If you're new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新这里，你可能想通过定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!谢谢您的访问！

The book titled Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World questions just about everything Muslims believe as historical truths.该书名为Hagarism：在一切使伊斯兰世界对穆斯林相信问题只是作为历史的真理。 It challenges the common belief that the Qur'an was revealed to Prophet它挑战的共同信念，即古兰经被透露给先知 Muhammad穆罕默德 over a period of 22 years (610-632) in Mecca and Medina.超过22岁（610-632）在麦加和麦地那时期。 Instead, the book contends that the Qur'an was composed, possibly in Syria or Iraq, more than fifty years after the Prophet's death, projected back in time, and attributed to the Prophet.相反，书中争辩说，古兰经的组成可能是在叙利亚或伊拉克，有超过50年之后，先知的死亡，预计在时间回来，原因是先知。 The Qur'an, according to the book, was fabricated during the reign of Caliph Abdul Malik (685-705 CE) to legitimize an expanding empire.古兰经，根据这本书，是凭空捏造期间哈里发阿卜杜勒马利克（685-705 CE认证），以扩大帝国的统治合法化。

The book also contends that the word “Muslim” was invented in the 8th century to replace the word Muhajirun (immigrants), which was the original name of the Arab community that conquered Palestine and built the Dome of the Rock.该书还争辩说，单词“穆斯林”是在第8世纪发明一词取代迁士 （移民），这是岩石原来的名称是阿拉伯社区，征服巴勒斯坦和兴建的巨蛋。 The book itself prescribes a new name for early Muslims.这本书本身规定了早期的穆斯林一个新名称。 It calls them Hagarenes , that is, the biological descendants of Abraham by Hagar.它呼吁他们Hagarenes，即由夏甲的后代生物亚伯拉罕。 This racial naming of early Muslims is employed to distinguish them from Jews, who are the descendants of Abraham by Sarah. Hagarism , the book's title, is a quasi-pejorative, and possibly a racist, label to describe the historical phenomenon of early Muslims.这种早期的穆斯林种族命名是用来区分犹太人他们从，谁是萨拉亚伯拉罕的后裔。Hagarism，书的标题，是一个准贬义，也可能是种族主义者，标签来描述早期的穆斯林的历史现象。

In the authors' own words, the book is written “by infidels for infidels.” Attacks on the Quran's authenticity, the Prophet's integrity, or Islamic在作家自己的话说，这本书是写“由异教徒异教徒的。”伊斯兰事件对古兰经的真实性，先知的完整性，或 history历史 are not new.是不是新的。 The Quran itself acknowledges similar attacks the unbelievers made while the Quran was being revealed.可兰经不信自己也承认了类似的攻击，而可兰经被发现。 For more than a thousand years, Western scholarship has been determined to expose what it considers to be the “fraudulent foundation” of对于年超过1万，西方学者已决定揭露它认为是“欺诈基础” Islam伊斯兰教 . 。 In this sense, Hagarism is yet another book in the large dump of attack literature.在这个意义上说，Hagarism又是文学书在攻击的大场。

However, what distinguishes this book is the fact that its authors, Michael Cook and Patricia Crone, no longer subscribe to its critical findings. On April 3, 2006, I had a phone conversation with Michael Cook and we talked about Hagarism .然而，这本书的区别是， 它的作者，迈克尔库克和帕特里夏克龙，不再支持其 2006年的调查结果的关键。年4月3日，我有一个迈克尔库克通电话与我们Hagarism谈论。 He said to me the following, which he later confirmed by means of an email: “The central thesis of that book was, I now think, mistaken.他对我说下面的，后来他证实了一封电子邮件，是指：“在那本书的中心论点是，我现在认为，错误的。 Over the years, I have gradually come to think that the evidence we had to support the thesis was not sufficient or internally consistent enough.” On April 6, 2006, I interviewed Patricia Crone, as well, to see what she now thinks about the book.多年来，我已渐渐觉得我们有证据支持论文是不充分或足够的内部一致。4月6日，2006“，我采访帕特里夏克龙，以及，看什么，她认为现在对书。 She was even more candid in repudiating the central thesis of the book.她更坦率的批判书的中心论点。 She agrees with the critics that the book was “a graduate essay.” The book was published in 1977 when the authors lived in England.她同意的批评，认为该书是“一个研究生的论文。”这本书1977年出版时，作者在英格兰住在纽约。 “We were young, and we did not know anything. “我们年轻，我们不知道任何事情。 The book was just a hypothesis, not a conclusive finding,” said Crone.这本书只是一个假设，而不是结论性的发现，说：“克龙。 “I do not think that the book's thesis is valid.” “我不认为这本书的论点是有效的。”

