5 comments about Holy War: The Crusades and Their Impact on Today's World.

1. Enjoyable reading, concise, and direct. I forgot to mention informative. I have read four other books and each I treasure.



2. Erudition, understanding, compassion for the meak, weak and (deliberately?) misunderstood.Historiography as it should always be.



3. I have noticed that many who review karen armstrong's book & this one in specific, generally expect a complete christian victory & anything that balances the view is considered biased & untrue.
   It is not a matter of who invaded the other first but what practices did the invader indulge in. Neither Islam nor Christianity condone invasions so we are dealing with a profane subject, a human trait not a religious one. Europeans simply used religion in their invasion of the levant & started a 2 century conflict that does resonate till today in the middle eastern pysche, though it should move on from that point, but obviously there are readers who are displeased to read that during the crusades the muslims were actually more civil than the christians. facts are hard sometimes & some cannot handle it, like some muslims today who think they are right on everything. karen Armstrong always writes with eloquence & clarity, her writings till now are very balanced no matter what some may say.



4. I would not have read this book if it wasn't for class. While the author does clearly state her thesis (multiple times), she does clearly make the connection between the Crusades and modern history. As a former-nun, she is very anti-Christian at the moment which impacts her ability to have a triple-vision, and is VERY biased towards the Muslims.



5. True that Armstrong's bias is highly critical of the Western Christian world and the way it approached the Middle East and pretty much ignores Muslim history except where it intersects, but that is the topic of this book. She is concentrating on the Crusades, which are normally presented as heroic and which are often used as a model for our current activism in the Middle East, but which have left centuries of distrust behind. This book is must reading for anyone interested in the history of organized Christianity or for anyone who wants to understand Western activity in the area. It will broaden your world view if you let it.

5 comments about The Crusades: A History.

1. Jonathan Ridley-Smith's "The Crusades: A History" is a comprehensive but dull look at the history of the Crusades from the 11th century until the last vestiges of the crusading movement died in the 19th century. Smith is a pluralist - he covers all of the Crusades, including those in Spain, Italy, and the Baltic area. Although this history is comprehensive in its coverage, its dry writing made it a difficult read.
   
   Smith fails to bring the Crusades to life in his narrative. I never felt that he showed how a small group of Europeans managed to gain a foothold in the Holy Land and hold it for so many generations, and he never really illustrated life in the Crusader states. Also, his writing presupposes a certain knowledge and understanding of medieval societies and the medieval Church. Many terms and concepts about the medieval world and church are not explained adequately - if at all - and this makes it difficult for the general reader to fully understand this work.
   
   This book is comprehensive and apparently well-researched. It would probably serve as a good resource for someone already familiar with the time period or the Crusades, but it is a difficult read for a general reader.



2. "The Crusades: A History" by Jonathan Riley-Smith is a dull but thorough retelling of the crusades from their inception by Pope Urban II in 1095 to the very last crusading vows made in the early eighteenth century. His narrative is filled with names and places that speed by and unless one has some degree of familiarity with them before reading, they become a blur. Being a reader of historical narratives I expected more about the actual crusades than the events leading up to and surrounding them. I forced myself to keep reading just say I'd read it but there were only a handful of pages where I was able to give my full attention and interest. My suggestion: know some people and places before reading this. You will get no explanations as you go.



3. Granting each of the previous reviewers problems with this book, it still stands as the current best one volume history of the Crusades that I have encountered. Furthermore, as Crusade history has become a booming industry since 9/11, this book is also published by Continuum in both paperback and hardback with another printing coming later this year. There are some interesting reviews of this book under the Continuum paperback edition listing here on Amazon that the reader may wish to consult. There are no footnotes, almost no white space and the print density is weak. The publisher, Yale NB, has chosen to turn a larger 392 page hardback into a compact 357 page paperback. I will assume this was done to keep costs down. So being forewarned if you wish to understand the Crusades and have some background in the history of the Middle Ages in Europe and the Middle East, buy this book and read it. If you have no background in the history of the Middle Ages, it might be best to find one of the many excellent one volume considerations of the entire era and read it before this book. You will be rewarded with far greater insight into the author's analysis of the Crusades.
   
