The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

On the Prophet’s birthday

Who was Muhammad? A review of a new biography.

By Sholto Byrnes Published 15 February 2011 13:02

As today is the Prophet Muhammad's birthday, it seems a propitious time to bring to your attention a new book, Jesus and Muhammad: Parallel Tracks, Parallel Lives, by the American academic F E Peters and published by Oxford University Press this month.

Peters's purpose is not to examine the theological issues frequently aired in connection to the religions founded by his subjects, but to look at what we know about the two men: an enterprise sometimes undertaken with wariness. For, as he writes:

The Jesus quest has become not a path but a crowded highway, while the search for the historical Muhammad has been transformed for some into a dangerous passage, not because it is crowded but by reason of certain outraged bystanders who resent any traffic along this particular road.

He starts with an openly declared scepticism, describing the siras, or early biographies of Muhammad, as being "as openly tendentious as the Gospels". But his target is not faith, more to discover what kind of "demonstrated knowledge" can be discerned, a venture that he argues both flocks could benefit from, given that mutual misinformation has been a difficulty from the moment of their first interaction, when what the two religions had in common, not their differences, caused the problem. As Peters puts it: "At first appearance Islam appeared to Christians too similar to their own faith to be a species of the familiar paganism. Islam looked and sounded like a Christian heresy."

From a historian's point of view, much is absent. "We have no baptismal records from 1st-century Judaea or the 7th-century Hijaz, no marriage registers or tax receipts." The literary accounts are plentiful, but frequently contradictory, disputed or displaying evidence of changes that sit uneasily with claims to immutability. Peters runs through what will be by now, to many, the familiar tales of the Apocryphal and Gnostic Gospels – of Thomas, Judas, etc – and of the mysterious source material "Q" that supposedly informs both the gospels of Matthew and Luke.

With Muhammad, he faces a different task. Though he says "there is an almost universal consensus that the Quran is authentic", he notes that "of Mecca and the Meccans, even of Muhammad, we are told very little. It is not what the Quran is about." And Peters is not all that impressed with what has for centuries been presented as truth. If Jesus was about 30 when he began his ministry, he writes, Muhammad was "likely about the same age, though the Muslim tradition makes him, without good reason, 40". He adds later, exasperated with the dates ascribed to the Prophet's birth and career, "we throw up our hands at the chronology".

Throughout the study, Peters casts doubt on many of the stories accepted by believers about both Jesus and Muhammad, such as those in which they are recognised in childhood as showing early signs of their exceptional roles. "Both may have been good young men; it is unlikely that either had a light over his head."

What he does not do, however, is engage in the type of debunking that some might hope to find. Here it is relevant to turn more to Muhammad than to Jesus, for while many non-believers are content to accept Jesus as a teacher with an attractively pacific and redistributive message, Muhammad has often been the object of far more malign judgements. Peters, however, dismisses them in turn. "The question of Muhammad's illiteracy is irrelevant," he writes in connection with the language of the Quran (bear in mind that he does not regard its divine provenance as "demonstrated knowledge"). "Most oral poets, and certainly the best, have been illiterate."

The issue that is most often seized upon, however, and done so in a manner that its proponents must know is gratuitously offensive, concerns the youthfulness of the Prophet's wife, Aisha. As Peters deals with this in such an admirably matter-of-fact way (and brings in the parallel with Jesus's mother, Mary, which critics of Islam neglect to get so worked up about), I am going to quote the passage in full.

They were betrothed at Mecca when she was six and the union was consummated at Medina when she was nine. Modern critics are here more bothered by the girl's age than were their medieval predecessors and far more than the Muslim reporters, who were not bothered at all. In many societies marriages can be contracted – for that is what they are, contracts – at any time by the principals' agents, and desirable spouses of either gender are spoken for early, sometimes, with royalty, in the womb. And in many societies, too, the age of puberty is the de facto age of consent. Aisha we assume reached puberty, not altogether unusually, at nine, just as we assume that Jesus' mother Mary was perhaps about twelve – betrothed at ten? – when her pregnancy was announced.