Many Western scholars, Christians and Jews, have dismissed Hagarism as a “thin argument” rather than “credible research.” One historian who appears to admire the book is Daniel Pipes, who has taught at Chicago and Harvard universities.许多西方学者，基督徒和犹太人，已驳回研究Hagarism为“薄论”而不是“可信的。”一个历史学家似乎谁欣赏这本书是丹尼尔管，谁曾任教于芝加哥大学和哈佛大学。 Pipes, an embittered Zionist known for his ugly utterings against Islam and Muslims, argues that while Western scholars like Crone and Cook “in the role of termites” are eating away at the magnificent Islamic edifice, Muslims are “acting as though the beams and joints were as strong as ever.” Even Pipes, however, describes the book as “wild.” Notwithstanding scholarly repudiations, Internet websites continue to rely on the book to malign Islam, assuming that the book's thesis is derived from credible research.管，一苦犹太复国主义对伊斯兰和穆斯林为他的丑陋utterings知道，而西方学者认为，像克龙和库克在白蚁的作用“”是蚕食的宏伟大厦伊斯兰，穆斯林是“充当虽然梁和关节仍与以往一样强烈。“即使管，但是，描述为”野生书。尽管如此学术离弃妻子“，互联网网站继续在依靠中伤伊斯兰教的书，假定这本书的论文是从可信的研究得出。

Even online Wikipedia features the book, citing a large quotation from Daniel Pipes.即使是在线百科全书功能的书，列举了大量报价从丹尼尔管。 The article concludes: “Although this line of research is discounted by Islamic traditionalists, Western scholars have generally applauded Crone and Cook's advances in tracing the origins of Islam.” When I insisted that Wikipedia provide a source to support the above conclusion, the editor added “citation needed” to the conclusion.文章得出结论：虽然这方面的研究路线是由伊斯兰传统主义折扣“，西方学者普遍称赞克龙和追查伊斯兰教的起源库克的进步。”当我坚持认为，维基百科提供来源，以支持上述结论，编辑补充“编辑”的结论。 As of today, no citation to support the conclusion has been furnished.截至今天，没有引用来支持结论已经布置。

Part of the confusion arises from the fact that Cook and Crone have made no manifest effort to repudiate their juvenile findings in the book.这一混乱局面，部分是由于库克和克龙都没有明显的努力，推翻他们的少年在书中发现的事实。 The authors admitted to me that they had not done it and cater no plans to do so.提交人向我承认，他们没有这样做，并没有照顾计划这样做。 Repudiating scholarly work is not easy because sometimes errors are intertwined with valid findings.批判的学术工作并不容易，因为有时错误交织在一起的结果有效。 No scholar is obligated to rewrite books to correct errors.没有学者有责任书，以纠正错误重写。 Scholarly decency, however, demands that the authors officially repudiate a scandalous thesis, one in which they no longer believe and one that maligns the faith of more than a billion people.学术尊严，但是，要求提交正式否认了令人惊讶的论文，在其中，他们不再相信，作为一个maligns了超过10亿人民更加有信心。

It appears however that the authors do not wish to discount a book that launched their careers and brought to them contacts and fortune.不过，它的作者似乎不想折扣一书，推出自己的职业生涯，并提请他们接触和财富。 Patricia Crone teaches at the Institute for Advanced Studies, the academic home of Albert Einstein, an institute that proclaims itself as “one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry.” Michael Cook is a chaired professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University, who in 2002 (a few months after 9/11 terrorist attacks) received a $1.5 million Distinguished Achievement Award from the Mellon Foundation “for significant contribution to humanities research.”帕特里夏克龙教于高级研究中，爱因斯坦，一个机构来宣布为“的理论研究和学术访问的世界领先的中心之一，本身的学术家研究所。”迈克尔库克是主持教授，近东研究普林斯顿大学，谁（2002年数个月后9 / 11恐怖袭击）梅隆基金会收到了150万美元的杰出成就奖，以人文学科研究的重大贡献“。”

One needs no brains to write against Islam in the Western world.一个不需要绞尽脑汁，对伊斯兰写在西方世界。 After 9/11, anti-Islamic literature has become a big business that even acclaimed academics have generously exploited for self-promotion.经过9 / 11，反伊斯兰文学已成为一门大生意，甚至有著名学者慷慨地自我推销剥削。 In this milieu, repudiating even a false anti-Islamic book will be condemned as apostasy.在这种环境中，甚至是虚假的批判反伊斯兰的书将被视为叛教的谴责。 We need not burn the book.我们不必烧书。 Crone and Cook themselves must muster the courage and put out the brushfire they started three decades ago, albeit in youthful excitement.克龙和库克自己也必须拿出勇气，提出了布拉什菲尔他们开始在30年前，在青春的激情，尽管。