A Critical Exposition of the Popular 'Jihád'/Appendix B/14

[Sidenote: The affair not noticed in the early biographies.]

14. Now this is perfectly a fictitious story. Neither there was any such affair, nor is there anything on this head mentioned in the Koran. It is very strange that Sir W. Muir has abruptly left aside, in this instance, all his principal authorities, the Arabian biographers, Ibn Ishak, Wákidi (his secretary), and Tabari. The story is not to be found in any of these biographies, nor in the canonical collections of Bokhari, Muslim, and Tirmizee. Sir W. Muir had himself laid down the rule that only these original authorities are to be depended upon, and the later authors are to be rejected. He writes:&mdash;


 * "To the three biographies by Ibn Hishám, by Wackidi his secretary, and Tabari, the judicious historian of Mahomet will, as his original authorities, confine himself. He will also receive with a similar respect such traditions in the general collections of the earliest traditionists&mdash;Bokhari, Muslim, Tirmizi, &c.&mdash;as may bear upon his subject. But he will reject as evidence all later authors, to whose so-called traditions he will not allow any historical weight whatever."