Note : this post was too long and Reddit isn't letting me post it in one post so I'mma split it into two parts and post at the same time 😭

[Read Part 1 here]

5— Social roles of pre-Islamic Arab women :

“Being wives and mothers was not the only roles women played in pre-Islamic time. Women commissioned inscriptions, made offerings to their gods in their own right, acted as administrative officers, took up their deceased husbands’ overlordship, and constructed public buildings and tombs” (Hoyland, p. 132; also see Al Fassi, 2001, p. 48–55).

The above quote demonstrates that women in pre-Islamic Arabia were involved not only in domestic life but also in religion, administration, and public affairs.

One of the clearest examples is the role of female deities in Arabian religion. Among the most famous were al-Lat, al-‘Uzza, and al-Manat, the chief goddesses worshipped by many Arabian tribes. The Qur’an refers to them as “the daughters of Allah,” and the Quraysh held them in high reverence. It is notable that qualities such as power, war, and protection—traits stereotypically associated with masculinity in many societies—were associated with a goddess like al-‘Uzza,

Whose Custodian

Was Killed by Khalid.

These were not the only female divine figures. There is also evidence for other female-associated deities such as Shams, Nuha, and Naila. In addition, sources mention priestesses and kahinahs (female soothsayers or diviners) who held influential social and religious roles.

Al Fassi writes :

"

Tradition connects the later settlers in pre-Islamic times with women of influence. For instance, al-Zarqa, daughter of Zuhayr was a kahina of Quda'a who prophesied where her tribe should settleafter losing some battles against the tribe of Nizar, predicting that they would live in Hajar and prosper there. Her people followed her advice*, left Tihama on the west coast of Arabia, and moved eastwards to Hajar, in the direction of Bahrain, where they overcame the Nabataeans, who were there, according to the story, and took control. Then, according to Ibn Khaldun (d. 1405 CE), she received another prophecy in rhyme, that they would live in Hajar until a crow cried in a certain way, which would be a sign for them to move to Hira in southern Iraq (Ibn Khaldun 2: 288; al-Asfahani 13: 87).* Her tribe trusted in her and believed in her wisdom*.* It was probably wise advice, since the direction of their migration was in line with the fertile and productive land, in both eastern Arabia and Iraq. "

AL Fassi further writes :

"

This kahina had an interesting career, giving prophecies that came to pass each time that were obeyed. What is remarkable is the level of trust that the Arabs gave women, especially with regard to supernatural powers of this kind"

And Islam later condemned these practices and limited/abolished their roles

For example, Jami‘ at-Tirmidhi 135 narrates:

"Whoever engages in sexual intercourse with a menstruating woman, or a woman in her anus, consults a soothsayer, then he has disbelieved in what was revealed to Muhammad."

And I will mention their influence in the infanticide ssection

Sahih al-Bukhari 5191 shows how women's agency varied a lot depending upon the region

"

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:...

We, the people of Quraish used to have the upper hand over our wives, but when we came to the Ansar, we found that their women had the upper hand over their men*, so our women also started learning the ways of the Ansari women.. “*

this shows how diverse Arabia was

And Medinah was the city

according to the companions where the women had the upper hand over their men

They openly debated and criticized them.

The exact opposite of the traditional narrative of pre islamic Arabia.

Another interesting thing is that the famous wife beating verse according to apologetics is "taken out of context"

But if you look at the context

It implies that wife beating was already some what a taboo

At least in Medinah

Ibn Kathir : writes :

*"A man from the Ansar came to the Prophet with his wife, and she said: O Messenger of God, her husband is so-and-so, the Ansari, and he struck her and left a mark on her face. The Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “He has no right to do that .” Then God revealed: “Men are in charge of women [by what God has given one over the other] ,” meaning: they are in charge of women in terms of discipline. The Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “**You wanted one thing, and God wanted another "

Al-Qurtibi writes About Al Tabari's interpretation

“ It was said: “Abandon them” (ahjuruhunna) is derived from “hujr,” which means harsh speech, i.e., speak harshly to them and have intercourse with them, or otherwise. This meaning was stated by Sufyan and narrated from Ibn Abbas. It was also said: It means confine them to their homes, from the expression “*hajara al-ba’ira,” meaning to tie a camel with a “hijar,” which is a rope used to tether a camel. This is the interpretation chosen by al-Tabari, who criticized all other interpretations ”

He also writes :

“It is narrated Ibn Wahb from Malik, that Asma’ bint Abi Bakr al-Siddiq, the wife of al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam, used to go out until she was reproached for it. He said: He rebuked her and her co-wife, so he tied the hair of one of them to the other and then beat them severely. The co-wife was better at avoiding harm, and Asma’ was not avoiding harm, so the beating was more severe on her. She complained to her father, Abu Bakr, may God be pleased with him, and he said to her: O my daughter, be patient, for Al-Zubayr is a righteous man, and perhaps he will be your husband in Paradise. And it has reached me that if a man has intercourse with a woman in the morning, he will marry her in Paradise ”

Leila Ahmed also describes an account in which some women are reported to have celebrated Muhammad’s death. She writes:

"There were in Hadramaut six women of Kindah and Hadramaut*, who were desirous for the death of the Prophet of God; they therefore (on hearing the news) dyed their hands with henna and played on the tambourine. To them came the harlots of Hadramaut and did likewise, so that some twenty-odd women joined the six. . . . [The text then lists the names of some women, including two it describes as grandmothers.] Oh horseman, if thou dost pass by, convey this message from me to Abu Bakr, the successor of Ahmad [Muhammad]: leave not in peace the harlots, black as chaff, who assert that Muhammad need not be mourned; satisfy that longing for them to be cut off, which burns in my breast like an unquenchable ember."*(Ahmad , 1992; p,59)

She further notes:

"Abu Bakr sent al-Muhagir with men and horses against the women, and although the men of Kindah and Hadramaut came to the women's defense, al-Muhagir cut off the women's hands."

