The Crusades: The World's Debate

by Hilaire Belloc

Belloc shows that the Crusades were a titanic struggle between Christian civilization and \"the Turk,\" savage Mongols who had embraced Islam. He explains the practical reasons why the Crusaders initially succeeded and why they ultimately failed then he predicts the re-emergence of Islam, since Christendom failed to destroy it in the 12th century. Makes history come alive and gives a rare, true appreciation of Christendom and of our Catholic forefathers!

Genres: History, Catholic, Religion, Christianity, Nonfiction, Medieval, Church History

256 pages, Paperback

First published December 3, 1992

About the author

People considered Joseph Hilaire Pierre René Belloc, French-born British writer, as a master of light English prose and also knew widely his droll verse, especially The Bad Child's Book of Beasts in 1896.

Sharp wit of Hilaire Belloc, an historian, poet, and orator, extended across literary output and strong political and religious convictions. Oxford educated this distinguished debater and scholar. Throughout his career, he prolifically across a range of genres and produced histories, essays, travelogues, poetry, and satirical works.

Cautionary Tales for Children collects best humorous yet dark morals, and historical works of Hilaire Belloc often reflected his staunch Catholicism and critique of Protestant interpretations. He led advocates of an economic theory that promotes and championed distribution of small-scale property ownership as a middle ground between capitalism and socialism alongside Gilbert Keith Chesterton, his close friend.

In politics, Hilaire Belloc served as a member of Parliament for the Liberal party, but the establishment disillusioned him. His polemical style and strong opinions made a controversial figure, who particularly viewed modernism, secularism, and financial capitalism as threats to traditional Christian society in his critiques.

Influence and vast literary legacy of Hilaire Belloc extends into historical circles. Erudition, humor, and a forceful rhetorical style characterized intellectual vigor and unique perspective, which people continue to study and to appreciate, on history, society, and human nature.

Reviews

[Ann · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hilaire Belloc is never an easy read but pressing through is always well worth the challenge. In this book, he gives fascinating historical background re: the political landscape of Medieval Europe and how it affected the success and failure of the Crusades. He details how feudal Europe hampered the participants in truly organizing the Crusade against Islamic control over the Holy Land ... our current understanding of nations and nation states have nothing in common with feudal Europe and its many feudal lords, each with their own serfs loyal to them ... the concept of a nation with a standing army was not yet thought of or desired, thus making it difficult to organize under a common military strategist.
The strength of feudal Europe was in their common faith and thus their common goal. This is what held them together, in spite of the many factions that vied for control and power during the Crusades. In spite of the Crusaders' lack of truly cohesive leadership, Islam was even more fractured and subject to the arbitrary rise and fall of powerful viziers who held power until they were toppled by another more cunning or deceptive and more powerful.
The initial Crusade was the most successful Crusade, and in spite of incredible hardships suffered due to the crusaders' unfamiliarity of the land and people, they were successful in regaining control of Jerusalem and setting up a monarchy that held that area for almost 50 years. Belloc explains how the establishing of what was a monarchy of sorts, was the key to holding the Holy Land. Lack of a consistent supply of men and arms made it difficult to continue to maintain control over the land ... the great body of the crusaders came and fought and then trickled back home and although reinforcements kept arriving, it was not enough to form a very stable hold on the land. In the end, Islam finally organized under powerful vizier warriors, the greatest was Saladin, and regained control of the Holy Land.
Belloc's account of the final defeat of the Crusaders fighting against Islam was heartbreaking.
In his final analysis, in commenting on the Europe of modern day, Belloc stated, "The West has returned, and one might say that the work of Saladin was plainly undone." Having said that, he warns, "...recent domination of western Europeans... over Mohamedan lands, is due to causes mainly material and therefore ephemeral. One must always look to ... spiritual causes for the understanding of human movements and political change. ... in the major thing of all, Religion, we have fallen back and Islam has in the main preserved its soul. Modern Europe and particularly Western Europe has progressively lost its religion, and especially that united religious doctrine permeating the whole community, which unity gives spiritual strength to that community. ... Islam has not suffered this spiritual decline. ... We are divided in the face of a Mohammedan world ... divided by separate independent national rivalries, by the warring interests of possessors and dispossessed - and that division cannot be remedied because the cement which once held our civilisation together, the Christian cement, has crumbled." This book by Belloc was written in 1937 and he very presciently predicts the future rise of Islam and says, "Nor does it seem probable that at the end of such a change, especially if the process be prolonged, Islam will be the loser."
In light of current events, with militant Islam on the move, this prediction seems especially prophetic !

