddimah of Ibn Khaldun, Franz Rosenthal stated in a footnote, "In 1952 a book by Frank V. Fischer appeared, entitled Buy LowSell High: Guidance for the General Reader in Sound Investment Methods and Wise Trade Techniques."

If Ibn Khaldun's gospel is applied to cost analysis, it becomes obvious that profit may be increased, even for a given price of a final product, when one reduces the cost of raw material and other inputs used in production by buying them at a discount or, in general, at a low price even from distant markets, as he indicated in his account of benefits of foreign trade. Nevertheless, Ibn Khaldun concluded that both excessively low prices and excessively high prices are disruptive to markets. It is therefore advisable that states not hold prices artificially low through subsidies or other methods of market intervention. Such policies are economically disastrous because the low-priced goods will disappear from the market and there will be no incentive for suppliers to produce and sell whenever their profits are adversely affected. Ibn Khaldun also concluded that excessively high prices will not be compatible with market expansion. As the high-priced goods sell less in the market, the policy of excessively high pricing becomes counterproductive and disrupts the flow of goods in markets. Ibn Khaldun had thus laid down the foundations of ideas which later led to the formulation of disequilibrium analysis. He also cited several factors affecting the upward general price level, such as increase in demand, restrictions of supply, and increase in the cost of production, which includes a sales tax as one of the components of a total cost. After his analysis of what stimulates overall demand in it growing economy, Ibn Khaldun stated the following:

Because of the demand for (luxury articles), they become customary, and thus come to be necessities. In addition, all labor becomes precious in the city, and the conveniences become expensive, because there are many purposes for which then, are in demand in view of the prevailing luxury and because the government makes levies on market and business transactions. This is reflected in the sales prices. Conveniences, foodstuffs, and labor thus become very expensive. As a result, the expenditures of the inhabitants increase tremendously in proportion to the civilization of (the city). A great deal of money is spent. Under these circumstances, (people) need a great deal of money for expenditures, to procure the necessities of life for themselves and their families, as well as all other requirements.

As to the impact of restricted supply on the price level, Ibn Khaldun summed it up thus: "When goods are few and rare, their prices go up."

By carefully reading the above two passages, it becomes obvious that Ibn Khaldun discovered what is now known as cost-push and demand-pull causes of inflationary pressures. In fact, he was the first philosopher in history who systematically identified factors affecting either the price of a good or the general price level.

Macroeconomics, Growth, Taxes, Role of Governments, and Money

In macroeconomics, Ibn Khaldun laid the foundations of what John Maynard Keynes called "aggregate effective demand," the multiplier effect and the equality of income and expenditure.25 When there is more total demand as population increases, there is more production, profits, customs, and taxes. The upward cycle of growth continues as civilization flourishes and a new wave of total demand is created for the crafts and luxury products. "The value realized from them increases, and, as a result, profits are again multiplied in the town. Production there is thriving even more than before. And so it goes with the second and third increase." People's "wealth, therefore, increases and their riches grow, the customs and ways of luxury multiply, and all the various kinds of crafts are firmly established among them." The concept of the multiplier was later developed and expanded by several economists, in particular by John Maynard Keynes. However, it was discovered for the first time in history by Ibn Khaldun.

Modern national income accounts were also developed and expanded using the equality of income and expenditures. Expenditures of one citizen are income to others; therefore total expenditures are equal to total incomes. This equality was first discovered by Ibn Khaldun. In fact, he used both terms as synonymous to one another after having established the equality between them. "Income and expenditure balance each other in every city. If the income is large, the expenditure is large, and vice versa. And if both income and expenditure are large, the inhabitants become more favourably situated, and the city grows."

Ibn Khaldun introduced the pioneering theory of growth based on capital accumulation through man's efforts.

(Man) obtains (some profits) through no efforts of his own, as, for instance, through rain that makes the fields thrive, and similar things. However, these things are only contributory. His own efforts must be combined with them, as will be mentioned. (His) profits will constitute his livelihood, if they correspond to his necessities and needs. They will be capital accumulation it they are greater than (his needs)."

Ibn Khaldun gave his account of the stages of economic development, from nomadic to agricultural to more "cooperation in economic matters" which occur through an expansion of a town to a city, where demand increases and skilled labor congregates and expands production both ill quantity and in "refinement." Economic growth continues so long as there is an extra effort which creates capital accumulation, which in turn, combined with effort, leads to more production and the development of crafts in the cities. As was presented earlier, wealth expands through labor and its efforts, whereas with less human effort there may occur a reversal to stagnation, followed by a downward trend in people's standard of living.

Governments play an important role in growth and in the country's economy in general through their purchases of goods and services and through their fiscal policy of taxation and expenditures. Governments may also provide an environment of incentives for work and prosperity or, inversely, a system of oppression which is ultimately self-defeating. Even though Ibn Khaldun regards governments as inefficient, "not so much calculation" is carried out by them of what is contemporarily known as cost and benefit; they still play an important role in the country's economy through their big purchases. Government expenditures stimulate the economy by increasing incomes, which are further hiked through a multiplier effect. However, if the king hoards the amount he collects in taxes, business slackens and the economic activities of the state are adversely affected through the multiplier effect. In addition to its welfare program for the poor, the widows, the orphans, and the blind, provided there is no overburden for the treasury, the government should spend its tax revenue wisely to improve conditions of its "subjects, to safeguard their rights and to preserve them from harm."

Ibn Khaldun was the first major contributor to tax theory in history. He is the philosopher who shaped the minds of several rulers throughout history. More recently his impact was evident on John F. Kennedy and later on Ronald Reagan. "Our true choice is not between tax reduction on the one hand and avoidance of large federal deficits on the other. An economy stilled by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenue to balance the budget, just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits." John F. Kennedy said that back in 1962, when he was asking for a tax decrease, a cut in tax rates across the board. But when John Kennedy said those words, he was echoing the words of Ibn Khaldun, a Muslim philosopher back in the fourteenth century, who said the following: "At the beginning of the dynasty taxation yields large revenues from small assessments. At the end of the dynasty taxation yields small revenue from large assessments….This is why we had to have the tax program as well as the budget cuts, because budget cuts, yes, would reduce government spending."

According to Ibn Khaldun, tax revenues of the ruling dynasty increase because of business prosperity, which flourishes with easy, not excessive taxes. He was therefore the first in history to lay the foundation of a theory for the optimum rate of taxation, a theory which has even affected contemporary leading advocates of supply-side economics such as Arthur Laffer and others. The well-known Laffer curve is nothing but a graphical presentation of the theory of taxation developed by Ibn Khaldun in the fourteenth century.

"When tax assessments and imposts upon the subjects are low, the latter have the energy and desire to do things. Cultural enterprises grow and increase, because the low taxes bring satisfaction. When cultural enterprises grow, the number of individual imposts and assessments mount. In consequence, the tax revenue, which is the sum total of the individual assessments, increases"; whereas with large tax assessments, incomes and profits are adversely affected, resulting, in the final analysis, in a decline in tax revenue. Ibn Khaldun made a strong case against any government attempt to confiscate or otherwise affect private property. Governments' arbitrary interferences in man's property result in loss of incentives, which could eventually lead to a weakening of the state. Expropriation is self-defeating for any government because it is a form of oppression, and oppression ruins society.

In macroeconomics Ibn Khaldun also contributed to the theory of money. According to him, money is not a real form of wealth but a vehicle through which it can be acquired. He was the first to present the major functions of money as a measure of value, a store of value and a "numeraire." "The two mineral 'stones,' gold and silver as the (measure of) value for all capital accumulations ... [are] considered treasure and property. Even if under certain circumstances, other things are acquired, it only for the purpose of ultimately obtaining [them]. All other things are subject to market fluctuations from which (gold and silver) are exempt. They are the basis of profit, property and treasure." The real form of wealth is not money, however; wealth is rather created or otherwise transformed through labor in the form of capital accumulation in real terms. It was, therefore, Ibn Khaldun who first distinguished between money and real wealth, even though he realized that the latter may he acquired by the former. Yet money plays a much more efficient role than barter in business transactions in a society where man exchanges the fruits of his labor, whether in the form of goods or of services, with another to satisfy the needs which he cannot fulfill alone on his own. Money also facilitates the flow of goods from one market to another, even across the border of countries.