   As the crusades are a specialist topic within the history of the Middle Ages, the author assumes that you, the reader, are conversant with such issues as the investiture crisis and church reform of the era for example. This may cause some confusion for the casual reader. However, there is still much to be learned here regardless of your knowledge of the Middle Ages. Further, Riley-Smith is a "pluralist." And this is a "plural history" in that it includes material on the Baltic, Spanish, Italian political, anti-heretical and other permutations of the Crusades as well as those directed at the holy lands and the Muslims. Each chapter within itself provides a reasonable narrative history of the topic under discussion. But to cover the subject fully, various specialized topics are considered at length that chop up the flow of material. The material is generally chronologically arranged but in no sense is this eloquent narrative prose. And yet out of all this, a detailed picture of the crusading movement and Middle Age Christian piety emerge. And, that unique European Middle Age Christian fervor is what drove the Crusades and make them explicable in a fashion that is not riddled by conceptual anachronisms.
   
   It is this reader's opinion that only with a plural historical framework can the Crusades be considered adequately to be understood as a function of their own time and culture. This Riley-Smith accomplishes with more credibility than any other one volume history of the Crusades that I have read so far. And, I have read most of this material. A fascinating short historiographical essay closes the text, and a remarkable and detailed bibliography is provided with extensive helpful commentary from the author. If you have an axe to grind with the Catholic Church, look elsewhere. If you are looking for supposed contemporary relevance in the Crusades, other books will provide you with far more of what you want. If you are sure that the Crusades were an imperialistic and proto-colonial activity, this book is not for you. If you find the Crusades to be the last massive act of European barbarism, read Runciman. In remarkable detail, Christendom's decent into armed intolerance and coercion is explained and illuminated by this work. This is not a happy story, and one wonders what the man from Galilee who said, "Love your enemies...," would think about all this. This book is near mandatory reading for any reader wishing to have more than a passing acquaintance with the history of the Crusades.



4. This book covers all the known wars that can be called Crucades. Not only does the author cover the four most widely known crusades to the Holy Land by Western Europe but also some of the lesser known crusades. This book is very informative, well written and compiled with in a time line format. This book is well worth the time needed to read it.
   
   I lent my copy of it out to a student and never got it back so obviously he liked it too!



5. The two words that this reviewer was left with upon reading Jonathan Riley-Smith's account of the Crusades was: balanced and encyclopedic. The first signifies high praise; the second not so much.
   
   The casual reader looking for a fair account of the Crusades has his work cut out for him. Objectivity and balance is always a treasure in historical writing, but it seems exceptionally rare where the Crusades are concerned. So many treatments available to the casual reader serve as convenient platforms for political diatribe or vehicles for scathing attack on the Catholic Church. It seems likely that no modern treatment of the Crusades could reach uncritical conclusions, but reasoned and balanced criticism is a far cry from polemicism, much less naked anti-Catholicism.
   
   Mr. Riley-Smith's work deserves solid praise in this regard. His book is by no means uncritical, but it's approach -- and tone -- is both balanced and reasoned. Considering the many other works with which it can be compared, this is no small feat. Mr. Riley-Smith shows how the crusading impetus developed in Catholic thought, contextualizing the movement instead of climbing atop a soapbox to assail it.
   
   The shortfall of the book, though, is significant, at least for the casual reader. Put simply, it is just too encyclopedic. For a student steeped in medieval history, the book might be just what the doctor ordered, but for the casual reader, this weakness is no small thing. This is not to say that the book is poorly written. There is nothing wrong with Mr. Riley-Smith's prose. But it is extremely dense, and the calvacade of personages, place names and the like can become overwhelming. Perhaps this is a predictable result of a book whose temporal scope is as ambitious as Mr. Riley-Smith's. But even if understandable, the plain fact is that such an approach renders this book much less engaging than it might have been.
   
   And that is truly a shame. For Mr. Riley-Smith shows keen analytical skills, an impressive breadth of knowledge and a commendable tone. He has no obvious axes to grind. A more focused approach, perhaps addressing one of the crusades instead of their panoply, could allow Mr. Riley-Smith to showcase these impressive traits and might provide a great book. This reviewer would give the present book 3.5 stars if Amazon's rating system permitted it. Considering Mr. Riley-Smith's strengths, this reviewer wishes he could have given an even higher rating.

4 comments about The Saint and the Sultan: The Crusades, Islam, and Francis of Assisi's Mission of Peace.

1. I visited Assisi while in Italy and found it a very moving experience. To see where St. Francis lived was incredible.Paul's book tells a story about St. Francis that I had never heard.He writes in a way that kept me fascinated throughout the entire book. Well done!



