The magical crone pdf free download

PDF Books World library is a high quality resource for free PDF books, which are digitized version of books attained the public domain status. Our mission is to transform the most popular works of legendary authors to modern reading room.

We publish pdf books on many subjects for readers of all ages including Fiction, Non-Fiction, Academic and Children's writings. Its emergence thus constirutes an unusual, and for a number of rdated reasons a peculiar, historical event. This book is an attempt to make sense of it. In making the attempt we have adopted an approach which differs appreciably from that of more conventional writing in the fidd. First, our account of the formalion of Islam as a religion is.

Finally, we have set out with a certain recklessness to acatc a coherent architeCtonic of ideas in a fidd over much of which scholarship has yet to dig the foundations. It might not be superfluous for us to attempt a defence of this enter- prise against the raised eyebrows of the specialist, but it would certainly be poindcss: it is in the last resort by specialists that our work will be judged, and the judgment of specialists is not open to corruption by pre- faces.

What has been said should also suffice to warn the non-specialist what not to expect: this is a pioneering expedition through some very rough country, not a guided tour. There is however one particular group of readers who arc in a special position. For although the characters who appear in our story arc all of them dead, their descendants arc very much alive. This is a book written by infidels for infidels, and it is based on what from any Muslim perspective must appear an inordinate regard for the testimony of in6dd sources.

Our account is not merdy unaccept- able; it is also one which any Muslim whose faith is as a grain of mustard seed should find no difficulty in rejecting. What we wish to stress for such a reader is that the strong evaluative overtones of the language in which we have analysed the forma- tion of Islamic civilisation do not add up to any simplistic judgment for or against.

We have presented the formation of the new civilisation as a unique cultural achievement, and one to which the maraudings of our own barbarian ancestors offer no paralld whatever; but equally we have pre- sented the achievement as one which carried with it extraordinary cultural costs, and it is above all the necessary linkage between the achievement and the costs that we have tried to elucidate.

Dr Sebastian Brock, Mr G. Hawting and Dr M. Kister were kind enough to give us their comments on an earlier draft of Part One. Dr Brock, Dr P. Frandsen and Professor A Schriber assisted us over queries in areas of their specialist competence. Consultation of a rather inaccessible Syriac manuscript was made possible by a grant from the British Academy and gready facilitated by the kindness of Father William Macomber and Dr J.

Professor Bernard Lewis was good enough to make available to us his translation of a Jewish apocalyptic poem prior to publication. The completion of our research was gready hdped in different ways by the Warburg Institute and the School of Oriental and African Studies.

Over and above these debts of execution, we would also like to put on record what we owe to two in8uences without which this book could hardly have been conceived. The first was our exposure to the sceptical approach of Dr John W ansbrough to the historicity of the Islamic tradi- tion; without this in8uence the theory of Islamic origins set out in this book would never have occurred to us. These debts are acknowledged in their proper places; such acknowledgements should be taken to indicate that the substance of the idea is not to be credited to us, not that the form in which it appears can be debited to Dr Wansbrough.

Finally, we would like to thank Professor J. Segal for teaching us Syriac, and Dr D. Kamhi for introducing us to the Talmud.

What goes without saying should in this case be said : none of those who have hdped us bear any responsibility for the views expressed in this book.

Postscript: For a hdpful survey covering most of the Syriac sources used in this book, sec now S. For an occurrence of the phrase ahl al-islimt in an insaiption dated A. For a dating of the earliest Koran fragments which, though for our purposes not suf6ciendy precise, should have been Cited at p. I 8, sec A. There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in any form before the last decade of the seventh century, and the tradition which places this rather opaque revflation in its historical context is not before the middle of the The historicity of the Islamic tradition is thus to some degree problematic: while there are no cogent internal grounds for rejecting it.

In the circumstances it is not unreasonable ceed in the usual fashion by presenting a senstbly edited version of the tradition as historical fact. But equally, it makes some sense to regard the tradition as without determinate historical content, and to insist that what purport to be accounts of religious events in the seventh century are utilisable only for the study of religious ideas in the eighth.

If we choose to start again, we begin with the Doctrina Jacobi, a Greek anti-Jewish tract spawned by the Heraclean persecution.

I, Abraham, went off to Sykamina and referred the matter to an old man very well- versed in the Scriptures. I asked him: 'What is your view, master and teacher, of the prophet who has appeared among the Saracens?

