The study of the emergence of Islamic doctrine and practice, indeed of early Islamic history in general, is confronted by the problem of the sources. More than a century ago, Ignac Goldziher initiated this debate regarding the (in)authenticity of the sources, especially the Hadith literature. Goldziher’s critical remarks were point of departure for many researchers after him. Departing from the tacit assumption that the Hadith traditions are nonetheless potentially valuable historical sources even when inauthentic, several competing paradigms have, since Goldziher’s time, emerged concerning the dating of traditions; in their essence all stem from different evaluations of the distinction between oral and written history and the transition from the first to the latter. A case study on the number of daily obligatory Salat-prayers in Islam (a question not explicitly dealt with in the Qur'an) is the main topic of this presentation which will also afford new insights about the methodology of dating of Hadith. Starting off by isolating the relevant traditions, submitting them to the different existing dating methods - mostly based on analyses of the transmission chains (sing. isnad) – then critically comparing their outcomes and finally testing these results against data retrieved from other sources (historiography, exegesis, awa'il literature etc., as well as data on Jewish/Christian influences on Islamic practice), the analyses presented here on this particular cluster of traditions will provide us with an alternative dating. Moreover, the presentation provides insights on the merits of the various competing paradigms concerning the authenticity of the sources and it will offer a number of possible generalizations based on the empirical data used. In addition, a contribution will be made to our understanding of the early history and development of a cornerstone of Islamic liturgical practice, the Salat prayer.

*S?ra* literature forms the principle source on the life of Prophet Mu?ammad and the particular history of the emergence of Islam that predominated our understanding of the early history of Islam from the mid-eighth century to present time. Particularly important in this regard is the presence in the s?ra literature of the sort of material that is typically expected of works of historical nature. In this paper I suggest that the extensive use of documents, treaties, letters, speeches, lists and genealogical trees endows *s?ra* with a special significance within the Muslim literary and historical tradition. They all play essentially similar role in the narrative and also act as a means by which discourse on history is generated. This discourse, or the assumption of it, is what distinguishes *s?ra* from other genres of Muslim literary and historical tradition such as *tafs?r* and *?ad?th* collections. It is also what the works of *t??r?kh* and *?abaq?t* then continue and elaborate further. This paper also examines the interplay and interdependence of literary and historical features in the *s?ra*. In particular, I argue that the use of such historicising techniques as documents, treaties, letters, speeches, lists and genealogical trees in the *s?ra* appears partly as carefully designed, partly as merely accumulative result of the information in the hands of the authors. In order to highlight my arguments, I employ a number of widely used as well as less known works of *s?ra* for the purposes of comparative analysis. These include the *al?S?ra al?nabawiyya* of Ibn Is??q (d. 150/767) in the recension of Ibn Hish?m (d. 218/833), the *Kit?b al??abaq?t* of Ibn Sa?d (d. 230/845), the *Ans?b al?ashr?f* of al-Bal?dhur? (d. ca 890s), the *Ta?r?kh al?kham?s* of al?Diy?rbakr? (d. ca 960s/1550s) and the *Ins?n al-?uy?n* of al-?alab? (d. 1044/1635).

This paper aims at revealing the debates on legal theory in the second half of the second Hijri century with the emphasis on legal sources. In addition to presenting the early proto-theories of the Hanafite and Malikite legal schools, this study intends to shed some light on the development of legal theory before al-Shafi‘i, which has not attracted sufficient attention for intense studies so far, by focusing on Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Shaybani’s work al-Hujjah ‘ala ahl al-Madinah. Al-Shaybani is one of the eminent jurists who lived in the Hijri second century. In addition to his contributions to the formation of the Hanafite school, standing in the heart of major juristic movements as a student of Malik and a teacher of Shafi‘i, he has crucial influence on Islamic legal theory, which can be clearly seen in his work al-Hujjah ‘ala ahl al-Madinah. In this work, he relates juristic debates between the Kufa and Madina schools, which were the two important juristic schools at that time, and compares their legal thoughts. With its significantly rich content, al-Hujja does not merely enable us see live legal discussions on various topics at this early age, but also enriches our understanding of early development of legal theory and makes a unique contribution to the contemporary scholarship in the field.

The role of the Qur’an as an oral text in the early centuries of Islam has been well-documented and modern scholars continue to investigate the transition from an oral to a written society during this period. The role of the Qur’an as a written text, however, has been largely neglected. Although the Qur’an was collected and codified in the first half of the seventh century, al-mushaf, the written Qur’an, was rarely mentioned by eighth-century writers. It was not until the beginning of the ninth century that accounts of the compilation appeared in Islamic sources, and another century passed before the value of the codified, written Qur’an was articulated by religious authorities. By surveying a variety of eighth and ninth-century texts, this paper will examine how and in what context Islamic writers referred to al-mushaf, and attempt to explain the significant changes in the characterization of the written Qur’an that occurred during these two centuries. The Caliph Abu Bakr (r. 632-634) authorized the first collection of the Qur’an and ‘Uthman (r. 644-656) ordered the canonization of the text, but the jurist Malik ibn Anas’ (d. 795) mentions the written Qur’an a mere four times in his Al-Muwatta, and refers only once to al-mushaf being used to answer a legal question. Abu Ubayd’s (d. 838) Fada’il al-Qur’an is the first work to include the compilation accounts, and a good portion of this book discusses issues specifically concerning the written text. Ibn Hanbal (d. 855) mentions al-mushaf over thirty times in his hadith collection, The Musnad, and even includes several hadith in which the written Qur’an is used during the lifetime of the Prophet. In the introduction to his Qur’an commentary, Jami’ al-Bayan ‘an Tawil ay al-Qur’an, Al-Tabari (d. 923) attributes the continued unity of the Islamic community to ‘Uthman’s canonization of the text. Was al-Tabari articulating a change in society’s attitude toward the written Qur’an or had its role in Islamic devotion and scholarship changed? Contextualizing these and other references to al-mushaf in their religious, political, and social environments will help to explain why Islamic writers characterized the written Qur’an as they did. Doing so will contribute to our understanding of the ways in which religious and political authorities used the written word to stabilize and articulate Islam in a socially and linguistically diverse empire.