What do you think?
Rate this book
Ancient Religions, Modern Politics: The Islamic Case in Comparative Perspective
Why Islam is more political and fundamentalist than other religions
Why does Islam play a larger role in contemporary politics than other religions? Is there something about the Islamic heritage that makes Muslims more likely than adherents of other faiths to invoke it in their political life? If so, what is it? Ancient Religions, Modern Politics seeks to answer these questions by examining the roles of Islam, Hinduism, and Christianity in modern political life, placing special emphasis on the relevance―or irrelevance―of their heritages to today's social and political concerns.
Michael Cook takes an in-depth, comparative look at political identity, social values, attitudes to warfare, views about the role of religion in various cultural domains, and conceptions of the polity. In all these fields he finds that the Islamic heritage offers richer resources for those engaged in current politics than either the Hindu or the Christian heritages. He uses this finding to explain the fact that, despite the existence of Hindu and Christian counterparts to some aspects of Islamism, the phenomenon as a whole is unique in the world today. The book also shows that fundamentalism―in the sense of a determination to return to the original sources of the religion―is politically more adaptive for Muslims than it is for Hindus or Christians.
A sweeping comparative analysis by one of the world's leading scholars of premodern Islam, Ancient Religions, Modern Politics sheds important light on the relationship between the foundational texts of these three great religious traditions and the politics of their followers today.
Why does Islam play a larger role in contemporary politics than other religions? Is there something about the Islamic heritage that makes Muslims more likely than adherents of other faiths to invoke it in their political life? If so, what is it? Ancient Religions, Modern Politics seeks to answer these questions by examining the roles of Islam, Hinduism, and Christianity in modern political life, placing special emphasis on the relevance―or irrelevance―of their heritages to today's social and political concerns.
Michael Cook takes an in-depth, comparative look at political identity, social values, attitudes to warfare, views about the role of religion in various cultural domains, and conceptions of the polity. In all these fields he finds that the Islamic heritage offers richer resources for those engaged in current politics than either the Hindu or the Christian heritages. He uses this finding to explain the fact that, despite the existence of Hindu and Christian counterparts to some aspects of Islamism, the phenomenon as a whole is unique in the world today. The book also shows that fundamentalism―in the sense of a determination to return to the original sources of the religion―is politically more adaptive for Muslims than it is for Hindus or Christians.
A sweeping comparative analysis by one of the world's leading scholars of premodern Islam, Ancient Religions, Modern Politics sheds important light on the relationship between the foundational texts of these three great religious traditions and the politics of their followers today.
568 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2014
15 people are currently reading
416 people want to read
About the author
Michael A. Cook
22 books95 followersMichael Allan Cook (born in 1940) is a British historian and scholar of Islamic history.
He studied History and Oriental Studies at King's College, Cambridge 1959-1963 and did postgraduate studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) of the University of London 1963-1966 under the supervision of Professor Bernard Lewis. He was lecturer in Economic History with reference to the Middle East at SOAS 1966-1984 and Reader in the History of the Near and Middle East 1984-1986. In 1986 he was appointed Cleveland E. Dodge Professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. Since 2007 he has been Class of 1943 University Professor of Near Eastern Studies. He was a Guggenheim Fellow in Spring 1990.
In 2001 he was chosen to be a member of the American Philosophical Society.
In 2002 he received the prestigious $1.5 million Distinguished Achievement Award from the Mellon Foundation for significant contribution to humanities research.
In 2004 he was chosen to be a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
In 2006 he won Howard T. Behrman Award for Distinguished Achievement in the Humanities at Princeton.
In 2008 he won Farabi Award in the Humanities and Islamic Studies.
In 2013 he was awarded an honorary doctorate at Leiden University.
In 2014 he won the Holberg Prize.
He studied History and Oriental Studies at King's College, Cambridge 1959-1963 and did postgraduate studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) of the University of London 1963-1966 under the supervision of Professor Bernard Lewis. He was lecturer in Economic History with reference to the Middle East at SOAS 1966-1984 and Reader in the History of the Near and Middle East 1984-1986. In 1986 he was appointed Cleveland E. Dodge Professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. Since 2007 he has been Class of 1943 University Professor of Near Eastern Studies. He was a Guggenheim Fellow in Spring 1990.
In 2001 he was chosen to be a member of the American Philosophical Society.
In 2002 he received the prestigious $1.5 million Distinguished Achievement Award from the Mellon Foundation for significant contribution to humanities research.
In 2004 he was chosen to be a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
In 2006 he won Howard T. Behrman Award for Distinguished Achievement in the Humanities at Princeton.
In 2008 he won Farabi Award in the Humanities and Islamic Studies.
In 2013 he was awarded an honorary doctorate at Leiden University.
