The History of al-Tabari

01

How this history is to be read

منهج الطبري

Al-Tabari did not write as Bukhari wrote. He did not condition a report on being sahih before he set it down. He set it down with its chain. The criticism, he said, is in the names. A reader who treats every line in the Tarikh as “what happened” has not read the introduction.

فَمَا يَكُنْ فِي كِتَابِي هَذَا مِنْ خَبَرٍ مُسْتَنْكَرٍ … فَلْيَعْلَمْ أَنَّهُ لَمْ يُؤْتَ فِي ذَلِكَ مِنْ قِبَلِنَا، وَإِنَّمَا أُتِيَ مِنْ قِبَلِ بَعْضِ نَاقِلِيهِ إِلَيْنَا، وَأَنَا إِنَّمَا أَدَّيْنَا ذَلِكَ عَلَى نَحْوِ مَا أُدِّيَ إِلَيْنَا.

Whatever in this book of mine is a report that is found objectionable — let the reader know it did not come from us. It came from some who transmitted it to us. We have only delivered it as it was delivered to us.

al-Tabari, introduction to the Tarikh

This is the key of the whole work. He is a trustee of transmission, not a guarantor of every story.

How to weigh this

Three lamps on every page of Nur’s reader: (1) Quran first, where the Quran speaks. (2) A sahih report from the Six, where one exists. (3) Tabari’s akhbar, with the chain named and the grade not assumed. If only the Tarikh carries a tale, we say so.