Interesting conclusions on Sauniere Symposium. Some great new facts about Rennes-Le-Chateau mystery. Good for those already initiated on the subjet

"The Knight" traces the evolution of an institution that played a key role in the formation of Western culture. Knights evolved from the early mounted warriors of which Charlemagne's cavalry was the archetype. They were powerful factors in the internecine struggles between European kingdoms as well as in the great Crusades. The influence of knights as members of an aristocratic elite persisted into recent history. The fact that West Point training was an expected activity of aristocratic men in the antebellum US South speaks to the widespread influence of knighthood.
Baker's accounts are imminently readable although they are not "searing". One of the most arresting aspects of the book is the contemporary account of jousts and tournaments. The casual descriptions of encounters that often were blood curdling speak to a very different mindset regarding deadly games during medieval times. Baker covers the first crusade, which shows the merciless treatment of "infidels" by Christian warriors. Baker's discussion of the monk knights, the Templars and the Hospitallars, provides a marvelous opportunity to explore the evolution of the pacifist religion of St. Paul into the militant movement of Pope Urban II. Unfortunately, the book is too short to explore this fascinating twist in history that remains with us to the present. "The Knight" leans toward the style and organization of a traditional academic treatise rather than the more gripping "popular histories". Despite these limitations, the book is a good overview for anyone wanting to learn something of the evolution of modern warriors.

By Bill Marsano. In a time of J-DAMS, MOABs and other expressions of remote-control super-power warfare, the notion of the medieval knight will seem quaint at best to many readers. On the other hand, the knight the decisive weapon on the battlefields of his time. Through generations of movies, comic books and fairy tale the knight has come down to us as a purely romantic figure. Alan Baker is here with this small book to rescue these great warriors from their bubblegum image.

This is a brief book, really no more than an essay for the entry-level history student, but enjoyable and informative nonetheless. Bakers gives us a clear-eyed view of how knights developed into an elite warrior class; how they trained and were armed; how they staged elaborate mock-combats--just as the Romans did in the Colosseum--to keep their skills sharp and their reputations high. For a taste of real warfare, Baker takes us through a well-organized history of the First Crusade.

This book is designed to whet your appetite, not satisfy it. It does the job well: Most readers will, I think, be eager to go deeper into the day of old when knights were bold.--Bill Marsano is a long-time enthusiast of military affairs.

A good overview of Germany's famous airmen of World War I. Not only are the fighter pilots reviewed, but also Zeppelin and seaplane pilots, observers, and the the generals that reorganized the air service. Some criticism of what should have been in the book:
1.) drawings of the Allied and German aircraft
2.) drawings of the medals recieved by these German airmen.
Also, the grammar was not right in some cases, especially when referring to months. A good overview of the heroes of the German air force in World War I.

On the whole, this is a good book, with plenty of information about these fascinating airmen. If you are new to the history of WWI in the air, it offers plenty to get you started. However the reader should be aware that the book is rifled with inaccuracies, some of them quite puzzling. Some pictures are misidentified, and there are numerous examples of statements which simply do not square with the facts.

Some examples of the types of errors found in the book (there are many others):

1) In Boelcke's bio, the author states that Boelcke crashed to his death in a Fokker Eindecker (pg.42), which is incorrect. But to make the error more puzzling, four pages later (pg.46) in Erwin Boehme's bio, he describes the collision saying that Boehme damaged Boelcke's "upper wing". That is true, Boelcke died in a biplane Albatros D.II... which completely contradicts the statement in Boelcke's bio, since the Eindecker did not have an "upper wing", being a monpolane.

2) In Karl Emil Schaefer's bio, a group photo has KES identified as the 3rd person on the left. Somewhat remarkable seeing as the plane they are standing in front of (a Fokker D.VII) was introduced a year after his death.

3) Several places pilots are credited with downing Sopwith Camels well before they were introduced to the front. The planes were most likely Sopwith Pups, or 1 1/2 Strutters. It seems almost as though an editor with little knowledge of the period came across references to "Sopwiths", and plugged in the only plane he knew of from that manufacturer. For instance, in Goering's bio the author states that he was downed by "Camels" in November 1916. The Camel was not introduced to the Western Front until late Summer 1917. Such an obvious error should never have made it to print.

I don't want a prospective reader to think that this book is not worth having, because it is. Many of the pilots covered in this work receive very little attention by most historians of the period. Their biography's are a welcome addition to my collection. I just want everyone to realize that it needs to be read with care. Obviously whoever edited this book, either did not know the period very well, or simply did a sloppy job. Either way, it is a shame that a good book on a very worthy topic ended up with so many unnecessary flaws.

I totally agree with the reader from Shalimar, Florida, who said this book cannot be read in only one shot, cover to cover. Why? Because it deals with fast biographies of 81 airmen from Germany in WW I. Each og the histories are interesting, well documented, but it only makes you wanna know more!

Rarely do I begrudge the money spent on a book but this attempt at a new theory for the origins of the Templars is sorely lacking in content. Without any footnotes and no index or bibliography I found trying to accept the authors' theories was a hard pill to swallow. This book deserves only two stars for the interesting ideas that are proposed - certainly not for the amateurish way in which they are presented. The many typo errors only add to the uncomfortable feeling that this entire effort was concocted in someone's garage and thrown out to the public at an outrageously high price.

This book was a real struggle to read. The authors thank their editor for helping to combine the writing of a Canadian and an Englishman, but as an American, I kept tripping over the excessive use of commas. Coupled with numerous typos, it was very hard to complete this book. While the authors disagree with Baigent and Leigh, I will credit the latter with providing footnotes, a more complete bibliography, and an index, all of which are missing from this book. This leaves me without much to pursue further. The real disappointment is the realization that this book is really only a part 1 of a story and all of the promises made to reveal things are left to the next book. I gave it the second star only because there actually are some original ideas presented here. Too bad the only way to continue to research their ideas is to take them on faith or wait for their next book. I hope they change editors before then and give us the benefit of some real references.

Indeed, this is a good book. But to get even more out of it, read The Illuminati Manifesto.
The Illuminati Manifesto makes public the secret of the Craft for the first time ever!

This book totally defies history's number one precept which is to entertain. Knight follows a random course through the Mexican Revolution digressing into such inane topics as the difference between a revolution and rebellion, or the difference between social and criminal banditry. Furthermore, he bogs down in trying to classify the different parts of the revolution as revolutionary or counterrevolutionary basically coming to the conclusion that the revolution was caudillismo on a grand scale where ideologies are overwhelmed by personal vendettas and disagreements between pueblos that go back to antiquity.
Knight finally finishes up with two main assertions that are neither enlightening nor cogent. The first is his characterization of the war as a struggle between mountaineers and lowlanders. The second is that the conventionist forces were regionalists versus the constitutionalists who advocated a strong central government. Merely characterizing the opponents is supposed to suffice for analyis. There is nothing here to suggest a paradigm for future or contemporary revolutions, nor to provide real insight in the Mexican Revolution itself. It's wholly academic and sterile.
This book contains many vignettes and examples to support Knight's "theories", but it is altogether not a good overview of the war.
I would recommend this book to a student of the revolution, already well versed who wants to gain some new information.