According to Leila Ahmed, the classification of these women as “harlots” may be misleading. She suggests they may have been priestesses, arguing that the severity of the response implies their actions were politically or religiously significant. She writes:

"This account is intriguing, for why should the opposition of harlots have been threatening enough to Islam to merit sending a force against them? Three of the women listed were of the nobility, and four belonged to the royal clan of Kindah. Their status and the support of their men suggest that they were priestesses*, not* prostitutes*, and that their singing and dancing were not personal rejoicing but traditional performances intended to incite their tribespeople to throw off the yoke of the new religion. They were evidently successful enough in gathering support to constitute a threat worthy of armed suppression."* (Ahmad , 1992; p,60)

She also adds that some Arabian women likely resisted the new religious order because of its restrictions on female autonomy:

**"Furthermore, some Arabian women at the time of the institution of Islam, and not only priestesses, doubtless understood and disliked the new religion's restrictions on women and its curtailment of their independence. For them Muhammad's death would have been a matter for celebration and the demise of his religion a much desired eventuality."(Ahmad , 1992; p,60)

Leila Ahmed also notes a tradition regarding Sukayna bint al-Husayn:

"That some women felt Islam to be a somewhat depressing religion is suggested by a remark of Muhammad's great-granddaughter Sukaina, who, when asked why she was so merry and her sister Fatima so solemn, replied that it was because she had been named after her pre-Islamic great-grandmother, whereas her sister had been named after her Islamic grandmother."

(Ahmad , 1992; p,60)

In addition, Safaitic inscriptions—thousands of graffiti left by nomadic Arabs—include numerous texts authored by women, showing their presence in written culture and their participation as social agents in pre-Islamic Arabia. These inscriptions demonstrate that women were not only present but also literate or semi-literate participants in public expression.

Archaeological and epigraphic evidence also points to women in positions of power in pre-Islamic Arabia. For example, Zabibe (Zabibê), dated to the 8th–7th century BCE, is often considered one of the earliest known Arabian queens in historical records. Shaqilat I is also described as a Nabataean queen who co-ruled with her husband.

Later figures include Mavia, an Arab warrior queen who led a rebellion against Rome and negotiated peace on her own terms. In the period surrounding Muhammad’s lifetime or shortly after,

There is evidence of Chieftesses (female chiefs)

Like Umm Qirfah

In fact there are at least two known rebellions lead by women

Salma, a tribal chief lead a rrebellion during the Ridda wars (I made a post about Salma Bint Malik And if you wanna Read it then Well you can )

There is also Sajah, the woman who claimed prophethood after Muhammed's Death And raised an army of 4000 men in weeks!

Leila Ahmed also suggests that female-led resistance may have been more common than preserved sources indicate:

"there can be little doubt that the guardians of Islam erased female rebellion from the pages of history as ruthlessly as they eradicated it from the world in which they lived." (Ahmad , 1992; p,61)

After the arrival of Islam The position of power for women was limited

Sahih al-Bukhari 7099 describes :

" Narrated Abu Bakra:

*During the battle of Al-Jamal, Allah benefited me with a Word (I heard from the Prophet). When the Prophet heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, "*Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler."

"

Ibn Kathir also references this Hadith on his Tafsir

On Quran 4:34 He writes "“Men are in charge of women,” meaning that men are responsible for women, that is, they are their leaders , their elders, their rulers, and their disciplinarians if they go astray. “Because God has given some of them more than others,” meaning because men are superior to women, and men are better than women*.* This is why prophethood was exclusive to men, as was the highest form of leadership, as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “A people who entrust their affairs to a woman will never prosper.” "

Despite this a few Muslim women of the Arab world rose to leadership roles

For example Sultana Shajar Al dur, The Last female Ruler of Egypt Reigned only for 2-3 months As she was forced to abdicate because of her gender. The caliph upon hearing that the Sultan is a woman Said “If you do not have men there, tell us so we can send you men.” And cited the same Hadith. She later died a very brutal death.

Moving on, Another well-known pre islamic figure is Hind bint ‘Utbah, who, according to tradition, played a prominent role in the Battle of Uhud. She is described as leading women in battlefield songs and acts of encouragement, and later is said to have taken symbolic revenge against the body of Hamza after the battle.

By "cutting out the liver of the man who had killed her father and cut off his nose and ears and those of other dead men on the field. Wearing necklaces and bracelets of the severed parts, she stood on a rock declaiming, in satirical verse, her triumphant revenge (Ibn Sacd, 3:1, 5-6). "

Hind is also noted for her assertive political stance, famously responding during allegiance discussions Where the pledge they asked her was different from men.

"By God, you ask us something that you didn’t ask men. In any case, we shall grant it to you!" (*See Tafsir of Ibn Kathir on Quran 60:12 )

Across early sources, women are also recorded as participating in social and religious authority. Khadija, for example, is described as a wealthy and influential businesswoman in her own right and is referred to in some traditions as Princess of Quraysh' (Ameerat-Quraysh), and 'Khadija the Great' (Khadija al-Kubra)

Other prominent women as Asma bint Marwan, Lubna bint Hajar, Arwa Umm Jamil and Safiyya also appear in early Islamic narratives.

Apologetics also claim that in pre-Islamic time during “times of war, women were treated as part of the loot. Simply put, their plight was unspeakable.”  But that very well continued into Islam: Narrated Buraida: The prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus ([one fifth] of the booty) and I hated Ali, and Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, “Don’t you see this (i.e. Ali)?” When we reached the prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, “O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?” I said, “Yes” He said, “Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus.” (Sahih Bukhari 5:59:637). Also see Sahih Bukhari 7:62:137; Sahih Bukhari 5:59:512; Sahih Bukhari 5:59:459.)

