THE MEDINESE AND MECCANS 247

(Muw. iii. 88), but he was also made the transmitter of a tradition from the Prophet in favour of the unsuccessful modification (Muw. Shaib. 271; Tr. III, 56). Ibn Wahb (Mud. v. 87) quotes him as stating that 'the Muslims have finally decided' in favour of what was the common ancient doctrine (intahā amr al-Muslimīn ilā dhālik); but this stood at the beginning and not at the end of the development.

On a question of weregeld a spurious opinion of Ibn Musaiyib, and an alleged remark of Zuhrī on it, were abstracted from a different statement, itself fictitious, on the doctrine of Ibn Musaiyib.

The oldest judgment on Zuhrī of which I know is that of Shaibānī, who calls him 'the greatest lawyer and scholar of the Medinese in his time, and the most knowledgeable among them with regard to traditions from the Prophet' (Tr. VIII, 13). This already reflects the changed standards of a later generation.

C. RABIʿA

Rabīʿa b. Abī ʿAbdalraḥmān, somewhat younger than Zuhrī, was, according to Shaibānī (Tr. VIII, 13), the most prominent lawyer of the Medinese in his time. His conventional reputation as a particularly strong upholder of raʾy, a reputation which later earned him the nickname of Rabī'at al-Raʾy, is not based on facts.¹ The information which we possess on him is of the same character as that on Zuhrī: an appreciable amount of genuine doctrine, together with spurious additions. We are in many cases able to determine the authenticity or spuriousness of the opinions ascribed to him.

Certainly authentic are references such as Muw. ii. 229, where Mālik states that he heard Rabī'a express a certain opinion on the problem of how to expiate a particular kind of breach of the state of ritual consecration during the pilgrimage.²

For further examples of genuine opinions of Rabī'a, see Mud. iv. 64, a passage which shows conscious legal thought and anticipates in its essentials Shāfiʿī’s argument in Tr. III, 80; further, Mud. v. 130 and 133, which have been discussed above, p. 211; and Mud. xvi. 166, a reference which is connected with a genuine statement on Zuhrī. Shaibānī’s reference to Rabīʿa’s