Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by CltFn (talk | contribs) at 03:46, 27 August 2006 (contribs). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World, 1977, is a controversial book on the early history of Islam authored by historians Patricia Crone and Michael Cook with contributions from a number of notable historiographers of Islam such as G. R. Hawting and Bernard Lewis.

In Hagarism the authors make an examination of the archeological , Arabic, Armenian , Coptic, Greek , Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin and Syriac records of the early 7th century and present their conclusions drawn from corresponding primary sources to present an account of early Islam at odds with the traditionally accepted version based off Muslim historical accounts.

According to the authors, the historical documents presented in the book suggest that the Arab conquests and the formation of the caliphate was a peninsular Arab movement inspired by Jewish messianism, who in alliance with Jews attempted to reclaim the Promised Land from the Byzantines. The authors present documentation to support their thesis that the Qur'an was the product of 8th century edits of various material taken from a multitude of Judeo-Christian and Middle-Eastern sources, and that Muhammad was the herald of Umar "the redeemer"; a Judeaic messiah.

Thesis

Hagarism begins with the premise that Western historical scholarship on the beginnings of Islam should only be based on historical, archeological and philological data rather than Islamic traditions which they find to be dogmatically-based, historically irreconcilable and anachronistic accounts of the community's past of no historic value. Thus, relying exclusively on historical, archeological and philological evidence the authors attempt to reconstruct and present what they argue is a more historically accurate account of Islam's origins and are summed up as:

Virtually all accounts of the early development of Islam take it as axiomatic that it is possible to elicit at least the outlines of the process from the Islamic sources. It is however well-known that these sources are not demonstrably early. There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in any form before the last decade of the seventh century, and the tradition which places this rather opaque revelation in its historical context is not attested before the middle of the eighth. The historicity of the Islamic tradition is thus to some degree problematic: while there are no cogent internal grounds for rejecting it, there are equally no cogent external grounds for accepting it. In the circumstances it is not unreasonable to proceed in the usual fashion by presenting a sensibly edited version of the tradition as historical fact. But equally, it makes some sense to regard the tradition as without determinate historical content, and to insist that what purport to be accounts of religious events in the seventh century are utilizable only for the study of religious ideas in the eighth.’ The Islamic sources provide plenty of scope for the implementation of these different approaches, but offer little that can be used in any decisive way to arbitrate between them. The only way out of the dilemma is thus to step outside the Islamic tradition altogether and start again.

The authors examine non-Muslim sources from the early part of the 7th century that seem to suggest that what is known as Islam today was originally a heretical branch of Jewish messianism heavily influenced by the Samaritans and by Babylonian Judaism. The followers of this movement were known as the Hagarenes reflecting the way Muhammad invoked the Jewish deity in order to introduce an alien monotheistic faith to the Arabs. The Hagarenes, who were arabs claimed biological descent from Abraham through his servant wife Hagar in the same way as the Jews who claimed descent from Abraham through Sarah. During this early period the Jews and the Hagarenes united, into a faith the authors loosely describe as Judeo-Hagarism, in order to recover the holy land from the Christian Byzantines who had expelled the Jews. In their analysis, the early manuscripts from eye witnesses suggest that Muhammad was the leader of a military expedition to conquer Jerusalem, and that the original Hijra actually referred to a journey from northern Arabia to that city. The authors then contend that the Hagarenes splintered off from the Jews, and went on to devise their own version of Abrahamic monotheism and that Islam was thus born and fashioned from Judaic mythology and symbology, that is; the creation of a sacred scripture similar to the Jewish Torah - (the Qur’an), and a Moses like prophet; along with a sacred city of (Medina) modeled on the Jewish holy city adjacent to a holy mountain .

While the full assertions of the book were controversial, the attempts to deconstruct early Islamic history have made this a groundbreaking and important work on early Islamic history.

Sources

The authors document their thesis that Muhammad was preaching a heretical form of Judaism around 634 and was proclaiming the advent of a Jewish Messiah by drawing upon early non-Muslim sources such as the Doctrina Iacobi (AD 634) and others listed in the table below.

Impact

The ground breaking impact of the book upon academic circles is demonstrated by the amount of discussion it has and continues to generate among many contemporary historiographers and historians of early Islam, such as: Bernard Lewis, Robert G. Hoyland, Reza Aslan, G. R. Hawting, Herbert Berg, Francis Edwards Peters, S. N. Eisenstadt, Ziauddin Sardar, Malise Ruthven,Richard Landes, Ibn Warraq and John Wansbrough. It is on the suggested reading list of the School of Oriental and African Studies of London and other various major universities' Middle East studies reading lists .

• John Wansbrough, who had mentored the authors, reviewed the book, specifically the first part, in the Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies. He begins by praising the book claiming, "the authors; erudition is extraordinary their industry everywhere evident, their prose ebullient." However, he later comments that "...most, if not all, have been or can be challenged on suspicion of inauthenticity" and that "the material is upon occasion misleadingly represented..."

My reservations here, and elsewhere in this first part of the book, turn upon what I take to be the authors' methodological assumptions, of which the principal must be that a vocabulary of motives can be freely extrapolated from a discrete collection of literary stereotypes composed by alien and mostly hostile observers, and thereupon employed to describe, even interpret, not merely the overt behaviour but also intellectual and spiritual development of the helpless and mostly innocent actors. Where even the sociologist fears to tread, the historian ought not with impunity be permitted to go.