Overall, these accounts suggest that women in pre-Islamic occupied a wide range of roles—from political leadership and religious authority to economic independence and cultural expression—rather than being confined to a single uniform social position.

6— Veil :

In modern Muslim discourse, it is sometimes claimed that the veil represents liberation from sexual objectification, or that it is a feminist choice that “dignifies” women, based on the idea that pre-Islamic women supposedly used to roam unveiled or even naked. However, this claim is not fully accurate. One often-cited example is the practice of tawaf around the Kaaba while naked, which is better understood as a ritual practice within a specific religious context rather than everyday social nudity.

Or because they did not use their veils to cover their necks and bossoms....even though that's not nudity-

Ibn Kathir describes :

"A place in Bani Harithah, and women would enter upon her without wearing loincloths, so that the anklets on their feet were visible, and their chests and hair were exposed. Asma’ said: How ugly this is! So God revealed: (And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their private parts) [ Quran 24:31].”

There is also evidence that class distinctions played a role in dress practices in pre-Islamic Arabia. Upper-class free women are often described as covering their bodies, and in some cases even their faces, reflecting the idea that their sexuality and reproductive capacity were socially controlled within marriage structures (Ahmed, 1992, p. 12). This pattern appears to have continued into the early Islamic period in modified form.

In contrast, enslaved women and lower-status women are often described as not being required—or sometimes not being permitted—to cover themselves in the same way. This distinction reflects broader social hierarchies that existed in both pre-Islamic and early Islamic societies.

For example, Sunan Abi Dawud 496 reports:

“if any of you marries his slave-girl to his male-slave or his servant, he should not look at her private part below her navel and above her knees.” This narration is graded Hasan by Al-Albani.

Other reports like Al-Sunan al-Kubra, describe : “The slave girls of Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) used to serve us with their hair uncovered and their breasts twitching.”

Similarly, Musannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah (ḥadīth  6382 )

Says "

Ali ibn Musahhir narrated to us, on the authority of al-Mukhtar ibn Falfel, on the authority of Anas ibn Malik, who said: “A slave girl whom he knew, who belonged to one of the Muhajirun or Ansar, entered upon 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, and she was wearing a jilbab and covering her face with it. He asked her: ‘Have you been freed?’ She said: ‘No.’ He said: ‘Then what about the jilbab? Take it off your head, for the jilbab is only for the free women of the believers.’ She hesitated, so he stood up to her with a whip and hit her on the head with it until it fell off her head "

Chain of transmission :Authentic

Based on such reports, later juristic discussions developed distinctions in awrah (the legally defined area of the body that must be covered), setting different standards for enslaved women and free women.

As Ronald Segal notes in Islam’s Black Slaves (2001, p. 13–65), Islamic legal and social systems maintained clear class-based distinctions in the treatment and visibility of enslaved people, including women. These distinctions in dress and public presence reflect continuities of social hierarchy rather than a complete break from earlier structures. Overall, the historical evidence suggests that practices of dress and veiling were shaped not only by religion but also by class, legal status, and social hierarchy, both before and after the rise of Islam

7— Infanticide :

Female infanticide in pre-Islamic times is one of the most commonly cited claims used to argue that women were “rescued from the gloomy injustice of Pre-Islamic darkness.” It is certainly true that the Qur’an categorically prohibits infanticide and is presented as having contributed to the decline of the practice in Arabia (Qur’an 6:151; 17:31). However, the extent to which the practice was widespread is debated in modern scholarship.

The Qur’an’s prohibition applies to the killing of children in general, not only girls. Some accounts suggest that certain tribes did not necessarily discriminate between male and female children when such practices occurred. In some cases, children were reportedly killed due to fear of poverty or economic hardship, while in others the motivation is linked to tribal conflict or concerns about captivity in warfare.

One example from Islamic tradition describes Muhammad’s grandfather, ‘Abd al-Muttalib*, making a vow to* sacrifice one of his sons if he were granted ten. According to the narrative, ‘Abdullah (the Prophet’s father) was selected through divination arrows but was ultimately spared following consultation with a female soothsayer (kāhinah) (Ibn Ishaq, p. 66–68). This account is often cited to show the social role and influence of such figures in pre-Islamic Arabia.

Some tribal traditions are also reported to have involved the killing of daughters due to fears that they might be captured during inter-tribal warfare and subsequently enslaved or taken as concubines. At the same time, the existence of multiple wives and concubines within Arabian society raises questions

How men of a society who bury most of their girls Have multiple wives and concubines and at the same time the population didn't collapse.

When examining non-Islamic sources, clear evidence for widespread infanticide is limited. The famous discussed case is a pre-Islamic South Arabian (Sabaic) tribal legal inscription from ancient Yemen, associated with the Maṭar / Maṭirat tribal alliance (Corpus of South Arabian Inscriptions, legal texts). Which is actually AGAINST killing of daughters

These inscriptions—carved in stone and written in the Musnad script—functioned as communal legal declarations. Among their contents is a prohibition against killing daughters. While the text does not explicitly define infanticide, it does indicate that the killing of female children or daughters was formally condemned in at least some pre-Islamic Arabian contexts.

However, this evidence is geographically and chronologically limited, dating several centuries before Islam, and cannot be generalized to the entire Arabian Peninsula. Finnish historian and Islamic studies scholar Ilkka Lindstedt (University of Helsinki) has argued that reports of widespread female infanticide in later Islamic literature are exaggerated in order to construct a sharper moral contrast between Islam and the pre-Islamic period (Jāhiliyya).The image of brutal Jāhiliyya (“Age of Ignorance”) was likely amplified later to emphasize Islam’s moral reforms.

He especially argues that stories about tribes like Tamīm murdering daughters may have grown from later political and tribal polemics during the Umayyad period. He also suggests that the terminology used in some sources may refer not only to infanticide but also to abandonment or neglect.

