Journal of history of Iran)

Document Type : review paper


Ibn khaldun’s introduction is undoubtedly replete with profound ideas and innovative and ingenious outlooks. Howeve,r the attitudes and insights of those Moslems preceding him have been given due heed in his analyses because Ibn khaldun’s Mogadammeh (Introduction) relied on facts. As a case in point, Ibn khaldun has praised Masoudi quite extensively in this Mogadammeh, so far as to refer to his own work. As successive to and hence inspired by Masoudi’s. Nonetheless, the question is why Ibn khaldun has mentioned Masoudi, among other Moslem historians, as his quintessential model, and which of Masoudi’s intellectual and professional attributes has given rise to his being chosen as a model by Ibn khaldun. On the other hand, in some other case, Ibn khaldun has severely criticized and even refuted Masoudi’s orientation. All in all, it might be said that it was the structure of Morouj-o-al-zahab and praticulaurly Masoudi’s journies and its geographical discussion- which by themselves had formed the foundation of his historical argumentationthat gave rise to Ibn khaldun’s infatuation by Masoudi. Ibn khaldun’s criticism of Masoudi, however, regards those issues that are thought to be beyond his knowledge of ‛omran.’ Apart from these two opposing views toward different Masoudi analytical approaches are taken toward the similar issues attended to by both authors. This difference of orientation is owing to the intricate composition of the Mogadammeh and Morouj-o-al-zahab, as well as the contrast in their attitudes