Foreign Trade

Ibn Khaldun also contributed to the field of international economics. Through his perceptive observations and his analytical mind, he undoubtedly shed light on the advantages of trade among nations. Through foreign trade, according to Ibn Khaldun, people's satisfaction, merchants' profits, and countries' wealth are all increased.

The merchant who knows his business will travel only with such goods as are generally needed by rich and poor, rulers and commoners alike. (General need) makes for a large demand for his goods...it is more advantageous and more profitable for the merchants' enterprise... (that he will be able to take advantage of) market fluctuations, if he brings goods from a country that is far away...merchandise becomes more valuable when merchants transport it from one country to another.

The italicized word, valuable, indicates Ibn Khaldun's perception of the gains of trade. If a good becomes more valuable by being transported from country A to country B and still sells at a profit in B after the cost of transportation and all other costs are taken into account, then it is (1) cheaper than the same good produced internally, (2) of better quality, or (3) a totally new product. If the foreign good is cheaper than that produced internally, foreign trade will serve to economize labor and other resources by having them diverted from the high-cost good which cannot face competition to other low-cost products. The resources which are saved from this process of diversion may be used to produce other goods or may add another layer of capital accumulation. Foreign trade may therefore contribute positively to the country's level of income as well as to its level of growth and prosperity. If the foreign good is of a better quality than that produced internally, the imported good will add to the level of satisfaction of those who purchase it. In the meantime, internal producers facing the competitive high-quality product must attempt to improve their production or accept a reduction in their sales and revenues. There will be a welfare gain in either case: a rise in the quality of internal products or a diversion of resources from the production of a high-cost good to a low-cost good, as in the first case. In the last case, when the imported good is a totally new product, the welfare gain from foreign trade may be expressed in terms of an increase in the level of satisfaction of those who purchase it or in terms of an increase in quantity or quality of production of other goods if the imported item is a new tool or a modification of an existing one. Furthermore, an introduction of a totally new product through foreign trade may attract internal producers, if it is feasible, to produce it once they are capable to compete with the foreign product.

Ibn Khaldun was conscious of what was later termed the "opportunity cost." Applying valuable labor to improving poor soils means that the labor could have been better used in the production of other goods. Resources in general should be put to the best possible use. Otherwise there will be a cost which will surface in a loss in value. Foreign trade provides further incentives in the attempts to optimize the use of labor and other natural resources.

Ibn Khaldun's originality in his perceptive observations and analysis of foreign trade deserves proper recognition in the field of international economics. The subject of gains from trade has been substantially developed and expanded, in particular, since the publication of Political Discourses by David Hume in 1752. But the first original seed of the subject was planted by Ibn Khaldun four centuries earlier.

Ibn Khaldun and Adam Smith

In spite of Ibn Khaldun's overall contribution to the field of economics, it is Adam Smith who has been widely called the "father of economics." Schumpeter's view of Smith's economics is more critical than admiring. "Personally, I do not share such a view, for I still consider Adam Smith one of the great philosophers who has significantly contributed to the field of economics even by having been a mere collector of previous economic thoughts. He eloquently presented these ideas in detail in an excellent new form and style. Nevertheless, by comparison, Ibn Khaldun was far more original than Adam Smith, in spite of the fact that the former had also restructured and built upon foundations laid down before him, such as Plato's account of specialization, Aristotle's analysis of money, and Tahir Ibn al-Husayn's treatment of government's role. Still, it was Ibn Khaldun who founded the original ideas in numerous areas of economic thought.

Despite Ibn Khaldun's contributions, some economic ideas as well as some economic philosophy of the freedom of choice, as presented above, were later attributed to Adam Smith without giving due credit to the original thinker Ibn Khaldun. "Smith's great economic treatise contains both his 'preaching' of the 'gospel' of economic liberalism, i.e., economic freedom for all individuals."39 Since there is such a striking similarity in the economic thought of Ibn Khaldun and of Adam Smith, it must be left to the economic historian to ascertain direct or indirect links between these two great thinkers who were four centuries apart. However, I would like to suggest some possible and likely points of contact. Even though Adam Smith did not explicitly refer to Ibn Khaldun's contributions, it may well be argued that there were several channels through which he may have encountered the latter's pioneering and original economic thought.

Adam Smith graduated from Glasgow University, where he was influenced by his teacher Francis Hutcheson, who was in turn affected by Antony Ashley Cooper, known as Lord Shaftesbury in the late seventeenth century and early eighteenth century, and other philosophers who were concerned with "liberal enlightenment," all of whom may have been directly or indirectly affected by Ibn Khaldun's thought. After his graduation, Adam Smith devoted six years to research at Oxford University's library, where he may have been exposed to Ibn Khaldun's contributions even without having been aware of the author's name. It was not uncommon in early times that ideas were circulated, discussed, and delivered from one generation to another without the name of an author. Furthermore, ever since the Crusades, which lasted from the eleventh to the thirteenth centuries, most Western philosophers attempted to discount the impact of Muslim scholars through a multiplicity of approaches, which included using Muslim ideas without mentioning the name of a Muslim author. The protracted war waged by the Crusaders to capture the Holy Land from the Muslims created a strong antagonistic feeling, well embedded in the Western mind, from which Western scholars were not immune and which lasted for centuries, probably until modern times. Another possible channel through which Adam Smith may have been directly or indirectly exposed to Ibn Khaldun's economic thought was through his tour of Europe. During this tour he encountered Quesnsay, other Physiocrats in Paris, and other European intellectuals who may have been influenced by Ibn Khaldun in one way or another.

Adam Smith could also have been exposed to the economic contributions of Ibn Khaldun through the dominant influence of the Ottoman Empire. Ever since the Ottoman Empire rose in the fourteenth century-and vastly extended its boundaries at its peak in the sixteenth century to include much of southeast Europe, southwest Asia, and northern Africa-a new bridge was erected linking intellectuals in the Continent with their counterparts in the vast territories of the empire, of which Egypt became a part in 1517. It was in Egypt that Ibn Khaldun spent the latter part of his life revising manuscripts of his works which he had originally completed in Tunis in November of 1377. His thoughts were then transmitted from one generation to another, from one century to another, and from one country to another. Influenced by Ibn Khaldun's idea that craftsmen and industrialists play a significant role in a country's growth, prosperity, and power, Sultan Selim 1, after having successfully extended his domain of influence over Egypt in 1517, took back with him from Cairo to Constantinople the best-known artisans at that time. In modern terminology, this was a case of a "transfer of technology."

The impact of Ibn Khaldun was extensive and profound, not only in the minds of some rulers and statesmen, but also among intellectuals and educators long before his books were even translated into other languages, In response to great interest in his works, his books were finally translated to the Turkish language in 1730, exactly forty-six years before the publication of Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations.

Concluding Remarks

Even if Adam Smith was not directly exposed to Ibn Khaldun's economic thoughts, the fact remains that they were the original seeds of classical economics and even modern economic theory. Ibn Khaldun had not only been well established as the father of the field of sociology, but he had also been well recognized in the field of history, as the following passage from Arnold Toynbee indicates:

In his chosen field of intellectual activity [Ibn Khaldun] appears to have been inspired by no predecessors ... and yet, in the Prolegomena ... to his Universal History he has conceived and formulated a philosophy of history which is undoubtedly the greatest work of its kind that has yet been created by any mind in any time or place.