2. This book captivated my sense of history and spirituality. Mr. Moses writes clearly, concisely and puts into context the times and forces that created one of the most unique individuals of his age or any age where war and money drive people's behavior. Moses, in his preface, tells us that perhaps there are lessons for us to learn from this extraordinary man and his quest for peace. Today, as we wage two wars and focus on our economic well-being, Moses' book provides us with another perspective, another way for us to think and live. This is a must-read.



3. In the midst of war, Francis goes unarmed to meet the enemy leader. In a time when Muslims were demonized, Francis has an extended dialogue with the Sultan. But the real story got lost in the midst of politics - the Crusades and heresy allegations. The author does a marvelous job of telling the real story and then showing how and why it was covered up. He also gives a sympathetic - yet realistic - portrait of the Sultan.
   
   It gave me an ever greater appreciation of St. Francis and his call to peacemaking. Francis wasn't a plastic saint for birdbaths. He was a real live follower of Christ, not afraid to tell the Crusaders that their effort was in vain and open enough to meet the enemy. A true peacemaker.
   
   It's a great book to help us get a better grasp of what Christian-Muslim relations could be.



4. Truly a wonderful book, and timely -- an extraordinary example of Christian-Muslim dialogue. It also frees St Francis from his long captivity as the patron saint of bird baths.

5 comments about Chronicles of the Crusades (Penguin Classics).

1. These are both excellent accounts of the crusades. Villehardouin proves insightful in what he does not say. A small army of crusaders faces unbelievable odds in Constantinople and yet somehow they conquer and hold this territory. It brings up the question of whether the conquest was an accident or a conspiracy, and a reader can answer that question through careful reading. There are other books wholly committed to this argument of conspiracy vs. accident.

   Joinville gives an equally appreciable account of a crusade, this time a failed attempt in Egypt by Saint Louis. Joinville is an author that gives a huge amount of information. The integrity of Louis is apparent as well as the mistakes made by the crusaders (Joinville rarely places direct blame of any failure on Louis, noting instead Louis's brother and his failures.)

   This is a well introduced book and is not difficult to read in my opinion.




2. The two accounts in _Chronicles of the Crusades_ provide readers with fascinating accounts of the 4th and 7th crusades. Villehardoun's observations of the sack of Constantinople leave some questions regarding whether it was a conspiracy to destroy the city or not; ultimately it is up to the reader to decide... It does, however, provide a window into 12th century warfare and politics.
   
   Joinville's chronicle of the 7th crusade into the Holy Land was similarly fascinating, providing more information about a European's impressions of the Near East and Christian-Islamic conflict than Villehardoun. I much preferred Joinville for this reason. Together, both accounts provide a well-rounded history of the time and place - a tremendously interesting read for professional and armchair historians alike.



3. I had to read this book in my Medieval and Ranasance Class at OSU. This book gives a first person view of what the Crusades were like. My teenage son has read the book several times and used for several research papers in high school.



4. Chronicles of the Crusades is a chronicle of the Crusades from two of the senior participants who took part in two of the Crusades. The book covers the descriptions of the fourth and the seventh crusades as seen through the eyes of Geoffroy De Villehardouin (who took part in the fourth crusade) and Jean De Joinville (who took part in the seventh crusade). The two chronicles were translated for this book by Margaret Shaw. The book was published in 1963 around the time of her death. The two chronicles give us a look into the two crusades as chronicled through the eyes of two important noblemen of their time. This in itself will taint the purity of the chronicle. Chronicles such as these lay out the justifications for the crusades and tend to gloss over the blemishes. These two are no different. They were written to glorify the Crusaders and surely the writers would not put on ink anything that would later detract from their names. These chronicles do an excellent job of showing how the two chroniclers thought and how they wanted these two crusades remembered. When this book is read this should be kept in mind. The average crusader was a mixture of those driven by greed and religious extremists. The crusaders were allowed to plunder the lands they conquered. In today's terms they were allowed to take war trophies, thus stealing from the inhabitants of the land. They were barbaric in their means of taking the land and the raping of women was allowed, if the women were not of the Christian faith. The fourth crusade received condemnation on its behavior when the Christian city of Constantinople was sacked. This was due to the crusaders raping of the women. This of course is not pointed out by Villehardouin. The chroniclers mention a little of the plunder, but do not mention anything else. Though the chroniclers are quick to point out the cruelty of the Saracens. Margaret Shaw refers to these two chronicles as being the most reliable accounts of the crusades written in French. I would have to disagree that these chronicles should be taken as completely accurate. Joinville refers to Prestor John as if he was a person who actually existed, thus showing that his accounts are not strictly cemented in fact. The chronicles give an overview of the crusades and do not go into much detail on the equipment used and the everyday life of the average crusader. This book is a good book to show the chroniclers thoughts and perspectives but if you are trying to get an accurate picture of what happened during these crusades I would look into other books as well. Such books that describe the opposing views as seen from the Muslim side and other books that can give specifics on how the crusaders lived and their equipment could help in understanding these crusades better. I am giving this book 5 stars because it does accurately convey it's title. It does cover the Chronicles of the Crusades.



