Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam

by Fred M. Donner

The origins of Islam have been the subject of increasing controversy in recent years. The traditional view, which presents Islam as a self-consciously distinct religion tied to the life and revelations of the prophet Muhammad in western Arabia, has since the 1970s been challenged by historians engaged in critical study of the Muslim sources.

In "Muhammad and the Believers," the eminent historian Fred Donner offers a lucid and original vision of how Islam first evolved. He argues that the origins of Islam lie in what we may call the "Believers' movement" begun by the prophet Muhammad a movement of religious reform emphasizing strict monotheism and righteous behavior in conformity with God's revealed law. The Believers' movement thus included righteous Christians and Jews in its early years, because like the Qur'anic Believers, Christians and Jews were monotheists and agreed to live righteously in obedience to their revealed law. The conviction that Muslims constituted a separate religious community, utterly distinct from Christians and Jews, emerged a century later, when the leaders of the Believers' movement decided that only those who saw the Qur'an as the final revelation of the One God and Muhammad as the final prophet, qualified as Believers. This separated them decisively from monotheists who adhered to the Gospels or Torah.

Genres: History, Islam, Religion, Nonfiction, Middle East, Theology, Medieval

304 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2010

Reviews

[فؤاد · Rating 3 out of 5]

کتاب بر خلاف کتاب شکل‌گیری اسلام که درآمدی کلی بر تاریخ اسلام بود، یک نظریۀ خاص راجع به تاریخ اسلام را مطرح می‌کرد. طبق این نظریه، مورخانی که خواسته‌اند ریشه‌های نخستین اسلام را در انگیزه‌های اقتصادی یا قومیتی جستجو کنند، با بن‌بست مواجه شده‌اند و نتوانسته‌اند برای بسیاری از وقایع و یافته‌های باستان‌شناختی توضیح قانع‌کننده‌ای بیابند. تنها با مذهبی دانستن ریشه‌های اسلام است که می‌توان این یافته‌ها و وقایع را توضیح داد. و همین نظریۀ اصلی کتاب است: این که نطفۀ اسلام در نهضتی بود که بر مبنای ایمان به خدای واحد، نزدیکی آخرالزمان، و زهد و تقوا شکل گرفته بود.

نهضت مؤمنان در ابتدا جنبۀ مسلحانه نداشت، هرچند خیلی زود با ایده گرفتن از الگوی امپراتوری مقدّس بیزانس، جنبۀ مسلحانه گرفت: برای تشکیل حکومتی جهانی بر مبنای اصول سه‌گانۀ ایمان (یک خدا، نزدیکی روز قیامت، عمل صالح)، حکومتی که مقدمۀ آخرالزمان و برپایی قیامت را مهیا کند، عرب‌های مسلمان، نه با انگیزۀ اقتصادی یا قومیتی، که در مرتبۀ اول با انگیزۀ ایمانی، تحت یک پرچم جمع شدند و به حکومت‌های اطراف که در نظرشان کافر یا گناهکار بودند، حمله بردند.

مؤلف این نهضت را «نهضت مؤمنان» می‌نامد تا آن را از «اسلام» که در قرن‌های بعدی شکل گرفت متمایز کند. این نهضت اولیه، اسلام به معنایی که می‌شناسیم نبود، و حتی یک دین شکل گرفته و مجزا هم نبود. قرآن در اغلب موارد مخاطبان خود را «مؤمنان» معرفی می‌کند و «ایمان» را مایۀ رستگاری می‌داند، و تأکید می‌کند مسیحیان و یهودیانی که به این اصول سه‌گانه (یک خدا، روز قیامت، عمل صالح) پایبند باشند داخل در دایرۀ ایمانند. در قیاس با موارد متعدد استعمال «ایمان»، قرآن از «اسلام» و مشتقاتش خیلی کم استفاده می‌کند، و در همان موارد نیز اسلام معنایی نزدیک به توحید دارد، نه یک دین خاص، و مثلاً ابراهیم مسلمان نامیده می‌شود یا یعقوب فرزندانش را به اسلام توصیه می‌کند. در نوشته‌ها و کتیبه‌ها و سکه‌ها و آثار باقی‌مانده از قرن اول اسلامی هیچ جا اسمی از اسلام نیامده، و در مقابل، همه جا از ایمان و مشتقاتش استفاده شده. هیچ جا اسم پیامبر اسلام نیامده و «ایمان به پیامبران» کافی دانسته شده. همین طور رفتار حکومت‌ها در قرون اولیۀ اسلامی مؤید این است که مسیحیان و یهودیان خارج از دایرۀ نهضت مؤمنان تلقی نمی‌شدند: مسیحیان در رده‌های بالای حکومتی به کار گمارده می‌شدند و بخش قابل توجهی از لشکر اسلام را تشکیل می‌دادند. کاوش‌های باستان‌شناسی نشان می‌دهد که کلیساها و کنیسه‌ها (جز در موارد نادر) در فتوحات اسلامی تخریب نشدند و گزارش‌های تاریخی می‌گویند که در اوایل تاریخ اسلامی مسلمان‌ها در کلیساها و در کنار مسیحیان نماز می‌خواندند. در مقابل، مسیحیان نیز در قرن اول اسلامی هیچ کتاب یا ردیه‌ای علیه عقاید اسلامی ننوشتند، با این که کتب مسیحی مختلفی از این دوران باقی‌مانده که علیه یهودیان و فرقه‌های مخالف مسیحی نوشته شده‌اند.