Through his great sense and knowledge of history, together with his microscopic observations of men, times, and places, Ibn Khaldun used an insightful empirical investigation to analyze and produce original economic thought. He left a wealth of contributions for the first time in history in the field of economics. He clearly demonstrated breadth and depth in his coverage of value and its relationship to labor; his analysis of his theory of capital accumulation and its relationship to the rise and fall of dynasties; his perceptions of the dynamics of demand, supply, prices, and profits; his treatment of the subjects of money and the role of governments; his remarkable theory of taxation, and other economic subjects. His unprecedented contributions to the overall field of economics should make him, Ibn Khaldun, the father of economics.

(Dr. Ibrahim M. Oweiss/Islamic World.net)

Friday, April 1, 2011

Kembalikan Pulau Pinang kepada Sultan Kedah

Oleh Zaini Hassan

15 Dis — Saya dan profesor kajian alam Melayu, A. Murad Merican mempunyai kepercayaan yang sama. Pulau Pinang harus dikembalikan kepada kerajaan Kesultanan Kedah. Bukanlah kerana saya orang Kedah dan Murad orang Pulau Pinang, maka kami bersetuju dengan cadangan itu.

Tapi ia adalah berdasarkan fakta sejarah.

Asal cadangan itu datangnya dari Pengerusi Persatuan Sejarah Malaysia Cawangan Kedah (PSMCK), Datuk Wan Shamsuddin Mohd. Yusof melalui kenyataannya kepada Bernama 1 Disember lalu.

Berita itu bertajuk: Kedah dicadang tuntut semula Pulau Pinang:

“PSMCK mencadangkan supaya Pulau Pinang dikembalikan kepada Kedah kerana negeri tersebut pada asalnya kepunyaan Kedah.

Pengerusi PSMCK, Datuk Wan Shamsudin Mohd. Yusof berkata, cadangan itu ditimbulkan kerana Pulau Pinang adalah hak milik Kedah sebelum berlakunya perjanjian antara Sultan Kedah dan British pada 1786.

“Setelah negara kita merdeka pada 1957, Pulau Pinang yang dijajah sepatutnya dikembalikan kepada Kedah sepertimana Dinding dan Pangkor dikembalikan kepada Perak. Tetapi Pulau Pinang tidak dikembalikan kepada Kedah dan terus dijadikan sebuah negeri yang berasingan,” ujarnya kepada pemberita.

Dalam perjanjian yang dibuat antara Sultan Kedah ketika itu, Sultan Dhiauddin Mukarram Shah dan Leftenan Gabenor Pulau Pinang, Sir George Leith Baronet pada tahun 1800, Pulau Pinang dipajak untuk menampung keperluan ekonomi pada masa itu.

Pada ketika itu, Pulau Pinang dipajak dengan harga 6,000 manakala Seberang Prai dipajak dengan harga 4,000 dan pihak British membayar wang tersebut kepada Sultan Kedah dengan menggunakan mata wang Sepanyol.

Menurut Wan Shamsudin, Pulau Pinang dan Seberang Perai disifatkan masih hak milik Kedah kerana duit pajakan masih dibayar oleh Kerajaan Pusat dengan nilai RM10,000 setiap tahun kepada kerajaan negeri Kedah pada masa ini.

“Pembayaran pajakan masih wujud sehingga kini dan ini bererti, keadaan tersebut masih wujud dan tidak salah untuk Kedah membuat tuntutan,”jelasnya.

Tambahnya, pihaknya akan mengadakan satu seminar dengan pakar-pakar sejarah untuk mengumpulkan fakta-fakta dan bukti yang berkaitan dengan sejarah Pulau Pinang yang dahulunya di bawah naungan Kesultanan Kedah.

“Kami juga akan menyerahkan bukti dan fakta tersebut kepada pihak-pihak yang bertanggungjawab dan terserah kepada mereka untuk menuntut semula Pulau Pinang atau tidak,”katanya.

Tanpa menjelaskan siapa pihak yang bertanggungjawab itu, Wan Samsudin berkata, tugas PSMCK ialah untuk menyuarakan kembali perkara itu memandangkan ramai pihak mula terlupa tentang sejarah sebenar negeri Pulau Pinang.

“Sama ada pihak tersebut mahu menuntut semula Pulau Pinang atau tidak itu terserah kepada mereka.

“Kami suarakan perkara ini kerana tidak mahu sejarah negeri Kedah dan Pulau Pinang terus dilupakan,”katanya.

Namun bukan semua orang menyenangi dengan cadangan itu. Ada yang mengatakan jika itulah pandangannya maka Tanah Melayu harus dikembalikan kepada Orang Asli?

DAP sudah tentu tidak mahu menyerahkan Pulau Pinang kepada Kedah. Mereka juga sudah tentu tidak bersetuju dengan pandangan dan cadangan itu. Pulau Pinang bagi DAP ialah kubu terkuatnya (sekarang).

Sejarah Pulau Pinang, sudah tentu mereka 100 peratus bersetuju, hanya bermula dari kolonial Inggeris, Francis Light. Bukannya dari kesultanan Melayu Kedah. Mereka juga percaya Raffleslah yang membuka Singapura. Bukan kesultanan Melayu.

Namun, cadangan Wan Shamsuddin itu mesti dipertimbangkan dengan wajar dan serius. Patik — Ahli Mahkota Kedah ini — berharap Duli Yang Maha Mulia Tuanku Al-Sultan dapat meneliti perkara ini sedalam-dalamnya.

Umumnya komen-komen yang diutarakan dalam siber bagi mencantas cadangan itu jelas memperlihatkan kedangkalan sejarah dan persejarahan di kalangan rakyat Malaysia. Pemikiran dan sikap mereka dalam hal ini bersifat kebudak-budakkan sehingga ada mengatakan bahawa jika kita hendakkan yang asal, mengapa tidak kembalikan Tanah Melayu kepada orang asalnya, Orang Asli.

Beberapa lagi komen menjurus kepada mencabar kedaulatan Malaysia — dari segi mengembalikan negeri-negeri seperti Kedah, Kelantan dan Terengganu kepada Siam, Thailand dan Sabah kepada Filipina.

Wan Shamsudin telah membangkitkan satu isu penting dalam sejarah dan persejarahan negara, bukan hanya kaitan Kedah dan Pulau Pinang. Ini adalah kerana sekian lama, sejarah dan persejarahan Malaysia, sama ada sengaja atau tidak, wujud dalam keadaan pelbagai kelompongan.

Saranan Wan Shamsuddin perlu disokong lalu diteliti dan dihalusi implikasinya dari segi sejarah dan persejarahan pasca kolonial. Kita bukan menolak kedatangan Inggeris dan kuasa barat ke Alam Melayu. Apa yang penting ialah usaha berterusan memberi tafsiran dan konteks yang lebih wajar kepada alam dan geopolitik kesultanan Kedah.

Murad juga dalam kenyataan akhbarnya menyebut, perjanjian memajak Pulau Pinang antara Sultan Kedah dan British pada 1786 dan 1800 tidak pernah menyebut bahawa ia tidak boleh dimansuhkan atau akan tamat pada tempoh tertentu.

Oleh itu, katanya tidak mustahil jika Pulau Pinang dikembalikan kepada Kedah jika ia dituntut sekarang. “Pulau Pinang boleh dijadikan satu daerah atau wilayah khas dalam Kedah jika ia dikembalikan kepadanya.”

Kata Murad, selama ini rakyat Malaysia hanya menganggap sejarah kewujudan Pulau Pinang berlaku pada 1786 iaitu apabila British mula sampai ke negeri itu. “Namun sebenarnya sejarah Pulau Pinang dan orang Melayu telah terpendam. Jika Kedah mengambil semula Pulau Pinang, ia sama sekali akan mengubah sejarah negeri itu,” jelas beliau.

Bagi menjelaskan lagi senario sejarah ini, saya menyarankan Persatuan Sejarah Malaysia dapat mengadakan seminar seperti cadangan Wan Shamsuddin itu seberapa segera. Pulau Pinang harus dikembalikan kepada hak kesultanan dan tamadunnya yang asal.

Kerajaan Pusat juga harus mengikuti perkembangan ini dengan teliti.

