Marxism Research Network
Unofficial English Translation

Liang Xiao: A Historical Investigation into the Laws of Civilizational Exchange, Mutual Learning, and Development—Based on a Critique of the Eurocentric Unilinear View of History

General Research

General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: "Civilizations become more colorful through exchange and richer through mutual learning. No matter which country or ethnic group's social soil a civilization originates from, it is fluid and open. This is an important law of the dissemination and development of civilizations." [1] The concept of civilization in the New Era holds that all world civilizations are the crystallization of human labor and wisdom, emphasizes that civilizations are diverse and equal, and posits that exchange and mutual learning constitute the law of civilizational development. This important theoretical innovation serves not only as the fundamental compliance for the construction of Chinese civilization and civilizational interaction in the New Era, but also as the guiding principle for correctly understanding the history of world civilizational development. Using the New Era concept of civilization as a guide to investigate the roles, conditions, and manifestations of the law of civilizational exchange and mutual learning in promoting the development of world civilizations—while breaking down certain deep-rooted erroneous ideas and further advancing our understanding of the history of human civilization—is an important academic task. Since the period of "Western Learning Spreading to the East" [2], Western philosophy and social sciences have been an important avenue for us to understand the world and to learn from and borrow the historical experience of Western modernization. However, the Eurocentric unilinear historical view permeated within Western philosophy and social sciences has also been unconsciously accepted by many. The Eurocentric unilinear historical view describes European historical development as an independent, internally connected, and inevitable process; it posits that this historical process is the center of world history, independently creating and leading human history. The Eurocentric unilinear historical view is a major intellectual root of the trend of thought known as historical nihilism [3]. Starting from the law of civilizational exchange and mutual learning, this article attempts to critique the erroneous concepts of the Eurocentric unilinear historical view that ignore such exchange, and to investigate the factors of civilizational exchange and mutual learning within the development of European civilization, as well as their important historical roles.

I. Fundamental Characteristics of Civilization and the Law of Development through Exchange and Mutual Learning

The concept of civilization in the modern sense is linked to ideas of human development and progress; civilization is a category used to measure the state and historical process of human material and spiritual progress. Within the theoretical horizon of Marxism, the concept of civilization is used to refer to the positive material and spiritual wealth created by human activity. Marx and Engels did not specifically expound upon a "law of civilizational exchange and mutual learning." However, their thought contains highly original ideas regarding civilizational interaction. In The German Ideology, Marx and Engels identified material production as the decisive force in human history, arguing that productive forces determine both the internal intercourse within a nation and the intercourse between nations; simultaneously, intercourse profoundly influences a nation’s development. Marx and Engels noted: "The whole internal structure of this nation itself depends on the stage of development reached by its production and its internal and external intercourse" [4]. In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels pointed out that under the impact of capitalist industrial civilization, the regionalism and isolation of material and spiritual production in traditional agricultural civilizations were shattered, and the mutual intercourse and interdependence between civilizations and nations were continuously strengthened. In his later years, while reflecting on Russia’s path of development in the drafts of his letter to Vera Zasulich, Marx proposed that Russia could achieve a "leapfrog" development of its social formation by drawing on advanced civilizations. Marx pointed out that because the Russian rural commune existed simultaneously with capitalist production, "it is thus able to appropriate all its positive achievements without undergoing its frightful vicissitudes" [5]. Guided by the Marxist historical materialist view and based on the practical requirements of coordinating the "two overarching situations" [6], the New Era concept of civilization integrates the concept of "valuing harmony and cooperation" (shang hehe) [7] from fine traditional Chinese culture. It proposes that all world civilizations embody the crystallization of human labor and wisdom. Through exchange and mutual learning, these forms of human wisdom corroborate, stimulate, and supplement one another, converging into a grander stream of human wisdom that is continuously inherited and developed.

  1. Civilization is the crystallization of human labor and wisdom General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: "Various civilizations created by humanity are the crystallization of labor and wisdom." [8] In order to survive and develop, humans must continuously engage in social practice, transform nature, transform society, and create material and spiritual wealth, thereby forming the historical process of human civilization. Fundamentally, human social practice involves humans, society, nature, and the relationships between the three. In social practice, humans continuously understand and transform nature, understand and transform society, and understand themselves to improve their spiritual selves. The understanding and transformation of nature form natural science and technology. The understanding of the relationship between the self and the individual (human development), the relationship between individuals (social development), and the relationship between humans and nature (the harmonious development of humanity and nature) forms a certain world-view, historical outlook, and outlook on life, creating a cognitive system of truth, goodness, and beauty. These embody humanity's profound understanding of the external world and the self, as well as their spiritual orientation; they are the crystallization of human wisdom and the core of social spiritual wealth (culture in the narrow sense). This spiritual wealth is, in turn, transformed into material wealth through labor.

