Customer Reviews

Crescent and Cross: The Battle of Lepanto 1571

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

 

 

I give this book two stars because the parts about ships and weapons are passable. But the author's understanding of the nature of the conflict between Christianity and Islam approaches dementia. His Turkophilia exceeds all sane bounds.

According to Bicheno, the harem was actually "a welfare system for deserving young ladies," and the Ottoman custom of using the harem to produce large number of royal siblings, then murdering all but one, a highly superior method of arranging the succession. He claims that the Turkish custom ("dervisma") of systematic kidnapping Christian children from villages so that they could be converted and enslaved, far from being barbaric, was actually so beneficial to the Christians that those who lived in cities actually sent their children out to the villages so they could have an equal opportunity to be snatched. (I am NOT making this up.) He describes the Ottoman society as being "highly dynamic."

These ravings don't just occur here and there, but are a drumbeat, which only let up when he launches into diatribes against Western civilization in general and Catholicism in particular. In short, the book is mostly politically correct nonsense, taken to extremes.

Mr. Bicheno seems rather impressed with his collection of facts and tidbits which he manages to jumble together in the most incoherent fashion.

I did not expect this work to be a running screed against Catholicism and Western Civilization in general. As an Ottoman apologist supreme, Mr. Bicheno continuously points out the shortcomings of Christendom, while ignoring the entire point of the necessity for this great Battle - Islamic Jihad!

Is it really too much to ask what the Ottomans/Muslims were doing penetrating into Greece and Europe in the first place? For a much better discussion of this topic, please see "The Legacy of Jihad" by Andrew Bostom.

As a historian currently writing on Lepanto, I read with interest Bicheno's treatment, which seeks to introduce a popular audience to one of the more interesting east-west struggles. The previous reviewer--ciao, Venezia!--is correct in pointing out that history is most reliably told by specialist academics who immerse themselves in dry detail and clearly our Venetian reviewer friend takes legitimate issue with the less-than-scholarly course Bicheno charts. However, there is another role of the historian, it seems to me, that Bicheno performs quite well: that of storyteller. Bicheno, unlike Agnus Konstam (whom our Venetian friend cites as well) has read a wide range of Lepanto secondary literature (and unlike Konstam, he seems per his bibliography to have read widely in other languages, where most of worth is to be found on the subject). Bicheno admirably concerns himself with more than the mere Oct 7strategic decisions and military aspects of the battle--he cautiously dips his toe into the artistic and cultural aspects of the battle. Bicheno's bibliography reflects, if not a specialist historian's focus or insight, an admirable synthesis of the broader implications of Lepanto that Bicheno might not understand as well as he does the military play-by-play but nonetheless fearlessly addresses. (ie the labryntine Counter-Reformation religious context; lepanto's impact on art--Vasari, Veronese, Titian, just to name a few of the guys with brushes...) For the military enthusiast, Angus Konstam's book, with its computer reconstructions and illustrations, is a quick and visually-compelling introduction to the battle scene. Bicheno tries to take the topic a bit further than Konstam, with some success and some limitations. Both authors are, it is worth noting, responding to the new efflorescence of interest in East-West struggles, filling the vaccuum of Lepanto in Anglophonic hands--Lepanto has not been of much interest to Anglophonic historians except for King James who wrote a poem about it in the 1580s (Bicheno gets it wrong that the poem is lost. It was published in 1603 and was used politically to tout the King's talents with the pen... ) Lord Chesterton of course waxed rhapsodic on the battle, using it for his own Catholic agenda...and the dulcit Ian Fenlon, who is I believe a musicologist at Cambridge or Oxford, made dents in my seat at the Biblioteca Marciana in Venice before my time and had a thing for motets involving Turks, artistic celebration and the sublime harmonics of Palestrina...) Anyway, Bicheno's is not a historian's history, but as a well-turned overview, I think its a good and timely introduction.

The narrative of this thorough and extensive work is divided in two: Iconic Battle and Military Battle. The first section deals with the Mediterranean in the 16th century (The Stage), ships and weapons (The Props), the empires, states, peoples and leaders of the time (The Players), international politics and role of the Catholic Church in the formation of the Holy League (Billboard). Part Two looks at the immediate background (Scene Setters), the campaign of 1570, the Ottoman offensive of 1571, the Holy League response and the details of the battle, concluding with an epilogue.

