The Crusades: A History From Beginning to End

by Henry Freeman, Hourly History

The Crusades Much has been written and much has been omitted when it comes to the Crusades; especially in modern parlance. Many talking heads in recent times have conjured up the specter of the Crusades as if it should be a source of great shame and disgust for Western Civilization. And with even President Obama drawing odd parallels in light of the beheadings of ISIS; many are wondering once again what all of this “Crusades talk” is all about. Inside you will read about... ✓ Backing Up Byzantium ✓ All Out Holy War ✓ The Kingdom of Heaven ✓ The King’s Crusade ✓ The Self-Defeating Crusade ✓ The Final Crusades ✓ The Post-Crusade World The Crusades took place over a thousand years ago, and yet we currently live in a modern day world of unspeakable terror. Islamic extremists are disrupting the entire planet, murdering, raping and enslaving everyone they encounter. Committing brutalities on a scale that rivals some of the worst abuses of the dark ages and yet people still point to the Crusades as if it is supposed to mean something. Ok, that’s fine. If detractors wish to point their finger and call out history, let’s find the truth, and let’s find out what really happened.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Ebooks, Historical, Religion, Medieval History, Medieval

50 pages, Kindle Edition

Published February 16, 2016

About the author

Henry Freeman is an author and archaeologist. He has a passion for history and loves to travel the world exploring various historical sites.

Henry graduated from the University of Cambridge with a double major in History and Archaeology and shortly after that started his career as an archaeologist.

After traveling the world getting first-hand experience with history, Henry was determined to take up his dream of becoming a best-selling author.

He decided to partner up with the newly formed publishing company Hourly History writing short, concise and straightforward history books that never takes more than one hour to read.

Reviews

[Fred Barnes · Rating 4 out of 5]

A BRIEF LOOK INTO THE CRUSADES

The crusades were not a bunch of illiterate, drunken Europeans bent thievery, mayhem, and destruction. They were out to free Christians who were enslaved, cities that were taken by force, and their religious artifacts and wealth stolen all in the name of religion.

Going into this, I will admit that my knowledge of the crusades was limited to say the least based on the little history I had read on this time period and region on what I had been exposed to via what I had watched on TV and saw in the movies. To my surprise, there were five crusades over hundreds of years that were called by the popes, kings, nobles, and even merchants during that time period. Shows based on the legendary Knights Templar were just fictional tells to entice our interests and to sell theater tickets.

Little did I know that during these crusades, the first hospitals were formed. The "Hospitalers" were a group of knights that were given a special mission for caring for the sick and injured in special houses set aside for all those needing medical attention.

I was also surprised to find out that there were many countries that were involved from England, Germany, Poland, Greece, Italy, and France to mention a few. I was also surprised to find out that Spain had contracted Christopher Columbus to find a land passage from the sea to avoid the Middle East region to be able to trade with the east. That Columbus was not only charged with finding a different route to the east but also to locate in pilfer any wealth to pay for additional crusades. This was Christopher Columbus' goal to begin with, and his will documented that his finances that remained after his death were to be used to help fund another crusade against the Middle East.

This book is well written and full of knowledgeable information regarding this time period and evens taken place in the Middle East. The only problem that I had was that THE CRUSADES: A History From Beginning To End was so shot that it didn't go into depth and just glossed over the high points. That being said, this book was an eye-opening experience, and I would recommend it to you for a historical look into the crusades.

[Cheryl · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was ok, but not quite as good as the other history books in the series. The problem I have with it is that the author seems very anti Muslim/Islam and very pro Christianity, it makes me wonder how accurate the rest of the book will be when he starts off so dogmatic in his own beliefs. He compares then (the Crusades) to now with ISIS and clearly wants one last crusade to fight Isis as it is in our present day. I did not like the introduction, it seemed very one sided and opinionated.

Ok so moving on, for the most part it seems like a good overview and I did learn much from it, although never quite shaking the question of how much was actual fact. The biggest question I had was were the crusades to reclaim the holy land or to defend the current Christian lands as they were then?

I think the dates and most of the history of this book are accurate but don’t let yourself get led by his own thoughts.

I feel disappointed by this book, I have really enjoyed so many of these books. Yes it was helpful and I do recommend it as a great starting point to anyone who wants to know just a bit about the Crusades without getting bogged down in heavy tomes. Just keep an open mind and be objective in your reading and thoughts.

