All right .. posing hypothesis on a topic .. so she initiated an hypothesis along with dr. Cook.,
Is that what your point is ?? for that she should be called as believer ? and you appears to be using it as derogatory term very regularly
Education is repetition :
Believer to the traditional narrative. Narrative which is mandatory to start to believe that the Quran is the word of God, giving to "Muhammad". Where? In Mecca/Zem zem, i.e., to be Muslim.
To be Muslim you are obliged to believe to the narrative as historical.
YOU ARE VERY WRONG saying she fled to Princeton., why would you say that??
Because it was no more possible to work in UK for her. Posing an hypothese (Hagarism and Meccan trade) about Islam was scandal. Whereas she even did not believe in it, as evidenced by her later articles.She fled to Princeton.
what do you mean by "insupportable" ?? it is hypothese ....it is HYPO-THESIS ., it is an idea to be explored ., it is supposed to be investigated., and to be proved whether it is right or wrong . You know that ., that is how modern scholarship works in every field of investigation.
Science does not work like that Yeez. There are clans, hate, etc.
well., no one becomes popular just by raising an hypothesis .,
In the topic of Islam, yes.
So there must be something in that booklet .. whether you call it as hypothesis or convulsed ..plain..simple concept .,
WHAT IS IT??
The hypothese that the narrative was partly wrong. And as the narrative is a belief mandatory to be Muslim, it mean call into question the Islamic religion.
Besides, Crone is wrong, like all the scholarship which, like her, identifies "the prophet has appeared coming with the Saracens, and is proclaiming the advent of the anointed one" to Muhammad.
There is no "advent of the anointed one" announcement in the Quran.
Ok., you mean to say ....she was wrong w.r.t Muhammad and she was wrong w.r.t appearance of new prophet .. and she was wrong in her scholarship and identifying "the prophet has appeared coming with the Saracens, and is proclaiming the advent of the anointed one" to Muhammad.
I mean to say that. In doing so, she does not start again. She keep the narrative : Muammad, Kaba, Zem zem. With this, it is impossible to find something. She found then nothing and was rather lost when she dealt with the core text of the Quran (about the pagans notably)..
She was dressed as a revisionist whereas she was not! And this "dress" obliged her to flee. It's quite ironic...
Am I (at last!) clear?
well then IT IS GOOD THING FOR PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND OTHERS ., you have something original to write , to explore, to explain on the history of Islam ., one person can not do everything ..
I never said (TM) she had to do everything. I just says that she start nothing as she still accept "Muhammad" and the rest. And I consider that in accepting "Muhammad" and the rest." she start again nothing. That is all