The Authoritative History of the War for the Holy Land

Long but good review of the crusade era that seems to be used by some to make legitimate the anger of some Muslum groups toward Western civilization of today. It also explains how the concept of jihad developed and was revived to become a major movement by radical Muslums today.

This is a comprehensive analysis of the crusades and paints a picture that is very different than I expected . The facts are well explained and the story was better than any tale out of Hollywood - Stupendous !

very "word dense" which isn't necessarily a bad thing. but, if you are not interested in every nitty gritty detail, you will find this book very tedious. that said, i am enjoying it and finding it very informative.

This is a comprehensive analysis of the crusades and paints a picture that is very different than I expected . The facts are well explained and the story was better than any tale out of Hollywood - Stupendous !

very "word dense" which isn't necessarily a bad thing. but, if you are not interested in every nitty gritty detail, you will find this book very tedious. that said, i am enjoying it and finding it very informative.

I'm only 200 or so pages into this book, so this is only a comment on what I've read so far.

This is a thorough, solid book, but it wasn't enough to keep me reading. Publishers Weekly is quoted on the front cover as saying "[it] reads like an adventure story"... please. I haven't picked up anything that read and felt so much like a textbook since I was in college. Most chapters even end with a "what we learned today" paragraph to recap the events covered in the chapter.

I'm not commenting on its worthiness as a resource for facts and theories surrounding the crusades. But it is simply that, a resource. Definitely not light reading.

If you are the type that can't get enough of the crusades, then this book is for you. If you're not, then this book won't get you interested.

This is the type of book that shows not everything works well on a kindle. If you're interested in this buy the book. Even a beat up used copy would be better than Kindle which cannot handle maps and footnotes. Book 5*, Kindle experience 1* = 3*

highly recommended for those who want to have an in depth look at one of interesting and dark times in the history of christianity.
Author validates information and events from both latin and muslim perspective rendering a more balanced presentation of
history .
Never a dull moment . history written with the fluidity of a novel . very informative

As far as the content, others have said it better than I can. Great book, page turner. Unfortunately, in the Kindle version, most of the footnotes are not linked (just see the number, can't read the footnote). There are a few footnotes that are linked, but reading one of those got me stuck at location 14052 at the end of the book, making whispersync useless. I've been trying to reset the 'furthest location' with the store customer service- way harder than I thought it would be- 30 minutes with the front line phone support and 12 minutes with a specialist to fix the location.

I recommend getting the tree version of this book, the Kindle version is a mess.

I do not throw out books until now. This author glossed over major violence that actually occurred against Christians which precipitated Pope Urban's call. There is no destinction made between people who happen to be Christian(royalty, usually) and those commiting something specifically for the Christian God. It would be like saying that the current wars between Islam and the West is a holy war because the people in the west happened to be of the Christian faith. Taken from a point of view that life was different then, and understanding how things worked then sheds like on peoples decisions, for better or worse. Most of the people who went on crusades died, the remaining returned to their homes. The church even made contracts to protect the propery of those who left. There was always the intent to return. Can people decide to do their own thing and twist something into a bad thing? yes, it happens today in any group of humans. It's so clear that this author did not consider these factors and comes out of the gate biased and lying by ommission. In the introduction pages, the author uses plenty of adjectives to discribe the poor actions on the behalf Chrisitians in regard to SECULAR matters, ignores the cause of repentance for those actions and the committment to do something that would most likely result in their death. Men, women and children took the cross to holy land. It was not a land grab! 80% of crusaders died! ....but when it comes to the Musilms the same level of exposing errors or explicit violence is not employed. I didnt see a desription of the 12k pilgrims from germanic areas that were killed by musilms on there way to Jerusalem...before the crusades were declared! Overlooked that tidbit. Theres a pastel,muted discussion of the expanse of Islam from the 600s to the end of the 11th century before there was a call to protect Christians and their faith. Knowing what happened to Christian communities and how it was omitted and daintily discussed, it was clear how the rest of this book would go. This is just another book written to foster anger and resentment toward Christians. For the first 1000 years of christianity, christs followers underwent violent death from pagans and jews, the Apostles never went anywhere threatening life unless they became christian. Christ left and said go and share the good news. Mohammed before he died said go to the house of war and attack them all until they submit to Allah. He started his mission from violence. That message is absent from the start of this book. It is unhelpful in heaing differences. Read Maddens book on the crusades which also gets into the conversation about why even the Muslims did not discuss this battle with Christianity up until the end of the 19th century after WW1. Theres area to criticize actions during the crusades, but fair and balance and understanding of the times will help clear the air and move forward.

This is overly thorough and detailed for the layman. It's impossible to keep track of all the characters - Franks and Muslims alike. It would be more interesting to skip over the detail and give the reader a better understanding of what life was like during the Crusades for the participants on both sides. That said, someone who just wants to know who did what to whom - a history teacher for example - might relish this approach.

The idea that the author could do in less than 700 pages what the abler Runciman didn't pretend to do in three volumes is a fanciful one. Asbridge writes an entertaining story, but his bombast about recent events seems less a thoughtful analysis than a plea for book sales. A presidential faux pas does not equate to a call to arms, and he admits as much a few pages later. He devotes a few pages to historical episodes that have merited thousands of pages each and trumpets, with little or no justification, answers to centuries-old historical disputes. Though he falls into the amateurish tendency toward adjective excess the book is, on the whole, well-written and is a good primer for a basic understanding of the event. But it is not the best one-volume out there, not by a long shot, and it falls well short of "authoritative".

Some of my concerns when picking up a book like this is usually

- Is the writing dull and likely to put me to sleep? - this book is the opposite. It reads as well or better than a page turner thriller fiction. The subject matter is so fascinating

- Does the author have some unnecessary bias which is wants to superimpose on the reader? - Thomas has none and presents the topic in a very very balanced manner

The other thing I would mention is that the writing is so so good. I am a particular fan of writers who can express complex things in a brief and concise sentences with proper emotion as well as fact.

Certainly a LONG book! Maybe should be broken up into several volumes. I cant help but get the feeling that the author had a slight leaning against the Christian crusaders. I am still waiting on Obama to apologize for his insults to Christians worldwide when he compared ISIS to the Crusades!

I saw The Crusades: The Authoritative History of the War for the Holy Land by Thomas Asbridge on a friend’s Goodreads list and decided to read it because of the subject, positive rating, and there was no wait list at the library. I love Medieval warfare, and one of my favorite subjects in history is the siege of Malta between Saint John’s Knights and the Ottoman Empire. So it was with the expectation of political intrigue, sieges, and gruesome warfare descriptions that I decided to read this book.

The Crusades has a lot of the positive traits. It is very balanced. The perspective goes back and forth between Muslim and Christian leaders. Since the subject is about the crusades, I found that especially important since so many people cite them while trying to make partisan or ideological points about the world today (something that the author is against). In fact, understanding the true historical and modern day significance was a big part of why I decided to read this.

My favorite parts of the book were the first and third crusade and the conclusion. These parts flowed well and were relatively concise. In the conclusion, the author seems to make the point that the crusades definitely affected history, but maybe not as much as some assume. We tend to see and unintentionally distort history through our modern lenses and ideas, and he makes the point that up until recently Muslims didn’t seem to view the crusades as being particularly historically significant. He similarly argues that although Christians cared about the Holy Land, they didn’t care enough to take and hold Jerusalem. They were too busy fighting each other. Honestly, this makes sense to me. The borders moved so much during this particular time period, and it is hard to see the crusades as anything other than a small blip in historical significance.

If this book about the first and third crusade with a short conclusion at the end, I would give it four stars. Unfortunately, there was a lot more. That probably makes it sound like the book is too long, but in fact, I think it was too short. The thoroughness of the first and third crusade are what make the story come alive.

In other parts of the book, I found myself wanting more information. For example, the author made the point throughout the different crusades that although both Christian and Muslim forces considered the Levant to be out of the way, relatively unimportant, and essentially frontier land, the logistics of war still favored the Muslims simply because it was easier for them to be resupplied and send troops to that part of the world. Although I get that, it would have been nice to seen numbers connected to this statement.

Another problem I had was that the author didn't go off on enough tangents. The author mentions people like Rashid ad-Din Sinan (aka the Old Man of the Mountain), but never elaborates. We know he is the leader of the Assassins and that they have an uncanny ability to infiltrate the inner circles of various leaders to have them killed, but I had to look him up on Wikipedia. Needless to say, he’s an interesting person, and I get that this book was already long, but I just felt that guys like that deserved a couple more pages.

Reading this book got me thinking about what I look for when I read history. Some of it is accuracy, a balanced perspective, and thoroughness. These are traits I often read about in other reviews of history books and there's no doubt that these things are important. But for me, these traits are necessary, but not sufficient. For me to like a history book, it has to have a strong narrative, preferably one that makes sense and is concise enough to sum up in a couple sentences. Unfortunately, you can’t do that with the crusades.

Contrary to what I often hear people say when talking about the crusades (or almost anything else), the idea of good versus bad doesn’t do this story justice. Even morally ambiguous versus morally ambiguous is an oversimplification. The crusades are very complicated. It is Game of Thrones on crack. It isn't enough to say "x" fought "y" and "y" won. "Y" might have won, but now "y" has to worry about "z" who was his ally and might be trying to grab power now that "x" is out of the way. Not to mention, "a" who is "y's" seemingly natural ally, is actually a frienemy and will probably be willing to help "z" undermine "y's" power. There is just too much backstabbing and political posturing to distil this narrative down to a comprehensible story. That isn’t inherently bad for any reason other that the various stories in this book were difficult to follow. It was easy to get lost in all the names mentioned (it also didn’t help that all these guys shared about five different names).

I would recommend The Crusades: The Authoritative History of the War for the Holy Land to anyone who was just getting into the history of the crusades and wanted a nice overview. Generally, though, I think it would be better to read a book about an individual crusade or a biography about a major player rather than trying to fit all this information into one book. I give it three stars for dragging, leaving out important information, and not being concise enough, but its best parts were very good.

I read this book together with God's War by Christopher Tyerman, because the store reviews gave the impression that this is the more readable book but Tyerman's is more thorough. They were right about that. Asbridge vividly narrates events, focusing particularly on the First, Third, and Seventh Crusades. He also analyzes why things happened the way they did, without going into the dry details that Tyerman does.

One major conclusion is that the First Crusade was both a ridiculous near-disaster and an improbable success, but Europeans remembered only the success. That memory bred what you might call a "crusading mentality", especially among crusaders newly arrived from Europe, that was obsessed with bold, aggressive moves. Leaders who chose slower, wiser courses of action lost the confidence of the enthusiast armies, contributing to disasters like the Battle of Hattin and the breakup of the Third Crusade.

The other strength of the book is that it alternates between the European and Muslim perspectives, going into detail about how Islamic rulers reacted to the crusades. Although the First Crusade was a shock to them, they didn't initially care very much; Jerusalem was holy to Muslims, but the land wasn't very valuable in other ways. Once the crusader states were established, Muslims tended to coexist with them, albeit awkwardly, partly because they were a lucrative gateway to trade with Europe. Asbridge argues that Saladin only promoted the recapture of crusader territory as a way of justifying his seizure of power in Egypt and Syria, and he was never enthusiastic about it. Only the Mamluk rulers of Egypt treated the crusaders as infidels to be driven out at all costs.

Though Asbridge never quite says it outright, a major insight I drew from this book is that the crusader states were destroyed by ordinary medieval politics. States in medieval days, both in Europe and the Middle East, were always attacking and seizing territory from each other. The European nobility who ruled the crusader states were at a disadvantage in those struggles because their numbers were so few when an active crusade wasn't backing them up. That reality, at least as much as religious enmity, doomed the crusader states to be swallowed by neighboring Muslim kingdoms.

Asbridge, unlike Tyerman, doesn't go into outgrowths of crusading in Europe, like the Albigensian Crusade in southern France or the campaigns of the Teutonic Knights in Eastern Europe. That's not a problem in itself, but Asbridge's limited scope may have led to the two main criticisms I have. One is that, after spending a great deal of space on the dramatic Third Crusade, he gives comparatively brief treatment of the Fourth. The sack of Constantinople by the crusaders is the strangest twist in the history of crusading, and you really need to get into the details to see it as anything other than an inexplicably stupid move. Asbridge seems to be so focused on the Near East that he doesn't feel like going into great detail about a crusade that never reached it. The other flaw is his assertion at the end of the book that the crusades had been virtually forgotten by the end of the Middle Ages. There were feeble attempts to launch a crusade against the Turks as late as the 1460s, and, as Tyerman shows, outgrowths of crusading ideology lasted even longer.

Read Asbridge if you want a vivid, detailed story, seen from both the European and Muslim sides. Read Tyerman if you want to analyze the European perspective in depth, especially the abstract ideology of crusading, and don't mind that it's a less compelling read.

After reading Lost to the West, the story of the Byzantine Empire, I wanted to read up more on the crusades and came upon The Crusades by Thomas Asbridge. With the sub title of “The authoritative history of the war for the holy land”, it certainly seemed like the book to read. And it is a huge undertaking, covering over 200 years of history, from the first crusade to fifth, in just under 700 pages.

Given the billing, its size and weighty subject, I was a bit cautious about reading it as I have no great knowledge of the time period or the region. However, soon into the first few chapters I found TA’s style easy to read and follow for the most part, if a touch stale at times. He certainly has done his homework as the book has 80 pages of detailed notes. I found myself looking forward to reading the book each night.

The book follows the call to the first crusade in 1095 all the way up to the taking of Acre in 1291, effectively ending the crusades. The first and thirds crusades get most of the coverage and book really does shine in these chapters. The attention to detail and references really infuse the writing with life, and TA often quotes historical documents with first-hand accounts of what happened. There are several nice touches to the book including a chronology of events at the end (which helps sort out the history), plentiful maps that cover the Holy Land and beyond (complete with many place names noted in the text, always a plus for me) as well as smaller maps such as those of Acre and Jerusalem.

The book covers the crusades from the Christian and Muslim perspective, and frequently bounces back and forth between these views. This, combined with the detailed coverage and historical references provide a balance look at a complex time in history. For example, I was quite surprised to find several truces and deals being made between the two sides, and TA tries to explain these in detail giving us his take on why things happened. I also liked that the author analyses how our view of the crusades has changed throughout history. In other words, this is not just a book about the crusades but also a book about the historical view of the crusades. I liked how an event or a person can be interpreted different ways at different times.

Several other interesting sections of the book include the military orders, economics and trade, as well as general life in Holy Land during this time. I found these sections fascinating but I wished there was more of this general or background knowledge. It did help explain the time and thinking of the era.

Although I enjoyed the book it does have some shortcomings. It is a huge detailed work and at times, it does bog down in details. I think a bit of editing would have helped. There are many people and place names to recall and after a while, they really do start to blend together. TA does a decent job adding in reminders after names (e.g. “Baldwin, the once king of Jerusalem, now found himself…”) but even then it is easy to lose track of who is who. I think a family tree or list of rulers would have helped out somewhat. Some parts, such as lesser known crusades (e.g. the children’s crusade) and events, are given little coverage and breezed over in a few sentences. The end chapters covering the fall Acre and the “Legacy of the Crusades” do seem a bit rushed, and as noted, the first and third crusades get the lion’s share of the book (pun intended). I guess these are typical issues with any book covering such a large period of time.

Summary: This really is an epic book in scope and content, and I think for the most part it succeeds in its coverage of the crusades. It is quite detailed, well mapped and referenced, and generally well written, though at times slow. It does seem to lose a bit of steam at the end (or maybe that was me?), but on balance the pluses far outweigh the negatives and I enjoyed reading this book. I give it better than a 4 at 4.2 (84%).

Definitely a good, balanced, well-researched review of a series of battles and wars that have assumed unusual and unjustified significance in our times.

The wars over the four Lavant regions or Crusade States from 1090-1300 were perhaps not too unusual. There were many parties and battles involved but almost all the divisions were along the religious lines, which was the most unusual part in real time. Both sides had massive adversaries coming together at times under religious banners for the defence of the Holy Land. As history bears witness in countless episodes, power-grabbers introduced religious causes early on to fund/recruit for/militarise their armies.

Once again as common in all such long-period wars that last decades and centuries, there were some impressive warriors and war stories, mistakes and embarrassing defeats, massacres and inhuman barbarism, destructions, long marches, and countless other things that any historian would struggle to wade through. Mr Asbridge creates a great narrative out of this confusion to hook the readers all through. The balance he provides in the discussion is particularly important given the undercurrents assumed by crusades and jihads in our times.

At times, details could prove overwhelming for anyone but the avid enthusiasts of the topic. This is unavoidable for any reasonably detailed work on a subject so complex and one that defines an era. One feels that the chronological account could have done with more analysis of implications at times, although the author tries to provide an account like a true historian by describing the events as they appeared in real time and without much hindsight bias except at the end.

Definitely a worthwhile book for anyone starting on the subject.

This book took me one year to finish - a terrible indictment of the writer. Between when I started the book and when it was finished, I managed to read 12 other books. This stuff was just painful.

In the end, the anti-western slant of the writer is obvious. He presents the Muslim perspective, almost providing justification for the maniacal obsession of Islamists with destruction of "the infidels."

This book was billed as "the authoritative" history of the crusades. The author explains both the Moslem and European politics that influenced the conflict without descending into PC moralizing. Massive but readable.

After reading Lost to the West, the story of the Byzantine Empire, I wanted to read up more on the crusades and came upon The Crusades by Thomas Asbridge. With the sub title of “The authoritative history of the war for the holy land”, it certainly seemed like the book to read. And it is a huge undertaking, covering over 200 years of history, from the first crusade to fifth, in just under 700 pages.

Given the billing, its size and weighty subject, I was a bit cautious about reading it as I have no great knowledge of the time period or the region. However, soon into the first few chapters I found TA’s style easy to read and follow for the most part, if a touch stale at times. He certainly has done his homework as the book has 80 pages of detailed notes. I found myself looking forward to reading the book each night.

The book follows the call to the first crusade in 1095 all the way up to the taking of Acre in 1291, effectively ending the crusades. The first and thirds crusades get most of the coverage and book really does shine in these chapters. The attention to detail and references really infuse the writing with life, and TA often quotes historical documents with first-hand accounts of what happened. There are several nice touches to the book including a chronology of events at the end (which helps sort out the history), plentiful maps that cover the Holy Land and beyond (complete with many place names noted in the text, always a plus for me) as well as smaller maps such as those of Acre and Jerusalem.

The book covers the crusades from the Christian and Muslim perspective, and frequently bounces back and forth between these views. This, combined with the detailed coverage and historical references provide a balance look at a complex time in history. For example, I was quite surprised to find several truces and deals being made between the two sides, and TA tries to explain these in detail giving us his take on why things happened. I also liked that the author analyses how our view of the crusades has changed throughout history. In other words, this is not just a book about the crusades but also a book about the historical view of the crusades. I liked how an event or a person can be interpreted different ways at different times.

Several other interesting sections of the book include the military orders, economics and trade, as well as general life in Holy Land during this time. I found these sections fascinating but I wished there was more of this general or background knowledge. It did help explain the time and thinking of the era.

Although I enjoyed the book it does have some shortcomings. It is a huge detailed work and at times, it does bog down in details. I think a bit of editing would have helped. There are many people and place names to recall and after a while, they really do start to blend together. TA does a decent job adding in reminders after names (e.g. “Baldwin, the once king of Jerusalem, now found himself…”) but even then it is easy to lose track of who is who. I think a family tree or list of rulers would have helped out somewhat. Some parts, such as lesser known crusades (e.g. the children’s crusade) and events, are given little coverage and breezed over in a few sentences. The end chapters covering the fall Acre and the “Legacy of the Crusades” do seem a bit rushed, and as noted, the first and third crusades get the lion’s share of the book (pun intended). I guess these are typical issues with any book covering such a large period of time.

Summary: This really is an epic book in scope and content, and I think for the most part it succeeds in its coverage of the crusades. It is quite detailed, well mapped and referenced, and generally well written, though at times slow. It does seem to lose a bit of steam at the end (or maybe that was me?), but on balance the pluses far outweigh the negatives and I enjoyed reading this book. I give it better than a 4 at 4.2 (84%).

Definitely a good, balanced, well-researched review of a series of battles and wars that have assumed unusual and unjustified significance in our times.

The wars over the four Lavant regions or Crusade States from 1090-1300 were perhaps not too unusual. There were many parties and battles involved but almost all the divisions were along the religious lines, which was the most unusual part in real time. Both sides had massive adversaries coming together at times under religious banners for the defence of the Holy Land. As history bears witness in countless episodes, power-grabbers introduced religious causes early on to fund/recruit for/militarise their armies.

Once again as common in all such long-period wars that last decades and centuries, there were some impressive warriors and war stories, mistakes and embarrassing defeats, massacres and inhuman barbarism, destructions, long marches, and countless other things that any historian would struggle to wade through. Mr Asbridge creates a great narrative out of this confusion to hook the readers all through. The balance he provides in the discussion is particularly important given the undercurrents assumed by crusades and jihads in our times.

At times, details could prove overwhelming for anyone but the avid enthusiasts of the topic. This is unavoidable for any reasonably detailed work on a subject so complex and one that defines an era. One feels that the chronological account could have done with more analysis of implications at times, although the author tries to provide an account like a true historian by describing the events as they appeared in real time and without much hindsight bias except at the end.

Definitely a worthwhile book for anyone starting on the subject.

This book took me one year to finish - a terrible indictment of the writer. Between when I started the book and when it was finished, I managed to read 12 other books. This stuff was just painful.

In the end, the anti-western slant of the writer is obvious. He presents the Muslim perspective, almost providing justification for the maniacal obsession of Islamists with destruction of "the infidels."

Some of my concerns when picking up a book like this is usually

- Is the writing dull and likely to put me to sleep? - this book is the opposite. It reads as well or better than a page turner thriller fiction. The subject matter is so fascinating

- Does the author have some unnecessary bias which is wants to superimpose on the reader? - Thomas has none and presents the topic in a very very balanced manner

The other thing I would mention is that the writing is so so good. I am a particular fan of writers who can express complex things in a brief and concise sentences with proper emotion as well as fact.

In a footnote to the intro, Mr. Asbridge states his intention of writing a fact-based book with careful effort to remove bias. I find Mr. Asbridge's single volume history on the Crusades to be remarkably even-handed. The author did not have any apparent anti-Western Western academic bias nor did he show any apparent Western enculturation bias.

The author paid careful attention to the player's motives. While those who enjoy history as enacted by larger-than-life caricatures may be disappointed, I found the portraits painted to be well-rounded and human. Asbridge did not cynically dismiss the players' professed spiritual motivations nor did he neglect other temporal and political motivations. Great players such as Saladin, Baybars, Frederick II, and Richard the Lion-Hearted rise and fall on their own merits without help from the historian. Motivations of individuals and groups are well-treated and in the context of their actions and contemporary sources.

Another reviewer stated that Mr. Asbridge's writing tended to be self-congratulatory at the expense of other historians. I did not get this. With a stated intent of clearing distortions and myth, Mr. Asbridge does discuss and challenge other perceptions; however, I believe these were not handled arrogantly.

Because this book is more socio-political, I do not believe the military buff will enjoy this book as much as those looking for a clear overview of the Crusades in the Near East. However, for military buffs just discovering the Crusades, this book provides an excellent springboard and context for more detailed reading.

The extensive notes provide an invaluable reference for further reading and exploration, most of which are considered authoritative in their own right. The writing is clear and the narrative flows well. Mr. Asbridge is clearly an authority on the Crusades; I expect to find this book referenced in many future volumes.

the subject matter was interesting and the book well written, but I could not finish the audiobook. The narrator voice was so dull that I found myself not paying attention frequently and missing sections of the book.

Without exception this was the best book I have ever read about the Crusades, and one of the best medieval history I have read. It was informative and easy to follow. There was an entertaining balance of deep history and personal details. The characters were alive in their stories, and military details always related to the people involved - making everything easy to follow. Entertaining and educational, I would recommended this book to anyone interested in the history of the Crusades.

This book was billed as "the authoritative" history of the crusades. The author explains both the Moslem and European politics that influenced the conflict without descending into PC moralizing. Massive but readable.

This is a massive book that covers the history of the crusades from its glorious beginning to its ignominious end. It's a subject that covers a lot of ground and a lot of time, but the author handles his material very well.

In addition to telling of the military, political and religious aspects of the various crusades, the author gives us brief biographies of the main characters, and he does that well. The military aspects don't get bogged down in minutia, which is good for anyone who doesn't want to read about boring tactics ad infinitum. The battles are described in a straightforward manner, which is how I like my military history.

This book is enriched by the inclusion of the Muslim writings that cover this period, which is a change from many books on the same subject which tend to relate only from the Western side. This is a much more balanced approach, and one that I appreciated.

While this book is not for everyone, those who read it with an interest in the subject will come away with a heightened understanding of the period, the people, and the reasons why things happened the way they did in this martial and religious era.

If you are even contemplating buying this book you must already have at least a passing interest in the Crusades. Safe to say this book will reward your interest! Thoroughly researched, fast paced and packed with vivid detail and eyewitness accounts, I would get lost in this book for hours at a time. Learned and retained so much. I've been annoying my wife for weeks with interesting facts and stories.

First and foremost, The Crusades is a great read. From page one, it pulls you in with a narrative that reads more like a great adventure novel than true history. I for one, did not know much about the Crusades prior to this. As i progressed, I found myself investigating more and more details from other sources to further gain insight into the battles and backstory. That is not to say there are not plenty of details in the book as it is. It is very rich. The way Asbridge divided up each piece of the story really worked to make the journey concise, literate and educational. For a fan of history, The Crusades is as good as it gets.

This is unfortunate, but wars create history and Crusades represent a typical example. They were as much acts of Christian aggression as wars of defence. After the First Crusade's seemingly miraculous success and the formation of the Frankish states, the lasting almost 200 years war for the Holy Land was perpetuated by cycles of violence, vengeance and reconquest, in which Christians and Muslims alike perpetrated acts od savage brutality. It must have been very hard and stressful to exist in these times, when true borders in fact did not exist, and each city/fortress tried to survive numerous sieges and slaughtering of population. In general, Islam did benefit from the fact that it was waging a war on what was tantamount to home ground. Muslims were lifted to victory by charismatic and ruthless leadership offered by Nur al-Din, Saladin and Mamluk's sultan Baybars.

In the end, the crusades have been presented as an international conflagration that reshaped the world: dragging Europe out of the Dark Ages towards the beckoning light of the Renaissance.

Thomas Asbridge book represents a fantastic history lecture that reads like a thriller. Great descriptions of numerous cities' fortifications makes the book even more interesting, but it calls for better and more illustrations. Eventually I was able to 'google' picyures for majority of them: Acre, Krak des Chevaliers, Kerak, Montreal, Aleppo, Antioch, Masyaf, Montfort, Safed, Damietta and many others..monumental breath taking constructions.

Anyone looking for a serious introduction to the Crusades cannot do better than read this book. It is a great read, superbly written, informative and scholarly, with a good account of the sources - which are surprisingly numerous for such an early period. It focuses on the military elements of the Crusades, and describes the lengthy battles, sieges and campaigns vividly. In parts I found it so engaging that it was hard to put down before completing the story of a campaign. The book gives a vivid account of the atrocious conditions and suffering of medieval warfare, which provoke a morbid fascination at an age that seems so far removed from our own. It covers a very large subject and cannot deal with all aspects equally. Its portraits of such figures and Saladin and Richard the Lionheart are very well drawn, but there is not sufficient room to cover all aspects of their lives. One area that remains rather mysterious even after completing this excellent book is the inner workings and lives of the Latin kingdoms in Outremer. How did these people actually live and govern in their exotic colonies? A good balance is maintained between the Christian and Muslim perspectives, and many stereotypes are no doubt rightly debunked in the process.

Having known little of the details of the Crusades prior to reading this book I found it fascinating. The only reason I didn't give it 5 stars is because I felt at times the author detailed some history excellently and made passing mention of other details I felt were important. I would have liked extreme detail on the Military Orders, but then again, I can always find a book centered on them. I will also want to review the history of the Mongol Empire as they showed up late in the book and peaked my interest. For a book that had to pack 200 years of history in 681 pages, T.A. did a great job.

Admittedly, I knew very little about the Crusades before reading this book. Given that, I found the book to be a well-written, relatively fast paced (as fast as 680 pages can be) read. Asbridge gives a balanced account of the events that led to each Crusade. He draws equally from Western and Muslim sources to balance the story given, and this allows the book to read as more of a dispassionate review of events than a polemic. All in all, it was a fantastic book, and I finished up with a desire to read more about the Crusades.

Nonetheless, I do have two criticisms about the book. First, he tends to heavily emphasize the First and Third Crusades at the expense of other campaigns during the time period. I suppose this was due to the needs of keeping the book shorter, or perhaps, Asbridge's choice to emphasize those two periods specifically. Second, the last chapter which emphasizes the impact of the Crusades on the following centuries and modern times appears to be preaching more than academic research. His interpretation of other people's (non-academics to be specific) views of the Crusades is largely unnecessary. I found myself gripped by the book for the last 650 pages until this last chapter. At which point, I started to lose interest. However, in those two criticisms pale in comparison to what the book has to offer.

This book is very well done, but attempts an impossible task. The author set out to write a compehensive book on the crusades in only 680 pages. Clearly, he had to decide what must be set aside. For the most part, he was successful, but often I questioned his decision to emphasize certain aspects while ignoring others.

One weakness is the author's stated intent to give a "balanced" account -- which meant to him (apparently) that each side must be both praised and condemned in equal measures. In a period when massacring prisoners (both combatants and non-combatants) was the norm, it is too easy to find equivalencies that are (historically speaking) meaningless with respect to any kind of judgment. In fact, the story might have been better told without the author's repeated judgments.

These criticisms should be considered as my personal minor irritations with a excellent effort to tell a complicated story. "The Crusades" is well-written, and constructed so that it flows from event to event in as easy-to-read manner. I read the book over several days, always looking forward to picking it up again.

I am an avid history student and reader of history books, interested in all periods and cultures. It is extremely rare for me to buy a book after carefully reading reviews and even a sample and then put it down as just too uninteresting to even read. For me, this book can't keep my interest. It just reviews the paths, conquests, temporary alliances and massacres over the few hundred year period in the area in such a rote and mechanical manner that it doesn't have any interest for me and I stopped reading it.