5. I highly recommend this translation of Joinville and Villehardouin.
   
   The translator has taken care to translate these works into lucid, contemporary language without dumbing down the writing. Her work has paid off, providing a readable and lively edition still suitable for scholarly review.
   
   Whether you are reading these for enjoyment, personal interest, or academic reasons, this translation is a good one.

5 comments about The New Concise History of the Crusades (Critical Issues in History).

1. Professor Madden presents a scholarly and well written history of the Crusades, easily the most misunderstood and misrepresented period in Western history. Rather than the absurd historical stereotype of the "evil" Christian hordes descending on peaceloving Muslims, Professor Madden explains how the Crusades were a natural and predictable response by Christianity to almost 300 years of non-stop violence and imperialism by Islam, which had conquered and oppressed 2/3 of the Christian world before the Crusades were finally organized to respond. This history does no sugarcoat any aspect of the Crusades and does an outstanding job of clearing away the myths and legends.



2. As one who is not a scholar of this period of history, but who wanted to learn more about the Crusades in this post 9-11 world, I found this book to be an excellent introduction. I like the fact that the author uses recent research to debunk the outdated and inaccurate version of the Crusades presented to us in a single paragraph in our high school history books. What they say about history is so true: The more that historians of integrity study a subject, especially as the years pass and new manuscripts and evidence come to light (as has occurred recently in the field of Crusade research) the more clear the events of the past become, and the better equipped historians are to accurately write about them.
   
   You will find it easy to read and a page turner. Enjoy!



3. Madden does a fine job in introducing the layman and student alike to the history of the crusades. He touches on each of them with enough information to get students up to speed on the history and writes in a very appealing manner that keeps the readers attention, not to mention turning the pages into the late hours of the night. I can highly recommend this book to any person interested in learning about the crusades. It is a really great starting point if you have never read about the crusades. I can also recommend "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes" by Amin Maalouf for a different perspective of the period, not to mention some idea as to the long running hostilities still felt in some parts of the world today. Hostilities that may have roots from 1099, Saladin, Richard the Lionheart etc.



4. This glorious book made Thomas F. Madden my favorite non-fiction author. Madden corrects many myths about the crusades and gives a great history of the Crusades. One myth is that the Muslims hold the West in ill-regard because of their memory of the Crusades. Madden crushes this myth.
   
   Madden's books are never slow and always fun to read.
   
   This should be the bookshelf of anyone who wants to better understand the West and the Muslim part of the world.



5. This interesting compilation of the events that compose the Crusades is fascinating and informative, plus easy to read. I recommend this book for any high school or college student, or for anyone interested in the history and reason behind the Christian Crusades. You won't be disappointed!

5 comments about The Crusades Through Arab Eyes.

1. This book is essential reading for any student of medieval or Middle Eastern history. Breaking the monopoly Western society has held on telling the story of the Crusades, it reveals the Islamic perspective of this turbulent and bloody time period. To the Islamic states of Syria, Iraq, and Egypt, the Crusaders were almost Viking-like figures, a horde of unwashed heathens come, seemingly from nowhere, to destroy the civilization it had taken their ancestors centuries to cultivate. To the Arabs and Turks, the Crusaders were not God's soldiers fighting a holy war, but were murderers and liars who had no comprehension of medicine or even personal hygiene, and who were not above resorting to cannibalism to stay alive.
   
   Part of what makes this well-researched and highly readable book so valuable is that it is not simply a piece of Islamic propaganda. The author is by heritage a Maronite, a Lebanese Christian whose ancestors provided some of the Crusaders' strongest allied contingents in the 12th Century. The author does not hijack this era for Islamic or Arab civilization - he observes their many flaws, also - notably political intrigue and disunity - and recognizes many cases of chivalrous behavior that transpired between the Crusaders and the Muslims as the 12th Century wore on. He extends his account past the conquests of Salah al-Din to describe the Arab perspective of al-Kamil's selling of Jerusalem to Emperor Frederick in 1229, the bitter Mongol wars of the mid 13th Century, and the final Mamluk conquest of Outremer in 1291. His chapter dealing with the last of these events is fittingly entitled `God Grant That They Never Set Foot There Again!'
   
