Rating: 
Summary: No so much a history of the templars
Review: I was fairly disappointed in the title of the book leading me to believe that this was written with the templars as primary focus of subject matter. To my dismay, the templars happen to only be a backround story to the actual focus of this book which is the crusades and all the politics and battles of the time. Unfortunately, this book doesn't really do a good job of conveying very many ideals and thoughts of the templars. Another problem I have with the book, the timeline jumps everywhere, it is hard to follow what year the author is referring to. Ideas, thoughts, and facts are haphazardly thrown together, making it difficult to follow let alone keep interest in. Anyone who read the book and understood everything the author wrote on their first attempt would be lying to you. I've read it three times with the intention of trying to disseminate the information in it, and I am still having problems. Unfortunately, I don't have anything else to recommend for a definetive history on the subject matter, because the templars were, after all, shrouded in mystery from the time they were concieved.
Rating: 
Summary: A Well Written Short History of the Crusades
Review: Last year, following a short visit to Malta, I read The Great Siege of Malta by Ernie Bradford (informative and fast paced) and then got deeper and deeper into reading about the clash of Moslems and Christians, the Crusades, the Middle East, the Jews, the Arabs, etc. So when I saw this book in a shop window in Amsterdam I returned to buy it but it was already gone and I got my copy from amazon. Well, it was a good refresher on the history of the Crusades but surprisingly thin on the Templars themselves. It was illuminating to read how the crusading orders were the great corporate bodies of the medieval world, that it took 5,000 acres of farmland to support a knight, etc, etc, but I'd say only about a quarter of the book was specifically on Templars - the rest was a Crusade review. Again, I am glad I read that review, bringing to a close a year of reading in this area, but as a book on Templars it was rather thin. Curiously enough, I had this book with me on a recent trip to New Zealand where I stayed in the home of a prominent local farmer who pulled out papers tracing his lineage to Geoffrey de Buillon, whom crusaders had elected the Emperor of Jerusalem. What a small world!
Rating: 
Summary: Time not completely wasted
Review: Piers Paul Read has gone to great lengths to put his account of the Templars into historical context. However, in doing so, he tends to confuse the reader with a constant barrage of facts from the Crusades. Although the Templars were directly involved with the Christian efforts to retake the Holy Land, the constant fluctuation between Crusade History and the real bread and butter of Templar history leaves the reader wanting more. A complete insight into the Templars actual dealings within Europe, both on the financial and political side, are not thoroughly explored. The true power of the Templar Order within both society and religion is barely brushed. This book contains many interesting facts and a nice, light account of the Crusaders toils in the Middle East, but for someone wanting a focused account of the Templar Order, I recommend another read.
Rating:
Summary: Huh!!
Review: I was dissapointed by this book. I respect how hard it is to find quality information on the subject of the Templars. I don't mind that the author filled in much of their history with a targetted history of the Crusades. What dissapointed me was how confused the narration of the history of both the Crusades and the Orders' histories. I found it difficult to follow as the the author leapt from the history of the order backwards and forwards through varying lineages and the interconnectedness of these lineages. The thread of thought dissapeared. I waw often left wondering what these names had to do with the Orders' and the Crusades and thouroughly annoid when it wasn't well explained.The author needed to narrow his focus better either by section, part, chapter or book. This book is a blending of three lines of thought although the lines may converge for the author they author doesn't convey their convergence to his audiance. The best part of the book is probably the appendix, which is understandable. I also suspect the bibliography is of great use to someone interested in this period of history.
|