I shall give this a 3*/5 because it did do what I wanted, it helped me understand a little about this time and the crusades, it just wasn’t written as well as it could have been.

[Brooke (Books are my Favorite!!) · Rating 4 out of 5]

For a few centuries, two religions coexisted reasonably peacefully. Muslims did not forcibly convert Christians to their faith, nor did they close churches or ban Christian worship
Starting with the People's Crusade or The Peasant's Crusade, there were 9 Crusades total. Not all are outlined in detail here but this is a good companion piece for historical inquiry. The Crusades lines up historically with some other books I'm reading both fiction and nonfiction so I'm happy to expand on those. This short account really helped me to put some pieces together of this complex time in history. The Heroic Legend of Arslan is a historical fiction manga that focuses on this time period, and Sultan Kijil-Arslan gets a moment in the Syria-Anatolia mountains. And other characters in the manga are names for historical counter parts such as King Innocentus representing Pope Innocent III who was responsible for an embarrassing surrender in the 5th crusade.

Poor leadership, a lack of communication, and ignorance about the hydrogeography of the River Nile caused the Fifth Crusade to go out with a whimper rather than a bang.


Eleanor of Aquitane, whose bio I just reviewed, was mother of Richard the Lionheart.
Richard was the third son of Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine. He was given the duchy of Aquitaine, his mother’s inheritance, at age 11 and was enthroned as duke at Poitiers in 1172. His prowess in the Third Crusade made him hero of many romantic legends. Jerusalem became one of the first English colonies.

Honestly difficult for this time period to be summarized succintly but this did what it needed for me. This is definitely not the only book on the crusades you should read if you want a thorough investigation.

Over two centuries, repeated attempts to reclaim the Holy Land of Jerusalem ended in failure and yet, again and again, ordinary people took the cross and made the arduous journey east. In launching their Holy War and maintaining its momentum over two centuries, the Crusaders showed the world the devastating effect of forcibly dividing the world along the lines of religion.

The Jews and Muslims of Jerusalem fought side by side against the Crusaders and were slaughtered side by side when victory was assured.

The 1204 sacking of Constantinople is a stand-out moment in the history of the Crusades for its abandoned ferocity. Considering themselves victims of the treachery of the Byzantine Empire that had distracted them from their pilgrimage to the Holy Lands, the Crusaders forgot their oaths and went on a vile rampage, raping the women of Constantinople, destroying the city, and defiling the many holy sanctuaries.

Crusades had a lasting impact on medieval Europe. The kingdom of Jerusalem was essentially Europe’s first colony and inspired later monarchs and military leaders to embark on massive projects of colonization.

the Crusades came to embody the very notion of chivalry. How much the Crusades were an aggressive act of Christian fanaticism and how much they were a defensive military intended to check the spread of Islam and reclaim Christian territory is still debated.



Some other important locations and times in history
Syria
Anatolia
Nicea
Antioch
Constantinople (1204)
100 Years War - England and France

[Udit Nair · Rating 4 out of 5]

Again hourly history does a great job in summarising the sequence of events. Ofcourse such religious fanatic phases are best to be forgotten. But yet they convey the fault lines present in society and makes us cautious about it. Whatsoever might be the motivation, what cannot be debated is that 1.7 million ordinary people, both Christians and Muslim, died as a result of crusades (officially), and that loss of life cannot be considered chivalric in the slightest.

[Stephanie (Bookfever) · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Crusades is one of those topics that I like to read about, though I haven't read about it a whole lot. And I liked this book for sure, though it's not a favorite of mine of recently read historical nonfictions.

I learned quite a bit about the crusades, which is always nice. The writing was also pretty great and it was a fast read.

I do have to admit that the tone of the writing felt pretty opinionated. I'm not sure if it's just me who felt that way or if it's just the way it was written.

However, I really did think this was a interesting read and would definitely recommend it to people who want to read more about the crusades.

[Murray · Rating 5 out of 5]

the crusades and the jihads

A focused and fairly detailed overview of the nine Crusades and the Muslim jihads that followed which brought Muslim armies storming into Europe.

This essay doesn’t take the easy route of claiming only Crusaders committed atrocities but takes note of slaughters perpetrated by Muslim forces too.