In this and in general, Peters is clear-eyed about the need to see both his subjects in the context of their time. With Jesus, this, on the surface, may appear less of a point of contention – but it is necessary all the same; otherwise his declaration "Render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God" could seem merely to be a crafty and rather cowardly get-out rather than a foundational statement for the doctrine of the separation of church and state.

With Muhammad, it is more urgent lest he be seen as what Peters calls "the devil of Christian polemic", a successor version of which has been enthusiastically propagated by Islam's critics today. Peters's assessment is quite different, though it will come as no surprise to those who have read objective biographies before. "Politically Muhammad was relentless, even ruthless: pragmatic rather than an ideologue . . . possessed of piety but the very antithesis of pious; famously uxorious yet married, monogamously, to the same woman for 24 years . . . excessive in little besides energy and profound conviction; and generous, always generous."

This is not quite the picture some have in mind. It may be too much to hope for, but those of violent words on both sides of the argument when it comes to Islam could benefit from reading this thorough, concise and often amusingly wry book. After all, there is precious little pragmatism, still less generosity, in that debate.

Tags: Islam Religion

More from Sholto Byrnes

View the discussion thread.

38 comments

Tue, 2011-02-15 14:11 — Lou (not verified)

The age for achieving adulthood was puberty, non Biblical references cite Mary as being twixt 12 and 14 but betrothed to Jesus from the age of 9. There are many Roman, Greek and Jewish writings of the time that say this was a cultural and religious norm.

Life expectancy then was also as low as 25 and as high as 39. I think that puts the young ages of sexual maturity and betrothal into the context of the times.

Tue, 2011-02-15 14:16 — Lou (not verified)

Correction and apology on previous point, I do of course mean Joseph not Jesus.

Tue, 2011-02-15 14:41 — Des Demona (not verified)

Oh please - it's all a lot of hocus pocus - arguing over how old someone was is rather pointless. Frankly I'm disappointed the NS devotes so much time to religious claptrap and thereby legitimizes the whole lucicrous notion.

Tue, 2011-02-15 14:58 — Cempreepsyfet

Well done NS for removing my posts about Muhammad and sex with a 9-year-old in which I asked how it could not be rape. Thanks for proving my point.

Wed, 2011-02-16 13:59 — michael gonyea (not verified)

Diverse and decentralized Islam resists generalizations.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/7748640/islam_101.html

Tue, 2011-02-15 15:14 — crabstix (not verified)

Wikipedia says on puberty: "The average age of menarche in girls is 11.75 years. The time between menstrual periods (menses) is not always regular in the first two years after menarche. Ovulation is necessary for fertility, but may or may not accompany the earliest menses. In postmenarchal girls, about 80% of the cycles were anovulatory in the first year after menarche, 50% in the third year and 10% in the sixth year."

Yet this author writes: "Aisha we assume reached puberty, not altogether unusually, at nine,"

I am sorry but 9 has to be an exceptionally rare age for puberty by any reackoning. Even so, the justification for thinking this as 'normal' would be in the case of betrothal between girls and boys of similar ages. Mohammed was, if I remember correctly, about 54 when he popped the nine year olds cherry. More Gary Glitter and a Vietnamese child rather than Romeo & Juliet. Even in the 7th century, context was everything.

Tue, 2011-02-15 15:19 — Des Demona (not verified)

@Flashbuck

From Anglo-Saxon marriage rituals in the 8th Century -'Children were considered capable of consent to marriage at the age of seven, but marriages could be voidable, as long as a girl was under the age of 12 and the boy under 14 '

Anglo-saxon - you know what that is right?
How about giving it a rest now?

Tue, 2011-02-15 15:44 — Cempreepsyfet

Des Demona

Stop changing the subject... which is that by categorically insisting others do same Muhammad condemned millions and millions of gilrs into forced marriage and it's still happening today, even in the UK (The NS editor denies that ha ha ha). Last time I looked The Guardian reported there were at least 8000 a year forced into marriage from the UK. And they reckon that's just the tip of the iceberg. Well done, Islam.

Tue, 2011-02-15 16:33 — snark! hi namechangers! (not verified)

I think you'll find the correct style on this is "a 'prophet'" not 'the prophet'. Thanks

Tue, 2011-02-15 16:30 — David Rand (not verified)

Does it include pictures? Every good biography needs a few good picture.