Hoyland also emphasizes the lack of contemporary non-Islamic evidence for widespread female infanticide in Arabia. His broader work on pre-Islamic Arabia repeatedly warns against accepting later Islamic depictions of Jāhiliyya at face value because they were written centuries later and often had theological agendas.

Some pre-Islamic traditions instead reflect a more complex attitude toward female birth. For example, sayings attributed to Arabs describe the birth of a daughter with a saying "

Congratulations on the blowing "

In pre-Islamic times, the Arabs used to say, if a girl was born to one of them, “Congratulations to you, the one who increases your wealth,” because you take her dowry and add it to your wealth, and it increases " (Link)

This challenges the infanticide argument because births if daughters were literally associated with wealth

Islamic sources also preserve accounts of individuals who opposed the killing of children. One such figure is Zayd ibn ‘Amr ibn Nufayl, described as actively discouraging the killing of daughters and offering to support and raise them instead. (Link)

There is also In Sunan Abu Dawood 4717, it is reported: “The woman who buries alive her newborn girl and the girl who is buried alive both will go to Hell.”

Which makes you question that why The new born is going to hell??

However, while the Qur’an strongly prohibits the killing of children and acknowledges the social distress associated with the birth of daughters (16:58–59), it does not explicitly prohibit other practices such as wartime captivity and enslavement, which remained part of the legal framework of the period. Similarly, Al Idrisi is cited as commenting on a desirability of Nubian concubines: “Their women are of surpassing beauty. They are circumcised and fragrant-smelling…Of all the black women, they are the best for pleasures of the bed” (Ibid, p.50). Thus, we see that while degradation of women as enslaved concubines could have been banned by Islam, which was a fear out of which the Tamim tribe would kill their daughters, it not only continued the practice but was justified by the early Muslim scholars.

In short saying Pre-islamic Arabia buried daughters everywhere is like saying entire India does it even tho It's a very rare practice in some rural areas. And most of what we know about it is an exaggeration

Conclusion :

In conclusion, the claim that Islam universally “liberated” women from a uniquely oppressive pre-Islamic Arabia is far more complicated than popular apologetic narratives suggest. The historical evidence does not support a simplistic picture of pre-Islamic Arabia as a uniformly barbaric society in which women possessed no rights until Islam arrived. Rather, Arabia was socially, politically, and culturally diverse. Across different tribes and regions, women could inherit property, initiate or dissolve marriages, exercise economic independence, hold political authority, lead tribes, act as priestesses and soothsayers, and in some cases even shape lineage and household structures through matrilineal and matrilocal systems. Archaeological evidence, inscriptions, and even early Islamic sources themselves reveal a far more complex social reality than the later constructed image of a universal “Age of Ignorance.”

The repeated portrayal of pre-Islamic Arabia as wholly oppressive served an ideological purpose for later Muslim historians and jurists: it established a sharp moral contrast between Islam and what came before it, legitimizing Islamic authority as the sole source of civilization and justice. Yet as modern scholarship demonstrates, this narrative often oversimplifies, exaggerates, or selectively preserves evidence to fit theological and political aims.

and Islam could've established equality from many existing practices

.

✨Sources and References ✨ :

•Hoyland, R. G. (2001). Arabia and the Arabs – From the Bronze Age to the Coming of Islam. London and New York: Routledge.

•Mernissi, F. (2011). Beyond the Veil: Male-Female Dynamics in Muslim Society. London: Saqi.

•Ibn Saʿd. Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, Volume 8: The Women of Madina.

•Segal, R. (2002). Islam’s Black Slaves: The Other Black Diaspora. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

•Al-Fassi, H. A. (2007). Women in Pre-Islamic Arabia. British Archaeological Reports (BAR), Archaeopress, Oxford.

•Sozomen. Ecclesiastical History (Book VI, Chapter 38).

•Ahmed, L. (1992). Women and Gender in Islam. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

•Ibn Ishaq. (2010). Sirat Rasul Allah – The Life of Muhammad. Translated by A. Guillaume. Karachi: Oxford University Press.

•Bennett, E. The Queens of the Arabs During the Neo-Assyrian Period.

•Hidayatullah, A. A. (2014). Feminist Edges of the Qur’an. New York: Oxford University Press.

•Robertson, S. W. (1907). Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia. London: Adam and Charles Black.

•Ibn Saʿd. al-Ṭabaqāt al-Kubrā, Volume on Women (Kitāb al-Nisā’).

•Lindstedt, I. (2026). “The Portrayal of the Pre-Islamic Arabs as Murderers of Their Own Infants.” Approaching Religion, 16(1).

•Book of Idols.

•Ali, K. (2010). Marriage and Slavery in Early Islam. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

•Ahmed, L. (1986). “Women and the Advent of Islam.” Signs, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 665–691. University of Chicago Press.

•Yaacob, A., & Melhi, A. Q. (2021). “Manifestations of Woman’s Veiling and Unveiling in Pre-Islamic Arabic Poetry.”

•Sozomen. Ecclesiastical History (Book IV, Chapter 36).

•Al-Jallad, A. Safaitic Epigraphic Corpora (referenced alongside Al-Fassi 2007).

•Book of Proverbs.

•El Kholy, A. (2020). “Al-Durr, Shajarat.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of African History. Oxford University Press.

•“If You Lack Men’: Shajar al-Durr’s Abdication and Tomb,” in Tree of Pearls. Oxford University Press, 2020.

•The Sword of Allah, Khalid Bin Al-Waleed: His Life and Campaigns by Al akram

•Al-Fassi, H. A. (2012). Women in Eastern Arabia: Myth and representation. In A. E. A. Sonbol (Ed.), Gulf women (pp. 25–47). Syracuse University Press.

