Islam spread remarkably quickly before the era of
European colonialism. This column argues that an important economic factor in
determining the geographic range was spatial inequality that necessitated a
politically unifying force like Islam. Regions that harbored such economic
inequality were especially ripe for a system like Islam that offered
progressive re distributive tenets with centralized authority to enforce them.
Both the Arab Spring and the ongoing struggles in
Syria are giving a new shape to the Muslim world. The power of the state is
shifting from dictators to Islamic parties. Naturally, the international
community is following this transition closely. Will centralized religiously
based political forces succeed in bringing together the heterogeneous
population of the region? Will it put them on a path towards embracing adequate
political and economic reforms?
What’s
the impact of Islam on economics and politics?
Existing evidence regarding the impact of Islam on
political and economic indicators is controversial. Some studies identify a
negative relationship (cf. La Porta et al. 1997, Barro and McLeary 2003),
whereas others show a positive or insignificant association (cf. Pryor 2007,
Sala-i-Martin et al. 2004). Such correlations are interesting, but our
understanding of the Muslim world will remain limited unless we identify the
forces that gave rise to the adoption of Islam across as well as within
countries. Our recent research provides a first step towards that goal
(Michalopoulos, Naghavi and Prarolo 2012).
The
role of 'geographic inequality' and trade in the adoption of Islam
Prominent Islamic historians and scholars (e.g. Ibn
Khaldun 1377, Lapidus 2002, Berkey 2003, Lewis 1993) whose research focuses on
where Islam was adopted emphasize the historical role of trade routes. Whether
Islam was adopted can also be explained in part by geography. Building on this
work, we provide a systematic exploration of the geographic factors that help
explain its adherence within as well as across countries.
Geographical
inequality
Our empirical investigation establishes that
‘geographic inequality’, meaning inequality in regional suitability for
agriculture, is a fundamental determinant of contemporary Muslim adherence. It
also shows that distance from pre-Islamic trade routes has a lingering effect
on the contemporary distribution of Muslims with communities closer to
preindustrial trade routes featuring a larger fraction of Muslim adherents.
These findings provide a justification to the growing empirical literature that
treats Muslim representation as predetermined with respect to contemporary
economic and political indicators.
To conduct the empirical investigation we construct
new data on:
- The
regional suitability for farming.
- The
pre-Islamic and pre-industrial trade routes in the Old World.
Combining these sources with information on Muslim
adherence, we establish the following empirical regularities:
- First,
countries with unequal endowments of regional agricultural potential and
those located closer to pre-Islamic trade routes have higher Muslim
representation, as shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3.
- Second, we focus on ethnic groups. Exploiting intra-country variation mitigates concerns related to the endogeneity of contemporary political boundaries
Figure 3. Major trade routes in the Old World AD 600-AD 1800
The modern state's religious affiliation is, arguably, differentially affected by such things as state sponsorship of religion. As such, it is crucial to account for these state-specific histories. Unlike a cross-country setting, this is feasible with an 'intra-country-across-ethnic-groups' analysis. We can show, for instance, that ethnicities whose traditional homelands are characterised by unequal land endowments located closer to historical trade routes have higher Muslim adherence.
The modern state's religious affiliation is, arguably, differentially affected by such things as state sponsorship of religion. As such, it is crucial to account for these state-specific histories. Unlike a cross-country setting, this is feasible with an 'intra-country-across-ethnic-groups' analysis. We can show, for instance, that ethnicities whose traditional homelands are characterised by unequal land endowments located closer to historical trade routes have higher Muslim adherence.
From
'geographic inequality' to economic equality
We start with the observation that, on the one hand,
Islam surfaced in the Arabian Peninsula under conditions featuring an extremely
unequal land quality distribution across regions. And, on the other hand, Islam
surfaced in areas close to lucrative trade routes. As a result, when dwellers
from the oases were attempting to cross the surrounding vast arid lands in
pursuit of trade profits, they were facing threats to their livelihoods from
nomadic groups. These encounters had the potential to bring trade flows to a
halt, setting the stage for the emergence of a centralising force that featured
redistributive rules. We argue that Islam was such a centralising force and
that, accordingly, its economic tenets had to address inherent economic
inequities across clans. This resulted in an economic doctrine that promoted
poverty alleviation and redistribution, equitable inheritance rules and
anti-usury laws.
The
rise of Islamic economic principles
The conjecture that Islamic economic principles arose
from the interplay between geographic inequality and trade opportunities
generates an auxiliary prediction. Namely, the intensity of the adoption of
Islam within unequally endowed groups should depend on their proximity to trade
routes. This prediction is borne out by the data. In the empirical analysis,
the interaction of ‘distance to trade routes’ and ‘geographic inequality’
enters with a negative and significant coefficient. This finding fits the narratives
of Greif (2006), Insoll (2003) and Lewis (1993), who describe how a combination
of highly developed Islamic legal codes with a single source of authority
offered adherents and prospective adherents a strong commitment device. This
commitment device was well suited to handle desert issues across communities
who were engaged in trade but lacked the concentrated authority that was
necessary to effectively impose duties or inflict penalties across
heterogeneous groups.