The book opens with a Chronology of rulers from 1500 to 1600 and important events from 1492 to 1600. Eight pages of colour plates include, inter alia, portraits of Don John, Sultan Selim II, Pius V, and various battle scenes by artists like Vasari, Vicentino, Veronese, Titian, Sebastian de Caster and Juan Luna. The 8 pages of black and white plates include the flagships of Ali Pasha, Don John Of Austria, various types of armor and weaponry, papal galleys and some battle scenes. In addition, there are three diagrams in the text: a depiction of a Venetian light galley, fortification systems and the decorative stern of Don Juan's galley La Real. Thirteen excellent maps enhance the text, focusing on relevant parts of the Mediterranean and Adriatic, on the Ottoman expansion into Europe, Africa and Asia, the 1570 and 1571 campaigns, the battle site at Navpaktos at the mouth of the Gulf of Corinth, the deployment of ships and different stages of the battle.

The vast scope of the book encompasses discussions of culture, religion and representations of the famous clash in Christian art and iconography. Bicheno deals extensively with the myth and the legend in literature by discussing and quoting works by Cervantes, Felix Lope de Vega y Carpio, Luis Velez de Guevara, Shakespeare (Othello), Thomas Moravius, Fernando de Herrera, Alonso de Ercilla y Zuniga and of course GK Chesterton and his magnificent poem Lepanto. The account of the battle itself is quite detailed as Bicheno draws on all available sources (whilst evaluating them) to analyse the vessels, the weaponry, the tactics, the terrible carnage and the liberation of the Christian slaves.

The author is highly critical of Europe and the fractious Christendom of the time in his introduction. He compares the world of the 16th century with our own time and is a Eurosceptic (good) but a bit too repetitive in his assertions of the supposed tolerance and civilizational superiority of the Ottoman Empire against the supposed backwardness of Europe (bad). Bicheno insists time and again that the battle had no major military significance and that the Catholic Church largely nurtured the legend of the great Christian victory. In this, he does not fully convince. Yes, the Turks immediately rebuilt their navy but it was done in great haste to produce a ramshackle fleet that never again threatened the West.

What makes the writing difficult to enjoy, if not exhausting, are the frequent detours that the narrative takes into the events leading up to 1571. Instead of pursuing a thread from beginning to end, the author frequently digresses by smothering the reader with a plethora of minor events, details and personalities so that the plot does not unfold smoothly. This occurs frequently as he deals with flashpoints of the conflict in Malta, Cyprus, Crete, Tunis, Djerba and along the Dalmatian coast. It really makes your head spin if you seek a linear progression of events.

The four appendices discuss the principal actors, the estimate of forces, orders of battle and casualties. There are 5 pages of bibliographic endnotes, a complete bibliography and an index. Despite my irritation with Bicheno's non-linear or frequently interrupted presentation of the conflict between the Holy League and the Ottomans that culminated at Lepanto, Crescent And Cross is a masterpiece of sorts, a most valuable reference work and a detailed study of the culture, weaponry, politics and personalities of the time.

For those who share my interest in the naval conflict at Lepanto, I can
recommend this book with some reservation. Mr. Bicheno's enthusiasm and
interest are overtly evident in his writing. Oddly, he exploits the subject as a forum in an overly long intro, to bash Christianity with
particular vitriol aimed squarely at Latin Catholicism. To what end? Beats me! I suspect the reason is to take the least appropriate opportunity to spout left-wing effluent clap trap, despite whether it be
germain to the subject or not. If you're able to endure the introduction,
then good for you. If not, simply skip it.
The core of the text demonstrates Bicheno's talent for excruciating minu-
tia. After all, it is over three hundred pages dedicated to a single event. Having never declared myself Mr. Excitement, I can admit to this
book as my "cup of tea." On the other hand, if you prefer a proper, more
traditional treatment of The Battle of Lepanto, invest in Niccolo Capponi's Victory of the West.
To Messrs. Bicheno and Brown, you should be grateful, as am I, that Amazon
. Com does not leave the reviews to the pros.

