the Euphrates river founded in AD 637/8, and [*al-Ruāfah*]{} is said to be close to [*al-Kūfah*]{} (hence, probably not the part of Baghdad called [*al-Ruāfah*]{}).

The event was observed by [*al-Manūr*]{} and/or one or more members of the group travelling with him to Mecca. In the first report, it is mentioned that the source of [*al-abar*]{}*ī* was connected to [*Muammad b. Ibrāh*]{}*ī*[*m*]{}, the govenour of Mecca, who was a member of the group. It is therefore well possible that the report goes back to him. It is possible that also the historian [*al-Haytham ibn $^{\rm c}$Ad*]{}*ī*, mentioned as source of the second report, knew the story from the very same source. If [*al-abar*]{}*ī* used two apparently different sources, they may not have been independent of each other, which could explain the almost identical wording in both reports. At the beginning of the 2nd report, [*al-abar*]{}*ī* starts the report with [*Dhukira $^{\rm c}$an al-Haytham ibn $^{\rm c}$Ad*]{}*ī* ..., which means [*as has been reported from al-Haytham ibn $^{\rm c}$Ad*]{}*ī* ..., possibly indicating that the source was not available to [*al-abar*]{}*ī* in written form. According to Leder (1991), who has studied all known reports citing [*al-Haytham ibn $^{\rm c}$Ad*]{}*ī* as source, there 