The Second Crusade 1148: Disaster outside Damascus: No. 204 (Campaign)

Bought as present. Went down well.

We all know what we get when we buy an Osprey Campaign book; a little background history, an overview of the forces involved, an account of the campaign itself and then a bit of a post mortem as to the effects, the conclusions etc.. and this book is no exception.Of course, with a fairly slim paperback you are always going to run the risk of cramming a lot of infomation into a small space and the author then walks a precarious tightrope between too much and too little. I'm afraid for me this tips over into too much. Surely no-one still regards the Crusades as a glorious expedition and a proud campaign of liberation to release the Christian church and the Holy Land from the forces of evil in the form of sinister Saracens, yet even so David Nicolle's text seemed to be slightly imbalanced in favour of the Damascene forces (and their allies) defending against the shaky alliance of attacking Crusaders. Western chroniclers recording events are often dismissed out of hand yet the accounts of their Eastern counterparts are accepted as accurate. My preference would have been for the presentation of both accounts, where they vary, and an acceptance of the author that the truth varies with the witness's viewpoint. I think the reader could have been trusted to make up their own mind.As a Western reader I confess I find Islamic names difficult to pronounce and remember, especially when trying to deal with a lot of very similar new names. There were a lot of complex relationships involved in the forces of Moslems, Turks, Seljuks etc.. and I found it very tough to understand who was who and what their role was when Mr Nicolle suddenly introduced a complex web of connections between several leading figures. After reading it three times I was still no closer! I feel he perhaps over-complicated matters since readers looking for real depth in the subject would probably be investing in a weightier publication anyway. It doesn't help that there was no logical (or chronological) step, rather a fairly rambling narrative of the past, present and future details of the relationships between the major players in the East that jumped back and forth and meandered into digression.Mr Nicolle also seems to be a fan of revisionist history and pushes a line of conclusion in opposition to much of what is considered the mainstream history of the Second Crusade. That's fine for any historian, but perhaps an Osprey title is not the appropriate publication in which to make contentious claims or turn a thousand-odd years of understanding on its head. There is simply not the space to conduct a balanced discussion of the reasoning.As to the illustrations, Christa Hook's style is fairly sketchy but does the job well enough, my only gripe being that none of the pictures is particulary informative as regards the clothing, armour or weaponry of the forces involve. They seem to be depicting dramatic events during the campaign in a cinematic style and I would have preferred something that informs us a little more or at least allows a better view of the combatants. The photographs throughout the book were mostly useless and included modern pictures of the towns along the Crusaders' route (which show us nothing of relevance), bits of contemporary illustrations, pottery and decoration showing people of the time (fairly interesting and informative) and a couple of shots of surviving ancient gates and walls in Damascus itself (these at least were relevant and interesting). The maps were of too small a scale, confused and difficult to follow.At the time of writing this review, the book has been reduced to half price and I suspect this is due not only to the obscure and relatively unpopular nature of this Crusade to military historians (amateur and historical) but also the slightly haphazard feel of the book. All you have read in this review must make you think I hate it. I don't, far from it, but I don't love it. This is still an Osprey book and still looks glossy and is high quality. The prelude, campaign and aftermath are set out nicely as per the usual style and it will give the reader a decent grounding of events without giving them a deeper understanding, which is precisely what one would expect. Many of my quibbles are personal gripes and many more readers may well disagree, so I feel I should make it clear the difference between a bad book and a book that, although at times doesn't appeal to me, may well appeal to others. I still recommend this book, but only as an addition to your library on the subject, not as your definitive title.