Unfortunately the author makes no mention of Muslim crusades or jihads which resulted in the conquest of Spain in 711, a conquest that lasted 700 years, which I think partially contributed to the regrettable Crusade fervor that swept Europe.

A painful saga that included a lot of Christian infighting and a lot of Muslim infighting too.

It’s estimated that over 1.7 million died in the ongoing warfare that lasted hundreds of years.

Saladin was defeated twice by Richard the Lionhearted. He retained Jerusalem but sought a peace treaty with Richard that lasted until his death.

Warfare between various religions has not yet left us. The folly of such conflict being engaged in by people claiming to serve and worship a God of love and peace, whatever else they claim God to be, seems to be lost on those who initiate and perpetuate such warfare.

[Noreen · Rating 4 out of 5]

History without excessive brain strain. A short read, with interesting conclusions about the effects of the Crusades on the Europe, Britain, the collapse of the Byzantine empire. The collapse of the Byzantine empire completed the split between two Christian schools of thought. Islam has a split between Shia and Sunni. Buddhism has a split between Mahayana and Hinayama.

[FernandoG · Rating 4 out of 5]

No es una novela, es una corta narración histórica de datos acerca de las Cruzadas. Aporta datos muy interesantes, a saber, el concepto de hospitales u hospitalarios, el papel de Cristóbal Colón en las cruzadas, etc.

[Raven · Rating 2 out of 5]

Reads like a high school students attempt at research paper.

[Dr.J.G. · Rating 4 out of 5]

"“The Crusades—the most signal and most durable monument of human folly that has yet appeared in any age or nation.”

"—David Hume, The History of England"
................................................................................................

"“By heart we believe and by mouth confess the one Church, not of heretics but the Holy Roman, Catholic, and Apostolic Church outside which we believe that no one is saved.”

"—Pope Innocent III"

And so say all abrahmics of every branch, making a sum total of multiple gods and hells equal sum total of abrahmic branches - to all but one hell amongst which, all abrahmics too are promised by all other abrahmics.
***

"In the early years of the thirteenth century, the outbreak of popular crusading fervor brought on by the capture of Constantinople needed direction. No Fifth Crusade had yet been called, and pious knights and laymen who wanted to take the oath, wear the cross, and claim their Crusade indulgence were desperate for a directive. In 1208, Pope Innocent III answered their call and ordered a holy crusade against the heretics of southern France, known as the Albigensians."

And thus Crusades turned into inquisition.
***

"The Crusaders captured the Cathar town of Beziers and slaughtered its inhabitants without making a distinction between Christians and heretics. Between 1209 and 1215, the Crusaders captured or forced the surrender of all land between Rhone and the Garonne. Simon, the English lord of Montfort, was confirmed by King Philip II as the leader of the region in 1215, but when the people rebelled, another Crusade was launched. Simon was killed in 1218 in a major uprising, and after continuing the fight for a further six years, his son, Amaury conceded defeat. Those who had ruled southern France before the Crusade reclaimed their land, and the practice of Catharism began again and continued as before."

If this is to be called Crusade, then Crusades must be defined as Vatican going to war against all those not swearing loyalty to Vatican and giving control of their minds to pope.
***

"“An army, like a serpent, travels on its belly.”

"—Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor"

How did he explain Mongol hordes conquering, and not just accidentally once but repeatedly across centuries, all the way to Europe?
***

"The army was well-equipped and set about capturing Egypt—the strategy introduced by Richard the Lionheart during the Third Crusade. The Crusaders were able to take the port of Damietta in 1219 after a long siege during which the Muslim powers agreed to a peace treaty that involved the cession of the kingdom of Jerusalem. The Crusaders refused peace and for the next year defended their position at Damietta."

It's unclear why they refused, when Jerusalem was included for gift.
****

Unbelievable level of antisemitism from the author of this volume - and, too, the publishers of the series.

"One place cuts through all of the complexities of the outbreak of the extended Holy War to represent the fundamental disagreement between Christians and Muslims—Jerusalem. Jerusalem is the very cornerstone of over a millennium of contention between Christians and Muslims, with each religion believing themselves to be its true and rightful owner. For Christians, Jerusalem is supremely sacred as the site of the Crucifixion, Resurrection, and Ascension of Jesus Christ. Jerusalem is equally sacred to Muslims who believe their Prophet Muhammad, founder of the Islamic faith, experienced his own Night Journey and Ascension on this land."