[Curtis · Rating 5 out of 5]

The Crusades, by Hilaire Belloc, this book has all the benefits, and suffers all the problems of a book written in it's era. Belloc, an Anglo French writer, friend to G.K. Chesterton, has done very good research, and is unhampered by many of the biased and pre or miss conceptions of our age.
One will gain a better, and I say, a more correct, more scholarly view of the Crusades and those who participated, more inline with modern real scholarly work, and less like the popular view.
One should have a good Atlas or maps of the Aegean and Near East as well as a good dictionary at hand. Belloc dose write in the late Victorian style, so he can go off on to tangents, repeat himself and uses large words, and long passages, do not let this deter you. In the end, it a very good read.

[Zbigniew Zdziarski · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you want to read a book on the Crusades that reads like a superior novel with intrigue, deception, adventure, treason, spirituality, war, politics, religion, then this is the book for you. But this work isn't fiction, it's fact. And it's written the way all historical books should be written - with passion. None of this scientific, soulless rigidity with footnotes on every single page. This historical book is a real page turner.

[C. M. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Depressing

[William · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book concentrated on the first crusade. I enjoyed the fact that the scope was limited; however, it dealt a lot with military strategy which I found boring. Also, the repetition of the importance of conquering Damascus was a bit tiresome. Finally there was a bit of racism when Belloc talked of the failure of the first crusade being due in part to the admixture of French blood with Oriental blood. The last chapter did talk about the cohesiveness of Islam in 1937 because of its unity in belief, whereas Europe had lost the faith. His contention was that Islam was a threat in the future because of this and that our current (1937) superiority in arms was ephemeral.

[MARY GRACE · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author is a good historian and writer, however, this book is not for someone who does not know much about the Crusades. Better to read an “elementary” level book first and familiarize yourself with the events and people surrounding this period in history prior to picking this one up.

[Ethan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kind of dragged in the last third, but is definitely another outstanding work from Belloc. Very informative, very opinionated, very hard to disagree with. Belloc is a master.

[lloyd sales · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting and informative

Explained in a easy way to follow.My knowledge of the world back then was fuzzy now it's a lot clearer.My thanks to the author for the good work👍

[Patrick Santino · Rating 3 out of 5]

His writing style is really fun: engaging, vivid, & epic. The book only goes from the rallying of the First Crusade to Saladin’s capture of Jerusalem, beyond that Belloc doesn’t consider anything else a “real” Crusade since they come up short of recovering the Holy Sepulcher. Unexpectedly I found the best parts to be the “brass tacks” of getting into the medieval Westerner mind, the machinations of Feudalism, estimation of army sizes, tactical constraints & decisions, military superiority of the mounted Western knight, & the construction of castles in that Age. Under such a feudal system it is remarkable the First Crusade even cohesively got to Jerusalem, let alone held it for a century. But there was never enough manpower to defend it, because they were too far away from the Western European homeland, & under feudalism kings could only be stirred to send reinforcements if something bad happened. It also boggles the mind the fractions of these armies that actually made it to the Holy Land compared to what had set out from France/Rhineland. Byzantium was also much too coy that it’s incredibly annoying & verging on cowardly, given how much direct stake they had in the land & how much centralized defense they could have brought had they actually helped. Then there is no way a review of this book cannot mention how much Belloc harped about how they should have taken Damascus, which based on the great geography lesson of the 3 Roads would have been key, but also it was potentially never actually doable (especially for feudal lords with religious motivations & personal ambitions). His claim that if the Crusaders held Damascus they could have divided the Muslim world in half permanently I find dubious. And then his claims about the Western blood being diluted with Eastern Armenian blood leading to a decline of the Jerusalem Kingdom’s Royal Family, I found eventually off putting. I don’t think he was just talking about a chivalric/warrior/relentless “Gallic” spirit or mentality or cultural character compared to a more luxurious/political-intrigue Middle Eastern proclivity (which I could perhaps accept), but he was saying the actual superiority of one blood (race) over another based off only their royalty. Besides in regards to producing heirs (which rates did decline in the Holy Land), I think a 1937 Christian should have found the actual “blood” of royals to be irrelevant in governance of a kingdom (vs cultural character, which is important). Then interestingly, lots of his thoughts on the character of the main leaders are significantly different than other Crusade sources I’ve read, particularly on Count Raymond of Toulouse; clearly more arguments about them were proposed post this book. Overall I thought the rallying of the armies/leaders & their march across Europe & Asia Minor was the most fun part cuz it was epically legendary & larger than life, quite an adventure story, & the politics weren’t yet too hamstringing. Well-sized book given the topic too. 