Oh wait, i forgot.

Tue, 2011-02-15 17:03 — Keir

Poor Muhammad sat carefully taking dictation, alone in a cave, from a senior angel, for 23 years, at the rate of ten words per day. Only to lose them all. How does a deity manage that? It's like Joseph Smith and His Amazing Spectacles.

Wed, 2011-02-16 17:27 — Keir

Supposing that Muhammad wrote the Qur'an- and no Muslim knows that he did- what is it that Muhammad taught? Prophecy? None, other than what is either already in the Bible, or so vague or uncheckable as to be useless. What did Muhammad teach about the past? Nothing that anyone could have written who had read the Bible and deliberately changed its meaning. Anyone can do that, especially at least 600 years after the facts. Nobody can get others to believe that such a book is any more than fiction without violence. Which, it seems, Muhammad really was liable to exercise. An average of one battle every other year, for 160 years, was what put Islam on the map, not a compelling read.

Tue, 2011-02-15 17:24 — Keir

If Mary was twelve years old when she was married, she was as old as Jesus was when she and Joseph took him to Jerusalem. Twelve-year-olds were kept close to mum, then, as they should be now. And yet, before she had Jesus, Mary went, apparently alone, all the way from Galilee to south Judea to see Elizabeth, and stayed three months. She there came out with a prayer that few young children are capable of, notwithstanding its similarity with that of Hannah, centuries before. The signs are that Mary married when mature and fully aware of what she was doing, notwithstanding the contemporary practices of the Jews, which were often at variance with OT precepts, as Jesus often noted.

Tue, 2011-02-15 17:39 — Fruininut

"Render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God what belongs to God" could seem merely to be a crafty and rather cowardly get out rather than a foundational statement for the doctrine of the separation of Church and State.

Well Sholto...show us that you are not a coward,now that you are confronted with Satan.

As it happens I thought it was a brilliant get out for the rest of us as Ceaser was a crook,just don,t get cought. !

Mon, 2011-04-11 06:02 — jontee

OK, I can understand that accepted norms were quite different in the 1st and 7th centuries. The problem for me is when modern people see those norms as acceptable, even desirable in todays world. There are some absolutes in human affairs. The equality of women, children, the less strong and those of 'other' sexuality are the markers that indicate to me where my cultural relativism can go no further.

Tue, 2011-02-15 17:46 — Keir

What is wrong with "Give to Caesar"? A Jesus too contemporary, too close for comfort? Even to the Left?

Tue, 2011-04-12 03:40 — Captain Sensible (not verified)

Jesus and Mohammed were the absolute anti thesis of each other like their religions, why bother to find common cause!!!!!!!!!!

Tue, 2011-04-12 03:44 — Mr Woogy (not verified)

Say Mohammed telephoned Salman up and dictated the "Satanic Verses" to him in order to make people stop and think. I mean would you follow the prophet and take Gemina Khan has your second wife?

Sat, 2011-04-16 13:33 — Drakula

Lou: You are right to accept the fact that Mary was betrothed to Joseph, that is correct.
But who was Jesus' father?

Well according to the Jesus Family tomb it was a Roman soldier called Tiberius Panthera!!!!!

This and the Mohommed scandal well who needs religion? Let's move on.

Who was the mind behind the renaissance? It certainly wasn't the Roman church try googling Rene de Anjou and Cosimar de Medici they were behind the secret societies that brought us science, democracy and enlightenment!!!

Tue, 2011-02-15 19:13 — hajira (not verified)

@flash buck :According to many narratives, Ayesha participated in the battles of Badr and Uhud. No one older than 15 was allowed to accompany the Prophet’s army in the battle of Uhud. This applied across the board to all participants, men and women alike. The battle of Uhud took place around the 2nd Hijrah, a time line close to her marriage with the Prophet. Obviously, she was at least older than 15 at that time.