• Historian Daniel Pipes states:

In Hagarism, a 1977 study by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, the authors completely exclude the Arabic literary sources and reconstruct the early history of Islam only from the information to be found in Arabic papyri, coins, and inscriptions as well as non-Arabic literary sources in a wide array of languages (Aramaic, Armenian, Coptic, Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and Syriac). This approach leads Crone and Cook in wild new directions. In their account, Mecca's role is replaced by a city in northwestern Arabia and Muhammad was elevated "to the role of a scriptural prophet" only about a.d. 700, or seventy years after his death. As for the Qur'an, it was compiled in Iraq at about that same late date."

• Eric Manheimer stated:

"Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World is truly a unique approach to the study of the transfusion of religious concepts to Islam from other varied religions of the Middle East and adjacent areas. "

• David Waines, Professor of Islamic Studies Lancaster University states:

"The Crone-Cook theory has been almost universally rejected. The evidence offered by the authors is far too tentative and conjectural (and possibly contradictory) to conclude that Arab-Jewish were as intimate as they would wish them to have been."

• Oleg Grabar writes that THIS iS a brilliant, fascinating, original, arrogant, highly debatable book. To some, Muslims in particular, it will be downright unacceptable. ..Irritating though it is at times, it is also a disquieting book which does conjure up the uneasy feeling that much in our traditional understanding of the formation of Islamic culture is so utterly wrong that only a dramatically revolutionary statement such as this one can shake the truth loose. "

• Michael G. Morony remarked that "Muhammad is presented as a messianic leader who used Abrahamic descent to combine Arab ethnicity and fighting ability with Judaic religious values and led an ideologically irredentist exodus to Palestine. There the religion of the emigré descendents of Hagar (muhäjirün) evolved into Islam by borrowing from Christians (recognition of Jesus as Messiah) and Samaritans (acceptance of the Torah alone, replication of the sanctuary of Shechem in the Makkan cult, and of the high-priesthood in the imãmate). When the center of power shifted to Iraq, classical Islam, combining a holy law with a learned laity, emerged under the influence of Babylonian rabbinic Judaism. The cultural intransigence their initial cohesion gave the conquerors interacted with provincial cultures made vulnerable by their alienation from the cosmopolitan culture of late antiquity to create a new Islamic civilization that was the victim of its own syncretism, of the inconsistency between its Arab identity and the universal potential of monotheism, and of its incomplete combination of religion with politics. ."

• In 2006, Legal scholar Liaquat Ali Khan posted an opinion piece on the Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel website whose title "Hagarism: The Story of a Book Written by Infidels for Infidels" is based of a claim to the same in the book claimed

The book titled "Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World," questions just about everything Muslims believe as historical truths. It challenges the common belief that the Quran was revealed to Prophet Muhammad over a period of 22 years (610-632) in Mecca and Medina. Instead, the book contends that the Quran was composed, possibly in Syria or Iraq, more than fifty years after the Prophet's death, projected back in time, and attributed to the Prophet.

The Quran, according to the book, was fabricated during the reign of Caliph Abdul Malik (685-705) to legitimize an expanding empire. The book also contends that the word Muslim was invented in the 8th century to replace the word Muhajirun (immigrants), which was the original name of the Arab community that conquered Palestine and built the Dome of the Rock.

The book itself prescribes a new name for early Muslims. It calls them Hagarenes, that is, the biological descendants of Abraham by Hagar. This racial naming of early Muslims is employed to distinguish them from Jews, who are the descendants of Abraham by Sarah. Hagarism, the book's title, is a quasi-pejorative, and possibly a racist, label to describe the historical phenomenon of early Muslims.

Liaquat Ali Khan further said that Hagarism is "another book in the large dump of attack literature" and an attack on "the Quran’s authenticity, the Prophet’s integrity, Islamic history". He stated that he has had private correspondence with the authors and stating that Michael Cook had said, "The central thesis of that book was, I now think, mistaken. Over the years, I have gradually come to think that the evidence we had to support the thesis was not sufficient or internally consistent enough" and that Patricia Crone had said, "The book was just a hypothesis, not a conclusive finding," and "I do not think that the book's thesis is valid." Ali Khan also states, "Part of the confusion arises from the fact that Cook and Crone have made no manifest effort to repudiate their juvenile findings in the book. The authors admitted to me that they had not done it and cater no plans to do so."

Despite the generally negative reception given the specific assertions in the book, the authors' criticism of what they saw as credulous reliance upon biased Islam histories has been widely influential. Subsequent histories of early Islam have usually referred to Hagarism, if only to refute it. Even though the book is out-of-print and no longer widely available, it still features in many academic bibliographies and reading lists.

References

1. P Crone & M Cook, Hagarism: The Making Of The Islamic World, 1977, Cambridge University Press, pg. 3
2. J. Wansbrough. "Review". Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 41, No. 1. (1978), pp. 155-156.
3. Daniel Pipes. "Lessons from the Prophet Muhammad's Diplomacy". The Middle East Quarterly. September 1999. Volume VI: Number 3.
4. Eric I. Manheimer. "Review". The American Historical Review, Vol. 83, No. 1. (Feb., 1978), pp. 240-241
5. Introduction to Islam, Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press, 1995. ISBN 0-521-42929-3, pp 273-274
6. Grabar, Oleg. Speculum, Vol. 53, No. 4. (Oct., 1978), pp. 795-799.
7. Morony, Michael G. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 41, No. 2. (Apr., 1982), pp. 157-159.
8. P Crone & M Cook, Hagarism: The Making Of The Islamic World, 1977, Cambridge University Press, pg. 8
9. "Hagarism: The Story of a Book Written by Infidels for Infidels". Retrieved 2006-06-12.
10. Liaquat Ali Khan. "Hagarism: The Story of a Book Written by Infidels for Infidels". Retrieved 2006-06-09.

See also

• Historiography of early Islam

Further reading

• The Historical Problem of Islamic Origins
• External References to Islam.

• 1977 books
• Islamic studies books