Have they already wiped out all traces of memory of Jews from their own consciousness, or are merely attempting to do so from minds of readers, by this avoidance of all mention of them in context of the very city that the Judaism religion identified with, not only when their king was crucified by Rome and long before, but even after their exodus enforced by Rome, gor two millennia, when they religiously promised and prayed for "next year in Jerusalem "?
................................................................................................


"In the year 638 CE, the Caliph Omar, direct successor to the Prophet Muhammad, captured Jerusalem from the ancient Christians who ruled it. For a few centuries, the two religions coexisted reasonably peacefully. Muslims did not forcibly convert Christians to their faith, nor did they close churches or ban Christian worship, but they did assert their authority as the ruling power in the land. Christians were forbidden from preaching in the presence of Muslims or criticizing the Muslim faith in any way under the penalty of death. As a result, few Christians dared make the pilgrimage."

That's usual modus operandi wherever they proliferate, establishing their superiority by sections of law and thought - for example by making it seem a choice of women to walk in black tents, counting it as a matter of no consequence if a victim is nonmuslim and perpetrator muslim - but an ultimate horror if that's switched, a conversion a normal and laudable event if one way but punished with stone pelting or otherwise execution if in reverse direction, and so on.
................................................................................................


"The uneasy coexistence of Christians and Muslims in the Holy Land was disrupted at the beginning of the second millennium with seismic changes taking place on both sides of the religious divide. During his lifetime, the Prophet Muhammad had not only founded the religion of Islam but had united much of what was then termed Arabia into a single entity. As with any flourishing society, Islam wanted to expand its influence and conquered the Middle East, much of Central Asia, northwest India, North Africa, southern Italy, and parts of modern-day Greece."

That "As with any flourishing society, Islam wanted to expand its influence and conquered" not only seeks to justify every invader and conquistadores, but begins with a lie.

Flourishing societies are content to stay, build and live. It's those lands and societies that are riddled with poverty and disease, lack of food and a poor land unable to sustain people, where, contradictory to what one would expect, nature encourages exponentially increasing reproduction, and the ones unable to sustain go invading everywhere else.

Think England and those forced to seek employment in India even as colonisers.

Or think Mongolians raising hell through Asia and Europe.

Even closer, think Hitler seeking lebensraum by killing all in east and not exactly being beneficial in any other direction either.

None went because they were well offended flourishing - or sought to benefit others.

And India knows by experience of well over a millennium and a half, of invaders intent on looting and destroying civilisation of India and wiping out all memories thereof from consciousness of the Earth.
................................................................................................

"In parts of the Islamic Empire where Christians and Muslims lived in close proximity, a truce was upheld, yet the balance of power between the two sides was far too delicate to last. In an attempt to rein in the spread of Islam and claim ownership of the Holy Land, the Christian west launched a military campaign like no other. This time, fighting men did not receive the usual call to arms to defend their country. Instead, they received a call to the cross to defend their god. Offering the prize of guaranteed redemption at the gates of heaven, papal authorities inspired a religious zeal in their men that could not be extinguished."

Funny, the monotheists asserts a staunch faith in their own god as the only obe, and yet then not conclude that it must then of necessity be identical, the same as, that of every other faith! Instead they go to war to "defend their god", or invade other lands to do propaganda.
................................................................................................


"While the First and Fourth Crusades could reasonably be described as successful, the majority of the other seven crusading expeditions to the Muslim east ended with disaster. Over two centuries, repeated attempts to reclaim the Holy Land of Jerusalem ended in failure and yet, again and again, ordinary people took the cross and made the arduous journey east. In launching their Holy War and maintaining its momentum over two centuries, the Crusaders showed the world the devastating effect of forcibly dividing the world along the lines of religion."

Are they even going mention the historic fact of German crusaders, having decided it was too tiresome to fight for Jerusalem, decided to butcher Prussian folk instead, and, having done so, claimed the land?

Prussian language, separate from German, was wiped off the face of the earth.
................................................................................................
................................................................................................


"“Dues le Volt! (God wills it!)”

"—The first Crusaders"

What else is new! Abrahmic god always seems to "Volt" war.
................................................................................................


