¹ PSAS xvi (1986), p. 18Google Scholar. I would wish to qualify one of the statements in this passage: Although the (lost) history of Thābit b. Sinān aṣ-Ṣābi’ is clearly one of the principal sources used by Miskawayh and Ibn al-’Athīr for this period, I do not now believe that the work published as Thābīt's ’Akbāru l-qarāmiṭah has anything to do with him and have expressed in print the opinion that the latter is “a clumsy forgery knocked together out of extracts from Ibn al-’Athīr” see El ², art. Ṣābi’. The El article has presumably been overlooked by Hajnal, who quotes repeatedly from pseudo-Thābit.