I began this book exactly a year ago, before my first trip to Mecca to make Umrah. I only read the introduction and first chapter, but felt it best not to leave the book on the currently reading shelf longer than a year. I took lots of notes to write up a comprehensive review, but after reading chapter 11 I find myself exhausted. The tragedy of what has become of Mecca is painful, and I find myself wanting to leave it behind, just as Sardar means to opens one's eyes. Indeed, he argues that Mecca has always been like this, and that the Mecca of our imaginations is a pious illusion and dream, one that he too shared and admits does exist to some degree. I skipped chapters 6 to 9 and skimmed much of the preceding sections only to read particular references to Mecca. Despite sharing a faith, my own perspective is quite different from Sardar’s, and I did not appreciate his approach in large part, though I recognise his valid concerns.
The book begins with an account of Sardar’s experience of Mecca as a pilgrim, particularly the remarkable, entertaining and moving narrative of his pilgrimage on foot from Jedda. This is followed by a simple and standard account of Mecca’s pre-Islamic history, origins of Islam and the life of the Prophet (SAWS) for the first two chapters, from traditional and secular perspectives, then three chapters on mediaeval Islamic history. Chapters six to nine, which I passed over, covered from the 1510s to the 1950s, from the beginning of Ottoman control to modern Saudi Arabia. Chapters 10 and 11 feel like a return to the introduction, with Sardar’s own biography overriding much of the history, before his concluding reflections.
Admittedly, the book does not present itself as an academic work, and I would not recommend it as a work of history. Having formally studied Islamic history, albeit by no means a specialist, I found reading it frustrating. Sardar presents a standard, relatively simplistic account of Islamic history, which often consists of tangents not directly relevant to Mecca. These make sense only insofar as they set the scene and provide context, but little is done with this. A comment on the blurb praises the book for its focus on human stories, but these consist of largely uncritical use of anecdotal narrations and travel accounts, the latter of which were more interesting. Areas of history I am less familiar with, such as the history of the sharifs, were more palatable, though I suspect also likely to be flawed. Even there, and most frustratingly, basic mistakes, such as anachronistic translations, and the frequent misidentification of figures and mis-spelling of their names and terminology suggests little familiarity with the periods he is expounding upon and which make up the bulk of the book.
While his observations of the tragic and horrific state of affairs for many living in Saudi Arabia are not to be shied away from, he also makes broad characterisations of Hijazis and Najdis as money-grubbing and corrupt, and seeks to substantiate this villainisation historically. Sardar makes many assertions without citations or mention of his sources, some of which are general, many of which are stretches, and most of which are, even if true, unflattering, though this at least is intentional. He sets up simple thematic binaries such as tolerance vs puritanism, rationalism vs obscurantism, and seeks to portray historical Mecca (as well as its people “the Meccans” often described as acting en masse with apparently clear group motives, albeit without citation) as the epitome of the latter.
This unflattering approach is deliberate and express. Be it out of a modern fascination with a grotesque, rejection of the romantic, or quest for realism, justified or not, this historical exposé of Mecca also feels deeply personal for Sardar, which he makes clear. As mentioned, the book lacks historical rigour, which it makes up for in rhetoric, with strings of open-ended questions. For this reason it feels half-baked and unfinished, and in many ways Sardar’s personal attempt to respond to crisis – to some extent a panicked and flailing call to action.
On the other hand, the final chapter is compelling. As Sardar himself admits that in the accounts by pilgrims he uses, the travel to and from Mecca are the more interesting part, and I would say the same is true of this book. Its beginning and end are the most compelling, grounded in Sardar's own experience of the city, which is the catalyst for the book. This is particularly interesting as he worked there at a time of its (not so) great transformation in the 1970s into the "Arabian Las Vegas". As little is done with the historical narrative and context, these sections would work better independently as an opinion piece or work of essay writing. As mentioned, the historical narrative provided often feels irrelevant to Mecca and could be better found elsewhere, as Sardar largely summarises well known sources.
I wonder who the audience of the book is. I surmise that the portrayal of the book as a history of Mecca is perhaps intended to draw in Muslim readers who hold this mythic Mecca sacrosanct in their minds and then to deconstruct and expose it. It is meant to be uncomfortable reading, and if these were Sardar’s purposes, then at least with me in this he did succeed. Nevertheless, if, as he asserts, most Muslims hold a uninformed, pietistic view of history, I do not feel that his tone would necessarily win those individuals over, while I do not see the subject matter nor its personal inflection as of being much interest to a non-Muslim audience. In any case, even if “realistic”, I would not say the historical narrative he presents is balanced, and so while I would agree that most Muslims sadly have not had the luxury of familiarising themselves with Islamic history to a great extent, this book does not provide a particularly beneficial corrective in that regard.
Sardar mentions his own feelings of guilt that he was unable to prevent what happened to Mecca in the 1970s, that he threw in the towel, and his disillusionment is clear. I wonder to what extent the effort to portray the history of Mecca and more importantly the Meccans as ever corrupted is (subconsciously) an attempt to alleviate that guilt: "It was their nature, it was always like this, how could I have changed that?" It goes without saying that Sardar cannot be blamed for this.
Overall, I appreciate Sardar’s intent in providing another wake up call to the Muslim community, with Mecca as its centre, a mirror of the diseases that beset it. For me at least, this was difficult reading, and I agree that it must not be shied away from, let alone left unacted upon. Nevertheless, the book also purports as a work of history, in which it is largely insufficient, even as popular history. I personally feel I disagree with many of Sardar’s views and object to his tone, although I sympathise with his frustrations and his expression of them, having felt much of the same alienation, frustration and disillusionment on my own trip to Mecca. I can only imagine the pain at seeing the point of transformation and being unable to effect change. For this reason alone I bump it up a star.
In conclusion, while I admit that I neither read the whole book nor have written a comprehensive review, I would not personally recommend the bulk of this book for those interested in the history of Mecca, which Sardar suggests has simultaneously much and little to offer. Meanwhile, I would agree in encouraging Muslims to read up on, recognise, and respond to the tragedy to which the Mother of Cities and hence her many children have been callously subjected, and in this regard there is benefit to be found in the Introduction and final two chapters.