"In the mid-eleventh century, western Europe entered a period of massive transformation. The population across the mostly feudal, inter-connected, and yet far from civilized collection of kingdoms was booming. Economic prosperity followed as sea-faring Italians revolutionized European trade by pushing back against the Arabs’ dominance of the shipping industry. The Norman invasion and conquer of England in 1066 proved that Europeans were capable of mounting formidable military campaigns, and heads of state everywhere were looking for ways of expanding their territory."

And that's the real motive behind almost all aggression, acquisition of wealth by looting as in Troy - or of land, as invaders did in various lands not their own.
................................................................................................


"Christianity in Europe was entering a stage of revival. The Gregorian reform movement of the eleventh century sought to completely refurbish the structure of the church and bring Christianity back to its purest state. Pope Gregory VII advocated that all bishops, priors, and abbots be canonically-elected by the Pope in Rome. Simony, or the practice of paying for a position in the church, would be abolished and all men of the cloth should return to a state of celibacy. The effect of these reforms on the day-to-day life of the masses was negligible, but the effect on religious life was astounding."

Funny, that description exposes the reasons for need of reform- and question of whether the previous state continued nevertheless! Else why was Luther's drive for reform needed?
................................................................................................

"Men, women, and children were slaughtered in the streets, and the Crusader leaders went against their promise to uphold the sanctity of the city’s mosques as places of sanctuary. Even within the Aqsa Mosque, Jewish and Muslim civilians were killed. After the madness, the Crusaders lay down their weapons and prayed at the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, thanking God for returning Jerusalem to Christian rule for the first time in 450 years."

Peace?

After slaughter of blood relatives of their king whom Rome had murdered, whom crusaders worshipped?
................................................................................................
................................................................................................

[Timothy Smallwood · Rating 3 out of 5]

very brief overview

If you want details, this is not your book. It a relaxed telling of major persons & places of the Crusades. Thank you for trying to write this so people gain an interest for history.

Docked a start for repeated editing errors in the ebook.

[Thom Swennes · Rating 3 out of 5]

“Whoever devotedly undertakes and performs this most holy journey … shall have the enjoyment of eternal reward from the repayer of all men.” -Pope Eugenius III-
I can’t help but see the similarities between this statement and the promise given to all of the jihad terrorists that appear in western newspapers and strike fear in the hearts of millions.

I have always been both fascinated and confused with the phenomena known collectively as the Crusades. What would motivate people from all walks of life to leave their homes and loved ones to fight for an area of arid ground thousands of miles away? What did they hope to accomplish? Once successful, if indeed this unorganized southeastern trek proved triumphant, what would they have to sacrifice to keep their distant gains? The Crusades can be separated into seven distinct pilgrimages, spread over two centuries. Only the first and fourth migration could be considered a success for the Christian forces but these weren’t slated to last for long, as they were surrounded by hostile Islamite tribes.
Even today, almost a millennium after the First Crusade of 1096, Jerusalem, though in the heart of the Jewish State of Israel, remains a contested city. Muslims, Jews, and Christians still consider it the core of their religion and only a fragile peace prevails. Think of the countless number of lives, the insurmountable suffering, and the enormous monetary cost this pearl of a city has cost over the centuries.
It would be impossible to describe this monumental movement on a personal base. This book provides the reader with a minimum amount of information in its extremely limited space. This leaves many more questions than it provides answers for. It does serve as an inspiration and motivation for a further in-depth study. The occasional typographical error is more of a nuisance than a hindrance.

[Madelon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dispute over Jerusalem is a war for the ages, a war that has literally been ongoing for millennia. The Crusades (there were nine plus the Children's Crusade) represent 208 years of war between Christians and Muslims for the right to rule the Kingdom of Jerusalem as a Christian or Muslim state.

Although this account is well written, for me, it is too much like history as it is taught in school… specific dates, the names of long-dead kings, and battles that resulted in too much death and destruction. Although the Knights Hospitaller are mentioned more than once, the Knights Templar are noted but once in connection with the Second Crusade. Two hundred members of these Knight orders were executed at the end of this unsuccessful attempt. I have had a certain fascination with the Templars whose mythos is a blend of history and fiction. In addition to the lack of importance of these warrior knights during this time period, it is also noteworthy that the Jewish population plays a minor role during the conflict. It is noted Jews fought alongside Muslims during the First Crusade.