Bagi mendapatkan ruang bicara mengenai cadangan dan pandangan ini, Prof. Murad yang juga Ketua Kluster Penyelidikan Kajian Oksiden di Alam Melayu, Universiti Teknologi Petronas memberi analisis impirikal ringkasnya mengenai hal ini. Katanya cadangan itu membuka perbincangan yang penting bukan hanya dari segi kedaulatan kesultanan Kedah (yang tertua di dunia dan Malaysia), tetapi juga usaha berterusan mengeluarkan sejarah dan persejarahan Malaysia dari kepompong kolonial Inggeris.

Ikuti tulisan beliau:

Dari sudut Perlembagaan Persekutuan, cadangan Datuk Wan Shamsuddin itu tidak bercanggah dengan undang-undang negara. Mengubah sempadan sesebuah negeri diperuntukan dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan dalam Bahagian 1, Artikel 2, tertakluk kepada persetujuan Dewan Undangan Negeri terbabit dan Majlis Raja-Raja Melayu.

Kita juga seharusnya tidak mengenakan sekatan pemikiran dan pergerakan untuk meluruskan masa lalu demi generasi masa depan. Kita maklum bahawa apabila Inggeris dan Belanda bertapak di Kepulauan Melayu, mereka melakarkan sempadan geopolitik. Ini membawa maksud mencampur tangan dalam hal ehwal masyarakat dan kerajaan Melayu.

Apa yang berlaku pada hakikatnya ialah pihak Inggeris telah campur tangan dalam hal-ehwal kesultanan Kedah. Dan campur tangan ini bermula lebih awal daripada Perjanjian Pangkor 1874.

Maka wujudlah nama-nama seperti Light, Scott dan Leith yang dikaitkan dengan sejarah Pulau Pinang dan seterusnya Malaysia. Maka pelbagai buku dan bahan tentang sejarah Pulau Pinang mengandaikan bahawa Pulau Pinang hanya mempunyai sejarah selepas mendaratnya Francis Light di Tanjung Penaga pada 11 Ogos 1786, dan seterusnya perjanjian pada tahun yang sama dan pada tahun 1800.

Akibat dari perjanjian-perjanjian tersebut, alam Melayu mula dikotak-katikkan “ khususnya jajahan Kesultanan Kedah, kerajaan Melayu yang tertua di Malaysia dan kerajaan beraja yang tertua di dunia.

Jika kesedaran umum bahawa “segala-galanya” bermula dari Melaka, maka kita memesongkan sejarah. Ini tidak semestinya kita mengetepikan Melaka yang merupakan asas kepada institusi dan sistem kerajaan di Malaysia kini.

Namun demikian, kesedaran ruang dan masa yang lebih awal dari itu amat kritikal sekali dalam penulisan sejarah negara dan perlu diketengahkan pada tahap akademik dan popular.

Dan apabila kita baca penulisan tentang sejarah Pulau Pinang, Kedah hanya dirujuk dalam konteks Sultan Kedah membuat perjanjian dengan Francis Light. Lebih dari itu, Kedah hilang dalam persejarahan Pulau Pinang.

Begitu juga dengan pelbagai penulisan tentang sejarah Kedah. Apa yang saya perhatikan ialah persejarahan Kedah setakat ini tidak memberi penekanan kepada Pulau Pinang sebagai sebahagian daripada Kesultanan Kedah. Persejarahan Kedah juga menjadi mangsa kepada perspektif kolonial, yakni, menerima sebagai hakikat bahawa sejarah Pulau Pinang asing dan berbeza dengan sejarah Kedah.

Persejarahan Kedah memandang sepi penempatan Melayu Pulau Pinang dan warisan Kedah di pulau itu kecuali salah satu kertas kerja Datuk Wan Shamsudin beberapa tahun lalu yang ada menyebut penempatan Melayu sebelum kedatangan Inggeris.

Malah akibat daripada perjanjian dalam tahun-tahun tersebut, perhubungan Kedah dengan wilayah-wilayah di Sumatera pun tidak ditonjolkan seolah-olah tidak ada kesepaduan tradisi, bahasa, agama dan budaya di antara Kedah dan wilayah-wilayah tersebut.

Beberapa tahun lalu dalam syarahan saya pada PSMCK di Alor Setar, saya menganjurkan bahawa sejarah dan persejarahan Pulau Pinang mesti lari dari sudut kolonial lalu mencadangkan bahawa ia dilihat dari perspektif negeri dan Kesultanan Kedah.

Cadangan Datuk Wan mempunyai implikasi kepada sejarah negara. Tidak ada sebab mengapa kita tidak boleh luruskan persejarahan. Tidak ada sebab mengapa kita tidak boleh mengubah geografi alam kita sendiri demi menerokai satu ruang lapisan sejarah yang telah disisih.

Asal usul negara bangsa Malaysia perlu dihalusi dan dibincangkan secara terbuka. Kenyataan-kenyataan yang tidak menggambarkan hakikat hendaklah ditangani sewajarnya demi masa depan.

Sebagai contoh, sebuah buku yang diterbitkan pada tahun 2007 dengan tajuk Malaysian Chinese and Nation-Building: Before Merdeka and Fifty Years After (Penerbit: Centre for Malaysian Chinese Studies, Kuala Lumpur) telah menyatakan bahawa Malaysia sebagai sebuah negara bangsa bermula dengan pembukaan (founding) Pulau Pinang pada tahun 1786.

Bab satu buku itu yang bertajuk “State and Nation: An Overview and Malaysian Perspective,”menyatakan bahawa dari situ, perkembangan seterusnya telah menjurus kepada pembentukan satu politik.

Dalam perbincangan pembentukan Malaysia, buku itu menekankan kepada warisan undang-undang dan pentadbiran British sebagai asas kesamaan wilayah-wilayah di Malaysia (ms.10).

Wacana-wacana sebeginilah yang memesongkan sejarah dan persejarahan Malaysia. Apakah ia mengandaikan bahawa Malaysia tidak ada sejarah sebelum 1786? — Utusan Malaysia



Sumber: http://sejarahnagarakedah.blogspot.com/

SEJARAH PERKEMBANGAN DAN KEJATUHAN PEMERINTAHAN ISLAM DI ANDALUSIA: TELADAN DAN SEMPADAN.

Oleh: Dr. Mohd Roslan Mohd Nor - m_roslan@um.edu.my





Abstrak:
Andalusia pernah berperanan memberi impak yang besar kepada umat Islam. Ia melonjakkan tamadun umat dengan perkembangan di dalam pelbagai bidang keilmuan sehingga lahir pelbagai tokoh yang dihormati masyarakat timur hingga ke barat. Namun, kegagalan umat Islam mempertahankan kedaulatan Andalusia telah menjadi sempadan yang pahit untuk dirungkai. Apapun, pengalaman dan pengajaran jatuh bangun Andalusia cukup penting untuk dikaji bagi
mengambil iktibar dan menjadikannya panduan dalam menghadapi cabaran semasa. Kertas ini akan cuba sedaya yang ada untuk berkongsi fatrah Andalusia ini dalam merentasi sejarah kegemilangan umat Islam seketika dahulu.

Pengenalan
Kecemerlangan Tamadun Islam menguasai dunia telah lama terbukti dengan penyebaran Islam dan penguasaan yang dilakukan samada di Timur mahupun di Barat. Penguasaan Islam terhadap semenanjung Iberia, Asbania atau lebih khusus Andalusia, telah menunjukkan bahawa Islam telah tersebar ke blok Eropah. Andalusia mewakili masyarakat barat di atas kedudukannya yang bersambung dengan tanah besar Eropah dan ia dikuasai oleh Kristian sebelum kedatangan Islam ke tempat tersebut.

Kedatangan Islam di Andalusia
Benua Afrika, terutama Afrika utara merupakan daerah yang penting dalam kaitannya dengan Andalusia dan juga penyebaran Islam di Eropah. Ia merupakan pintu gerbang utama masuknya Islam ke wilayah yang selama berabad-abad lamanya di bawah kekuasaan Kristian dan menjadi benteng pertahanan Islam untuk ke wilayah Eropah.


