As I understand them, the Journal of Medieval Worlds has at least four goals. First, it aims to publish research that expands upon the concept of a “global Middle Ages.” The editors seek contributions, in other words, that both illuminate traditional Western European medieval studies from a global perspective as well as scholarship that treats parts of the world outside the traditionally accepted boundaries of medieval history in Europe and the Mediterranean basin. Here, we have been particularly anxious to receive contributions that treat Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and the Americas, as well as pieces that are thought provoking and make theoretical contributions to our understanding of this larger vision of the medieval period. Second, the journal aims to publish work that is comparative, setting the findings from one geographical or chronological space alongside another in an effort to make new observations about each. Third, we have been particularly interested to support research that illuminates traditional questions and problems—the migrations of peoples, the transmissions of texts, the development of social networks, to name just a few—through new methods. From the first, our discussions about the journal’s brief pointed to the growing body of research that draws upon new scientific methods like DNA analysis in the quest to deepen understanding of the movement of peoples, or the possibilities that computer-assisted research offers to mine large data sets. And finally, the journal is committed not just to the publication of original research, but to expanding readers’ understanding of best practices in pedagogy related to global studies and the Middle Ages.

This issue offers something that speaks to all these goals. The first piece, “Verifying Source Citations in the Hadith Literature” by Mairaj Syed, Danny Halawi, Behnam Sadeghi, and Nazmus Saquib, reports on their efforts to evaluate the reliability of Gawāmiʿ al-Kalim …