Do the prophets come with sword and chariot? Truly these happenings today are works of disorder But you go off, Master Abraham, and find out about the prophet who has appeared. One is the doctrine of the keys. It is not of course Islamic, but there are some slight indica- tions that it was a doctrine which the Islamic tradition had been at pains to repress: there is a group of traditions in which the keys of paradise are sublimated into harmless metaphor, 5 and a Byzantine oath of abjuration of Islam mentions the belief that the Prophet was tQ hold the keys of para- dise as part of the 'secret' doctrine of the The point is not of great intrinsic interest, but it does suggest that.

Of greater historical significance is the fact that the Prophet is represented as alive at the time of th-' conquest of Palestine. This testimony is of course irreconcilable with the Islamic account of the Prophet's career, but it finds independent confir- mation in the historical traditions of the Jacobites, Nestorians and Samari- tans; 7 the doctrinal meaning of the discrepancy will be taken up later.

That is to say the core of the Prophet's message, in the earliest testimony available to us outside the Islamic tradition, appears as Judaic messian- ism. The idea is hardly a familiar one, but again it is strikingly confirmed independent evidence.

He raises up over them a Prophet according to His will and will conquer the land for them and they will come and restore it in greatness, and there will be great terror betWeen them and the sons of Esau. Judeo-Hagarism said: "A troop of camels and a troop of asses"? But he, the rider on the camel, 14 goes forth the kingdom will arise through the rider on an ass. Again: "a troop of asses", since he rides on an ass, shows that they are the salvation of Israel, like the salvation of the rider on an ass.

This interpretation makes sense when set alongside the testimony of the Doctrina that the Prophet was in fact proclaiming the advent of the messiah, and at the same time provides independent confirmation of its authenticity.

It may of course seem strange that Jews should accept the credentials of a presumably Arabian prophet as harbinger of the messiah; but there was good Judaic precedent for the performance of an Arab in this role.

U 'Umar's embarrassing by-name was not of course left unglossed in the Islamic tradi- tion. When eventually the original Aramaic sense of the term had been successfully forgotten, it acquired a harmless Arabic etymology and was held to have been conferred by the Prophet himself.

An earlier view at- tempted a historical rather than an etymological evasion: it was the people of the book who called 'Umar the foroq, and the appellation some- how slipped onto the tongues of the Muslims. For if there is contemporary evidence that the Prophet was preaching the coming of the messiah, it can hardly be for- tuitous that the man who subsequently came bears even in the Islamic tradition a transparently messianiE title. The warmth of the Jewish reaction to the Arab invasion attested by the Doctrina 15 and exemplified by the 'Secrets' is far less.

The converted Jew of the Doctrina protests that he will not deny Christ, the son of God, even if the Jews and Saracens catch him and cut him to pieces. H There is nothing here to bear out the Islamic picture of a movement which had already broken with the Jews before the conquest, and regarded Judaism and Christianity with the same combination of tolerance and reserve.

What the materials examined so far do not provide is a concrete picture of the way in which this Judeo-Arab involvement might have come about. For this we have to turn to the earliest connected account of the career of the Prophet, that given in an Armenian chronicle written in the 66os and ascribed to Bishop Sebeos. Although they [the Ishmadites] were ready to accept this close kinship, they [the Jews] nevertheless could not convince the mass of the people, because their cults were different.

As the command came: from on' high, they all united under the authority of a single man, under a single law, and, abandoning vain cults, returned to the: living God who had revealed Himsdf to their father Abraham. Mahmtt forbade them to eat the Besh of any dead animal, to drink wine, 38 to lie or to fornicate:.

He: added: 'God has promised this land to Abraham and his posterity after him forever; he acted according to His promiSe: whae he loved lsrad. Only love: the God of Abraham, go and take possession of your country which God gave to your father Abraham, and none: will be: able: to resist you in the: struggle:, for God is with you.

They divided among their tribes the twdve thousand lsrac:litc:s, a thousand per tribe, to guide them into the land of Israc:l. These are the tribes All that re- mained of the peoples of the children of Israel came: to joiD Then they sent an embassy to the emperor of the Greeks, saying: 'God has given this land as a heritage to our father Abraham and his posterity after him; we: are the children of Abraham; you have: hdd our country long enough; give: it up peacefully, and we: will not invade: your territory; other- wise: we will retake: with interest what you have: taken.

