He would never proceed with his forces without seeking counsel first...

He would never proceed with his forces without seeking counsel first, as is observed in the battles of Badr, Uhud etc[^22]. His relationship with the troops was always based on the principles of humanity, compassion, compromise, sympathy, reform, magnanimity[^23], aiding the oppressed, assisting in the doing of good, actively opposing tyranny and transgression, and equality among the people[^24]. And this would include all the people despite their differences[^25].

In order to achieve this objective, he had to bring the community together at the same level under one common rubric and imbibe love and compassion for each other in their hearts[^26]. He needed to establish a link of brotherhood between them and counter their lassitude and uncertainty. Because of this, those who had gathered around him[[^27] were all pleased with him and had come to accept this matter.

All the goals that he worked towards and strived to attain, and the preparations that he made so that the brutal battles may be won internally and externally, are truly astounding for the people who read about them, and all the people who have learnt about this type of leadership are left with no option but to admit its greatness.

The American Michael Hart says: ‘My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level.’[^28] The Englishman Montgomery Watt says: ‘His readiness to undergo persecutions for his beliefs, the high moral character of the men who believed in him and looked up to him as leader, and the greatness of his ultimate achievement - all argue his fundamental integrity.

To suppose Muhammad an impostor raises more problems than it solves. Moreover, none of the great figures of history is so poorly appreciated in the West as Muhammad.’[^29] As for the reason behind my choosing this subject, it is because of the military and historic significance[^30] that it has. It clarifies aspects of ingenuity, management and administration that have been largely ignored by researchers or have only been mentioned by them in passing.

This is because they only try to concentrate their efforts in approaching the subject of military expeditions[^31] in a specific manner, not in the way the great documenters of expeditions and battles[^32] have presented them.