[James Uscroft · Rating 2 out of 5]

The bulk of this book consists almost entirely of an analysis of the period of the first and second Crusades up until the fall of Jerusalem; a summary which you can read pretty much anywhere, (except without this author's glaring oversights, disingenuous claims and outright lies,) combined with tediously dry analyses of the politics, geography and logistics of the era, rationalising the author's pet 'Armchair General' theory that if only the Crusaders had conquered Damascus, then Islam would have been destroyed and the Middle East would be Christian. But woven throughout this dry analysis and 'What If'-ing is all of the comedy gold of listening to self-proclaimed 'Historians' and 'Intellectuals' like Peter Hitchens, Sebastian Gorka or Dinesh D'Souza rant and rave about "The Clash Between Islam & The West" with none of the bitter aftertaste of knowing they're still alive and stoking Islamophobia across the world. Because after all, the author died in 1953.

Indeed, one has to wonder why anyone went to the time and trouble of re-publishing this long debunked Anti-Muslim polemic when, as I say, historians have long since eviscerated the 'Civilisation Against Barbarism' narrative of the Crusades. On top of which, as I also just mentioned, this book's descriptions of the events can be found in a much more accurate and less biased form on any Wikipedia page, and the author's pet theory is 'Academic' in the most derogatory sense of the term. So in the end, the only reason I can think of is that the entire premise of this book is built upon the same rabid paranoia (contradicted by the author's own analysis of the Muslim politics of the era) that Islam - a single, malevolent movement - seeks to invade and destroy 'Superior' Christian Europe that is the basis of all 21st Century Islamophobia as well. But still, if like me, you've read to every other book about the Crusades that you can find, are able to stomach the author's seemingly endless racist ranting against 'Mongels,' (Seljuk Turks,) 'Mixed Marriage' and 'Half-Breeds' and have never unironically claimed anything to the effect of "It's Not 'Islamophobia' Because My Fear Of Islam Isn't Irrational," then this might be good for a laugh.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

Belloc provides some much needed context to this narrative of the first crusade and the subsequent history of the Christian Crusader states. This has enhanced my understanding of the medieval world and the way it developed organically from the Roman world. Belloc also has some very strong opinions as to why the crusades ultimately failed, particularly the failure to take Damascus and the general lack of reinforcement from the west until it was too late. Highly recommended for anyone who wants to better understand this period in history.

[Strong Extraordinary Dreams · Rating 3 out of 5]

3-stars: a perfectly good book, but didn't really "ring my bell"

Very well written, crisp clean sentences, well organised. A huge subject that has helped form both the western and the Islamic worlds. A very good 'first book' on the First Crusade.

Somehow this book did not really grab me, but maybe that's just me.

One thing: this is the First Crusade only. According to the author, all subsequent six crusades were only echos and more flippant repeats of the (eventual) failure of this, the first crusade.

[David Leister · Rating 3 out of 5]

Overall a good, short overview of the 1st and 2nd crusade. The book is somewhat outdated since it spends some of the time looking at the crusades through the lens of the 1930s. Belloc is definitely an advocate for the crusader goal (which is fine by me) but it does raise questions about his portrayal of some of the individuals he discusses. Despite this, the broad strokes are really strong and Belloc does a really good job laying out the stakes and broad form reasons for the initial success and ultimate failure of the crusades.

[Chris O'hanlon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent history of the crusades, I learned a lot as I knew pretty much nothing about them before reading this. Refreshingly not politically correct at all and would probably be banned if published today because of the authors viewpoint and some of his phrases. It was written at a time when scholarship was of a very high standard far superior to that of today so I would bet that it gives a far better account than you might get from many modern historians. I intend to read more Belloc.

[James · Rating 2 out of 5]

I typically enjoy Belloc quite a bit, but this book was more of a military history / analysis of the battles between the Christian Crusaders and the Muslims- which isn’t really what I wanted to read. However, I did learn quite a bit about the culture of the time- I only wished I got more of that and less of a play by play of the numerous battles.

[Sergio Cresta · Rating 5 out of 5]

Este hombre que ha penetrado con singular preocupación en el pasado, nos muestra cómo las Cruzadas -con sus tribulaciones, penurias, pestes y derrotas y con sus victorias brillantes y sus conquistas heroicas- dejaron huellas imborrables en la historia religiosa del mundo y en las tierras por las que pasaron los hombres que "tomaron La Cruz".

[Joshua C(himpius) · Rating 3 out of 5]

Rather dry and analytical without much of the discussion of sources. Most praise for the book seems to come from the last two chapters where Belloc discusses the charism and impact of the crusades. The epilogue discusses the state of Islam and would definitely be worth reading on its own. I hope to read The Great Heresies for more of his discussion in that department.

[Daniel C · Rating 4 out of 5]

Breve libro para conocer la historia de las primeras dos cruzadas: la conquista de Jerusalén (1099), el intento de conquista de Damasco (1148) y la pérdida de Jerusalén (1187). Belloc también propone –con su tono enfático– cuáles fueron los factores decisivos que llevaron al fracaso de las cruzadas (solamente la primera tuvo éxito) y su impacto en la historia posterior.

[Joe · Rating 3 out of 5]

The analysis still holds up today. Many indict Christianity over the Crusades. It, however, was a testament to western civilization.... the intent was anyway. I wonder what Hilaire would have thought about the events of the last 20 or so years.....

[Jason Passmore · Rating 5 out of 5]

A real, truthful look at the Crusades

A real, truthful look at the Crusades, their importance then and now, why they failed, and prophetic in the return of the Mohammedan menace to Europe and the West.

[Owen Chamness · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the wise words of Pete Hegseth’s forearm, “Deus Vult.”

[Dave Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent over all history of the economic, political and cultural ramifications of the Crusading movement to include the Baltics and Spain. I would prefer more military implications but it was interesting to learn how much Western culture is beholden to the Levant -- particularly modern day Syria -- and the impact the Crusades had on medicine, ancient history and mathematics.

[Jimmy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent study of the Crusading effort, from the Council of Clermont to the fall of Jerusalem in 1187. Mr. Belloc thoroughly explains what lead the Catholics of Europe to start on the First Crusade, and why the Crusading effort ultimately failed. As a very minor criticism, I wish he would have covered the remaining Crusades to the Holy Land (the Third through the Ninth).

[William Gill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Belloc excels in writing what for him was apparently a chore of a book. Fortunately, it is not so for the reader. Having read extensively on the Crusades, I have to admit that Belloc's perspective was novel; I learned plenty and chewed upon much more.

[Erik]

Recommended by James Schall in Another Sort of Learning, Chapter 12, as one of Ten Books by Hilaire Belloc Well Worth Reading.

[Jonathan]

None

[Brian Reinholz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A long book but fascinating and detailed in its scope. Certainly some bias in its insights but it doesn't disrupt the value.

[ValeriZentsov · Rating 4 out of 5]

Exhilaratingly partisan analysis of the crusades.