It is also manifestly ahistorical in its admixture of Biblical ethnography and de- monstrably wrong in the role it ascribes to the Jewish refugees from Edessa. In contrast to the standard Islamic account of the relations between Muhammad and the Jewish tribes of Medina, the Jews appear in the document known as the 'Constitution of Medina' as forming one community ua with the believers despite the retention of their own religion, and are distributed nameless among a number of Arab tribes.

What Sebc:os has to say is also of considerable doctrinal interest in its own right. In the first place he provides a clear statement of the Palestinian orientation of the movement, a feature implicit in the messianic scenario and independently attested in the Jacobite historical tradition; 42 it is of course in some tension with the insistence of the Islamic tradition that the religious metropolis of the invaders was, already at the time of the conquest, identified with Mecca rather than Jerusalem.

Equally the exodus into the desert with which the story begins can plausibly be seen as the enactment of a well-established messianic fantasy. Thus Sebc:os, without directly attesting the messianic theme, helps to provide a doctrinal context in which it is thoroughly at home.

But Sebc:os also offers something entirely absent from the soW'Ces examined so far: an account of the way in which the Prophet provided a rationale for Arab involvement in the enactment of Judaic messianism. This rationale consists in a dual invocation of the Abrahamic descent of the Arabs as Ishmaelites : on the one hand to endow them with a birthright to the Holy Land,4 7 and on the other to provide them with a monotheist genealogy.

Neither invocation was without precedent. There is no good reason to suppose that the bearers of this primitive iden- tity called themselves 'Muslims'. The earliest datable occurrence of this term is in the Dome of the Rock of 69 If;49 it is not otherwise attested outside the Islamic literary tradition until far into the eighth century. This designation appeat;5 in Greek as 'Magaritai' in a papyrus of , and in Syriac as 'Mahgre' or 'Mahgraye' from as early as the 64os; 51 the cor- responding Arabic tc:rm is muhajirUn.

The first, rather lost in the Islamic tradition, 53 is genealogical: the 'Mahgraye', as an early Syriac source informs us, are the descendants of Abraham by Hagar. But no early source attests the historicity of this exodus, 56 and the sources examined in this chapter provide a plausible alternative in the emigration of the Ishmaelites from Arabia to the Promised Land.

Two points are worth adducing here in favour of this alternative. In the Jirst place, the muhajim of the Islamic tradition are by the time of the invasion of Pales- tine only the leading element of the conquering religious community; and yet the Greek and Syriac sources use the terms 'Magaritai' and 'Mahgraye' with every appearance of referring to the community as a whole. Holy Land, political success was in itself likely to prove doctrinally embarrassing.

Sooner rather than later, the mix- ture of Israelite redemption and Ishmaelite genealogy was going to curdle. For inherent in the messianic programme was the question once put to Jesus of Nazareth: 'Lord, wllt thou now restore the kingd6m to Israel? But the very success of the Arabs precluded a gradual dissociation from Jewish messianism, and required instead a sharp and immediate break. The context in which this break actually occurred may well have been the central symbolic act of the messianic progt:unme, the restoration of the Temple.

On the one hand we have the readiness of the early sources to speak of Arab buading activity on the site as restoring the Temple, 1 which at least suggests that this is what the Arabs originally took themselves to be doing; and in particular, we have the statement of the that the second king who arises from Ishmael will be a lover of Israel who 'restores their breaches and the breaches of the temple'.

The problem had long ago been faced and solved in a very different style by the Christians. As the Hagarenes broke with their erstwhile Jewish proteges and ac- quired large nwnbers of Christian subjects, their initial hostility to Christianity was clearly liable to erosion. Thus Isho'yahb Ill, Nestorian Catholicus c. Marwin in the 68os, and the latter's love of the Christians.

Already in an account of a disputation between a Christian patriarch and a Hagarene emir which probably took place in , 11 the emir appears neither to reject nor to affirm the messianic status of Jesus. The most interesting attestation of this recognition occurs in a letter of Jacob of Edessa d. The Mahgraye too They reproachfully maintain against them This is firmly professed by the Mahgraye, and not one of them will dispute it, for they say always and to everyone that Jesus son of Mary is in truth the messiah.

It enables us to see in the rather inert and perfunctory Koranic recognition of Jesus as messiah the residue of a basic Hagarene tenet vigorously maintained in controversy with the Jews. The point of such a tenet is obvious enough. In the figure of Jesus Christianity offered a messiah fully disengaged from the political fortunes of the Jews.