To my way of thinking, religious war is one of dogma where each fighter believes himself or herself to be right and nothing can change that belief. It is a no win situation. The Crusades were a bloody failure that cost 1.7 million people their lives. They died in battle as well as from starvation and dehydration. Some Crusaders died because their leaders did not understand the hydrogeography of the Nile.

The First Crusade was undertaken in 1096. It is now 2019, and war in the Middle East continues. The names of combatants and locations have changed but the underlying premise of a holy war remains.

[James Crawford · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book covers the history of something which really shows the stupidity of some people as a far as religion goes. Instead of trying to peacefully coexist, some religions claim to be the absolute only way to the truth and any one who doesn't believe that is bound for eternal punishment after, of course, they are killed for being non-believers.

In that case you had the Roman Catholic church backing military action against Muslims who were carving out an area for themselves in the world. The book goes into the various crusades, who, when and where and usually what went wrong.

Imagine you had an army which would fight and, after winning, many of the soldiers would decide enough is enough and head off home. That is, after they made sure they plundered whatever area they had conquered.

This is something that still affects the world even today where there is so much distrust between Christianity in general and Islam. This is reflected in small-scale wars and, in particular, in prejudice against Islamic immigrants into the U.S.

It really seems that some times humanity just doesn't even try to learn from its past.

[J Layne · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think this is the first book I have ever read on the Crusades that explains them in layman’s language, easy to understand. Perhaps the author oversimplifies the story, but he has the right perspective about the Crusades, stating that the fighters were not marauding savages but were defending their own lands from Muslim rule. Such has been the case throughout history, and such is the case now, when the West is being threatened with Muslim dominance in the daily news. This time they may take us without a fight because there are many in our midst who would lay down arms and allow it to happen. These people don’t know history and will be doomed to repeat it. Sadly, the entire population suffers when ignorant people rule the culture (from the Supreme Court to college presidents who allow brainless snowflake students to disallow free speech on campuses because it “hurts their feelings” when they are confronted with someone who has a different viewpoint).

Some little editing needed.

[Mandy Peterson · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is biased and makes comparisons regarding today's terrorists and how Christians during the crusades aren't like these terrorists, which kind of gives a distorted view of the Crusades and History of Roman Catholicism. He left out the Crusade against the Cathars and focused on the crusades against the Muslims. Author states that Christians were justified to crusade against Muslims because Muslims were forcing people to convert through threat of violence. Ummm Christians did that too. A lot!

[Robert Rogers · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting brief summary of the Crusades. He gives the basic facts, so it is useful to get the main story. However, Freeman is openly biased in favor of the Crusaders, and downplays their cruelty and draws parallels to ISIS.
The author's writing is also atrocious. The book often reads like a speech delivered orally, complete with slang like "beat the crap" and incomplete sentences.
The book was free, so I got my money's worth out of it.

[Joshua · Rating 1 out of 5]

Reads like a C- student's attempt at a 9th grade history class term paper.

The length is massively inadequate to address the subject and it throws out a few easily discovered facts about the crusades before devolving into a screed against Islam. You're better off reading wikipedia than this trush. At least wikipedia has standards.

[Sam · Rating 1 out of 5]

This reads like the first draft of a bad long winded university dissertation. It has spelling and grammatical errors throughout. It has the wrong dates for events which are easily confirmed by multiple first and second hand sources. It wrongly names a King in the same paragraph it gets it right. It is biased towards Christendom to put it mildly and frankly Islamophobic from start to finish.

[Jerry Jares · Rating 1 out of 5]

First, I love to read Hourly History books because they are usually concise, interesting, and accurate. It is shocking that such a fine brand as Hourly History would support this bilge.  Comparing today's ISIS with the religious wars of the Middle Ages isn't fair.  Stating that Egypt, Syria, Libya, and Iraq were forced to convert to Islam is ignoring the fact that Christians forced some people of the Balkan nations to become Christian at the end of a sword point.  

The author displays such bias that the whole book is suspect.  I wonder who proofread this copy?  On page 4, Martin Luther "made a complete 360 in his stance..." Actually, I believe he just made an about-face (that's a 180-degree turn).  I think the entire introduction is incendiary.  On page 11, the author used the word 'crap' in a text purporting to be of a scholarly nature. In my opinion, that is a poor choice.  In fact, I took exception to many of the emotionally-laden words by this author; the reader can easily tell which side the author is on (and it certainly isn't on the side of clear, nonjudgmental story-telling). 