  2. Civilization is colorful The historical process of human civilization’s development is formed by the convergence of civilizations created by different nations. "Every civilization is rooted in its own soil of survival, embodies the extraordinary wisdom and spiritual pursuit of a country and a nation, and possesses its own value of existence." [9] Every country and nation, facing different natural environmental challenges and different social problems, will propose its own responses based on its own conditions and historical heritage. These form social practices with their own characteristics. On the basis of these practices, nations continuously deepen and perfect their understanding, forming unique world-views, historical outlooks, and outlooks on life—as well as understandings of truth, goodness, and beauty—thereby forming civilizations with distinct characteristics and civilizational identities. Therefore, in this regard, every civilization is unique.

  3. Civilization is equal General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: "In terms of value, all human civilizations are equal; each has its strengths and its shortcomings. No civilization in the world is perfect, nor is any civilization devoid of merit. Civilizations do not differ in terms of high or low, superior or inferior." [10] Regarding civilizational development, differences in level do exist—for example, in the understanding of natural laws, the level of science and technology, or the depth of aesthetics. However, from the broad perspective of the development of human civilization, the diverse origins, development, and mutual borrowing of civilizations drive the progress of humanity. In this historical process, every civilization is a unique product of its environment and socio-historical conditions; each is a crystallization of the wisdom of the laboring people and possesses irreplaceable value. In the process of development through civilizational exchange and mutual learning—whether ancient or modern, and whether Asian, European, African, or American—all contribute their wisdom and play their respective roles in the process of human civilizational development, possessing irreplaceable value.

  4. Civilization is inherited and developed through exchange and mutual learning General Secretary Xi Jinping has pointed out: "History tells us that only through exchange and mutual learning can a civilization be full of vitality." [11] Human civilization carries universal values and orientations, namely human development, social development, and the coordinated development of humans and nature. For a civilization to develop, it must not only inherit the wisdom of its own country and nation but also learn from the wisdom of other countries and nations. Because different countries and nations have different natural geographical conditions and socio-historical conditions, their angles of understanding humans, nature, and society differ, and the wisdom condensed in their civilizations will have different features. This diversity creates complementarity between civilizations. By drawing on the wisdom accumulated in other civilizations to supplement one’s own deficiencies, a civilization can rapidly "expand the capacity" of its wisdom, achieving leapfrog development. General Secretary Xi Jinping noted: "Chinese civilization is a civilization produced on the land of China, but it is also a civilization formed through continuous exchange and mutual learning with other civilizations." [12] Civilizational exchanges between China, the Western Regions [13], and South Asia around the start of the Common Era; the exchange between Chinese civilization and various national civilizations during the Tang Dynasty; the civilizational exchanges between Zheng He’s seven naval expeditions and the peoples along his routes during the Ming Dynasty; and the dissemination of European astronomy, medicine, mathematics, geometry, and geography in China during the late Ming and early Qing dynasties—all these greatly promoted the inheritance, development, and innovation of Chinese civilization. Similarly, the same is true for Western civilization. "China's four great inventions—papermaking, gunpowder, printing, and the compass—brought about changes in the world and promoted the European Renaissance. Chinese philosophy, literature, medicine, silk, porcelain, and tea spread to the West and permeated the daily lives of Western people." [14]

II. Main Tenets of the Eurocentric Unilinear Historical View

The Eurocentric unilinear historical view is a view of history that formed alongside the rise of Western hegemony. Eurocentrism "regards Europe as the sole active agent of world history, a 'fountainhead' of sorts. Europe issues orders, and the rest of the world obeys. Europe is active; elsewhere is passive. Europe creates history; other places had no history before contact with Europe. Europe is the center; elsewhere is the periphery. Only Europeans can lead reform and modernization; people elsewhere cannot." [15] The Eurocentric unilinear historical view depicts for us a certain historical picture: the Aegean Sea gave birth to Ancient Greek civilization. In the 5th and 6th centuries BCE, Ancient Greek civilization bloomed with a radiance that illuminated the world, creating democracy, freedom, rationality, and art. "Ancient Greece produced Rome, Rome produced Christian Europe, Christian Europe produced the Renaissance, the Renaissance produced the Enlightenment, and the Enlightenment produced democratic politics and the Industrial Revolution. Industry met democratic politics to produce the United States, embodying the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." [16] This is a historical picture with which many are familiar [17]. Eurocentrism holds that this unilinear historical development process of Europe possesses universal world-historical significance; it is the center of world history, creating and leading human history. Since the mid-20th century, Eurocentrism (the unilinear historical view) has been questioned and critiqued [18]. However, it still permeates Western philosophy and social sciences in various forms.

The Eurocentric unilinear historical view contains the following four basic tenets:

  1. The European unilinear historical development process possesses internal continuity and inevitability Eurocentrism holds that the history of the development of Western civilization is the history of the development of the human spirit. Ancient Greece is the true origin of European civilization. From there, the human spirit has continuously developed and enriched itself. Europe’s unilinear historical process possesses internal continuity and inevitability. Hegel’s philosophy of history is the most representative intellectual expression of the internal continuity of European civilization. Hegel believed that history is the history of the Absolute Spirit. The Absolute Spirit externalizes itself, unfolding logically within time, continuously manifesting its own richness, recognizing itself, and achieving identity with itself. This history moves from the "East" toward the "West." Various nations represent different stages of the development of the "Absolute Spirit": the East is the childhood of world history, Ancient Greece is its youth, Rome is its manhood, and the Germanic world is its old age—the stage of maturity and perfection. This history is essentially the history of humanity achieving freedom through reason. "The East knew and to the present day knows only that One is Free; the Greek and Roman world, that some are free; the German World knows that all are free. The first political form therefore which we observe in History, is Despotism, the second is Democracy and Aristocracy, the third is Monarchy." [19] The historical process of Europe possesses an internal logic. As the starting point of European civilization, the fundamental elements of European civilization, such as freedom, democracy, and reason, were already generated in Ancient Greece. The historical process of Europe is the process of the unfolding of the potential of these civilizational characteristics.