چه زمانی اسلام به عنوان یک دین مجزا کم کم شکل گرفت و ادیان دیگر، همچون مسیحیت و یهودیت از دایرۀ خودی‌ها خارج شدند؟ مؤلف زمان عبدالملک مروان را آغاز این روند می‌داند. عبدالملک مروان، بعد از پایان دادن به شورش‌های متعدد و جنگ‌های داخلی طولانی (عبدالله بن زبیر، مختار ثقفی، خوارج و...) و برای وحدت دادن به امپراتوری که از لحاظ فکری و احساسی چند پاره شده بود، روی آن چیزی تمرکز کرد که به قبایل مختلف عرب وحدت می‌بخشید: قرآن، پیامبر اسلام، و قومیت عربی. آثاری که از دوران عبدالملک مروان باقی مانده، کتیبه‌های مسجد الاقصی، سکه‌ها، و گزارش‌های تاریخی، نشان می‌دهد که عبدالملک هر چه بیشتر روی قرآن و پیامبر مانور می‌داد، و هر چه بیشتر عناصر غیرقرآنی (مثل باورهای مسیحی) را نفی و طرد می‌کرد. این اقدامات باعث شد هویت اسلامی کم کم از دل نهضت مؤمنان که نهضتی «اکیومنیست»* بود بیرون بیاید و در سال‌های بعد به دینی به کلی مجزا تبدیل شود.

* اکیومنیسم: نهضتی در کلیسا که خواهان وحدت بین فرقه‌های مختلف مسیحی است و همهٔ فرقه‌ها را به یک اندازه مسیحی می‌داند. مؤلف در طول کتاب برای توصیف باز بودن نهضت مؤمنان نسبت به دیگر ادیان ابراهیمی، از این اصطلاح استفاده می‌کند.

[Oldroses · Rating 4 out of 5]

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.

[Umar Lee · Rating 3 out of 5]

An informative and readable book giving an academic description of the early days of Islam. More wonkish than the books of Lesley Hazelton, but not as enjoyable of an experience. A lot of good information in here, but could've been longer. Donner glossed over many key details including early supporters of the household of Muhammad in matters of succession. We also don't learn too much about the competing racial and religious narratives surrounding the Umayad dynasty or that much about their relationship with the conquered peoples.

[Hamza Sarfraz · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting, if somewhat speculative, take on the early origins of Islam. I particularly liked the notion that the Islam we know only became crystallised at a much later time as a result of active policies pursued by the Umayyads.

[Tiemu · Rating 5 out of 5]

PROBABLY NO WORD in Muslim parlance is more calculated to shrivel a person's standing than "Unbeliever". Yet its coeval term, "Believer" (Mu'min in Arabic), no longer carries much currency among Muhammad ibn Abdullah's ("Prophet Muhammad's") votaries, who since Islam's second century identify themselves rather as "Muslims" and their religion as "Islam" rather than "Belief".

This taxonomy, banal as it seems, entails significant implications of our understanding- or rather misunderstanding- of early Islamic history. This is Fred M. Donner's hypothesis, who has composed an alternative understanding of Islamic history whereby "Islam" as a separate creed of monotheism did not exist in its first century and its followers were not considered a separate people called "Muslims" ("those who submit") but rather as merely "Believers" in monotheism. This supposition will surprise Muslims and non-Muslims alike.

Fred M. Donner is unconvinced of Islam's official history of itself and the conquests. The traditional accounts were written for an audience who were too young to have known Muhammad personally, in an Arab empire ruling over vast areas of foreign populations, with heroic tales of mass armies who vanquish their unbelieving rivals. What is problematic in this narrative is that there is scant evidence from archaeology or contemporary sources to prove this was a conquest rather a less interesting taking over of a weak hegemony ready to be taken. Byzantium and Persia had fatigued each other through so many centuries of conflict with each other in a war of attrition that by the seventh century there their feeble outposts posed no effective sentinel to outside invasion. The Western Roman empire had already collapsed to Germanic barbarians by this time. These 'Islamic conquests' would therefore be in the same vein as how Roman historians have suggested that Rome fought only one real war- against Hannibal- and then in uninteresting fashion walked through the Mediterranean to create an empire through little resistance.

The Qur'an is not a source pointing to a history of Islam as presented by Muslims of later ages. Nor is Donner a votary of the radical revisionism of historians like Crone and Cook, who once opined that Muhammad probably never existed. But what did not exist was a unique Muslim people or religion until the end of Islam's first century, under Abd al-Malik (646-705) following the Believers' two brutal civil wars.

The Qur'an makes mention of the words 'Muslim' and 'Mu'min'. But while 'Muslim' occurs less than 75 times in the Qur'an, 'Mu'min' is mentioned more than a thousand. The Qur'an's use of 'Muslim', one who submits, it not to denote a separate religion or people other than monotheists. The declaration of faith in the Qu'ran and the earliest sources of Islam, like early coins, is simply "no god but god", without mention of Muhammad. The Qu'ran is speaking to Believers, "oh you who believe", not to a separate Muslim identity. Thus Jews, Christians, Sabeans and Hanafis are being spoken to not as 'unbelievers', but as Believers who are members of the same "ummah" (community of believers). A Muslim- one who submits- could simultaneously be a Christian, Jew, Sabean or Hanafi (Donner makes no mention of the last two, but we can infer this from the Qur'an itself, which lists all five as monotheists, subject to certain conditions). One modern comparison to this ecumenical belief system is the Bahai'i religion, which accepts people continuing to practice creeds of other religions provided they are in agreement with the basic fundamental tenets of the umbrella movement.

