I enjoyed this biography very much. I thought it struck a nice balance of respect and context driven history. The book is a nice antidote to the vitriole of "The Truth about Muhammed" by Robert Spencer on the one side, and the overly reverential view of Martin Lings biography of the Prophet (which non-Muslims might find hard to sympathize).

Muhammad has never been treated as a whole person in West. In some way, implicitly or explicitly he has been judged by a Christian norm of how Jesus was and became. It is very seldom that people in general take "side" about Muhammad without being ideologically flawed in some way, either mega-conservative Christians or ultra-atheist ex-Muslims. Being myself of Christian background and Liberal Christian, I felt that I needed a book which was above all other books, that could grasp both the context in which Muhammad acted and also having him described as he would have wanted.

Rogerson begins by stressing that he wants to write in a new way about Muhammad. His style is colourful, analytical and heavy - but not always succesful. The first three chapters are a sort of an introduction of Arabia in 6th century, its neighbours, its religious and social system.

The analysis of Arabia's neighbours is fruitful. It seems that Arabia was demographically very heterogenous, geographically very economically important and Muhammad became very early an observant of this fact.

The author goes thru Muhammad's first revelations, the nature of the Cor'an, why the people found Muhammad's message threatening but also inspiring, his wars and his end of life. I think the chapter about wars is important cause it has in some way been the only feature that ordinary people know about and have misunderstood. It is easy here to judge Muhammad by 20th century standards. The same goes for Muhammad's wives - the polygyny notwithstanding - the marriage of 9-year-old Aisha to the 53-year-old prophet is difficult to understand.

Thru Rogerson's pen Muhammad becomes a strategic militant, a family father, a caring husband, a visionary, a man who dreamed of a united Arabia and foremost a inner seekers, who wished the best for his follower's spiritual state.

This book stands out in my reviews, which mostly are about Joseph Smith, the Latter-day Saint prophet (1805-1844). He started his prophetic call in Palmyra and he is my favourite prophet and muse - he really inspires me. When reading Rogerson, I refreshed my memory that Palmyra also was an ancient Roman city in Middle East, not that far from Tyros, and Muhammad passed by this grand city. In some way, I am not that off the track reading about Muhammad. Both him and Joseph became prophets!

The 3-star-note is because I wanted a more detailed analysis of sources in the text itself rather than in an appendix and also the fact that the author is not using the historical overview in a more academic way. He should have changed style in this case. He is also using current name on states such as Iraq about the same areas in those days. The many stories rest unconfirmed and thus the biography doesn't become fairly sustained.

If this book is one of the better biographies of Muhammad, as one reviewer says, then we are in sad shape, indeed, in understanding both Muhammad and early Islam.

This is not to argue with accuracy of the facts (to the extent they are known) of Muhammad's life, as offered by Rogerson. But legends, tales and traditions that have little or no grounding in historical fact are offered up as if they are absolutely, provably known. Time after time, the author simply doesn't differentiate between fact and speculation.

Even worse, the author breezily tells us that it was fine that Muhammad's third wife was 9 years old (he was 53) because, after all, they were deeply in love! And when Muhammad was attracted to his step-son's wife, the step-son was more than happy to divorce her so Dad could move in. Gimmee a break. But that's how Rogerson writes. I do think such a style is called "mindless apologetics".

Islam, and Muhammad's role in establishing Islam, are simply too important for us now to have books like this trotted out as helpful. Can't someone give us better?

Mr. Rogerson has written an excellent portrait of the Prophet, woven into the lives and times of Arabia in the 7th Century. While extremely readable, unfortunately it contains certain glaring inaccuracies. To name but a few:
* He misquotes the first revealtion to the Prophet as being from Surah Ignaa (page 89). It should be Surah Alaq.
* On page 91 he refers to Kadir, when it should be Layl-atul -Qadr.
* On page 114 he refers to the Prophet's "daughter" Aisha. Hazrat Aisha was his wife.
-Sami T. Ahmad.

Rogerson has a talent for stories, and among all the other biographies of Muhammad, this is the one I would recommend to the absolute (and not-so absolute) beginner. It is a pleasure to read, almost like a novel. Other biographies are either hagiographies written by enthousiastic and well intended authors with a lack of critical thinking, or thoroughly scolarly volumes, unfit for a good read.
Rogerson is not just a storyteller, he also doesn't uncritically adhere to every muslim dogma on the Prophet, but uses the results of recent historical en archaeological research to put everything in a perspective that is both credible and positive. Besides that he puts forward more than one alternative explanation on issues that seem critical to Islam. His view on the Quran for example clearly sees Muhammad himself as the author, but still leaves his status as Prophet perfectly unblemished. It is views like these that make the Muhammad in this book quite acceptable as a 'real person' to both muslims and non-muslims, although some orthodox muslims might still take offence.
As a good biographer should, Rogerson has a positive attitude towards his subject. Most of the time this works and he manages to explain the uneasy and difficult in well enough positive terms to make it at least understandable, if not acceptable to the non-muslim reader.
On the downside there are two points to be made. In some chapters Rogerson makes extensive use of quotes from the scources instead of trusting his own undeniable writing skills. This happens more often in the later chapters where he also increasingly leans towards hagiography and the use of unnecessary adjectives of the laudatory kind. The combination of these three can sometimes be a bit irritating.
The second point is more serious. Everyone knows that at one point a Jewish tribe in Medina was massacred at the instigation (if not order) of Muhammad. Both critics and followers of Muhammad have very good and well documented points to make in support of their respective viewpoints, and the discussions on this historical event will not be finished soon. Rogerson acknowledges the savagery of the event, even more so than some more critically minded biographers. But when push comes to shove he concludes that this act of mercilessness was necessary in order for Muhammad to show leniency later on and to really show the value of leniency. That is the kind of propaganda that would not be misplaced in the Third Reich. There are better and more subtle points to be made in support of Muhammad.
These lapses however are not many and can easily be disregarded. Rogersons book is still one of the best popular biographies on Muhammad and certainly the best that I know.

(this review refers to the Dutch translation)