帕特里夏·克罗内与早期伊斯兰史学的“世俗传统”:一个注释

IF 0.5 Q1 HISTORY History Compass Pub Date : 2022-09-21 DOI:10.1111/hic3.12747
J. J. Little
{"title":"帕特里夏·克罗内与早期伊斯兰史学的“世俗传统”:一个注释","authors":"J. J. Little","doi":"10.1111/hic3.12747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Patricia Crone famously identified three distinct sub-traditions within early Islamic historiography: a “religious tradition”, a “tribal tradition”, and a “secular tradition”. Whereas the first is extremely unreliable and the second is partially unreliable regarding early Islamic history in general (c. 600–750 CE), Crone argued that the third provides “a coherent historical account”, at least as far back as the beginning of the Umayyad period (c. 661 CE). Some confusion has since arisen over the identity of this “secular tradition” (thanks to Crone's famously terse and technical style), but a close examination of her work reveals that she had in mind state-oriented chronology and prosopography (i.e., basic political information on early Muslim caliphs, governors, judges, and commanders) or proto-<i>taʾrīkh</i>. Crone argued that this material (which mostly survives intermingled with the religious and tribal traditions in extant Islamic literary sources) derives via continuous written transmission from rudimentary state-oriented chronicles and prosopographies composed by pro-Marwanid Muslim writers in eighth-century Syria. Although these proto-<i>tawārīkh</i> are now lost, Crone argued that their eighth-century existence can be inferred from contemporaneous references thereto in extant Christian chronicles—a conclusion strengthened by more recent scholarship. For this reason, the “secular tradition” is substantially more reliable than the other traditions within early Islamic historiography, which underwent a protracted process of oral transmission and consequent mutation, distortion, and growth.</p>","PeriodicalId":46376,"journal":{"name":"History Compass","volume":"20 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hic3.12747","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patricia Crone and the “secular tradition” of early Islamic historiography: An exegesis\",\"authors\":\"J. J. Little\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/hic3.12747\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Patricia Crone famously identified three distinct sub-traditions within early Islamic historiography: a “religious tradition”, a “tribal tradition”, and a “secular tradition”. Whereas the first is extremely unreliable and the second is partially unreliable regarding early Islamic history in general (c. 600–750 CE), Crone argued that the third provides “a coherent historical account”, at least as far back as the beginning of the Umayyad period (c. 661 CE). Some confusion has since arisen over the identity of this “secular tradition” (thanks to Crone's famously terse and technical style), but a close examination of her work reveals that she had in mind state-oriented chronology and prosopography (i.e., basic political information on early Muslim caliphs, governors, judges, and commanders) or proto-<i>taʾrīkh</i>. Crone argued that this material (which mostly survives intermingled with the religious and tribal traditions in extant Islamic literary sources) derives via continuous written transmission from rudimentary state-oriented chronicles and prosopographies composed by pro-Marwanid Muslim writers in eighth-century Syria. Although these proto-<i>tawārīkh</i> are now lost, Crone argued that their eighth-century existence can be inferred from contemporaneous references thereto in extant Christian chronicles—a conclusion strengthened by more recent scholarship. For this reason, the “secular tradition” is substantially more reliable than the other traditions within early Islamic historiography, which underwent a protracted process of oral transmission and consequent mutation, distortion, and growth.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"History Compass\",\"volume\":\"20 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hic3.12747\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"History Compass\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hic3.12747\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History Compass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hic3.12747","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

帕特丽夏·克罗恩(Patricia Crone)在早期伊斯兰史学中提出了三个不同的子传统:“宗教传统”、“部落传统”和“世俗传统”。第一个是极其不可靠的,第二个是部分不可靠的,关于早期伊斯兰教的历史(公元600-750年),Crone认为第三个提供了“一个连贯的历史描述”,至少可以追溯到倭马亚王朝(公元661年)的开始。从那以后,人们对这种“世俗传统”的身份产生了一些困惑(多亏了克劳恩著名的简洁和技术风格),但仔细研究她的作品就会发现,她的思想是以国家为导向的年表和编年史(即早期穆斯林哈里发、统治者、法官和指挥官的基本政治信息)或原始的塔·塔·r·赫。克罗内认为,这些材料(在现存的伊斯兰文学来源中,大部分与宗教和部落传统混在一起幸存下来)来自于8世纪叙利亚亲马尔瓦尼穆斯林作家撰写的以国家为主导的基本编年史和预言书,是通过不断的书面传播得来的。虽然这些proto-tawārīkh现在已经丢失了,但克罗内认为,它们在八世纪的存在可以从现存的基督教编年史中同时代的文献中推断出来,这一结论得到了最近的学术研究的加强。由于这个原因,在早期伊斯兰史学中,“世俗传统”实质上比其他传统更可靠,后者经历了一个漫长的口头传播和随后的突变、扭曲和成长过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Patricia Crone and the “secular tradition” of early Islamic historiography: An exegesis

Patricia Crone famously identified three distinct sub-traditions within early Islamic historiography: a “religious tradition”, a “tribal tradition”, and a “secular tradition”. Whereas the first is extremely unreliable and the second is partially unreliable regarding early Islamic history in general (c. 600–750 CE), Crone argued that the third provides “a coherent historical account”, at least as far back as the beginning of the Umayyad period (c. 661 CE). Some confusion has since arisen over the identity of this “secular tradition” (thanks to Crone's famously terse and technical style), but a close examination of her work reveals that she had in mind state-oriented chronology and prosopography (i.e., basic political information on early Muslim caliphs, governors, judges, and commanders) or proto-taʾrīkh. Crone argued that this material (which mostly survives intermingled with the religious and tribal traditions in extant Islamic literary sources) derives via continuous written transmission from rudimentary state-oriented chronicles and prosopographies composed by pro-Marwanid Muslim writers in eighth-century Syria. Although these proto-tawārīkh are now lost, Crone argued that their eighth-century existence can be inferred from contemporaneous references thereto in extant Christian chronicles—a conclusion strengthened by more recent scholarship. For this reason, the “secular tradition” is substantially more reliable than the other traditions within early Islamic historiography, which underwent a protracted process of oral transmission and consequent mutation, distortion, and growth.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
History Compass
History Compass HISTORY-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
59
期刊最新文献
Issue Information A Landscape of Toleration: Central Europe in the Early Modern Era A Railway Carpenter in the History of Technology?: New Opportunities From Modern South Asia Issue Information ‘Temples Devoted to Cold Coffee and Hot Sex’: Coffee Bars and Youth Culture in Postwar Britain
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1