Moral Judgement as a Method in Historiography: An Analysis of al-Biruni’s al-Athar al-Baqiyah ‘an al-Qurun al-Khaliyah

Mohammad Umair Abd Rahim,Mohd Syahmir Alias

doi:10.21315/kajh2021.28.1.6

Mohammad Umair Abd Rahim, Mohd Syahmir Alias

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.21315/kajh2021.28.1.6

Copy DOI

Abstract

The practice of moral judgement in historiography is a topic in critical philosophy of history. In general, there are two opinions on the practice of moral judgement in history: firstly, those who are against it, such as Croce, Bloch and Butterfield; secondly, those who are in support of it, such as Lord Acton, Ibn Khaldun and al-Biruni. Understanding the practice is crucial in facilitating “intellectual serenity” among historians in deciding on their research method. This article discusses al-Biruni’s position and epistemic justification on the issue of moral judgement in research in history. The analysis of al-Biruni’s perspective, based on his book, al-Athar al-Baqiyah ‘an al-Qurun al-Khaliyah, shows that his epistemic justification on moral judgement in history was influenced by his religious tradition.

Highlights

Moral judgement in historiography is a topic in critical philosophy of history (Tucker 2009, 3–4; Vann 2004, 3)
This study identified three main forms of moral judgement used by al-Biruni in his work: 1. Personal moral judgement in describing actor/s in the history being studied
Analysing the way al-Biruni gave moral judgements in al-Athar al-Baqiyah, it shows that the discussion of “should or should not historians make moral judgement in history” is not as simple as it sounds

Summary

Introduction

Moral judgement in historiography is a topic in critical philosophy of history (i.e. philosophy of historiography) (Tucker 2009, 3–4; Vann 2004, 3). According to Vann (2004, 4), moral judgement in history is the expression of evaluation on morals of men in the past. In the language of praise or blame. Oldfield (1981, 260) on the other hand describes it as statements that “typically made in language that praises or blames” and “the. Any historical descriptions that attempt to expose the moral quality or value of any person, institution or party are moral judgements in history. Whenever a historian described historical agent/s with the notion of being better or worse, right, or wrong, it is moral judgement in history (Berkhofer 1995, 142–143; Hooker 2017, 98)

Objectives

Findings

Conclusion