Difficulties with the Traditional Historical Account of the Quran's Origins

Modern Academic Scholarship has questioned the traditional Islamic account (from the sirah (biographies), tafsirs (commentaries) and hadith (sayings/traditions of the prophet), which were recorded far later than the time of revelation) of the Quran's creation to varying degrees. While these are heavily debated in academia, those scholars who propose the largest differences are roughly categorised as the Revisionist school of Islamic studies. While these are not typical historical errors in the sense of the Quran contradicting historical fact, they do undermine the reliability of both Sunni and Shia traditions on the interpretation of the Quran. Some of their issues with the traditional account, particularly around the area of preaching are mentioned below.

Sodom and Gomorrah being located near Mecca and Medina

The prophet Lūṭ,/(Biblical 'Lot') is a Jewish prophet also mentioned in the Bible as well as the Qur'an, who warns the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (סְדֹם (Səḏōm) and עֲמֹרָה ('Ămōrā)) of imminent destruction if they do not repent their sinful ways, who do not and so are quickly destroyed by God (as well as Admah, Zeboiim and Zoar (Bela) in the Bible, making up the five "cities of the plain"). These are believed to be located in North-West Arabia^[1] for example, near the "Lot's Wife" pillar of salt, on Mount Sodom, Israel (as in the biblical account his wife is turned into a pillar of salt), and placing Gomorrah located near the southern end of the Dead Sea, south of the peninsula of Al-Lisan.^[2]

Traditional Islamic scholars have seemingly agreed with the placement in Northern Arabia too, as Patricia Crone notes in her 2008 article What do we actually know about Muhammad?'...the Qur'an twice describes its opponents as living in the site of a vanished nation, that is to say a town destroyed by God for its sins. There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia. The prophet frequently tells his opponents to consider their significance and on one occasion remarks, with reference to the remains of Lot's people, that "you pass by them in the morning and in the evening". This takes us to somewhere in the Dead Sea region. Respect for the traditional account has prevailed to such an extent among modern historians that the first two points have passed unnoticed until quite recently, while the third has been ignored. The exegetes said that the Quraysh passed by Lot's remains on their annual journeys to Syria, but the only way in which one can pass by a place in the morning and the evening is evidently by living somewhere in the vicinity.'^[3]

In relation to other cities

The following verse also mentions the destruction of other towns from previous prophets with Hūd who preached to ʿĀd and Ṣāliḥ to Thamūd. ʿĀd and Thamūd are associated with northern and mid- Arabia, but it is only (the ruins of) the people of Lūṭ (Lot), located much further near the Dead Sea, which are stated as being 'not far from you'. A simple reading of this would imply that ʿĀd and Thamūd (and therefore the Arabian peninsula), were further away than the Dead Sea from this verse's initial preaching/audience.

So the claim is that for this to make sense to those being spoken to at the time of revelation, this would place at least part of Muhammad's preaching in that vicinity (as many in the Revisionist school of Islamic Studies do), rather than strictly in Mecca and Medina where orthodox Islamic views found in the biographies and hadith place him.

The Romans in a nearby land

The Quran claims that the Romans (Byzantines) have been defeated in the nearest (part of) the land.

To be notable enough to have gained a mention in the Quran, this could refer to large scale defeats by the Persians at Jerusalem in 614 CE or Damascus in 613 CE, and many other battles in the Byzantine-Sasanian War of 602-628, which primarily took place in Northern Arabia/Africa/Mesopotamia. But neither of these locations can be considered to be “nearest” land to Mecca or Medina, which are both hundreds of miles away.^[4] Leaving a site much further North the more fitting to this verse.

Destroyed towns nearby Mecca

In addition to Lot above, in a surah said to be revealed in Mecca in the traditional account,^[5] a verse brings the attention of the audience to the destruction of the towns and peoples around them.

