...was...Islam a 'movement of merchants'?Well Mohammed, who was beyond doubt a real historical figure, was a merchant himself so it is safe to assume the movement he inaugurated was a merchant movement itself in origins.
jaycee: Quote:We do know that there was a historical Muhammad as he gets a passing mention in early non-Muslim sources. We don't know if he was a merchant, whether he actually came from Mecca or what his real relationship was with the writing of the Qur'an. The surviving Muslim traditions on this date from much later, in the eighth and ninth centuries. It can't just be assumed that they record real history....was...Islam a 'movement of merchants'?Well Mohammed, who was beyond doubt a real historical figure, was a merchant himself so it is safe to assume the movement he inaugurated was a merchant movement itself in origins.
Engels was a capitalist, Marx was middle class etc- that doesn't mean Marxism and communism is a movement of the bourgeoisie.Marx and Engels did not inaugurate the communist movement and in my opinion Marxism and communism are two quite separate things. You are right though, my argument is very flacid. After all Jesus was a carpenter in his early life but that does not mean he started a movement of carpenters. I think the clues you are searching for may be found in Quran itself on the issues of divorce of inheritance. Sorry if I'm talking out my arse. On a related matter, is their any connection between the original written sayings of Jesus and the Holy Catholic Church? I can see none: the two seem diametrically opposed!
Agreed, this looks like a really fascinating topic. Two possible avenues to look down... First is the field of Soviet Orientalist studies in Islam, though with obvious provisos around the need for scholarship to meet the needs of the party/state...That's interesting to read, though there were some unlikely theories floating around. Here's a longer article that I haven't actually read through as yet. From a quick glance I think the writer might follow a rather traditionalist account of Islamic origins. The Soviet Discourse on the Origin and Class Character of Islam, 1923-1933 Edit: Looking through that a bit further Liutsian Klimovich comes across as an interesting, if sinister, figure. Apart from his tactical changes of stance, and contribution to the removal and possibly execution of academic rivals, some of his ideas do seem to prefigure western revisionist scholarship by forty years or so.
James MacBryde wrote:The later traditions also contain conflicting accounts. Here's a twitter thread with academic experts on early Islam discussing hadith claiming that Muhammad was a shepherd. A likely explanation for this is that the old testament prophets were shepherds so later exegetes thought Muhammad should have been a shepherd as well. However Sean Anthony, who I'd take seriously as a historian, argues "that he was likely not a merchant (as modern bios say), but rather a shepherd". So who knows. https://mobile.twitter.com/iandavidmorris/status/822546010547322880 Morris is discussing work on his PhD thesis here. It seems that it touches on class relations in the Arabian societies where early Islam developed and looks like it could be interesting reading when finished. I wonder if jaycee ever got any further with his article. Here's an interesting new article from Tommaso Tesei that looks at the political and military background to the composition of the Qur'an: https://www.academia.edu/30962853/_The_Romans_will_win_A_Qur_ānic_prophecy_Q_30_2-7_in_light_of_7th_c._political_eschatology._Lecture_given_at_Tel_Aviv_University_Tel_Aviv_17_January_2017jaycee: Quote:We do know that there was a historical Muhammad as he gets a passing mention in early non-Muslim sources. We don't know if he was a merchant, whether he actually came from Mecca or what his real relationship was with the writing of the Qur'an. The surviving Muslim traditions on this date from much later, in the eighth and ninth centuries. It can't just be assumed that they record real history....was...Islam a 'movement of merchants'?Well Mohammed, who was beyond doubt a real historical figure, was a merchant himself so it is safe to assume the movement he inaugurated was a merchant movement itself in origins.
Ian D Morris - Class relations at the origins of Islam
https://mobile.twitter.com/iandavidmorris/status/1192848151591505920
The anecdotes in the paper are by no means new. They have been part of the scholarly conversation since M.J. Kister’s article on Ṭāʾif, published in 1979. But where Kister found a series of contracts, what I see is a peasant community yearning to be free. A Marxist interpretation lays bare the class relations in every contract: the asymmetry of power and the tacit threat of violence. For students of Early Islam, this kind of investigation might seem unfamiliar, even eccentric. But I hope to convince my colleagues that such an orientation upon our sources can enrich our understanding of the people who built Islam. The merchants of Arabia were also landlords; their caravans were fed on land rent. This was the class that Muḥammad unified. As the Conquests proceeded, many poor Arabians enlisted in the Muslim armies; they and their descendants did very well. Quite a few generals and governors claimed descent from the Thaqīf. But those who stayed home were squeezed for rent and eventually transported. However many stories of rags to riches our sources like to tell, the fact of exploitation never ends. The origins of Islam belong to the history of class struggle.
.
Twitter thread with a summary of the article:
https://mobile.twitter.com/iandavidmorris/status/1122144592567197697
Class relations at the origins of IslamMuhammad was a merchant. Historians are forever trying to explain the details of his life and the contents of the Qur’an with reference to his career, travelling and trading among Jews and Christians.
And since W.M. Watt published his books on ‘Muhammad at Mecca’ and ‘Muhammad at Medina’ in the 1950s, we have even wondered if the rise of merchant capitalism frayed the bonds of tribal society, disturbing the traditional order and paving the way for Muhammad’s moral revolution.
This paper argues that we have focused too much on trade itself and too little on the class relations that support a trading economy.
Muhammad and his peers were more than merchants: they were a highly mobile class of warrior landlords who – through tax, rent, interest and tribute – seized and concentrated surplus wealth from the petty herdsmen and oasis farmers of Arabia.
From this angle, Muhammad was not a revolutionary, but a consolidator. His new coalition did not abolish the class system, but it did unite the ruling class into a single political force.
Together in their zeal for primitive accumulation – with God’s blessing – they went on to conquer and exploit their wealthier neighbours across the Middle East. The origins of Islam belong to the history of class struggle.