...there is an inherent continuity and necessity. Hegel stated: "In the case of the Greeks, we immediately feel as though we are at home, for we have arrived at the realm of the 'Spirit'." [35]

2. Europe is the center of world history The French thinker Condorcet, the German philosopher Hegel, and the German historian Ranke are prominent representatives of this view. Condorcet’s Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Spirit is a representative work of the historical philosophy of the Enlightenment. Using representative events in cultural development as markers, Condorcet described ten eras of human spiritual progress in the form of a linear history. After traversing the three eras of tribalism, pastoralism, and agriculture, humanity entered the fourth era: the Ancient Greek period. From this point forward, the major events of human spiritual progress—such as the classification of science, scientific advancement, the revival of knowledge during the Crusades, the Renaissance of science, the invention of printing, the emergence of scientific methods represented by Descartes and Locke, and the rise of the Enlightenment—all occurred in Europe. Hegel argued that the Mediterranean connects Europe, Asia, and Africa; it is the heart of the world and the condition for its existence. The Mediterranean endows the world with life. "Without the Mediterranean, 'world history' would be inconceivable." [36] Only by connecting with the Mediterranean can one participate in world history. Europe is the primary stage for the development of the "Absolute Spirit" and the place where history attains its end. Ranke was a historian with significant influence in both Europe and the world. His conception of history differed widely from Enlightenment thought, and his positivist historical research method differed widely from Hegel’s method of starting from theories or concepts. Yet, he was equally a Eurocentrist, and his concept of universal history exerted a major influence on historiography. However, "the core of Ranke’s world history is European history... in his plan for writing a universal history, Ranke excluded all cultures that the West had not inherited." [37]

3. European civilization possesses incomparable superiority and creates human history Eurocentrism holds that European civilization possesses immense creativity, constantly innovates, and perpetually opens new chapters of history. "Most of the truly important historical events—that is, 'history-making events'—have occurred in Europe or were triggered by stimuli from Europe (with 'Europe' still referring to 'Greater Europe')." [38] The American scholar J.M. Blaut listed a series of such propositions in chronological order, including: the Middle East (or the Christian Holy Land) invented agriculture, and humanity began sedentary life; the earliest principalities, cities, organized religions, writing systems, and division of labor appeared in the Middle East; iron smelting was invented in the Middle East or Eastern Europe, and the "Iron Age" first appeared in Europe; monotheism first appeared in the Middle East; democratic systems first appeared in Ancient Greece; most pure sciences, such as mathematics, physics, history, and geography, appeared in Ancient Greece; the Roman Empire was the first great empire, featuring a bureaucratic apparatus and a legal system; feudalism, as another major advance in human social formation, developed in Europe; Europeans invented a series of technologies during the Middle Ages that made them superior to non-Europeans; Europeans invented the modern state; Europeans invented capitalism; Europeans were particularly endowed with an "adventurous spirit" and were great explorers; Europeans invented industry and created the industrial revolution... [39]. Some of these views have been abandoned, while others have become historical "common sense." In the eyes of Eurocentrism, the unilinear historical process of Europe possesses universal significance. Since Eurocentrism cannot completely deny the contributions of other civilizations, it treats them as a "prologue" to European civilization. Eurocentrism asserts that the creativity of European civilization stems from certain inherent traits, which constitute its superiority. Christianity, climate, geographical environment, trade, democracy, rationality, and race have all been sequentially viewed as these defining characteristics. These traits are often derived by comparison with an imagined "Orient." Among these theories, the theory of Oriental Despotism—"Western (European) liberty versus Eastern (Asian) despotism"—is a representative example.

4. European civilization leads human history In the Eurocentric view, European civilization is eternally advanced and perpetually progressing. The world's other civilizations are backward and stagnant. European civilization is the center of the world, while other civilizations are the periphery. The center leads, and the periphery lags; the center innovates, while the periphery imitates the center. European civilization creates human history and must necessarily lead it. European civilization continuously spreads "civilization" to the backward periphery, like light illuminating dark regions. Within the Eurocentric horizon, as the leader of human history, Europe’s unilinear historical development process is universal; other parts of the world must repeat Europe’s historical process and "should" repeat it. Consequently, Eurocentrism also manifests as the "mission" of European civilization: when other peoples were still mired in "barbarism" or "stagnation," Europe bore the "right and obligation to 'civilize' the 'uncivilized,' the so-called 'White Man’s Burden' or 'Civilization’s Burden'." [40]

