Scan barcode
Reviews
In the Shadow of the Sword: The Birth of Islam and the Rise of the Global Arab Empire by Tom Holland
itst's review against another edition
4.0
I've never delved into the history of christianity, judaism, or islam. For me, this book is a door opened. Reading reviews by better versed readers I will find some more in depth material than this, but I consider it a good start.
felix_matteo's review against another edition
5.0
Though at times meandering, Tom Holland's exploration of the births and infancies of the three major Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) takes readers on a vividly detailed and thoroughly researched journey through Late Antiquity. The Fertile Crescent and its environs were under constant threat of war between the two "global" superpowers of the time, Constantine's Eastern Roman Empire and the Sasanian Persian Empire, each of which sought to unite the world under one banner - and one God.
In telling this historical tale (which spans from roughly AD 200 to AD 800), Holland provides a context for the times as well as the trajectories of the three religions over time as each of them fell in and out of favor with various rulers and their dynasties, which helped to shape them and the worlds around them. As one digs deeper, it becomes clear that the beliefs ascribed to these religions are as much the consequence of the political machinations of the time as any mandate from Heaven, and Holland lays out said politics in fascinating detail.
My one criticism of the book is that it can be quite dry, and I often found myself flipping back to the glossary to remember who such-and-such a Parthian dynast was, and why his grandfather was important. It's also worth noting that the titular religion of Islam doesn't make an appearance until roughly the last third of the story, and so perhaps the title is a bit misleading.
In any case, I would consider this a must-read for theological history buffs, and anyone who wants a grounded view of early religion and some insight into why we are where we are in today's modern world.
In telling this historical tale (which spans from roughly AD 200 to AD 800), Holland provides a context for the times as well as the trajectories of the three religions over time as each of them fell in and out of favor with various rulers and their dynasties, which helped to shape them and the worlds around them. As one digs deeper, it becomes clear that the beliefs ascribed to these religions are as much the consequence of the political machinations of the time as any mandate from Heaven, and Holland lays out said politics in fascinating detail.
My one criticism of the book is that it can be quite dry, and I often found myself flipping back to the glossary to remember who such-and-such a Parthian dynast was, and why his grandfather was important. It's also worth noting that the titular religion of Islam doesn't make an appearance until roughly the last third of the story, and so perhaps the title is a bit misleading.
In any case, I would consider this a must-read for theological history buffs, and anyone who wants a grounded view of early religion and some insight into why we are where we are in today's modern world.
mj470's review against another edition
3.0
I needed to read something to give me context into the present contentions in the middle east. This has lots of speculation about the writing of the Quran that I didn't find the most informative. However discussion of the interplay between Muslims, Jews, and Christians historically was fascinating. It's a very violent and superstitious past so that in and of itself is informative for our present.
jyaremchuk's review against another edition
4.0
Not the makings of a smooth narrative, but lots of interesting bits....
aront's review against another edition
4.0
Easy reading & well worth it. 2 critiques:
1. He often quotes contemporaries fantastical view of events straight up when it is quite obvious he is slightly mocking them, which is fine once in a while but it becomes repetitious shtick
2. He hints at but doesn't really answer the question he posed at the beginning - what are the origins of the Quran and Islam and who is the Mohammed character?
In the documentary he did and in interviews he is much more forthcoming about his theories on point 2. Anyone reading this book should also watch the documentary and listed to his interview with Robin Pearson from the History of Byzantium podcast (as well as Robin's podcast on the topic of the Origen of Islam). I get that they are just theories and perhaps he was a bit reluctant to be too concrete and explicit in a book so as not to be accused of replacing one fantasy for another.
One last point: for every other major religion existent (and non-existent) today where there are tons of popular science*-based overviews, Holland's book is the first on the shelf for this topic and he does a damn good job. To his credit he's cracked the nut, opening the doors for others to popularize a more scientific approach to the origins of Islam.
* by science I mean critical, skeptical & evidence-based approaches not based on the evidence-free premise that any given religion is the word of God/s
1. He often quotes contemporaries fantastical view of events straight up when it is quite obvious he is slightly mocking them, which is fine once in a while but it becomes repetitious shtick
2. He hints at but doesn't really answer the question he posed at the beginning - what are the origins of the Quran and Islam and who is the Mohammed character?
In the documentary he did and in interviews he is much more forthcoming about his theories on point 2. Anyone reading this book should also watch the documentary and listed to his interview with Robin Pearson from the History of Byzantium podcast (as well as Robin's podcast on the topic of the Origen of Islam). I get that they are just theories and perhaps he was a bit reluctant to be too concrete and explicit in a book so as not to be accused of replacing one fantasy for another.
One last point: for every other major religion existent (and non-existent) today where there are tons of popular science*-based overviews, Holland's book is the first on the shelf for this topic and he does a damn good job. To his credit he's cracked the nut, opening the doors for others to popularize a more scientific approach to the origins of Islam.
* by science I mean critical, skeptical & evidence-based approaches not based on the evidence-free premise that any given religion is the word of God/s
poxav's review
4.0
An intriguing exploration into the chaos of government and beliefs characteristic of late antiquity, the same chaos that sets the stage for the rise of Islam. At the start it read more like a 3/5 if I’m being honest, but by the end I can understand why the author presented all the information in such a way, and I ended up appreciating it. Fundamentally, this book is more about the setting rather than ideas, but it fulfills its intended purpose with clarity and style.
iread2much's review against another edition
2.0
I bailed on this, the writing is very good, but the author makes a lot of statements that he didn't back up with any evidence, and I don't think good non-fiction books make such sweeping statements without a lot of evidence. I read more of this book than I normally for a book that didn't provide enough citations just because the writing was so well done. I wanted to keep reading it, but even when I tried to look at his notes and bibliography, I didn't see anything that justified what some of his statements were. As an example, claiming that the Christian mind is "hard wired" to question the literal nature of the Bible (meaning that it's acknowledged that it was written not by God, Christ, and/or his apostles) seems outrageous not just because I live in the USA where fundamentalism is prevalent, but also because I'm pretty sure that there is a LOT of ink on this very critical topic to the authors point that goes back for hundreds of years. I'm not a biblical scholar, so maybe he's right, but the author really needs to provide me with lots of citations to back a statement like that up. I will have to look elsewhere for a history of this region.
The lovely writing is why this gets 2 stars. I wish I could finish it because the writing is so good, but I just can't handle the way the author seems to skip over evidence for major concepts. I acknowledge that it might be that I need to read a LOT more on the history of Christian theology and biblical history before I know if the author is writing based on some famous theory I don't know about, but as this was NOT billed as an advanced historical treatise, I don't think it's unfair to ask for citations, especially for a concept that seems really sweeping in nature.
The lovely writing is why this gets 2 stars. I wish I could finish it because the writing is so good, but I just can't handle the way the author seems to skip over evidence for major concepts. I acknowledge that it might be that I need to read a LOT more on the history of Christian theology and biblical history before I know if the author is writing based on some famous theory I don't know about, but as this was NOT billed as an advanced historical treatise, I don't think it's unfair to ask for citations, especially for a concept that seems really sweeping in nature.
radbear76's review against another edition
3.0
A comprehensive look at the roots of Islam by starting with the religions which preceded it. While interesting it jumps around in time a bit to describe the historical events from the perspective of the various major religions. This was a little confusing but not unmanageable. Overall the thesis that Islam is a religion constructed over time from multiple sources comes through very clearly as does the evidence supporting this supposition.