The First Crusade: A New History (review)

This is essentially a popular history of the First Crusade, intended to provide a synthesis of the great volume of recent writing for a "wider audience" (p. x). It is very appropriately organized to do just that. The main text provides a clear and well written account into which elements of analysis have been very carefully integrated. There are plenty of easily followed maps, though it is a pity that Nicaea, the site of a major siege and battle on the crusade, is placed on the coast to the west of Lake Ascania, when it is actually inland and on the eastern end of that body of water. The list of the main personalities with thumbnail sketches of their significance is very useful. A good short glossary, a brief chronology, and a full index complete the support material for the general reader. It is tempting, in the light of Asbridge's stated intention, to compare this book with the many popular accounts of the First and other crusades which have appeared in recent years, of which one of the very best is M. Billings, The Cross and the Crescent. A History of the Crusades (London: BBC Publications, 1987). But although it is entirely suited for a "wider audience," Asbridge's book is founded, to a much greater degree, on a fine knowledge of recent scholarship. It could, in fact, be usefully given to students starting to study the crusades, as a guide both to the events of the First Crusade and to the literature about it. The origins of the crusade have been sharply disputed, especially as the former consensus around the views of Erdmann has been challenged in recent years. In chapters 1, "Holy War Proclaimed," and 2, "Afire with Crusading Fever," this range of material is carefully set out and a judicious summary is provided. This is inevitably somewhat bland, but that is inherent in the business of offering a survey. In chapter 3, "The Journey to Byzantium," the story is carried on with a heavy emphasis on the "People's Crusade," and the opportunity is taken to introduce, albeit briefly, the Byzantine and Islamic perspectives. Asbridge is well aware of the difficulties of the sources for Byzantine-Crusader relations, and the notes to this chapter will help any student new to the subject. The journey to Antioch is clearly described, though perhaps more could have been made of the logistical difficulties the army faced and its consequent losses. The siege of Antioch was such a dominating event that it is hardly surprising that Asbridge allocates to it three chapters (5, 6, and 7). It is to his credit that he clearly explains the topography of the city which had a profound influence on the course of events. The story is well told and the difficulties dealt with carefully. However, Asbridge thinks the battle on the St. Symeon road on March 7 marked a turning-point because of its effect on the morale of the garrison. But a lot of heavy fighting lay ahead, and the extraordinary silence of both the Gesta Francorum and the account of Albert of Aachen on the later stages of the crusader siege hides much from us. On the other hand Asbridge's analysis of the second siege of Antioch is very acute, and there is much to be said for his suggestion (pp. 229–232) that the crusader leaders were prepared to come to terms with Kerbogah. After their stunning victory over Kerbogah the crusade descended into bitter wrangling, and the convolutions of the consequent intrigues and quarrels are very well discussed here in chapters 8 and 9, with particular reference to their disastrous impact on Raymond of Toulouse's ambition to lead the crusade. In chapter 10 the siege of Jerusalem is vividly described with a real appreciation of the peculiar cocktail of piety and brutality which constituted the crusading mentality. Perhaps the great strength of this book is that it offers a real insight into the outlook...