Sometimes neither report contains the words “earlier” or “later,” yet reliable historical evidence dates the underlying events. A well-known discussion concerns cupping while fasting, including «أَفْطَرَ الْحَاجِمُ وَالْمَحْجُومُ» and a report of cupping during a fast.
Where the later date of an event is reliably known, it may illuminate the possibility of abrogation. Nevertheless, the analyst must still determine whether the two narrations concern the same ruling under comparable conditions.
This example is subject to juristic disagreement. A purported later incident does not by itself abrogate an earlier report; chronology, wording, and the possibility of reconciliation all remain material.