   Do not buy this fascinating book expecting to read some fair, let alone politically correct, description of the tumultuous events of the late 11th, 12th, and 13th Centuries Middle East. Buy it expecting to have what you thought you knew about the Crusades challenged, and buy it expecting to hear `their' side of the story - an intriguing, and poignant twist indeed.



2. Everyone knows that the Middles Ages were barbarous times, but the Europeans come out of this account looking like downright savages. Don't get me wrong, the Arabs aren't presented as the ideal people of earth in the book, but their "Christian"-invader counterparts from Europe come off as filthy, greedy, opportunistic and brutal which, truth finally be told, they were. Maalouf even supplies a few recorded accounts of crusader cannibalism, where the enemy is cooked and eaten. Along with that are several Arab exchanges of heads in boxes. Gruesome.
   
   Maalouf has done his due diligence here. He starts with the state of the Arab world before the first Crusade, indicating the fractured state of the area and how one kingdom would not necessarily come to the aid of another. Everything takes off from there, with an account of all the Crusades, the Saladin, etc. If you've played Age of Empires 2: Age of Kings, seen Kingdom of Heaven: The Making of the Ridley Scott Epic (Newmarket Pictorial Moviebook) and read The Civilization of the Middle Ages: A Completely Revised and Expanded Edition of Medieval History, then you'll be fully prepared for Maalouf to round out the story of the Crusades. And the author does it all without any sort of bias towards one side or the other.
   
   Concise, educational and entertaining all at the same time.



3. This was a fascinating and rather moving inverted view of events which are very familiar from the Western perspective. The Arabic perspective might as well never have existed for all we normally see of it. This is an anomaly in its own right, as the Muslim world into which the Crusaders came crashing in the 11th Century was, with China, the globe's most learned and most literate culture. This translation of Maalouf's Arabic-language account corrects this bias somewhat by drawing on the rich variety of Muslim sources to present the view from Baghdad, Cairo and Damascus.
   
   The translation is wonderfully readable and a real page-turner. The Arabs allegedly have a real passion for language that cannot fully be conveyed in English, but the translator seems to have made an excellent job of trying. Maalouf's perspective is very much that of the Arab world, but I found that he avoided too biased an account and does not rail against the Crusaders or their religion the way one might expect. This is a rather balanced and professional account.
   
   The Crusades, of course, brought horrors enough even given a balanced account, especially since Maalouf includes as part of the Crusades the Mongol incursions and genocide. The Franks appear to have bargained with the Mongols, some of whose prominent personages were Nestorian Christians, in an attempt to catch the Muslims in a pincer movement from East and West. This was a surprise to me, albeit not a great one.
   
   The Crusaders come across as by turns fanatically religious and entirely cynical. Only ten years after the fall of Jerusalem, Frankish armies met on the field as enemies, one city allied with Seljuk Turks and another allied with Arabs. Christian and Muslim against Christian and Muslim. The Franks seem to have been rapidly integrated into the intrigues and betrayals of business-as-usual in this divided world, despite their pretensions of superiority.
   
   The Muslims themselves were betrayed, then as today, by division. It took decades to respond effectively to the invasion because one potentate would not leave his city unguarded to commit an army. He was literally more scared of a Dolchstoss from his fellow Muslim rulers than of the invaders. A rising tide of pious outrage from the Muslim populace and the emergence of a few salient personalities, especially Nur ud-Din and Salah ud-Din, finally led to an effective response and the expulsion of the Franks from much of their conquests. The Franks did not help themselves by also making enemies of all other factions without discrimination, persecuting or oppressing Orthodox, Nestorian, Armenian and Syrian Christian, Jew and Muslim alike.
   
   Maalouf finishes off with a commentary about the parlous state of the Arabic world in the late 20th Century when he was writing. It is a striking change of fortunes that the once most scientifically and medically advanced culture outside, perhaps, the Far East has today fallen under the heel of various tinpot dictators, apparently irreparably divided against itself, partly occupied by foreign troops and - most worryingly - rejecting as the work of evil foreigners any hint of the liberal, secular and scientific advances which characterise its competitors. Why does the political opposition the Arab world largely reject modernisation as foreign and evil? Why, in a nutshell, is the political opposition in the Arab world mainly driven by fundamentalist Islam?
   
