Document Type : Research Article
Authors
1
Doctoral Graduate Department of Quranic and Hadith Sciences, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.
2
Associate professor, Faculty of Theology, Department of Qur’an and Hadith Sciences, Yazd University, yazd, Iran; Associate professor, Faculty of Theology and Ahl-al-Bayt (Prophet's Descendants) Studies, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
3
Associate Professor Department Of Qur`an And Hadith Studies University Of Mazandaran BabolsarIran.
4
Ph.D. Student, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, Department of Quranic and Hadith Sciences, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.
Abstract
The credibility and reliability of historians have always been a determining factor in the authenticity of historical accounts. The core of this research is to examine how historians have dealt with fabricated narratives and to analyze their methodological approaches in source validation. This study employs a descriptive-analytical method to investigate the various approaches of historians in confronting forged traditions. The findings indicate that the process of validation in Islamic historiography has been influenced by three main factors: First, sectarian tendencies that led to selectivity in narrating reports, as seen in examples such as Awānah ibn al-Ḥakam al-Kalbī, who fabricated or omitted accounts to support the Umayyads, and Ibn Shihāb al-Zuhrī, who aligned his reports with the caliphal viewpoint. Second, the widespread influence of Isrā'īliyyāt, which mixed historical sources with fabricated narratives. Third, the distortion of historical events through methods such as omitting essential parts of reports and replacing them with vague phrases like "such and such." A case study of historians such as al-Ṭabarī, Abū Mikhnaf, and Sayf ibn ʿUmar reveals that even the most reputable historians were not immune to sectarian biases.Consequently, it can be concluded that Islamic historiography in the early centuries was shaped more by religious prejudices and political considerations than by purely scientific critical standards.
Keywords
Main Subjects