For a > 250 page book, this one has a startling lack of actual history in it. Far too many pages are wasted on the author's reiterating points he made on earlier pages, and there is far too little diversity among his sources or actual use of source material. This book seems to have been intended for a less scholarly/wider audience (it is as much political commentary as historical analysis), but, even, so, I fault it for assuming that the modern, casual reader is a nitwit who lacks all capacity to retain what was said not once or twice, but again and again; and who would rather take the author's word that inquisitors said and did x, y and z than be introduced the words of those people.
Which is not to say that the book does not quote the inquisitors or reference source material; it does, sporadically. However, it is one of those books where, at the end of it, you're amazed at how many pages you read to come away with so little of actual substance.
Additionally, I would note that the title is rather misleading. "A History of Terror in the Name of God" this is not; it certainly starts as such (from a western, Christian perspective, at least), but then finishes with a look at secular state sponsored terror (again, from a western perspective). The author attempts to illustrate, with more success in some cases than others, that these later cases are products of the Inquisition, or at least influenced by it, but they are certainly not performed in "the Name of God". A more appropriate title would, perhaps, have been "The Legacy of Terror in the Name of God". I'm not meaning to nitpick here, but to include the godless regimes of Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany as illustrative of the "history of terror in the name of God" seems a bit silly.
Also, while the focus of this book is the influence of the Inquisition on similar state sponsored terror networks/state sponsored pursuits of "heretics"/undesirables/others, the author doesn't explore some obvious points, and leaves some interesting questions unanswered.
To address the first point, Jonathon Kirsch barely mentions states like England, which, while touched marginally (in England's case, once) by the Inquisition proper during its history, nonetheless employed many of the same tactics against "heretics" - be they witches, Jews, protestants, Catholics, etc. - and for the same reasons - genuine fear of "the other", superstition, and, of course, greed. What influence did the Inquisition have on England? What influence did England have on the Inquisition? Or did the two exist in veritable vacuums, uninfluenced by one another and yet doing the same work? Reading this book, one would never know, for Kirsch ignores the question entirely.
As to the other point (which, in some ways, ties to the previous), what was the influence of contemporary society on the inquisition? Again, Kirsch mentions the suspicions held against Christians by their earliest persecutors (before they took on the role of persecuting one another) - the pagan nations in which they dwelt; he notes how these same early accusations against Christians by pagans were reiterated nearly charge for charge against "heretics" by their fellow Christians during the Inquisitions. He also references that the Inquisition was not the first to employ torture against its enemies...but, while these points are noted, they are never explored fully or given any real context. Was the Inquisition simply a new, religious-ized, perhaps more effectively managed, version of what was already considered acceptable, or was it truly a revolutionary new way of doing things? This is not merely a point of interest or obscure history - it is crucial to the entire point of Kirsch's book, which is the legacy of the Inquisition. If the Inquisition is merely a product of the world about it, it would more properly be seen not as the propagator of this form of terror, but merely as a continuer of such - much as the Nazi and Stalinist (stripped of the God-element) regimes can be seen. And yet the author neglects to properly address this question.
Finally, the author's last points - where he attempts to extend the reach of the Inquisition beyond the actual Inquisition, to the current day Iraq/Afghanistan wars - are deeply flawed. The author attempts to equate the thought crimes for which "heretics" were burnt in droves with the more literal crimes for which "enemy combatants" are held by noting similarities between tactics employed to discover "heretics" and "terrorists". He overlooks an important distinction, however...In the days of the inquisitions, a *thought* (real or falsely attributed to the accused) outside of accepted boundaries was enough to merit "interrogations"; and, worse yet, so was something utterly outside the control of the victim - one's "blood" or descent. One can not control if one's ancestors were Jewish/Muslim/Cathar/etc.; one can control joining up to fight with someone, financially supporting them, etc. Which is not to say that everyone caught and accused is likely guilty, of course...however, this is a failing all justice systems must combat (the possibility of accusing innocents). The fact that innocents may have been accused wrongly of taking up arms against US is not the same thing as saying innocents were accused of *thinking* anti-US thoughts. Agree or disagree with the wars, Guantanamo Bay, etc., it is a ludicrous disservice to those dispossessed, brutally tortured, left to languish in prison, burnt to death, and otherwise abused, by the inquisitors of yesteryear for nothing more than thinking (or being accused of thinking) thoughts deemed unacceptable - or having a trace of "impure" blood - to equate their suffering and abuse with our current predicament.
The first part of the book (the discussion of the inquisition) I give 3 stars; an interesting enough examination of the history, but containing too little history and far too much repetition. The latter part, I give 2 stars; hurried and inadequate examinations of the history presumed to support his points. All in all, I say 3 stars...it's an interesting point of view, and a quick enough read that, even with its failings, you haven't wasted your time.