Donner does not mention it, but the punishment for adultery in 'Islam' is based explicitly on the torah. The hadith recounts that Muhammad orders the adulterer stoned to death not by the Qur'an but by authority of the Torah. The Qur'an's punishment is flogging or immurement, and the bible offers no punishment at all. If the hadith is true, might this suggest that practicing contradictory laws of God is not even an problem for the Qur'anic god?

The central theme of Muhammad's movement, Donner argues, was puritanism based on regular prayer. A person's creed was not a bar to living righteously, for it was the righteous who were permitted to live within the ummah. The requirements to living righteously were compatible with other monotheists who would have had little trouble accommodating themselves as Believers among Muhmmad's community: belief in God without partners, regular prayer, and belief in the last day. The other 'pillars' of Islam- fasting and pilgrimage- are not requirements for entering paradise in the Qur'an. Donner does not elaborate on whether any form of religious pilgrimage and any fast is acceptable according to the Qur'an, but if it is, then Jews and Christians had no trouble abiding by even five pillars of Islam (remembering that Muhammad's name was not used in the shahada in the early years of Islam, in spite of the horatory in the hagiographic film 'The Message').

The idea that other religions' followers formed an equal position in Muhammad's community of believers, the ummah, seems incongruous to today's reader. Ummah now refers only exclusively to the community of Muslims. The reason for this change comes after Islam's two civil wars, and what a Muslim actually is. Donner recounts the two wars lucidly without miring readers too deeply in lists of names and skirmishes. It's one of the best chapters on Islam's civil wars that I've have the pleasure to encounter. With Abd al-Malik gaining eventual supermacy over the Empire by the defeat of al-Zubayr, and consolidation of the Marwannid brach of the Umayyad family as rulers of the empire, we see the inchoate emergence of Islam as we know it today. Coins begin reading Muhammad universally and human images are removed; the Dome of the Rock is built, whose tiles repeatedly scream heavy polemics against Christianity; Muhammad's name enters the shahhada; Muslims stop praying in churches or eastwards; and prayers become formalised.

Just as Israel Finkelstein's diggings about Israel reveal the Hebrew 'conquests' of the Levant was not a heroic (or barbarous) battle for stealing their neighbours' land but instead a peaceful social reform movement, Donner offers a similar explanation for the lack of evidence of mass slaughter and destruction by Muhammad's followers toward their northern neighbours in the first Islamic century. If true, it is a positive view of history for Muslim and non-Muslim eyes. Donner gives evidence of Christian participation in these raids against the Byzantines. Christian armies fought for the Umayyad Amirs during Islam's civil wars, churches were built and were not destroyed.

Massacres and theft did occur during this changing hegemony, as recorded by Thomas the Presbyter of the Battle of Gaza in 634. Donner offers two explanations for this. First, the nomads who populated the Believers' armies are disparagingly marked as lowbred savages who know no better. Secondly, places that did not resist were spared, and few places resisted once the weak Byzantine or Sassanian garrisons were defeated. Both excuses seem rather feeble, as even the mafia do not harm you if you submit without resistance. But the lack of evidence of destruction in places most excavated, chiefly Syria, reveal no evidence of a mass conquest. For most of the occupied populations, it seems the change of rulers made little difference. Zoroastrian tax collectors continued to levy taxes a century after the fall of the Sassanids, and Christian holy sites continued to operate unmolested.

As Crone opines in God's Caliph, the early Islamic rulers were not Caliphs until decades after Islam's takeover. Only the title Amir al-Mumineen, 'Commander of the Believers', was in currency at the time. Crone raised important theological issues with this title, suggesting that the ruler of the believers also held the religious authority to form a new religion that gradually became Islam. Donner does not suggest this, possibly because as an ecumenical movement there was no need to augment a new, separate religion when none was needed. A rather vague pietistic movement without even a codified holy book until they were ruling vast swathes of land outside their homeland, strongly drawn by a belief that a wicked world needed to be subdued by God's rule for a nihilistic Day of Judgment, was reason enough to rule one's neighbours and bring unimagined wealth to the followers.

Donner covers more than has been mentioned here. He explains the difference between the emigrants from Makkah and the helpers in Medina well, a source of continual tension within the community that plays an important part in the ensuing civil wars. A brief opening chapter on the state of the Byzantine and Sassanian empires before Muhammad gives enough of a background the milieu surrounding the Believers movement, and the early life of Muhammad is so elementary to people familiar with the stories of his life that the book does not seem to start very promising. But as Donner's hypothesis weaves its way throughout the rest of this relatively short book, it becomes enthralling, leading to an excellent foundation of understanding of the early Believers movement up till the time of Abd al-Malik.