Para sejawaran sepakat menyatakan bahawa kedatangan Islam ke Andalusia adalah di bawah pimpinan Tariq ibn Ziyad yang telah memimpin pasukan tentera menyeberangi lautan Gibralta menuju ke semenanjung Iberia itu. Pasukan Islam yang hanya berjumlah 7000 orang itu perlu berdepan dengan tentera Visigoth yang berkekuatan 100,000 tentera lengkap bersenjata. Lalu bagi meningkatkan semangat dikalangan pasukan Islam, dikatakan bahawa Tariq ibn Ziyad mengarahkan agar kapal mereka dibakar, dan beliau berpidato:

“Wahai saudara-saudaraku, lautan ada di belakang kalian, musuh ada di depan
kalian, ke manakah kalian akan lari? Demi Allah, yang kalian miliki hanyalah
kejujuran dan kesabaran. Ketahuilah bahawa di pulau ini kalian lebih terlantar
dari pada anak yatim yang ada di lingkungan orang-orang hina. Musuh kalian
telah menyambut dengan pasukan dan senjata mereka. Kekuatan mereka sangat
besar, sementara kalian tanpa perlindungan selain pedang-pedang kalian, tanpa
kekuatan selain dari barang-barang yang kalian rampas dari tangan musuh
kalian. Seandainya pada hari-hari ini kalian masih tetap sengsara seperti ini,
tanpa adanya perubahan yang berkesan, nescaya nama baik kalian akan hilang,
rasa gentar yang ada pada hati musuh akan berganti menjadi berani kepada
kalian. Oleh kerana itu, pertahankanlah jiwa kalian.”4

Kalimat terkenal ini dikobarkan oleh Tariq bagi menaikkan semangat pasukan tentera Islam dan akhirnya tercatat dalam sejarah penyebaran Islam ke Andalusia setelah tentera Visigoth tidak mampu melawan semangat jihad tentera Islam.

Ucapan ini walaubagaimanapun diragui oleh sesetengah pengkaji sejarah terutama hal yang melibatkan pembakaran kapal kerana faktor-faktor di bawah:

i. Ucapan beliau hanya dirakam oleh para sejarawan Timur sahaja seperti Ibn al-Athir, tetapi tidak dicatat oleh para sejarawan Andalusia atau sejarawan Afrika Utara yang dari sudut geografinya adalah hampir dengan Andalusia. Oleh kerana ia hanya disebut oleh sejarawan Timur, kemungkinan penambahan itu terhadap ucapan itu berlaku di dalam sejarah Islam.

ii. Disebabkan Tariq ibn Ziyad dari kalangan Barbar yang baru memeluk Islam, makaadalah tidak munasabah bagi beliau untuk memberi ucapan yang begitu tinggi dari sudut bahasa dan begitu utuh kefahamannya terhadap Islam.

iii. Serangan Andalusia tidak dibenarkan oleh Khalifah al-Walid yang khuatir dengankeselamatan tentera kerana masih belum dibuat kajian sebelum serangan itu dilakukan. Jadi kemungkinan untuk Tariq ibn Ziyad untuk membakar kapal itu adalah pada tahap paling minima.

iv. Usaha menakluk Andalusia pada peringkat pertama melalui jalan laut ini diusahakanoleh Tarif ibn Malik bersama kekuatan pasukan armada lautnya bagi merintis jalan ke arah penaklukan semenanjung Iberia itu. Kejayaan Tarif telah mendorong Musa ibn Nusair untuk menuju ke sana dan turut mengerahkan Tariq bergerak sama demi menakluk Andalusia. Oleh itu ada keraguan bagi Tariq untuk mengarahkan kapal dibakar kerana sepatutnya Tarif lebih layak untuk berbuat begitu.

Pidato beliau yang dilihat tidak mempunyai banyak pertikaian ialah bahagian yang tidakmenyentuh pembakaran kapal.5 Ini yang lebih hampir kepada ketepatan dan bagi mengelak berlebih-lebihan dalam mengungkap sejarah lampau serta menunjukkan etika yang baik dalam penyelidikan.

Ketika Andalusia di bawah pemerintahan Rom, mereka telah membawa masuk orang-orang Yahudi yang mengakibatkan berlaku ketegangan antara orang Yahudi dan Kristian dan mereka sering berebut menduduki takhta pemerintahan.6 Ini telah melemahkan kerajaan Andalusia sehingga memberi peluang untuk Islam menakluki rantau itu.7

Kemenangan tentera pimpinan Tariq bin Ziyad telah membuka ruang untuk pasukan Islam terus menguasai Andalusia sehingga Tariq dapat meneruskan penguasaan ke Cordova dan Toledo.8 Sejak dari itu, Islam mula tersebar luas ke seluruh Andalusia dan bermulalah penguasaan Bani Umaiyyah di Andalus. 

Khalifah Bani Umaiyyah yang berpusat di Damsyik telah mewakilkan Gabenor untuk mentadbir Andalus. Seramai 20 orang Gabenor telah mentadbir Andalus dari tahun 718 756M. Gabenor yang pertama ialah Abdul Aziz ibn Musa ibn Nusayr dan yang terakhir ialah Yusuf ibn Abdul Rahman al –Fihri.9 Sejak dari itu, kemenangan demi kemenangandapat dicapai oleh tentera Islam dalam usaha melebarkan kerajaan Islam dibumi Eropah termasuk Bandar Zaragoza, Leon dan beberapa buah bandar lain.10

Apa yang menarik untuk diperhatikan sejarah pemerintahan Andalusia ini ialah pemerintahannya kekal di bawah penguasaan kerajaan Bani Umayyah, walaupun kerajaan Bani Abbasiyyah telah mula bertapak dan berpusat di kota Baghdad bermula pada tahun132H / 750M. Ini bermaksud, walaupun kerajaan Islam yang memimpin majoriti umat Islam sudah beralih kepada Bani Abbasiyyah, namun Andalusia terus diungguli oleh para pemerintah dari kelompok Umayyah.

Secara tidak lansung, kecemerlangan yang dibina pada peringkat awal di Andalusia terus dapat dibangunkan walaupun ada pergolakan kepimpinan yang berlaku di peringkat pentadbiran pusat sehingga pemerintahan Umayyah beralih kepada pemerintah baru.Proses mempertahankan kedaulatan rantau Andalusia agar bebas dari cengkaman Abbasiyyah dikatakan berlaku pada tahun 138H / 756M selepas kira-kira 4 dekad ia dibuka oleh pasukan Islam.11

Secara umum, pemerintahan Islam di Andalusia dilihat sebagai satu pemerintahan yangmementingkan kecemerlangan ketamadunan dari sudut ilmu, sosial dan masyarakat.Sejarawan pada umumnya mengakui bahawa sebelum Islam membuka Andalus, masyarakat Kristian Eropah hidup di dalam kegelapan dan kejahilan.12 

Ini bermaksud, kedatangan dan era pemerintahan Islam di Andalusia telah melonjakkan tamadun Islam secara keseluruhannya sehingga ada yang menganggap ia lebih hebat dari tamadun Islam di Timur yang berada di bawah pemerintahan Bani Umayyah dan Abbasiyyah.


