What do you think?
Rate this book
A History of the Crusades #3
A History of the Crusades, Vol. III: The Kingdom of Acre and the Later Crusades
Sir Steven Runciman's three volume A History of the Crusades, one of the great classics of English historical writing, is now being reissued. In this final volume, Runciman examines the revival of the Frankish kingdom at the time of the Third Crusade until its collapse a century later. The interwoven themes of the book include: Christiandom, the replacement of the cultured Ayubites by the less sympathetic Mameluks as leader of the Moslem world, and the coming of the Mongols. He includes a chapter on architecture and the arts, and an epilogue on the last manifestations of the Crusading spirit.
542 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1951
19 people are currently reading
1814 people want to read
About the author
Steven Runciman
45 books239 followersA King's Scholar at Eton College, he was an exact contemporary and close friend of George Orwell. While there, they both studied French under Aldous Huxley. In 1921 he entered Trinity College, Cambridge as a history scholar and studied under J.B. Bury, becoming, as Runciman later commented, "his first, and only, student." At first the reclusive Bury tried to brush him off; then, when Runciman mentioned that he could read Russian, Bury gave him a stack of Bulgarian articles to edit, and so their relationship began. His work on the Byzantine Empire earned him a fellowship at Trinity in 1927.
After receiving a large inheritance from his grandfather, Runciman resigned his fellowship in 1938 and began travelling widely. From 1942 to 1945 he was Professor of Byzantine Art and History at Istanbul University, in Turkey, where he began the research on the Crusades which would lead to his best known work, the History of the Crusades (three volumes appearing in 1951, 1952, and 1954).
Most of Runciman's historical works deal with Byzantium and her medieval neighbours between Sicily and Syria; one exception is The White Rajahs, published in 1960, which tells the story of Sarawak, an independent nation founded on the northern coast of Borneo in 1841 by the Englishman James Brooke, and ruled by the Brooke family for more than a century.
After receiving a large inheritance from his grandfather, Runciman resigned his fellowship in 1938 and began travelling widely. From 1942 to 1945 he was Professor of Byzantine Art and History at Istanbul University, in Turkey, where he began the research on the Crusades which would lead to his best known work, the History of the Crusades (three volumes appearing in 1951, 1952, and 1954).
Most of Runciman's historical works deal with Byzantium and her medieval neighbours between Sicily and Syria; one exception is The White Rajahs, published in 1960, which tells the story of Sarawak, an independent nation founded on the northern coast of Borneo in 1841 by the Englishman James Brooke, and ruled by the Brooke family for more than a century.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
July 29, 2022
"The triumphs of the Crusade were the triumphs of faith. But faith without wisdom is a dangerous thing. By the inexorable laws of history the world pays for the crimes and follies of each of its citizens. In the long sequence of interaction and fusion between Orient and Occident out of which our civilisation has grown, the Crusades were a tragic and destructive episode. The historian as he gazes back across the centuries at their gallant story must find his admiration overcast by sorrow at the witness that it bears to the limitations of human nature." p. 401
Volume 3 (1954) of A History of the Crusades by British historian Steven Runciman takes off where Volume 2 left off. In 1187 the Crusader army was destroyed by Saladin at the Battle of the Horns of Hattin. This loss meant the Kingdom of Jerusalem was no more. All that remained for the Franks were some coastal cities (Tyre, Acre, Tripoli, Antioch) and the island of Cyprus. In all, this was enough of a beachhead to ensure military campaigns for another century.
But by now the calls to crusade by Pope and Kings alike were less successful. Enthusiasm for militaristic expansions in the East waned. This meant that crusades were now undertaken by petty lords and vain kings, seeking glory and loot with which to enrich themselves. To be fair, from the start the crusades suffered from the same problem, but back then there were strong personalities to channel these antagonistic ambitions.
At first the Third Crusade was rather successful due to the energies and leadership of the English king Richard, also known as Richard Lionheart. But these conquests, although it established the Second Kingdom (of Acre), proved to be untenable and over the course of the thirteenth century we see the continuous ambition to reconquer Jerusalem rising to a fever pitch yet the capacity to achieve this degrade at rather the same pace.
