In this reading, the authors convincingly and methodologically present the two prevailing approaches to the study of Islam; the "traditional approach" and the "revisionist approach". One of the important aspects of these distinctive approaches for the scholar is in the recognition that while these two approaches present parallel arguments, they do not intertwine or connect. "The latter typically discounts the formers validity as "historical inquiry, while the former at best ignores the latter altogether." (88)

The key thesis of this reading is based upon the author's assumption that "the two methods cannot both be valid."(88) In addition to the these approaches the authors also examine other criteria used to validate research in Islamic Studies: 1) source criticisms 2)the Qur'an 3) Attitudes to the "Isnads" 4) Trade 5) Evidence external to the Muslim Account such as archeological evidence and numismatics and epigraphy (rock inscriptions)

Ultimately the authors conclude that "the ability to derive history from the account of seventh-century events found in the Muslim sources is, for the "traditional approach", a basic fact, the one firm basis on which to build. [However] For the "revisionist approach", it is merely a hypothesis which needs to be proved; and the more external evidence one examines, the harder it becomes to prove it." (105)

< back to readings page ... >

< back to main page ... >