What do you think?
Rate this book
Narratives of Islamic Origins: The Beginnings of Islamic Historical Writing
How and why did Muslims first come to write their own history? The author argues in this work that the Islamic historical tradition arose not out of "idle curiosity," or through imitation of antique models, but as a response to a variety of challenges facing the Islamic community during its first several centuries (ca. seventh to tenth centuries C.E.). The narratives that resulted focused on certain themes of Islamic origins, selected to legitimize particular aspects of the Islamic community and faith in one or another. These included the need to establish the status of Muhammad (d. 632) as prophet, to affirm that the community to which they belonged was the direct descendant of the original community founded by the Prophet, to explain (and justify) Muslim hegemony over vast populations of non-Muslims in the rapidly growing Islamic empire, and to articulate different positions in the ongoing debate with the Islamic community itself over political and religious leadership. An examination of these key themes of early Islamic historiography and the issues generating them is placed in the context of other styles of legitimation in the early Islamic community, including such methods as appeals to piety and genealogy. Narratives of Islamic Origins is a groundbreaking work that represents the first comprehensive tradition-critical account of the origins and rise of Arab-Islamic historiography, and is essential reading for all historians of medieval Islamic history and civilization, and for all those interested in the historiography of comparative civilizations.
358 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1998
2 people are currently reading
167 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
Read
October 23, 2017impressive book for experts, not for people like me. It examines trustworthiness of sources of our knowledge of the early life of the Prophet and the dating of the Quran. It concludes that the early Islamic sources were 'an exercise in legitimation' and were conscientiously chosen and developed with an eye toward specific historiographical, polemical, or aesthetic purposes. Nevertheless this does not detract from the traditional position that the general story told by these writings convey the correct history of Early Islamic development.
The introduction shares the four approaches that govern scholarly acceptance of Islamic/ Arabic sources, ranging from traditional to skeptical.
Part I identifies differences between the Quran and the corpus of hadiths that allow us to date and place hadith literature with their 'secularist' composers of Iraq and Syria centuries beyond original writing of the Quran.
It also contains discussion of the difference of presentation, emphasis and motivation between the Christian and Islamic narrative of common stories like the Fall of Adam and the revelation of Joseph to his brothers. The book here claims the difference occurs because the Quran views these stories not as revolutionary events in the history of a chosen people but as useful exemplary instances of a universal story of good pious men against evil agents:
"In the Qur'an, on the other hand, all peoples have a
prophet, and all prophets are equal, so the story of any one prophet
is not really distinctive; the names change, but the lesson is the same.
The Qur'anic narrations do not come together in a progression to form
the history of a chosen people, marked by particular and distinctive
events, as in the Old Testament, but rather depict an eternal moral
choice-the choice between good and evil, Belief and unbelief-faced
by all people from Adam on in more or less the same form, and hence
simply repeat~d generation after generation."
I find this curious because my impression of Islam contained the perhaps erroneous understanding that certain cultures occupy unassailable privilege-- the true Quran could only be read in Arabic, for example.
The introduction shares the four approaches that govern scholarly acceptance of Islamic/ Arabic sources, ranging from traditional to skeptical.
Part I identifies differences between the Quran and the corpus of hadiths that allow us to date and place hadith literature with their 'secularist' composers of Iraq and Syria centuries beyond original writing of the Quran.
It also contains discussion of the difference of presentation, emphasis and motivation between the Christian and Islamic narrative of common stories like the Fall of Adam and the revelation of Joseph to his brothers. The book here claims the difference occurs because the Quran views these stories not as revolutionary events in the history of a chosen people but as useful exemplary instances of a universal story of good pious men against evil agents:
"In the Qur'an, on the other hand, all peoples have a
prophet, and all prophets are equal, so the story of any one prophet
is not really distinctive; the names change, but the lesson is the same.
The Qur'anic narrations do not come together in a progression to form
the history of a chosen people, marked by particular and distinctive
events, as in the Old Testament, but rather depict an eternal moral
choice-the choice between good and evil, Belief and unbelief-faced
by all people from Adam on in more or less the same form, and hence
simply repeat~d generation after generation."
I find this curious because my impression of Islam contained the perhaps erroneous understanding that certain cultures occupy unassailable privilege-- the true Quran could only be read in Arabic, for example.
November 28, 2020
Donner makes a profound historiographical point: people don’t innately write history, but rather develop a historical tradition in response to particular conflicts that necessitate historical justification.
This book goes into detail about why an Islamic historiographical tradition began to develop in the late first century AH. He makes a convincing point that the original movement around Muhammad was one focused on strict piety (although he overstates the degree to which it was non-confessional). It was not until the various “themes” that Donner outlines in the book (fitnah, the need to justify Muhammad’s prophethood, the need to justify Arab rule, etc.) that Muslims began to write history.
Overall, Donner makes a strong case for a “tradition-critical approach” to early Islamic history. Good book for anyone interested in western scholarly debates over Islamic historiography and the reliability of ahadith.
