• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
oh boy. i cant wait to take part in a crusade (and dare i say) transplant my dynasty to the levant..for better or worse. :D

you know, cognitively i respect islam ans am somewhat suspicious of all organized religions (islam, christianity [too much Zola] etc.)...

...but when it comes to emotions, i have great belief and hope in the catholic teachings and disregard other religions as somehow getting it wrong. so at least in CK ill let my emotional side go crazy and carry the cross betwixt constantinople, jerusalem and mecca. oh yes! a church on top of the black stone. :eek:
 
Originally posted by Alzate
hmm, i was just going to buy Runciman's "Sicilian Vespers". i have not read him yet so i do not know whether he is biased or not.
As i would like to read more on the Levant in ithe Middle Ages, Havard, which historians in your view are more balanced"?
thanx
Before I forget to reply: It was not my intention to dissuade anyone from reading Runciman - just that they should read someone else too to get a different perspective on things... I have the "Sicilian Vespers" and I would recommend it to anyone interrested in the period - it gives a good overview of the Mediterranean politics of the time, and is a good read.

What I was referring to earlier is that he is, at some parts, getting quite outdated in the views he professed, and at other parts plain wrong (like e.g. his anti-venetian view on the fourth "crusade").