<![CDATA[This article reframes the early Islamic experience as a usable archive for global constitutionalism by theorizing the Medinan compact and the prophetic pledge of allegiance (bay’ah) as a covenantal social contract. Unlike transactional models that center self-interest, a covenantal grammar binds political membership through thick consent, reciprocal guarantees among distinct communities, and a shared locus of authority and adjudication. Methodologically, the study integrates internal reconstruction of primary clauses in the Medina Charter with a cautious comparative reading against modern contractarianism. We operationalize three indicators (consent, reciprocity, and authority) and code their textual instantiation across clauses on common defense, inter-communal autonomy, and dispute settlement to God and His Messenger. The analysis shows that consent is ritualized and renewable (bay’ah), reciprocity is institutionalized through mutual protection and liability rules, and authority is centralized yet procedurally shared through a common adjudicatory forum. These features distinguish a covenantal contract from transactional social contracts and generate implementable design cues for plural polities: a shared moral preamble, inter-communal autonomy with a forum, reciprocity guarantees over religion and property, and periodic covenant renewal as a civic rite. The article addresses anachronism and authenticity debates by triangulating early sources and bracketing contested passages. While historically bounded, the framework broadens the archive of global constitutionalism and offers a normative vocabulary for post-conflict constitution-making and durable coexistence in religiously diverse societies.]]>