In between we see the vile attack on Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade, practically destroying the Byzantine Empire and ensuring the later Ottoman success. Which says enough on how sincere these Christian armies were in their Crusading spirits - this was militarism with the aim of obtaining loot and royal titles.
In the end, the Second Kingdom is overtaken and destroyed by the Muslim forces from the north and south. All that remained now was the island of Cyprus and the rather (politically) unreliable principality of Armenia. For many decades, even centuries, Popes tried to rally forces for new Crusades, but in vain. Geopolitically the situation had changed drastically, both in the West (kingdoms fighting perpetual wars) and the East (the Mongols, the Ottomans).
Runciman finishes this epic work with the story of the dying Pope Pius II who in 1464 went on a Crusade to recover the fallen Constantinople, or so he thought. In reality, the mercenary army he assembled disbanded even before reaching the port from which they were to embark - the Pope's personnel leaving the delusional man to die in peace, believing he initiated the rescue of Christendom, once more.
The contrast of this last example with the energetic and sectarian enthusiasm of the First Crusade in 1096, when Pope Urban II was able to collect a large army with some of the most esteemed knights at the head, let alone their gains (the establishment of the Kingdom of Jerusalem) is illustrative for these crucial centuries in world history. The Crusaders really never learned anything: time and time again we see them destroying and massacring cities, not interested in long term politics, blind to other cultures and peoples. The contrast with fierce opponents like Nur ed-Din and Saladin is striking, these were smart, cultured and capable leaders, while the Frankish states were characterized by petty squabbles and betrayal.
I am not a military strategist, but my guess is that with the same means as the Crusaders were able to amass, a military campaign could have been set up to establish a defensible and fruitful Kingdom in the Near East. But that would require unity in ranks and viable and durable political strategies. Both were lacking and it isn't to be wondered that in the end the Crusades brought nothing apart from temporarily channeling the energies of quarrelsome European barons to external foes.
"Powerful and intelligent leadership might have saved the movement. But the feudal background from which the Crusaders were drawn made it difficult for a leader to be accepted. The Crusades were the Pope's work; but papal legates were seldom good generals. There were many able men amongst the Kings of Jerusalem; but they had little authority over their own subjects and none over their visiting allies. The Military Orders, who provided the finest and most experienced soldiers, were independent and jealous of each other. [...] It was indeed less remarkable that the Crusading movement faded away in failure than that it should ever have met with success, and that, with scarcely one victory to its credit after its spectacular foundation, Outremer should have lasted for two hundred years." pp. 400-401
This trilogy by Runciman is truly amazing. It is probably the best introduction to the Crusades one can (still) find. He offers a complete picture and doesn't shy away from pointing out all the details of who did what and when. The downside of this approach is that one has to work through 1000 pages which can become rather repetitive... Also, one has to remind oneself that this was written by a British author in the early 1950's, so the work is both outdated (in its approach more than its content I'd say) and tied to the Christian-European perspective on the Crusades - although to be fair Runciman doesn't seem too fond of the European side and his respect for various Eastern monarchs and political figures shines through on many pages.
Volume 3 (1954) of A History of the Crusades by British historian Steven Runciman takes off where Volume 2 left off. In 1187 the Crusader army was destroyed by Saladin at the Battle of the Horns of Hattin. This loss meant the Kingdom of Jerusalem was no more. All that remained for the Franks were some coastal cities (Tyre, Acre, Tripoli, Antioch) and the island of Cyprus. In all, this was enough of a beachhead to ensure military campaigns for another century.
But by now the calls to crusade by Pope and Kings alike were less successful. Enthusiasm for militaristic expansions in the East waned. This meant that crusades were now undertaken by petty lords and vain kings, seeking glory and loot with which to enrich themselves. To be fair, from the start the crusades suffered from the same problem, but back then there were strong personalities to channel these antagonistic ambitions.