A glaring issue in this whole hypothesis however is how to account for the Qur'an's several calumnies against Christians and Jews, if these same people were equal members of the Believers movement. Donner addresses it in less than a page, stating rather weakly that as the Qur'an hadn't been codified and was unknown to most Believers themselves, it simply did not cross their mind. A better explanation could be that, as with many other issues within it, the Qur'an is frustratingly vague and contradictory in its animadversions against the People of the Book (Jews and Christians), with other verses that seem to annul what it says. As an example, the Qur'an gives an anecdote of Jews turning into pigs and apes (scholars have shown this to derive from a tale in the Talmud), but is this to mean all Jews are the descendants of these creatures (as taught by some Imams this day), or is it an isolated case unrelated to the rest of the Jewish people? The Believers' eventual full separation from Christianity comes when it is clear the Christians will not abandon their trinitarian views. Some say that Muhammad only turned against the Jews and Christians for failing to accede to his claims later in his career, but using Donner's research it could be this never occured, beginning only a century after his death with the emergence of Islam as an independent religion.

The introduction to this book states it is only an beginner's book on Islam, but the ideas it contains should stoke interest advanced learners as well.

[Myles Chuang · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very, very interesting thesis for the origins of a religion pinned between two superpowers of late antiquity. Ideological history at its best.

[Rachel Edney]

Read a chapter of this for class, and it's fantastic. COME BACK TO IT @me

[Raya Paul Gracchus · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very basic, but readable introduction to Islam, presented through the framework of Donner's pet theory, which I happen to find convincing. I first learned about this book in an "Introduction to the Quran" class in University, and afterwards I watched some of his lectures. If you know the general shape of early Islam's history and if you watch one of his lectures on YouTube, you will understand the idea behind this book -- that 'Islam' as such emerged decades, or maybe a century after Muhammad's death, and that the movement that Muhammad himself actually led was a more ecumenical community of monotheist believers, including Christians, Jews, and potentially Zoroastrians. Tidbits about the 'constitution of Medina,' and the early group of Muhammad's followers that crossed the Red Sea to the Christian Kingdom in Abyssinia may be familiar to casual or newly-introduced readers like myself, but Donner does pack the book with a lot more evidence than one is able to present in a one-hour lecture, and there is some value in that.

[David]

Really exciting and well-written book on the history of early Islam that lays out the received narrative in a clear and instructive fashion while challenging it in pretty fundamental ways.
The part about the civil wars is very depressing and very complicated. I gotta start thinking Hijri, this reliance on the christian calendar is holding me back.

[Vika Gardner · Rating 5 out of 5]

I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants a thorough but not too dense overview of the early period of Islamic history. Donner includes here the best overview of the pre-Islamic Middle East I have ever read (and that's saying something), as well a sophisticated but clear presentation of the early "Believer movement". His discussion of the development of leadership of the community in the first hundred years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad does not get bogged down in the divergent narratives but nonetheless is able to delineate how the various groups and political parties develop, and how this process culminates in the development of the religion that is more recognizable today.

Students will have a very hard time with all the names, despite Donner's clearly sincere effort to limit himself only to those needed to clarify the narrative.

This would be a superb book for someone who doesn't know anything about the early period of Islam but wants a sense the history and historiography. It goes without says that there's a glossary and "for further information" section.

[Little Timmy · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of the absolutely best history books I have read. Written in an engaging but very readable format it is enjoyable to rad while be very informative. I learned and understood so much more about this very misunderstood religion's origins. I recommend this to ANYONE that is willing to learn more about Islam and how it began and what it really meant at it's beginnings. I promise you will be both surprised by what you learn and swept up in the reading. My highest recommendation

[Ross · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating theory! I'm sympathetic to several of his major points but he always seems to take it just a bit too far:
The early Arab conquests may have been relatively less bloody than we might suppose but they were hardly unopposed. The early community of Believers may have welcomed the inclusion of Christians and Jews and Sabians in conquest and administration but if the core Believers were none of these but also people of the book, what were they? While I agree we can't consider Mohammed a Nasserite I find it very unconvincing concepts of Arab choosiness were a purely latter accretion. Particularly when one considerers the importance of Ishmael, the Arabic language and the many affinities of early Islam with Judaism. This is may not be a Muslim book but it's decidedly Sunni in its sympathies.
All these things considered I still think it's worth a read and probably on to something. Just don't let it be your only source.

[Taylor Swift Scholar · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was very impressive. Donner both writes for an interested lay-person rather than an academic, and puts forth an actual argument instead of just a summary. While I am far from an expert, I found his argument compelling and learned a lot about early Islam along the way.

[ella · Rating 3 out of 5]

read for school.

[Gabriele Barra · Rating 5 out of 5]

As always, good bibliography apparatus, eye opening reflections for whoever isn’t acquainted with the history of early Islam. Formidable

[Michael Rozek · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting book that seriously deals with the great distance of the 'primary' sources of Islam from the actual historical events. There are great problems with the early Muslim primary sources, which are at a greater chronological distance from the actual events and eyewitness accounts than the Gospels. The same standard and measure must be applied to both! Donner's main thesis is that Islam began as a monotheistic Believers movement in one God and the Last Day, believing that such days and the Final Judgement was imminent. Islam as we know it today formulated after Umayyad dynasty finally gained stability and hegemony with the reign of both Mu'awiya and Abd al-Malik. Donner argues that the Believers' movement (early 'Muslims) greatly tolerated Jews and Christians in an ecumenical embrace, if they did not resist or fight agains the warriors of the Believers' movement after the death of Muhammad. This ecumenical tolerance gradually waned and Jews and Christians gradually became more segregated and limited in their social, legal, and religious liberties as second class dhimmī peoples. This follows in Patricia Crone's analysis and approach to the subject in that Islam and its institutions did not bloom fully grown ex-nihilo, but rather gradually came forth. Donner also writes to a general audience instead of a scholarly one and elucidates the schism of Islam (or the Believers' movement) in the two civil wars that emerged as a result of the differences on who should be the 'Commander of the Believers' movement (i.e. the Caliph-even though this title wasn't used by the successors of Muhammad until the late Umayyad and early Abbasid periods).