The migration to Habashah happened 8 years before Hijra. If she married Muhammad in the 2nd Hijrah (623-624 A.D), she could not be less than 19 years of age

Most historians have consensus on the age of one of the oldest female companions of the Prophet, namely, Asma, the elder sister of Ayesha that was ten years older than Ayesha. It is also reported in Taqri'bu'l-tehzi'b as well as Al-bidayah wa'l-nihayah that Asma died in 73 Hijrah when she was 100 years old. Clearly, if Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of Hijrah, Ayesha was 17 at the time of Hijrah and 19 at the time of consummation of her marriage with Muhammad.

Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani also has the same information: "She [Asma (ra)] lived a hundred years and died in 73 or 74 AH."

Tabari informs in his treatise on Islamic history that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the pre Islamic period. The pre-Islamic period ended in 610 A.D, a fact that makes Ayesha to be at least 14 years of age at the time of her marriage around 613-624 A.D.

.Ibn Hisham, the historian, reports that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam quite some time before `Umar ibn al-Khattab which only means that Ayesha (ra) accepted Islam close to the time of first revelation (around 610 A.D). This means she must have been at least a young girl at that time. Assuming she was barely 6 or 7 at that time this information puts the age of Ayesha at 20 or more at the time of her marriage with Muhammad (623-624 A.D.)
Finally, it must be pointed out that Ayesha’s age at the time of her marriage has never been an issue. If it were, his enemies must have picked up on this issue as they did to him on some other issues. Also, the reader must note that none of these Hadith reports concerning Ayesha’s controversial age of marriage with the Prophet goes back to the Prophet himself. In other words, it is not the Prophet himself who said Ayesha was 6 or 9. These reports came from a single individual and the Iraqis reported from him when he grew old and his memory started failing.

In conclusion, this article is an attempt to prove that the books written 200-300 years after the death of Muhammad, while providing a good deal of historical information about him are not free from faulty, less than perfect and self-contradictory materials. These should not be taken as the final word for a Muslim. There is a Final Word for a Muslim and that is the Book of God, the Holy Qur’an—the book that defines the marriageable age for a man or woman when he or she attains soundness of judgment (Al-Qur’an 4:6). If Muhammad is a model for mankind, if he followed the Qur’an all his life, if Allah stands witness to his rock-solid character, .. HE Mohammed(S.A.W) IS PROPHET OF ALL TIMES, FOR EVERYONE, BLESSINGS FOR ALL..AS ALLAH IS A GOD OF EVERY WORLD..MOHAMMED IS THE PROPHET OF EVERYONE..LETS LOVE HIM..HE IS NOT MINE OR URZ..HE IS OURS. All people out there.. Read more n what disturbs ask instead making up ur mind. Full of misconceptions’. just believe one thing all prophets of ALLAH ARE RIGHT..N MOHAMMED {S.A.W) IS A BEST EXAMPLE..
SALAM TO ALL PROPHETS OF ALLAH..N THE FINAL MESSENGER AND THE LAST AND BELOVED..PROPHET HAZRAT MOHAMMED(p.b.u.h.)dont let ur self misguided about any religion n esp our PROPHET (P.B.U.H.)..HIS ALL WORDS AND ACTIONS ARE ON ALLAH'S WILLL.HE SAID NOTHING BUT TRUTH..

Tue, 2011-02-15 19:27 — Cempreepsyfet

hajira -

Sorry, I just can't be bothered to read all that stuff you posted.

But you might like to read this from your awn authentic and most reliable hadith...

From Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310 -

Aisha reported: Allah's Apostle married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

From: Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 -

Narrated Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old...

Deal with it, loser.

Sat, 2011-04-16 13:59 — Drakula

The book 'the family Tomb' also cited one of the early church fathers Origin when he was libeling the likes of Celsus a Greek philosopher who said that Mary was raped by Tiberius and was locked out of the house by Joseph.
This piece of circumstantial evedence only survived because it was written by Origin within the confines of the Roman church and therefore escaped being put to the torch.

So who's version of the story are we going to believe?

A seduction of a Roman soldier or a the 'divine' conception with a God?

Tue, 2011-02-15 19:50 — Keir

'Ayesha participated in the battles of Badr and Uhud.'

Prophet Jesus pbuh obviously got it badly wrong with "Turn the other cheek."