At first the Third Crusade was rather successful due to the energies and leadership of the English king Richard, also known as Richard Lionheart. But these conquests, although it established the Second Kingdom (of Acre), proved to be untenable and over the course of the thirteenth century we see the continuous ambition to reconquer Jerusalem rising to a fever pitch yet the capacity to achieve this degrade at rather the same pace.
In between we see the vile attack on Constantinople during the Fourth Crusade, practically destroying the Byzantine Empire and ensuring the later Ottoman success. Which says enough on how sincere these Christian armies were in their Crusading spirits - this was militarism with the aim of obtaining loot and royal titles.
In the end, the Second Kingdom is overtaken and destroyed by the Muslim forces from the north and south. All that remained now was the island of Cyprus and the rather (politically) unreliable principality of Armenia. For many decades, even centuries, Popes tried to rally forces for new Crusades, but in vain. Geopolitically the situation had changed drastically, both in the West (kingdoms fighting perpetual wars) and the East (the Mongols, the Ottomans).
Runciman finishes this epic work with the story of the dying Pope Pius II who in 1464 went on a Crusade to recover the fallen Constantinople, or so he thought. In reality, the mercenary army he assembled disbanded even before reaching the port from which they were to embark - the Pope's personnel leaving the delusional man to die in peace, believing he initiated the rescue of Christendom, once more.
The contrast of this last example with the energetic and sectarian enthusiasm of the First Crusade in 1096, when Pope Urban II was able to collect a large army with some of the most esteemed knights at the head, let alone their gains (the establishment of the Kingdom of Jerusalem) is illustrative for these crucial centuries in world history. The Crusaders really never learned anything: time and time again we see them destroying and massacring cities, not interested in long term politics, blind to other cultures and peoples. The contrast with fierce opponents like Nur ed-Din and Saladin is striking, these were smart, cultured and capable leaders, while the Frankish states were characterized by petty squabbles and betrayal.
I am not a military strategist, but my guess is that with the same means as the Crusaders were able to amass, a military campaign could have been set up to establish a defensible and fruitful Kingdom in the Near East. But that would require unity in ranks and viable and durable political strategies. Both were lacking and it isn't to be wondered that in the end the Crusades brought nothing apart from temporarily channeling the energies of quarrelsome European barons to external foes.
"Powerful and intelligent leadership might have saved the movement. But the feudal background from which the Crusaders were drawn made it difficult for a leader to be accepted. The Crusades were the Pope's work; but papal legates were seldom good generals. There were many able men amongst the Kings of Jerusalem; but they had little authority over their own subjects and none over their visiting allies. The Military Orders, who provided the finest and most experienced soldiers, were independent and jealous of each other. [...] It was indeed less remarkable that the Crusading movement faded away in failure than that it should ever have met with success, and that, with scarcely one victory to its credit after its spectacular foundation, Outremer should have lasted for two hundred years." pp. 400-401
This trilogy by Runciman is truly amazing. It is probably the best introduction to the Crusades one can (still) find. He offers a complete picture and doesn't shy away from pointing out all the details of who did what and when. The downside of this approach is that one has to work through 1000 pages which can become rather repetitive... Also, one has to remind oneself that this was written by a British author in the early 1950's, so the work is both outdated (in its approach more than its content I'd say) and tied to the Christian-European perspective on the Crusades - although to be fair Runciman doesn't seem too fond of the European side and his respect for various Eastern monarchs and political figures shines through on many pages.
June 11, 2018
An outstanding final volume to this 3 volume series on the Crusades. Absolutely fascinating. The Crusades, as Steven Runciman points out, were an amazing period in human history, but not necessarily in a good way. In this history, as well as in the previous two, we see so many missed opportunities, so much needless bloodshed --- the outcome of faith unguided by wisdom, courage unaccompanied by foresight or reason.
