Identity of The First Male Muslim - Orientalists' Outlook

Orientalists' Outlook

The identity of the first male Muslim is of little importance to Western historians of Islam. William Montgomery Watt, the author of one of the more detailed English biographies of Muhammad. He wrote:

"It is universally agreed that Khadijah was the first to believe in her husband and his message, but there was a hot dispute about the first male. At-Tabari has a large selection of source material, and leaves the reader to decide for himself between the three candidates, Ali, Abu Bakr, and Zayd ibn Harithah. The claim of Ali may in a sense be true, but for the Western historian it cannot be significant, since Ali was admittedly only nine or ten at the time and a member of Muhammad's household. The claim made for Abu Bakr may also be true in the very different sense that, at least from the time of the Abyssinian affair, he was the most important Muslim after Muhammad; but his later primacy has probably been reflected back into the early records. As a matter of sheer fact Zayd b. Harithah has possibly the best claim to be regarded as the first male Muslim, since he was a freedman of Muhammad's and there was a strong mutual attachment; but his humble status means that his conversion has not the same significance as that of Abu Bakr." (Watt 1953, p. 86)

Since no political or religious faction ever formed behind Zayd, his claims to priority have been only intermittently advanced.

As the quote from Watt indicates, academic historians are reluctant to speak with much certainty on the matter. All the texts relating to the first years of Islam were written down some 150 years after the events in question—as well as after the events had become matters of intense dispute. In the eyes of the academic, there is not enough reliable data to form a firm conclusion.