A very insightful journey into the world of Crusading.. It's an educational tool that is very helpful in understanding the Middle East. I do wish that the narrative would have taken into account the time prior to Islam when Christians, Jews and others occupied the lands. It might have placed the Crusades in more accurate context. All in all and very worthwhile read

Asbridge illustrates in detail the nuance and complexity of the Crusades from the eleventh to the last decade of the thirteenth century. He explains the success and failures of the contending forces in detail and does not give way to agenda driven characterizations. Divisions and conflicts both dynastic, ethnic and religious are shown to be important in explaining the course of events. Asbridge sources both conflict and cooperation between Christians and Muslims; along with the economic impact and consequences of the Crusades. Finally, he details the historiography and the current political context of crusader history. It is a masterful foray into what remains a provocative and important period!!!

The absolute best book I have found on the crusades. Reads like a historical novel and is much less tedious to navigate than Harold Lamb's book. The background, politics, nuances and all else are described in easy to digest, intricate detail. I will read it again. Thanks to this great book, I really understood the crusades for the first time.

I enjoyed this easy to read, very intentionally even handed history of the crusades. It gave a good understanding of the culture, motivation and individual characters throughout the 200 year crusades.

The book is very well written, the author establish's the context very well through out the book. After reading this book I can say with confidence that I have an in dept knowledge of the crusades. Since the book is written with both Christian and Muslim perspectives it gives the reader a good understanding of the conflict as a whole. I recommend this book to anybody who has an interest in medieval history.

This is by far the largest book I've ever read, cover to cover: it's just shy of 700 pages. The author has just written such a thrilling account that you keep going, page after page. I'm totally serious when I say that it reads like a medieval adventure story.

It's also of course completely educational. Prior to reading this I had no background in crusade history. None. All I had was a semi-serious interest in modern day middle east goings-on. That was enough for me to buy the book and start it; from there, like I mention above, the book took care of itself.

If you have any interest in the time period, wars, religious conflict, etc buy this book.

This is one of the best history books I've ever read. Factual, detailed, yet always vivid and interesting. Gets into the characters and personalities of the players. Really makes you feel the presence of history from a close perspective. I wish we had books like this when I was slogging through Western Civ and various history courses in college.

Very well written account of the Crusades. With all that is happening in the world today with ISIS killing in the name of God, I thought it was important to know some history of Christians fighting Muslims. After Obama made his comment about Christians killing Muslims during the Crusades I wanted to know the truth about those Crusades. This is a very unbiased account of that Period.

WebbWeaver was asked by Simon & Schuster UK to review this title based on a 100 page excerpt and reference materials with maps. We graciously accepted their request and we were quite pleased.
We began our journey into The Crusades with Chapter 13, 'To Crusade' and continued through Chapter 16 'Lionheart'.
In late summer of 1187 Archbishop Joscius of Tyre, set sail for the West. Since Saladin's overtaking of the Holy Land, the most powerful men in the Latin world had become compelled to take up the cross and engage in the campaign and call to arms known throughout history as The Third Crusades. Among the most powerful were Frederick Barbarossa, Emperor of Germany and Phillip II Augustus, the young King of France. But it would be Richard the Lionheart, King of England who would rise as champion of the christian cause and challenge Saladin. The two would meet head to head in the Third Crusades, pitting King against Sultan.
Saladin's rise to power had grown quickly but his taking of Jerusalem marked the beginning of his real trials of leadership and would almost certainly become his downfall. It was much easier to conquer a land than to rule it. The battle between Christendom and the Jihadists is highlighted in great detail, re-enforced with artwork and maps that strategically place the reader directly in the heart of the conflict as it unfolds. We are witness to the first battle where the Christians are finally in a position to go on the offensive and begin the task of attempting to reclaim that which has been taken by Saladin but, a shift in the tides results in mass casualties and the Christians are defeated on the plains of Acre.
The turn in Christendom's favor begins when three and a half years after taking up the cross, King Richard I of England, finally sails into Palestine on June 8, 1191, bringing with him much needed supplies, re-enforcements and positive morale for the weary. Abandoned by the King of France, Richard the Lionheart would step up as a leader and king making the world know his intentions to reclaim the lands Saladin had taken.
After the execution of over 2,600 Saracens due to a broken treaty he and Saladin had entered into together, Richard the Lionheart was free to lead the Third Crusades on to victory. He would do this with the help of many including, the Templars, Poitevins, Normans and the English.
Though he may not be responsible for the turn in The Third Crusade, it is widely believed that Richard's contribution of outward gallantry just may have been the deciding factor in the direction the Crusades would take. The battle at Acre would indeed drive Saladin's forces into retreat however it would not signal the end of the Third Crusades, though it would bring Richard the Lionheart to the brink of victory.
The Crusades is an intricately and beautifully woven tapestry of historical proportions.
Though we have not had the pleasure of reading the book in its entirety, the small part of the journey we took with the writer was entrancing and enlightening. We are quite anxious to read more on the Crusades and that interest was sparked by our reading of three small chapters from The Crusades.
WebbWeaver is giving The Crusades:The War For The Holy Land a 4-star rating. We would recommend this to any history lover and anyone who has ever wondered about or questioned the past. Pick up Thomas Asbridge's book, you are sure to be pleased.
CK Webb & DJ Weaver
WebbWeaver Reviews

It may be daunting in length, but you'll be riveted by the intimate and extraordinarily detailed accounts of battles, sieges and plunderings of these medieval warriors. It's a downright miracle anyone survived. Superbly written. If you like History at all, this is for you. You will so appreciative of the fact you weren't living then. Nothing was too gruesome of these God 'soldiers.'