III. The Crucial Historical Role of Civilizational Exchange and Mutual Learning: A Critique of the Main Views of the Eurocentric Unilinear View of History

All civilizations of the world have accumulated human wisdom. Through civilizational exchange and mutual learning, this collective wisdom is brought together to drive the continuous forward development of human civilization. The error of the Eurocentric unilinear view of history lies in its disregard for the creativity of other peoples and the diversity of civilizations. It intentionally or unintentionally ignores the significant role that exchange and mutual learning between civilizations played in promoting the development of European civilization. It attributes the major achievements produced by the convergence of human wisdom to Europe alone, constructing a history of European civilization as something that independently created and led human history [41]. Below, starting from a critique of the errors in the main Eurocentric arguments, this article will reveal the important historical role of civilizational exchange and mutual learning in the development of European civilization.

1. Diverse civilizations each contribute wisdom to humanity; European civilization is but one of them Civilizational development is not unilinear but multilinear; many civilizations have achieved brilliant success. For the vast majority of time, Europe was not the center of world history. The culture of Ancient Greece was magnificent, yet it cannot be called the sole center of ancient civilization. During the same period, the civilizational development of China and India was equally striking. It is for this reason that Karl Jaspers’ theory of the "Axial Age" has gained wide recognition. Philosophy and science are important representatives of Ancient Greek civilization. However, "in terms of philosophy, to say that Ancient Greek philosophy was more advanced than the various schools of the Hundred Schools of Thought [20] in China or the Buddhist Indian philosophical thought—which developed against a background of highly advanced thinking—is difficult to accept for anyone familiar with the latter two." [42] While Greek geometry was ahead of China and India, "Greek arithmetic and algebra lagged far behind their Indian and Chinese contemporaries." [43] From the perspective of modern medicine, comparing the theory of the wuzang liufu [21] and the four diagnostic methods advocated by Bian Que [22] with the contemporary humoral theory of Hippocrates, Bian Que’s theory was more advanced. The Roman Empire exerted a profound influence on the Mediterranean region. Simultaneously, China’s Han Dynasty was equally powerful. Given the transportation conditions of the time, its influence radiated throughout East Asia, South Asia, and West Asia, exerting a major impact on the development of world history. After the Western Roman Empire fell to the barbarians, from the 5th to the 15th centuries AD, the world’s civilizations developed along diverse paths. The Byzantine Empire (the Eastern Roman Empire) continued the legacy of Rome and maintained immense influence in the Eastern Mediterranean. The 8th to 10th centuries marked the peak of the Byzantine Empire, with highly developed culture, education, and art. Chinese civilization continued to develop: the Tang Dynasty reached a pinnacle of national strength, and the Song Dynasty saw economic and cultural prosperity. In West Asia, the Arab Empire rose, forming an empire spanning Europe, Asia, and Africa. It once occupied the Iberian Peninsula and Sicily, with its influence radiating across more than half of the Mediterranean, possessing great strength and flourishing culture. In sharp contrast to the civilizations above, during this period, Latin Christian Europe was in the "Dark Middle Ages." On the map of Eurasia, from a geographical, economic, political, and cultural perspective, the Latin Christian region of Western Europe was a remote and desolate "corner" of a large peninsula in the west of the Eurasian landmass. In the 11th century AD, Sa'id al-Andalusi, a Muslim scholar in Spain, introduced various peoples who had made major historical contributions to civilization in a work on nations. He regarded Latin Christian Europe as northern barbarians, stating that "these peoples did not apply themselves to the sciences; they are more like beasts than humans." [44] This author’s description undoubtedly bears clear "Arab-centrism." However, one can still see the degree of Western Europe's backwardness at that time through the author's evaluation.

2. The vitality and creativity of European civilization stem from civilizational exchange and mutual learning, not just elective civilizational traits Innovation and creation in civilization are not mysterious. Civilization is the crystallization of a people's labor and wisdom. When a people inherits the wisdom of their ancestors and learns from the wisdom of other peoples, applying this wisdom to face new challenges, proposing new ideas and methods in new social practices, and forming new understandings and concepts to push this wisdom a step further—that is innovation and creation. Therefore, without the accumulation and inheritance of a nation's own wisdom, and without the collection and absorption of wisdom from other nations, brilliant civilizational achievements would be impossible. Eurocentrism treats Ancient Greece as the origin of European civilization and regards Greek civilization as "original." However, Ancient Greek civilization did not develop in isolation; it was the product of civilizational exchange, mutual learning, and inherited development. The belief that Ancient Greece originated solely from itself was a 19th-century European intellectual product. Greeks of the Classical and Hellenistic periods believed that "the rise of Greek culture was due to colonization; around 1500 BC, Egyptians and Phoenicians civilized the inhabitants of the Greek mainland. Furthermore, the Greeks continuously borrowed heavily from Near Eastern cultures." [45] In his Essay on the Customs and the Spirit of the Nations, completed in the mid-18th century, Voltaire even wrote: "The East is the cradle of all arts; the East gave everything to the West." [46] The view that Ancient Greece borrowed from Near Eastern civilizations provides a more rational explanation for the sudden blossoming of the light of Greek civilization. Modern archaeology has discovered that between approximately 3000 BC and 1200 BC, several empires had already appeared in Egypt, the Near East, and the Aegean region. Close trade and cultural exchanges existed between these empires, forming an Eastern Mediterranean civilization circle; Ancient Greece was an integral part of this circle. Around 1200 BC, due to climate and other factors, the Eastern Mediterranean civilization collapsed. Northern barbarians entered the Greek region, and Ancient Greece entered its "Dark Ages." In the Near East, although empires rose and fell, culture was passed down in various forms. In the 7th century BC, Ancient Greek civilization rapidly recovered and developed, producing astonishing civilizational achievements in philosophy, geometry, physics, geography, and medicine. Civilizational creativity is premised on the inheritance and accumulation of national wisdom and the convergence of wisdom from various nations. The sudden burst of civilizational achievements in Ancient Greece cannot be understood solely from within Greece itself; it must be understood from the recovery and development of the entire Eastern Mediterranean civilization circle, and from the inheritance of human wisdom accumulated over thousands of years in that circle, stimulated by the exchange and mutual learning between civilizations in the Eastern Mediterranean.

