2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Early Islam and Hagarism and Meccan Trade and the problem of the early islamic sources

Reader comment on item: Mahram Despotism vs. Saudi Women
in response to reader comment: bill's girl's ad hominem & insulting argument

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Nov 21, 2010 at 09:32

Hi byzantinist

>"As for the book Hagarism, I agree with reviews that this is a racist book, as she offers to give a new name to Islam (Hagarism) and Muslims (Hagarenes)! And, both of these books that you choose to continuously refer to are based on nothing. They were written by non-Muslims, and completely disregard any Islamic sources."

Bill's girl is more likely than not an Indian Muslim or a Pakistani and he is a man and his command of Arabic or any of the languages of the late antique period is big zero and he has no clue about the historical method. And you can see that he had no clue that Meccan Trade by Crone was not about if Muhammad did exist or not but it was about exploring the literary sources about the so called Meccan trade and if it was the really spark for the rise of Islam. As for "Hagarism" you must be aware that Muslims from India and Pakistan (Arabic speaking Muslims do not know or care about Hagarsim) read reviews by other ignorant Muslims on the web and the most notorious source is islamicawarness.org et voila Crone becomes a racist. But did the likes of Bill's girl read the book? and can he tell the difference between both books? and the naswer is no. And it is indeed strange that he mixed both books or as his Arab masters would say; bel taqrib or close enough

And as you will see below there is harldy any early islamic sources that can help us to reconstruct what really happened

>Obviously "Bill's girl" has indeed NOT read Crone and Cook's "Hagarism" for she is completely wrong that they "completely disregard any Islamic sources." C & C disregard the "Islamic literary traditions"

You are half correct. Crone in Hagarism examines the extant literary sources external to the Islamic literary sources be it Greek, Coptic, Armenian or Syriac and the reason is we do not even have enough extant Islamic sources that early

>because they were written down very late in Abbasid times, and so may have been changed in various ways to reflect the Islam of Abbasid times rather than the Islam of pre-Abbasid times.

Very correct and it really means that the islamic sources were very late and they reflected the way al-3abasiyuun viewed the history of what was to become Islam or in the words of Wansbrough it is all salvation history and that Wansbrough had doubts that we will ever know what really happened. There is no doubt that Crone is very critical of the early Islamic sources and she is very correct. However, her reconstruction of what really happened and as was pointed out again by Wansbrough that there was no reason for us to believe the non Muslim sources either and in the words of Doner "it means that to look elsewhere is futile."

>"Hagarism", and other SCHOLARLY treatments of early Islam DO in fact look at EARLY Islamic sources,

I disagree with you here. There is no extant literary evidence be it papyri, ostraca, monuments or epigraphy that existed in the Hijaz prior to 632CE not a single word and all we have is literary sources written in distant Mesopotamia 300 years after the death of Muhammad

>which are archeological i.e. epigraphic and papyrological: inscriptions and official documents written by early Muslim rulers.

Well the so called al-khulafa' al-rashisduun more likely than not never existed and the umayyads were more likely than not Christian Arabs that followed a Pre-Nicene Syrian Christianity and that Mecca was an invention of the Abbassids that had no like or use for the Umayyads and their religion

>They also look at some early non-Muslim literary sources not because C &C are "racist" (Bill's girl is quite happy to insult others when it suits her purpose, but gets furious at "dhimmi no more's" supposed insults)

I did address the word "racist" as Muslims are not a race and I gave the likes of Bill's girl a mega dose of sarcasm and if it is viewed as insults then so be it

>but because those non-Muslim literary sources (such as Sebeos' history written c. 661, John of Nikiu's chronicle written c. 645, Doctrina Jacobi written c. 640. etc) are very, very early: MUCH earlier than any Islamic literary history of the conquests, none of which was written down before c. 800 AD.

You are very correct but I urge you to read Wansbrough's Sectartian Milieu where he makes it very clear that such sources cannot, by their very sectarian nature, reconstruct what really happened

>And no, using Christian sources written down in the seventh century, along with seventh century Islamic archeological sources is certainly NOT racist.

Wait: The earliest monument in islam is al-masjad al-aqsa (692CE) or 72 years after the death of Muhammad and why is it in Jerusalem and not in Mecca and I believe it was because there was no Mecca that early on and it was an invention of al-3abasiyuun and Abd al-Malik as well as the other Umayyads were local Syrian Arabs and if you read Luexenberg's new reading of the epigraphy it becomes very clear that Abd al-Malik's religion was indeed not islam but a form of Syriac Christianity that is Pre-Nicene

>It is in fact the only PROPER historical method to use to understand the seventh century Muslim conquests: i.e. to use seventh century sources by those who experienced the early Muslim conquests, like John of Nikiu, Sebeos, etc.: .