   Maalouf suggests that this is the legacy of the Crusades. Superior in every way except military potency, the Arabs were humiliated by what they saw as their inferiors. When they succeeded in responding, they did so as a result of a renaissance in religiosity which existed as a popular groundswell before it achieved power over the state. To this day, Islam is associated with popular revolt against corrupt power. To this day, the West is seen as militarily potent and culturally backward - Enlightenment values and all. If so, the rise of Islamism is probably no transient fashion, and may signal a shift that will work its way up to the level of governments in decades to come.
   
   Maalouf's thesis appears to me to be plausible, and the stakes these days are high enough to make it worth considering.
   
   If you are interested in the history of the Crusades, you really must read this book, without which you will not enjoy an important perspective.



4. I found this book to be very informative. Clearly, I've held some misconceptions regarding the Crusades. What I particularly found intriguing was that bit written about Muslim Ibn Jubayr who traveled across the Mediterranean while on his way to Mecca in the early 1180's. During his journey he found that the Muslims were far better off in those lands controlled by the Crusaders than they were in Muslim ruled lands, and that Muslims preferred to live in the Crusader realms as those lands were more orderly and better managed.
   
   Ibn Jubayr wrote: "Whose lands were efficiently cultivated. The inhabitants were all Muslims. They live in comfort with the Franks - may God preserve them from temptation! Their dwellings belong to them and all their property is unmolested. All their regions, patrolled by the Crusaders in Syria are subject to the same system: The land that remains, the villages and farms, have remained in the hands of the Muslims. Now, doubt invests the hearts of a great number of these men when they compare their lot to that of their brothers living in Muslim territories. Indeed, the latter suffer from the injustices of their co-religionists, whereas the Franks act with equity."



5. I definitely want to read the more-complete works mentioned in the critical reviews, but I still think this is a good book. Some of the things the average Christian reader will find surprising are
   
   (1) How Christians colluded with the Mongol empire in a partly successful effort to destroy the Muslim Middle East; and
   
   (2) How Crusader princes formed coalitions with their Muslim counterparts to fight other Crusader-Muslim coalitions in the Middle East.
   
   By covering those episodes, this book will give pause to Christians who think that "Crusade" is a flattering term to use for our evangelism efforts.

5 comments about God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades.

1. I enjoyed Stark's thesis that the crusades where not entirely financial wars of greed by bored Europeans. I do think this is considerable material for arguing other rationale. Stark touches on these possibilites, but doesn't really argue for them very well, particularly as the book progresses, descending into a forgettable history that feels forced and obligatory.



2. When Dr. Stark told me he was writing a book defending the Crusades, I said, "They might bring back witch-hunting!" He responded, "Yeah, well, I don't give a d*n. The fact of the matter is that Arab culture is pretty much nonsense."
   
   If you don't mind your history with a little attitude, this may be the book for you. Stark is a sociologist with a taste for the history of religion, a non-denominational Christian, and a sort of latter-day cold warrior. He privileges Western civilization, and makes no apologies for doing so.
   
   Compared to his other works, God's Battalions is short and more narratival than theoretical. (Though Stark's theories are still in play under the surface, seeming to have survived the ideological changes of his career largely intact.) His main targets in this book are (1) the myth of Arab civilization, it was running largely on the fumes of Christian and Jewish dhimmitude; (2) and that Islam was more advanced or kinder and gentler than the West (though occasionally he concedes a point or two on this score, not always directly); (3) the myth that the West was backwards (here he makes some interesting points -- also see our interview).
   
   Strictly as narrative, the book is I think pretty successful. I have read other books about the Crusades and the larger conflict between Christianity and Islam, and his points generally accord with what I knew from other sources, and add to it. What stands out after reading the book is how improbable the Crusaders' many victories seem, in the abstract. Also that one need not be ashamed, as we have been taught to be ashamed, of the role the Crusaders played in Western history. Sure, they did some bad things, but so did American forces in World War II, fighting even more ruthless enemies.
   
   Stark's description of the Crusades are not as simple as one recent reviewer suggests. He also describes attacks on Jews and between Christians, mentions the cannibalism at Ma'arra (see The Crusades Through Arab Eyes for the gory details), and corrects, but does not dismiss, the popular image of the sack of Jerusalem as a bloodbath. Far from a "genocide," as the critic claims, Muslims sometimes found Frankish rule positively TEMPTING, as no doubt do Arabs in Israel today. Let me also recommend the swashbuckling Jihad by Paul Fregosi, and the excellent source materials in Peter's The First Crusade. Stark's For the Glory of God and One True God also help best to put this part of his on-going sociological history of monotheism in context.