Tue, 2011-02-15 20:54 — Bryan Seck (not verified)

To me it's a perfectly valid move to point out that Mohammed raped a nine year old and the points about puberty and age of consent don't really stand up (if anything, puberty occurred later then than nowadays). It's a shame we can't find something equally gratuitously offensive to say about Jesus. Both J & M lived in ages whose morality we find utterly bizarre and disgusting in most respects, and neither repudiated that morality in more than a superficial way. This makes it difficult to take either of them seriously unless we give up on such modern notions as child rape being wrong.

Tue, 2011-02-15 21:15 — Keir

I don't think that people in those days invented lies quite as quickly as we do.

Thu, 2011-02-17 02:10 — Keir

It's risky to describe killing as merely 'naughty', surely. Unless one is tired of life.

Wed, 2011-06-01 06:38 — Lee Jay (not verified)

The article is shoddy.

Mohammed sat down and watched all the men over puberty be beheaded and this applies to more than 600 Jews in total.

This applies to a tribe which followed Judaism.

I do not recall Jesus, the Buddha, and leaders of the Sikh faith supporting such a barbaric crime....do you?

Mohammed married a child, had sex with many concubines, married more than 9 wives - and yes, God in the eyes of Islam really did care about Mohammed's sex life.

After all, if Muslim men marry more than 4 women at the same time it is breaking Sharia Islamic law. Yet, God just loved to please Mohammed once he obtained power.

Pointless book and you can not compare an individual who stopped a woman from being stoned to death with an individual like Mohammed who supported stoning to death for adultery according to the Hadiths.

Of course, it was ok for Mohammed to do adultery.

Wed, 2011-02-16 01:12 — Abbas (not verified)

I'm glad to hear/read that more people are studying aspects of religion in this case Prophet Muhammad through history rather than just religious scriptures.
It is true that historically it has not been odd for young children to be married for example in ancient Greece. Regardless as far as I'm aware Aisha was not 6 or 9 when she was married but according to most historians somewhere between the ages of 16-23, a narration by Aisha where she says that she was 5 years older than Fatima the Prophets daughter when she was married would make her 19 as Fatima was 14 at the time. I wish more people knew of Fatima, the Prophet had 3 biological children all with his first wife, 2 boys who died in infancy and a girl. Fatima was renowned for her intelligence, she led Islam’s reforms of women’s rights and she used to teach women at her home, she died before she was even 20.

Sun, 2011-04-10 16:02 — Keir

Fear drives humans to absurdity, self-contradiction and apparent insanity. Even to violence.

But remember: those who live by the sword, die by the sword.

Wed, 2011-02-16 10:19 — Cempreepsyfet

Abbas - stop wriggling.

Numerous authentic hadith all confirm Aysha was just 6.

Shameful.

Fri, 2011-04-08 18:25 — DAULAT RAM

Quit toadying, will you?

Worshipping some Middle Eastern crank is no better than bumsucking Hitler.

Wed, 2011-02-16 11:23 — Mr. Divine (not verified)

@Martin W: uxorious in this case means 'dependent'. Mohammed married a rich woman. So 'yet' is just OK to use.

Tue, 2011-02-15 13:31 — Freeman2

I assume people who are not Muslims but refer to 'the Prophet' are the same kind of creeps who called Stalin 'the Great Leader' and Mao 'the Great Helmsman'. This kind of fawning really is pathetic.

Tue, 2011-02-15 13:33 — Cempreepsyfet

If a 55-year-old man such as Muhammad takes a 6-year-old girl and marries her, then "consummates" that marriage when she is just 9-years-old, how is that not rape? Can a 9-year-old give informed consent about such things?

Tue, 2011-02-15 13:36 — Lou (not verified)

Good piece Sholto.

I would just add that it's not difficult to come to the knowledge and understanding Peter does if you read, learn and seek truth out. Education is the key but unfortunately you can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink.

Religious intolerance or hatred has been like a baton handed down through the millenia, all contrary to the teachings of the particular faith yet promoted with such religious zeal whilst rendering the follower to a sort of stoical apathy to the truth of anyone else's Prophet/Messiah.

Seek and ye shall find is the saying isn't it. If more people sought out the truth and facts, we'd all be in a better place.