THE CONSTITUTION OF MEDINA

Abstract

There exists a written contract known as 'the Constitution of Medina', which the Prophet Muhammad exchanged with the people of Medina after the hijra. The original document of the Constitution is not extant now. It is preserved in Kitab Sira Rasul Allah written by Ibn Ishaq (d. 151 A. H. In the followings, year of one's death is indicated by the Muslim calender), which was compiled and annotated by Ibn Hisham (d. 218).(1) Although most of the leading Muslim historians like al-Tabari and the scholars in hadith such as al-Bukhari did not record the full text of the Constitution in their big volumes, most of the modern scholars did never suspect the authenticity of the text. W. M Watt suggests, however, that the text of Ibn Ishaq might be formed of some diffrent dated documents. (2) R. B. Serjeant assumes again that the text is a set of eight documents of different dates.(3) On the basis of his field works in South Arabia, he indicates that the contracts made among the tribes there have many points of similarities to the text. Although he states that his work is still preliminary one, it includes many valuable suggestions. It is J. Shimada of Chuo University in Tokyo who points out that beside the text of Ibn Ishaq there exists another version of the text.(4) It is recorded in Kitab al-Amwal by Abu 'Ubayd (d. 224).(5) Now, let us suppose that the text of Ibn Ishaq is the text A and that of Abu 'Ubayd is the text B. Shimada concludes that the texts A and B are the same in substance. Some stipulations of the text A, however, are left out in the text B. It is true that those stipulations are not essential parts of the Constitution, but the fact of dropping out of certain parts of it in the text B may mean that the text of the Constitution is the com-posite one. And it should be noted that the text B contains its isnad which is completely wanting in the text A. M. Hamidullah compiled a book of political and diplomatic documents As a matter of course, the text of the Constitution is included in his book. For revising the text, Hamidullah refers to another version recorded in Kitab al-Amwal by Ibn Zanjuyah (d. 248). Let it be supposed that the third version of the text is the text C. As the author will make it clear in the followings, the texts B and C are of the same route. Every modern scholar like Wellhausen, Caetani, Wensinck and upto Watt and Serjeant discussed the Constitution basing only the text A. Even Shimade and Hamidullah who point out the existence of the texts B and C never pose any new problems on the Constitution. In this paper, the author may add some new comments on it using the three versions of the text and others. The text will not be fully translated in this paper. The author will quote the translation by Watt with necessary revisions. As for the numbering of of the stipulations, the author will follow Watt again. II In principle, each hadith is composed of its isnad and its math. The text A does not show, however, its isnad. So every modern scholar except Shimada discussed the Constitution being complete ignorant of its isnad. The isnad of the text B is as follows; 1) Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri (d. 124); 2) 'Uqayl b. Khalid (d. ?); 3) al-Layth b. Sa'd (d. 175); 4) Yahya b. 'Abd Allah b. Bukayr (d. ?) and 'Abd Allah b. Salih (d. 223). It is needless to say about al-Zuhri of 1), because he was a famous scholar who adjusted many hadiths on the life of Muhammad, and his name is listed in the Encyclopaedia of Islam. According