3. I just today finished the book, and i must say it is great! Stark takes a logical/reasonable point of view about the biggest series of events of the Middle Ages. Stark backs up what he says clearly and with sources out the wazoo to prove his points. For those thinking that he's just going to make the Crusaders a bunch of good guys be rest assured he makes it clear that they did many terrible things, but one must the era and the mindset of people during those days.
   
   A must read for anyone interested in the subject of the Crusades, and for those who want to see a different point of view on the subject.



4. This book is a well-written and informative history. I highly recommend it to everyone with an interest in this time period.



5. Rodney Stark claims right in the title of his book to be making a case for the Crusades. This is certainly a bold claim, and perhaps foolhardy. The Crusades have become a byword among intellectuals and the public alike for the ugliness of European culture, religion, imperialism, you name it. Having studied the Crusades myself, the subject has become a myth-busting hobbyhorse for me. Most people think they know something about the Crusades. They're almost always misinformed.
   
   So while I looked forward to reading Stark's arguments, at first I was skeptical of this book. I had studied the Crusades for a long time and never heard of Rodney Stark. So the first thing I did when I got the book was leaf through the bibliography, and believe me--Stark has done his homework. Stark has consulted every major work on the Crusades, as well as many lesser-known, more academic works, in the research for this book, which blew me away.
   
   Stark's book is incredibly well-researched, well-written, and well-argued. He places the Crusading movement in its proper historical context, treating medieval people as medieval people rather than pawns in modern intellectual exercises, and does them justice in explaining their beliefs, ideals, and the reality of their lives. His treatment of the actual Crusade campaigns is rather brief, but more than made up for by the care with which he sets up those beliefs and ideals I just mentioned. Stark gets at "the inside of history," as G.K. Chesterton called it, examining the things that mattered to people at the time.
   
   A few other reviewers have pointed out mistakes in Stark's book, and certainly it's not perfect. But for those who have never studied the Crusades it's an excellent introduction to a controversial topic, and for those who have it's a useful corrective. If you're looking for a good companion piece to Stark's book, check out Thomas F. Madden's New Concise History of the Crusades, which covers much of the same ground but with different emphases.
   
   Highly recommended.

4 comments about The History of the Medieval World: From the Conversion of Constantine to the First Crusade.

1. I am so pleased to finally receive this newly published book.
   I have read the author's other books on History and love them.
   This one is just as excellent as the others. It is easy to read and interesting.



2. I really enjoyed this book. It's full of surprises for the uninformed about history. This book can almost be read as a novel or a soap-opera. Here you'll find an ex-prostitute becoming the empress; a self-proclaimed prophet marring a six year old girl; a man refusing the crown of an empire and choosing instead a monastery.
   
   In those days, when sons couldn't wait to have a crown of their own and fought their fathers until one or another were dead or exiled. Of course, later the surviving sons had to fight each other until one was declared absolute ruler of the land.
   
   It was a time when most monarchs died due to strange circumstances --poisoning was a sure method to put somebody out of the way. Marriages were arranged when the future spouses were just kids, usually to form alliances or as a sign of good will with a potential enemy. The maps of the known world changed almost overnight and nothing was more certain that the next war against your neighbor ...certainly, it's makes look Dick Cheney like an amateur.
   
   I liked the maps and timelines at the end of each chapter. It helps to keep track of the thousands of characters of this human comedy.



3. Why was this book written? And why was this particular author chosen for this project? These are the two major questions that plagued me as I read this book. Is there really a need for a quick overall history of the "Medieval" world? This book attempts to cover every major civilization, from Europe to China, but excludes Africa. The chapters are short and uninformative. There are historical anachronisms and ahistorical arguments. If //The History of the Medieval World// is even supposed to be a quick introduction to history, then it fails at that. Attempting to cover the entire world history in about 640 pages, you need to pick your battles and your themes. Trying to cover hundreds of years in a single chapter that is only four to five pages long simply will not work. This brings up the other question: Why choose Susan Wise Bauer? She is probably a good author in her own right. She writes in a conversational style that is easily accessible, except that she is not a historian at all. Instead, she is an English professor. A disappointment from Norton, on many levels.
   
