The battle of Tabuk and bogus history

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), May 4, 2008 at 17:52

Hi Williame

Never use wikipedia as an historical source as it is more often than not a poor source, and in this case tendentious

So was there such a thing as the battle of Tabuk?

Well if you examine the extant Greek and Syriac literary sources and even the Arabic language literary sources (and for this see Hoyland Survey where you will find all the literary sources be it papyri, coins, epigraphy and monuments until the end of the Umayyad's dynasty in 750CE you will never read anything about such battle). Yes sources can be lost but in this case if this was such an important battle then the silence of the sources is really important

There is no reason for us to believe that such battle has taken place and notice that the evidence for such battle is transmitted to us from Arabic language literary sources that come to us 250-300 years after such so called battle.

Even more amazing fact is that the extant literary sources in Arabic for 72 years after the death of the so called historical Muhammad are silent about the name of Muhammad. Go figure

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".