Customer Reviews

The Complete Idiot's Guide(R) to the Crusades

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(7)

 

 

When I went to school, history began in 1492. If we regarded Europe at all, it was with the annoyed curiosity of a kid who finds a bow with no arrows. That's what Europe was without us - and it served them right for being so mean. No sitting around musty castles for us. Our history skipped over all the boring stuff. We'd jump right in with Columbus, following every nail-biting, cliff-hanging turn as he battled the raging seas.

Because our history begins relatively late on the world's timeline, we have no knowledge of the crusades or most events that happened prior to Queen Isabella's reign. If you mention the crusades, most of us envision a knight in shining armor (or dirty tunic) rushing into battle. That's it. We can't elaborate, but we know it was a long, drawn out European something or other. All we know is that we shouldn't talk about it. (Remember the outcry when Bush called the war on terrorism a "crusade"?)

The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Crusades is EXCELLENT for those of us who like our history lessons full of action. I have little patience for history that is taught by forcing people to memorize names and dates. Instead, TCIG to the Crusades is very funny and smartly written. I finished it in two days and couldn't put it down, wanting to see what would happen next. It's inspired me to find out more about the Crusades and the history of Christian/Muslim relations. Please do yourself a favor and add this to your library.

If you have ever wanted to know anything or everything about "The Crusades", from the first and most successful,to the third and most famous, all the way down to the last and most tragic, this work is an absolutly wonderful way to satisfy that thirst for knowledge. Not only is it entertaining from cover to cover, but the two authors made it so reader friendly that it was hard for me to put it down......not a big deal....but when it was time for the bookstore to close, it was a big deal. I truly am delighted to have read this book and be the owner of a copy myself.

The on-line extract of this book is a total fantasy of mediaeval life. There are ludicrously wild generalisations, such as the assertion that mediaeval meat, even the most prestigious kinds, was "poorly prepared and undercooked", and that "the huts of the peasants are one-room hovels constructed of rough wood or sod" (really? That's in the whole of Europe, then, from Denmark to Sicily?) and plain untruths, such as that the peasants were deformed by rickets caused by malnutrition on a diet that included "grass as a principal staple". (Not only was there no part of Europe where grass was a normal food, but rickets is actually caused by a lack of sunlight, calcium and phosphorus - so anybody who did farm work and ate greens would be very unlikely to get it! Rickets only became common in the heavily-polluted cities of the Industrial Revolution.) The author also asserts that the jus primae noctis existed in England, something that no historian has ever claimed (in fact all serious historians now agree that the jus primae noctis is a fantasy which didn't exist anywhere in Europe). He goes on to say that the peasant farming was so inefficient that they couldn't grow enough food; "without iron tools, they can't plough the land". Tripe! Archaeology has shown that the farming technology of early mediaeval Europe was perfectly capable of sustaining good levels of production.

Then there are wild bits of Grand Guignol such as the idea that when people bit into blood sausages "the blood spurts from your mouth. You can't wipe it away." Rubbish: if you cook blood in a sausage casing it rapidly becomes dense, solid, dark in colour, highly nutritious and delicious. It's called black pudding.

If this extract is typical of the rest, then this book might make a good Monty Python sketch but can't possibly call itself history.

If you want a sound, basic introduction to the Crusades... this isn't it. There are a number of other books I would recommend rather than this one. I've given it one star because I can't give it a 0 or a minus.
On a cursory flick through, I found examples of discredited legends being trotted out as fact, and glaring basic factual errors, e.g. the Piedmontese Conrad de Monferrat being described as a "Flemish knight".
Baudouin IV's leprosy is described in sensationalist terms. A young man who, although blind and crippled, was mentally entirely capable and actively involved in government until within a few days of his death cannot be written off as a "living corpse", as if his presence at Kerak were merely as a mascot. No, he was still very much in charge (see Hamilton's biography of him).
Nor did Henri de Champagne "slip on a banana skin": he overbalanced near a window, and his dwarf tried to save him (you couldn't make this up!).
The author is not a historian, and gives no sign of having used primary sources. Christopher Tyerman's 'Fighting for Christendom: Holy War & the Crusades', Jonathan Riley-Smith's 'History of the Crusades', and (though somewhat dated) Terry Jones's anecdote-heavy Runciman-lite 'The Crusades' and Georges Tate's 'The Crusades & the Holy Land' illustrated pocket book are all better than this. Avoid.

Paul Williams has superbly highlighted the period of the eight Crusades (1095-1270) in 279 engrossing pages. This book is a must read for both the casual reader, as well as history buffs. The main actors, battles, and glimpses of social and cultural life of the time are accurately and wittingly portrayed. Excellent read!

Although other critics on this page would bash Williams' creation for being shallow, I would like to help that critic understand that this is, as advertised, an overview for those that are interested in gaining a general understanding of the Crusades. Depth is not an option here. Additionally, understating the folly of those involved (on all 4 or 5 sides) should be considered humor and not self hatred.

That said, this is a very entertaining look about a time that is incredibly confusing for those without a degree in Early Medieval European History. If you want to know what basically happened during the Crusades, don't want to read volume after volume on the matter, and want to laugh out loud at times doing so, buy this book!

(Unless, of course, you cannot find the slightest thing funny about your own history. The recommendation then would be to make dinner reservations for one.)

This book is a joke. Not only is it full of outrageous claims that are not referenced to any reliable sources, but it even contains glaring spelling errors. To name a few: Domino, non sum dingus, p. 9 (instead of Domine, non sum dignus); Alexis Comnena, p. 33 (instead of Alexius Comnenus); Emich of Leisengen, p. 41 (instead of Emicho of Leiningen). This author is a storyteller, not a historian. Don't waste your money on this book if you want an accurate history of the Crusades. Instead, read articles and books by Thomas F. Madden, Ph.D. He is a historian who actually specializes in the Crusades.

I'm not a certified expert on the Crusades, but it's easy to see that this book was written for pure entertainment, with little attention to detail.The author's remark that serfs had anal sex with their women "as quickly as you can say 'jackrabbit.'" was more like a dirty joke that really didn't belong in a book which children often read. But I also didn't like it because it had only one small map, and it was confusing, showing same-colored lines criss-crossing each other so you couldn't tell the direction of one crusade from the other. Plus, there were no photographs of ancient sites of the Crusades. If you don't mind any of this, go for it. But if you want a truly informative book on the subject, read Morris Bishop's "The Middle Ages."

This book is poorly researched and packed with cliche and bias, to the point of insult to ancestry. You've seen some examples of the inaccuracies in the other reviews. Mostly Mark Twain-esque dribble, and far from first hand research of historical sources, a major handicap in modern history books which repeat false nonsense.
Much of this book simply spits in the face of common sense. For example, saying knights in the melee of a tournament fought by "...hacking at one another with heavy (20- to 30-pound) broadswords." If that doesn't show a detachment from reality and lack of research, along with reliance on modern fiction, I don't know what does.

Having just watched the "Kindom of Heaven", I was very interested in learning more about this periord of history. I found many books on the subject, but most were very dry and hard to get into. I picked up a copy of the Idiot's Guide to the Crusades and believe it or not, I could not put it down. This book is not a scholarly work but is very entertaining and well presented. The title of this book is deceiving. Few idiots would take on a subject matter like this. My only criticism is that it does not contain more maps and pictures. For the amount of people involved in the crusades, it's hard to keep track of who is who.