3. Civilizational exchange and learning are reciprocal, not a one-way transmission from European civilization to others Since the 18th century, with the rise of European civilization, European civilization has spread outward...

Other civilizations strove to learn from the achievements of European civilization. However, it must be recognized that Europe’s emergence from the "dark Middle Ages" also benefited from other civilizations. Since the advent of writing, the translation of a civilization's classics has been an extremely important means of drawing upon its wisdom. Between the 12th and 13th centuries, a "century-long translation movement" occurred in Latin Christian Europe. During the Crusades, some Western European scholars realized the extreme backwardness of their own culture. Beginning in the 12th century, these scholars began to translate Arabic academic works. There were three main locations for the translation and dissemination of Arabic scholarship into Latin Christian Europe. The first was Antioch, located on the northeastern coast of the Mediterranean. European scholars came here to study Islamic culture and translate Arabic scientific classics, such as Adelard of Bath, who translated the complete Elements of Euclid, Al-Khwarizmi’s Zij al-Sindhind (Astronomical Tables of Sind and India), and Abu Ma'shar's Introduction to Astrology. The second location was Sicily, which was sympathetic to Islamic civilization. The third was Toledo on the Iberian Peninsula. Western European scholars traveled to these border regions of the Islamic Empire to study and translate Arabic philosophical and scientific texts. In 1236, after Cordoba was captured by Christian armies, a vast quantity of Arabic literature fell into their hands. Toledo became the center for translating Arabic documents into Latin. Gerard of Cremona was a representative figure of this movement; he and his team translated a large number of medical textbooks and surgical manuals. "By the end of the 15th century, the curriculum in European universities already covered Latin translations of all the works of Islamic masters, such as Ibn Sina, Ibn al-Haytham, Ibn Rushd, al-Razi, al-Khwarizmi, and many others too numerous to mention. Especially in medicine, European scholars continued to study and publish translations of Arabic medical works until the 18th century." [23] It was precisely the borrowing and absorption of scientific and philosophical achievements from Arab-Islamic civilization that rapidly raised the scientific and cultural level of the Western European intelligentsia, laying a solid intellectual foundation for the European Scientific Revolution. Yet, this important historical fact is rarely mentioned in European academic research.

Chinese civilization has also had a profound and massive influence on Western civilization. Marx pointed out: "Gunpowder, the compass, and the printing press—these were the three great inventions which ushered in bourgeois society. Gunpowder blew up the knightly class, the compass opened up the world market and established colonies, and the printing press became the tool of Protestantism and, generally, the means of the regeneration of science, the most powerful lever for creating the necessary prerequisites for intellectual development." [24] From the 17th century onward, on one hand, "Western learning spreading to the East" (xixue dongjian [25]) and its influence on China became widely known. On the other hand, "Eastern learning spreading to the West" (dongxue xijian [26]) and the immense influence of Chinese civilization on the West have been overlooked. The translation of Chinese classics, language, and literature into Western languages had a major impact on Western scholarship. Chinese artworks, garden architecture, chinoiserie, and Chinese science and practical technologies were welcomed in the West. In the 18th century, a "China fever" developed in the West, particularly in France.

4. The internal connectivity and necessity of European civilization is a historical fiction that ignores the vital nourishment provided by other civilizations

The Eurocentric unilinear historiography constructs a history from Ancient Greece to modern Europe (including the United States). This history is presented as a process in which certain inherent qualities of European civilization continuously unfold, possessing internal continuity. These civilizational traits constitute the superiority of European civilization. Consequently, this history is also a process in which the superiority of European civilization is manifested, possessing a sense of necessity. Eurocentric unilinear historiography intends to outline a pure civilizational "lineage" untainted by external "contamination." However, this Eurocentric unilinear historical picture faces the massive historical problem of the thousand-year-long "dark Middle Ages." Therefore, Eurocentrists constructed a "Renaissance" of classical culture: Ancient Greek civilization created all the actual and potential elements of European civilization, but civilizational development was interrupted by barbarian invasions. The classics of Ancient Greece, serving as the "sparks" of European civilization, were "preserved" and "guarded" by the Arabs. During the Renaissance, Latin Christian Europe recovered the lost Ancient Greek civilization from the Arabs, reigniting the sparks of European civilization, which then exploded with immense vitality to create modern civilization.