This book goes into detail about why an Islamic historiographical tradition began to develop in the late first century AH. He makes a convincing point that the original movement around Muhammad was one focused on strict piety (although he overstates the degree to which it was non-confessional). It was not until the various “themes” that Donner outlines in the book (fitnah, the need to justify Muhammad’s prophethood, the need to justify Arab rule, etc.) that Muslims began to write history.
Overall, Donner makes a strong case for a “tradition-critical approach” to early Islamic history. Good book for anyone interested in western scholarly debates over Islamic historiography and the reliability of ahadith.
October 18, 2012
Ostensibly, the purpose of the book is to address the question of why the early Muslims began to write history and why the history they wrote took the shape that it did. But in doing so, Donner also tackles the question of "authenticity" that has consumed so many historians of Islam, especially in the West.
The book begins with a summary of four major approaches to Islamic history: classical, source-critical, tradition-critical and skeptical, and argues for some form of tradition-criticism (not too different from the approach of traditional Islamic hadith scholarship, which Donner seems to admire). Donner then argues (convincingly) for an early date for the Quran of around AD 630. The majority of the book is then spent detailing the various themes that Muslim historical accounts were concerned with. The idea here is that the early Muslims faced certain pressing questions about leadership, political legitimacy, taxation and administration, legal affairs, etc. for which answers were sought in the past to support various positions. Although the accounts that emerged included a great deal of material that was forged, exaggerated or transposed in time, these accounts had to have some relation to some real events or personages to be of any use (the principle of "verisimilitude of forgery"). A story about the last Sassanid emperor handing a clod of earth to a Tamimi chief before the battle of Qadisiyyah is almost certainly spurious. It obviously serves to bolster the prestige of the chief's descendents and possibly to serve as a literary device, a harbinger of the great conquests. But it would not have served those purposes if the audience was not already familiar with the battle of Qadissiyyah.
There is, however, a lot more to the book than "verisimilitude of forgery", and the concluding chapter and epilogue contain an eloquent and sensible refutation of the more extreme "skeptics," arguing instead for accepting the broad outlines of the classical account.
Donner's writing is lucid and clear for such a technical subject but there is only so much he can do in that regard given the complexity of the argument. It is a book that may need to be read more than once, even by a specialist. If you are new to Islamic history or just a casual reader, look elsewhere. This is a book for people with at least some grounding in the subject. A good place to start would be Donner's own "Muhammad and the Believers" (even though I do not agree with the "ecumenical" argument it promotes).
The book begins with a summary of four major approaches to Islamic history: classical, source-critical, tradition-critical and skeptical, and argues for some form of tradition-criticism (not too different from the approach of traditional Islamic hadith scholarship, which Donner seems to admire). Donner then argues (convincingly) for an early date for the Quran of around AD 630. The majority of the book is then spent detailing the various themes that Muslim historical accounts were concerned with. The idea here is that the early Muslims faced certain pressing questions about leadership, political legitimacy, taxation and administration, legal affairs, etc. for which answers were sought in the past to support various positions. Although the accounts that emerged included a great deal of material that was forged, exaggerated or transposed in time, these accounts had to have some relation to some real events or personages to be of any use (the principle of "verisimilitude of forgery"). A story about the last Sassanid emperor handing a clod of earth to a Tamimi chief before the battle of Qadisiyyah is almost certainly spurious. It obviously serves to bolster the prestige of the chief's descendents and possibly to serve as a literary device, a harbinger of the great conquests. But it would not have served those purposes if the audience was not already familiar with the battle of Qadissiyyah.
There is, however, a lot more to the book than "verisimilitude of forgery", and the concluding chapter and epilogue contain an eloquent and sensible refutation of the more extreme "skeptics," arguing instead for accepting the broad outlines of the classical account.
Donner's writing is lucid and clear for such a technical subject but there is only so much he can do in that regard given the complexity of the argument. It is a book that may need to be read more than once, even by a specialist. If you are new to Islamic history or just a casual reader, look elsewhere. This is a book for people with at least some grounding in the subject. A good place to start would be Donner's own "Muhammad and the Believers" (even though I do not agree with the "ecumenical" argument it promotes).
September 2, 2014
This is my first book for my grad school class on approaches to Middle Eastern and Islamic history. The book was accessible and fascinating. The book answers two main questions - why did Muslims begin to record their history and how. As a new student of Islamic history, I found the first half especially interesting as the author addresses the context of early Islam. The second half wasn't quite as engaging as he discusses the themes and issues with the history, but it was still an enjoyable read.
October 21, 2015
Decisive rebuttal to sceptical accounts of early Islamic history by Crone et al. Provides a thematic taxonomy of the earliest surviving works of Islamic historiography (Ibn Ishaq, al-Baladhuri, al-Tabari, etc.), arguing for a certain view of the developing historiographical tradition and the social forces that shaped it. Interesting belief that pious thinking was at heart a non-historical sort of thinking that had to be overlayed with historical writing when later political difficulties required 'legitimation'
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews