Customer Reviews

The Templars: The Dramatic History of the Knights Templar, the Most Powerful Military Order of the Crusades

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(20)
3 star:		(13)
2 star:		(19)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

I have added this book to my personal library because it gives the history of the Knights Templar with clarity and precision. Reviewers who found it odd that the Templars weren't even mentioned until around page 90 overlooked the fact that it's difficult to just yank a story out of history without first giving some background. If you're looking for a more esoteric history that ties the Templars to things like the Shroud of Turin or the Holy Grail, you won't find it here. And, even though I enjoy reading those types of books, I still highly recommend this one. It's a no frills historical account.

I felt this book on the Knights Templar was very informative, especially since my knowledge prior to reading this book was far from extensive. This book explains the reasons for the Knights formation as a religious order, continues on through out the book with political, and structural issues. I feel that emphasis on the politics of the era is important as religion and politics were hardly distinguishable bureaucracies. My initial conflicting opinions on this religious order have been clarified to some extent since reading this book.

I was excited to read this book due to my interest in the history of the Templars, however I was very disappointed by the time I had finished. Although the book is well written, I would describe it more as an abridged history of the Crusades, followed by a few chapters about the destruction of the Templars, and topped off with a somewhat rambling concluding chapter that somehow ends up with a condemnation of the nation state!! Obviously some background history of the Crusades is necessary, but when the title of the book is "The Templars", the book should focus on how the Templars fit in with that history. I got the feeling when reading this book that the author had to remind himself to mention the Templars occasionally in the course of his descriptions of the Crusades!! My advise is to not bother with this book...spend the money on Sir Steven Runciman's History of the Crusades if you haven't already got it.

Ask any schoolboy to give you his version of what a knight looks like and the chances are he will say that a knight wears chainmail, a helmet and a white surcoat with a red cross emblazoned on it. A pretty good description of what a Templar Knight would have looked like to us, had we been there at the time they were joining the crusades to protect pilgrims and save the Holy Land from attacks by the infidels.

Their Order rose to be one of the most powerful in the Western World, until their wealth and power began to frighten people in high places, no less in fact than the French King, who accused the Order of heresy and even immorality. He extracted confessions from the senior members of the order, through torture and even burning at the stake.

Most of the senior members of the Order were murdered and the few who escaped scattered across Europe.

This is an excellent book, descriptive and well written. Nothing like the dusty, dry volumes that I read in large numbers in sixth form college, more years ago than I would care to remember. This book is exciting and has the pace to grip the reader like a novel would, rather than a book with factual content. The truth well told will always beat fiction, at least in my book it will.

Or, perhaps, it should be renamed "A History of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, with Special Reference to the Crusades." The author tells us that this book was written to answer questions about the Templars, a legendary but shadowy group about which even the generally better-informed person of today probably knows very little. As a force in the Holy Land and Europe they lasted for only two centuries, from about 1100 to 1300. The author, however, in order to set the scene for them, first gives us approximately 2000 years of excruciatingly boring history about the development of the three main religions that have fought over the Holy Land for so many years and how the Templars were an outgrowth of this endless conflict. For page after page, name after name after name is invoked, battles are fought, spheres of influence come and go, Popes are named -- and then we get *another* 50 pages of the same stuff. And still no Templars.

Eventually the Templars are introduced -- but hardly play a major role in the *next* 200 pages or so. More names, more battles, more Popes, plus, of course, various Crusades. Finally, in the last 40 pages or so of the book, we have the destruction of the Templars at the hands of King Philip of France and the Church. Here the focus is finally put upon the Templars themselves, but even so in a curiously lifeless manner.

This is a dry, dull book that may well have been intended to be an overall history of this period until an editor took the author aside and told him that it would never be published unless he found some sort of theme to hook the narrative to so that it might interest the general reader -- with the result that the Templars were given an added emphasis. I could be wrong about this, but I find it curious that an author who has apparently published a dozen novels could write such a lifeless, tedious book. It's as if he had researched this period thoroughly, put names and dates onto 10,000 3-by-5 cards the way we were taught to do in high school, and then worked like crazy to get every single bit of information from his research into the text of his book.

About the only virtues I can find in this book are that he does write a clean, serviceable prose. And that he appears to be very even-handed, even excruciatingly fair, to all the religious points of view. He is, however, unable to get the reader interested in the broad picture of what is happening as he gets hopelessly bogged down in the details. One minor example: at the very start of the book he gives us a detailed account of Mohammet's early days and his creation of Islam. And yet he never tells us what "Islam" actually means. Do you know? Go look it up for yourselves....

I was excited to read this book due to my interest in the history of the Templars, however I was very disappointed by the time I had finished. Although the book is well written, I would describe it more as an abridged history of the Crusades, followed by a few chapters about the destruction of the Templars, and topped off with a somewhat rambling concluding chapter that somehow ends up with a condemnation of the nation state!! Obviously some background history of the Crusades is necessary, but when the title of the book is "The Templars", the book should focus on how the Templars fit in with that history. I got the feeling when reading this book that the author had to remind himself to mention the Templars occasionally in the course of his descriptions of the Crusades!! My advise is to not bother with this book...spend the money on Sir Steven Runciman's History of the Crusades if you haven't already got it.