In 2014 he won the Holberg Prize.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
October 23, 2014
Islam’s struggle with modernity. This is a comparative analysis of Islam, Hinduism and Catholicism and their role in politics. What is the reason for revival of fundamentalism in Islam? To answer this question he compares and contrasts with Hinduism and Catholicism in India and Latin America. All three of them third world cases. Arab world shares many similar problems with the other third world countries in Asia, Latin America and also Africa. But only in the Islamic world has religious fundamentalism become such a strong political contender. Rise of such fundamentalism didn’t happen in any other third world nations. Latin America with its strong anti – U.S element saw liberation theology with its Marxist and catholic syncretism. In India, there has been a rise of Hindu nationalism - a chauvinistic ethno-cultural nationalism. His answer to this it as it seems to me is that there might be many geopolitical reasons but there are religious reasons too which are a unique heritage of Islam that make it such a strong political force.
This book is structured into three parts.
Part one deals with identity as provided by a religion. Only in Islam is there a strong sense of a Muslim identity. An international Muslim solidarity that transcends any other nationalistic or ethnical boundaries. In Hindu case especially there is no such thing as a Hindu religious identity. Nationalistic organisations like RSS are trying to create a minimal form of Hinduism that can encompass everyone. With such diversification of sects and beliefs in Hinduism, the only way they can do this is by rallying against the common enemy – Muslims. An Aryan identity is one genuine possibility in the Hindu case, but it ends up alienating most of the population as only the twice – born are Aryans.
Part two deals with the values associated with the religion in the areas of Law, warfare and politics. While it is in the Hindu case that the religion is the most pervasive in all aspects of the daily life, the complete inegalitarian nature of a Hindu society and the archaic nature of its mainstream values compared to the modern western values make Hindu fundamentalism a political suicide. Whereas in the Islamic case, there is a strong overlap between its values and the modern values.
The third part deals with fundamentalism. All three cases are susceptible to fundamentalism but only in the Islamic case has it taken a root.
His ultimate conclusion is that the Islamic heritage has a lot to offer for the modern politics that no other religion can. One being their egalitarian heritage (even though the equality was never extended to women and infidels). The other being the close relation between politics and religion in Islam since its conception. The idea of warfare against infidels being endorsed by the religion also makes it a tempting political choice.
This is written by a historian and so is more of a historical analysis than a political one. But still provides a lot of insights into the case. Most of the Arab nations like the rest of the third world had strong communist parties, women’s rights movements etc. Marxism, Fascism, and the other kinds of nationalisms like that of Nasser have given them a sense of sovereignty, a sense of defying the west. It’s no coincidence that the rise of Islamism has taken steam after the collapse of Marxism. So perhaps the rise of a new ideology, preferably an indigenous one will once again mark the end of fundamentalism.
This book is structured into three parts.
Part one deals with identity as provided by a religion. Only in Islam is there a strong sense of a Muslim identity. An international Muslim solidarity that transcends any other nationalistic or ethnical boundaries. In Hindu case especially there is no such thing as a Hindu religious identity. Nationalistic organisations like RSS are trying to create a minimal form of Hinduism that can encompass everyone. With such diversification of sects and beliefs in Hinduism, the only way they can do this is by rallying against the common enemy – Muslims. An Aryan identity is one genuine possibility in the Hindu case, but it ends up alienating most of the population as only the twice – born are Aryans.
Part two deals with the values associated with the religion in the areas of Law, warfare and politics. While it is in the Hindu case that the religion is the most pervasive in all aspects of the daily life, the complete inegalitarian nature of a Hindu society and the archaic nature of its mainstream values compared to the modern western values make Hindu fundamentalism a political suicide. Whereas in the Islamic case, there is a strong overlap between its values and the modern values.
The third part deals with fundamentalism. All three cases are susceptible to fundamentalism but only in the Islamic case has it taken a root.
His ultimate conclusion is that the Islamic heritage has a lot to offer for the modern politics that no other religion can. One being their egalitarian heritage (even though the equality was never extended to women and infidels). The other being the close relation between politics and religion in Islam since its conception. The idea of warfare against infidels being endorsed by the religion also makes it a tempting political choice.
This is written by a historian and so is more of a historical analysis than a political one. But still provides a lot of insights into the case. Most of the Arab nations like the rest of the third world had strong communist parties, women’s rights movements etc. Marxism, Fascism, and the other kinds of nationalisms like that of Nasser have given them a sense of sovereignty, a sense of defying the west. It’s no coincidence that the rise of Islamism has taken steam after the collapse of Marxism. So perhaps the rise of a new ideology, preferably an indigenous one will once again mark the end of fundamentalism.
Read
January 29, 2018٢.٥ من ٥ ، الفصول تشعر أنها جزر منعزلة عن بعضها، والترجمة ليست بتلك السلاسة .. شعرت بالملل وأنا أقرأ الكتاب، ولكن يبقى كتاب مفيدا في تجلية طبيعة الإسلام السياسية وأنها عصية على العلمنة أكثر من بقية الأديان (الهندوسية / النصرانية) ..
August 12, 2016
So... I skipped all the parts about Hinduism and Catholicism. Yeah yeah.
There was a lot of useful material in this book about Islam's relationship with politics, including a number of choice stories and traditions I had never heard of, complete with Cook's usual replete referencing.
