|
|
some of these contain new matter,
others are merely variations, or old traditions supported by better
authorities than those already known.
|
The chapter of most value for us is that on the "Deputations." The
chief authority here relied on by Ibn S'ad is Ibn Kalby, the Commentator (d.
146) ; but Wâckidi is so constantly referred to, that we may presume he
wrote a monograph on that subject also. This chapter, and indeed the
Secretary's whole work, excepting the "Campaigns," resembles
closely in its composition the Sunna; the authorities for each
tradition are recited with the same punctiliousness of detail, his own
opinion being rarely given, and then only in an extremely short form. The
greatest portion of the materials is taken from Wâckidi: but many very
valuable traditions of his own collecting are added by the Secretary.
|
According to the canons of traditional criticism, Wâckidi is reckoned
untrustworthy, partly because he was not orthodox (he inclined to the Shiea
doctrine), partly because he was uncritical in the choice of his authorities,
and not himself invariably true. His Secretary, Ibn S'ad, on the contrary, is
held so trustworthy that many adopt the traditions of Wâckidi only when
attested by his pupil, quoting in this way:—"the following is from
Wâckidi, supported, however, by Ibn S'ad." He seems thus to have sifted
the materials collected by his Master, and in the process, no doubt, cast
much aside.
|
The merit of Wâckidi and his
Secretary does not in the least consist in their rejection of legendary
matter, or in their narrative having less the colour of the age than that of
Ibn Ishâc. If they put aside certain improbable traditions, because founded
on no better authority than Ibn Ishâc, they have, on the other hand,
embodied many legends which escaped that author, and given new authorities
more ancient than Ibn Ishâc himself, for many of his stories. Their real
worth consists chiefly in the additional matter which they supply. By giving
(which the Sunna-collectors also do) the more ancient and rudimentary
versions of the legends, they aid us in searching out their origin, and thus
enable us to demolish the dogmatic biography (III., p. lxxvi.).
|
|
We are now in a position to receive, but with some reserve, the conclusion of
Sprenger. "According to my judgment," he says, "the
Sunna contains more truth than falsehood, the Biographies more falsehood
than truth. Further, the numberless versions in the former, of one and the
same tradition, serve as a means of criticism. Hence I hold the Sunna,
after the Coran and original documents of which copies have been preserved, to
be the most trustworthy of our sources." (III., p. civ.). But the main
difference, as we have seen, is, not that the Collectors of the
|