Peta perkembangan Islam di Semenanjung Iberia, Utara Afrika dan juga di Asia. 
Semenanjung Iberia ini juga terletaknya Portugis dan Sepanyol Islam yang terdiri daripada pelbagai bangsa Barber, Arab, Eropah dan sebagainya. Tidak mustahil Portugis yang sampai ke Semenanjung Melaka pada zaman sebelum kejatuhan Andalusia 1492 adalah pedagang Portugis Islam yang terdiri daripada pelbagai bangsa - (Peta inserted. The caption is mine dan bukan dari artikel yang asal)


Para pengkaji membahagikan tahap perkembangan Islam di Andalusia kepada beberapa tahap.
Antaranya ada yang membahagikan kepada: 13
1. Tahap penubuhan dan pembinaan
2. Tahap krisis dan pemberontakan
3. Tahap kegemilangan
4. Tahap kelemahan dan keruntuhan

Manakala dari aspek pemerintahan Islam di Andalusia pula, para pengkaji sejarah membahagikan
kepada tahap-tahap berikut:14
1. Zaman Pemerintahan Gabenor  Bani Umayyah Damsyik (711  756M)
2. Zaman Pemerintahan Bani Umayyah (756  1031M)
3. Zaman Pemerintahan Kerajaan Kecil ( hingga 1086M)
4. Zaman Penguasan Kerajaan Afrika Utara (1086  1143M)
5. Zaman Pemerintahan Bani Nasr (hingga 1429M) 




Perkembangan Islam terus menerus dari Tanah Arab ke Eropah, Nusantara dan juga China dari semenjak zaman Rasullullah s.a.w masih hidup 627 masehi sehinggalah ke zaman Umayah, Abbasiah dan Uthmaniah. 
Barat dan Timur itu bertemu di mulut selat Melaka di antara Acheh dan Semenanjung Melaka yang Gunung Jerai di Kedah menjadi panduan. Wilayah Islam Nusantara yang telah punya Undang-undang Islam semenjak tahun 222 Hijrah selari dengan zaman Andalusia dan Abbasiah. Ini belum lagi dipadankan dengan catatan pelayaran Armada Empayar China yang menyatakan dengan tepat nama tempat dan gelaran puak2 disepanjang pelayaran mereka. Lihat juga jalan pintas ke China merentas Semenanjung melalui Kedah-Champa-China (Peta inserted. The caption is mine dan bukan dari artikel yang asal)

Secara umum, pemerintahan Islam di Andalusia telah menjadi pemangkin kepada kejayaanEropah dalam membina tamadun mereka. Usaha-usaha yang dilakukan oleh para pemerintah Islam telah memberikan impak positif sehingga barat dapat membina tamadun mereka yang membanggakan pada hari ini.

Pada peringkat awal, pemerintah Islam berjaya untuk mengawal masyarakat Andalusia walaupun mereka mempunyai pelbagai latarbelakang. Ada dikalangan mereka berbangsa Arab, Yahudi, Barbar, Islam, Kristian dan lain-lain. 

Kecemerlangan dapat dicapai apabila masyarakat berbilang kaum ini dapat dijaga dengan sempurna. Namun, antara punca kejatuhan kerajaan Islam Andalusia juga turut disebabkan oleh kepelbagaian budaya ini yang merenggangkan sesama sendiri sehingga akhirnya kerajaan turut menjadi lemah.

Pemerintahan Islam digambarkan berjaya menjamin hak-hak asasi kaum lain sehingga mereka boleh membantu dalam usaha meniggikan tamadun. Antaranya dapat dibuktikan daripada kajian yang menyatakan bahawa: after five centuries of Muslim rule duirng which the Jewish community had been allowed to follow their practices practically unhampered  often with Jews being given high-ranking posts in the administration of the country, and especially after Abdul Rahman I had become the Amir of Andalus in 756  their numbers had increased considerably.15

Daripada gambaran ini, dapat difahami bahawa perpaduan antara kaum berasaskan jaminan terhadap hak-hak kaum minoriti sebenarnya boleh membantu mewujudkan kestabilan selagi mana ia tidak bertentangan dengan hasrat pemerintahan. Oleh sebab itu kita dapat menyaksikan tamadun Islam Andalusia menguasai dunia dan meniti dibibir umat dalam menghormati ketamadunan yang dibina.

Peringkat Kecemerlangan Islam di Andalusia
Kecemerlangan pemerintahan Islam di Andalusia boleh dikatakan berlaku pada zamanpemerintahan Bani Umayyah Andalusia, selepas mereka bertindak keluar dari penguasaanAbbasiyah terhadap wilayah Andalusia. Kejayaan ini berlaku pada zaman Abdul Rahman al- Dakhil yang mula mengukir nama di Andalusia pada tahun 138H / 756M. 

Zaman ini berterusan selama kira-kira 3 abad sehingga 422H / 1031M di mana pemimpinnya berjaya membentuk satu masyarakat yang dinamis dan harmonis dalam kepelbagaian latarbelakang penduduknya. Dalam hal ini, Ahmad Zaki mempertegaskan bahawa kecemerlangan di zaman pemerintahan Umayyah ini telah berlansung dalam dua peringkat pentadbiran yang penting iaitu pertama: era kepimpinan Umayyah yang memerintah tanpa campur tangan asing dan kedua: era pemerintahan Umayyah yang tidak dipengaruhi oleh kerajaan Abbasiyyah di Baghdad dari segi politik bersama semangat
rohnya.16


Melihat kepada zaman kecemerlangan ini, boleh dikatakan bahawa pentadbiran yang diberi kuasa mentadbir secara sendiri tanpa pengaruh anasir luar, boleh sebenarnya memacu kecemerlangan yang ingin dicapai.

Apabila pentadbiran itu tidak dicampur dengan urusan-urusan lain, maka mereka tidak akan disibukkan dengan pergolakan luaran yang berlaku. Lalu, tumpuan mereka adalah dalam kerangka mempertingkat daya dan usaha ke arah merealisasikan matlamat yangdigariskan. Oleh yang demikian, tidak hairanlah Andalusia itu muncul sebagai satu ketamadunan yang cukup membanggakan Timur dan Barat.

Bermula dengan era pemerintahan Abdul Rahman al-Dakhil jugalah telah memperlihatkanperkembangan pesat ketamadunan berlaku. Di zaman beliau, masjid Cordova17 telah dibina dan sekolah-sekolah telah didirikan di beberapa kota besar Andalusia. 

Hisyam pula merupakan orang yang mengungguli syariat Islam dan Hakam didapati banyak memberi sumbangan dalam melengkapkan aspek ketenteraan dari segi kelengkapan dan latihan yang sempurna untuk pasukan pertahanan ini.

Bermula pada zaman Abdul Rahman III yang dikenali juga dengan nama Abdul Rahman al-Nasir, pemerintahan di Andalusia mula menggunakan gelaran Khalifah, mungkin disebabkan oleh merekalah satu-satunya kerajaan yang meneruskan pemerintahan Bani Umayyah di kala Bani Abbasiyyah mula mengukir kuasa di Baghdad. 

Ada yang mengatakan bahawa pemakaian gelaran Khalifah itu berlaku kerana Abdul Rahman III melihat bahawa Kerajaan Bani Abbasiyyah mungkin akan runtuh disebabkan oleh pergolakan yang menyaksikan al-Mu’tadil dibunuh oleh pengawalnya sendiri. Gelaran Khalifah ini sudah tentu akan mengangkat martabat beliau kerana ia akan dianggap sebagai pemerintah bagi keseluruhan wilayah Islam.

Di atas semangat Abdul Rahman III inilah telah memperlihatkan kejayaan pemerintahan beliau dalam mendirikan pusat kecemerlangan ilmu, iaitu Universiti Cordova yang terus berdiri megah sehingga hari ini.

Namun begitu, seakan sudah menjadi lumrah bahawa di sana ada kitaran ketamadunan seperti yang dibicarakan oleh Ibn Khaldun. Kitaran ketamadunan itu menyebabkan kita berfikir bahawa segala apa yang berada dipuncak pasti akan melalui zaman menurun. 

Kitaran inilah yang turut melanda Andalusia sehingga kejayaan yang dibina semakin lama semakin menunjukkan ketidakmampuan untuk dipertahankan. Apa yang dimaksudkan ialah ketidakmampuan untuk mempertahankan penguasaan Islam di sana dari sudut politik pentadbiran, bukannya dari sudut kecemerlangan intelektual dan fizikal.

Kejatuhan Andalusia tidak berlaku sekelip mata, tetapi ia melalui proses yang panjang.Sayangnya, tiada dikalangan pemimpin umat Islam pada ketika itu yang berjayamempertahankan ketuanan Andalusia. Bibit-bibit kejatuhan itu bermula apabila pemerintahan Andalusia dijuzukkan kepada kerajaan-kerajaan kecil.