•Nader Masarwah

Marriage in Pre-Islamic Arabia as Reflected in Poetry and Prose: The Social and Humane Relations Between Husband and Wife

Published in 2013 (journal article / Sociology Study, vol. 3, no. 11)

Note:this post is too long and Reddit isn't letting me post it in one post so I'mma split it into two parts and post at the same time 😭 [Read Part 2 here]

Introduction :

The Jahiliyah period, also known as the Age of Ignorance, is often used to describe the barbaric and extremely patriarchal nature of pre-Islamic Arabia. This framing tends to generalize the entire Arabian Peninsula and suggests that Islamic societies granted Arabian women rights and elevated their status compared to before. But is this really accurate? Is it fair to generalize the people of an entire peninsula?

Today, I am going to examine this topic, exploring the claim that Islam liberated pre-Islamic Arabian women and considering whether Islam may have drawn on some pre-existing practices to shape gender norms.

We need to understand that most of the information about pre-Islamic Arabia comes from Islamic sources, which carry bias, and that much of the region’s earlier history and practices were not fully preserved. If you search for “Status of Women in Islam,” you’ll find countless results. However, tracing how women have actually been portrayed in Islamic writings over the past fourteen centuries—most of which were authored by male scholars—is more difficult. You will also notice that the phrase “Status of Women in Islam” is relatively modern, becoming common only in the early twentieth century. Earlier works focused more on women’s “duties” or “roles” within society.

Early scholars, writers, and historians frequently used historical examples to argue that Muslim women should not resemble women from pre-Islamic Arabia, often referred to as the “Age of Ignorance.” However, when we closely examine both traditional Islamic sources and the limited but important independent accounts, it becomes clear that the claim that Islam fully granted women their rights is often overstated.

First, we must remember that pre-Islamic Arabia was not a monolith. The status, roles, and agency of women varied depending on tribe, city, era and region. Any claim that pre-Islamic Arabia was entirely barbaric, completely patriarchal, or fully matriarchal is an oversimplification. Practices such as polygny and polyandry both existed, as did BOTH patrilineal and matrilineal social structures.

As many regions once influenced by Muslim rule—where earlier narratives about women in Islam had developed—later came under European colonial control, European critics often portrayed Muslim societies as backward, particularly criticizing practices such as the seclusion of women. In response, later Muslim writers adopted a more defensive approach, arguing that pre-Islamic women were treated as little more than property and that the Qur’an was revealed to uplift and protect them from the injustices of that earlier period.

These later, politically shaped narratives are still widely read and repeated today, which is ironic given that women are not equal in classical Islam.

While it is true that Islam granted certain rights to women in Arabia, it also limited the rights of many.

As Leila Ahmad , an Egyptian-American scholar of Islam and gender studies, argues that some middle Eastern women were better off before the rise of Islam:

“ Islamic civilization developed a construct of history that labeled the pre-Islamic period the Age of Ignorance and projected Islam as the sole source of all that was civilized – and used that construct so effectively in its rewriting of history that the peoples of Middle East lost all knowledge of the past civilizations of the region. Obviously, that construct was ideologically serviceable, successfully concealing, among other things, the. fact that in some cultures of the Middle East women had been considerably better off before the rise of Islam than afterward ” (Ahmed, 1992; p. 37).

In this report I will focus on how Islam could've achieved Equality.

Also

I think we should stop using the term Jahiliyyah period (‘age of ignorance’) because it’s an inaccurate generalization and honestly gives colonial vibes. Instead, we should use Pre-Islamic Arabia since it’s neutral.

I mean, the Ottoman sultans literally practiced fratricide to prevent civil wars, yet we don’t refer to their era as a ‘sultanate of ignorance.’”

1— Inheritance :

One of the most common claims is that Islam was the first religion to grant women the right to inherit. This is obviously false. Women in several earlier societies—such as ancient Egypt—could own and inherit property and run businesses. Similar practices existed among Spartan women and certain Native American tribes, some of which were matrilineal, meaning inheritance passed through the female line.

Muslim writers on inheritance also argue that Islam introduced property and inheritance rights for women in a context where pre-Islamic women supposedly lacked them, presenting this as groundbreaking for its time However, this claim does NOT hold even within Arabia itself.

“ women were able to inherit and also to bequeath inheritance to whom so ever they wish (sic). The fact that women were those who bestow rights to their close relatives demonstrates their legal power of ownership and inheritance ” (Al Fassi, 2001, p. 55).

Al Fassi’s work also draws on inscriptions and archaeological evidence, showing that women appeared in inscriptions and on coins, were involved in business and property ownership, and demonstrated legal independence in certain contexts. This suggests that women could own property, act independently in transactions, and in some cases held legal status that allowed them to inherit.

This can be seen as early as 4 century BCE

But this isn't limited to ancient Arabia

If we go during Muhammed's time

We still have examples of women inheriting

For example, Khadija is known to have inherited wealth from her father, her husbands, and possibly her mother, and she expanded her business significantly. There is also Sulafa and Hubba—two women entrusted as Keepers of the Key of the Kaaba, a role that was never held by women after the Muslim control of Mecca. Additionally, Salma is said to have inherited her mother’s camel and chieftainship

Leila Ahmed also notes in her work that women in Medina were not entirely receptive to Islamic inheritance laws:

“

Women's right to inherit property — generally speaking, a woman is entitled to about half a man's share — was another Islamic decree that Medinians found novel and apparently uncongenial. Medina's being an agricultural community presumably made the new inheritance law, involving the division of land, more complex in its consequences than for commercial Mecca, where property was in herds and material goods and where even before Islam it was apparently the custom for women to inherit." (Ahmad , 1992; p,53)

This suggests that, at least in some parts of Arabia it was already Customary for women to inherit property prior to Islamic legal reforms

And another interesting thing is that in Islam, a woman almost never inherits equally to a man.

For example, if there are multiple daughters and at least one son, each daughter gets half the share of a son.

If there are no sons but multiple daughters, they collectively receive 2/3 of the estate. The remaining portion goes to the nearest male relative. (Father or uncle)

If there are no sons and only one daughter, she gets half of the estate, and the remaining portion goes to the nearest male relative.

