A recently published analysis raises the question of whether Faiz Mohammad Katib Hazara, the prominent 20th-century Afghan historian, can be considered a "sociologist." The author views this labeling as an ahistorical and ethnically-driven reinterpretation of Katib's work, arguing that the title is inconsistent with the nature of his scholarship.
The analysis begins by defining the science of sociology, referencing its classical founders like Marx, Weber, and Durkheim. Sociology is a modern science that emerged in the 19th century to understand the crises of modern society and has a distinct methodology. The author argues that to consider a writer a sociologist, they must be familiar with the science and its concepts.
Examining Katib's life and education, the analysis shows that he was not acquainted with modern epistemology or the science of sociology. His education was focused on traditional and religious sciences in Najaf, Lahore, and Afghanistan, and the books he studied under his teachers had no connection to modern humanities.
Katib's style of historiography is also categorized within the tradition of "court chronicling" (waqia-nigari). He primarily recorded the events of his time for the royal court. This style of history writing was already considered obsolete in the West by the 18th century. Therefore, linking him to historical sociology or modern historiography ignores the historical context of his work.
The analysis specifically critiques claims by some writers, such as Shafaq Khawati, who have presented Katib as an analytical sociologist in works like *Tazkirat al-Inqilab*. The author contends that *Tazkirat al-Inqilab* is a narrative of a historical period and a reflection of Katib's personal lived experience, not a sociological analysis based on scientific theory and method.
In conclusion, citing the German sociologist Norbert Elias, the analysis emphasizes that a sociologist's task is to analyze phenomena without personal judgment. In contrast, Katib's works, especially *Tazkirat al-Inqilab*, are deeply intertwined with his personal views and experiences. The conclusion is that while Katib is a vital historian for understanding Afghan history, calling him a sociologist is a historical and scientific error.
Source: Published media analysis
🌐
