al-Jawzī in "al-ʿIlal al-Mutanāhiyah" said (2/371): "al-Dāraqutnī said: Abū al-Rabīʿ erred, and it was only narrated by Hishām from Ḥafṣah bint Sīrīn from Abū al-ʿĀliyah as his own statement." The preferable criticism is through his father, Dāwūd, due to his unknown status as previously mentioned. Then, his statement: ".. as his own statement" I am not sure if it is precise! For I found in "Fatḥ al-Bārī" by Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (13/77): "In the mursal of Abū al-ʿĀliyah: all the signs in six months." This apparently indicates it is marfūʿ, but it is mursal. And Allāh knows best. It has a corroborating mawqūf narration from Ḥudhayfah who said: "When you see the first of the signs, they will follow in succession." It was recorded by Ibn Abī Shaybah (15/63) through the route of Mujālid from al-Shaʿbī from Ṣilah from him. This isnād is good for supporting evidence, and it is considered marfūʿ, especially since it is from the ḥadīth of Ḥudhayfah, the keeper of the secret of the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam). It has another corroborating narration from Ibn ʿAmr, and its documentation has been mentioned under number (1762). I also mentioned a corroborating narration from Anas there. In summary, the ḥadīth with these corroborations is authentic without doubt, and it seems for this reason the ḥāfiẓ affirmed it in "al-Fatḥ" (13/77). As for the ḥadīth: "The signs after two hundred," it is fabricated, and I documented it in "al-Ḍaʿīfah" (1966)