Are
Muslim groups really different? Evidence from African ethnicities
In an effort to explore whether Muslim groups have
distinct societal and economic arrangements from non-Muslim groups, we turned
to Murdock’s Ethnographic Atlas (1967), which codes
pre-colonial cultural, societal and economic characteristics of 522 African
ethnicities.
Similar to the pattern found for all groups in the Old
World, African Muslim groups reside on geographically unequal territories that
are close to pre-industrial trade routes. Our findings are consistent with the
argument that geographic inequality dictates a specific subsistence pattern; we
find that Muslim societies in Africa are characterised by a distribution of
productive activities that are skewed towards pastoralism, that is, featuring
little surplus-producing agriculture. Moreover, unlike non-Muslim groups for
which the association between geographic and social inequality is strong, the
tendency of an unequal geography to create social inequality within a group is
muted for Muslim-majority ethnicities.
Islamic
redistributive principles
But what economic traits characterise Muslim
communities? Islamic doctrine prescribes an array of redistributive economic
principles. Unfortunately, data on the extent of charity or usury laws within a
group are not available. However, evidence does exists on types of pre-colonial
inheritance systems, key aspects of Islamic economic principles (Kuran 2003,
2004). This evidence suggests that groups whose majority adheres to Islam are
34% and 24% more likely to have equal inheritance rules regarding movable and
land property, respectively.
Islamic scholars such as Lapidus (2002) have suggested
that nascent Islam aimed at creating a strong sense of community by imposing
informal and formal punishments on its adherents, such as those related to ridda (apostasy).
In this way, Islam effectively acted as a state-building force. It offered a
means by which tribes could be unified through a common identity under one god
that transcended clan and class divisions (Stearns et al., 2010). Is this facet
of Islam evident in the anthropological record?
Fortunately, among the pre-colonial traits recorded by
Murdock (1967) there is an entry describing whether a group believes or not in
gods that are supportive of human morality. Anthropologists and evolutionary
biologists have argued that the belief in moralising gods – gods who tell
people what they should or should not do – was necessary to keep societies
together by condemning infringements on other group members. Similarly, we argue
that the presence of an unequal geography and proximity to trade opportunities
intensified the need for cooperation among heterogeneous clans. Such
cooperation could be achieved by adopting a religion which, besides the
appropriate economic rules, would provide a coordination mechanism that
penalised those who deviate from prescribed norms. With this in mind, it is not
surprising to find that a 50% increase in Muslim adherence within a group
increases the likelihood that a group believes in gods that dictate what should
or should not be done by 40%. If anything, Christian and ethnoreligious groups
are less likely to have harboured beliefs in a moralising god in the
pre-colonial period.
The narrative suggests that Islam attempted to bring
together heterogeneous tribal societies by appropriately crafting its economic
principles. But was it successful in doing so? Is there evidence to suggest
that Muslim groups are more politically centralised than non-Muslim groups?
Muslim societies certainly have more levels of jurisdictional hierarchy
enveloping their underlying communities. This pattern also suggests that Islam
was a state-building force, gaining a hearing across tribal populations,
thereby politically integrating them into more centralised units.
Conclusions
Our findings show that Islam flourished in very
challenging geographical terrains. These terrains harboured inherently unequal
economic opportunities and bred conflict. Any political platform that attempted
to bring clashing populations together had to address these primordial
inequities. Islam was certainly such a movement, and its spread is a prime
example of how geography shapes a society’s institutional and societal
arrangements.
References
Barro, R and R M McCleary (2003), “Religion and
Economic Growth Across Countries,” American Sociological Review,
68(1).
Berkey, J P (2003), The Formation of Islam:
Religion and Society in the Near East, 600-1800, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press.
Greif, A (2006), Institutions and the Path to
Modern Economy: Lessons from Medieval Trade, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press.
Insoll, T (2003), The Archaeology of Islam in
Sub-Saharan Africa, Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press.
Khaldun. I (1377), Muqaddimah: An Introduction
to History, translated by Franz Rosenthal (1967), Princeton, NJ, Princeton
University Press.
Kuran, T (2003), “The Islamic Commercial Crisis:
Institutional Roots of Economic Underdevelopment in the Middle East”, Journal
of Economic History, 63, 414—446.
Kuran, T (2004), Islam and Mammon: The
Economic Predicaments of Islamism. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Lapidus, I M (2002), A History of Islamic
Societies, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
La Porta R, F L de Silanes, A Shleifer, and R Vishny
(1997), “Legal Determinants of External Finance”, Journal of Finance,
52(3), 1131—1150.
Lewis, B (1993), The Arabs in History, 6th
Edition. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Michalopoulos S, A. Naghavi, and G Prarolo (2012),
“Trade and Geography in the Origins and Spread of Islam”, NBER Working Paper,
18348.
Murdock, G. P. (1967), Ethnographic Atlas,
Pittsburgh, PA, University of Pittsburgh Press.
Pryor, F L (2007), “The Economic Impact of Islam on
Developing Countries”, World Development, 35(11), 1815—1835.
Stearns P N, M Adas, S B Schwarz and M J Gilbert
(2010), World Civilizations: The Global Experience, 6th Edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall.
No comments:
Post a Comment