I'm not sure I'd recommend this book to others, but if you have access to it in a library somewhere there's a really useful chapter called "Polity" (chapter 7) which lays out a lot of material about Islam and its political vision in a systematic fashion.
There was a lot of useful material in this book about Islam's relationship with politics, including a number of choice stories and traditions I had never heard of, complete with Cook's usual replete referencing.
I'm not sure I'd recommend this book to others, but if you have access to it in a library somewhere there's a really useful chapter called "Polity" (chapter 7) which lays out a lot of material about Islam and its political vision in a systematic fashion.
Read
August 30, 2019A very good manuscript. My review:
https://www.academia.edu/22651112/Anc...
https://www.academia.edu/22651112/Anc...
September 25, 2014
Cook's knowledge of Islamic history, politics, theology, and culture is pretty stellar. And then he goes to town on Hindu theology as well, and even provides some depth in his discussions of Liberation Theology in the Latin American Catholic context, and then I'm triply blown away.
I've read a fair number of articles and books trying to explain Islam's experience with modernity and "the West." Bernard Lewis tried about ten years ago with "What Went Wrong?" Commentators like Tariq Ramadan, and even politicians like Iraq's Ali Allawi have tried their hand, with decent to good results, in my opinion. But Cook's analysis is sweeping, incisive, prescient, and written in an engaging yet professorial style that is truly pleasant to read. I haven't come across anyone to this point who gets it right quite as well as Cook.
Essentially, he concludes that Islam is much more of a force in today's political landscape than Hinduism or Christianity largely because of the content of the religion and the historical mileu in which it took shape. On its face, the conclusion isn't particularly earth-shattering, but the way in which Cook carefully constructs his arguments, focusing on each of the three faiths' ideas on identity, warfare, divine jealousy, etc. makes the conclusion seem far less flimsy and conclusory than it usually feels coming from the blowhards that typically want to talk about political Islam. I also appreciate Cook's understanding that the seeds for engaging in positive ways with modernity are inherent in Islam. Again, we've hard this assertion before, but mostly from liberal Muslims with an agenda. It's refreshing and convincing coming on the foundation of Cook's painstaking research and writing, and it's quite accurate.
Great read for both specialists and reasonably well-versed students of world religions.
I've read a fair number of articles and books trying to explain Islam's experience with modernity and "the West." Bernard Lewis tried about ten years ago with "What Went Wrong?" Commentators like Tariq Ramadan, and even politicians like Iraq's Ali Allawi have tried their hand, with decent to good results, in my opinion. But Cook's analysis is sweeping, incisive, prescient, and written in an engaging yet professorial style that is truly pleasant to read. I haven't come across anyone to this point who gets it right quite as well as Cook.
Essentially, he concludes that Islam is much more of a force in today's political landscape than Hinduism or Christianity largely because of the content of the religion and the historical mileu in which it took shape. On its face, the conclusion isn't particularly earth-shattering, but the way in which Cook carefully constructs his arguments, focusing on each of the three faiths' ideas on identity, warfare, divine jealousy, etc. makes the conclusion seem far less flimsy and conclusory than it usually feels coming from the blowhards that typically want to talk about political Islam. I also appreciate Cook's understanding that the seeds for engaging in positive ways with modernity are inherent in Islam. Again, we've hard this assertion before, but mostly from liberal Muslims with an agenda. It's refreshing and convincing coming on the foundation of Cook's painstaking research and writing, and it's quite accurate.
Great read for both specialists and reasonably well-versed students of world religions.
October 13, 2015
The author discussed Islam in Middle east with the views of Jihadists, Qutb and Maududi, highly selective excerpts of the Quran and Hadith. It discusses some relevant topics but fails to acknowledge the vast difference between the anthropological barriers that separates The West and The East and Both from the Middle east. Which is not expected of the book i understand and yet would be crucial to form an objective opinion.
The part about liberation theology, Hindu Nationalists, Dayanand was interesting. But also I realize there was vast novelty value for it. The drawback is that the book reads like a textbook, I had to pull some hardcore reading to get over line with this one.
The part about liberation theology, Hindu Nationalists, Dayanand was interesting. But also I realize there was vast novelty value for it. The drawback is that the book reads like a textbook, I had to pull some hardcore reading to get over line with this one.
December 23, 2015
One of the most erudite scholars I've read so far. I don't know if he had people transliterating terms, but if he didn't, this man is an absolute machine.
Anyways, there's not much ground to dispute on for me, the only thing I noticed was that in the afterword, a movement like Da'esh didn't get mentioned, though Zarqawi and Zawahiri had been. Fundamentalists taking control of an existing state and reforming it was described, but a new Islamic State wasn't, even though the book was written in 2013.
Anyways, there's not much ground to dispute on for me, the only thing I noticed was that in the afterword, a movement like Da'esh didn't get mentioned, though Zarqawi and Zawahiri had been. Fundamentalists taking control of an existing state and reforming it was described, but a new Islamic State wasn't, even though the book was written in 2013.
December 18, 2016
Interesting. But not as clear as Reza Aslan.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews