Please recommend some works about the Crusades

DiscussieMedieval Europe

Sluit je aan bij LibraryThing om te posten.

Please recommend some works about the Crusades

Dit onderwerp is gemarkeerd als "slapend"—het laatste bericht is van meer dan 90 dagen geleden. Je kan het activeren door een een bericht toe te voegen.

1BordyLSU
jan 19, 2012, 5:29 pm

I am currently reading Ivanhoe, which has me wanting to learn more about the Crusades. I'm sure there are countless titles on this subject. Can anyone maybe point out a few that stand out? Both fiction and non-fiction

2AngelaB86
jan 19, 2012, 5:34 pm

These are from my library:

The First Crusade: A New History
Warriors of God: Richard the Lionheart and Saladin in the Third Crusade (one of my favorites)
The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople

I also have The Crusades Through Arab Eyes, but have not yet read it. I also recommend checking out the author Thomas Asbridge (he wrote The First Crusade: A New History); he has many books on the subject.

3RockStarNinja
jan 19, 2012, 6:56 pm

Lionheart by Sharon Kay Penman was pretty good.
It's told mostly through Richard and his wife Berengaria, but there are many other characters who were in Penmans Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine trilogy. This book follows almost immediately after Devil's Brood, although it isn't necessary to read the others to enjoy it.

4cemanuel
Bewerkt: jan 19, 2012, 7:05 pm

If you know a bit about the Middle Ages, Johnathan Riley-Smith's The Crusades: A Short History is probably the best jumping-off point. He includes enough references where you could look into things more deeply if you were interested.

5aulsmith
jan 19, 2012, 8:27 pm

Scott wrote a prequel to Ivanhoe called The Talisman which I liked more than Ivanhoe.

I also enjoyed Gore Vidal's A Search for the King which tells about Richard's captivity.

6nathanielcampbell
jan 19, 2012, 9:24 pm

I second cemanuel's recommendation of Jonathan Riley-Smith's The Crusades: A Short History.

7barney67
jan 19, 2012, 9:50 pm

8stellarexplorer
jan 19, 2012, 10:00 pm

A terrific book about the period is Saladin in His Time by P.H. Newby. Here is my LT review:

"Readable and engaging account of this influential figure and his times. Especially interesting in its sympathetic portrayal of the non-European point of view. Saladin is seen to possess many of the traits his Christian opponents would honor: Compassion, wisdom, fairness, honest bargaining."

9hdcclassic
jan 20, 2012, 3:06 am

Jerusalem Delivered by Torquato Tasso is probably the most important fictive account of the times (First Crusade to be more specific).

10cemanuel
jan 20, 2012, 11:20 am

#2 - In reference to The Crusades Through Arab Eyes I try to caution people that this isn't a book about what happened during the Crusades but rather how Arabs perceived the Crusades over the years. This includes modern characterizations for political purposes. I think Maalouf has been unfairly criticized sometimes when historians say that what's in his book isn't what happened. IMO that isn't the purpose of the book and, for its purpose, it's pretty good.

For someone interested in the Arab side of things while the crusades were taking place there's Gabrieli's Arab Historians of the Crusades which includes some source material. More academic but (I've been told, haven't read it yet) quite good is Hillenbrand's The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives. But neither of these should be the first thing you pick up on the Crusades.

11varielle
jan 20, 2012, 3:18 pm

You might enjoy the recent crusader movie Kingdom of Heaven starring Orlando Bloom.

12BordyLSU
jan 23, 2012, 5:09 pm

> 11, I saw it a few years ago. It didn't really do anything for me, but that is likely because I have such poor knowledge of the crusades.

Thank you all for the recommendations. After I learn some more on this subject, I'll re-watch Kingdom of Heaven.

@ 5, I own a copy of The Talisman, I guess I should have read it first.

13cemanuel
jan 23, 2012, 7:41 pm

#12 - KOH is one of my peeves. I fully accept dramatization to make a better story (though I still cringe at films like Braveheart). The problem is, the real story of Balian is better than the one they made up.

In the real story Balian goes to Jerusalem after Hattin to evacuate his family. Saladin had the city under siege (or close to it) and gave Balian permission (and allowed him through the lines) to enter and immediately leave for this specific purpose. Once he was in the city Balian saw how pathetic the defenses were and decided to stay and lead the defense. When Saladin arrived Balian sent a message apologizing but saying he felt he had to stay. Saladin forgave him and escorted his wife and kids from the city to safety.

Great story and WAY better than the love story they made up IMO. Going with a version (they'd have had to dress it up a bit, obviously) of this would have been just as entertaining and I think would have made for a film that was at least as good and very possibly better.

Sorry - sometimes real history can drag and they have to make stuff up to get butts in the seats but I don't think that applies here. A peeve.

14marieke54
jan 24, 2012, 4:07 am

I liked The Fourth Crusade: The Conquest of Constantinople by Donald Queller immensely. There is also the contemporary report of this crusade by Geoffroi de Villehardouin, which you can find in the Gutenberg collection: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6032 . Queller was once (in the eighties and nineties) considered very controversial by a.o. many byzantologists because of his views on the role of the Venetians (for a history course I photocopied and read with great gusto the fierce discussions in the historical journals). At present his views are mostly accepted.

16dkathman
jan 25, 2012, 12:54 am

I'm not an expert specifically on the Crusades, but my "crusades" tag encompasses 10 books in my library, including several of those mentioned here:

http://www.librarything.com/catalog/dkathman&tag=crusades

17cemanuel
jan 25, 2012, 6:41 am

>dkathman - You got me looking at my tagged stuff and I realized I forgot a recommendation. If you want to start looking at sources but aren't sure where to go, The Crusades: A Reader by S.J. Allen is a great way to start. It's a collection of excerpts from various sources.

U of Toronto Press has a whole series of these and whenever I'm ready to go after sources about a topic I look at the reader (if they have one for that topic) first. It can help in putting together a reading list.

18KayEluned
feb 3, 2012, 7:10 am

At the risk of being thrown out of LT for mentioning the Idiot Box, the BBC is currently doing a very good documentary series about the Crusades which I think would be a great introduction to someone just getting interested in the subject.

19erilarlo
feb 9, 2012, 2:19 pm

I have to agree with cemanuel's comments on Kingdom of Heaven. It strikes me as "historical romance", which is NOT a category of book I read or movie I see by choice. Yes, I did see it and was not impressed.
As for books on the Crusades, Runciman is readable, though too exhaustive for a beginner.

20EricJT
feb 11, 2012, 7:06 am

> 18 I'll share the risk and say the BBC series would make an excellent introduction.

21erilarlo
feb 11, 2012, 10:03 pm

On the BBC series, from what I've heard, it might be fine for a beginner . Just don't ask a medieval historian for an opinion; I've been reading some 8-)

22emmatheknight
aug 5, 2012, 6:30 pm

If you're interested in elaborately illustrated information on harness and specific battles the Osprey Men-At-Arms and Campaign series have a number of Crusade-related titles; though they're skimpy on the socio-political angle.

23Vanye
aug 6, 2012, 4:18 am

#13-I watched Kingdom of Heaven today but did not realized that it was based on a real person. I liked it OK but they did hype the blood & gore-no surprise I guess! 8^)

24Coessens
aug 6, 2012, 4:39 am

A recent and very complete book is "God's War", by Tyermann. And of course Runciman in three volumes, maybe a bit outdated but very readable.

25chuck10
mrt 24, 2013, 3:45 pm

I recommend watching the Director's Cut....more understandable....

26HarryMacDonald
mrt 24, 2013, 4:03 pm

In re #24, Sir Stephen Runciman isn't dated, besides which, he writes wonderful prose. For related material -- also a chance to savour his erudtion and wit -- find his history of the first Bulgarian Empire.

27Coffeehag
apr 13, 2013, 1:57 pm

I, too, recommend The Crusades: a Short History by Jonathan Riley-Smith. I found it quite accessible and informative.

28erilarlo
mei 25, 2013, 3:11 pm

I second Runciman 8-)

29timspalding
mei 27, 2013, 12:38 am

Get The Crusades by Hans Eberhard Mayer—a punchy and very dense narrative history. It won't replace other books, but it's good to have around.

30ELEkstrom
jun 16, 2013, 1:14 pm

God's War by Christopher Tyerman and his Oxford Press monograph, The Crusades - A Short History, Jonathan Phillps' work, The Fourth Crusade.

31Mithalogica
Bewerkt: jul 12, 2013, 1:25 pm

#28, and anyone who suggested Runciman: No, no, a thousand times, NO to Runciman! His view of the Crusades is deeply skewed, as he takes his view almost entirely from Walter Scott's novel The Talisman, a highly romanticized view of the Crusades, born of the romantic/Pre-Raphaelite literary movement. Runciman's view has become the dominant model, and has taken scholars decades to begin to overcome it. Every Crusade film that gets raked over the coals is based squarely on Runciman, including KOH. If you are really interested in the history, seek more current sources.

Norman Housely's Fighting for the Cross is excellent. I also HIGHLY recommend Allen & Amt's Crusades: A Reader which is a collection of period sources from the Crusades. It offers a solid view of the Christian perspective, but also explores the Muslim (and even Mongol, in the later Crusade era) perspective.

32Mithalogica
jul 12, 2013, 1:20 pm

#30 - Agreed on both your recc's, especially Phillips.

33timspalding
jul 12, 2013, 1:23 pm

>31 Mithalogica:

I'm interested. What are his main errors of interpretation?

34Mithalogica
jul 12, 2013, 1:50 pm

>32 Mithalogica:: I edited my comment above, but primarily, Runciman approached his work saturated with the current view of the Crusades at the time (1940s-50s), which itself came almost entirely from Scott's novel. As such, even where he tries to set that interpretation on its head (and I'm not convinced he succeeds) he still brings a whitewashed, cardboard-cutout view of the Crusades, very much in keeping with the Romantic period's neo-medieval infatuation. Even where he tries to present a more balanced view, he does so by leaning heavily on the Alexiad, hardly an unbiased source.

