The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 8, No. 3, 1991 557 

Book Review 

Merchant Capital and Islam 

By Mahmood Ibrahim. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990, 246pp. 

This book, based substantially on the author's doctoral dissertation 
(UCLA, 1981), presents an economic interpretation of the early hi tory of 
Islam. By studying the trends and consequences of pre-Islamic Makkah's 
commercial activities, it seeks to bring out both the material bases of the 

rise of Islam and the element of continuity between pre-Islamic Makkah and 
early Islamic history. 

The author bases his work on the following postulate: the development 
of merchant capital in sixth-century Makkah allowed it to become the dominant 
political and economic power in Arabia. The most successful wielder of this 
status, the Banii Umayyah, eventually consolidated its position as the wielder 
of authority. The growth of commercial capitalism, which caused social 

lOfbid., 4 7. 



558 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 8, No. 3, 1991 

transformations within Makkah and made the effective regulation of its external 
relations a necessity so as to safeguard its commercial interests, resulted in 
the development of several institutions, such as sadaquh (charitable offerings), 
rifaduh (support), siqiiyah (providing water to the pilgrims to Makkah), ilfif 
(a pact guaranteeing safety and safe-conduct), hums (those people inhabiting 
the harum at the time of the Prophet’s appearance who observed rigorous 
religious taboos), and hi& (confederacy). However, institutional development 
in Makkah proved inadequate to the demands created by rapid economic 
progress. 

The resultant problems gradually formed the material basis which caused 
the advent of Islam. Islam, in turn, sought to promote Makkah’s commercial 
capitalism through, for example, the concept of a monotheistic God’s absolute 
and everlasting authority, which solved the problems associated with the 
breakdown of pre-Islamic Makkah’s tribal authority, and through its concept 
of an ummah which transcended tribal barriers and made social and economic 
mobility possible. 

After suggesting that Islam suited the interests of Makkah’s merchants, 
the author surveys early Islamic history using commerce as his point of 
reference. He argues that already during the reign of ‘Uthm5n, the pre-Islamic 
merchant class (the “Traditional Segment”) had virtually monopolized the 
state machinery and made it an instrument for promoting its commercial 
interests. This policy was continued by the Umayyad state with great success. 
The assertion of the Traditional Segment’s economic interests, however, came 
to be bitterly opposed by those Muslims who owed their position only to 
Islam (the ”New Segment”) and not to any pre-Islamic factors. ‘Umar, during 
his reign, tried to balance these contending parties. However, during the reign 
of his successor ‘Uthmiin, members of the New Segment became so 
disenchanted with his policies that they murdered him. This group later 
identified with ‘Ali. As ‘Ali’s coalition was a collection of groups with different 
interests, some of them left and became known as the Khawlrij . The victory 
of Mu‘lwiyah over ‘Ni during the arbitration after the Battle of Siffin cleared 
the way for the former to undertake the internal reconquest of the ummah 
and represented the final victory of the Traditional Segment. 

This is the substance of Ibrahim’s argument. The book ends with an 
epilogue which briefly alludes to some subsequent historical developments 
in the Umayyad and the early ‘Abbasid periods. He concludes that although 
Islam lent itself to the promotion of commercial capitalist interests during 
its first two centuries, its spirit was in fact neither capitalistic nor feudalistic, 
although historically it has been able to adapt itself to the dominant social 
forces. 

The following observations may now be made. The thesis that the advent 
of Islam is essentially a product of the socioeconomic situation created by 



The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 8, No. 3, 1991 559 

the development of commercial capitalism in Makkah is essentially a nAteration 
of Montgomery Watt’s ideas? Ibrahim’s work does, however, mark an advance 
due to its greater detailing of Makkah’s commercial milieu, the rise of Islam 
within it, and its tracing of continuities of pre-Islamic commercial trends 
into Islamic times. 

However, while Ibrahim’s reconstruction of the process whereby the Banii 
‘Umayyah gradually acquired economic and political power in Makkah and 
then used it to establish the ‘Umayyad caliphate is noteworthy, his attempt 
to link the advent of Islam with the development of merchant capital is rather 
unconvincing. For instance, he does not explain why, if Islam was so eminently 
suited to the Makkan merchants’ interests, did they so bitterly oppose it until 
the end?2 Perhaps more importantly, as Patricia Crone pointed out in her 
current polemic against Watt’s view on the nature of Makkah’s trade, if Islam 
was a product of Makkan commerce and its attendant problems, why was 
it first accepted in Medinah, a city in which Makkah’s economic conditions 
did not exist?3 

Ibrahim’s account of the first civil war is, on the whole, disappointing. 
The substance of his interpretation follows the arguments of Martin Hinds4 
and M. A. Shaban5 and does not add anythmg significant to them. Throughout, 
the explanation is reduced to the conflicting economic and social interests 
of the New Segment and the Traditional Segment and, while it is recognized 
that the “conflict . . . was within an Islamic framework,” no effort is made 
either to explicate this framework or to give it any importance. 
~~ 

‘For Watt’s other works, see: Muhammad at Mecca (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 
1953); Islam and the Integmtion of Society (London: Oxford University Press, 1961); 
Muhummud, Prophet and Statesman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964); and Muhammads 
Mecca: History in the Qurizn (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1988). 

