100 ANALOGY, SYSTEMATIC REASONING

discussion is the same as that of Shāfi'ī. This influence of Graeco-Roman rhetoric might also account for other traces of Greek logic and Roman law in early Muhammadan legal science,¹ including the particular kind of analogical reasoning known as istiṣḥāb² which we find for the first time in Shāfi'ī,³ and perhaps even the reasoning called istiṣlāḥ.⁴

A. THE UMAIYAD PERIOD

The information on the early judges of Egypt in Kindī can hardly be considered as authentic throughout as far as the first century is concerned; but it agrees with that relating to the first half of the second century in making the judges rely on their personal opinion to the exclusion of traditions. This ancient feature, therefore, still persisted at the time in which the information on the first century originated, and it certainly existed in the earlier part of the second century.

P. 312, A.H. 65: among the desirable qualifications of a judge are mentioned knowledge of the Koran and knowledge of how to distribute the shares of inheritance; the judge in question did not have either, but 'judged according to what he knew [that is, what he had heard from others], and inquired [that is, consulted others] about what he did not know'; there is no question yet of knowledge of sunna or traditions. If it is stated (p. 313) that this judge was illiterate but nevertheless successful because he used to frequent the company of two Companions of the Prophet, the evidence to the contrary from a much later period compels us to regard this as a secondary explanation.

Pp. 314-20, on 'Abdalraḥmān b. Ḥujaira, judge A.H. 69-83: several decisions are ascribed to him, and the context shows that they are regarded as the result of his own discretion. They are so irregular by all later standards that it is possible or even likely that they reflect authentic legal opinions of the first century, even if their ascription to this particular judge is not beyond doubt.⁵ His alleged