He downplays not only the savagery on both sides, but his interpretation of the religious underpinnings (for good or ill) of the Crusade movement is shallow and simplistic, where he touches on it at all. Granted, he was one of the first to begin with the rise of Islam in the Middle East to set the stage for the Crusades (which he oddly then bypasses for his thesis RE the Byzantine issue, which, I think, severely hampers his understanding of the first three Crusades). In fact, in his reliance on the Alexiad, Runciman ends up with outright errors in his account, events which we now know simply did not happen. (I'm away from my home at present, I can cite specifics for you later if you like, but I recall Runciman claiming that Alexius sent weapons or supplies via an Englishman to Antioch (I think, this is from memory, be kind!). We now know this has no basis in fact.

But ultimately, Runciman falls prey to that very desire to 'set the stage.' However compelling or dramatic his account may be, he misses subtleties, complexities. Certainly, history must interpret, and even the most up-to-date scholarship is far from perfect. However, Runciman falls prey to his desire to tell a story, one which it seems he has laid out beforehand, and packs his history into, rather than letting the history tell itself.

Not to mention which, we simply know so much more now than we did in the 1950s. On that alone, I'd urge anyone really interested to seek more current sources.

35AndreasJ
Bewerkt: jul 12, 2013, 2:43 pm

Since it's approximately ontopic, any opinions about John France's Victory in the East: A Military History of the First Crusade?

36cemanuel
Bewerkt: jul 12, 2013, 6:06 pm

>34 Mithalogica: - That's pretty good. I'd have just said he writes with a pro-Byzantine bias. :)

I don't think he's worthless, exactly, but there's enough newer, better stuff out there that he really isn't necessary.

37Coessens
jul 13, 2013, 1:07 pm

Anyone read Frankopan, The first Crusade? Is it good? New insights?

38ScarletBea
Bewerkt: jul 13, 2013, 2:54 pm

For fiction about crusades, mixed with fantasy too, I find Alamut great, by Judith Tarr.

39ELEkstrom
jul 13, 2013, 3:50 pm

Has anyone read Crossed by Nicole Galland? I have it in my queue for reading, but I keep getting distracted by the events leading up to the Norman Conquest and life in general.

40DinadansFriend
Bewerkt: sep 8, 2013, 6:06 pm

I'm pro Runciman even with the strictures brought forward by Raven_moon. I have read some byzantine works covering the period, Notably "O City of Byzantium" by Niketas Choniates, which even ends with the writer's adventures during the Sack of the City by the Fourth Crusade, and found little in Runciman to complain of. As for "white-washing" the Crusaders, perhaps Sir Steve did downplay the level of violence, but I consider his excellent efforts to describe a clear interrelation of actions outranks a need to express moral outrage at violence.
I think "Setting the Stage" is the basic historical act, and the book (especially the Second volume) still reads well enough to be gripping and a wonderful introduction. Research more about the period, certainly, but great disrespect for a central work isn't pretty to watch!
The Alexiad, well I don't think any of us would reject an act of filial piety that is translated and republished nine hundred years after it was written! It must have some historical value
As for works with their moral foundations in "The Talisman", I think the film "Gates of Heaven" far better fits the bill. I also agree that a more realistic treatment of Balian II of Ibelin will be a great novel. Must add that to my "Books to be Written" pile.

42DinadansFriend
sep 8, 2013, 6:09 pm

Oh, about good novels about the Crusades, Alfred Duggan's "Lady for Ransom", "count Bohemond" ,"Knight with Armour", and "Lord Geoffrey's Fancy" should kill a couple of evenings for you.

43fredsmithx
jun 24, 2014, 9:32 am

Runciman is slightly dated but to say 'takes his view almost entirely from Walter Scott's novel The Talisman, a highly romanticized view of the Crusades' (31) ?! He says in the preface (and on my book flap) that you can consider it as a romantic adventure or as the last great barbarian invasion. He obviously has a romantic attraction to the subject but clearly considers the crusaders fascinating barbarians. Despite the length he has more about politics and (battle) strategy then tactics and the impact on the locals. He is offhand in a '...and then they were all massacred' sort of way (not a real quote). It's all there but he doesn't spell out the moral outrage.

The length is not a problem. He never waffles or wallows or goes into painful detail. After reading it you can't imagine how the story could be told more briefly.
A fascinating read by a great scholar. Unmissable.

44M_Clark
jul 28, 2018, 12:36 pm

I very much enjoyed reading "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes" by Amin Maalouf. It is useful to look at the Crusades from a different perspective.

45Stbalbach
sep 24, 2019, 8:19 pm

#43: five years later.. Runciman is fashionable to discount but he really is very good and well worth reading vs. a new shiny thing.

46DinadansFriend
okt 25, 2019, 3:44 pm

Having read a few of the "Shiny Things"....I cannot but agree with you. Read well and prosper!