This third volume is a tale of tragedies ---- but, by far, the greatest was the Fourth Crusade that dealt the Byzantine Empire what ultimately would be its death blow --- and, with that, the West losing its last firewall between the various conquerors from the Islamic World and Eastern Europe. This would shape the history of this region, particularly the Balkans in ways that would reverberate again and again in the centuries to follow even to this day. About the best that can be said is that the early crusades may have bought the Empire another century of life than it otherwise may have had --- but even this is debatable, given subsequent events, given the damage that these encounters between Occidental and Oriental Christendom created.
As with the previous two volumes, I strongly recommend this book to anyone seeking to learn more about the Crusades ---- absolutely one of the best resources to this end.
This third volume is a tale of tragedies ---- but, by far, the greatest was the Fourth Crusade that dealt the Byzantine Empire what ultimately would be its death blow --- and, with that, the West losing its last firewall between the various conquerors from the Islamic World and Eastern Europe. This would shape the history of this region, particularly the Balkans in ways that would reverberate again and again in the centuries to follow even to this day. About the best that can be said is that the early crusades may have bought the Empire another century of life than it otherwise may have had --- but even this is debatable, given subsequent events, given the damage that these encounters between Occidental and Oriental Christendom created.
As with the previous two volumes, I strongly recommend this book to anyone seeking to learn more about the Crusades ---- absolutely one of the best resources to this end.
March 19, 2013
-Erudición y entretenimiento no tienen que enfrentarse, al menos no necesariamente-.
Género. Historia.
Lo que nos cuenta. Desde la Primera Cruzada, con una mirada hacia atrás para entender el sustrato del Imperio Romano y su herencia, hasta la caída de San Juan de Acre, con una mirada hacia delante hasta Pio II para entender sus estertores, retrato pormenorizado y cronológico de los hechos, personajes y acontecimientos que construyeron el fenómeno conocido como Las Cruzadas.
¿Quiere saber más del libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
Género. Historia.
Lo que nos cuenta. Desde la Primera Cruzada, con una mirada hacia atrás para entender el sustrato del Imperio Romano y su herencia, hasta la caída de San Juan de Acre, con una mirada hacia delante hasta Pio II para entender sus estertores, retrato pormenorizado y cronológico de los hechos, personajes y acontecimientos que construyeron el fenómeno conocido como Las Cruzadas.
¿Quiere saber más del libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
February 28, 2020
Although newer research has made Runciman’s work somewhat obsolete, his definitive three-volume set is still the gold standard in the field of Crusader research. Well-written and scholarly, as an overall look at the history of the Crusader kingdom in the Holy Land, it is an enjoyable and authoritative read. A must-have for any research library!
August 24, 2019
Maybe the best of the three, shocking and brutal, we see the rise of the Mongols and the Turks, i was surprised to read that the Mongols were much more well disposed towards Christians than Muslims!
July 3, 2011
Although this was published in the 1950s the three volumes are still a very serviceable introduction to the Crusades. This is a top down narrative history mostly taken-up with dynastic struggles between Crusaders and Byzantines, Crusaders and Muslims, Muslims and Byzantines, Muslims and Muslims, Mongols and Muslims, and Crusaders and Crusaders
The success of the first Crusade was quite astonishing. A not very well organised group of competing noblemen managed to march their army via Byzantium into the Levant and carve out a kingdom and retake Jerusalem within the space of a year or two. Of course the infighting, greed, pride, ambition, stupidity (the usual suspects) combined with formidable external threats from the Muslim world helped to bring the whole thing down less than two centuries later.
I think when I read another history of the Crusades I’d like more social, economic, cultural details than I got here, but this was still a very enjoyable and informative read.
The success of the first Crusade was quite astonishing. A not very well organised group of competing noblemen managed to march their army via Byzantium into the Levant and carve out a kingdom and retake Jerusalem within the space of a year or two. Of course the infighting, greed, pride, ambition, stupidity (the usual suspects) combined with formidable external threats from the Muslim world helped to bring the whole thing down less than two centuries later.