[Ali · Rating 1 out of 5]

I don't believe I ever read anything new the entire time. It seemed like his whole premise was established simply by changing around vocabulary, rather than through any real mustering of evidence. Not as sensational as the descriptions would suggest.

[AskHistorians]

Another attempt at an introductory text for newcomers to the field. Donner is very well-respected so the scholarship is pretty solid, but the argument he pushes for is sometimes unconvincing. Definitely worth reading in order to understand the historical debate within the field though.

[Matthew · Rating 5 out of 5]

exceptional book. should be required reading for anyone studying or teaching early Islam.

[Daniel Stepke · Rating 5 out of 5]

Donner’s thesis is that Islam was not primarily a social, political, or economic movement, but a monotheistic, pietistic, apocalyptic, religious reform movement, characterized in its early days by ecumenical focus but slowly shifting to a unique religious creed of its own. There was no tribal problem or impetus that caused Islam; and nascent Islam (what he calls the Believers’ movement) was oriented to reforming the understandings of fellow monotheist Christians and Jews without disturbing their faith, the Islamic religious identity only emerging later.
Donner supports his argument by his analysis of a few different kinds of sources. First, he relies heavily upon the Koran. He claims that it is the source closest in time to the origination of the Believers’ movement, and thus is the most reliable source about budding Islam. From it, he draws the religious ideas of the Believers, including their core commitments of monotheism, the imminence of the Last Day, and their pietistic emphasis but also more specifics, like their notions of jihad, pilgrimage, and views of the Bible. For the narrative of Islam afterwards, Donner relies on other Islamic sources (but only as potentially historically accurate, due to their heavy bias and agenda) and a smattering of non-Islamic sources (Byzantine, Christian, Sassanian). Donner’s final weapons are numismatics and broader archaeology. For example, he references the Umayyad coins (187) to show new emphases in their rule, and to show how early Islamic conquest wasn’t always violent, he references how buildings in conquered areas seem undisturbed circa the conquests’ dates (supporting their ecumenism). (107)
Donner seems his most insightful in his higher premises about how the Believers’ movement related to religious belief. People take religion seriously, and whole movements can be driven by religious beliefs. We should not a priori think that people see religion as secondary to their “real concerns” of socioeconomics and politics—especially when they say exactly the opposite (as the Believers do). Absent a reason to think the Believers are lying when they say they are motivated primarily by their devotion to God, it is not charitable to think otherwise. Furthermore, Donner is right to think that the socioeconomic and political can be explained by the religious. The Believers saw themselves as the agents of God, the divine viceregents, who would bring heaven to earth. (86-9) How does one conquer the world without engaging with the world? How do you take over the political entirely apolitically? Such is impossible. But the religious is an adequate motive for the Believers’ push to do so. Hoyland says that Donner fails to treat the Muslims as “ordinary humans with material wants and needs as opposed to superhuman beings concerned only with God and Judgement Day.” (Hoyland 576) But normal people can care about both, and Donner respects that by his interweaving of the supernatural and natural into the Believers’ mindsets. Donner is also right to side with Berkey on how Islam crystallized and emerged, rather than broke onto the scene. (Berkey 335) However, the book is not without its weaknesses. First, only briefly is the idea of Paradise mentioned, (79) and there is not even an entry for it in the index. Donner mentions that the Believers were worked into a frenzy against corruption due to anxiety about the Last Day and their salvation from the world. But what were they going to be saved unto? A luscious garden filled with wine and sex—things we would call worldly pleasures. This paradox within the Believers’ movement is essential. The Koran does not just harp on the Last Day—it harps on the Believers’ rewards and non-Believers’ tortures. How worldly the Believers’ movement was depends on this. Even if their belief is religious, is it ultimately aimed at worldly goods? And if their goal is to bring about heaven on earth, as Donner says, to what degree will it be worldly, like the Koranic vision of Paradise? Second, Donner’s vision of the Koran’s ecumenicism seems worrisome, especially considering Christian Trinitarianism. As Powers notes, pagans are largely omitted. (Powers 308) With such an emphasis on monotheism, how did dedicated polytheists simply switch quickly to monotheistic belief? In regard to Christians, such virulent Koranic material against the Trinity would surely turn a Christian away from the Believers, considering how central the Nicene Creed is to Christianity. Donner seems to think that Nestorians and Monophysites denied the Trinity. (70, 212) But they did not—they simply had a different view of the nature of Christ, still believing in his divinity. They would still be guilty of polytheism on the Believers’ view, prompting the question of whether Believer-adjacent Christians actually understood the Believers’ movement; allied themselves politically with the Believers; or were forced into submission. Donner takes up none of these views nor even considers them, to his detriment.

