Does the detailed news in the hadiths about the victory of the Romans exist in historical sources?

- It is written in the chapter of ar-Rum in the Quran that the Romans will be victorious in a few years. However, it is not written in detail; it is only written that they will win. If we want to know the details of it, we need to look at hadiths. Since the hadiths are ahad news, the information in the hadiths is not certain and I know that this incident does not exist in any sources other than hadiths. For example, details such as the bet about the chapter of ar-Rum in the hadiths and the 9-year duration is determined for the bet are only found in hadiths; and they are ahad news; their accuracy is doubtful.

- Does the detailed news in the hadiths about the victory of the Romans exist in historical sources or in any other source whose accuracy is certain?

- Or, as I know, does the detailed information about this verse exist only in hadiths? Will you give me information regarding the issue?

Dear Brother / Sister,

1) First of all, it is clearly stated in the chapter of ar-Rum that the Romans will fight and defeat the Iranians, against whom they suffered a great defeat, within a few years. The following is stated in the Quran / chapter of ar-Rum clearly:

a) It is a definite miracle that the Quran foretells that there will be war between the Romans and the Iranians soon.

b) Limiting the period of war to between 3 and 9 years (BID’A) is another miracle.

c) The announcement that the Romans, who suffered a great defeat a short time ago, will be strong enough to wage a war again and that they will win a great victory in this war is clear news about ghayb and a miracle.

d) Emphasizing that Muslims will also experience great joy (with the victory at Badr) on the same day is some other news about ghayb and a miracle.

2) The news value given by the ahad hadiths is greater than and superior to the news in historical sources.

- The narration by three people is also considered ahad. However, in the life of this world, people generally trust even the word of a single person. Which of us rejected some news given by a person by saying “it is ahad”?

Ahad hadiths express at least a “zann al-ghalib (highly strong opinion)”. Most of the criteria in people’s social life is zann al-ghalib; similarly, almost all of the ijtihads of fiqh scholars express zann al-ghalib. All the wajibs in Hanafi madhhabs are based on this kind of justification.

Why do we not use this criterion, which we accept in worship, which is the main issue of religion, in historical events - supported by the Quran?

However, there is such ahad news that is like tawatur in terms of meaning. For example, it is a mental illness to be suspicious about an event that different people at different times reported to have happened. No one hesitates to believe some news that even two or three children aged 8-10, who are likely to lie, give by citing different sources.

3) Moreover, this incident, which is mentioned in the chapter of ar-Rum, is also included in many historical sources. (For example, see Tabari, Tarikhut-Tabari, 1/467-468; Ibnul-Mutahhar, al-Bad’u wat-Tarikh, 1/253; Dhahabi, Tarikhul-Islam, 1/ 60; Ibnul-Athir, al-Kamil, Fit-Tarikh, 1/165, Ibn Khaldun, at-Tarih, 2/179-180; Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya wan-Nihaya, 3/134 -135; an-Nihaya fil-Malahim, 1/77)

For more information, please click on the link given below;

How many years later did the Byzantines defeat the Iranians, which is mentioned in the chapter of ar-Rum?

Questions on Islam