The Hospitallers fell when Christendom was divided - the gap in between the first and second sieges of Rhodes was because Islam was divided.
Rhodes was always going to fall - if we are to make an end of it, what an end we'll make.
Written by a Knight of Malta - why do these institutions still have an attraction - Knights, Freemasons etc. - that innate desire in men (mostly, not women so much) to live in heroic times and do heroic things.
The question of what to read - this book passed over my desk and piqued my interest - the Knights have always been fascinating - this book in some ways a dull recitation of the siege but a book that appeals as easily digestible information.
Leaves me in a reading hollow - where to go now - I have my pile of "read and then donate" books staring at me, but there is no theme there. Does there have to be? The constant battle in my mind over that, pointless I know.
Books read: The two sieges of Rhodes 1480-1522 by Eric Brockman
Showing posts with label Eric Brockman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eric Brockman. Show all posts
Thursday, 4 February 2016
February 2 2016
The fight for the Holy Land - Knights of St. John - how and when did it become important that the Holy Land was in Christian hands. The Crusade a human construct - people want and need something to believe in and fight for.
The inevitability of conquest once you have an empire - Mehmet could not allow Rhodes to survive and claim to be a great Sultan.
Knights of St. John - fundamentalists? In a way - they could have come to an arrangement with the Sultan and he would have been happy to let them be.
A tragedy for both sides.
The toughness of the men.
Yet another great little narrative history written in the 1960s - no fuss, no bother, no obvious ideological or theoretical barrow to push. I think after a break, these sorts of histories are creeping back, although unfortunately along with other more partisan publications, from either end of the spectrum.
Books read: The two sieges of Rhodes 1480-1522 by Eric Brockman
The inevitability of conquest once you have an empire - Mehmet could not allow Rhodes to survive and claim to be a great Sultan.
Knights of St. John - fundamentalists? In a way - they could have come to an arrangement with the Sultan and he would have been happy to let them be.
A tragedy for both sides.
The toughness of the men.
Yet another great little narrative history written in the 1960s - no fuss, no bother, no obvious ideological or theoretical barrow to push. I think after a break, these sorts of histories are creeping back, although unfortunately along with other more partisan publications, from either end of the spectrum.
Books read: The two sieges of Rhodes 1480-1522 by Eric Brockman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)