Having bought this book a while ago I wasn't able to read it until now. And although you get a good history breakdown of all the major players of the Crusades, you don't get a picture of The Templars! Why sell a book, and name a book, that is supposed to be about the Templars when you don't really write about them? This is a poor attempt by Piers Paul Read to capitalize on the Templar name in an attempt to sell more of his book. First off, he isn't a true historian. So the previous reviewer who stated that this is one of the best researched books is sorely wrong. All he has done is compile what all the TRUE researchers have come up with and then stamp his name on the cover. He didn't do any research! All total, if you combine everything that is actually about the Templars, then you may have forty pages worth. He has whole chapters based on Richard the Lionheart, Saladin, Frederick of Hohenstaufen, Louis of France, the Enemies Within (which is a chapter on the struggles that Christians and the papacy are going through on the continent). One of the final chapters, named The Temple in Exile, hints that you finally will get a chapter on the Templars, even if it is of their downfall, but this chapter rarely talks about them! Instead he spends the chapter discussing Philip IV of France and the struggles he has with Boniface VIII.

And who edited this book? There are so many typos that it is misleading at times. He transposes names where they shouldn't be, as in Turks instead of Byzantine, or Clement V instead of Clement IV, date of 1177 instead of 1277, and the list goes on and on. At first you brush it off saying that it happens, don't worry, but then they keep coming. Was this book edited at all to make sure that it is accurate?

Another hint that he is not a historian writing this book is that, and I wish I remember where he wrote this (I think it was of Philip IV and his wife Joan), he claims as evidence that the king and his wife loved each other and had affection of each other was because they had eleven children! Does he know absolutely nothing about medieval marriage practices? Does he know anything about marriages made to further the family's possessions and power? Is he completely numb to the history of England revolving around Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine and the number of children they had despite them not liking or having affection for each other, eventually resulting in Eleanor being imprisoned? Such assumptions show that he is not a historian and his book should not be taken as one. Also, he mentions Joseph and when the Israelites came to him for grain and were saved, but doesn't mention that the Israelites are Joseph's blood brothers. Little stuff where a small amount of essential detail is left out shows where he is lacking. Look at the books he has written! Mostly fiction, with a few nonfiction that don't touch anywhere near the same periods of history (for example, remember the movie Alive? The rugby team whose plane crashed in the Andes and they started eating the dead bodies? This is his other nonfiction. Doesn't relate to the time period at all, showing that he is an amateur historian, not a professional historian).

If you are looking for a really broad overview of the times, from the Mongols in the east to England in the west, and everything in between, then read this book. This is not a book about the Templars, but rather about the monarchs of the Continent and England, and the Crusades. And you shouldn't be reading this if you already have a firm grasp on medieval times, because this book is for people without any background in this period of history.

All in all, very disappointed. I had very high expectations when I purchased this book. But that is what I get for buying it before seeing what qualifies the author to write on the subject.

Indeed I was rather disappointed. I must agree with most of the previous reviewers in that the actual history of the Order is only about 1/4 of this book, and all the rest is more of a general history of the Crusades. I strongly suggest you choose Malcolm Barber's books on the subject - "The New Knighthood" and "The Trial of the Templars".

P.S. For Greeks that might be contemplating to read this - don't bother to buy this book translated (that is if no one here convinced you against buying it altogether). The Greek translation sucks big time, as it is apparent that the translator is not a historian (his knowledge of the simplest bits of terminology leaves a great deal to be desired), and this makes it even more boring a read!

Finally; instead of all the hype, pseudo-science, outlandish claims, and fanatical views both pro- and con- by an assortment of authors, each of whom seems to have some sort personal agenda; we have an honest, intelligent, balanced, well-written account of this interesting historical event. The author also wrote "Alive, The Story of the Andes Survivors" which was also well-written, balanced, objective and empathetic to the unfortunate individuals involved.

This book is a worthy addition to any novice historian's home library for the clear way in which it explains the setting of the Crusades -- the history of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the split of the Eastern Orthodox and Latin rite ("Roman Catholic") Churches are explained more clearly and quickly than one would think possible. It is not exhaustive and a serious medievalist would probably regard it as fluff or worse. But for someone who finds he needs to start learning about the Crusades and the military orders, the first 100 pages are worth the price.

It does describe the formation of the Order, how it grew from the pacific monastic orders, and how they evolved to be a sort of power-brokerage house in the Holy Land and, to a smaller extent, in France and England. It provides an excellent overview of the Crusades, and it does clearly show that while the Templars were heroic, they seem to have gained a fearsome reputation in spite of any actual accomplishments -- they hindered at least as often as they helped, and always for the worst of reasons.

It does not outline very well how their banking practices grew up, how much territory they covered in their financial sphere, or how they trained, or lived, or operated as an institution (this is much better addressed in, say, Burman's "Templars: Knights of God"). Read focuses on the historic, Catholic monastic order, and does not address those who claim to have maintained the order, nor any of the conspiracies attributed to the surviving brothers.

If you need really detailed info on the Order, this is at best a primer, and so it may not be for you. A better title would emphasize the Crusades more and the Order less, such as "The Crusades and the Templars".

I still found Mr. Read's book to be worthwhile, and if, like me, you are beginning to study the monastic orders and/or the Crusades, I recommend this as an excellent starting point.