It’s all in the details!

A fascinating perspective on the history and personification of evil throughout various early cultures, and how they impacted Judaism and ultimately Christianity. For the first two chapters, Russell establishes definitions of terms he will be using through out the text and his methodology. Chapters three and on dive into the polytheistic gods of the underworld (chthonic), the developments of monism and dualism, Judaic and Christian apocrypha, etc. There are two major reasons for choosing this text over others: Jeffrey Burton Russell has an academic background on the subject and he takes a historical perspective rather than a theological perspective on the subject of evil. There are three other books in the series: [b:Satan: The Early Christian Tradition|1305142|Satan The Early Christian Tradition|Jeffrey Burton Russell|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1387740126l/1305142._SY75_.jpg|1294381], [b:Lucifer: The Devil in the Middle Ages|654961|Lucifer The Devil in the Middle Ages|Jeffrey Burton Russell|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1348155260l/654961._SY75_.jpg|641063], and [b:Mephistopheles: The Devil in the Modern World|216558|Mephistopheles The Devil in the Modern World|Jeffrey Burton Russell|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1348647180l/216558._SY75_.jpg|209661].

This book is really interesting for anyone that wants to know more about the concept of Evil and how it shaped the idea of the Devil (it is the first of a series of I think 3). There is a lot of knowledge, although there seems to be quite a bit of repetition, but that is not very bothersome (at least for me).

I don't think it is as accessible as many non-fiction books are nowadays, but I found it thought-provoking.

I wasn't impressed by these books on the devil through history, of which I read three. From memory the first may have had most to it. But I found them undeep, I hesitate to say shallow. I felt I'd learnt very little at the end of three books, aside from detail. I didn't find deep thought on evil, although he tries. I remember he quotes from Dostoyevsky, and I remember it was a surface use of the quotes, that only contrasted him to Dostoyevsky to me. There's nothing here like that great's treatment of evil or his hallucinated devil in The Brothers Karamazov. I must gotten rid of them as empty, I can't find them now.