But the thing that really shocked me was the idea that ISIS could be compared to Muslims today.  Having lived amongst them for more than two years, I can attest that Muslims are less likely to commit crimes than the population at large.  Although our family is-and-was not Muslim, we were never in danger while living in their country.  Painting all Muslims with the ISIS label is just plain wrong.

I cannot recommend this awful mess.  The people who participated in the Crusades were not the God-loving angels this book suggests.  Some Crusaders promised to spare people if they surrendered and then killed every man, woman, and child they could find.  Many of the Crusaders stayed in the countries because they became massive landowners and wealthy beyond their dreams.  The real story of the Crusades has little honor for either side involved.

[M Gharib · Rating 1 out of 5]

A total waste of time, I can't describe this as a historical book at all.
Antimuslim ,full of fairy tales, and Exaggerated information
I think the author got his information form movies and novels.
some of the brilliant information in the book
Total 3rd crusade power 600,000 men ( actually not more than 75,000)
there was a good relation between Richard the Lion heart and Saladin !!
No mention to Battle of Hattian or Arsuf or any battle form the most important Crusade !!

But The crusaders entered Jerusalem peacefully ? from where did you come with this information? the brutalities and murders that happen in the city is a historical fact. you want to make the crusaders looking good that I could understand but to deny or not to mention facts to prove your point of view that is lie.

Also Claiming that Egypt Syria and Lebanon was Christian countries before the Muslim conquering them, yes they were Christian ( actually after wiping out the old pagan religions with blood and fire). but anyway still there are Christian their till now living proud and living in peace . may be they had some discriminations form some Muslim rulers during the course of history but they remains still. the same as the Christians did to Muslims in other parts in the world (Spain for example while but of course in a smaller scale). at the time of the crusades those lands were Muslim lands and the Christians were the invaders you can't change that.
also in a matter of fact that there was a huge gap between eastern and western Christians in the core of their believes and the Crusades didn't help them but was a reason to increase the hate between Muslims and Christians and didn't make the relations between eastern and western Christians any better.

[Eugene Kernes · Rating 2 out of 5]

As Islamic armies were threat to the Western world, Pope Urban II initiated the first Crusade. A Crusade that was meant to defend besieged Christian peoples in the East. The Kingdom of Jerusalem was a collection of captured cities, creating a Crusader Kingdom. Later Crusades were launched to retake lost lands in previous Crusades. This book showcases a few events from a majority of the Crusades, which include the rivalry and respect between Richard the Lionheart and Saladin. In another Crusade, in a twist of events, the Crusaders ended up sacking the Byzantines which they were meant to protect. A key lesson in this book is that negotiating diplomatically had better results than warfare.

There is a huge problem with this book which is what the book leaves out. Not because it is a short book which lacks events and proofs, but the perception that Freeman continues to instill in the reader. A perception that the Islamic Empires were ruthless, cruel, and dishonorable, without any redeeming qualities. Without mentioning anything about cruelties and dishonorable behaviors of the Christian world. In an effort to provide a more nuanced view, unlike the Christian world of persecution, the Islamic world facilitated tolerance between different religions and made many intellectual breakthroughs which help precipitate the enlightenment in the West. What is worse is that the antagonistic view held by the author throughout the book, involves relations in the early 21st century. There were a few times that the author claimed that historians could not deny a fact, but historians would disagree and provide a way more nuanced claim.

[Saad Daroub · Rating 1 out of 5]

Wrong history

In his book "Anti Christ" Nietzsche writes: (59) If Islam despises Christianity, it has a thousandfold right to do so; Islam at least assumes that it is dealing with men...(60) Christianity destroyed for us the whole harvest of ancient civilization, and later it also destroyed for us the whole harvest of Mohammedan civilization. The wonderful culture of the Moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece, was tramp!ed down (-- I do not say by what sort of feet --) Why? Because it had to thank noble and manly instincts for its origin-- because it said yes to life, even to the rare and refined luxuriousness of Moorish life!... The crusaders later made war on something before which it would have been more fitting for them to have grovelled in the dust-- a civilization beside which even that of our nineteenth century seems very poor "senile." -- What they wanted, of course, was booty: the orient was rich... . Let us put aside our prejudices! The crusades were a highest of piracy, nothing more! What's the matter with you calling Palestine Israel especially at that time, Israel was risen in 1948 ! You're most fanatic.