[Muawiyah Yousuf · Rating 3 out of 5]

While much has evolved in the field of prophetic biography since Fred Donner wrote this book—with more evidence unearthed and different approaches to the seerah literature employed—this work is nevertheless quite exceptional in the conclusions it reaches. It argues against some of the most absurd and radical theories propounded by revisionist Orientalists. While Donner—being rather moderate in the revisionist school— challenges most of these preposterous ideas, he nevertheless comes up with one or two of his own that can equally be considered far-fetched.

The unique aspect of Donner's scholarship is that he neither wholly accepts the traditional Muslim narrative nor the radical Western understanding. I found certain information presented in the book fascinating. Some of Donner's arguments are highly convincing (take, for example, his analysis of the word Muslim against the word Mu'min); on the other hand, certain ideas of his are built on heavy speculation, especially given the contradicting nature of the historical sources at times.

He summarizes key events spanning from the eve of the Prophet's advent up to the reign of 'Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan. Donner credits 'Abd al-Malik with the standardization of many practices that the wider Muslim community follows today. To say the least, this is an extreme theory that hinges on conjecture.

The core argument of the book is that early Islam—from the time of the Prophet ﷺ through the end of the reign of Mu'awiya ibn Abi Sufyan—was fundamentally different from the Islam that emerged under the Marwanids. According to the author, the Prophetic and Companion eras were less rigid and more ecumenical, encompassing all monotheists who feared God and were believers, regardless of whether they were Jews or Christians. In contrast, Marwanid Islam developed into a more clearly defined and exclusive religious identity that departed from its earlier character. Lines were drawn, and new definitions were given regarding who was considered a believer/submitter.

To Donner, the Umayyads are not the godless hijackers they are often made out to be, but rather people who should be credited for shaping what Islam is today. To quote Donner:

"I see the rulers of the Umayyad dynasty (660–750) not as cynical manipulators of the outward trappings of the religious movement begun by Muhammad but as rulers who sought practical ways to realize the most important goals of the movement and who perhaps more than anyone else helped the Believers attain a clear sense of their own distinct identity and of their legitimacy as a religious community. Without the contributions of the Umayyads, it seems doubtful whether Islam, as we recognize it today, would even exist."

Chapter 3 on the expansion phase was very interesting. Apart from that, I wouldn't recommend the book to anyone who is unaware of the traditional seerah.

[Michael Nguyen · Rating 4 out of 5]

It covers Islam from the revisionist and secular perspective. I don't really recommend this for people looking for the traditional account of Islam as they will find many things that they will disagree with here. It says that the early community of religious followers of Muhammad was known as The Believers (mu'minun) and that they were ecumenical community that consisted of Christians and Jews and maybe Zoroastrianians. As time went on there was a religious expansion, which consisted of a combination of warfare and peaceful transitions (this part was confusing). Donner challenges aspects of the traditionist account of warfare, stating that some of it was to emphasise the divine providence on side of Muslims, and a lack of emphasis on the peaceful conversions and transitions to the religious community of the Believers. There is a lot of coverage on the war, battles, military; I didn't particularly find those interesting.

Later on it covers 'Ali, Aisha, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Mu'awiya, Yazid and Abdal Malik. It is very different to the traditional Shia account as well, in that it doesn't cover the divine appointment theology of Imam Ali which is what the Shiites believe. It revises Islamic history again covering how Abdal Malik solidified the creation of Islam as a distinct religious identity, how the term mu'minun (The Believers) slowly went out of fashion, and how he changed the coins to indicate Islamic theology, and him building the Dome of the Rock.

The religion starts out as a ecumenical faith community started by Muhammad, consisting of Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians; later after the Prophet's death there is the succession by Muhammad's companions Abu Bakr (Aisha's father), 'Umar, Uthman by shura or democratic selection (wrongly, according to Shiites). Uthman is assassinated for nepotism. Then Ali is appointed, and Aisha raised a failed coup against Ali. Ali is assassinated by the Kharijites for a reason I didn't quite understand but it was explained as they were against political arbitration between him and Mu'awiya and they believed God was the great decider. Later on Mu'awiya is caliph, engages in further nepotism, when he dies he appoints his son Yazid. Later on 'Abd Al Malik emerges victorious. The Believer community fully transitions into a solidified Islamic identity.

Whether you believe this theory is up to you. I think its really interesting. Muslims will generally disagree with this account, not that it matters to non-muslims, but it is an interesting meta-debate.

[Lembusora · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sungguh buku yang sangat bagus.

Lewat penelitian yg ia lakukan, Donner menjelaskan dgn brilian asal-usul Islam. Ia sengaja memakai istilah Umat Beriman (Believers) untuk menunjukkan bahwa pada mula-mula memang ia sebuah gerakan, bukan agama.

Donner mengupas bagaimana awal Muhammad memulai gerakan ini, yg tujuannya mengembalikan umat kepada monoteisme dan sadar bahwa pagan adalah kesalahan.

Gerakan Umat Beriman pada mulanya mencakup umat Yahudi dan Kristiani yg memang monoteis. Namun seiring perkembangan, Umat Beriman mengidentifikasikan diri pada Quran dan Muhammad sehingga disebut Islam. Yahudi dan Kristiani tidak ikut karena mereka enggan mengakui Muhammad sebagai rasul Allah. Belum lagi ketidaksepakatan sebagian Umat Beriman terhadap Trinitas.