There is not much to say. This book is an amateurish compilation work based mainly on popular descriptions of the battle of Lepanto. As such is completely useless and, if possible, is more useless than Angus Konstam' Lepanto 1571. Which is a quite awful detail.


Keith Lowe review, and especially his assertion that I should "leave the reviewing to the professional", calls for a short reply.
First of all it is not the "Sunday Telegraph" that claims that Bicheno "has all the right qualifications": such claim belongs to Mr. Noel Malcom, a journalist specialist on Hobbes, Kosovo, Bosnia and nonsense. A very professional reviewer, indeed, for Lepanto.
I asked professor Norman Stone, an appreciated and well known authority in Modern History (XIX-XX century, as far as I know) and International Relations now teaching at the renowned Bilkent University in Ankara, if he really was the author of the preface. His answer was: "Oh dear oh dear - did I get something wrong ? I did a preface for the book and thought it was well written and informative". The verb "to think" has, as main synonyms, to believe, to imagine, to feel, to suppose, to assume.
It is more than 30 years that I am researching, lecturing and writing on the War of Cyprus and on Lepanto and I still feel quite ignorant. But I know enough to debunk amateurs that lists in impressive bibliographies books they never investigated or, if ever, read.
I can understand Mr. Lowe disappointment for my review, but he should have been much more careful before declaring it "inaccurate": I keep at his disposal the list, a very long list, of the historical and technical mistakes I found in the book.

This is far more than a history of a particular battle. Bicheno devotes the first 248 pages of his book to setting the political and military stage, including previous conflicts between European Christians and Ottoman Turks. The actual clash of fleets at Lepanto takes up less than thirty pages. Nonetheless, this book is a lively read. Bicheno has ranged widely in his research, touching on everything from religious attitudes to fortress design. And he knows how to tell a story, or in this case many stories. The book includes color and black and white plates, plus some diagrams. Three appendices provide details.

I am the author and a colleague has just drawn my attention to some of the detritus that has washed up on this site. The fellow who accuses me of Turkophilia needs help in more than the reading department. It was the OTTOMAN Empire, and it spent a great deal of energy keeping the Turks down. Furthermore, anyone who has cracked a single book on the subject knows how far ahead of 'the West' the Ottomans were in the sixteenth century. I am surprised to see 'Beretta' Morin's review still there: it is plainly libellous under the laws of England and the fact that he wrote a far more careful review on Amazon.uk shows that he knows it. Morin's fulsome review of Niccolò Capponi's 'Victory of the West', which admirably restates and develops in depth the traditional - dare I say it - Italophile point of view, may have something to do with the fact that the author cites one Marco Morin as his foremost research assistant and inspiration. But hey, that's show business. All the same, you ought not to publish defamatory remarks - someone might decide that suing you was a quicker way to make a buck than writing books.

I want to correct the inaccurate view given by the reader from Venice. This book is not written by an amateur, but by a gifted historian who has been receiving widespread acclaim in Europe. He is one of the authors of the Oxford Companion to Military History. Britain's "Sunday Telegraph", probably the most conservative of the national newspapers, claims that Bicheno "has all the right qualifications", and that this is "a wide-ranging and constantly engaging book, written under the pressure of real intellectual enthusiasm". Normam Stone, historian, reviewer and Professor of International Relations in Turkey, says that "if you wish to have a very readable and knowledgeable account of the many sides to [this sixtenth century world], Hugh Bicheno's book is the right start".
I openly confess that I am the publisher of this book, and perhaps you should take the five stars I have given it with a pinch of salt. On the other hand, I would urge you to pay attention to the alternative reviews I offer above, from people who know what they are talking about. I don't make a habit of reviewing the books I publish - if they get a bad review from a reader I tend to shrug my shoulders. But I am passionate about this particular book, and am frustrated to find it so badly misrepresented. My answer to the reviewer from Venice: Hugh Bicheno is not an amateur, and perhaps you should leave the reviewing to the professionals!