I think one must segregate emotions from intellect, and belief in Divine Truth from belief in Islamic Tradition to properly do justice with the scope of this approach. I am not necessarily in agreement with the author btw but I do appreciate the perspective.
Re: Finally, something worthy of academic attention
What I find striking is that the overwhelming number of publications in the reference section have non muslim authors. I am certain that there must have been academic treatments of the subject done at some point in our history, by fairly academic minded persons. Perhaps such works are referred to indirectly through another academic’s paper, but I see that as a problem. One should be able to refer directly to sources of the subject one is studying. Building a case on non original references or indirect references to original material tends to worsen slants and biases.
Re: Finally, something worthy of academic attention
What I find striking is that the overwhelming number of publications in the reference section have non muslim authors. I am certain that there must have been academic treatments of the subject done at some point in our history, by fairly academic minded persons. Perhaps such works are referred to indirectly through another academic's paper, but I see that as a problem. One should be able to refer directly to sources of the subject one is studying. Building a case on non original references or indirect references to original material tends to worsen slants and biases.
The problem is, Islamic history does not have any written documentation (please refer to the "oral tradition" rhetoric) in the first one and a half century of the Islamic era that survives today. I tend to think along the lines of a sinister undertaking centered around the time of the nascent Abbasid kingdom. Another problem is the identification of the conquering Aras not being referred to as Arab, or Muslim, but as SRCN (Latin transcribed in English as SARACHINOS) or MHG/JR (Latin transcribed in English as MAGARITE), even in some legal (we're talking LEGAL) contracts in the Umayyad era.
Re: Finally, something worthy of academic attention
The problem is, Islamic history does not have any written documentation (please refer to the "oral tradition" rhetoric) in the first one and a half century of the Islamic era that survives today. I tend to think along the lines of a sinister undertaking centered around the time of the nascent Abbasid kingdom. Another problem is the identification of the conquering Aras not being referred to as Arab, or Muslim, but as SRCN (Latin transcribed in English as SARACHINOS) or MHG/JR (Latin transcribed in English as MAGARITE), even in some legal (we're talking LEGAL) contracts in the Umayyad era.
I am not sure if that is entirely correct. Remember that the Prophet (PBUH) would dispatch letters to monarchs etc. Qur'an is also said to be written down (at least in parts if memory serves) before it was collected and compiled. Moreover, there is also record that the Ahadith began being recorded at the time the Prophet (PBUH) was alive. I do agree that the the Quraysh and Mohammad (SAWS) being involved in trade and commerce would certainly have had some sort of records of business transactions, payments, shipments etc. that would be an invaluable source of information historically speaking.
I am intrigued by your take of a sinister undertaking (on the part of the Abbasids or just at that period in time?) that is the cause of a lack of written record.
When you talk about Arabs being identified as SRCN/MHG in the Ummayyad era, do you mean to say as a primary identifier or as the only identifier with no mention of tribal/sub tribal affiliation? That seems a little unusual given all the rivalries extant at the time. Even in the absence of rivalries it would be unusual as in the absence of ID cards/Driver's licenses theses affiliations would serve to identify someone as it happens (or used to happen till recently) with land records (Patwari's records) which would use name, fathers name, religion, zaat, Qaum/Qabila as the main identifier of a person
Still, there should be a plethora of writings from Islam's golden age of learning which would discuss/mention the points you make. I still find it hard to digest that academics do not refer back to any writings of Muslim writers and academics when dealing with this subject.
Re: Finally, something worthy of academic attention
I am not sure if that is entirely correct. Remember that the Prophet (PBUH) would dispatch letters to monarchs etc. Qur'an is also said to be written down (at least in parts if memory serves) before it was collected and compiled. Moreover, there is also record that the Ahadith began being recorded at the time the Prophet (PBUH) was alive. I do agree that the the Quraysh and Mohammad (SAWS) being involved in trade and commerce would certainly have had some sort of records of business transactions, payments, shipments etc. that would be an invaluable source of information historically speaking.
Peace Mufakkar,
Let's break this down further.
1) You mention that the exalted prophet dispatched letters to monarchs. There seems to be a written record at the Church of Mount Sinai, and a document of that is supposed to be the dictation that he gave to Zaid. Other than that, there is not wrtten record of direct instructions.
2) There is an oral record, written down later on that mentions an earlier written record. But how does oral record confirm that things were written down.
3) Yes the Quran was written down and compiled before it's alleged compilation era. The Hijazi script (cursive Arabic derived from Nabataean) was the original mode of writing on papyrus. The monumental Kufic script (atually closest to the Nabataean Aramaic script) was used in the alleged Uthmanic copies... Uthman's family (banu Umayyah) formed the first Islamic monarchy that paralleled many facets of the earlier Nabataean kingdom that was snatched from the Arabs by Rome. The deviation from the cursive to monumental script even on parchment is a major indicator here, if you catch my drift.
4) Yes if there were business transactions, where are they, and in what form? It is interesting that the mode of commercial and religious undertaking during the prophet's time was not Arabic, but Greek in the north, Hebrew in central, Middle Persian in the north east, and Sabaic in the south, and Nabataean among pagans. Arabic was only introduced after Islam for liturgical and commercial purposes in the para/post-Sufyanid Umayyad era: It did not even have its own alphabet. This is evident from epigrahic evidence.
I am intrigued by your take of a sinister undertaking (on the part of the Abbasids or just at that period in time?) that is the cause of a lack of written record.
Well, there's lots still left undiscovered.
When you talk about Arabs being identified as SRCN/MHG in the Ummayyad era, do you mean to say as a primary identifier or as the only identifier with no mention of tribal/sub tribal affiliation? That seems a little unusual given all the rivalries extant at the time. Even in the absence of rivalries it would be unusual as in the absence of ID cards/Driver's licenses theses affiliations would serve to identify someone as it happens (or used to happen till recently) with land records (Patwari's records) which would use name, fathers name, religion, zaat, Qaum/Qabila as the main identifier of a person
The major tribes of Arabia from the time of Abraha (perhaps you read my paper on the "People of the Elephant") were banu Amir, banu Asad Banu Sa'd and to some extent Banu Kinda (though they were more Sabaic than Arab). It is interesting that there has never been any mention of a tribe called "Quraish" in any pre-Islamic document that I have come across at least. As such, any pre-Islamic inscription or papyrus does not really speak of tribes directly... only the Arab identity is referred to where a strong message of Arab-hood is to be sent. For all other matters, other languages are commited to writing...
Still, there should be a plethora of writings from Islam's golden age of learning which would discuss/mention the points you make. I still find it hard to digest that academics do not refer back to any writings of Muslim writers and academics when dealing with this subject.
You are assuming that any such undertaking in the muslim world would have been let to survive. Many scholars seemd to have been imprisoned, flogged, and even crucified (what?) for a lot of mundane issues; is that it or could it be something deeper than that?