An exceptionally well written and lucid discussion of early Muslim history. Professor Donner summarizes the recent scholarship on the origins of Islam, pointing out that in the first two or three generations, the Believers movement was open to all righteous mono-theists, including Christians and Jews. Only after a period of civil war within the Muslim empire did Islam evolve into a separate faith with distinctive markers.

This book includes a discussion of the early Believers community, including the Umma Document, a survey of sources, and a bibliography with suggestions for further reading. ( )

I grew up thinking religion meant teachings of kindness and peace, and that these were among the most central of goals in the earliest forms of most faiths. Naive, I know, but the assumption lingered that it was only later power struggles that led to war and cruelty, after the originator and his closest followers faded into the past. I'm dismayed to say that after reading this book I no longer think this of early Islam.

The author examines Muhammad's life and teachings and the earliest decades after, comparing the primary evidence which is available with the tradition which has grown up around them. The two are quite different in many respects, as might be expected, but what I did find disconcerting was the evidence (both primary and in tradition) that Muhammad actually preached and carried out war as a means of enforcing religious philosophy. (That is not to say he himself had reasons other than religion for doing so, although this may be true.)

Donner gives an overview of the political and religious atmosphere in the Middle East at the time, then goes through the traditional story of Muhammad's life and the founding of Islam. From there he discusses the story as actually available in early texts and other documentation of the time, without the layers of myth and interpretation which have been added. I've been quite surprised at some of this, especially the tradition that Muhammad actually used and preached war as a conversion tactic, although Donner seems uncertain how much of this actually went on. What surprised me was that the religion has developed and promoted the tradition of Muhammad's promotion of war. While Christianity and most (all?) other religions have been used as excuses for war, at least they don't tend to officially claim that it was the founder's intent.

Donner argues that much of 19th and 20th century scholarship is incorrect in its representation of Muhammad (d. 632) and his early successors as having little religious motivation. On the contrary, he finds that the early teachings were pietistic, monotheistic, and eschatological, with early expansion and war seemingly intended to bring as many into God's fold as possible before the last judgment, expected within Muhammad's lifetime or soon thereafter. The earliest documents refer to his followers as Believers and apparently included anyone who was willing to renounce plural deities (including the trinity) and embrace a pious lifestyle. Believers were free to follow their own laws if they were Jews or Christians, and both groups were represented in leadership positions here and there in the new society. There are multiple examples of Believers, including non-Christians, worshipping in the churches of the time. The effort was towards uniting the areas in and surrounding the Middle East and pushing back the Babylonian and Susanian empires, protecting the homeland (Medina, and later Mecca and the surrounding areas) and persuading or forcing the conversion of all inhabitants. It was only after two extensive Civil Wars among the Believers (656-661 and 680-692) that the winners decided they needed to draw lines between those who professed that Muhammad was their prophet and those whose traditions were founded on Moses or Jesus.

Certainly the teachings of Islam, as well as Christianity and probably all other religions, have been used as an excuse for increasing political and economic power. But it was disconcerting to find that Muhammad thought war an acceptable tool, and that this occurred before Islam as a distinct faith had separated itself from other pious peoples (read monotheists) in the area. What this all says about today's situation is unclear, but it's something to consider when trying to understand what Islamic fundamentalists base their arguments on.

The book is very readable, although by the second civil war I found myself somewhat lost among the Arabic names and lineages. Luckily this didn't detract from the central theme and I was able to skim a few pages and get on with it. There are several useful maps and illustrations, as well as a glossary and detailed index. ( )

Back in the early 1980’s while the Cold War was still raging, I used to joke that I must be on some FBI and/or CIA watchlist because of my growing collection of books on the Soviet Union, including books (in translation) authored by Soviet writers who were not dissidents. My curiosity about all things Russian stemmed from my idea that you can’t "hate" an enemy that you know nothing about.

Fast forward to 9/11 when we realized that we were facing a new enemy, radical Islam. Again, my curiosity was sparked, but finding books about Islam that didn’t demonize it have been difficult to come by. Author Fred M. Donner, a professor of Near Eastern History at the University of Chicago, presents us with an objective look at the beginnings of Islam in his book "Muhammad and The Believers", which he has been working on since 2000. It is a badly needed perspective on the hotly debated subject of the origins of some of the more radical beliefs espoused by today’s terrorists.

Most books and opinion pieces today take one of two positions. Either Islam is a religion of peace or it is a religion of jihad. Professor Donner shows us that it is both. Islam started out as a radical movement of monotheists in an area of the world dominated by polytheists. Members of the movement, who called themselves The Believers, stood out from other cults and religions because of their piety and righteous behavior. Initially, they embraced Christians and Jews who were also pious. It was only after the death of Muhammad and the question of succession had been settled after two civil wars that Islam was rigidly defined and codified, restricted to only those who followed the teachings of the Koran who were now called Moslems.

Towards the end of Muhammad’s life, The Believers embarked on what we today call jihad, battling the adjacent Persian and Byzantine Empires that they considered ungodly. Within just a few generations, Islam had spread across North Africa and into Spain. Admittedly, the initial impetus to the expansion was the overthrow of neighboring infidel empires, but after some time, the Islamic leadership began to depend on the revenue generated by taxes imposed on subject states.

I think that this is what should concern us in the 21st century. Those who claim that modern day jihadists are twisting Muhammad’s teachings or that jihad is a modern concept are wrong. Jihad and the forced conversion or overthrow of non-Islamic states is nothing new. It has been going on since the founding of Islam. But, just as Christianity was able to evolve from the militancy of the Crusades and the Inquisition, to more peaceful means of recruiting new members, so should Moslem leaders begin to turn their followers from the concept of violent jihad to non-violent jihad, converting new members with missionaries rather than soldiers.

Although written for a popular audience, Professor Donner is unable to break out of his scholarly writing mode. He has taken a subject that is incredibly fascinating and made it dry, dry, dry. Dull, dull, dull. I literally fell asleep several times while reading it. In the future, I would suggest that he employ a ghost writer geared toward popular readership. The topic that he writes about is much too important not to be accessible to as many people as possible. ( )