ZPatricia Crone, Meccan Tmde and the Rise of Islam (Princeton: Princeton University 
Press, 1987), 235. 

31bid. While Crone’s argument that if Islam emerged in response to the needs of Makkan 
trade it would not have been accepted first in Medinah (where economic conditions were 
very different) is valid, her further assumption that because Makkah’s merchant class rejected 
Islam because it could not solve those very problems is not valid. This can be shown by 
pointing out the fact that the solutions provided by Islam were opposed by the rich Makkan 
merchants who were intent upon maintaining their current status at the expense of solving 
Makkah’s larger economic problems. But, pace Ibrahim, to say that the Prophet’s mission 
could offer a solution to Makkah’s economic problems is not the same, however, as saying 
that it was suited to the interests of the rich Makkan merchants nor that his mission was 
itself inspired by these conditions. 

4M. Hinds, “Kufan Political Alignments and Their Background in the Mid-Seventeenth 
Century A.D.,” International Journal of Middle East Studies I1 (1971): 346-67. Also see his 
article “The Murder of Caliph ‘Uthmin,” International Journal of Middle Ehst Studies 111 

SM. A. Shaban, Islamic History: A New Interpretation (Cambridge: Cambridge University 
(1972): 450-69. 

Press, 1971). 



560 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 8, No. 3, 1991 

The discussion, moreover, is often very vague. For example, he notes 
that the conflict between the New Segment and the Traditional Segment “was 
expressed in two opposing views of the office of the caliph and its powers” 
(p. 166), but nowhere does he explain what these two opposing views of 
the nature of the caliphate may have been. When summing up the New 
Segment’s stand following ‘Uthm5n”S murder, the author writes: “In essence 
the New Segment said that the Traditional Segment should accept the entire 
transformation brought about by the death of ‘Uthman” (p. 169). But as to 
what this “transformation” may have been, and whether it was brought about 
immediately on the caliph’s death or not, the reader is left to draw hidher 
own conclusions. 

Unfortunately, the author displays a tendency to indulge in 
oversimplifications and sweeping generalizations, especially in the epilogue. 
This adds nothing to his originality, but does detract from the worth of this 
book. One is moreover struck by the author’s overriding concern to link all 
developments to economic causes, a concern which sometimes results in rather 
crude and misleading interpretations. Thus, for instance, ‘Umar ITS policy 
of ameliorating the conditions of the mawfiZi (freed slaves) is inaccurately 
accounted for exclusively in terms of the commercial expansion which occurred 
during the time of the Umayyad caliphate. This condition then necessitated 
their fuller participation in the copmunity’s life so as to enable commerce 
to maintain its accelerated activity (pp. 191 ff). Comments on al Ma’miin’s 
religious policy are rather more curious: his victory in the civil war against 
his brother “brought another threat against the landowners when he adopted 
the Mu‘tazili dogma and began to enforce their doctrine of the ‘Createdness 
of the Qur’an’ . . . The most vehement opponent of the Mu‘tazilah and the 
doctrine of the ‘Createdness of the Qur’an’ was Alpnad b. Hanbal . . . himself 
a petty landlord” (p. 192). How the theological tenets of the Mu’tazilah could 
threaten landed interests is accounted for by the suggestion that postulating 
a “created,” and thus a temporally limited rather than eternal, Qur‘an could 
possibly extend the scope for the exercise of caliphal authority. This authority, 
when brought to bear on taxation, could then adversely affect the interests 
of the landowning classes (p. 193)! In opposing this doctrine, Ibn Hanbal, 
“himself a petty landlord,” was thus in fact defending landed interests. 

This reviewer has no wish to deny that helpful light can often be shed 
on sociopolitical and sometimes also on intellectual and religious problems 
and developments by referring to relevant economic factors. In general, 
however, the influence of economic factors is far more subtle (even if and 
when it is substantial) than a simple one-to-one correspondence (of the kind 
the author attempts with reference to al Ma’miin’s religious policy, for instance, 
or more generally with the rise of Islam itself) would allow. Furthermore, 
the influence of economic or, for that matter, of any other factors on given 



The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences Vol. 8, No. 3, 1991 561 

historical developments has to be clearly demonstrated rather than merely 
suggested or asserted. 

To conclude then, it may be stated that although this book addresses 
an extremely important period in the history of Islam, its one-sided perspective 
precludes it from making an important contribution to our understanding. 
However, it does have the merit of emphasizing and trying to trace historical 
continuity between the pre-Islamic and early Islamic periods. Its interpretation 
of early Islamic history in terms of economic factors and developments could 
also have been useful if, in highlighting their role, other factors as well had 
been considered for the purposes of historical accuracy and interpretative 
balance. 

Muhammad Q. Zaman 
Institute of Islamic Studies 
McGill University 
Montreal, Quebec, Canada