From the perspective of the history of world civilizations and their development through exchange and mutual learning, the Eurocentric unilinear historiography provides a distorted historical picture. Ancient Greek civilization inherited and drew upon Eastern Mediterranean civilizations; it was not an original creation. What Latin Christian Europe received from the Arabs was not merely the achievements of Ancient Greek civilization, but new civilizational achievements that integrated the fruits of many ancient civilizations and were innovatively developed through practice. Ancient Greek civilization has been discussed previously and will not be repeated here. Here, I only discuss the issue of Arabic civilization. Arabic scholars did not merely "guard" Ancient Greek classics as Eurocentrists claim. During the "Century of Great Translation" in the Arab Empire, supported by Caliphs represented by al-Ma'mun, Arabic scholars used every possible means to collect classical documents from Ancient Greece, Ancient Persia, and Ancient India. They translated them into Arabic, corrected, organized, compared, researched, annotated, developed, and innovated upon them, bringing philosophy, geometry, geography, astronomy, and chemistry to new heights. By the second half of the 10th century, original Arabic works had replaced classical documents. "In fact, some of the greatest Greek texts, such as Ptolemy’s Almagest, were no longer regarded as cutting-edge research, but were replaced by more complex and sophisticated astronomical works." [27]

IV. The Role of the State in Promoting Civilizational Exchange and Mutual Learning: A Critique of the Theory of Oriental Despotism

The theory of Oriental Despotism is an important theoretical pillar of Eurocentric unilinear historiography; it is widely disseminated and profoundly influential. This theory holds that "freedom" makes the West (Europe) full of creativity, while "despotism" makes the East (Asia) lifeless and stagnant. This is claimed to be the fundamental reason why the West has been able to become the center of world history since Ancient Greece, continuously innovating and leading human history. However, this theory is ahistorical. It uses "freedom" as an abstract standard to measure complex history, ignores the different stages of the development of state forms, and overlooks the important historical role of state governance capacity in consciously promoting civilizational exchange and mutual learning.

The theory of Oriental Despotism arose during the European Enlightenment. During this period, European economy and society developed rapidly, while by comparison, the Asian empires appeared devoid of vitality and mired in stagnation. Regarding the intellectual world of that time, most European scholars still acknowledged that Eastern civilization had profoundly influenced Western civilization. What caused the stagnation of the East? And what caused the vigor of the West? Scholars attributed the causes to Eastern "despotism" and Western "freedom"—the former leading to superstition, ignorance, and the degeneration of knowledge, while the latter contributed to the development of human reason and knowledge.

Oriental Despotism refers to the political systems of Asia. The theory of Oriental Despotism imagines a political picture of the East. The theory holds that in an Oriental despotic regime, the monarch as an individual stands above the entire society and rules everyone. Except for the monarch, everyone is a slave. The state has no laws (or very few), and the monarch rules the country according to his own opinions and will. The monarch owns everything, and the people have no property rights. The nature of a despotic regime requires absolute obedience, and the principle of a despotic regime is fear: "it is necessary that fear should suppress all courage, and extinguish even the least sense of ambition." [28] In a despotic state, the role of religion is to increase fear and serve as the monarch's most important tool of rule. Despotism is often accompanied by superstition. "Those whose interest it is to deceive will soon lose their taste for the pursuit of truth. They are satisfied with the submissiveness of the people and believe that no new methods are needed to ensure the continuation of it [knowledge—Note by the author]." [29] Therefore, a despotic regime inevitably hinders scientific progress, leading to the stagnation of science; even the knowledge accumulated in previous centuries will continuously disappear, and the human spirit will sink into superstition and prejudice, reduced to ignorance. Thus, the great empires of Asia were bound to head toward stagnation and lose their vitality.

The theory of Oriental Despotism holds that, contrary to the East, the West is free. The opposition between the free West and the despotic East has existed since Ancient Greece; the Greco-Persian Wars were a battle between "freedom" and "despotism" that decided the fate of the West. It is precisely freedom that gives the West its incomparable vitality and creativity. Condorcet believed that the politics of Ancient Greece were free. Within Ancient Greek society, unlike in the Eastern empires, there did not form a priestly caste that monopolized knowledge and a system of preaching to maintain despotic rule. "All men possessed an equal right to know the truth. Everyone could strive to discover the truth in order to communicate it to all, and to communicate the whole and complete truth to them." [30] Freedom enabled the Ancient Greeks to further develop the knowledge derived from the East.

