THE BYZANTINE WORLD WAR

A reconsideration of the causes of the First Crusade in light of the struggle between Byzantium and invading Turks.

According to Holmes, the “brutality” and “scale” of the First Crusade was “unprecedented,” and it “reshaped the Middle Ages and served as the crucible for the modern world.” However, despite its importance in world history, its genesis isn’t always properly understood, he says. Rather than focusing on the event as the crescendo of a mounting theological conflict—a clash of religious civilizations—he reframes it as an effort to retrieve lands that Byzantium had lost to invading Seljuk Turks. First, Holmes paints a vivid picture of a decaying empire; Byzantium, he says, was actually the eastern vestige of the Roman Empire, so weakened by inconstant rule that it surrendered the gains that it had accrued during the previous century. Meanwhile, it suffered a “seemingly endless onslaught of barbarians battering at its gates,” the most dangerous of which were the Seljuk Turks, whom Holmes calls a “new superpower” of largely “nomadic tribesmen” who were recently converted Muslims. Holmes artfully depicts the new Byzantine emperor, Romanus Diogenes; he was previously arrested for taking part in a coup against the royal family, which he felt wasn’t doing enough to prepare for war. Despite Romanus’ exemplary leadership, the advances of the Seljuk Turks, under the direction of Alp Arslan, proved unstoppable. This set the stage for a wide-ranging coalition to regain the lands that Byzantium had lost as well as holy land that had been surrendered long ago, such as Jerusalem. The coalition also sought to save Byzantium from “rape, pillage, and slaughter.” In addition, the situation presented an enticing opportunity for Pope Urban II to extend his power over Constantinople.

Holmes’ history is as concise as it is astute, and his scholarship is admirably scrupulous throughout. Over the course of the book, he writes in a consistently accessible prose style that avoids the unwieldy apparatuses of academic scholarship; the work is clearly intended for a wider audience, and as a result, readers are spared extended reviews of specialized secondary literature. Holmes presents his thesis persuasively and corrects aspects of the historical record that were constructed on shaky evidentiary ground. For example, contrary to the fashionable view that Romanus was an “arrogant fool,” the author convincingly portrays him as an impressively brave and noble figure, even after he was captured: “Surrounded, Romanus fought like a lion. There isn’t a single source, pro-Romanus or anti-Romanus, which doesn't praise him as a hero.” Likewise, Arslan is distinguished by his “chivalrous behavior” and by the magnanimous way in which he offered Romanus his “hand in friendship” upon victory. Indeed, for all of Holmes’ keen historical research, the chief strength of his study is the almost novelistic way in which the drama unfolds. It’s a refreshing alternative to interpretations of the Crusades that emphasize a confrontation of spiritual worldviews rather than more terrestrial concerns, such as self-preservation, extension of empire, and aggrandizement of power.

A thrilling blend of historical rigor and dramatic storytelling.