If there is only one son, he receives the entire estate (after the widow and others with fixed shares are given their portions). If there are multiple sons, they share the remaining estate equally.

The widow receives 1/4 of the estate if there are no children, and 1/8 if there are children.

The husband of a deceased wife receives 1/2 of her estate if there are no children, and 1/4 if there are children.

2 — Marriage and Sexual Relationships.

Muslims claim that ‘Islam gave women the right to choose their husband’, but there are instances where Muslim girls were married off by their guardians/fathers,

Aisha is the best example who was married off by her father

Leila Ahmad mentions :

"My mother came to me and I was swinging on a swing. ... She brought me down from the swing, and I had some friends there and she sent them away, and she wiped my face with a little water, and led me till we stopped by the door, and I was breathless [from being on the swing] and we waited till I regained my breath. Then she took me in, and the Prophet was sitting on a bed in our house with men and women of the Ansar [Medinians] and she set me on his lap, and said, 'These are your people. God bless you in them and they in you." And the men and women rose immediately and went out, And the Prophet consummated the marriage in our house."

(Ahmad , 1992; p,51)

Here we can see how Young Aisha was when her marriage was consummated (she was 9 btw)

And there are chapters in Hadith books like

Chapter: The marrying of a daughter by her father to a ruler

Or Chapter: A Man Marrying Off His Young Daughter

As well as

Chapter: Marriage of minor girls arranged by their fathers

These titles show the existence of arranged marriages conducted by male guardians

There is also the example of al-Musayyab ibn Najaba giving his newborn daughter’s hand in marriage to his cousin’s son and Muhammad arranging his cousin, Zainab bint Jahsh’s (apparently against her will prompting the revelation of 33:36, see Tafsir of al Jalalayn)

As well as the Famous Quranic verse

"As for your women past the age of menstruation, in case you do not know, their waiting period is three months, and those who have not menstruated as well. As for those who are pregnant, their waiting period ends with delivery.1 And whoever is mindful of Allah, He will make their matters easy for them" (Quran 65:4)

Explanation of Ibn Kathir  : وكذا الصغار اللائي لم يبلغن سن الحيض أن عدتهن *عدة الآيسة ثلاثة أشهر ; ولهذا قال : ( واللائي لم يحضن )

• Translation: As well as the young girls who did not reach the age of menstruation that their waiting period is the same as the old woman: Three months; That is why he said: (And the one who did not menstruate)

Link

Explanation of Al-Tabari : ( وَاللائِي لَمْ يَحِضْنَ ) يقول: وكذلك عدد اللائي لم يحضن من الجواري لصغر إذا طلقهنّ أزواجهنّ بعد الدخول.

• Translation*: (And those who have not menstruated): Likewise is the waiting period of those who did not menstruated among the little girls due to being too young young if their husbands divorced them after entering.*

Link

And

The Hadith

Sunan Ibn Majah 1871

mentions that “her consent is her silence."

interestingly

Sahih al-Bukhari 6968 describes :

"... Some people said that if a virgin is not asked for her consent and she is not married, and then a man, by playing a trick presents two false witnesses that he has married her with her consent and the judge confirms his marriage as a true one, and the husband knows that the witnesses were false ones, then there is no harm for him to consummate his marriage with her and the marriage is regarded as valid. "

And "Ibn Battal said: It is permissible to marry a young girl to an older man, even if she is still in the cradle, by consensus." (link)

"it is permissible for a father to marry off his young daughter without her permission. Al-Bukhari did the same, and it contains evidence that it is permissible to marry a young girl to an older man" (link)

Thus, even if male guardians arranged marriages in pre-Islamic Arabia, the practice did not disappear with the arrival of Islam.

Hoyland gives several examples to illustrate that while Islamic law establishes descent through the male line, pre-Islamic Arabia also included matrilineal arrangements that allowed women to choose who they wished to marry and have children with (2003, p.129–131).

The scholar Naser Masarwah describes :

"From the surviving pre-Islamic texts it may be learned that women had some say in whom they would marry. Some “daughters of noble families were not married off without their consent; they had the right to agree or reject” (Jawad 'Ali 1993; Collins and Coltrane 2000)"

And he also describes a sharp say from Hind hint ataba

"Hind the daughter of 'Ataba likewise insisted to her father, 'Ataba b. Rabi'a, that he must ask her opinion if anyone came to ask for her hand. She said to him: “I am a woman who is master of her own affairs, and no man will marry me if you do not present him to me”. He replied: “You have this right” (Ibn Hisham 1996), "

And She chose Abu Sufyan b. Harb as her husband.

Ibn Habib dedicated a special chapter to “The women who were married and were able to stay if they wished and leave if they wished, due to their honor and esteem” !

Ahmad writes

"Sawda, a Muslim widow and former emigrant to Abyssinia, described as "no longer young," sent back with Khawla the message "My affair is in your hands," indicating her consent (Ibn Sacd, 8:36). This point confirms that as Khadija's case had suggested, widows in the Jahilia were apparently free to dispose of their persons in marriage without consulting any guardians (Ibn Sacd, 8:36)"

the above passage speaks for itself.

Masarwah also mentions that Arabs placed strong emphasis on lineage for both men and women. He describes:

"Malik b. al-Mundhir al-Bajli urged his sons on his death bed: “Marry your equals” (Al-Sajistani 1961: 124; Collins and Coltrane 2000)."

And:

"Zurara b. 'Ads gave the following advice to his sons and grandsons: “O my sons, marry women who are your equals”(Habib N.d.: 398-399)

As well as:

" Give wives only to their equals (Al-Sajistani 1961: 136)"

From this, it is clear that lineage was highly important in Arab society, not only for men but for women as well.