I think when I read another history of the Crusades I’d like more social, economic, cultural details than I got here, but this was still a very enjoyable and informative read.
June 2, 2018
"The Crusaders made many mistakes. Their policy was often hesitant and changeable. But they cannot be entirely blamed for failing to solve a problem for which, in fact, there was no solution," Steven Runciman says at the beginning of the last book of his epic three volume history of the crusades. His words, I felt, neatly summarized the third volume of his history.
Dealing with the inevitable downfall of Outremer, it chronicles the bitter century that followed the fall of Jerusalem which started with the respiro granted by the third crusade and continued on to the slow disentegration into futile expeditions, in-fighting among the meager surviving coastal cities, the rise of powerful new enemies and ended with the complete obliteration of the remaining handful of colonies.
And if you thought things were bloody and cruel during the first crusades, wait till you meet Richard the Lionhearted, Emperor Frederick and those lovely Mongol hordes that were strong advocates of wholesale massacres. The Mamelukes took a page from their book and their most distinguished sultans were also their most bloody and treacherous.
I felt sorry Saladin had to deal with Richard and - as much as you can say something like this while reading a history book - for a while I seriously feared for his life, but luckily he got the violence-free death he deserved.
Most of the kings, knights and notables of the 13th century were rather unimpressive figures with the Outremer bloodlines diluting into ever more ineffectual and powerless leaders. Barely able to defend themselves and with Europe growing disinterested in their fate, they decided it was the right time to start fighting each other. By the end of the last book, you feel rather relieved they've been put out of their misery.
Overall, I LOVED Runciman's monumentous work on the Crusades which tried to cover as many points of view as possible and make sense of the whole two centuries worth of brutal violence and mayhem with a clear, unbiased and humanistic approach. The Crusades were an exercise in futility that ravaged a land thought holy and resulted in nothing but a legacy of distrust and violence between East and West.
Dealing with the inevitable downfall of Outremer, it chronicles the bitter century that followed the fall of Jerusalem which started with the respiro granted by the third crusade and continued on to the slow disentegration into futile expeditions, in-fighting among the meager surviving coastal cities, the rise of powerful new enemies and ended with the complete obliteration of the remaining handful of colonies.
And if you thought things were bloody and cruel during the first crusades, wait till you meet Richard the Lionhearted, Emperor Frederick and those lovely Mongol hordes that were strong advocates of wholesale massacres. The Mamelukes took a page from their book and their most distinguished sultans were also their most bloody and treacherous.
I felt sorry Saladin had to deal with Richard and - as much as you can say something like this while reading a history book - for a while I seriously feared for his life, but luckily he got the violence-free death he deserved.
Most of the kings, knights and notables of the 13th century were rather unimpressive figures with the Outremer bloodlines diluting into ever more ineffectual and powerless leaders. Barely able to defend themselves and with Europe growing disinterested in their fate, they decided it was the right time to start fighting each other. By the end of the last book, you feel rather relieved they've been put out of their misery.
Overall, I LOVED Runciman's monumentous work on the Crusades which tried to cover as many points of view as possible and make sense of the whole two centuries worth of brutal violence and mayhem with a clear, unbiased and humanistic approach. The Crusades were an exercise in futility that ravaged a land thought holy and resulted in nothing but a legacy of distrust and violence between East and West.
