THE QUESTION RAISED by M.J. de Goeje in his work Mémoire sur la conquête de la Syrie concerning the authenticity of the contradictory historical accounts of the conquest of Syria by the Muslims actually opened up the controversy surrounding Islamic history and historiography. Fred M. Donner has prepared an excellent concise survey representing the totality of research carried out on this issue from the second half of the nineteenth century through the early eighties of the present century. This survey appears in the introduction to the English translation of A.A. Dūrī's work.

It is well known that this research has examined a broad range of topics and has addressed the question from various viewpoints. But, as A. Noth has pointed out, it is easy to distinguish two typical tendencies in these works and to divide the research into two main groups. The first of these, which includes F. Rosenthal, Nabia Abbott, A.A. Dūrī, and Fuat Sezgin, deals with the methods and style by which the historical material was passed down, the development of an Islamic historical tradition, the traditions’ points of origin, and the relationship between written and oral material. The second group, which includes the research of M.J. de Goeje, Julius Wellhausen, Leone Caetani, and N.A. Mednikov, focuses on the traditions themselves.

In this paper, which belongs to the first category, I shall try to shed some light on the manner and style in which both al-Balādhurī and al- Ṭabarī derived their material from the available sources—either written or oral accounts-placing the emphasis on the terminology of transmission and on the extent to which it reflects the type of material and the historian compiler's attitude to that material. I shall also deal with the attitude of these two historians to the isnād (chain of authorities) and the extent to which this attitude was expressed in the choice of material they compiled. I shall examine the degree and the scope of the criticism they voiced with regard to the material, as well as the criteria on which this criticism was based. I shall also consider certain peripheral issues that will arise in the course of dealing with these questions.