We also see Islamic law making it necessary a woman (whether virgin or previously married) to have a male guardian (Wali) give her away in marriage. For example, when Muhammad married Umm Salamah, she was an older widow, but she was still “married to the Prophet” by her son, Salamah (Ibn Hisham, 2010, p. 793).

According to

Sunan Ibn Majah 1882 :

It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that:

the Messenger of Allah said: “No woman should arrange the marriage of another woman, and no woman should arrange her own marriage. The adulteress is the one who arranges her own marriage.”

This is Graded Sahih as well.

On the other hand, pre-Islamic forms of unions that gave women more autonomy were replaced by a more patriarchal structure. These pre-Islamic unions included matrilocal marriage, also known as “Beena” marriage, where the woman remained in her own household and lived independently. In many cases, the man could not take another wife, and after the woman’s death, the man inherited nothing from her. According to Ahmed, Muhammad’s own mother had contracted this form of marriage with Abdullah ibn Abdul Muttalib, and this may also have been the type of marriage between Khadija and Muhammad.

W. Robertson Smith cites many examples from different sources to illustrate these different forms of marriage. One such example is the story of Salma bint ‘Amr:

“ An illustration of this kind of union as it was practised before Islam is given in the story of Salma bint ‘Amr, one of the Najjar clan at Medina( Ibn Hisham, p88). Salma, we are told, on account of her noble birth )the reason given by Moslem historians in other cases also for a privilege they did not comprehend), would not marry anyone except on condition that she should be her own mistress and separate from him when she pleased. She was for a time the wife of Hashim the Meccan, during a sojourn he made at Medina, and bore him a son, afterwards famous as ‘Abd al-Mottalib, who remained with his mother’s people. The story goes on to tell how the father’s kin ultimately prevailed on the mother to give up the boy to them. But even after this, according to a tradition in Tabari, 1:1086, the lad had to appeal to his mother’s kin against injustice he had suffered from his father’s people. . . The same conditions underlie other legends of ancient Arabia, e.g., the story of Omm Kharija, who contracted marriages in more than twenty tribes, and is represented as living among her sons, who, therefore, had not followed their respective fathers ” (Robertson Smith, op cit, pp85-86)

This demonstrates that there were multiple sub-types of matrilocal marriage in pre-Islamic Arabia.

First, a woman could leave her own tribe and join her husband’s tribe, in which case the children would generally belong to the husband’s tribe unless special conditions had been agreed upon beforehand.

Second, the wife could remain with her own tribe while the husband visited her periodically. In this arrangement, the children would belong to the mother’s tribe or later transfer to the father’s tribe after early childhood. Some scholars argue that this type of arrangement may have influenced later Islamic custody traditions, in which mothers retain guardianship of young children for a limited period.

Third, the woman could remain with her own tribe while the husband permanently joined her household. In this case, the children would belong to the mother’s tribe.

These examples show how socially diverse pre-Islamic Arabia actually was. Marriage practices were not uniform, and many systems overlapped, combining matrilineal, patrilineal, matrilocal, and patriarchal elements in different ways depending on tribe, region, and social status.

As for polygny Some scholars argue that Islam allowed men up to four wives (and ignoring the countless concubines! ), and that this was presented as a regulated system of polygyny

And thus making it the only religious system in the world to restrict limitless polygyny for the first time

However this is also not entirety accurate as similar systems of restricted polygyny existed elsewhere. Over five hundred years before Islam, Hinduism already allowed upper-caste Brahmanas up to four wives (Baudhayana Prasna I, Adhyay 8, Kandikka 16). Christianity, in contrast, is often interpreted as promoting monogamy (1 Timothy 3:21, Corinthians, 7:21, Timothy 3:12 etc).

Thus, other religious systems before Islam also regulated or restricted polygyny, and alternative monogamous frameworks already existed.

Interestingly

Sahih al-Bukhari 5069 in a way encourages polygamy :

"

Narrated Sa`id bin Jubair:

Ibn `Abbas asked me, "Are you married?" I replied, "No." He said, "Marry, for the best person of this (Muslim) nation (i.e., Muhammad) of all other Muslims, had the largest number of wives."

"

Polyandry ( a woman having multiple husbands/partners)

is often dismissed as impossible in pre-Islamic Arabia due to its patriarchal structure, yet the reality is actually the opposite.

Sahih al-Bukhari 5127 describes multiple forms of pre-Islamic marriage, including a type in which several men had relations with one woman, and paternity was later assigned by Her choice.

“

'Aishah

Narrates "there were four types of marriages In pre-islamic Arabia

....

Another type of marriage was that a group of less than ten men would assemble and enter upon a

woman, and all of them would have sexual relation with her. If she became pregnant and delivered a child and some days had passed after delivery, she would sent for all of them and none of them would refuse to come, and when they all gathered before her, she would say to them, "You (all) know waht you have done, and now I have given birth to a child. So, it is your child so-and-so!" naming whoever she liked, and her child would follow him and he could not refuse to take him. .... But when Muhammad was sent with the Truth, he abolished all the types of marriages observed in pre-Islamic period of Ignorance (except the type of marriage the people recognize today.)"

This account indicates that polyandrous arrangements existed and were significant enough to be systematized.

Fatima Mernissi (2011) argues that polyandry, which was banned by Islam, was degrading to men not women:

Because the father’s identity remained unknown, the man’s role was reduced to that of a biological contributor and a temporary sexual partner. The woman, in contrast, was the one who bore the child and took responsibility for raising them. !

Robertson (1907) also notes that polyandry in the pre-Islamic world is often labeled as fornication by later writers, but argues that when children are acknowledged and women are not punished or disgraced, such labeling becomes questionable. This raises the possibility that in early Islamic biographies, the term “zina” may have been used in ways that included or obscured earlier forms of marital practice such as polyandry.