The theory of Oriental Despotism cannot withstand the test of historical fact. Regarding the inheritance and development of science and culture during the Golden Age of Ancient Greece, it was not the West that truly pushed it to its peak, but the East. The first instance was the Ptolemaic Dynasty. It pushed Ancient Greek science and culture to a pinnacle. However, the Ptolemaic Dynasty was, in a strict sense, a so-called "Oriental Despotic" state. "The Ptolemies continued the traditions of Egypt; they were the owners of the land and all property, and they were sacrosanct. The King was the State." [31] The second instance was the Arab Empire. From the 8th to the 13th centuries, the scientific achievements of Ancient Greece, Ancient Persia, and Ancient India were advanced to new heights by the Arab Empire. In sharp contrast, "free" Latin Christian Europe was sinking into the "dark Middle Ages"—a dark period that lasted for a full millennium.

There are two major theoretical errors in the theory of Oriental Despotism.

First, using abstract "freedom" as a yardstick to measure state forms makes it impossible to correctly understand the history of the development of state forms. These thinkers use "freedom" as a standard and the degree of freedom as the degree of a state's development. Hegel thus regarded the East as the childhood of world history, Ancient Greece as youth, Rome as manhood, and the Germanic world as old age; Eastern despotism was the initial stage of history, while Western "freedom" was a higher stage of historical logic. However, from the perspective of the history of human social development, small populations and small states in early human societies, along with corresponding individual freedom, were a universal phenomenon across the world. Within the borders of the Persian Empire on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, there existed a large number of democratic city-states. Jack Goody argued: "There was no significant difference between Oriental despotism and city-state democracy, whether in Greece or Phoenicia. In Mesopotamia, city-states were numerous." [32] "The evolution of state forms always goes from small to large, moving toward universalization. In a history of Europe, the only empires that can truly be called universalized are the Macedonian Empire and the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire was the peak of European history. Rome learned from Macedon, and Macedon learned from Persia. The Greek city-states were not the high end of state evolution, but rather the low end." [33] Therefore, looking at the historical process of state form development, the Ancient Greek city-states, the Italian city-republics, and the early feudal states of Western Europe were all initial forms of states formed after the collapse of great empires and the influx of backward peoples. While dynasties in Eastern states rose and fell, when backward peoples entered, they would actively accept the existing state governance system. Oriental despotic states were instead higher forms of state development. Historically speaking,

Western Europe also evolved from an early feudal state consisting of numerous small principalities into an absolutist feudal state. This evolutionary process was, without doubt, a historical progression. It is only due to the rise of the capitalist modern state that many have overlooked the historical role played by the absolutist state.

Second, measuring state forms using the abstract yardstick of "liberty" [34] makes it impossible to correctly understand the important historical role of state governance capacity in promoting the process of exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations. The theory of Oriental Despotism emphasizes the opposition between "liberty" and "despotism" in an ahistorical manner, ignoring the development of state governance capacity and governance systems. Historically, due to limitations in land area and resources, the governance capacity of city-states and urban republics was vastly inferior to that of unified monarchical states. Ancient Greek city-states were defeated by the "barbaric" Macedonian Empire; the Roman Republic evolved into the Roman Empire; and the Italian urban republics fell to emerging absolutist feudal states such as Spain, England, and France. The fundamental reason lies in the fact that absolutist monarchies were able to forge more powerful state governance capacities.

Exchanges and mutual learning among civilizations enable a nation to rapidly acquire the wisdom accumulated by humanity, driving a civilizational leap in development. Such exchanges can be spontaneous, or they can be consciously promoted by the state through its sovereign power. Relatively speaking, unified monarchies in the East possessed stronger state capacity, enabling them to mobilize more resources to drive civilizational exchange and rapid development. The promotion of scientific and cultural development during the Hellenistic period by the Ptolemaic dynasty, and the "Translation Movement" [35] driven by the Abbasid Caliphs—represented by Al-Ma'mun—are prominent examples.

After the fall of Athens, Alexandria in Egypt became the new center of science and culture. For the needs of state rule (including governance), the Ptolemaic dynasty used state power to fund the creation of a scientific research institution—the Musaeum of Alexandria. The Musaeum was a complex comprising research institutes, a library, and an academy. The rulers of the Ptolemaic dynasty went to great lengths to collect vast quantities of papyrus documents and parchment manuscripts, recruiting the most famous scientists and scholars in the Mediterranean region at the time with generous compensation, high social status, and convenient research conditions. Scholars relied on the Musaeum to carry out various academic activities, pushing Ancient Greek science and culture to the pinnacle of the Classical era.

During the Abbasid Dynasty of the Arabian Empire, the empire enjoyed relative political stability and prosperous economy and trade. Rulers, represented by the Caliph Al-Ma'mun, vigorously promoted scientific and cultural development. The House of Wisdom [36] established by Al-Ma'mun preserved scientific documents from Greece, Persia, and India collected by the empire, gathering outstanding scholars from within its borders to translate, research, and deliberate. The House of Wisdom became a "research center for original science" and was "closer to a genuine academic research institution." Al-Ma'mun initiated "Big Science" projects at the state level, funding and monitoring their progress. Al-Ma'mun established three major national scientific research projects: first, the establishment of the first observatory in the Islamic world to critically evaluate Ptolemaic astronomy based on observations, improve Ptolemy's Handy Tables, and compile new astronomical tables including the positions of the sun, moon, and planets, their rising and setting, and data on solar and lunar eclipses; second, the organization of scientists to measure the circumference of the Earth; and third, the drawing of a new world map based on the geographical and other scientific achievements of the time. These major projects were beyond the capacity of any single individual; they could only be completed by the state providing funding, mobilizing elite scholars from multiple disciplines to form large teams, and conducting continuous field surveys while innovating scientific methods and theories. It was precisely these state-organized major research projects that advanced ancient science to new heights. In contrast, during the Middle Ages, Western European feudal society was fragmented into numerous small states plagued by constant warfare. These small states lacked the capacity to mobilize resources; although they possessed "autonomy" and "liberty," they were unable to absorb the excellent achievements of other civilizations on a large scale or promote the development of science and technology.