Sorry I disagree with you here I believe that Wansbrough is very correct that we will never know what really happened and that the extant non Muslim sources are just as unreliable as the very late Muslim sources

>A critical historian does NOT use ninth century sources like al-Baladhuri or tenth century sources like al-Tabari to illuminate the 7th century,

Very true but this is beyond the muslim mind and if you read Tabari's Futuh Masr he had no clue about who is really al-Muqawqas and he had no clue about the geography of the land in the 7th century

>EXCEPT insofar as they agree with the seventh century literary and archeological sources (both Muslim and non-Muslim).

There is hardly any islamic sources that predates 750CE and for all the literary sources prior to 750CE see Hoyland Survey where he divides such sources as between 632CE and 692CE and from 692CE until the Abbassids revolution in 750CE

>This proper historical method has been followed with regard to early Christianity for a long time: you don't use Saint Augustine or late antique patristic writers to understand the New Testament or early Christianity: you use first and early second century sources, both Christian AND non-Christian. Saint Augustine can only tell you what late fourth and early fifth century Latin Christians thought the New Testament meant, not necessarily what it originally meant, or what primitive Christianity was like. And no, it isn't "racist" to use Josephus and Pliny the Younger or Tacitus to help illuminate what first century Palestine or early Christianity were like simply because those writers weren't Christians.

Very true

>Muslims like "Bill's girl" have a LOT to learn about historical method, as it has NOT been followed by Muslims at all to illuminate early Islamic history.

Well the answer here is that their history is only salvation history and if you read Noth then you will realize that it is all topoi and schemata that lead us no where.

>C &C did not use the word "Hagarene" because they were racist, but because they wanted to use a word for "early Muslims" in the period before the word Islam or Muslim were used, or used to mean what they mean today.

Very true (see Hoyland) as those invaders did not call themselves al-Muslimeen but called themselves al-Muhajiruun which in Greek Moagaritoi and in Syriac it is Mhgraye but again Bill's girl is ignorant

>This is no more "racist" than scholars of early Christianity using words like the "Jesus movement" or "Jesus followers" --which is common--instead of "early Christianity" or "Chistians" for the primitive church and its members.

Very true


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submitting....