All the Hagarenes had to do to rid themselves of their own messianic incubus was to borrow the messiah of the Christians. Where the exchange of a Judaic for a Christian messianism was less help- ful to the Hagarenes was in the development of a positive religious identity of their own. Jbe harder they leant on Christianity to dissociate them- selves from the Jews, the greater the danger that they-would simply end up by becoming Christians like the majority of their subjects.

In con- ceptual terms the key to their suvivallay in the primitive religious identity already delineated in Judeo-Hagarism, and in particular in the Prophet's invocation of the God of Abraham in order to present an alien mono- theism to the Arabs as their ancestral faith. The idea of a rdigton of Abraham is of course prominent in the Koran. It is clearly presented as an autonomous religion 24, 22 ; and its founder is not only categorised as a prophet , cf.

The doctrinal resources of this faith extend to a scriptu- rally ambiguous but essentially revivalist role for Muhammad himself 2 :IZ 3 , and it also seems to have provided the primary context for the development of the notion of islam.

It is a Christian source which makes good this loss by introducing the notion of Abraham's 'commandments'- also alluded to in the 'Secrets' 22 - a. The first concerns the relationship of this faith to Islam.

It is of course aue that the elements of the Abrahamic cult survive into the Islamic tradition. In the case of sacrifice, moreover, this presumption is reinforced by a further consideration. The Christian sources indicate sacrifice to have been a standard cultic practice in Syria.

Thus the Jacobite patriarch Athanasius of Balad, in a letter of regarding the religious dangers of Christian intercourse with the con- querors, is particularly concerned to stop Christians eating the sacrifices of the 'pagans'; 35 and Jacob of Edessa, in the course of some curious observations on the religious malpractices of the Armenians, mentions that the Arabs practice circumcision and make three genuftexions to the south when sacrificing.

There are thus grounds for seeing in Hagarene circumcision and sacrifice the perpetUation of pagan practice under a new Abrahamic aegis. The religion of Abraham provided some sort of answer to the question how the Hagarenes could enter the monotheist world without losing their identity in either of its major traditions. But in itself it was too simple and threadbare a notion to generate the basic religious structures which such a will to independence required.

The faith which had most to offer the Hagarenes at this level was Samaritanism. The Samaritans had faced the problem of dissociation from Judaism before the Christians, and without ever being absorbed by them. They had also solved the problem in a style very different from that of the Christians, and a good deal more relevant to the immediate needs of the Hagarenes: where the Christians sublimated the Judaic categorifl' into metaphor, the Samaritans replaced them with concrete alternatives.

At one point in the disputation etween the patriarch and the emir referred to above, 43 the emir demands to be told how it is that, if the Gospel is one, the Christian sects differ rmong themselves in matters of belief. The patriarch replies Just as the Pentateuch is one and the same, and is accepted by us Christians and by you Mahgraye, and by the Jews and the Samaritans, and each community is divided in faith; so also with the faith of the Gospel, each heresy understands and interprets it differently.

Hagarism is thus classed as a Pentateuchal religion. The patriarch replies with a barrage of unspecified scriptural citations, the weight of which was clearly pro- phetic. Adherence to this scriptural position can also be detected in some pas- sages of Levond's version of the correspondence between 'Umar and Leo. It is the Evangelists But Jesus was truly worthy ofbc:lic:f, was dose: to God, and knc:w himself more: closely than writings distorted and perverted by peoples unknown to you.

In each case, the tendency on the Hagarene side is clearly towards the Samaritan scriptural position. Specifically, it ddeted the scriptural basis of the Davidic component of Judaic messianism - neither the legitimacy of the Davidic monarchy nor the sanctity of Jerusalem are attested in the Pentateuch; 54 and at the same: time:, it did something to reinforce the patriarchal em- phasis of the rdigion of Abraham.

More generally, the espousal of the Pentateuch without the prophets defined an attitude to the question of rdigious at least in its scriptural form, which was polemically viable in the monotheist world. Their religion of Abraham established who they were, their Christian messianism hdped to emphasise who they were not, and their scriptural position, in addition to helping out with messianism, endowed them with a sort of dementary doctrinal literacy, a line to shoot.

The trouble was that these solutioiU!. On the one hand the rejection of the prophets, by the; very neatness with which it excised the scriptural basis of Davidic messianism, made nonsense of the recognition of the Christian messiah; and on the other, the: recognition of the: Pentateuch alone: meant a Mosaic dominance which went badly with the notion of a religion of Abraham. But the root of the: trouble was that the Hagarenc:s had not yet faced up to the: basic dilemma of their religious predicament.