Donner juga memperlihatkan bagaimana suksesi kekuasaan adalah sesuatu yg sangat sulit. Peralihan kuasa dari Utsman ke Ali bin Abi Thalib yg menyebabkan konflik panjang, hingga bermuara ke perang saudara dua jilid.

Bani Umayya jelas marah Utsman dibunuh dan tidak suka dengan Ali karena dianggap melindungi para pembunuh Utsman. Hingga akhirnya kedua kubu gontok²an sampai kemudian syiah lahir (pendukung Ali menganggap keturunan beliau paling layak jd pemimpin karena ada garis darah langsung Muhammad).

Buku ini sangat penting untuk dibaca bagi umat muslim. Tentunya dengan dilanjutkan membaca buku sejarah Islam versi lain agar tak bias.

[Pat Byrd · Rating 3 out of 5]

A well regarded historical account of the first 700 foundational years of Islam recommended by my historian son.

From Goodreads -- "The origins of Islam have been the subject of increasing controversy in recent years. The traditional view, which presents Islam as a self-consciously distinct religion tied to the life and revelations of the prophet Muhammad in western Arabia, has since the 1970s been challenged by historians engaged in critical study of the Muslim sources.

In "Muhammad and the Believers," the eminent historian Fred Donner offers a lucid and original vision of how Islam first evolved. He argues that the origins of Islam lie in what we may call the "Believers' movement" begun by the prophet Muhammad a movement of religious reform emphasizing strict monotheism and righteous behavior in conformity with God's revealed law. The Believers' movement thus included righteous Christians and Jews in its early years, because like the Qur'anic Believers, Christians and Jews were monotheists and agreed to live righteously in obedience to their revealed law. The conviction that Muslims constituted a separate religious community, utterly distinct from Christians and Jews, emerged a century later, when the leaders of the Believers' movement decided that only those who saw the Qur'an as the final revelation of the One God and Muhammad as the final prophet, qualified as Believers. This separated them decisively from monotheists who adhered to the Gospels or Torah."

[Cynthia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reading this book was not unlike reading a physics textbook. I had a hard time keeping track of terms, I was often confused, and I needed several re-reads of passages because my mind kept slipping off into bored-beyond-belief territory. I'd recommend this to any in need of a strong soporific- it'll knock the caffeine and insomnia right out of you!

Perhaps my less-than-favorable opinion of this book was caused by the fact that I sustained around 40 mosquito bites trying to sit outside and read this sometime in early September. Taking that into consideration, the ideas encapsulated by Donner were interesting, and provided an extremely well-researched and (although dense) incredibly informative outline of the early history of Islam, which certainly is applicable to everything from foreign policy to polite hallway interactions. I did note a bit of bias in both directions (Donner seemed to switch around, playing the Devil's advocate with himself) but overall, he kept it nice and objective. My main caveat was the fact that he seems to expect the average reader to be able to keep up with 20 names and histories in their head simultaneously, which was a little much for my tiny brain. Overall, a good read for anyone, really.

[Luis Dizon · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Muhammad and the Believers” is one of the more recent works written by renowned scholar of Islamic history Fred M. Donner. This book is two things simultaneously. First, it is brief overview of the early history of Islam, from pre-Islamic history of Arabia, up to the reign of the Umayyad dynasty. Thus, it covers over two hundred years of history. Insofar as Donner is merely recounting early Islamic history, his book is both accurate and uncontroversial. However, there is that second aspect of the book, which is the reinterpretation of that early history. The main thesis that Donner seeks to advance, which he alludes to at various points in the book and develops most extensively in the final chapter, is that “Islam” as a distinct religion did not exist until the time of ‘Abd al-Malik, thus placing the birth of Islam at the end of the the seventh century rather than at the beginning of it. Prior to this, what we have is a “Believer’s Movement” that spanned monotheists of various faiths, be they Jews or Christians or Qur’anic followers.

The book is divided into five chapters. The first chapter, “The Near East on the Eve of Islam,” provides the socio-political background of pre-Islamic Arabia. It describes the various religious groupings extant in the region, which are Christianity (which itself is further subdivided into Monophysites, Nestorians, and Chalcedonians), Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and Arabian Paganism. It focuses on the rivalry between the Byzantine and Sasanian Empires, both of whom tried to extend their influence into the Arabian peninsula by adopting Arab client states (the Ghassanids and the Lakhmids, respectively).

Chapter two, “Muhammad and the Believer’s Movement,” provides a traditional account of the life of the prophet. It then states the problem of having to rely on relatively late sources for this account, as well as the problem of attempting to create an accurate chronology of the surahs of the Qur’an. Donner also first states his thesis here, as he sketches a portrait of a multi-confessional “Believer’s Movement” in Medina.

Chapter three, “The Expansion of the Community of Believers,” goes into the last years of Muhammad’s life, the turbulent aftermath of his death which culminated in the Ridda wars, as well as the subsequent expansion of the Islamic empire into Byzantine and Persian domains. Donner details the nature of the Believers’ communities that were established in the newly conquered lands, which kept them separate from the surrounding cultures, and ultimately kept them from being absorbed into those cultures and their religions.