April 13, 2021
Firstly, I apologise for the brevity of this review. A book of this caliber deserves a finer review than I think I can write at the moment. Alas. But, it has been over a month since I've finished this one and so while some of the details of this work have faded in my mind, the impact this 3 volume history of the Crusades has had on me is still remembered. But before I talk about the history as a whole, what was this volume all about? Well, the Frankish kingdoms are in severe decline at the outset (if they even exist anymore) and so this volume is all about the inevitable decline of the Christian states that had been established in the First Crusade. Every decision made seems to hasten their fall, and with hindsight the sheer folly and shortsightedness of the rulers seems beyond belief, but in the moment? Well, the rulers and those in power made decisions that seemed to benefit them at the time. No matter if it had dire consequences down the road. And especially no matter if the decision made by one ruler had adverse consequences on a fellow Christian ruler. This seems a bit cynical, but these were cynical times. So there is a sense of tragedy about this volume, but in the end? What other way could it have ended? With priorities so grievously misplaced, was it any doubt that the Frankish kingdoms would come to a sputtering end? So I enjoyed Runciman's continued dedication to laying out the narrative supported by all the facts and accounts he could gather. My favourite part of this work? I was not expecting this, but it was the parts about the Mongols! I possibly forgot (or did I ever know?) that the Mongols swept into the West at the same time the Christians still had a tenuous foothold in Palestine. It was incredibly fascinating to read of the rise of the Mongols and get a better understanding of why they were so utterly successful. (Hint - they had incredibly large armies with good generals and novel tactics. Also, they were ruthless. And also - they tended to be fairly benign decent rulers to those who surrendered. Surrendering to the Mongols was a good thing because it meant they didn't massacre your entire city). So this volume was worth it for the increased knowledge I gained on the Mongols alone! Now, I wrap up this volume with a brief reflection of these three volumes that I read on the Crusades. I realized last year that the Crusades was a section of history I knew little of. I knew some names and a brief outline...but that was it. I decided to remedy it and tried to find a fairly unbiased, comprehensive work on the Crusades. And this history by Runciman? Magnificent. The prose is pretty workmanlike and I'm sure he could have written a few more volumes on the other kingdoms of the time, but if you want to get a good understanding of what happened, with a focus (but not exclusively so!) on the Christian kingdoms, this is highly recommended. I'm going to keep these on my shelf and read them again at some point in the future. My knowledge of this era has been increased and my empathy for my fellow man has been deepened. To sum up, let me use some words that are far better than mine and quote the last few lines of Runciman's History of the Crusades:
"The triumphs of the Crusade were the triumphs of faith. But faith without wisdom is a terrible thing. By the inexorable laws of history the whole world pays for the crimes and follies of each of its citizens. In the long sequence of interaction and fusion between Orient and Occident out of which our civilization has grown, the Crusades were a tragic and destructive episode. The historian as he gazes back across the centuries at their gallant story must find his admiration overcast by sorrow at the witness that it bears to the limitations of human nature. There was so much courage and so little honour, so much devotion and so little understanding. High ideals were besmirched by cruelty and greed, enterprise and endurance by a blind and narrow self-righteousness; and the Holy War itself was nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of God, which is the sin against the Holy Ghost."
"The triumphs of the Crusade were the triumphs of faith. But faith without wisdom is a terrible thing. By the inexorable laws of history the whole world pays for the crimes and follies of each of its citizens. In the long sequence of interaction and fusion between Orient and Occident out of which our civilization has grown, the Crusades were a tragic and destructive episode. The historian as he gazes back across the centuries at their gallant story must find his admiration overcast by sorrow at the witness that it bears to the limitations of human nature. There was so much courage and so little honour, so much devotion and so little understanding. High ideals were besmirched by cruelty and greed, enterprise and endurance by a blind and narrow self-righteousness; and the Holy War itself was nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of God, which is the sin against the Holy Ghost."
June 2, 2024
Finishing the final volume of Runciman’s magnificent trilogy on the crusades leaves me with a sense of sadness and loss, because it is unlike anything else I’ve read and it’s finished now! At once adventure story and vivid history, its text was clearly written by a powerful mind that nonetheless remained receptive to wonder and passion and operated without fear of expressing such feeling. That is probably why the books are so rich in perspective and drama - there is an ambivalence about the way the story of the crusades are told that suggests Runciman was both deeply enchanted by its tales of endurance and chivalry but disgusted, at the same time, by the many cruelties and intolerances that accompanied them, especially when to the detriment of his beloved Byzantium. One of my absolute favourite works of writing ever. Definitely to be read again, from the start.
