“A Critical Study of the Authenticity of Futuh al-Sham and Its Attribution to al-Waqidi”

Muhammad ibn Umar al-Waqidi (d. 207 AH/823 CE), a prominent historian of early Islam, significantly shaped the development of narrative historiography in the Islamic world with his renowned work, *Al-Maghazi*. Relying on Medina's network of narrators and oral accounts of battles, he presented an organized, chronologically-based narrative of the Ghazawat. This tradition was later continued by his student, Ibn Sa'd (d. 230 AH/845 CE), in his *Al-Tabaqat al-Kubra*. Alongside his undisputed works, a book titled *Futuh al-Sham* (Conquests of Syria) became attributed to al-Waqidi over the subsequent centuries. This text presents an epic and detailed account of Muslim conquests in Syria, yet its attribution to al-Waqidi has consistently been a subject of doubt and skepticism.

It is certain that al-Waqidi authored a book named *Futuh al-Sham*. Ibn al-Nadim (d. 438 AH/1046 CE) lists *Futuh al-Sham* among al-Waqidi's works in his *Al-Fihrist*. Furthermore, historians such as al-Tabari (d. 310 AH/922 CE) and al-Baladhuri (d. 279 AH/892 CE), among others, transmit reports of conquests from al-Waqidi, indicating their access to his books on the conquests, including *Futuh al-Sham*.

This research aims to address the primary question: Is the *Futuh al-Sham* available today a direct composition by al-Waqidi, or is it the product of later revisions by his intellectual and narrative school in subsequent centuries? This study employs manuscriptology, chain of narration analysis (isnad), stylistic, and historical discourse analysis of the current *Futuh al-Sham*, comparing them with al-Waqidi's undisputed work, *Al-Maghazi*. Additionally, quantitative methods, including narrator network analysis and linguistic frequency analysis, are utilized to provide a more objective explanation of the text's evolutionary process.

The findings reveal strong evidence of incongruity in the chain of narrators (only 22% overlap), fundamental differences in linguistic and rhetorical style (an 1.8-fold increase in sentence length and a fourfold rise in rhetorical verbs in *Futuh al-Sham*), and the presence of post-Crusades ideological vocabulary and concepts within the text. Quantitative data further indicated an average authentic overlap of only 26%.

Based on this evidence, the central hypothesis of the research is confirmed: *Futuh al-Sham*, in its current form, is not a direct work of al-Waqidi. Instead, it is the result of epic-religious revisions within later narrative schools in the Syrian region, most likely between the 6th and 8th centuries AH (12th-14th centuries CE). These revisions were undertaken to reconstruct the collective memory of the conquests within the context of contemporary challenges, particularly the Crusades. Attributing this work to al-Waqidi was an attempt to lend historical legitimacy to the jihadist discourse and identity formation of that era.

The "al-Waqidi school" refers to the intellectual tradition established by al-Waqidi, where later historians, following his methods and approaches, engaged in historiography. This is analogous to the "al-Tabari school," where historians like Ibn Kathir (d. 774 AH/1372 CE) and Ibn al-Athir (d. 630 AH/1233 CE) followed his historical methodology. This research not only concludes that *Futuh al-Sham* is not al-Waqidi's direct work but also highlights significant differences in its methodology and style compared to al-Waqidi's well-known books like *Al-Maghazi*.

This study demonstrates that the study of Islamic historiography necessitates a hybrid approach combining critical evaluation of chains of narration, textual analysis, and an intertextual understanding of historical meaning production. *Futuh al-Sham* serves as an example of a text that, at the intersection of history and literature, reconstructs the narrative identity of the *umma* (community). It provides a deeper understanding of the reasons and mechanisms behind the transformation of early historical narratives into ideological accounts within the Islamic historiographical tradition. Furthermore, the research findings can offer a methodological template for critically re-examining other texts attributed to early Islamic historians, opening new avenues for understanding the dynamics of Muslim historical memory and significantly contributing to Waqidi studies.

This article is derived from my doctoral dissertation, authored by Seyyed Abolhassan Ahmadi Foroushany. During the research for my dissertation and my examination of *Futuh al-Sham*, I became doubtful about the authenticity of its attribution. Consequently, I compiled evidence and documentation to produce this article.

Professor Dr. Zahra Rouhollahi Amiri welcomed this research and, through her continuous follow-up, participation in the research, consultation of classical sources, overall supervision of the article, and its revisions, played a significant role in its authorship. Additionally, Professor Dr. Seyyed Hossein Fallahzadeh, as my dissertation supervisor, indirectly contributed to the formation and development of this article.