Chapter four, “The Struggle for the Leadership of the Community,” details breakdown of the Believers’ leadership with the assassination of ‘Uthman. When ‘Ali comes into power, the first civil war breaks out. This first civil war sows the seed of the future divisions of Islam into Sunnism, Shi’ism, and Kharijism. After ‘Ali’s death, we see the rise of the Umayyad dynasty, and the second civil war which culminates in the death of Husayn in the Battle of Karbala.

FInally, in chapter five, “The Emergence of Islam,” we have ‘Abd al-Malik, who solidifies the confessional identity of the Believer’s Movememt as Muslims. This is most clearly seen in his construction of the Dome of the Rock, which is patterned after Byzantine Martyria, and upon whose walls are inscribed Qur’anic verses denouncing Christian beliefs about the Trinity and the divinity of Christ. With this act, argues Donner, the evolution of the Believer’s Movement into the Islamic religion is now complete.

After the last chapter, the book contains two appendices. The Appendix A, “The Umma Document,” contains the Constitution that was used by the early Muslim in Medina, and serves as one of the main pieces of primary source evidence for Donner’s thesis. Appendix B, “Inscriptions in the Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem,” is an English translation of the Qur’anic verses inscribed along the walls of the Dome of the Rock. After this comes a list of recommended books for further reading.

As stated earlier, the main thrust of this book is to demonstrate that what Muhammad founded was not a distinct religion known as “Islam,” but a “Believer’s Movement” meant to unite the monotheists of Arabia around common theological and ethical ideals. Understandably, most Muslims do not find this thesis acceptable, since the classical Islamic view is that the religion was divinely revealed by God over the course of Muhammad’s lifetime, and was perfected towards the end of his life, as the Qur’an states (Q 5:3). It is not only Muslims who reject Donner’s thesis, however. Many scholars of Islamic history are critical of his views, such as Patricia Crone and Robert Hoyland.

The thesis also contradicts the many Qur’anic passages which speak of Jews and Christians as another religion, criticizes the tenets of their faith, relegates them to hellfire (Q 98:6), and enjoins war against them (Q 9:29). These passages imply that, far from being part of the same “Believer’s Movement,” Jews and Christians are to be seen as “the other,” to be dissuaded from excesses in their religion, and later on, to be subjugated through warfare. The book quotes selectively from various passages of the Qur’an, but does not take these specific passages into consideration--an oversight that weakens the overall argument of this book.

That aside, there is much to commend in this book. As a survey of early Islamic history, it is quite excellent (as long as one is aware of the author’s particular slant). His writing style is simple and easy to follow, making it highly accessible to non-specialists. In addition, his criticisms of certain other theories of Islamic origins (most especially the view that it was an Arab national movement that only later became a religion) which are stated in the Introduction are also quite valid. For these reasons, “Muhammad and the Believers” is a worthwhile addition to the library of anybody studying early Islamic history.

[Farhad Zaker · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent book to follow along with one of the most important questions for anyone who had cracked the late antiquity period, and now faced with a question of Islam, opening its way through conquest in a world already populated with great empires, supposedly annihilating themselves after 25 years of war.
I enjoyed this book, and I would suggest people reading it if they want to read one book about the rise of Islam. If I could improve one thing about it, however, it would be the over-reliance on the common narrative for the section regarding the civil wars (Fitna 1 and 2). I think that section is in need of a rewrite, to expand on the official narrative of muslim sources, vs what actually went on and its importance for the islamic world. Just to be clear, the present text is very well written, but might need to present a deeper dive in that section to be regarded as an absolute masterpiece in my humble opinion.

[Alan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An intriguing look at the "Believers" (مُؤْمِنُون) movement that preceded the codification of the distinct Abrahamic faith we now know as "Islam." The author's main assertion is that the Believers movement was at first an ecumenical one, concerned with righteous living, monotheism, and even included Jews, Christians, and possibly Zoroastrians. Major shifts in the identity of the community began to take shape near the end of the first century AH/seventh century CE—around sixty years after the death of the prophet Muhammad—under Umayyad leader ʿAbd al-Malik.

The language is simple and accessible for all audiences. The author provides numerous aids to assist the reader, including maps, a preface, a note on conventions used in Arabic names and dates, several appendices, a glossary, a guide to further reading, an index, and dozens of images and quotations from source materials.

[Waqar Ahmed · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fantastic book by Fred Donner on what transpired after the Prophet's (PBUH) death for the religion of Islam.

The author talks about the Rashidun Caliphate and how the Ridda Wars began soon after the Prophet's death during the time of Caliph Abu Bakar. Ultimately, the Prophet had no clear successor outlined and due to that a schism or split emerged soon after his death. He also talks about the First Civil War and the Second Civil War and how Islam eventually spread in Persia and Byzantine Empire.

A brilliant however slightly cumbersome book on Islam on the events soon after the Prophet's passing away.

[K · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this book to be compelling and well-argued, written with a clear and consistent narrative; however, I finished it with a sense of unease. For a work of this nature, I expect not just a single story, but a robust engagement with competing perspectives that also fit the evidence. The absence of these meaningful counter-narratives left me questioning whether the author's theory is persuasive because it is uniquely rigorous or because it simply omits competing data. Now I want to dig deeper and look for other books on the topic, especially as new evidence (particularly archaeological) continues to come to light.