August 2, 2018
The third and last in Runciman's Crusades series covers the slow crumbling fall of Outremer, from the small triumphs of the third crusade to the fall of Acre and the failures that followed it. It deals, too, with all the last crusades that succeeded or failed in reaching the Holy Land, talks about the coming of the Mongols and the Mamelukes, and gives a brief summation of the Crusades and how history remembers them.
The book is as well-researched and fascinating as the previous two instalments, with almost all the same strengths and weaknesses (the damn maps). The tragedy of this book is far more palpable than that in the other two, however: the sense throughout is very much of the folly and failures which led to the final downfall of the kingdom, and the stupidity which generation after generation showed when failing both the kingdom and relations between the two conflicted religions.
The only unique failing prevalent in this book is its final summation of the period: Runciman donates just a few pages to the legacy of the Crusades and their further-reaching impacts, which one imagines could easily be expanded almost indefinitely, across hundreds of areas. It feels a shame not to step back and see a fuller account of the influences and wider failures that the Crusades brought to Europe and the world.
That said, this book is as meticulous and fascinating as its predecessors, a worthy end to the trilogy: I am glad I read this masterful and in-depth trilogy.
The book is as well-researched and fascinating as the previous two instalments, with almost all the same strengths and weaknesses (the damn maps). The tragedy of this book is far more palpable than that in the other two, however: the sense throughout is very much of the folly and failures which led to the final downfall of the kingdom, and the stupidity which generation after generation showed when failing both the kingdom and relations between the two conflicted religions.
The only unique failing prevalent in this book is its final summation of the period: Runciman donates just a few pages to the legacy of the Crusades and their further-reaching impacts, which one imagines could easily be expanded almost indefinitely, across hundreds of areas. It feels a shame not to step back and see a fuller account of the influences and wider failures that the Crusades brought to Europe and the world.
That said, this book is as meticulous and fascinating as its predecessors, a worthy end to the trilogy: I am glad I read this masterful and in-depth trilogy.
June 28, 2020
The conclusion to Sir Steve Runciman’s trilogy focuses on the period from Saladin’s recapture of Jerusalem to the fall of Acre and the few remaining crusader cities. The book includes a chapter on the culture of Outremer and a conclusion that explores the legacy of the Crusades. Throughout this book the reader is shown the vicious factors that doomed Outremer and the crusading movement from the the very beginning; misguided diplomacy, friction between Western and Eastern Christianity, and unrealistic military planning.
Regardless of the fact that the Crusaders were able to capture Jerusalem initially, the movements long term effects were much more detrimental. By the Fall of Acre in 1291 the Byzantine Empire was a shadow of its former self, paving the way for the Ottoman expansion into the Balkans. Eastern Christianity suffered worse after the Crusades due to the intolerance sown between Islam and Christianity during the era. Finally the crusading spirit that was aimed at originally at the Holy Land shifted to Egypt, Constantinople, and even parts of Western Europe itself, just to become a tool of the papacy. Overall As Sir Steve Runciman said toward the end of the book, it was a vast fiasco.
Regardless of the fact that the Crusaders were able to capture Jerusalem initially, the movements long term effects were much more detrimental. By the Fall of Acre in 1291 the Byzantine Empire was a shadow of its former self, paving the way for the Ottoman expansion into the Balkans. Eastern Christianity suffered worse after the Crusades due to the intolerance sown between Islam and Christianity during the era. Finally the crusading spirit that was aimed at originally at the Holy Land shifted to Egypt, Constantinople, and even parts of Western Europe itself, just to become a tool of the papacy. Overall As Sir Steve Runciman said toward the end of the book, it was a vast fiasco.
March 10, 2025
Just finished the third and final volume of this classic history, which was originally published in the 1950’s. In the final chapters there were so many insightful comments which apply today…
“..greed and the lust for power are dangerous masters. They breed impatience; for man’s life is short and he needs quick results. They breed jealousy and disloyalty; for offices and possessions are limited, and it is impossible to satisfy every claimant”.
“Throughout the ages there have always been hopeful politicians who believe that if only the peoples of the world could come together they would love and understand each other. It is a tragic delusion.”