   Reviewed by Kevin Winter



4. I actually purchased this with an admixture of excitement and trepidation due to two factors. The first being that I found the previous volume very difficult to read with its peculiar approach to time and the near total absence of cultural, political and religious themes. It seemed moreso a loosely connected chronology of biographical information , a who's who of the ancient world without clearly discernible unity between the chapters. Having read many, many books on medieval history and theology I must say unequivocally that this book has unity thematically with one telescopic lens on the players while simultaneously keeping a broad overarching wide view as well. The second concern was whether the text would be complete enough for use by a catholic family and in fact, it is very broad in coverage. The mere mention of arianism and donatism,important and oft misunderstood heresies, in their proper context sent my Catholic heart and intellect aflutter. These battles of ideas are among the most important tasks for the written historian. Dr. Bauer did a marvelous job with not mere reportage of names and events, she provides the reader solid intellectual scaffolding behind the events thus providing motivation for why people and events followed the course they did . It is regrettable that the author ends her examination of medieval history at the culmination of the first crusade as I thoroughly enjoyed every moment spent with this book. There were a plethora of saints mentioned with detailed biographical information throughout the text which certainly makes it a far more complete history for use in our home as an effort usually has to be made to "fill in the gaps." Quite frankly there were none omitted that I consider fundamental for a complete history source. The coverage of Islam was likewise just and excellent in making clear the difference between Sunni and Shiite muslims and its historic source within the Prophet Mohammed's family tree. This will be our main source for medieval history along with a few other select materials to highlight philosophical and intellectual movements in the time period. One notable omission is that of the life of Jewish people in the Medieval time period this topic should have been covered and I believe it might be in the ensuing book that presumably will resume after the first crusade. This is a challenging topic due to the hideousness of the Christian faith in liturgy and practice against the Jewish people but it should be addressed and perhaps that is the authors intent for the next book in the series. In closing I highly recommend this book for the curious, the home educator, the college student and the amateur historian. Lest any person think the last term an offense, amateur has its roots in French to mean "love." A love of and for a subject of study is certainly not a term of disparagement but one of praise. This self professed amateur , autodidiact and bibliophile anticipates great things in the next installment of this series.

No comments about The Crusades: The Authoritative History of the War for the Holy Land.

2 comments about Holy Warriors: A Modern History of the Crusades.

1. Someone has finally written a history of the Crusades that is easily understood and appreciated, from the causes, the reasons to the personalites involved.
   
   And it also shows how those long ago holy battles continue to have a profound impact on our world today, from the World Trade Center to the latest jihad.
   
   A book that all who seek to understand the religious conflicts of our day--and tomorrow--should read.
   
   It may well be critical to our full and complete understanding of where we came from and how we got where we are today, as a world, as people of faith(s), and as people not afraid of, even eager, to go to war. The spilling for blood for a cause is not unusual. This book is is the story of those causes, of the men who caused the blood to be spilled in defense of God as they knew him to be.
   
   Quite gripping and at times a disturbing story,but a story critical to our understanding of today's world. And in words,thoughts and concepts we can understand and relate to.



2. Trying to examine two centuries of war, on two continents, and across five theatres in a single volume requires audacity. And Jonathan Phillips's "Holy Warriors: A Modern History of the Crusades" is certainly audacious in its scope, covering not only the several medieval efforts to reclaim and maintain a presence in the Holy Land, but for good measure throwing in the reconquering of Spain, the blood-drenched suppression of the Albigensians in southern France, and the so-called "Northern Crusades." Needless to say, in just over 400 pages, it is a shallow consideration at best.
   
   Though exploring none of these conflicts in sufficient depth, Philips does succeed on other, more intellectual levels. Most importantly, he demonstrates that the contradiction moderns imagine between piousness and brutal violence is anachronistic. The Christian knights who massacred their way through Jerusalem until covered with "blood from head to foot" and fell to their knees weeping at the burial place of the Prince of Peace, saw no conflict between the two. Yet wishing to paint as many of the crusaders as possible with a broad and forgiving brush, he can go too far; few scholars would agree that Venice's Dodge Dandolo, whose manipulations led to the sacking of Constantinople, was a mere victim of circumstances.
   
   Even if shallow on each Crusade (the Cathars alone merit volumes, here receiving a scant 20 pages), Philips still delivers a gripping read, populated with fascinating characters, known (Saladin, Richard The Lionheart, Dandolo) and more obscure (Queen Melisende of Jerusalem, The Leper King Baldwin IV, Louis IX). In examining the Crusades through their Muslim opponents' eyes, Philips offers a fascinating perspective. If lacking sufficient depth, it successfully demonstrates how the crusading spirit casts a long shadow into our present day, one which we ignore at our own peril.