They had begun with an uneasy combination of Israelite redemption and Ishmaelite genealogy; the specific content of each term might change, but the fundamental problem remained that of making an alien religious truth their own.

There were really only two solutions. On the one: hand they could proceed after the manner of the: Ethiopian Christ- ians, that is to say by themselves adopting Israelite descent. But in view of the play they had already made of L. On the other hand, if they would not go to the truth, the truth might perhaps be persuaded to come to them.

On the foundation of their Ishmaelite genealogy, they had to erect a properly Ishmaelite propheto- logy. It was a daring move for so religiously parvenu a nation, but it was the only way out. The initial doctrinal adaptions analysed in the: previous chapter had left Muhammad himself distinctly underemployed. The repression of messianism had reduced his mission to that of a monotheist preacher of rather ill-defined status. It was possible: to give: this status more precise definition by invoking the notion of a revivalist messenger sent to restore: the religion of Abraham.

It was just this relationship that stood in need of definition if an Ishmaelite prophetology was to be created. The Arabian warner had to advance beyond his comfortably parochial role into the dizzy heights of scriptural revelation: he had now to be aligned, not with Hiid and Salih. Two features of the Mosaic complex facilitated this alignment. The first was the ease with which it is pos- sible to shift within the Mosaic paradigm from redemption to revelation, the Red Sea to Sinai.

It was not difficult to see Mul ammad in the Mosaic role of the leader of an exodus, and there was therefore no reason why he should not complete the performance by receiving revelation on an appro- priate sacred mountain. But the Sira provides clear instances of the identification of Muhammad as the Deuteronomic prophet.

Where the Hagarenes had to fend for themselves was in composing an actual sacred hook for their prophet, less alien than that of Moses and more real than that of Abraham.

With regard to the manner of composition, there is some reason to suppose that the Koran was put together out of a plurality of earlier Hagarene religious works. In the first place, this. On the Islamic side, the Koran itself gives obscure indications that the integrity of the scripture was problematic, 12 and with this we may compare the allegation against 'Uthmin that the Koran had been many hooks of which he had left only one. On the Christian side, the monk of l:lale distinguishes pointedly between the Koran and the Sin-at as Sou.

The book is strikingly lacking in overall structure, frequently obscure and inconsequential in both language and content, perfunctory in its linking of disparate materials, and given to the repetition of whole passages in variant versions. On this basis it can plausibly be argued that the book is the of the and imper: feet editing But again, there is no direct early testimony as to the date of this 17 The Dome of the Rock does attest the existence, at the end of the seventh century, of materials immediately recognisable as Koranic in a text that not infrequently coincides with our own; 18 but it does not of course give any indication of the literary form in which these materials normally appeared at the time.

In any case, with the single exception of a passage in the dialogue between the pltriarch and the emir which might be construed as an im- plicit reference to the Koranic law of inheritance, 20 there is no indication of the existence of the Koran before the end of the seventh cen. Now both Christian and Muslim sources attribute some kind of rble to l:iajjaj in the history of Muslim saipture.

Once Muhammad was established in the role of a Mosaic saiptural prophet, the identity of the new faith was finally secure. In the first place, a shift from a prophetology more reactionary than Judaism to one more progressive than Christianity brought the older monotheist religions into a more comfortable The Mosaic presence receded somewhat, 23 and the Torah according to one tradition was deferentially dumped in Lake Tiberias.

At the same time the boldness of this solution rendered the religion of Abraham, with its timid espousal of the lut prophet that Ishmael could legitimately share with Israel, conceptually otiose. The verb aslama has cognates in Hebrew, Aramaic and Syriac. But whereas neither Jewish nor Christian literature provides satisfactory precedent for the Islamic usage, 32 we find exact parallds in the most important Samaritan text of the pre- Islamic period. The context of the idea in Samaritanism is patriarchal; and its leading example Abrahamic.

The religion of Abraham was thus the most appropriate locus for the assimilation and development of the borrowing, and the Koranic material bears out this inference. In general, this material gives a strong sense of the paradigmatic status of Abraham's submission and of the central role of submission in his religion. There are two directions in which one might look for the challenge which evoked this response. In the first place, we clearly have to do with a general religious category defining the proper relationship between man and God which occupies a position analogous to that of the covenant in Judaism.

