The First Crusade

Runciman was a genius. A brilliant writer in English, whose grand ambitions never lead him astray from the most meticulous separation of fact from speculation, he was also an extraordinary polyglot. He read not only the Latin, Old French and Greek among the contemporary accounts of the Crusades, but the Arabic, Syriac, Persian, Hebrew, Gergian, Ethiopic, Slavonic, Norse and Mongolian as well, not to mention modern secondary works in many more languages still. (My man had a BIG BRAIN.) If he shows any favoritism at all among the warring factions of the Crusades, then it is towards the Byzantine Greeks, although what looks like favoritism to me may only be due to my own ignorance. Even if I'm right about his favoring the Greeks, Runciman is still by far the most impartial historian of the Crusades known to me. He's certainly the only one who took the trouble and had the talent to read all the sources in the original. (Most people who've read widely in more than one language can probably appreciate how much tends to be lost in translation, not to mention how much is never translated at all.) As if his reading weren't enough, he often walked through the cities and over the battlefields which he describes in his works, in order to discover things which no one had yet written. Runciman makes sweeping judgements and expresses strong opinions, although these are often decently hidden between the lines of his polite Cambridge prose. But all of his judgements and opinions have the support of the most solid scholarship. I recommend the three-volume 'History of the Crusades'. The book 'The First Crusade' is an abridgement of the first volume, without footnotes or appendices or bibliography. In addition to the the three-volume history, I also have a copy of the abridgement 'The First Crusade', but it's the illustrated hardcover edition, ISBN 0521232554. I got it just for the pictures, many in color. The three volumes of the 'History of the Crusades' have a few black-and-white illustrations, and the paperback edition of 'The First Crusade' has no illustrations.

For an expert or someone not well-versed in the Crusades, there might not be a better resource than Steven Runciman's three-volume history of the Crusades. Volume one relates the origins of the Crusades, and Runciman also provides very interesting overview of Christian history in the process of describing the relationship of the Church in the east to Muslims and Jews. In doing so, the reader is impressed by the complexity of relations between the three major faiths that lay claim to the Holy Land, and how the complexity of these relations is not a new phenomenon. If anything, Volume One suggests that, freed from outside pressures, the "people of the book" can coexist. Runciman also conveys the human dynamic aspect of the early Crusades that might be lost. The relationships between the hermits and clergy that spawned the first crusade, the competition (of sorts) between the Frankish and German lords, their confrontations with Byzantine authorities (both ecclesiastical and secular) and those of the Middle East were the real drivers of the Crusades. In understanding how these human interactions developed and played out, the reader can better trace the ebb and flow of the cause-effect of actions and reactions that shaped the Crusades.

This abridgement couples Runciman's well narrated and concise account of the First Crusade with some beautiful illustrations of the Holy Land, medieval warfare, and Byzantine, Latin, and Muslim art. It is a shame, however, that amongst all these wonderful illustrations, there is not one detailed map of the Holy Land and Asia Minor. Still, the book is well worth having and reading. If you haven't already read the unabridged edition you may want to read that as well.

For those interested in secondary readings on the Crusades without the hassle of searching for books by Anna Comnena or William of Tyre, this book is for you. Runciman, a Cambridge professor, does an excellent job of ploughing through the facts and inconsistencies of William of Tyre, Anna Comnena, and other historians of that time period! I highly recommend you reading the other 2 volumes as well!

So you didn't like history either ? After being crammed withuseless dates and uninteresting facts about the decaying kings andkingdoms I never expected to ever pick up a history book again. So imagine my scepticism when somebody said that I "absolutely must" read Runciman's History of the Crusades...a work of history confined to only 3 volumes and enough pages to make any Russian author turn green with envy. And what a story...Runciman covers the 500 years of Middle East history with all the ingredients for a action packed thriller. The history is full of strong characters, mighty kings, impoverished adventurers and deceitful leaders. This is a tale of the clash of culture in its original form the east-west clash has its roots in these volotile times. The best part about these stories is not so much the historical matter of which they are made up but Runciman's presentation of his material. He manages an almost incredible amount of original and later sources without losing sight of his goal: a readable account of these fantastic times. The politics in these pages inspire to further studies of the period. There is nothing today which can mach the intrigue found in these pages and few writers have managed to make history come alive in such a thought provoking mix. What can I say ? I have a large library and since Runciman several historical works but nothing seems to ever reach the heights he attains or the inspiration. He is probably the only writer I feel able to read again and again without become tired in the repetition. Three volumes and 600 years defy explanation, within the covers one meets the greats like Baibers, Baldwin, the great Khan, Saladin and Richard the Lionheart and travels to the mystic scenes of Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch. How can I say "must read" any plainer without sounding banal ?