Kewujudan Kerajaan Kecil Andalusia Membawa Keruntuhan
Kerajaan-kerajaan kecil yang muncul di Andalusia terbentuk apabila kepimpinan utama mula lemah. Lebih tepat, ia rentetan daripada kelemahan pemimpin dikalangan Bani Umaiyyah yang menguasai Andalusia selepas daripada Khalifah al-Mustansar Billah (961 976M). Bermula dari itu, Andalusia yang diperintah oleh satu kerajaan, berpecah menjadi banyak daerah yang membentuk lebih daripada 20 kerajaan-kerajaan kecil. 

Pembentukan kerajaan-kerajaan kecil ini yang turut dikenali sebagai Muluk al-Tawa’if wujud disebabkan oleh antaranya semangat puak, iaitu untuk mengangkat kaum sendiri. Mereka seolah secara tidak lansung berpegang kepada semangat ke-bangsa-an dan seakan menjurus kepada perkauman sesama sendiri.

Fenomena ini berlaku setelah pucuk pimpinan di Cordova menghadapi masalah dalaman iaitu bergaduh dan bercakaran malah ada yang saling menindas untuk merebut kuasa khalifah. Secara tidak lansung, kerajaan  kerajaan kecil ini wujud pada dekad akhir pemerintahan Bani Umayyah di Andalusia, iaitu kira-kira sekitar tahun 403 H / 1012 M.

Namun bibit  bibit perpecahan awal telah pun wujud atau dapat dilihat 20 tahun lebih awal iaitu semasa Khalifah Hisham II memegang tampuk pemerintahan. Perpecahan adalah jelas ketara setelah Al-Mansur Ibn Abi Amir meninggal dunia pada tahun 392H/ 1002 M.18

Benteng Terakhir dan Kejatuhan Andalusia
Cordova yang masyhur di dalam Bahasa Arab sebagai al-Qurtubah merupakan bandar terakhir di bawah penguasaan Islam sebelum Andalusia jatuh sepenuhnya ke atas tangan golongan Kristian. Kedaifan dalam mempertahan pemerintahan Islam di Andalusia amat menyedihkan. Ia berlaku pada zaman pemerintahan terakhir Islam di bawah Bani al-Ahmar yang menguasai wilayah terakhir Andalusia iaitu Granada dari tahun 620  897H. Penyerahan wilayah terakhir ini terpaksa dilakukan demi menyelamat maruah pemerintah Islam di bawah pimpinan Abu Abdullah daripada diguling dengan lebih teruk.

Penyerahan dalam bentuk perjanjian yang ditandantangani oleh pihak Islam dan Kristian itu dilakukan dan penyerahannya kepada Raja Kristian Sepanyol iaitu Ferdinand dan Isabella. Perjanjian yang dikatakan mempunyai 67 perkara itu antara lain menjamin keselamatan orang Islam untuk tinggal di Sepanyol dan juga jaminan keselamatan sekiranya mereka ingin keluar dari Sepanyol menuju ke daerah lain, terutama untuk kembali ke daerah Afrika Utara.

Namun perjanjian yang tidak pernah ditunaikan oleh pihak Kristian itu nampaknya menjadi senjata yang menikam umat Islam terus menerus sehingga mereka tidak lagi mampu bertahan apatah lagi untuk merampas kembali Andalusia ini. Kesan-kesan peninggalan umat Islam, ketamadunan yang dibina dan seumpamanya telah banyak dimusnahkan.

Penulis ketika menjejaki kaki ke Andalusia seketika dahulu melihat sendiri bagaimana kota yang dibina oleh pemerintahan Islam kelihatan dihancurkan dan hampir tidak ditemui oleh para sejarawan dan ahli arkeologi. Dalam kes ini, lebih jelas jika dilihat bagaimana kota Madinah al- Zahra19 ditemui dalam keadaan yang sangat menyedihkan dengan runtuhan kota itu seolah tidak dapat untuk diselamatkan.

Walaupun kota ini dikhabarkan musnah akibat pergolakan dan peperangan saudara pada tahun 1010M, namun ia keunggulan kota ini terus malap apabila Andalusia jatuh ke tangan bukan Islam.

Ketika Bani Ahmar memerintah Andalusia, wilayah pemerintahan mereka sudah menguncup, tidak lagi sepertimana pada zaman kegemilangan pemerintahan Abdul Rahman III. Secara khusus, pemerintahan mereka hanya melibatkan wilayah Granada sahaja yang menjadi daerah terletaknya istana yang masyhur iaitu istana Al-Hamra’ atau dalam bahasa Sepanyol hari ini lebih dikenali sebagai al-Hambra.20

Oleh kerana berlaku perselisihan keluarga dalam hal mewarisi kepimpinan, akhirnya telahmenyebabkan pergolakan anak-beranak berlaku dan seterusnya melemahkan lagi pemerintahan Islam di Granada ini. Disebabkan Abu Abdullah tidak berpuas hati dengan pewarisan takhta yang ditunjukkan oleh bapanya, iaitu kepada saudaranya yang lain, lalu beliau memberontak sehingga dalam pemberontakan tersebut telah mengorbankan nyawa bapanya. Namun, takhta pemerintahan tidak menyebelahi Abu Abdullah, tetapi ia beralih kepada Muhammad ibn Sa’ad.

Lalu perancangan dibuat dalam bentuk kerjasama antara Raja Ferdinand dan Abu Abdullah untuk merampas kembali takhta pemerintahan. Rampasan itu berjaya, ringkasnya Abu Abdullah dapat menduduki takhta tetapi bagi jangkamasa yang pendek disebabkan tekanan dari Ferdinand untuk mendapatkan habuan.

Habuannya tidak lain tidak bukan ialah penyerahan wilayah Granada ini kepada beliau, lantas masyhurlah Ferdinand yang beristerikan Isabella sebagai raja yang berjayamenumbangkan kerajaan terakhir Islam di Andalusia. Kejatuhan Andalusia rupanya adalah kelemahan pemerintahan yang sanggup menggadai prinsip
mereka demi mendapat bantuan sokongan untuk menduduki takhta yang hanya buat sementara sahaja. Selain itu, ia turut disebabkan beberapa faktor, iaitu:

i. Usaha agresif puak Kristian untuk menakluk kembali wilayah yang ditadbir oleh kaum Muslimin sehingga menyebabkan pertahanan mereka terus rapuh dan tidak mampu bertahan atas serangan fikri dan askari yang dilakukan tentera musuh. Gerakan ini lebih dikenali sebagai Reconquista. Tidak dinafikan ia mempunyai kaitan dengan usaha pihak Kristian untuk menakluk wilayah yang telah jatuh ke tangan umat Islam di seluruh dunia di mana ia seolah turut terkesan dengan pergerakan tentera Salib yang menumpukanperhatian di wilayah umat Islam di Asia Barat.

ii. Ketiadaan sokongan dari pemerintah Islam di wilayah luar Andalus, melainkan sokongan yang sering diterima hanyalah dari Afrika Utara sahaja.

iii. Tiada mekanisma dalam mencari pengganti yang layak (succession plan) untuk meneruskan pemerintahan di mana kebanyakkan mereka mewariskan kepimpinan kepada anak beranak atau ahli keluarga.

iv. Tiada kesepakatan (wehdatul fikri dan wehdatul amal) dalam mentadbir wilayah yang dikuasai sehingga wujud perbezaan pemerintahan antara satu- wilayah dengan wilayah yang lain. Perbezaan fikrah yang wujud dikalangan mereka banyak membawa keruntuhan dan kurang usaha untuk bekerjasama dalam hal-hal yang disepakati.