Submit a comment on this item

<< Previous Comment

Reader comments (54) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
No one lay awake at night because Saudi women couldn't drive [121 words]Anon.Aug 2, 2019 15:19252240
Pity the sons-in-law of these Saudi women. [45 words]M.D.Jul 20, 2009 20:55159083
1Women's Lack of Rights Should be Focused on Much More [354 words]Ron ThompsonJul 20, 2009 18:37159079
Mahram Despotism vs. Saudi Women [164 words]Firozali A.MullaJul 20, 2009 01:34159047
1Confused Mulla [47 words]VijayJul 25, 2009 12:05159047
Mahram Despotism vs. Saudi Women [153 words]firozali A. MullaJul 25, 2009 21:38159047
12Our dear Mulla and the absurd [495 words]dhimmi no moreJul 26, 2009 07:13159047
9Our dear Mullah and the law [694 words]dhimmi no moreJul 27, 2009 07:28159047
We have one the Quran. [81 words]firozali A. MullaJul 27, 2009 22:33159047
9Our dear Mullah seems to have nothing to say [498 words]dhimmi no moreJul 30, 2009 06:11159047
Our dear Dhimmi no more... plz [466 words]Bill's girlOct 25, 2009 02:52159047
7our dear Bill's girl and breast feeding of the adult and Arabian imperialism and other sordid matters [1156 words]dhimmi no moreOct 27, 2009 08:59159047
5our dear Bill's girl and more evidence that the Qur'an a book that you cannot read in Arabic says that islam is religion of the Hijazi Arabs only [314 words]dhimmi no moreOct 27, 2009 20:22159047
3our dear Bill's girl and more evidence that islam is religion of the Hijazi Arabs only part deux [377 words]dhimmi no moreOct 28, 2009 07:17159047
3our dear Bill's girl and more evidence that islam is religion of the Hijazi Arabs only part trois [362 words]dhimmi no moreOct 28, 2009 07:35159047
re to dhimmi no more - 'Islam is for Hijazi Arabs' [1118 words]bill's girlOct 28, 2009 07:43159047
3Islam is really the religion of the Arabs only and you ain't one [461 words]dhimmi no moreOct 30, 2009 07:27159047
re: dhimmin no more - Hejaz [68 words]jessieOct 30, 2009 13:17159047
3Our dear Jessie victim of Arabian imperialism [544 words]dhimmi no moreOct 30, 2009 21:45159047
4our dear Bill's girl and Islam is the religion of the Hijazi Arabs only the long version [2932 words]dhimmi no moreOct 31, 2009 10:49159047
4Our dear Bill's girl and the word tablighees and Islamic delusions [381 words]dhimmi no moreOct 31, 2009 13:52159047
1re: dhimmi no more - bogus translation or incomplete verses [1972 words]bill's girlOct 31, 2009 16:36159047
re: dhimmi no more - discrediting the 'breast-feeding of the adult' [1853 words]bill's girlOct 31, 2009 18:09159047
quotes? [33 words]jessieNov 1, 2009 03:28159047
get a grip [221 words]jessieNov 1, 2009 03:45159047
hagarism [190 words]jessieNov 1, 2009 04:03159047
6Now Our dear Girl admits that there is such thing as hadith breast feeding of the adult and as if we did not know [286 words]dhimmi no moreNov 1, 2009 07:00159047
4Our dear Girl Bill's girl that is and hadith breast feeding of the adult and the fun goes on and on [234 words]dhimmi no moreNov 1, 2009 09:17159047
4Our dear Girl discredits a hadith that is regarded as hadith sahih and it is breast feeding of the adult hadith and what a scandal [91 words]dhimmi no moreNov 1, 2009 09:22159047
4Our dear Girl whose daddy is bill and his lesson in liguistics and history of language [912 words]dhimmi no moreNov 1, 2009 13:21159047
1tablighee by dhimmi no more [387 words]bill's girlNov 2, 2009 06:40159047
5Our dear Jessie and on being clueless [427 words]dhimmi no moreNov 2, 2009 07:24159047
6The Muslim mind and poor Muslim education [294 words]dhimmi no moreNov 2, 2009 07:33159047
5Our dear Jessie and her poor Muslim education [434 words]dhimmi no moreNov 2, 2009 08:04159047
dhimmi... you have no clue as to who I am or whence I come! [2536 words]bill's girlNov 2, 2009 10:57159047
right, dhimmi the expert on everything and everyone [381 words]bill's girlNov 2, 2009 11:20159047
5Our dear Girl and Syriac [40 words]dhimmi no moreNov 4, 2009 11:10159047
4Teaching Arabic to wannabe Arabs and the Qur;an says that Islam is really the relligion of the Hijazi Arabs only [637 words]dhimmi no moreNov 8, 2009 16:36159047
4Cherry picking time and Islamic paganism [379 words]dhimmi no moreNov 10, 2009 11:44159047
4Mistakes in grammar and spelling in the Qur'an and I'm in good company part deux [265 words]dhimmi no moreNov 10, 2009 12:07159047
3Our dear Girl [171 words]dhimmi no moreNov 10, 2009 13:01159047
4Islam is really the religion of the Arabs but it seems that 70% of the books of islam were written by Persians (gasp!) [388 words]dhimmi no moreNov 10, 2009 13:27159047
4Mistakes in grammar and spelling in the Qur'an and I'm in good company part trois [259 words]dhimmi no moreNov 12, 2009 16:29159047
7Our dear Bill's girl and monotheism [337 words]dhimmi no moreNov 12, 2009 16:56159047
3bill's girl's ad hominem & insulting argument [552 words]byzantinistNov 19, 2010 02:15159047
14Early Islam and Hagarism and Meccan Trade and the problem of the early islamic sources [1359 words]dhimmi no moreNov 21, 2010 09:32159047
dnm: good point about Quran restriction to Arabs however it has a precedent in the New Testament which was overridden [130 words]ShishirApr 17, 2013 09:57159047
What the Bible says [72 words]UgriApr 18, 2013 02:28159047
1The Denial of Muslimas [251 words]SusanJul 20, 2009 00:55159045
The Denial of Muslimas??? [177 words]bill's girlOct 25, 2009 03:06159045
7Our dear Bills' girl and reality check [563 words]dhimmi no moreOct 31, 2009 17:12159045
Dhimmi no more blog ? [25 words]Al QayyamNov 24, 2009 06:25159045
5Reading the Qur'an [76 words]dhimmi no moreNov 24, 2009 18:05159045
Wajeha al-Huweidar [24 words]SvetlanahJul 19, 2009 23:39159042

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Early Islam and Hagarism and Meccan Trade and the problem of the early islamic sources by dhimmi no more

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

ADVERTISEMENTS

eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2019 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)