Definitely well researched, few books making a conscious attempt to be unbiased and pick up sources from the Muslim world contradicting the myths that the Christian world was merely "defending" itself.

Don't let the length of this book dissuade you, because it's a truly fantastic read. Ambitious but completely engaging, Asbridge helps you see the crusades from both sides, switching between Islamic and Muslim perspectives from the rise of the First Crusade to the fall of the last Christian outpost in the Middle East, 200 years later. And perhaps one of the most valuable questions he poses: What are the modern-day implications of these ancient holy struggles?

I gave the book a 5 star review because the book is outstanding; a great read, a fair assessment, and an insightful perspective. I have a problem with the general tone of some of the reviews however. I have read thousands of reviews on the store and find them the best source of opinion and enthusiasm to help guide my future reading purchases. But on rare occasions you get the feeling that many of the positive reviews were written either by the author, his family, his friends, his publisher, and/or his hostaged students. This is one of those cases. A number of these reviews reek of being written by a publicist in hyperbolic ecstasy. There is a sameness to the syntax and style of these reviews. The main evidence is in the comments to the unfortunate one star review. Yes it is a ludicrous concept to trash an author's work based upon a complaint about the Kindle edition. And yes it does distort the overall rating, and is blatantly unfair. The problem is the level of antagonism and hysterical response to an obvious moron. You can actually picture the publisher's people freaking out, not common reading folk sharing opinions and insights. If this chicanery is true, and I could be wrong here, it does a disservice to a book that can speak for itself. I suggest that those of you who are horrified by reading this are the ones caught with their hands in the cookie jar. For the rest, fair warning about evidence of review hyperbole.

Largely an account of the political power plays (religious & secular) that may have motivated the leaders involved in roughly 200 years of "holy" war and the numerous challenges they encountered as they struggled to bring armies together under their banners. The book seems, to me, a fairly balanced discussion of the crusades/jihad, with enough information about actual battles to keep it moving while the main focus is actually "behind the scenes." The author, though, felt a need to constantly criticize other historians. Asbridge frequently implies that no one else had seen what was obvious to him and in a few instances, stops just shy of calling others' interpretations stupid. Another annoying tic he has is using the same tactic, repeatedly, to make these not-so-subtle attacks. He mentions a counter-interpretation then follows it with "in fact..." or "in truth..." (or a similar phrase) and proceeds with his take on events; as if his own interpretation should not be regarded as anything but ultimate truth, when ~in fact~ several interpretations are possible and valid (especially as much of the evidence is tainted by political maneuvering, religion and/or fear). He also has a habit of invoking 20/20 armchair hindsight in his assessment of the strategies employed by leaders in both camps. This is a common human failing, but coupled with the repetitive one-upmanship throughout Asbridge's book, it's just too much. I think this book is interesting, well written and clearly very well researched. But it would have been so much better were it not riddled with arrogant asides. It's unlikely that I'll read another of this author's works as the ego on display in this one sorely tried my patience.

A huge scholarly effort--amazing research and documentation. Stunning similarity with the same hatred and battles going on now as they did 1000 years ago. Maybe we can foresee the results of current conflicts.

Just came back from a trip to the Holy Land and bought this book to learn more about the Crusades. In my opinion this might be appropriate for a graduate level college course in the History of The Crusades, but it was much too detailed for the casual reader.

He may be an historian, but he is not a great or even good writer. Difficult to plod through unless you are in a college class of his and you have to. Left wing history of the crusades, a book Barack Obama would endorse. Written from the Muslim point of view. His hubris in claiming that he has written the "authoritative" history of the Crusades is sickening. Read Runciman's volumes instead.

Serious-minded Christians and objective students of Islam will notice the author's mistaken moral equivalence. It is one thing to practice objectivity in reporting history. It is quite another to presume that an ideology like Islam that was founded and spread on the basis of terror, warring and conquest be given moral equivalence with Chistianity, which is what the author does throughout. Was Obama an advisor?

The Crusades were a valiant effort to get rich while starting a war. The Crusades taxed the church and everyone in Europe gave willingly to the cause of ridding the Holy Land of the infidel. Soon men were claiming honor, knighthood and faith from fighting in the middle east, what a great cause to die and shed your blood, but no one can say that dying in the Crusades guarantees a trip to heaven, or can it?

I will have to pass on this ....if John Esposito is giving this book a good review, then I know it is going to be slanted and poor....Mr. Espostio he being the 'scholar' that is pro radical islam.....sorry....anything he recommends I know will be appalling!

I would like to give this book a good rating, but there is a major flaw with the notes, one that should not have escaped the least competant editor; and this for a high priced book by Kindle standards!

First of all, the note numbers in the text are not linked to the notes themselves, so to get to a note you must laboriously work your way through the TOC to get to the Notes section. This is bad enough in itself, but when you get there you find that the note numbers are missing!

I will probably keep it, as I'm finding it an interesting read; but for the price I would hope that the publishers would correct this and provide a free upgrade to previous buyers.