Kesan daripada kejatuhan inilah umat Islam dihina dan dihalau keluar dari Andalusia. Ia turut terpalit kepada kaum Yahudi, di mana tiada kuasa yang boleh melindungi mereka setelah kerajaan Islam menjadi lemahseterunya runtuh. Kehinaan yang diterima sepertimana berdasarkan perintah yang dikeluarkan padatahun 1492M iaitu setiap orang Yahudi yang enggan dibaptis, mereka perlulah keluar dari Andalusia dalam tempoh 3 bulan.

Ia dikuti perintah yang dikeluarkan 10 tahun selepas itu kepada mereka yang tidak mahu dibaptiskan, iaitu perintah pada Februari 1502 di mana pihak Kristian mengusir golongan pendatang yakni orang Islam dari Seville dan sekitarnya.21

Jelas, kejatuhan pemerintahan yang berlaku bukan sekadar peralihan kuasa politik, tetapi ia turut memberi kesan kehinaan kepada umat Islam, malah ada di antara mereka yangdiperangi ketika sudah bersedia keluar dari Andalusia.

Iktibar Sejarah Andalusia: Teladan dan Sempadan
Jika diteliti dari sudut perkembangan dan kemajuan Islam di Andalusia, jelas menunjukkanbahawa pemerintahan Islam telah mementingkan kemajuan intelektual dan keilmuan di samping perkembangan industri dan pertanian.

Namun, disebabkan beberapa masalah dalaman yang berlaku, pemerintahan Islam akhirnya tidak dapat bertahan dan terpaksa menyerahkan penguasaan mereka selama hampir 8 abad itu kembali kepada Kristian.

Antara punca yang dilihat melemahkan umat Islam ketika itu dan boleh dijadikan iktibar kini ialah:

1. Perebutan kuasa dikalangan pemimpin yang mentadbir wilayah.
Ini dapat dilihat pada peringkat awal pemerintahan Andalusia di mana para pemimpin sering berselisih dalam hal ehwal pentadbiran. Gangguan dari dalam ini telah menyebabkan ketidakseimbangan berlaku. Di antara pergolakan itu berupa perselisihan di antara elite penguasa, terutama akibat perbezaan ras dan etnik. Disamping itu, terdapat perbezaan pandangan antara khalifah di Damsyik dan gabenor Afrika Utara yang berpusat di Kairawan.

Masing-masing mengaku bahawa merekalah yang paling berhak menguasai Andalusia ini. Oleh kerana itu, tidak hairanlah penggantian pemerintah atau wali (gabenor) berlaku lebih daripada dua puluh kali dalam jangka waktu yang amat singkat. Perbezaan pandangan politik itu menyebabkan seringnya terjadi perang saudara sesama mereka lalu merencatkan pembangunan tamadun umat di sana.

2. Tidak mempunyai sifat ketaatan kepada kepimpinan sehingga mereka tidak mahu mengikut nasihat khalifah. Akhirnya, anasir-anasir tidak puas hati itu membawa kepada perancangan untuk merampas kekuasaan dikalangan umat Islam, sedihnya dengan melibatkan kerjasama dengan pihak musuh.

3. wujudnya golongan yang ingin menghancurkan mereka dari dalam seperti golongan yang inginbekerjasama dengan musuh tanpa mengambil kira untuk memperkuatkan ikatan dalaman sesama mereka.

Manakala kejayaan mereka yang boleh dijadikan iktibar ialah:
1. Andalusia telah membuka ruang untuk memastikan supaya sekiranya kita ingin sentiasamaju kehadapan, kita harus bersikap terbuka kepada pemikiran-pemikiran kreatif dan idea-idea yang inovatif. Mereka telah mencapai kejayaan dari segi sains dan teknologi kerana menggalakkan suasana intelek dan tidak rigid dengan kemasukan ilmu-ilmu moden.

2. kecemerlangan Andalusia dalam bidang pertanian dan industri memungkinkan kita untuk mempertingkatkan kemajuan dalam bidang ini dengan bantuan teknologi maklumat, dan mengambil nikmat bioteknologi untuk dikembangkan dalam sektor ini agar pertaniantidak lagi dipandang enteng.

3. Lahirnya ilmuwan seperti Ibn Bajjah (1082  1138M), Ibn Zuhr (1091  1162M) dan lain-lain menuntut kita melahirkan cendikiawan Muslim yang versatile, mahir dari segi ilmu turath dan juga ilmu moden yang mampu untuk meninggalkan jejaknya yang tersendiri di dunia ini. Generasi ilmuwan moden ini harus dibina jati diri mantap agar memberi manfaat kepada pembangunan negara.

4. Ketamadunan yang dibina telah meninggikan Eropah yang pada waktu tersebut beradapada zaman kegelapan. Bandar Cordova di Andalusia dilihat sebagai Bandar yangterulung dikalangan Negara-negara Eropah yang lain dan mereka telah memajukanintelektualisme dari aspek falsafah, senibina, matematik, teologi, perubatan dan banyaklagi sehingga Islam gambarkan begitu kehadapan dalam soal ini. Mereka dapat me-asimilisasi-kan Islam dengan falsafah dan pusat kecemerlangan Greek sehingga iamenyumbang kepada keseluruhan negara Barat yang didominasi kaum Kristian.

5. Kejayaan mereka membina tamadun dalam keadaan mereka mempunyai kepelbagaianbangsa dan penganut agama samawi juga sesuatu yang unik. Sudah pasti ia ada kaitandengan kefahaman terhadap ajaran Islam yang dipraktikkan dalam bentuk siyasi. Rujukantentunya terhadap contoh-contoh awal yang ditunjukkan oleh Khalifah Islam dalammemberi dan menjamin hak asasi setiap penganut agama yang mana mereka boleh hidupaman damai di bawah pemerintahan Islam. Contoh-contoh jaminan ini terus dilaksanakansehingga ke wilayah pemerintahan Andalusia. Oleh sebab itu kita dapat menyaksikan sejarah di mana umat Islam, Kristian dan Yahudi saling membantu mewujudkan suasanakeilmuan yang baik terutama di Cordova. Ini kelihatan begitu relevan dengan negara kitasekarang yang mempunyai kepelbagaian latar bangsa dan penganut agama. Oleh itu, demi mencapai puncak kemajuan, kerjasama antara kaum ini harus diberi tumpuan yang wajar bagi meningkatkan kerjasama dan kefahaman dikalangan rakyat yang ada.

Penutup
Kecemerlangan Tamadun Islam Andalusia berakhir tanpa dapat dipertahankan oleh umat Islam.
Ia jatuh di bawah pemerintahan kerajaan Sepanyol dan kekal sehingga hari ini. Kesanpeninggalan itu masih boleh dibanggakan walaupun hakikatnya tiada apa yang dapat diperolehi oleh umat Islam hasil peninggalan tersebut. Kejatuhan Andalusia kelihatan tidak memungkinkan ia kembali ditadbir oleh umat Islam.

Pengalaman pahit ini harus dipelajari agar umat zaman kini tidak mengulangi kesilapan yang dilakukan pada ketika dahulu. Sejarah Andalusia itu sudah tidak dapat diperbaiki untuk manfaat wilayah itu, namun pastinya pengalaman atau pengajaran dapat diperolehi bagi manfaat generasi kini.

Walaubagaimanapun, kesediaan Eropah membuka kembali pintu pada abad moden ini danmemberi peluang kepada bangsa-bangsa lain berada di wilayah mereka telah sedikit sebanyak menyaksikan kemunculan kembali umat Islam di Eropah, termasuk di Andalusia.Pada hari ini, bilangan umat Islam di Andalusia semakin bertambah.22 Walaupun pihak bukan Islam sedaya supaya seakan ingin mentalqinkan terus umat Islam di barat, tetapi nampaknya Islam semakin mendapat tempat dihati masyarakat Eropah. 


Jelaslah maksud ayat al-Quran surah al-Saff bahawa:
”mereka yakni orang-orang kafir berusaha untuk memadamkan cahaya Allah swt, namun Allah swt terus menyempurnakan cahaya-Nya walaupun orang-orang kafir itu benci.”

Rakan-rakan Pembaca Budiman