Because it ignores the historical development of state forms and the monumental role of state capacity in promoting civilizational exchange, the theory of Oriental Despotism cannot explain the leap-frog development of Eastern civilizations, nor can it persuasively explain the long historical period of "silence" in Christian European civilization.

Conclusion

Exchange and mutual learning constitute the law of civilizational development. The Eurocentric unilinear historiography fabricates a picture in which European civilization developed in isolation and led human history. Based on a critique of this Eurocentric unilinear view, we can see that during both the Golden Age of Ancient Greece and the rise of modernity, the development of Western civilization followed the law of exchange and mutual learning. Both periods benefited from the human wisdom accumulated in other civilizations, significantly enhancing civilizational vitality and creativity in the process of converging human wisdom. In the New Era, we must persist in and expand our research perspective on the law of civilizational exchange and mutual learning, deeply study the history of world civilizations and world history, and simultaneously deepen and expand historical materialism to construct an independent knowledge system of Chinese civilizational history and world civilizational history. In the practice of civilizational construction in the New Era, we must follow the principle of openness and inclusiveness, promote civilizational exchange and mutual learning, and, like the sea receiving all rivers [37], converge human wisdom to push Chinese civilization to new heights.

Translated by Tan Ronggen, Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2002, pp. 8-9. (21) Brett Bowden, The Empire of Civilization, translated by Du Fuxiang, Ji Cheng, and Wang Cheng, Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2020, p. 160. (22) From the perspective of exchanges and mutual learning between civilizations, it is first necessary to demonstrate that civilizations are diverse and colorful. Therefore, to maintain a clear logical argument, the critical analysis of the "intrinsic continuity and inevitability of the European unilinear historical development process" is placed at the end of this section. (23) Xie Shihui, Transformations in World History: Challenging Eurocentrism, translated by Jiang Lifeng, Beijing: People's Publishing House, 1989, p. 10. (24) Xie Shihui, Transformations in World History: Challenging Eurocentrism, translated by Jiang Lifeng, Beijing: People's Publishing House, 1989, p. 10. (25) Bernard Lewis, The Muslim Discovery of Europe, translated by Li Zhongwen, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 2018, p. 63. (26) Martin Bernal, Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization (Vol. 1): The Fabrication of Ancient Greece 1785–1985, translated by Hao Tianhu and Cheng Ying, Nanjing: Nanjing University Press, 2020, p. 27. (27) Voltaire, An Essay on Universal History, the Manners, and Spirit of Nations, Vol. 1, translated by Liang Shouqiang, Beijing: Commercial Press, 1994, p. 231. (28) Jim Al-Khalili, The Pathfinders: The Golden Age of Arabic Science, translated by Li Guo, Beijing: China Pictorial Publishing House, 2020, p. 281. (29) Collected Works of Marx and Engels, Vol. 8, Beijing: People's Publishing House, 2009, p. 338. (30) Jim Al-Khalili, The Pathfinders: The Golden Age of Arabic Science, translated by Li Guo, Beijing: China Pictorial Publishing House, 2020, p. 58. (31) Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, Vol. 1, translated by Zhang Yanshen, Beijing: Commercial Press, 2019, p. 31. (32) Nicolas de Condorcet, Outlines of an Historical View of the Progress of the Human Mind, translated by He Zhaowu and He Bing, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 1998, p. 37. (33) Nicolas de Condorcet, Outlines of an Historical View of the Progress of the Human Mind, translated by He Zhaowu and He Bing, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 1998, p. 41. (34) George Sarton, Hellenistic Science and Culture in the Last Three Centuries B.C., translated by Ru Xudong, Zhengzhou: Elephant Press, 2012, p. 20. (35) Jack Goody, The Theft of History, translated by Zhang Zhengping, Hangzhou: Zhejiang University Press, 2009, p. 55. (36) Li Ling, Persian Notes, Vol. 1, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 2019, p. 20. (37) Jim Al-Khalili, The Pathfinders: The Golden Age of Arabic Science, translated by Li Guo, Beijing: China Pictorial Publishing House, 2020, pp. 93-94. (38) Jim Al-Khalili, The Pathfinders: The Golden Age of Arabic Science, translated by Li Guo, Beijing: China Pictorial Publishing House, 2020, p. 95.

Author Biography: Liang Xiao (1970–), Researcher at the Institute of Marxism Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS); PhD in Philosophy from Renmin University of China. Source: Journal of Nanjing University of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition) Web Editor: Huihui