[W. Derek Atkins · Rating 2 out of 5]

A Poorly-Researched, Poorly-Written Book

I bought this book because I wanted to read a brief history of the Crusades as part of my research for a class I will be teaching, but I found this book quite disappointing. The author has done a poor job of researching this topic, and jumbled up a number of dates and facts. In addition, there are a fair number of typos. Finally, the author consistently applies 21st-Century understandings on the Crusaders; for example, at one point he explains certain behaviors by the Crusaders as being the result of PTSD, a concept that is, at best, only a century old. And while the author does express an awareness of the very real threat that Christian Europe faced from Islam, he nonetheless dismissed all accounts of miraculous happenings during the Crusades as the result of hallucinations, betraying his naturalistic worldview and denying the possibility that a spiritual realm may exist

My recommendation: If you want to read about the Crusades, find a book whose author is a much better researcher.

[Mark Tompkins · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The Crusades: A History From Beginning to End" (Kindle Edition) promises a comprehensive look at one of history's most complex and impactful periods. And while it does deliver on offering a broad overview, readers should be aware that it sacrifices depth and nuance for the sake of brevity. I, for one, appreciated the brevity as I wanted an overview, not an in-depth study. I will read more of this author.

Who should read this book?
- Readers new to the topic of the Crusades who want a quick and easy-to-understand introduction.
- Individuals looking for a portable and accessible overview for casual reading.

Who should avoid this book?
- Readers looking for in-depth analysis, detailed historical evidence, and nuanced perspectives.
- Those already familiar with the Crusades and seeking a more scholarly or academic treatment of the subject.

[Neil Brunton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Religion :just an excuse !

I enjoy reading the one hour history books. I find them a quick starting point to begin reading up on a subject . This book was different as I've read a few books on the crusaders and I always come to the same conclusion,it was just a excuse for land & riches and most of all murder all wrapped up in the excuse that they were doing God's bidding . Today the leaders would be on trial for genocide ,as much as I've read about the crusaders and the Popes who sanctioned the crusades,they should be looked upon in the same way as Stalin ,Hitler Ivan the terrible ,I could go on and name other evil despots . There is no need for me to because evil is evil no matter what flag it's wrapped in.

[Angieleigh · Rating 3 out of 5]

A friend suggested that I check out the Hourly History books as they're short books about things that have happened in history that you can read in an hour or less.

...That's probably pretty obvious already.

I decided to read the Crusades first as it caught my attention.

50 pages may seem too short to do the history of the Crusades justice, but they pack a LOT of information in those 50 pages. So much so that I felt lost more than once; I think you have to have at least a rudimentary knowledge of what the Crusades are to understand everything.

I do have to admit that I was bored a time or two, but I will be checking out more of the Hourly History books.

[Nihal · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Crusades were one of the biggest and costliest holy wars. Knights sent by the Pope to recover the Holy Land of Jerusalem, The Crusades had failed in almost every campaign; apart from the first and fourth Crusade. However, in the end, they weren't able to take back Jerusalem, and it remained under the hands of the Muslims.
This book just gives a brief introduction to all the nine crusades, including their starts, outcomes, and much more. It doesn't the information on how they were fought, or, what were their strategies. Also, it was written from The Christians' point of view, making the book feel one-sided.

[Nassia Tanri Asik · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Crusades as subtitled From Beginning to End is an interesting fast read. It rallied the historical events during dark ages and how holy wars were launched in the name of God for the different spheres wether it's western or eastern. The hotspot Jerusalem was the centre of conflict moving forward towards Constantinople the last hut of the Byzantin Empire.
I read it with sleepy eyes, I was undecided about the author for it sounds the book reflects its author's staunch on what took place years ago !!!???

[William · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was the most sympathetic treatment of the crusades I have ever read or heard. I was impressed with the author being understanding of the genuineness of the Crusaders’ faith, as well as his stark honesty about medieval Muslim aggression. This book also treats more briefly on what is typically construed as the crusades than I expected, and extends its discussion to some battles that I have not heard grouped in this way before.
My one criticism is some slightly unprofessional terminology when discussing events.