Despite the flood of introductory books on Islam that have appeared in recent years, works focused solely on the Quran have been remarkably scarce. Thus there is certainly room for a new textbook and Ernst's work is a worthy attempt to fill that gap. The book's coverage reflects one area of emphasis in contemporary Quranic studies, and instructors may well find it worth considering for classroom use. The book has a straightforward structure, readily adaptable to individual needs. A methodological introduction is followed by a lengthy first chapter devoted to the history and the form of the text of the Quran. Chapters 2, 3 and 4 pay attention to the early Meccan suras, the middle and late Meccan suras, and the Medinan suras respectively. A brief conclusion is followed by three appendixes dealing with the structure of individual suras and some “suggested interpretive exercises” for students.

Ernst is best known as a scholar of Sufism and this venture into writing about the Quran reflects his concern with teaching the basics of Islam within an American religious studies context. The book is, in its scholarly aspects, a synthesis of contemporary scholarship written by others. The work of Angelika Neuwirth and Michel Cuypers appears to have had a significant impact on Ernst; he devotes considerable attention to the idea of the “pre-canonical” development of the Quran (following Neuwirth) as well as to ideas about literary structures seen especially in the Medinan suras (following Cuypers).

The approach of the work is described as “historical and literary” and sometimes as simply “literary”, especially when that is posed as the opposite of “theological”. History really is the key to the analysis, however, as is made clear by the continued use of Nöldeke's four-part chronological division for presenting the text. While Ernst wishes to privilege a literary approach over a theological one, his emphasis on how the text “unfolds over the period of its articulation” (p. 74) incorporates certain Muslim theological presuppositions related to revelation that cannot be anchored in literary analysis alone; he does so despite the fact that he criticizes other books by saying “nearly all general treatments of the Qur'an (whether written by Muslims or non-Muslims) adopt some notion of traditional Islamic scholarship as the baseline for interpretation” (p. 10). He does finally admit that he too must accept some degree of theological presupposition when he discusses the Sīra's role in establishing the chronology of the Quran – that clearly being a part of traditional Islamic scholarship deeply affected by a salvific perspective – and he resolves the tension in his argument by simply saying this is the “best solution” (p. 37).

Ernst's book is marked by an explicit appeal to religious studies as a discipline, again as opposed to a theological point of view. This is reflected not only in the topics that receive particular attention (e.g. “orality”, a favourite religious studies marker of the Quran's distinctiveness) but also, on occasion, in the pains Ernst takes to define his religious studies approach as a way of defending what he is saying; on occasion this goes overboard and the reader feels that perhaps the author protests too much without fully exploring the implications of what is being said. The issue arises early on in the book. On page 1 reference is made to taking the Quran “seriously” as a text; this is stated in opposition to the “enormous anxiety” felt in “Europe and America” as expressed by religious conservatives and secularists, all of whom are declared not to take the text “very seriously” but to view it as a “dangerous problem”. This is, of course, quite false. A look at a Christian website such as “Answering Islam” will show that polemicists take the text of the Quran very seriously indeed, as does someone like Ibn Warraq on the secularist side. In fact, Ernst is invoking here the religious studies trope of “seriousness” which has its supposed relevance in suggesting that scholars need to respect the believer's position regarding revelation and the divine (i.e. the “religious” side of religion) and not simply dismiss it. Ernst has muddled two impulses in positioning his perspective in this way; the “anxiety” felt is real, but it has nothing to do with taking the text “seriously”.

The book follows a recent trend in Quranic scholarship that emphasizes the unity of individual suras, suggesting a firm compositional hand behind each chapter. Ernst is particularly impressed with “ring structures” which he sees within the Medinan suras. The pattern he finds in sura 60, for example, is as follows: A – verse 1; B – verses 2–3; C – verses 4–6; D – verse 7; C′– verse 8–9; B′ – verses 10–12; A′ – verse 13. This may be compared to the translations of Arberry whose paragraphs suggest groups of verses 1–3, 4–7, 8–9, 10–11, 12, and 13; Yusuf Ali suggests grouping verses 1–3, 4–6, 7–9, 10–11, 12, and 13, and Paret does similarly. My point here is that there is nothing natural, inherent or scientific about this extraction of structure. The ability to see structural features depends solely on the reader's willingness to project them onto the text. It is the desire on the part of scholars to find such patterns that interests me; its current popularity may well be a reaction to the work of the earlier generation of scholars who took the text to pieces or who thought the editing process of the text had obscured its compositional traits in most instances. The extent to which this must be viewed as an apologetic response on the part of contemporary scholars is something that needs discussion. There is an interesting study to be undertaken, perhaps as a PhD project, to understand why this theory has become so dominant in recent decades.

The book's sub-title draws attention to Ernst's Quran translations; according to the back cover “new translations of 725 Qur'anic verses” are supplied. Among the segments that receive extended translation are suras 1, 15, 18, 53, 60, 68, 79, and 80; other verses and short passages are scattered throughout the text. Ernst's renderings are fluid and modern, even if one might quibble with some things such as interpretive capitalization and certain translations (e.g. al-raqīm as “the epitaph”; muḥkam as “definite”; dīn as “divine service” in Quran 60:8).

Overall, Ernst has produced a textbook that will, I suspect, prove quite successful in the classroom, as long as the instructor wishes to approach the Quran through a chronological framework. The book certainly provides an excellent summary of one aspect of Quranic studies today. I would hope, however, that instructors using the text would balance its presentation by incorporating other recent scholarly material that places more emphasis on the historical-religious context of the Quran's emergence, so as to provide a better sense of the current state of Quranic studies as a discipline.