Same can be seen in sexual Intercourse with slaves Which is only for men

In one reported incident after Muhammad’s death, a Muslim woman slept with her male slave, thinking that ownership by the righthand applied equally to women. Umar ibn Khattab rejected this interpretation, stating she had acted “in ignorance,” and she was later barred from marrying a free man (Musannaf of `Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanani in Ali, 2010). This was used by early scholars to reinforce that sexual rights were not equal between men And women.

While it is funny that Muhammed specifically Got a verse that allows him to have relations with "what his right hands posses"

According to

Sunan an-Nasa'i 3959

"It was narrated from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah had a female slave (likely Maria The copt*)*

*with whom he had intercourse, but '*Aishah and Hafsah would not leave him alone until he said that she was forbidden for him. Then Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed:

"O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you.' until the end of the Verse.

"

This Hadith is Graded Sahih By Al-albani.

Another thing that apologetics tell us is that Islam ended the practice of marriage by capture in Arabia.

Which isn't true

Because both the Quran and the Hadith allow Sexual relations with female captives even if they had husbands before they were captured

which is worse than Marriage.

"Also ˹forbidden are˺ married women—except ˹female˺ captives in your possession." (Quran 4:24**)**

As well As

Sahih Muslim 1456 a :

"

Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah her pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace te upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:

" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end)."

This shows that Islam didn't end the practice of marriage by capture.

So it's evident that multiple models were available for Muslims to adopt for equality between both sexes in marriage.

3 — Divorce :

While it is generally stated that men held the primary right to divorce in pre-Islamic Arabia, there are also accounts suggesting that women could dissolve marriages in certain contexts:

“The women in the pre-Islamic time, or some of them, had the right to dismiss their husbands, and the form of dismissal was this. If they lived in a tent they turned it round, so that if the door faced east it now faced west, and when the man saw this he knew that he was dismissed and did not enter.” (Isfahani in Hoyland, p. 130)

Scholar Masarwah also notes that Ibn Habib, , recorded similar practices:

"Some women did in fact divorce their husbands, in the following manner. If they were in a tent ,they turned it around: If its entrance had been facing east, they made it face west, and if it had been facing south, they made it face north. When the husband saw this he knew that he had been divorced and did not enter the tent. This is what Mawiya did to Hatim al-Ta'i (Al-Marzuqi 1991)."

These reports challenge the claim that Islam uniquely introduced the concept of divorce rights for women, since forms of marital dissolution already existed in pre-Islamic contexts.

In contrast, within Islamic legal tradition, a woman does not has the right to even initiate divorce in the same way as a man. Instead, she has to seek divorce through processes such as khulʿ, which generally requires agreement or intervention. As a result, men retain a more direct unilateral right to divorce, while women must often pursue it through external mediation or judicial channels.

As one article summarizes:

"Islam further restricted women’s divorce rights by leaving it only to the husband to decide on divorce. Although the practice of foregoing one’s mahr for a divorce continues to exist in Muslim countries up to now, it no longer guarantees the wife a divorce: the husband has the right to refuse a divorce even if the wife is prepared to forego her mahr. Only very limited circumstances (such as disappearance of a husband over four years, or extreme physical deformities leading to sexual impotence) entitle a wife to ask an Islamic judge for a divorce. The final decision is left to the judge, however."

This disparity has never been clearer than in modern time when Muslim men can divorce via text messages while Muslim women have to wait for years to obtain a divorce making it clear that changing the direction of the opening of a tent was unquestionably empowering for a pre-Islamic woman!

.

4— Bridal Price (Mehr) :

Islam also continued the pre-Islamic practice of a “bridal price” (called mahr or sadaq), shaping Islamic marriage into what some scholars describe as a form of contractual authority. Mahr or sadaq is sometimes explained in Islamic legal discourse as a payment a man gives to a woman in exchange for marriage, and in some classical legal terminology it is even referred to in stark terms such as thaman al-bud‘a (“the price of sexual access”), a phrase attributed to al-Shafi‘i (Ali, 2006, p. 4).

However, prior to Islam—as discussed earlier—there were also forms of marriage in which women retained a high degree of autonomy. In some arrangements, women could contract marriages in which the husband was required to live in the woman’s household, and any children remained with the woman’s family. In such systems, the husband typically did not inherit from the wife upon her death.

Some early biographical traditions regarding Muhammad suggest that Khadija may have given a marriage gift of four thousand dinars, which has led scholars such as Robertson Smith and Leila Ahmed to speculate that their marriage may have reflected a pre-Islamic form in which Muhammad resided in Khadija’s household and remained monogamous during her lifetime, without inheriting from her estate after her death.

After Islam, men were not restricted to monogamy and were permitted multiple wives (as well as concubines), while women were not permitted polyandrous relationships. At the same time, modern Islamic discourse has increasingly reframed mahr or sadaq as a “gift” or token of goodwill rather than a transactional payment.

In legal tradition, mahr is often used interchangeably with sadaq, although some sources distinguish between them: in pre-Islamic contexts, such payments were sometimes given to the bride’s guardian, whereas Islamic law established it as the personal property of the bride herself. In Islamic jurisprudence, mahr is linked to marital rights and obligations, including sexual relations within marriage (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Hadith 81).

Qur’anic verses are often cited in discussions of marriage contracts and divorce conditions. For example, Qur’an 4:24 is commonly referenced in relation to lawful marital relations, while Qur’an 4:19–21 and 2:229 are frequently cited in discussions of divorce, financial settlement, and the return of mahr in cases where the wife initiates separation through khulʿ.

From this perspective, Islamic marriage is often described by some scholars as a structured contractual system in which financial exchange, rights, and dissolution procedures are clearly defined. At the same time, earlier regional marriage practices included a wider variety of arrangements, some of which granted women greater residential independence or different inheritance patterns.

Overall, what emerges is not a single linear shift from “pre-Islamic chaos” to “Islamic reform,” but rather a reorganization and standardization of existing diverse practices into a unified legal framework.

[Read Part 2 here]