Is the Koran a violent book? "The Koran reflects the violence of its historical context which, in the end, is resolved with a political agreement ", assures framework Demichelis, researcher of 'Religion and Civil Society' of the Institute for Culture and Society (ICS) of the University of Navarra. The expert in Islamic programs of study and Middle Eastern History has published the book 'Violence in early Islam. Religious Narratives, the Arab Conquests and the Canonization of Jihad' where he explores violence and the concept of jihad in the first centuries of Islam.

In the volume, published by publishing house IB Tauris (from group Bloomsbury), he analyses Islamic and non-Islamic historical sources on this period and makes a hermeneutical study of the violent verses of the Qur'an. According to researcher, the sword verses can only be understood in the context of the struggle between Mecca and Medina for the establishment of the monotheistic religion.

As Demichelis explains, finding no support in Mecca, Muhammad migrates to Medina in search of followers. Once there, he begins a more violent narrative against polytheism and those who rejected him in his hometown. However, "very few of his followers wanted to go to war because they were related at family and clan level to Mecca", he points out. After guerrilla warfare and caravan raids left Mecca isolated, Muhammad entered the city peacefully. " The violence of the Koran, which speaks of war between believers and polytheists, ends with a political agreement ," he says.

The researcher stresses that these violent verses are contextualised in this contest between Mecca and Medina and that the fight against polytheism does not extend to all non-Muslims. reference letter He insists that the Qur'andoes not refer to the conquest of the Arabian Peninsula or the Middle East - which occurred after the death of the Prophet. Moreover, later Islamic legal tradition forbids the killing of women, children and the elderly. "There is no room for religious radicalism in Islam because fundamentalism does not consider political agreement as an option, which Muhammad did," he adds.

War for political power

In this context, Demichelis argues that the first Arab conquests of the 7th, mainly, and 8th centuries cannot be considered religious conquests as the Islamic identity and religion are still to be constituted. There is no clear Islamic thought or doctrine until the end of the 8th century. He points out that this idea was created between one and two centuries later, once the Abbasid Islamic caliphate was established, within a narrative that sought to convince of the strength of the identity of Islam. " When there is a process of creating an identity, narratives are very important," he says.

On the contrary, the expert points out that these conquests are the result of an attempt to unify the clans of the peninsula by followers of the prophet after the death of Muhammad in 634-635. "Historical reality and other sources cast doubt on the real identity of these conquerors," he says. In fact, the great Arab conquerors, such as Amr ibn al-'As and Khalid ibn al-Walid, are among the last to accept the prophetic and political figure of Muhammad.

"We don't take into account that only a couple of years have passed since Muhammad's death when this phase of conquest begins and that this historical phase is very chaotic," he explains. In addition to the lack of a successor to the Muslim prophet, there is a power vacuum in the Middle East. Muhammad's prophetic vision is framed in a period of wars between the Byzantine and Persian empires, which ended in 628. The border area between the empires was defended by federated Arab clans (foederati) that were Christian, Romanised and Hellenised.

Faced with the push for Christian orthodoxy by the emperors Justin II, Tiberius and Mauritius, these clans broke with Byzantium, reports researcher. In turn, from the Arabian peninsula, there was a push for conquests after the death of Muhammad. According to Demichelis, it is very difficult to say which side these Christianised Arab clans were on. He suggests that some of them were already among the post-Muhammadan believing forces conquering the Middle East.

Finally, Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan, governor of Syria, promotes a policy of strong alliance with the Christian Arab confederation of the Banu Kalb, and becomes the first caliph of the Umayyad empire after a war of succession. Muawiya ibn Abi Sufya is crowned as caliph with a Christian liturgy in Jerusalem, the holy city of Christianity. "Muawiya is enthroned as king (malik) of all, both Christian and non-Christian populations," says the expert.

The concept of just war or holy war

It is, in fact, through these Romanised and Christianised Arab clans that the concept of 'just war' could come to Islam, he notes. In the 4th century Christianity is the official religion of the Byzantine empire and "begins to play a role in just war because God 'is on their side'," he notes. This impacts on Christian Arabs living between Jerusalem, Damascus and the northern Arabian peninsula and fighting against the Persian empire. "There was a whole narrative of just war very much related to being an Arab, being a Christian and being a Byzantine warrior," he illustrates.

According to researcher, in the Islamic context the word jihad becomes synonymous with war at the end of the 8th and beginning of the 9th century with the Abbasid army. He notes that, in the Qur'an, the word jihad with the meaning of war appears less than ten times. "The word for fight, combat, kill is qital, not jihad," he says. Likewise, the mujahedin - which today we associate with violence in Islam - is the volunteer who fights to defend the Islamic empire as a service to the community.

This book encompasses the research 'Qur'an and Qital.Ahistorical-critical and deradicalised perspective on violence towards the Other' carried out by Demichelis at the ICS between 2017 and 2019 thanks to a scholarship Marie Sklodowska-Curie (Ref. 746451) of the European Union's Horizon 2020 programme.