Hi!
Happy new year to all of you and thanks for all the interesting references.
Happy New Year to you Asbjoern
I have been so lucky to borrow from my library, Routledge Handbook on Early Islam, 2018. I recommend it very much. It has helped me a lot in understanding early Islam. There are articles here by Fred Donner, Nicolai Sinai, Herbert Berg, Stephen Shoemaker, David Cook, Markus Gross, Pavel Pavlovich and others.
The article by Pavlovich on the sira is on the internet and it is interesting. He writes this in his conclusion:
The Markus Gross article is here
https://religiondocbox.com/Islam/73559772-Early-islam-an-alternative-scenario-of-its-emergence-markus-gross.html".... A stringent methodology of studying the literary sources such as isnad-cum-matn analysis
has brought us to the end of the l st century AH; attempts to cross this "magic threshold" have
so far produced ambiguous results.
So what should be the logical conclusion of such a statement ?
Study of numi_smatic and epigraphic evidence suggests,
quite objectively, that the figure of Mu]:iammad was infused with a new-found religious and
political significance in the 680s,
So what should be the logical conclusion of such a statement ?
..... At the present stage of our knowledge, we may assert that the Arabian prophet was a historical figure,
Possible though some scholars have argued about later interpolation but they are not convincing.
that he unleashed sweeping conquests,
Historical data don't say that if you read the sources carefully.
and that he led an eschatological community
That is the Gallez theory but reading the course of how events unfolded prove it wrong.
of a hybrid nature, comprising his followers alongside Jews and possibly Christians.
Would these scholars say that persians in the 610's when they took over Syria, Egypt, etc were leading an eschatological community of a hybrid nature ? Of course they wouldn't so it is surprising that they get to such a conclusion for the arab conquests.