The possibility thus arises of seeing in islam a development of the covenant of Abraham in the face of the challenge of the Mosaic covenant. The most plausible sense of the root to in,voke here is that of 'peace', and the sense of 'to make peace' is well-attested for the cognate of aslama in targumic Aramaic; 37 from this it can be argued that the primary sense of islam was entry into a covenant of peace.

But if islam is the conceptual rival of one Mosaic notion, it is also the historical successor of another. In early Hagarism the idea of 'exodus' had constituted the central duty of the faith, and at the same time provided its adherents with a name. But when redemption became scripture, the Hagarenes needed a category more Sinaitic in scope. Hence islam replaced hijra as the fundamental religious duty, 40 and the 'Mahgraye' accordingly became Muslims. The polity itself had long disappeared, but its memory remained, most vividly in the restorationist aspirations of messianism.

Any religious movement dissociating itself from Judaism had perforce to exor- cise the ghost of this polity. The core of Samaritanism was the rejection of the sanctity of Jerusalem and its replacement by the older Israelite sanctuary of Shechem. This meant that when the Hagarenes in turn disengaged from 4 Shechem could provide a simple and appropriate model for the creation of a sanctuary of their own.

The paralldism is striking. Each presents the same binary structure of a sacred city closely associated with a nearby holy mountain, and in each case the liiri:aimental rit.. These parallels are the more remarkable in that the Meccan sanctuary is clearly only the terminus of a complex development.

In what follows we shall identify the major processes at work in this development, and attempt a speculative account of the way in which they may have interacted.

On the face of it the earliest references are those found in one Syriac version of the apocalypse of pseudo-Methodius; but although the apocalypse itself dates from the late seventh century, the references to Mecca which distinguish this version are J,ijely to be second- ary. Positively, the Koran itself tells us the name of the place where the sanctuary actually was: Bakka 3 The Islamic tradition is naturally at pains to identify this place with Mecca, 11 and none of our sources shed any light on its original location.

There is, however, one source of un- certain date, the Samaritan Aramaic text known as the Asa ir, which suggests that the name Bakka may be the residue of an archaic phase in the search for a Hagarene sanctuary.

According to this text, the children of Nebajoth built Mecca, as it is written: 'as thou goest b'k. This strained exercise in Biblical philo- logy might of course be nothing more than an instance of inveterate Samaritan antiquarianism. But it may also be that we have here the residue of a Hagarene attempt to procure from their Samaritan mentors a Pentateuchal sanction for a Hagarene sanctuary.

In the I:Iijaz itself, the evidence is highly unsatisfactory in that it derives almost entirely from the Islamic tradition. There are never- theless two places worth noting: Yathnb, to which we shall return, 1' and Ta'if. Ta'if presents one suspicious parallelism with Shechem in that both in contrast to Mecca are sanctuaries located in famously green environments; 16 and it is the subject of one suspicious Islamic tradition, to the effect that it had once been a place in Palestine.

We now reach an area for which Jewish settlement is well attested in pre-Islamic times, and for which a sacred geography had already been sketched out in the Jewish Targums. Through their habit of up-dating Biblical place-names, the Targwns provided versions of Genesis in which the wanderings of the key figures - Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael- were transposed onto north-west Arabia.

We do not know how late these pagan traditions survived in the area. But we have already noted the characteristic l:lanif1St transvaluation of pagan practice which would have applied here, and it was long ago.

Al-l:lijr was thus an obvious place for a grave of Ishmael. That the Hagarenes did in fact make this usc of it is suggested by a curious feature of Meccan topography: even in Mecca, Ishmael is buried in the l;ijr. In other words, we seem to have here a striking parallel to the case of Bakka. In each case the Hagarenes appear to have set out to find themselves a sanctuary from Gen. In the first place, we have the archaeological evidence of two Umayyad mosques in Iraq, that of I:Iajjaj in Wasif and another attributed to roughly the same period ncar Baghdad.

The other major source of perturbation in the sacred geography of Arabia was the search for a suitable scenario for the Mosaic activities of the Prophet. In the first instance this meant resiting the Hagarene exodus. Negatively, the Prophet was disengaged from the original Palestinian venture by a chronological revision whereby he died two years before the invasion began. Search for: Search. Search results for: maiden-mother-crone.

Maiden Mother Crone Deanna J. Author : Deanna J. Conway File Size : Author : Claire Hamilton File Size : Author : Kristin Madden File Size : Maiden Mother Crone Katie Metcalfe — in. Author : Katie Metcalfe File Size :