And as Patricia Crone mentioned in her 2008 article What do we actually know about Mohammed? 'There were many such ruined sites in northwest Arabia.', while they are not known to be around Mecca, though archaeological digs there are currently limited.^[6]

The Battle of Badr

Muslim tradition expands upon vague mentions in the Quran to create an extremely important and detailed historical memory of the 'Battle of Badr', with 'Badr' being mentioned once by name in the Quran (Quran 3:123).

According to Islamic Traditions:

Traditional exegetes commenting on this verse unanimously date the battle falling during Ramadan,^[7] and link it to other verses such as Quran 8:41 (which it is not mentioned by name in). However, as British historian Tom Holland notes (citation 50: refencing Crone (1987a), pp. 226–30: The papyrus fragment is Text 71 in Grohmann), an earlier (than the Islamic historians/exegetes) manuscript mentions the Battle of Badr, but does not lists a date in Ramadan, which raises questions on the traditional interpretation of these verses.

Academic scholar Gerard Hawting also discusses these issues in his 2015 paper 'Qur’ān and sīra: the relationship between Sūrat al-Anfāl and muslim traditional accounts of the Battle of Badr'.^[8]

Other scholars have noted parallels between the details from previous Judeo-Christians stories, e.g. Austrian orientalist Hans Mzik, notes the similarities in his 1915 paper 'The Gideon-Saul Legend and the Tradition of the Battle of Badr', which may have been used to shape the account, such as the number of fighters for Muhammad.

The battle is introduced in a prophetic dream in reports with similar details and symbolism,^[9] and other parallels are found in reports surrounding the battle.

Mismatches in law between the Quran and later Islamic texts

As academic scholar Michael Cook notes, there are many differences in religious law between the Quran and the later recorded biographies and 'sahih/authentic' traditions. For example, in regards to stoning adulterers (read the primary texts in: Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Stoning), where there are many recordings of the prophet ordering stoning as punishment, whilst the Quran only prescribes 100 lashes.

Unknown words in the Quran

The traditional account contains an extremely detailed and comprehensive collection of oral tradition of biographical reports, hadith and other traditions, supposedly originating from the time of the prophet with unbroken isnads (chains of narrations), from the statement being said to being recorded in writing, to explain the Quran's meaning. However not only are there often contradictory explanations for verses among classical Islamic scholars, there are even unknown words in the Quran. Michael Cook notes that taking the traditional account as history, this should not have happened.

It should be noted that even in the cases that Cook notes may be used for rhyme, this purpose and meaning is still debated, as one can see in Angelika Neuwirth's 2022 commentary on the Qur'an.

In many cases we see completely contradictory reports of the meaning of words, often with the origin of the alleged meaning being ascribed to the same member of earlier generations of early Islamic figures, showing these are personal inferences being extrapolated back to earlier respected figures rather than genuine historical memory.^[10]

Unknown religion in the Qur'an

Just as puzzling is a religious group called the 'sabians/sabeans' الصابئون al-Ṣābiʾūn. They are mentioned three times in the Quran, twice listed as being able to enter paradise, alongside the 'people of the book', i,e. the Jews and Christians.

And once generically alongside all other religions, see Quran 22:17.

We are not told of any of their religious practices in the Quran itself, however as 'people of the book' Islamic rights and laws apply differently to them than those who are not (see: Dhimma). They are a theologically distinct group who may have a chance of reaching paradise. So despite their identity being of high importance even to law, it does not seem to have reliably reached the earliest commentators, who have heavily disputed it since. In fact the ambiguity over their identity allowed many different groups to self-identify as Sabian's for self-legitimisation and avoid persecution under Muslim rule.^{[11] [12]}

Both classical Islamic scholars and modern academics have searched for a clear identity to this religious group, with no consensus yet found. We see candidates from pagans, polytheists, angel worshippers and those who leave and enter their religion,^[13] Jewish-Christian sects (such as the Elchasites),^[14] Manichaeans,^[15] Samaritans,^[16] among many others, e.g. see Ibn Kathir's commentary on them.^[17] This would suggest that the historical context of the Qur'an (and therefore meaning), initially passed through oral methods, is not as well preserved as traditionalist scholars believe, with even the religious environment of preaching being unknown.