Now more than ever we need history to be taught and the lessons learned the hard way over the centuries to be remembered. A sobering read. Stupidity is not confined to the present age.
“..greed and the lust for power are dangerous masters. They breed impatience; for man’s life is short and he needs quick results. They breed jealousy and disloyalty; for offices and possessions are limited, and it is impossible to satisfy every claimant”.
“Throughout the ages there have always been hopeful politicians who believe that if only the peoples of the world could come together they would love and understand each other. It is a tragic delusion.”
Now more than ever we need history to be taught and the lessons learned the hard way over the centuries to be remembered. A sobering read. Stupidity is not confined to the present age.
January 7, 2023
Λένε πως όταν ολοκληρώνεις την ανάγνωση ενός καλού βιβλίου, αισθάνεσαι σαν να έχεις χάσει κάποιο αγαπημένο σου πρόσωπο. Κάπως έτσι αισθάνθηκα μετά το τέλος του τρίτου βιβλίου που σήμανε και το τέλος της τριλογίας του Ρουνσιμάν για τις Σταυροφορίες. Πραγματικά αριστουργηματικό έργο που περιγράφει με πάσα λεπτομέρεια την πορεία των τριών αιώνων στη Μέση Ανατολή από τις αιτίες που οδήγησαν στην πρώτη Σταυροφορία μέχρι την πτώση της Άκρας και το τέλος της φραγκικής Ουτρεμέρ. Η τριλογία πρέπει να αποτελεί μέρος της βιβλιοθήκης κάθε φιλίστορα που ενδιαφέρεται για το συγκεκριμένο τομέα της ιστορίας.
August 16, 2018
Decent book, though for the most part strictly narrative rather than thematic or analysis-based. Shows the tremendous degree of infighting on every "side" of conflicts in the Crusader World, be they "Muslim," "Crusader," "Italian," "Byzantine," or "Mongol."
Most conflicts are, even if they seem ideological, quite fractal and based instead on combination of petty interests and relations.
Most conflicts are, even if they seem ideological, quite fractal and based instead on combination of petty interests and relations.
December 9, 2024
‘the holy war itself was nothing more than a long act of intolerance in the name of God, which is a sin against the holy ghost’
There will likely never be a more evocative finale to a historical trilogy.
Runciman’s historiography is at times questionable and throughout dated, but this is an excellent read from a man who took his subject, its protagonists, and their religion seriously.
There will likely never be a more evocative finale to a historical trilogy.
Runciman’s historiography is at times questionable and throughout dated, but this is an excellent read from a man who took his subject, its protagonists, and their religion seriously.
December 5, 2017
A classic in history literature. Just as good as Sicilian Vespers.
February 3, 2021
Отлично. Наглядное пособие того, как делать не надо. А так... ну эпик, эпик, конечно.
August 30, 2024
A monumental work, narrative history at its finest. This is the real Game of Thrones.
February 1, 2023
The bookend of three, brilliant, Runciman histories of the Crusades. Of value to the scholar and to the person seeking to learn about this history forming event.
June 5, 2024
Books 1 and 2 were just about manageable and readable but book 3, this one, was a struggle to get through. I gave up in the end as it became turgid and dull. There are better books out, ironically they will have drawn from Runciman's efforts. The books are well researched and likely aimed at academic readers. But still...
July 13, 2009
The most professional work I read so far on the unpeacable period of Outremer. A must read for the scholars of the Crusades.
Want to read
July 5, 2010FS ed.
January 14, 2011
Wonderful read. Not quite as enjoyable as the previous volume but no less important.
Read
October 3, 2012great
August 28, 2023
Great books, as a middle-eastern muslim this series of books gave me a new prospective to a very important period of our history, very underrated books, highly recommended.
December 31, 2008
The writing can be a bit dry, but offers some pretty fascinating facts and stories.
May 5, 2011
saint louis......
Read
August 11, 2011Just began, is as good as the other two books promise...
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews